There are actual Jewish characters from the comics that they refuse to adapt properly to the MCU, but these clowns think that the greedy billionaire tech wizard is supposed to be seen as Jewish?

And yes, pre-Iron Man Tony is explicitly okay with killing people using his weapons. Then he swears off selling weapons and makes the suits, then makes Ultron, then throws his weight around to force the Avengers to sign the accords. Hell, he shoots Sam when it’s Vision who knocks Rhodey out of the sky.  And then he tries to kill Bucky and Steve. 

Let’s be clear here, there is a direct parallel between already woven in the MCU: Tony’s missiles killed Wanda’s parents. Ultron, and stopping Ultron, is what killed Zemo’s family. And it would be FINE for Tony to need time to figure it out, to metabolize how Bucky was forced to do what he did, and what it means about agency and responsibility and all that.  Look: they had to torture Bucky for 70 years to get him to kill people but they had to torture Tony to get him to stop. 

And that would be great character development if Tony’s character actually, you know, developed but by Endgame, years later, Tony has doubled down on his position and still blames Steve for the rift in the Avengers and the MCU lets him get away with that. 

If they’d been willing to just lean into him as an anti-hero, a character who does some fucked up stuff but you can’t help but root for him anyway like Venom or Deadpool, that would have been one thing. Instead they wrote him doing all the bad stuff - killing people, war profiteering, misogyny, being irrationally emotional and taking his rage out on innocents, ignoring everyone around him telling him not to do something and then blaming *them* when it goes wrong like they told him it would, thinking he’s entitled to make others pay the consequences of his mistakes - but they *presented* him as the ultimate hero of the franchise, constantly gaslighting the audience by telling us no, actually, tony is selfless and he’s always right even when he’s not and when he fucks up it actually is everyone else’s fault.

holy shit @lucidasidera just blew my mind

And this just really...

It’s almost as fictional story does not fudamentaly change your morals unless you’re a child who is still developing them. [And then it’s prents job to monitor you, not internet’s.] And even then I don’t remember any massive kill-rated spike when Nightmare on Elm’s Street came out.

[There are incidents where person or two were supposedly inspired by a book/movie. They would’ve been inspired by anything.]

Especially when, you know, fanfiction is 99,99% properly tagged so a reador know they read fucked up shit. So it’s like your saying ‘we should romanticize torture with those Saw movies’ because the bad guy wins there so of course it’s romanticized.

For the simple reason that there is a no way to show what is ‘romaticized Bad Thing’ and what isn’t. Do you mean any depictions of the thing? Where the bad guy gets away with it? If the victim take revange on them is it romanticising the revange?

People are not that simple. Adults can see a difference between harmless fiction and harmful reality. Children, who cannot, should be protected by those adults.

Creators - tag your works properly.

Parents - raise you children and edcuate them.

period.

if a kid is young enough to think that pedophilia is normal or okay because they read a fucking sebaciel fanfiction (which, in all likelihood, was probably written by another kid, they are too young to be on the internet.

period.

kids should not be in adult spaces.

period.

adult spaces should be marked as such and do their very best to keep kids out.

period.

anything can be used to groom children, so even though some fic is fucking gross, the fact is, some weirdo’s fanfiction is not large enough of a cultural influence to normalize pedophilia.

it’s the responsibility of the parents to protect their children from bad people because unfortunately, we don’t have an infinity gauntlet and can’t make all the bad people in the world disappear with the snap of our fingers. so the onus is upon the parents to protect their children, and teach their kids the things that they will need to know to protect themselves as they get older. people in the notes are talking abt how they were fucking molested and think it was fanfic that made the pedo think it was okay? fuck no. chances are, if they were older than 10 and weren’t sexually abused themselves, they already knew it wasn’t okay and just didn’t care.

fiction does impact reality, that is true, and that is why 18+ creators can be so aggressive in keeping kids away; however, it’s not going to make someone who’s not already a psychopath do bad things.

that being said, there has been a worrying trend of increasing sexualization of teenagers in recent years, especially middle schoolers. this has always been a problem in mainstream media, but it has become particularly noticable in the 21st century, likely as a result of influencer and social media culture, but has been present since the 20th century and before.

the impact of a work of fiction depends on its aim, and the nature and spread of its influence; something niche, like fanfiction, even if it truly romanticizes/eroticizes rape/pedophilia/abuse/bestiality, and isn’t just intended to either be a dark joke, or horror that uses an unreliable narrator and relies on the reader thinking for themselves and having morals (for example, lolita, while mainstream, was not intended to be romantic; it was intended to be read through the lense of the reader’s own morals and was intended to be horrifying by nabokov), will never have the same cultural impact as something in the mainstream of pop culture (lolita’s reviewers). it’s a problem of the mainstream media, especially in the digital age with the rise of social media and influencer culture.

