Why The Internet Is Disturbed By This ‘X-Men’ Poster *Trigger Warning*

[sheshe2]

A new poster for “X-Men: Apocalypse” featuring Jennifer Lawrence is getting attention for the all the wrong reasons.

The poster features Lawrence as her blue-skinned character Mystique being strangled by antagonist Apocalypse, played by Oscar Issac. Unsurprisingly, many are not happy with the imagery 20th Century Fox chose.

There is a major problem when the men and women at 20th Century Fox think casual violence against women is the way to market a film. There is no context in the ad, just a woman getting strangled. The fact that no one flagged this is offensive and frankly, stupid. The geniuses behind this, and I use that term lightly, need to to take a long hard look at the mirror and see how they are contributing to society. Imagine if it were a black man being strangled by a white man, or a gay male being strangled by a hetero? The outcry would be enormous. So let’s right this wrong. 20th Century Fox, since you can’t manage to put any women directors on your slate for the next two years, how about you at least replace your ad?

The Mary Sue also commented on the negative implications of showing a naked woman being choked by a male three times her size in such a public and promotional manner.

“There’s an indulgent, gross, and exploitative quality to this decision, where the promotion of the film relies on images of abuse,” reporter Sasha James wrote. “With Mystique at the mercy of Apocalypse’s destructive will, this poster reinforces a narrative that commandeers and reduces women into a position of helplessness through violence.”

Read More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/jennifer-lawrence-x-men-poster-strangle_us_57507594e4b0c3752dccdcbd


[url=http://postimage.org/][img][/img][/url]

I am deeply offended by this. They cannot promote their film any other way? This promotes Violence Against Women.

[yeoman6987]

1. I get that

However the actresses want to be treated equally. There will be a female bond someday who will be shot at and beat up throughout the movie. Not great imagery but it does raise the equality of actresses in movie which is one step actresses want. Jennifer Lawrence would never accept this role if she didn't think this scene in the movie was important. Jennifer Lawrence is huge supporter of woman's equality in films. I trust her judgement then internet opinions.

[PJMcK]

10. No disagreement but...

... actors don't have anything to say about how a film is marketed. Generally, their contract would give the studio the right to use the actor's image in advertisements. In fact, some contracts require the actors to make personal appearances to promote the film. It's part of why they get paid so much.

None of this is to suggest that I approve of the imagery. I heard Jeffrey Lyon's review on the radio and he said the X-Men need to be retired; I agree.

[Rosco T.]

12. Not retired, taken from FOX and given back to Marvel so they can do it right

[LostOne4Ever]

141. Do it right?

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]If Marvel had X-Men there would NEVER have been a rated R Deadpool movie.



They would have watered it down and killed it just to get a PG-13 rating and have said as much. I think the X-Men are better off away from Marvel especially given the way they have treated the comic book.

Besides, with the exceptions of the first Wolverine Movie and X3 they have made some pretty good X-Men movies.[/font]

[Act_of_Reparation]

185. I also think the IPs being in separate hands keeps MCU from getting too bloated.

Let's be honest here. If MCU had access to X-Men and the mutants, they'd probably implode under the weight of the sheer number of characters at their disposal. Hell, they had enough trouble trying to shoehorn new characters into Age of Ultron and Civil War (to a lesser extent).

And to be fair, FOX made the same mistakes with the X-Men franchise. Here's a two-dimensional colossus for approximately ten seconds, and there's an Angel with no backstory or motivation, and if there's a way to fit Wolverine into this movie, you damn well better believe we'll find it... unless the movie is Deadpool. Then you just get a picture of Hugh Jackman stapled to Ryan Reynolds' face.

[yeoman6987]

14. I didn't know part 1 of your post but appreciate the knowledge

Part 2 I agree 100 percent. I hope this is the last one. I think I heard JL say she's close to being done with the franchise. Maybe that's a good sign. It had a great run.

[Chan790]

240. It'll never be the last one.

It's an IP in the same straits as Fantastic Four. As long as they continue to make a movie every few years, they maintain the licensing rights in perpetuity.

They're going to continue to make X-Men movies, even if they start losing money, until they become hemorrhage-level losses because the IP is valuable and they want to keep it away from Marvel. It doesn't just cover the films...it covers all merch rights to the characters, because of the films and their rights to tie-in marketing.

We'll see "Storm and Mystique knitting" before we see them give up those rights.

[greiner3]

39. It's not the same;

"However the actresses want to be treated equally."

Hell, I remember the vitriol and stupid comments of the 60s and 70s when the women's movement came about;

She can open her own door, and I bet she'd go down with one punch (yes, that's an actual quote from someone I used to know and any of many other winning sayings of the time.

So I don't know where you wanted to go with equal treatment and your post but it came off pretty shitty.

Just sayin

[Calista241]

236. Angelina Jolie has beaten up and been beat up by males in her movies for years.

[JackRiddler]

272. Jennifer Lawrence may have no say whatsoever on the poster.

It doesn't matter. The poster is not the movie. The movie is irrelevant to the poster. The context of the poster is the street, where people see it involuntarily. Most of those people don't care about the movie and don't know what a kick-ass, "positive" character Mystique might be. Most people still see the poster. This is elementary.

[quickesst]

2. my take on it

Mystique is not an ordinary woman. She is gifted with powers that are beyond the abilities of a normal person. She stands with the X-Men, not behind them. If one believes a simple poster promotes violence against women then one has to believe that the entire movie does the same and should not have been made. Simply because she is a woman doesn't mean she should not battle or compete with men. Women have earned and deserve their superheroes.

