Kometa!: The most universal quality

I wanted to highlight this commentary by netizen 4PointOh in his response on Newsarama. That post is a response to "2011's Hot Buttons p.4: Superhero Diversity" an article by Newsarama contributor Vaneta Rogers.

Re: 2011's Hot Buttons p.4: SUPERHERO DIVERSITY
by 4PointOh » Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:49 pm

This article lets the industry, especially DC Comics, off the hook in ways too numerous to mention. Newsarama was obviously trying to bring attention to a problem that has plagued the comic book industry since its inception without actually offending the prime movers and shakers.

As a group (not as individuals), white heterosexual men are the most perplexing creatures on the planet to me. They seem to be the only group almost always incapable of buying into any form of media unless theirs is either the dominant or exclusive image contained therein. They seem hypersensitive to and threatened by the very idea of including “the Other.” For them, if the Other must be included (and it's always regarded as some sort of intrusion), then the Other has to meet some arbitrary, but rigorous inclusion standards: The Other cannot be a replacement/legacy character for some previously beloved white character; the Other cannot be placed in the media as a part of some attempt at political correctness, tokenism, or diversity; the Other cannot be more competent or more central than the white character, etc, etc, etc. And even when the Otherized character meets the ridiculous standards—standards that, by the way, the white male characters rarely, if ever, have to meet: The white guys automatically belong; everyone else needs a reason to be there—it's still more likely than not that the character will not receive the support of the white male audience.

From the creators' end, the Otherized characters almost always embrace some sort of stereotypical trope including, but not limited to: For black characters, if there's not a full-faced mask, then there's some animal theme or some contrivance to make them “less black” (Storm's white hair and blue eyes, for example); for female characters, either her tits or her ass have to be a central feature (sometimes, both at the same time); for gay characters, sexuality of any kind can be expressed only if it's the kind that white heterosexual men like: namely, “hot lesbian sex.”

And most of the time, creators don't do anything innovative, imaginative, or subversive with those stereotypes (unlike the brilliant twist in the Walking Dead television episode “Vatos”). Nope. Generally, it's the same tired racist, sexist and homophobic tropes, only they don't want you to call it racist, sexist or homophobic. Pointing those things out will only force creators to become defensive and evoke the conservation ender: “No matter what we do, you're going to find fault with it. You'll never be happy, so why should we try to do anything in this regard? That’s why we keep everything so white and male: because you’re so sensitive about it all, we feel it’s the safest route to take. So, see? It’s actually your fault.” That, of course, is just a specious argument designed to hide their profound lack of imagination, talent and creativity—and perhaps their own racist, sexist, and homophobic tendencies.

Instead of you looking for and finding fault with them, they want you to just be grateful that they deigned to include the Other in the first place. They want you to thank them for at least trying.