need proof? just look at how people in the mainstream media treat the kids from stranger things, or just actors in general, especially child actors. look at any social media feed. look at the fashion trends for teens, and even children, these days. increasing sexualization across the board.

meanwhile, fandom is universally thought of as being inherently perverted and weird; it is not the fault of fandom that we see increasing sexualization of young teens. any behavior that becomes associated with fandom is immediately shamed by the mainstream, even harmless ones. in japan, otaku culture is associated with pedophilia because of a pedophile serial killer who liked lolicon. incels are almost all in fandom. fandom will always carry a stigma. behaviors in fandom will never reach mainstream because of that; when people think of fandom, they think ‘creepy yaoi fangirl’ or ‘incel’ or ‘school shooter’ or ‘serial killer’. they don’t think, ‘wow, i’m going to do these things.’ because of this, most young teens, especially girls, want nothing to do with fandom.

Crying about fan fiction being pedo, and focusing on it, makes a mockery of real world CSA.

If you keep crying pedo over fiction, that in itself normalises the word because people become desensitised. People will throw the word around left and right because it will no longer be taken seriously.

And worse - when REAL CSA happens, nobody will believe you because they assume you’re talking about ships. So innocent children get harmed because nobody can tell fiction from fact.

And EVEN WORSE - it gives a space for actual pedos to hide because if they deflect the blame towards fiction, they can keep grooming real kids as everyone else goes after loli and shota.

It has happened no less than FIVE times that predators and rapists have used fanpol/the anti movement to hide. Three antis on twitter have been busted for distributing real CP and having an underground pedo ring. But look at their accounts and you will find nothing but them screaming “death to pedos!” and saying about the evils of anime cartoons.

- Tony hurting Sam for no reason.

- Tony hurting Sam for no reason part 2.

- A list of bad things Tony has already done.

- Tony was deffending the Accords. Now, this is what the Accords were about.

- Tony wasn't just trying to kill Bucky, he also didn't care if Steve died in the process.

- Tony didn't really care about his team mates

- Tonys motivations to want the accords (from his own mouth)

- Tony's rant in Endgame was peak bullshit

- Tony's rant in Endgame was peak bullshit part 2

- Tony isn't and will never be a good father figure to Peter

- Tony loves to use other people's trauma as a joke

- Tony loves to use other people's trauma as a joke part 2

- Tony loves to use other people's trauma as a joke part 3

- Tony loves to use other people's trauma as a joke part 4

- Tony was the one to start the airport fighr and his team had 0 comunication

- Tony called a child "pussy"

- Tony didn't offer a compromise in CW as some people think

No one is giving the “he didn’t know!” excuse, he knew he was profiting off of violence. But when he was forced out of his bubble and faced with the hurt that he has caused, he didn’t retreat to his bubble, he made a conscience change to try and put safety into the world instead.

Tony literally does damn near all the of the shit you mentioned though? He literally donates his money to people in need. The rest he uses to create things that will help humanity as a whole.

“ he made a conscience change “ yeah i can see how guilty he is using all that money made with blood. please. If he really felt guilty, he would feel dirty even after donating all of his money to the people he fucked up. 

Again, this is not ALL THE PEOPLE, it’s a GROUP of POWERFUL people that don’t give a shit about the CIVILIANS. They just want AN ARMY of SUPERHEROES. Steve saw this with Shield and even with the army, he knows how this thing works. It’s not HIS CHOICE, it’s just thinking about it a little be more before giving away your free will and begging to act like the attacking dogs of international groups. He thought about the people when he started to try to stop Thanos in Infinity War, even if those GROUPS wanted him in jail meanwhile. 

Like if they wanna act like the CIA then they can be under the same rules the CIA is. You don’t have “civil rights” to destroy people’s countries just cause you have a bloated sense of self righteousness and chose to undergo human experimentation that left you with super strength wtf

The accords literally make it so that any enhanced individuals can be detained indefinitely without trial for no reason whatsoever. That is not regulation. It’s literally persecution and a CLEAR violation of BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS

Since when does working with the cia, or military, mean that you can be detained in a supermax prison without rights to trial for no reason at all?

so thor spends his movie appearances throwing himself into the hands of other people, and people he does not necessarily consider his equals. earth teaches him that he doesn’t know as much as he thought he did, that the universe and its people are more complex than he ever bothered to know, that even the people he’s known all his life have complex histories and inner lives that he never cared to see, assuming his superficial understanding of his own goodness was all that mattered. thor starts to understand how much power he has to hurt others - his father, his mixed race brother, all the planets of “”lesser beings”” caught in the cross-fire of his family’s conflict, and starts to see how his own actions play into a system of violence and chaos. 