[Volaris]

163. She's also one of the X men that can hold her own in a physical fight.

I mean that, despite her shape-shifting abilities, mystique in her filmic incarnations is a highly trained martial combatant, to the point that she can mostly hold her own against even the wolverine (no small feat).
The image above (I think) is meant to portray not violence against women specifically, but the nasty character and overt power of Apocalypse beyond that of other mutants.

Was it a dumb decision on Foxs part? Probably. But if it were a comic cover no one would care except for the suggestion that that there's about to be a badass brawl connected to that Cover Art. It's not an excuse, but context is important here, I think..

That's just me and I hope that doesn't come off as naively misogynist. When I see that image, I see an EPIC and well-deserved beatdown in Apocalypse's near future, with Mystique constituting a significant part of that asswhooping.

[quickesst]

169. Sounds reasonable to me

I guess I'm just one of those people who is not prone to peel back the layers in order to find something offensive or detrimental. I think that if any of them had been in the same situation the effect would have been the same. This is one bad MF and it is going to take all of us to defeat him. If mystique did not play an equal, and vital part in that scenario why would she even be a character in the movie? Then again, maybe I'm just getting too old, and can't keep up anymore.

[Bettie]

171. I see her in that position and I see a moment

right before she gets free and contributes to the ass kicking.

I prefer a female superhero to a female character who always has to be rescued. Mystique is not a victim character.

The thing I like about the XMen is that the women are just as important as the men and just as formidable.

I don't find the image particularly problematic in terms of what the movie is.

[quickesst]

219. Exactly!!

[whathehell]

179. She,'s not portrayed in the poster as ,'poweful"...

She's portrayed as a victim...Ask yourself why the didn't show one of the men being strangled

It's not a matter of one picture -- The media depicts violence against women in a sexualized, sensationalist manner.
.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

197. Yes, because the idea behind the poster is to show a character (Mystique) who is a known butt-kicker

in peril. That's not to diminish her but to play-up the extent of the threat posed by the villain. It's as if to say, "Oh my gosh! If Mystique can so easily fall are any of the rest (even the boys) safe?"

[whathehell]

211. Okay...I'm not that familiar with the series

so in this case, you may well be right.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

217. Hopefully, this will help shed more light on the character --

No shrinking violet, she.

[quickesst]

226. My opinion

I think you're reading too much into this. I wish people would stop insisting that every woman who finds themselves in a dangerous situation is a powerless victim. Male superheroes find themselves in that same place all the time. They always come back stronger, and believe it or not this applies to female superheroes also. I am not a misogynist, but I don't looking for them under my bed every night before I go to sleep either. There are quite a few movies where women might start out as victims but because of their resolve, and strength of character, soon turn that situation around.

[whathehell]

230. Please.'re-read my post..

and tell me where I said that "every woman who finds herself in danger is a victim".

That wasn't my complaint. Please read it again.

[JackRiddler]

267. Sorry, the movie, character and plot are irrelevant.

This is a poster on the street. It is a paid advertisement targeting the entire public. Currently you will see it all over New York City, I can assure you, whether you want to or not. Everyone sees the poster, whether or not they will ever see the movie, or ever know what the movie is about, who the X-Men are or who Mystique is, or ever care about it. The poster connotes and promotes independently of what the message of the movie may be. The poster forces itself on millions of eyeballs involuntarily. (I can't believe how this elementary point appears to escape a segment of a film's pre-sold fandom every time there is an issue about posters.)

At the very least, the distributors are engaging in a witting public display of sexualized violence against women and not caring about it because they have calculated that it will sell the movie more than not.

[quickesst]

274. It seems..

.... after some research that I am outnumbered as to my take on the poster. I do completely understand your point of view, but I still hold to my opinion that someone of mystique's strength and character will overcome whatever dire straits they find themselves in. I would absolutely agree with you if she was a mere mortal and not a superhero with unique powers. I have every confidence that by the end of the movie my opinion will be validated.

[JackRiddler]

275. I'm sorry, you are missing the point.

The poster is not the movie. It doesn't matter if the movie has her winning the presidential election on a platform that ends all violence and gives women wages for housework. People will still see the poster involuntarily and most of them won't know or care what's in the movie. They don't know or care who Mystique is. The poster is an advertisement. Its context is the street. It depicts sexualized violence in a hot manner and uses it as a selling point.

[TipTok]

3. How do these people go outside...?

Someone getting choked? In a superhero movie?

You don't say...?

Landagocious... Me oh my...

You want her to sit in the background and knit or something?

[SCantiGOP]

5. Agree, Tiptok

[CatWoman]

245. Hey Strom Jr!!

I agree with Tiptok as well

[SCantiGOP]

248. Catwoman

How are you? Long time since I've seen you here.
Still in Hotlanta I assume.
Your state might have a chance to go blue this year; sadly no hope for SC unless zombie Strom comes back and runs as a Democrat (or Dixiecrat).

[CatWoman]

252. you are more optimistic than I am

yep, still in Atlanta



I heard that North and South Carolina were redrawing their borders, and some residents may switch states as a consequence?

[SCantiGOP]

261. 18 houses.

Not a big deal, except you might have to face the bathroom police if they move you to NC.
There is still an argument about which state Andrew Jackson was born in; both states have a Jackson State Park.
I say let NC have the old dead bastard.

[Skeeter Barnes]

48. They're not happy unless everyone around them is miserable.

Constantly shaming like an abusive parent. If you look a little further down the thread, the image has now been deemed racist as well.

