Just in case people aren't 100% on buying the comics yet
deleted_kea5mnlk1493840
Banned
Now, I'm going to start by saying that you should definitely buy the comics, they're really fun to read if you like the world and characters. However, I know not everyone wants to buy the comics without seeing what they're like first, so I'm leaving a link to a website where you can view the first 19 Issues. If you enjoy them, then please go and buy the comics. I recommend buying them in Volumes, which contain multiple Issues, usually around 10.
http://www.idoc.co/read/14955/fables-comics
Please, buy the comics.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
I would buy the comics, but the thing is the creator of them is an extremist right wing dick.
Why should we want to support the creator if he's an asshole?
http://thegeekwhisperer.com/2009/01/11/comics-politics-screw-you-bill-willingham/
Because the comics are good, fuck politics. I don't even live in America, so I have no idea what the right wing even is.
He also claims he doesn't like 'diversity because of what it means in today's climate', whatever the hell that is supposed to mean.
I'm just trying to let people who are interested in the comics have a look at them. I give absolutely zero shits about Bill Willingham's private life, views or political beliefs.
The right wing is not exclusive to america by any means. It's a political idea that is expressed in some way, regardless of whether it is the main power, in pretty much every country in the world.
But you're not telling us to support the comics, you're telling us to support the creator. Why on earth would we want to?
Fables is already coming to a definitive end in issue 150, so there's no point buying them in hopes he'll make more.
If people buy them, they should buy them because they enjoy them, not to give the creator more spending money as you suggest.
And I had no idea Bill Willingham was a douchebag. I can always edit the original post if that makes you happy.
No, you're telling them to get the comics because, as you bolded to emphasise this point, you want us to 'Support the creator by buying the comics.'
And as I said, I had no idea Bill Willingham was a gun-slinging, 'Murica spouting stereotype. I can easily edit the original post if you wish.
In today's cultural climate ''diversity'' means ''there's too many whites people, bring in the browns - and not the well-educated brown people like the Indians*, but the third-worlders who won't assimilate and will leech the system out of money''.
*from India, because I grant very few forum users the benefit of the doubt to know I wasn't talking about Injuns
No no, feel free to express your view. Just because I disagree with it doesn't mean it's fundamentally wrong or bad or anything, just my opinion
I tried reading the comic, I honestly did. 10 or 12 issues of it. It wasn't very good. The art was dull and bland (ironic, considering the characters are supposed to be from whimsical settings originally), and the writing was mediocre at best. Throughout it all I never once felt that the characters were characters (like in the game), but mere vessels to spout dialogue that Willingham ordained need be spoken at that point.
Right, but that's just over generalising within the diversity speech which isn't what diversity is about: not all people from India are well educated, for example.
Diversity only has a negative sense because of the right wing. Really diversity is just about making things we create more representative of how the world actually is, not of our unpleasant fantasies or incorrect conceptions about it.
So this means that when there is diversity, things happen like there being gay characters and black characters etc. Because they're there in real life, no disagreeing with that.
People think its gone to far because they're used to seeing the world as their little heterosexual paradise. This is why, even though about one in 15 people are gay, people are outraged when there is a gay character and claim it to be 'pandering to the left wing' or 'politically correct', even though it's incredibly likely to have at least one gay character in a game, as more have more than 15 people in them. That's why some were extremely angry when Walter and Matthew were gay characters, even though logically we should have met more.
And...god I'm writing too much, I'll restrain myself. Rant over
There is absolutely nothing in the article that would make me consider him an asshole. Do you react so negatively to everyone that questions your worldview?
Who questioned my worldview?
What about the fact that he says he's 'rabidly pro-israel' and that the entire Fables series is supposed to be a metaphor for the conflict?
Here's another quote:
'I have problems with feminism, gay marriage, and gun control. '
I was hoping we'd get this shindig started proper.
''Diversity only has a negative sense because of the right wing.'' - It has a negative sense because of the right wing as a RESPONSE to the left wing demanding we bring in more brown people without any standards, because that would be racist in their (left wing) minds.