the things tony learns in his movies? that he is the smartest person on earth. other people can appropriate his capacity for violence and power and direct it at places tony never intended. like himself. or at his fellow americans. tony learns that his actions have encouraged a system of violence and chaos and is mainly concerned that it’s outside of his sole control. he logically concludes that means he’s the only one smart and trustworthy enough to use his weaponry to protect people properly. he’ll just make himself the arbiter of righteousness, and that means whatever he thinks is right at the time is the best thing, even if it’s not the action he was championing six months ago. 

when thor’s eyes are opened, he starts grappling with how to handle his capacity to harm while being part of a royal family caught in a cycle of abuse, with a father he respects and loves who is also a petty, vicious racist imperialist. thor needs to go on a journey before he sees his place in the system clearly, but he’s actively committed to making it, and he realises that he cannot achieve anything as a lone ruler like his father expects. thor tackles his privilege by seeking out communities, teams, valuing the input of different people with different experiences. he pushes to understand and champion people who his dad considers primitive animals. he starts to understand the reason the nine realms are falling apart every few years is because asgard is a coloniser who keeps them dependent and weak. that no one can grow as long as asgard fights to keep itself on top. like tony, thor also drops in and blows things up to keep order in the nine realms, but thor is searching for how to undo the tyranny and destructive power he’s responsible for while not neglecting his other responsibility to use his power to protect others.

tony will not admit to his role in the cycle of violence and abuse and imperialism. tony wants to take responsibility, but only for being a hero. tony is afraid he will be condemned because of the violent system he is a part of. because he went through personal change and now he deserves to be considered a good person. which means if he decides to consolidate his power as a billionaire and become the ultimate judge of righteousness upon earth, that’s the action of a good person. because tony cares about everyone, and he can act on the world’s behalf because his privilege and wealth and intelligence make him the only one who’s smart enough to know best. 

ultron flat out tells us both of their deepest fears revolve around their own unchecked power. thor fears people will die because of it. tony is afraid they’ll die if he doesn’t have it. humility vs hilarious vanity.

which is why thor is the one who finally sees that his family’s legacy is nothing but a shiny gilded trash pile and must tear down the literal all-powerful embodiment of his ancestors’ imperalism because, unchecked, it will only grow stronger. he throws his lot in with people. with revolutionaries, freed slaves, common folk and forsaken warriors and his adopted brother. thor may still have some arrogance and superiority and can be an arsehole about it, but he also invites in people who aren’t necessarily nice to him, who disagree with him or dislike him, who keep openly challenging his ideas of how things should work. he’s constantly working at understanding his weaknesses and his place in a broken system and knows he needs to keep choosing to work with people, that collectively they will work to do better and achieve safety. he knows his own power, but he also believes unreservedly in the capability of other people and knows it’s necessary to trust them.

steve: …

tony: did you even hear what i-

steve: ssSssSSssShhhHhhhhhH

steve: do you… do you hear that?

tony, straining to hear: no, what is it?

steve: it’s… the world’s tiniest violin playing.

Well hi again let’s talk about the two monsters known as Fujoshis and Fudanshis. Now what is a Fudanshi? This may be a new word for everyone. 

The definition for a Fudanshi is a boy who enjoys yaoi and it literally translates to “rotten boy”; and is the male version of fujoshi. This is paraphrased from Urban dictionary. 

Why are these communities both bad and why do both Fundashi and Fujoshi translate to Rotten Boy and Rotten Girl?

Well to understand let’s take a history lesson on when Yaoi first came to be and we’ll talk about the community in a bit on why they’re bad.

Yaoi is an acronym derived from the Japanese phrase 「ヤマなし、オチなし、意味なし」(yama nashi, ochi nashi, imi nashi) This means meaning “no climax, no resolution, no meaning” since it’s a sexual term. The two people who are credited with coining the term are Yasuko Sakata (manga artist) and Akiko Hatsu (also a manga artist). For there dōjinshi, Sakata’s Loveri, was amongst the very first to be described as yaoi. 

What Yaoi used to mean was a sexual dōjinshi about two boys; but people now are using Yaoi as a means to sexualize any boys who are in a romantic relationship. Which is making it harder for people to accept someone being gay.

Fudanshis and Fujoshis are slowly ruining the gay community by sexualizing being gay. Not only that they’re harrasing young artists about shipping a guy with a girl even though a show never explicitly calls a character gay.

An example of this is from the video game series known as Danganronpa. There’s an extremely popular gay ship know as Komahina aka Nagito Komaede and Hajime Hinata. Neither characters are confirmed lovers and neither characters are confirmed as strictly gay.