The Democratic party is full of this type of garbage and it drives normal people away. They don't necessarily vote for R's. They just don't bother voting or even identify themselves as a Democrat. They don't want to be associated with this kind of nonsense.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

93. I don't like the term "outside". Please use non-roofedness in the future.

[TipTok]

110. Show some sensitivity...

With your normative pronouns...

I.... Pshaw...

[DisgustipatedinCA]

111. You got me there.

[GummyBearz]

238. Oh my

"Roofed" is way too close to "roofied" for this thread to handle... yikes

[AlbertCat]

191. How do these people go outside...?

Last edited Fri Jun 3, 2016, 12:09 PM - Edit history (1)

Apparently they don't...or read comics or go to movies in the past 16 years. They must live in a persecution vacuum.

"There is no context in the ad, just a woman getting strangled."

No context? Just a woman.....?

A blue woman who has kicked ass in 4? 5? other films (directly connected to this one), usually one of the villains, and can change to look like anyone. Perhaps she should have changed into the shape of a man. Then it would be alright for her to get strangled, right?

*********
To not get the context, you'd have to live in a pineapple under the sea!

This is a thing called "Retentive Advertising".

"According to the MBA Knowledge Base website, advertising campaigns typically have a cycle of three stages -- the last of which is referred to as the retentive or "reminder" stage. Stage one of the advertising cycle is referred to as "pioneer" advertising and introduces the consumer to the product. Stage two of the cycle is "competition" advertising, which reflects the market maturity of the product and the need for the company to show product superiority through comparison to competitors. Companies cannot begin the third stage -- retentive advertising -- until their product is well known by consumers."

It is for people who already know the characters and the other NINE x-men movies in the franchise, with 2 more coming up.

[JackRiddler]

268. The poster is not a superhero movie.

The poster is a public display. Its recipients have no choice but to see it. For a minute I thought your question was going to be, how do those responsible for placing this public advertisement go outside without gagging at themselves for choosing an image of sexualized violence against a hot blue woman with her tongue lolling and so obviously thrusting it at the 90% of the people who don't give a shit about the movie and will never see it. Why do they think this sells, and if they do, why do they do it anyway?

[TipTok]

276. Who cares if they see it?

It's a still of a fight scene from a movie. It doesn't have to appeal to 100% of the population. It just has to appeal to folks who might go see the film.

Probably people who saw ol Raven choke the crap out of this guy.



Oh no! Using sexy women to sell films? Say it ain't so...

Someone fetch my fainting couch!

[JackRiddler]

277. It's not using "sexy women" to sell films.

It's using violence against sexy women to attract attention.

You can say you have no problem with it, it's irrelevant, the corporation has a god given right to buy any ad space and stick any image on it. If you did, you would be honest.

But you seem to want to deny the self-evident fact of what the poster depicts. At least be honest.

(The movie still you post is a movie still. It is not a billboard on the street.)

[TipTok]

280. I understand on an intellectual level...

I just don't care...

Anyone that sensitive is going to be offended by a very long list of things in the world and I see no reason to sterilize society for their delicate benefit.

[JackRiddler]

281. This is not "society."

It is the billboard advertising industry. What rights should it have? I would not call for content restrictions. Rather:

I see no reason to have society arranged for the pleasure of advertisers. I see no reason why advertisers get the privilege of dominating public spaces.

Cities in Brazil and incredibly enough Houston have banned it as a form of pollution. Good for them.

[TipTok]

282. Billboards are out in society...

That's why advertisers pay for them.

Are you moving on from being triggered at the picture itself to the concept of billboards now?

[JackRiddler]

284. I think advertisers should get whatever they want.

If they want to stop the train so that they can play a trailer for a movie, they should get to do that.

Sir or madam, do not project on to me.

I am not triggered by the picture. I do see what it depicts and do not deny it. It is a depiction of sexualized violence against a female form. I will tell you what triggers me: all the people on this thread who cannot admit this obvious fact, or who try to obscure it in blah-blah about what's in the movie. Because stupidity always triggers me. Fancy that.

As for the concept of billboards, I never liked them, especially not in public social environments. Advertisers shouldn't decide what the design of the public environment is. People in Houston and Porto Allegre agree. I guess you'd be happy if there was a giant billboard on the Taj Mahal, or the Statue of Liberty.

[TipTok]

286. Its a sexy woman in a fight....

... because that's what's in the movie.

Should they photoshop a bomb suit on her to take away the curves? Is it the sexiness you object to?

Maybe even more padding to hide the gender... Maybe it's the fact she is a woman. Perhaps you'd prefer if she was holding a sewing circle in a secure location far away from icky violence since obviously women shouldn't be in this position?

[JackRiddler]

287. They can pick a different image to promote the movie...

That's up to them. Currently they're free to buy space and push any image on people involuntarily. I'm not for content restriction (I'd just take down the billboards period).

There is no context for the image. It is a still. You can interpret the things that it doesn't show or what you think happens before or after however you like: fight, rape, dance, whatever. Doesn't matter.

The actual image is of a male strangling fatally a female in a sexualized fashion. It reflects the belief of the promoters that this will sell the film. It reflects their apathy to the fact that they are exploiting an image of violence against women for commercial purposes. It reflects their apathy to how people sensitive to such images might react. (And no, I don't want to mock every possible sensitivity that human beings might have about images in public. There may be a basis to objecting to images of violence, especially superfluous ones whose only function is to make money.) It does so solely for the profit, without art being the intent. (By definition of adverstising, and you don't get to change that.)

Again, I would prefer that no marketing images be thrust at me on the subway. If works of art expressing a human being's views might depict emotionally disturbing matters, I probably wouldn't mind. I do mind exploitation for commercial purposes.