''Really diversity is just about making things we create more representative of how the world actually is, not of our unpleasant fantasies or incorrect conceptions about it.'' - You can't see how the latter applies to those who want ''diversity''. Throughout history people have normally stuck together with their own kind, this is natural, as we have an inborn impulse to be leery of those that are different, be it in skin tone, or simple dress sense. This has kept us alive throughout the ages. It is only in the last 100 or so years that the notion that we need to ''diversify'' has come into play, and it isn't one that's natural. Sooner or later you will get two groups who are incompatible with each other for one reason or another and conflict will occur - all because someone wanted diversity for the sake of diversity. Sometimes it's OK to stick with your own. Also note, we seem only to have a desire to diversify Europe and the US, not Africa, not the Middle-East or the South Americas. Funny that.
''So this means that when there is diversity, things happen like there being gay characters and black characters etc. Because they're there in real life, no disagreeing with that.'' - You're changing the subject from real life politics to fiction. This is not important right now.
''This is why, even though about one in 15 people are gay, people are outraged when there is a gay character and claim it to be 'pandering to the left wing' or 'politically correct''' - Granted there are knee jerk reactionists who dislike gay characters in fiction without reason other than they're gay. However, there is a case to be made when companies make gay characters solely for the function of being gay and to attract positive press - that is pandering and that is trying to be politically correct. If writers create a character who is gay, but their sexuality in no way is in the spotlight of things then that is good writing, especially if the character is well written (Walter and Matthew, and Aunt Johnny from Rachel Rising). There's a good way to handle it, and there's a bad way to handle it. Doing it for publicity is bad.
''That's why some were extremely angry when Walter and Matthew were gay characters, even though logically we should have met more.'' - Now this is getting into the realm of ratios in fiction and reality, and when it's appropriate to put in people with different skin colours and sexual orientations into the story. There is no right or wrong answer, so it is up to the writer to decide and for the public to react to. In my mind, it's all about intent behind the character. Walter and Matthew are a good example of good intent. EA's and BioWare's way of handling it (screaming off the tallest mountain ''HEY GUYS WE HAVE A GAY CHARACTER, GUYS LOOK, WE'RE SO TOLERANT AND PROGESSIVE, TELL YOUR LGBT FRIENDS TO BUY OUR GAME'') is an example of shitty intent.
What about the fact that his Arabic characters are portrayed as raving stereotypes in Fables Volume 7?
Quote from a review: 'They oppress women, own slaves, and are physically presented in the most simplistic, unimaginative stereotypical way you could possibly think of.'
And no, in their fable background stories they did not oppress women or keep slaves. He added that. Because they're arabic so must all think like that.
I read the first issues and I thought they were awesome
apparently much changed in these 20 years because everyone is acting a bit differently
Feminism has gotten way out of hand with the likes of Anita Sarkeesian (to name the most obvious one) and Gail Dines - ones who keep wagging their fingers calling every last representation of women bad, and all but directly saying male sexuality is malevolent in its own existence. Gun control is also a bad idea. Please notice how the latest shooting and massacre happened in California (Elliot Rodger). California, a left wing state.
Though I am surprised that you mention him saying he's ''rabidly pro-Israel'' with a slight touch of disapproval. Not judging, just ain't used to seeing such things.
[removed]
I did some research (perhaps you should give that a try) and it turns out it is not a in fact a metaphor for the conflict. The whole issue began when Bigby made a analogy to the conflict however the writer said that this was merely drawing parallels and that the comic is apolitical.
As for his support of isreal. Well I know very little about the Israel-Palestinian conflict but what I do know about it is that it is a very complicated conflict. Complicated enough that shaming people for being on either side is fool-hardy.
1- Yes, it does. Exactly. The right wing have made the word 'diversity' have a bad sense, and it is not intrinsically bad.
2- Examples please. Where has specifically diversifying a community in the western world led to some kind of race war?