If you dare ship the character Komaede with a girl you’re called homophobic. If you don’t even ship KomaHina you’re homophobic. Fujoshis and Fundashis have made people extremely worried that they are homophobic for not liking what they like or shipping a girl and boy together even though neither one have a confirmed sexuality.

Even if it’s implied the character likes the same sex in a romantic fashion it doesn’t mean that character can’t be bisexual or pansexual as it’s not confirmed. Now if it was confirmed the character was a specific sexuality be calm and debate about it. Don’t you ever tell someone to kill themselves or they’re a homophobe over that. For people who do that have not repect.

because being gay is fine as long as they’re not all icky and ~sexual about it

Honey, people can ship two people who are the same sex. I’m saying not to use Yaoi and Yuri to classify two people being romantic because funfact Yaoi and Yuri are classified as porn.

Here are some recent “yaoi (read: BL) manga for ya

That doesn’t mean BL doesn’t contain sex, because infantilizing gay men and pretending they only do uwu #pure things is childish. That also doesn’t mean that there aren’t problematic BL, because everything thas problematic elements.  

In Japan manga that focuses on mxm relationships is generally broken into two main groups - BL and geicomi - in order for the various comics to be more marketable.

Geicomi is what is often mistakenly called “bara” by westerners. This is usually with more muscular men, lots of hardcore sex, bdsm, abuse and little to no story, and is marketed to middle-aged adult gay men as erotica. There’s very little censoring of sex apart from maybe a small bar across the genitals to comply with Japanese obscenity laws.

BL is what is mistakenly called “yaoi” by westerners. This is usually with guys that tend to fall more in line with traditional east-asian beauty standards (bishounen and ikemen). If there is sex (and there very often isn’t), it will be more softcore and will be part of a story. Oftentimes the genitals arent drawn at all. There’s usually more romance and an actual plot. This is usually marketed to a younger audience - late teenage and young adult women. Why women? Because romance as a genre is very much seen as a ‘girl’s thing’ in Japan, so regardless of if you have a m/f, f/f or m/m couple, if there’s a lot of focus on the romantic aspects of the couple rather than the sex, then it will be seen as “for women”. However, while BL is mainly marketed toward women due to the expectation that romance is a “girl’s thing”, depending on the series in question, up to half of all BL readers are male.

There are some crossover groups nowadays, and the two markets are converging more and more, but it’s still quite binary like this.

In Japan, “Yaoi” originally refers to a specific subset of anime parody doujinshi that satirizes the “no homo” male-male bonding of earlier (usually) shounen series by portraying it as romantic or sexual. (x) “Yaoi” referring to solely to R-18 pwp mxm interactions is a western fandom thing and is a misnomer.

It’s interesting that you mention Yasuko Sakata and Akiko Hatsu, as they were both women that were part of the post year 24 group. Now, the Year 24 group was a group of women mangaka in the 60s and 70s who pioneered what later became known as yuri and BL. Originally, their work was just labeled as “shoujo manga” (meaning girl comics), and they revolutionalized the genre by addressing LGBT+ gender and sexuality issues at a time when homosexuality was only just starting to be decriminalized in much of the world. The creator of one of the first yuri shoujo manga was a woman named Ryoko Yamagishi.

Year 24 refers to their birth year (1949/showa 24), so the post Year 24 group were women who were part of this revolutionary group but born after 1949.

With regard to the coining of the term “yaoi” - the original phrase 「ヤマなし、オチなし、意味なし」refers not to sex, specifically, but to something that was plotless or pointless, and was originally spoken by Osamu Tezuka to refer to poor quality manga. This definition of yaoi (meaning plotless, and referring to her manga as a form of self-deprecation) is confirmed by Hatsu Akiko herself, and that yaoi itself refers to stuff intended to be a satirization or parody. (x) This idea of her comic being “plotless” was in comparison with her own more serious comics, and in comparison with the other members of the Year 24 group who wrote mainly Bildungsroman genre fiction in their shounen-ai/tanbi comics that generally requires a background in literature, culture and history to be able to understand, and thus were very plot-heavy.