[TipTok]

288. I think you are projecting a bit...

It's a fight... Doesn't look very sexual to me other than the fact that Jennifer Lawrece is dead sexy by her mere existence.

[JackRiddler]

289. I think you are denying more than a bit.

In any case, the advertiser knows exactly what reactions they produce. They've studied this. They decided to use this image as a seller for a reason, knowing that of course most people would reasonably (and involuntarily) see a huge man strangling a woman to death. They could have chosen a hundred other images. (The same way you chose one that isn't on the billboard.)

[TipTok]

290. My image was from a previous one...

... where she choked the crap out of another guy.

Again, I'm trying to whip up some angst about the fact that they are using a sexy woman to promote their film but nothing yet.

You are the one suggesting that it's a sexy choke instead of a regular one. Like I said, projection...

Like those angry preachers who see gay propaganda wherever they go. They see what they want to see and what's on their mind.

[JackRiddler]

291. Meh. You are the one pretending to be image-illiterate.

You'd flunk an advertising or art course if you really didn't see the sexualization in the image. But actually I give you more credit than that. You're just a man (presumably) who insists on being "right" and on having a set of simple principles that answer all arguments.

In any case, may a media conglomerate wrap a giant blinking screen billboard display around your bedroom and flash alternating military recruitment and strip club ads 24/7. Because society can't be arranged for your tender sensibilities and no attention should ever be paid to the aesthetics of public spaces. If you're not paying for it, tough!

[TipTok]

292. Military recruitment ad wouldn't do much good...

... seeing as how I'm typing this from Afghanistan.

Side question.. Why did you even bring this up? This thread wrapped up two weeks ago...

[JackRiddler]

293. I didn't see it two weeks ago.

For whatever reason, it was back up top, and I replied without looking at OP date. They only die when they drop for good (or get locked).

Or if you mean why mention military recruitment ads, well your avatar suggests as much. Anyway.

Apropos, did you ever see this one?

[mikehiggins]

4. Saw the movie with my former wife (separated). Neither of us mentioned that scene afterwards.

More dramatic was the female character who kicked the villain's all but omnipotent butt all the way back to pre-Egyptian times.

Want to talk about powerful females? Go see the movie.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

9. Please, stop trying to drag context into it

And you can bet the people complaining the most would never even acknowledge the film's existence aside from this.

[moriah]

149. Though perhaps not those with the most right to complain -- females in fandom/ons/etc.

I'm not a huge gamer but I sure spent enough time playing D&D and do know a developer on FB (we met when I was a teenager on local BBSes) who regularly writes about the issues since GamerGate, etc. He's not exactly a person I would call a raving feminist, but he posted about this today -- his opinion was "Bad taste for an ad, doesn't mean I won't go see it."

Even in the ultra-feminist movie "Enough" there's a scene where the actress is being choked. Since in the movie she gets the last laugh, though, merely depicting violence against females isn't inherently wrong. It was using it for the advertisement that got his "bad taste" comment, simply because without the context of the movie to perhaps show her throwing him through the Empire State Building (haven't seen it obviously) after, it just looks like they're trying to get FSOG fans to watch.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

253. A poster featuring Jennifer Lopez in "Enough" being choked would be over the line

That movie is based on a daily reality.

I think the context of superhero/fantasy films is something different. The author of one of these articles, without saying it, tacitly admits if a white man like Henry Cavill as Superman for example were being choked by Darkseid, no one would say a thing. They say there would be an outcry if it was a black man, let's say John Stewart's Green Lantern, or a gay man (ok how the fuck is a gay man depicted in a rendering so you know he's gay if you don't know shit about the character like so many of these idiots crying don't....) like Alan Scott also as GL were being choked. I think there'd be as much of an outcry as these people are putting on, which is not much. The fact is the buzz surrounding this film was that it's JLaw's last XMen movie possibly and therefore she's the one likely to be killed and that folks is a huge deal. She is the star of this film. She is being set up as the primary hero. And she's a woman.

I'll also say in the Civil War movie, Black Widow almost gets choked out by the Winter Soldier's bionic arm. It is an intense moment but never once do you think "Oh my God she's a woman she can't handle this" because her character is a badass but almost any other hero in that spot would be in trouble too.

[moriah]

266. They were pretty careful with triggering imagery in trailers, etc there.

For good reason.

But as I said, he was more looking at it from "Tacky, bad taste" for the still ad, not the movie. It's enough that for years advertisers have catered nearly exclusively to the male gamer/fandom demographic, looking like violent porn vs just "fanservice" as it's often called was what he called bad taste. But he wasn't saying the producers of the movie were to blame, calling for a boycott, etc etc blah. Or that he thought it would have been a bad movie.

[JackRiddler]

279. More fan discussion of what's in the movies.

Doesn't matter.

The poster is not the movie. The movie is not its context. The street is the context for the poster. Most people don't know and don't care about the movie. They see the poster. They don't get to choose. The poster depicts what the poster depicts. It does not depict what it reminds you of, as a fan of X-Men, JLaw or whatever. What it depicts is unmistakable. You can be fine with that. You can say it's freedom to show it. But you don't get to deny it with a lot of irrelevant talk abou the possible meanings of the film. Doesn't matter.

[JackRiddler]

269. The movie is not the context.

The context is the street, where the poster is rendered visible to people who have no choice but to see it, whether or not they care in the least about the movie. Why do you refuse to see the context of the poster?

[dark forest]

6. No context?

It says "X-men" and "Apocalypse" right on the image.