Are you arguing that all black people should be kept apart from white people? Sorry for making such a brash statement, it just it seems that you're arguing that separate groups live separately fro a reason. Do you support the concept of Apartheid then? E.g. having 'white villages' and 'black villages', and having 'white bathrooms' and 'black bathrooms'?
What's the difference between that and what you're saying here?
3- We're discussing how real life politics interact with fiction like comics and games. Of course it's relevant.
4- Not just that, many people threaten to kill characters because they're gay. Happens on facebook all the time, such as when a gay character in dragon age inquisition was revealed.
'there is a case to be made when companies make gay characters solely for the function of being gay and to attract positive press'
Ok, then make the case. Give me some solid examples of that, and I'll be willing to accept that point.
I mean, what you describe there would be bad. Doing it for publicity would be bad. But I disagree that it actually happens. Give me a few examples and I'll change my mind. In fact, you've only given me examples of characters where that hasn't been the case, interestingly.
5- Where, oh where has Bioware ever said anything like your claiming? Source please.
In fact, in one of their recent character reveals, they mentioned he was gay in an extremely off hand way.
Does Flog have a source? Flog does have a source!
http://www.dragonage.com/#!/en_US/news/character-profile-dorian
If you think that is bioware screaming it from the highest mountain, then you simply can't be reasoned with.
Nice troll attempt.
Just because it's complicated doesn't mean you can't disapprove of someone's view of it.
You don't know much about it and yet you're saying I should give doing research a try?
Why don't you research the conflict then!
So what? Who knows what he means by "feminism"? He certainly doesn't have a problem putting women in power in his comic books.
Maybe he has, or had at one point, problems with gay marriage? Who didn't at one point? Who really gives a shit? Not everyone who feels or felt that way at some point is a right wing extremist.
And he has problems with gun control? Again, so what? And, also, fucking good for him.
That's not feminISM getting out of hand, that's some feminISTs getting out of hand.
If you actually look up most definitions of feminism, it's about believing women are equal to men, and vice versa.
This is the feminism symbol:
And yeah, I think being extremely pro-Isreal is bad. That's just my opinion, and so I myself judge him for it. You don't have to.
You can put women in power and still be sexist.
Feminism is believing both sexes are equal. And if he openly says he disagrees with that, then I find his view quite disturbing.
Who didn't have a problem with gay marriage at one point? Umm, loads of people, such as me, my husband, my parents and my school friends.
You're asking 'who gives a shit' if you disagree with gay marriage? I....really? You're really asking that?
Try MILLIONS of people!
Well I again did some research. I couldn't find exactly what fables were in this volume but judging from the title many were from the 1001 nights (Arabian nights). These stories were written throughout the golden age of Islam and according to my research slavery did exist in the Muslim world during this time. It stands to reason that fables based on this culture would think slavery normal. Also Islamac states are known to hold double standards as far as sex is concerned.
1 - Not intrinsically no, but in the context which we're discussing now it tends to be.
2 - I never mentioned a race war, don't put words in my mouth. Look to Sweden, where they accept immigrants without any sort of standards, with open arms. Conflicts have happened (look up Sweden muslim riot) (mostly on the native population). There is tension there because of forced diversity between groups that cannot co-exist easily. Radical muslims, violent thugs in general and the spineless locals.
Click here
Click here
3 - We started talking about the meaning of diversity.
4 - That is in reaction of companies making gay characters so they can say they have a gay character. This is perceived as someone with an agenda working the strings.
You mentioned it yourself. The mage Dorian from Dragon Age: Inquisition. The announced his sexuality as if it were something important and defining about the character, when all it defines is which gender he likes to have sex with. This is done so that they get positive publicity as a ''progressive'' company. In fact, there are some forumites on BioWare who once complained about the Witcher being a straight character. This is who they pander to.