Fujoshi means you’re a woman that’s a fan of any kind of mlm fiction, which can include, but isn’t limited to, yaoi doujinshi, professionally published BL, geicomi, slash, original novels, and even just if you ship two male characters from a piece of media who aren’t together canonically. Having it translated literally as “rotten woman” is what I would consider a mistranslation, as the english word “rotten” has some implications that do not exist in Japanese. Fujoshi is a pun on the word “婦女子” (also read ‘fujoshi’) - which means “grown/respectable women” - where the “fu” character for “wife” is replaced with the “fu” character for “fermented/ruined/decay”. It was originally coined by cis straight men as a misogynistic insult, on 2channel, to deride any woman that created/liked slash, mxm pairings or even just solo gay characters, and had to be reclaimed, as it implied that women who had any mxm pairings were ruined for life/unmarriable and brought decay and ‘destroyed’ the canon material of ‘their’ (male-marketed) series. This is why it uses the ‘fu’ character for ruin/decay that replaces the ‘fu’ character for ‘wife’ in fujoshi (fujoshi using the wife character means a respectable woman, fujoshi is a homophonous pun). It was a way to drive out mxm slash creators out of what they deemed ‘their’ turf (male-marketed media) by shaming women.

Fujoshi has, thankfully, long been reclaimed, and is used across multiple eastern fandoms as the word for a female fan of mxm media. It was translated into English by Japanese speakers specifically for the purpose of giving slash fans from other cultures words to describe themselves, and was never intended to be used as an insult again.

Fun fact! :The original term for fujoshi was “yurizoku” (lily tribe), which came from a gay men’s magazine column (“yurizoku no heya” / “Lily Tribe’s room”) in the 70s/80s and referred to their female readers. (originally published in the November 1976 edition of “Barazoku”) Because so many of these female readers were lesbian or bisexual, the shortened term “yuri” eventually came to mean fxf relationships in manga and novels.

Fudanshi means you’re a man that’s a fan of mlm fiction and/or mlm ships (though because geicomi is marketed to men and expected to appeal to mlm, it generally doesn’t count unless it’s a crossover-type manga as mentioned above).

“A Fundashi fetishsize being gay.”

Setting aside the fact that not all BL (sometimes called yaoi in the West where yaoi is used as an umbrella term for m/m romance) is porn - gay and bi men, I.E. men who are sexually attracted to men, are allowed to like porn about men.

Gay men liking gay porn aren’t “fetishizing” being gay.

Oh no, gay men enjoy gay porn! They’re fetishing being gay!

Um…maybe they just like men and want to see men fuck because they find men sexuallly attractive because they’re gay!

“Sexualizing being gay”

and

Sounds kind of right wing to me - pretty straightforward analogy to corporate powers and really any wealthy individuals - but hey, maybe I got something wrong? I’m pretty sure the comic CW was based on was written by a libertarian, and even the nuance and severity included in that has been eliminated by the film, but it’s still possible I’m mistaken.

At the very least, he is not nearly as politically invested as he is personally, despite his moniker, seeing as he was willing to endanger multiple civilians in order to ascertain that James wasn’t going to be tried in court. If I’m not wrong, Bucky was offered UN-sanctioned assistance with any psychological or physiological problems, along with the pardons for everybody involved the first go around. The only bone Steve had to pick was that Bucky would eventually have to have his case reviewed by a jury and judge, which… that’s exactly what would happen to any civilian or officer suspected of murder, powered or otherwise. There might have to be new precedents set, but it was not nearly as likely as some people claim that Bucky was going to be killed or even sentenced.

Also, Steve was willing to commit fraud using public and private funding to pursue hidden agendas, regardless of the intent for which the funding had been provided. He was also using non-monetary resources that were meant to be used to help the public and to save people’s lives, instead to pursue a personal interest. It doesn’t matter what that interest is, it certainly doesn’t speak well for the respect he holds for government programs.

Don’t even get me started on how he judges men vs women. I have a whole post drafted analyzing the differences in the way he treats Tony and Wanda for their parts in AOU. So if you really want to hear that long-ass spiel, you can check it out if I ever get around to actually posting it.

Finally, I don’t think he… did punch Hitler 200 times? Like, he fake-punched an actor playing Hitler for the purpose of drumming up war support? I mean it’s possible he learned about the genocide going down before Pearl Harbor and was advocating for the US to enter the fray, but within the canon of the MCU there’s no proof of that. (And historically speaking, nobody in America, or the UK for that matter, really paid attention to it, and those that did, were journalists, who mostly didn’t actually have a very strong stance on the matter. The only people advocating for intervention were Jewish leaders and journalists. Anyways, the idea that any of gentile America was all raving and roaring to go help out their oppressed Jewish friends is revisionist at best.)

Steve was opposed to the Accords, not oversight, and not accountability. He was opposed to being turned into the UN Security Council’s attack dogs, of serving the agenda of assholes like Thaddeus Ross. He was opposed to an agreement that would require enhanced persons  to be tagged, monitored and tracked like convicted felons. He was opposed to enhanced persons surrendering their rights to due process and legal representation. He was opposed to their indefinite incarceration in black site prisons like the Raft. The last two we actually see happen in the movie. It’s also laid out in the official MCU Wiki. Unlike Team Iron Man fanon, I’m not just pulling this out of my ass.