Not that I don't understand the complaint, but "no context"?

[JackRiddler]

283. So what?

Who cares about X-Men? Who knows what it is and who'd ever watch it? Who can go blah-blah-blah about the wonderfully liberating qualities of Mystique, a woman who murders as well as Wolverine, hooray?

Minorities.

Does that change the content of the picture? You may think it depicts a character called "Mystique." The vast majority will necessarily (as the advertiser knows) see an attractive (blue) woman being strangled in a sexualized way, with her tongue lolling.

Does that change the context of the picture? No. The context is the street, where no one has a choice about seeing the billboard.

[Throd]

7. Oh please, she probably ends up kicking that thing's ass.

[DeadLetterOffice]

41. ACK!! SPOILER ALERT PLEASE!

[Buddyblazon]

53. Dude...wtf?

Is this your first time on the Internet? Delete your comment...lest you be the least popular dude at the dance.

[Bucky]

67. only in the next movie Mystique turns out to be a mole

put a spoiler alert on that one too please

[Lizzie Poppet]

207. Yep...an actual mole. Pic related:

[Bucky]

235. Changed her name to Mole-Woman

But the results are not what the fans will be expecting
















Okay, that was corny. Let me make it up to you with this...

[AngryAmish]

8. If the internet is disturbed then the internet is fucked.

What the fuck is wrong with people.

[sheshe2]

17. Yes, when the internet and women IRL

Are disturbed about misogamy, you tell me we are the ones that are wrong.

[AngryAmish]

18. You realize this is not real life, yes?

Was Obi Wan Kenobi dying in Star Wars elder abuse?

There are too many turds with access to keyboards.

[Quackers]

28. OMG!!! I choked!

[Buddyblazon]

54. This...

They do the feminist movement harm when this stuff is complained about for that reason.

It's a comic book story. COMIC BOOK. You cannot be offended at everything. Then you go from supporting a cause to just being an asshole.

[sheshe2]

73. Went staright over your head.

It is all about VAW. Happens every dayum day.

It's a comic book story. COMIC BOOK. You cannot be offended at everything. Then you go from supporting a cause to just being an asshole.

What is comic is you calling women fighting for their lives assholes.

[George II]

77. Jury results - LEAVE IT 6-1

On Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:17 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Went staright over your head.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7876573

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Calling people that don't get your sensitivity over a subject does not allow you to call the names. That's right in the TOS.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:24 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No harm, no foul. Leave it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: debate it, ok! I'm watching the NBA Finals.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No names were called. Alert is bogus.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Asshole is not misogynistic. Guess what is though?
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's a civil post. Why are we still fighting over this anyway. The Sanders-Clinton prizefight is unofficially over.

[sheshe2]

80. OMG. Thank you George.

Thanks....

[snooper2]

176. look away child! LOOK AWAY!

LOL

[phleshdef]

204. You trying to tie an X-Men poster to any serious feminist cause is hilariously sad.

[JackRiddler]

285. The poster takes up space in real life, in a public area.

Maybe you get to live in a nice fat suburb where the billboards don't get thrust at your head.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

216. What does this have to do with marriage? Do you mean misogyny?

And are you aware that it doesn't have anything to do with that, either?

[Major Nikon]

11. I wonder if this one will make it to 377

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025431864

[linuxman]

13. Because people are running out of real problems.

[sheshe2]

20. VAW is no longer a real problem.

Thank you so much for letting me know. You belittle the crimes against women. They are not real problems. Got it.

[linuxman]

22. This may come as a shock to you, but X-men is a movie.

Now, I didn't direct the film, but I'm pretty sure no crime was committed during this scene.

Does violence involving women in movies bother you? Well, steer clear of any of them featuring strong, capable, bad-asses like Mystique, Rogue, Jean Gray, Storm, etc. You see, in superhero movies with heroines, they usually get into fights.

I think Anne of Green Gables or Sense and Sensibility may be more to your taste. I prefer ones where female characters aren't treated like dainty, delicate flowers, but as heroes who can take a hit and keep going. Sick, I know.

Different strokes, I suppose.

[sheshe2]

92. Women take a hit every day and we keep going. nt

[linuxman]

96. Yet this (fictional) movie seems to have stopped a few others cold.

Apparently, those aren't the same women.

[sheshe2]

100. You just don't get it. nt

[linuxman]

102. Oh. Okay then.

[phleshdef]

200. There is nothing to get. You are absurd.

[Loki Liesmith]

259. And you don't know what you are talking about

With respect to Mystique.

[sheshe2]

260. Well you don't know what you are talking about...

When it comes to abused women. I find your comment sad.

[Bettie]

173. So, no more female superheroes

because they might be involved in violence?

I don't get that and I'm a woman. I'm a woman who has experienced violence in several forms through my years on the planet.

I like seeing a woman in a movie able to give as well as she gets, I hate seeing passive victims waiting for a big, strong, man to come save them.

I also dislike movies where nothing happens and everyone is a polite chipmunk throughout.

Sometimes a poster is just a poster...Mystique is a popular character, so they used her image on the poster.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

90. This movie poster is not a problem. If it is a problem, you're going to need to go back in time

and take a stand against every movie that features violence since movies started being made. Come on. There are some big things happening. This isn't one of them.

[sheshe2]

94. VAW is not a big thing? Alrighty then. nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

97. You've failed at trying to put words in my mouth. Do you recall sentence diagramming from school?

Good.

Go back to my statement and tell me what the subject of my sentence was. I'll be waiting.

[linuxman]

98. Nobody said that but you.

Odd...