5 - I was using hyperbole to illustrate my point. Also, the fact that they made almost every companion in DAII (sans Varric and Hawke's siblings) bisexual indicates that they are trying to appear LGBT friendly not because they have a story to tell with characters to happen to be gay or bi, but because they want the people from that camp to buy their games as well. This is using sexuality as a commodity to sell and market and it's fucking stupid in terms of business practice when it directly contradicts what they wish to appear as. Doesn't help that Dorian is a stereotypical ''dashing gay''. If Big Bull was gay that would be playing against type.
That is feminism getting out of hand since they have hordes of supporters and, god help us, peoples outside of feminist camps are taking them seriously. Like Sarkeesian getting the games ambassador award or being invited to Bungie to deliver advice on how to create female characters (iirc) and the Icelandic government inviting Gail Dines as an authority opinion on banning porn because it's ''degrading to women''.
No, "feminism" means a lot of different things to different people. So does "equal." I don't know how hard that is to understand.
Pat yourself on the back for coming from a progressive family. Please continue hating the overwhelming majority of Americans who didn't always see things your way.
But the fables themselves were nothing to do with that.
That's like saying since little red riding hood was originally from the late 16th century, she should think all gay people should be hung and that women should have a set role in society.
1- 'tI still don't understand your overall point about that matter. Diversity isn't intrinsically bad, but is presented as bad by the right wing, therefore...?
2- Oh, sure it can happen. Most things can happen. Doesn't mean that any inter-racial interaction is terrible, nor that races fighting each other are certain.
And since you ignored the second half of my point, I'll ask again: do you support the ideals of Apartheid?
4- NO, they did NOT make a huge specific announcement about it. They mentioned it in an off hand way, just as they have done with saying Josephine is attracted to women.
They also didn't mention Sera is a lesbian in any public interview, they just answered fan questions. Surely if they were hungry for diversity points they would have made a large announcement to everyone about it?
Showing me some pictures of some bioware fans does not mean Bioware is specifically pandering to them. Plenty of the fans stand up for the Witcher on the forums too.
And FYI, the renmiri quote is because she's a female, and she is forced to play a set gender which she doesn't like. She wishes at least that if she is forced to play as a male she can romance other males, but she can't in the witcher hence the 'too hetero male' quote.
5- Oh yes, because hyperbole is always an effective argument.
Anyway: they made them bisexual so that everyone got a choice regardless of sex. That is to say, if you're a women who only likes other women, you have a choice in who you bang, which is nice. They were trying to make things as fair as possible.
And Aveline was straight as well FYI.
The Dorian interview makes it abundantly clear that, with this character, they DO have a story to tell about him being gay.
I'm not sure what you want: you seem to dislike Bioware telling you if a character is gay or not, but only liek them having gay characters when it's a big part of their character arc.
Those ideas contradict: for Dorian it's a big part of his character arc as he is a noble from a country where you're supposed to always procreate for the sake of your noble house, and yet you thought them mentioning it was unnecessary.
Just because thinking all members of a group are a stereotype is bad, doesn't mean there are no walking stereotypes. Besides, if you've heard his voice you'll know that he is far from a compelte steretype.
I'm actually very happy you bring up Iron Bull: he has recently been revealed as bisexual, so actually they are going against stereotypes.
Well red riding hood is a lot more abstract than these stories. Regardless it is not about what the characters should be but what they can be. The one thousand and one nights are from a culture in which slavery existed so it makes sense for the characters to follow that culture. He didn't have to draw that connection but he did and there is nothing racist about that.
I don
t like comics at all.:D I prefer books.I havent stumbled across any good zombie books lately so sometimes I read the fanfics on this forum.They are really interesting.Feminism was once about equality of the sexes but now feminism has become a world-view. A world view with ridiculous ideas like patriarchy theory and the subject-object dichotomy and a world-view that demonizes sexualization.
Yeah... this thread got out of hand quick.
Mmhmm. Kinda wish I'd just posted the link and nothing else. My bad. >_<
It's not your fault. It's just that some people have a bad habit of bringing up irrelevant topics that have no relation to the Wolf Among Us or Fables whatsoever.