You know the type of people who support all the policies cited in the previous paragraph? Right-wingers, authoritarians and fascists. Just substitute Muslim or POC for enhanced persons and I think you’ll get the picture. 

The rest of your post is just steaming,Tony stan horseshit.

Steve went after Bucky in Bucharest because those same good people responsible for crafting the Accords had issued a kill on sight order on him. Which is illegal BTW. Steve was willing to believe he had bombed the UN, but also believed he deserved to actually be tried in a court of law, rather than summarily executed. So to ensure this, and ALSO TO PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE HIT SQUAD WHO HAD BEEN SENT TO EXECUTE THIS ILLEGAL ORDER, he went after Bucky himself. Because a Bucky in full on Winter Soldier mode would have gone through those men like a hot knife through butter.

And the only person offering Bucky “ UN-sanctioned assistance with any psychological or physiological problems” was Tony, in an attempt to manipulate Steve into signing. The only problem is, Tony had no authority to actually make that offer. The extradition to Wakanda was already a done deal, so it was extradition and execution Bucky was facing, not counselling and court.

And misusing private and public funding to pursue a private matter? I’m sure you’re referencing his search for Bucky and this persistent stannish belief that Steve and the other Avengers have been parasitising poor, naive, generous Tony for years. There is not one bit of on screen evidence to support this contention, just so you know. It’s more fanon generated horseshit.

Following the collapse of SHIELD, Tony has been equipping the Avengers. He CHOSE, for whatever reason, to continue funding the Avengers’ activities, probably part of his whole “privatizing world peace” schtick. But Steve, and all the other Avengers, have their own resources. Considering Steve would be owed millions in back pay from the US army, he would be entirely capable of funding his own search for Bucky, and given what we’ve seen of his character, entirely unwilling to involve Tony in any part of it. Sam and Nat sure, because they’re close friends and comrades. Tony is just a work friend and sort of employer, not someone you involve in a deeply private, sensitive matter, even second-hand.

And yes, there’s a huge difference in the way he treats Tony and Wanda and it has nothing to do with gender. Steve respects women. Tony leers at them and makes rape jokes. 

Tony is a powerful, wealthy, middle-aged man, who has all the resources of the world at his fingertips. It’s too bad he hasn’t utilized any of them to actually get his head out of his ass and grow the fuck up, but that’s not Steve’s fault. Wanda is a badly traumatized young woman from a poverty stricken, war-torn country who has lost her whole world and has never had the tools or opportunity to learn how to deal with those losses in an emotionally healthy way. So Steve is protective of her. Gosh, what an asshole. 

And for fuck’s sake, of course MCU Steve hasn’t punched Hitler, 200 times or ever. His work in WWII was entirely focused on taking down Hydra and Red Skull. And really, you’re arguing that because a lot of conservative, nationalistic, protectionist Americans didn’t want to involve themselves in WWII prior to the bombing or Pearl Harbor, that it’s inconceivable that Steve would have had an issue with Nazis? A poor, sickly, first generation Irish-American coming of age at the height of the Great Depression wouldn’t feel more than passing concern at the Eugenics movement and the rise of fascism? You really think a young Brooklyn-born man, an aspiring artist, wouldn’t have friends and acquaintances in the Jewish community?

But also, I don’t remember anything in the film series including the tagging and monitoring system or any of the extremity that’s in the comics. I’m not trying to paint that as liberal, it’s not, but I said from the beginning I was focused on the movies. I could be wrong (seriously, I mean it, I’m not trying to be an asshole) so if that’s the case, it’d be cool if someone could link me to where it’s mentioned, because I really shouldn’t be posting with faulty memory of the movies. Also, I may not have a full understanding of the way that international government works, but I don’t think supers being the Security Council’s attack dogs would’ve been as clear cut a result as people think. I mean, I’m not trying to diminish the fact that the US, and other SC countries have too much power, but from what I remember, all UN-controlled task forces, organizations, and proposed/accepted documents have specifically created committees made up of representatives from multiple countries.

I also never said Steve was ambiguous to Naxis. Christ, I was joking because one of the earlier reblogs said he punched Hitler 200 times and I thought it’d be interesting to share some info that I learned in my Modern Jewish History class. I wasn’t the most tactful, as I’ve admitted already, but I wasn’t calling Steve apathetic to genocide. I just meant he, like anybody else living during the time, likely wouldn’t have had access to information about the Holocaust unless he himself had connections to the Jewish community. In the comics, I’d say it’s pretty highly implicated, but the MCU didn’t prioritize his defense of the innocent so much as his hatred of bullies and patriotism. But that’s just my interpretation and if you disagree and think I’m a dumbass, that’s fair.