[sibelian]

156. It's slightly more prevalent than violence against men in a domestic context.

About 60% to 40% in recent surveys, IIRC.

In other contexts frequency of acts of violence against men regularly exceeds the frequency of acts of violence against women by a multiplier of about 5, give or take, depending on where you live and your social background, things like that.

So, yes, it's a big thing.

[Bluenorthwest]

165. The tactic 'putting words into the mouths of others' is a bully's tactic, it is a form of rhetorical

aggression. Claiming to be against violent control of others while playing that sort of game is self indulgent hypocrisy.

[skepticscott]

181. I would disagree

First and foremost, it's a coward's tactic (though they are often the same thing). It's the tactic of someone who has already decided the total and unquestionable truth of a matter, and who can abide nothing that will upset that worldview. It is the tactic of someone who knows deep down that they can't prevail in an honest, fact-based, rational debate, so they have to lie about what other people have said. It's a tactic all too common on DU, sad to say.

[TipTok]

114. Maybe you want all the female superheroes...

... To sit in a secure bunker and talk about their feelings?

I wonder if folks are really up in arms about this or just trying to get a rise out of the logical portion of the population.

I suspect around 50 /50.

[AlbertCat]

195. I suspect around 50 /50.

I'm sure it's good for publicity.

[yallerdawg]

15. Are DU'ers actually suggesting you...

"Don't get your panties in a wad?"

Shameful.

Casual internet misogyny. "Comic Book Men." "Gamergate" and gaming 'culture' of sexism. Hollywood.

Keep bringing it to our collective attention, she!

"In the land of the blind, the one-eyed woman is queen!"

[sheshe2]

16. "Casual internet misogyny."

Yup, brush it off. It is not important at all.

Thank you my friend. I am awed by the responses here. Not surprised, yet in awe. Women are not liked here very much.

[okasha]

24. This is a venue where a woman can be told

to "go fuck herself with a brick" with impunity.

Am I the only person to note that the victim in that picture is not white, and her attacker is?

[sheshe2]

29. Bricks are okay here. A leave!!!!!!

Gawd that comment hurt.

No, never saw that she was a person of color (blue) and he is so very white. I just saw his big hand around her throat. This is how they promote a movie.

Thanks okasha, love you.

[okasha]

113. Got your back, sister.

[sheshe2]

131. Love you back!

[melman]

32. "the victim in that picture is not white, and her attacker is?"

OMFG. You have got to be kidding.

[christx30]

40. The woman in the picture can become any color she wants.

She's been a white man, Asian female, Russian, black, gay, straight ect, whatever her mission calls for.
Her assailant is a mutant from ancient Egypt, and is trying to bring about the end of the world.

[okasha]

123. Two points.

1. None of that is evident in the poster.

2. The advertisers had a wealth of alternative images at hand, but chose this one that depicts a man strangling a woman.

[sheshe2]

132. Yes!

Point #2

[Humanist_Activist]

143. I agree about the VAW aspect, but I really don't understand the color argument...

neither "character" is white, and the actress playing Mystique is white IRL, so I'm not sure what argument you are trying to make there. Indeed, if you were to try to pin down En Sabah Nur's ethnicity, its ancient Egyptian, so likely a mix of near-eastern, north African and Nubian if anything.

And its not evident in the poster for obvious reasons, two characters under heavy makeup/special effects are fighting. Due to the backstory, where their mutant traits are dominant over most if not all possible "ethnic" traits, its impossible to really pin either down to a race from a picture.

[skepticscott]

170. It's evident to anyone who has bothered to educate themselves, okasha

But instead, you choose to just wade in with fake outrage, while understanding nothing. apparently your endless preaching about "context" doesn't apply to you.

Strange too that you're so wound up with being outraged over a movie poster that doesn't even depict what you say it does, while being an unabashed apologist for the catholic church, the biggest promoter of actual sexism and homophobia in the world.

[snooper2]

180. you are correct! Remember the outrage when this came out!

Assault, rape, violence! And every claimed- Oh, it's just a movie!

[phleshdef]

201. Two points

1. Who the fuck cares?

2. Who the fuck cares?

[Egnever]

234. How do you know it is a man's hand?

Or are you just projecting your own insecurity?

[okasha]

265. Species: opposable thumb.

Gender: size relative to female's hand.

[Lordquinton]

144. "Am I the only person to note that the victim in that picture is not white, and her attacker is?"

Yes... you might want to adjust your monitor color because they are actually both blue.

[sibelian]

159. Yes. You are the only person to notice that.

Well, actually, no. There might be some other people somewhere who may think that Apocalypse is "white"... but, ummmm. That's not reeeeeeally got anything to do with Apocalypse. Apocalypse isn't white. He's..... a sort of bluish GREY. GREY is a different colour from white.

Also, I'm unaware of the historical context from which we may form a basis for this image's subtext. The oppression of blue people by grey people isn't something I've ever been taught about in school.

It's not your job to educate me, I'm sure.

[skepticscott]

162. Her coloration (blue) has nothing to do with race

Nor does his. He has gray skin, btw, so where the fuck you got "white" is another mystery, unless it's iust your need to manufacture fake outrage at every opportunity.

There are MUTANTS for pity's sake. Educate yourself before you comment so foolishly.

[snooper2]

178. Have you seen this! I walked out of this movie, blatant shaming-

I have the same issue, making fun men with a chrome penis!




See at 20 seconds in!

[Buddyblazon]

56. Help help...I'm being repressed.

.

[TipTok]

119. I didn't vote for you...

v

[Buddyblazon]

120. Love it...

When people get my references. Lol

[TipTok]

124. I try not to associate with anyone...

... Who wouldn't get that reference.

[Buddyblazon]

126. .

[William769]

19. People that can't see misogyny are bound to repeat it.

People that see it and refuse to acknowledge it are well just assholes.

[sheshe2]

21. Thank you.

[A Simple Game]

25. And people that see it when nothing is there...? n/t

[William769]

27. See post #19.

[A Simple Game]

37. In case you didn't notice, that was the post I was responding to.

Don't let it bother you, I didn't expect an answer.

[William769]

44. Still same response.

[A Simple Game]

172. I see you have the time to respond, could it be you don't want to answer in which

case you probably wouldn't have replied more than once, or that you don't want to admit what the answer would be.

My guess is it is you don't want to admit that some people, if they want it badly enough, will find what they are looking for even if it isn't there. Perhaps you also know such people fall into the category of perpetual complainers or should I say perpetual victims?

As for the example in this thread? It is a form of advertising, and whether it is misogynistic or not, you are doing what was intended, you are talking about it.

But perhaps the intent goes deeper, I see a struggle between good and evil and it makes me wonder which side will prevail. You see misogyny and violence against women, so why do you see a woman before you see good, or a mutant? But then again we see what we want, don't we?

[Quackers]

23. I disagree. This is an action film

Violence kinda goes hand in hand with action films. Besides, have you ever seen mystique in these films? She kicks a lot of ass! In regard to her being naked, she stopped wearing "normal" clothes because she was tired of being oppressed by those who thought she was a freak. She wanted to represent who she really was and no longer pretend to be a normal human. Don't forget that she has the ability to change her appearance too. In the next scene she could be a guy or a girl. I think this article is just looking for a reason not to like this franchise.

[JackRiddler]

278. This is not a film.

It is a poster. The poster is not the film. The poster is an image placed prominently in a public space. The poster is a separate medium, a work unto its own, something many more people will see than the film. No one gets a choice about whether they see the poster. 70-90% of them don't know or care about the film. The movie's "message" and the character's story are irrelevant to them. Some explanation of why the character is so liberating for women (because she murders people as easily as Wolverine! Hooray!) doesn't matter.

The poster depicts sexualized violence against a female form. This is explicit. To see that is only to see that. You want to say it's okay, it's freedom, whatever. You may. No one is censoring you. You want to say it's not sexualized violence against a female form, you are denying what the poster depicts.

[Matrosov]

26. Where's the context?

I haven't seen the movie. What if she beats his ass in the next scene? Is it still misogynistic?

Maybe the poster isn't supposed to make us think that women are weak and deserve to be abused. Maybe the poser is just meant to get us excited about Mystique..

[sheshe2]

55. Hmmm...

Maybe the poster isn't supposed to make us think that women are weak and deserve to be abused. Maybe the poser is just meant to get us excited about Mystique..

There is no way I am touching that comment.

[snooper2]

183. Why not, who doesn't like shapeshifting badass hottie!

[Travis_0004]

30. Lets just not cast any women in action movies, so you wont be offended.

[Buddyblazon]

86. Boom...

Truth.

[rpannier]

101. Or...

single sex action films

Either way, this whole thing seems absurd to me

[Reter]

31. So now Mutants want equal rights?

Mystique is mostly a villain anyway, and a Mutant that defeat 100% of regular humans, and has killed many in the past. Can't really support those being offended by this.

[DeadLetterOffice]

42. Seriously, stop with the plot reveals

[Agnosticsherbet]

45. So sorry.

[TipTok]

122. Self delete...

Seriously though...

They was going to be my last movie before deployment.

WTF...

[Agnosticsherbet]

125. Done, and it is worth seeing. Not as good as Captain America Civil War

But very good.

[Orrex]

43. You just saved people the trouble of watching the movie. Nicely done.

[Reter]

57. Which is why I said "Mystique is mostly a villain anyway"

[cagefreesoylentgreen]

34. Which is more of a threat?

Two fictional characters in a make-believe supernatural fight, or a presumptive presidential candidate who has all but sworn he'll turn women's rights back by fifty years?

I know who the real promoter of violence against women is. Do you?

[sheshe2]

46. Your post is

Rather antagonistic toward me. You have been here for a few hours and attack me. You know nothing about me.

No, if you knew me you would get that it is not about two fictional characters. It is about violence against women.

I ask you kindly to back off please. I think you should get to know DUers a little better before you attack them.

[cagefreesoylentgreen]

50. Actually

I've been a lurker here for 6 years and only recently bothered to sign up. And I know your handle.

[sheshe2]

52. So please.

Clearly explain to me what my 'Handle' is. TIA.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

66. "Handle" is another word for "username"

I think the poster was saying they recognize your username and know your reputation (whatever that is).

[X_Digger]

58. Blue lives matter!

(For the inevitable jury, Mystique's skin color is naturally blue.)

You seem to have a lot of questions pending upthread, and you seem to be ducking them while answering other posts.. I wonder why that is..

[sheshe2]

59. You are a DU monitor?

Didn't know we had one.

PS...already said she was blue.

[AlbertCat]

198. Your post is Rather antagonistic toward me.

Should we start another thread about antagonistic posts toward sheshe's?

[Agnosticsherbet]

35. This was an epic, life or death struggle in a super hero movie for the fate of the world.

The violence was not causal.

[JackRiddler]

270. No. The movie is irrelevant.

The poster is on the street. The real street. That is the context. It doesn't matter to most people what happens in the movie. They have no choice about seeing the poster.