So, look, I was going to continue to be civil, but considering you called me stupid a thousand times, and this argument needs to be put to rest, I’m gonna forgo that just for now.

STOP COMPARING SUPERS TO MUSLIMS AND POCS FOR FUCK’S SAKE.

You know why? Well, I mean, for one, mutants already take that mantle in the comics, whereas normal supers don’t suffer from the same systemic disenfranchisement. It’s a direct parallel that’s been acknowledged multiple times. I’m sure you’re aware of it - you seem like you’re very invested in this, in a good way. None of the supers in the MCU are mutants, not even the Maximoffs, due to the shitty character rewrite and awkward casting situation. (She’s not even Jewish anymore, ffs.) So there’s that, but I’m sure most people don’t care.

More importantly, stop implying that superheroes are equivalent to minorities because superheroes have powers that, without proper training or oversight, can lead to civilian injuries and fatalies. That’s not arguable. It fucking happened. And that doesn’t fucking apply to Muslims or POC in any way, because Muslims and POC are just normal people with different religious beliefs and/or melanin levels. Being either or both doesn’t automatically imbue you with the ability to hurt others any more than being any type of person does.

People with literal super powers are not oppressed by attempts to mitigate the damage those people can do, not unless it’s systemic the way it is with mutants in the comics. Trying to claim that super heroes are disenfranchised because they are in the numerical minority and because people want to put laws in place to ensure they don’t take advantage of their powers, is insulting to actual minorities. And is, as I said before, similar to people who claim the rich and wealthy are disenfranchised because when taxes are higher for some because they have more of money, it’s an infringement on their rights. Which. Is an actual point. I’ve seen wealthy conservative Cap fans make.

Muslims and POC are attacked, oppressed, and disenfranchised because white people need a scapegoat, because of white supremacy, because of prevailing bigotry. That does not apply to the superheroes in the movies, who are approached by 117 countries worried for their citizens and their sovreinty, which despite what people say, is a real legitimate concern, because even though yes, most governments are corrupt and the world is a shitpile, protecting African countries from American-sourced military action in which civilian casualties are sometimes treated with less gravity than their due deserves at least as much consideration as the concerns of super heroes. Ross is involved, yeah, and guess what? He’s going to get his way unless somebody fights him on it using legal means.

Anyway, it’s the same reason why comparing homosexuality to being a werewolf (like Rowling does in Harry Potter) is a bad idea. Homosexuals don’t turn into monsters who can spread their ‘condition’ with a bite. Muslims and POC don’t have unstable powers which if not properly monitored or trained could cause fatal injuries to those around them, and being a Muslim or POC does not put one in a position of power over others the way being a fully funded superhero is. If you still hate and despise me so much after everything I wrote, please at least consider this last part. I don’t intend to finish my reply because this was the only actually important thing I had to say anyway.

Anyway, I don’t hate Steve Rogers, but his portrayal in the MCU (outside the physical portrayal by Evans himself) is not the same as his character himself. I shouldn’t have condemned his character, and didn’t mean to. You come off as kind of a jerk, and maybe you thought I deserved it, but whatever. I thought I managed to be relatively polite during my first post, so I guess I’ll pull a Rogers. Sorry you got so pissed. Hope you understand if I don’t offer a burner phone.

But while I apologize for the insults, I don’t retract the substance of what I was saying. The terms of the Sokovia Accords are laid out in the MCU fandom wiki ( http://marvelcinematicuniverse.wikia.com/wiki/Sokovia_Accords). Some of the consequences show up in Agents of SHIELD, where the terms of the Accords are used by a member of the Accords committee to target and exterminate Inhumans. I’ve never read the Civil War comic, but from what I understand, there’s a fair degree of overlap, even if the X-men don’t yet exist in the MCU.

How are enhanced people in the MCU substantively different from mutants in the X-men universe? For people like Stark and Rhodey and Sam, whose enhancements are purely technological, sure they can take the suits off and just be normal citizens again. Wanda, Bruce, the Inhumans from AOS, hell even Steve and Bucky– whether their enhancements are random genetics or manufactured in a lab, they don’t have the option of shucking them off and walking away. These people are being specifically targeted and their civil rights abrogated because of what they are, not whether they’ve caused any specific harm. The parallels seem pretty clear to me. Legislation that Others a minority population are based on fear mongering–they’re different, they’re dangerous, they’re not like Us. The perceived capacity for harm is far more important than any actual harm committed. Yes, the Avengers are dangerous in a way that real world minorities are not, but unless there is a clear pattern of them abusing their abilities in an irresponsible or criminal manner–and nothing in Ross’s little slide show demonstrates that, including Lagos–what is the point of such draconian legislation except to establish control? Accountability doesn’t require stripping people of their civil rights, but it’s a very useful tool for asserting control in the hands of unscrupulous authoritarians.

That’s a theory made up by Tony stans cause they literally cannot let anything Steve does not be about Tony.

*shouted at him constantly

*always told him to shut up because adults were talking

*was very physical and threatening during confrontations

*never paid any attention to Tony except to lecture him

*forced Tony into the war profiteering business by making him focus his attention on weapons instead of what he wanted to invent to help people

*was constantly ragging on how much of a failure Tony was

*always made sure to tell Tony that his inventions weren’t good enough

*ignored Tony’s opinions and wants in favor of what HE wanted Tony to do

Things Howard actually did to Tony:

*scolded him for messing with his delicate models while he was working but never raised his voice at him

*didn’t spend as much time as he probably should have with Tony

*talked about Captain America a lot because he was obsessed with finding his friend’s body

*had very high expectations of Tony because he taught his son everything he knew and had provided him endless resources to work with

*gently called Tony out for being sarcastic and rude when he was a teenager

*tried to get out of the weapons business, and had a plan in place so that Tony would be all set up to start down a new path involving clean energy and healing tech instead of bombs and missiles

*made a video for Tony telling him how he was sure that he was going to accomplish great things so his son would know that no matter what happened, Howard cared about him and believed in him

[Things the stans claim Tony does to Peter:

*scolds him for messing with delicate projects

*doesn’t spend as much time as he should with Peter because he gets busy in the lab or with work

*has very high expectations of Peter because he knows he’s a genius and is providing him with everything he needs to succeed

*is always gentle and even-toned when he scolds Peter

*tries to set Peter’s future up for success by helping him get into good colleges or setting up a research career for him

*leaves Peter notes or videos telling him how proud he is of him]

Things Tony has actually done to Peter:

*screamed in his face

*told him to shut up because the adult was talking

*physically got in his space and backed him up while berating him

*flat out ignored Peter until he was actively in the process of getting himself killed, upon which he showed up to yell at him and then went right back to ignoring him

*actively set Peter down a path to killing people by arming him with lethal weaponry, having instant kill mode as the default combat setting for when the suit was set to fight, and letting him go into combat situations completely unsupervised

*takes his failure and rubs it in his face to show him how useless he is and why he needs to leave things to the adults

*constantly tossing out derisive comments about how low-tech and pathetic all of Peter’s gear is, how he is in “DIRE NEED of an upgrade”

*ignored Peter’s wishes and disregarded his protests about being dragged to another country without his aunt’s knowledge

Gee…it’s almost like someone took all of the traits from what the stans love to claim is Howard’s list, and basically just pasted them into the Tony/Peter relationship.

And yet, somehow, even with all of their very blatant abuse check boxes being ticked for Tony’s treatment of Peter, they still call it a sweet and healthy relationship.Funny how abuse only seems to count when it’s Tony who is being abused…

(x)

Captain America’s actual words to the murderous shitstain on the other side who got all his friends thrown in illegal detention and then tried to kill Captain America’s best friend for a crime he didn’t commit.

Too bad you didn’t even watch the movie but are still running your mouth like a dumbass.

But more importantly, do you not know that you can only commit a crime if you are doing it wilfully and intentionally?? Which excludes the things tortured brainwashed prisoners of war are made to do by the way.

“Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor.”  — Stan Lee

Avengers: Age Of Ultron  (2015) 

I also doubt some vague standard of ~honesty~ is what definitively makes one worthy of the power of Thor. Unless you’re also saying Thor has never lied in his 1500 years of existence, or withheld information. Which of course would be stupid, as well as false. This line of thinking also does not explain why Rhodey can’t lift the hammer, even though as far as I can recall he’s never once lied in all of his screen time. 

 And finally, ‘Mjolnir found Steve honourable but not worthy’ makes very little sense. ‘Honourable’ is a far less arbitrary gauge of worthiness than honesty or innocence, not to mention far less context-dependent also. If the hammer found Steve to be ethical, principled, righteous and right-minded (all synonyms of honourable) when he’s keeping Hydra’s involvement in Tony’s parents’ deaths from him…why in the world would it not find him worthy? And how does that even work when he can clearly move the hammer? He’s either worthy or he isn’t. He can’t be both at the same time.

"ohh but the rule wasn't applied during Thor's rampage" Nope, but Mjolnir judges one based upon your morals, hence why Thor could finally wield it at the end of the first movie because he finally understood the fragility of life and respected others different from him