[IronLionZion]

38. Mystique is a violent, dangerous, psychopath of a woman

but yes it does seem like a very odd way to promote the movie. It does look very misogynistic if you didn't know the story. This was a poor choice for advertising.

some other posters:

[sheshe2]

49. Thanks ILZ.

They had plenty to pick from as you have shown. Yet they picked the one with violence against women, that sells as does sex.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

60. Anyone "sold" expecting going to see women lose is going to be very disappointed if there are.....

....such people.

But absolutely none of that means a thing to you, so carry on.

[Orrex]

47. Also, his arm is too short in that poster.

[Bucky]

63. He's a mutant. It might just be his birth defect

and I need to report you to the moderators for making fun of people with birth defects

[Orrex]

64. Nice post, Winter Soldier.

Wait--wrong Bucky.

[Buddyblazon]

51. In this case...

I see it more Supervillain on Superhero violence.

Sometimes I think people are finding things to be upset about.

I guess if we don't want to see violence on female superheroes, they could delete female superheroes from the films.

Superheroes find themselves in violent circumstances all the time....male and female. They're superheroes for Pete's sake.

[sheshe2]

69. Hey Buddy,

I guess if we don't want to see violence on female superheroes, they could delete female superheroes from the films.

Superheroes find themselves in violent circumstances all the time....male and female. They're superheroes for Pete's sake.

I guess if we don't want to see violence of women in general, then we should just delete them from our lives. Women find themselves in violent circumstances all the time and they are not super heros. They are just women. Wives, children, aunts, grandmothers and friends.

[Buddyblazon]

71. You are 100% correct...

Those actual people are not fictional fantasy characters in a comic book story line that is about superheroes fighting supervillans.

There's a difference.

If female superheroes were done away with so we didn't have to see them in violent situations...would that please you?

That's a serious question and I expect a reply.

[sheshe2]

133. What would please me...

Is not to exploit violence against women. The movie poster does that.

[Buddyblazon]

135. Are you okay with violence...

to female superheroes during a fight during the movie?

[Buddyblazon]

136. Because you didn't answer my question...

Don't think it went unnoticed.

[sheshe2]

138. Hey Bud.

I love to see women kicking ass.

What I don't like is a studio selecting a image of a woman being strangled. They had plenty to pick from, yet they chose this one. Violence sells especially when it is the woman that is the victim.

[Buddyblazon]

140. Sheshe....

We're just going to have to agree to disagree out of politeness. You and I will never agree on this point.

And I'm no caveman. I was raised by my grandmother, mother and sister...all strong independent women who had and have successful businesses.

I just feel that there are many more undeniable examples of misogynistic behavior that your admirable tenacity could more effectively be applied.

Have a great night, sheshe.

[demwing]

61. Apparently, female protagonists may only fight female antagonists

Shame on someone for their defiance. I don't know who they are, but shame on them, and shame on their families for good measure

[truebrit71]

174. Yep, nothing like some good old fashioned girl-on-girl action....

No wait, that didn't come out right....

[MisterP]

62. I am intrigued: how would they want "a gay male being strangled by a hetero" depicted?

[Bucky]

65. it doesn't help matters the character is shown running around naked through the whole movie

not that strangling a naked woman is any more misogynist than strangling a clothed woman

[davidn3600]

68. Putting the poster aside....Are you saying no female character can be harmed?

Protagonists get hurt. They get shot at. They sometimes even get tortured.

Watch Die Hard and John McClane is always bleeding from somewhere. In Star Wars, Luke Skywalker gets his hand cut off by Vader. Bane breaks Batman's back. Even Superman has weaknesses and gets his ass kicked at times. Heroes in movies are not invincible and flawless. There is no enjoyment in watching a superhero on "god mode."

Should violence never be shown against a female hero?

[sheshe2]

70. Whoooosh!

The whole point went over your head.

This not about a comic book. This is about women and those that abuse them.

[Buddyblazon]

72. That's because you reached really...

really far to try to drum up offense. Posters just ain't feeling it because in this case it's apparent you're trying really hard to be offended.

Posters ain't feeling it.

[sheshe2]

74. Buddy.

You are in denial.

[Buddyblazon]

76. And you are doing the feminist movement a great disservice...

when you call people names for not being offended over this.

Misogyny and VAW are real problems. Blowing up over stuff like this makes you look bad.

[sheshe2]

78. I called people names?

And you are doing the feminist movement a great disservice...
when you call people names for not being offended over this.

Misogyny and VAW are real problems. Blowing up over stuff like this makes you look bad.

Wow.

Misogyny and VAW are real problems. Blowing up over stuff like this makes you look bad.

I very much aware there are real problems. Women that have issues with this makes us look bad???? Ooooh my gawd. Blame the woman! It is our fault.

[Buddyblazon]

81. I didn't say "women"...YOU just did.

I said "you". Don't try to turn my statement into something it wasn't because that makes you look even worse.

[melman]

112. Why even bother

with a poster you know has no intention of engaging honestly?

[sheshe2]

134. :(

[JackRiddler]

273. Indeed, whoosh. So much so that it seems deliberate.

The movie is not the poster. The poster is on the street. The street is the context. The image speaks for itself. Most people don't know the movie and don't care. They see the image, no choice in the matter. They see it because it is an advertisement. Someone paid to put this image in front of them.

[mythology]

75. Somebody is always disturbed by something

That doesn't mean everybody else needs to agree that a fictional depiction of violence is inherently misogynistic.

Unless you want to believe that the violence in American History X is also inherently racist. There's a promo still from that movie with Edward Norton's character standing with arms wide open underneath a burning swastika. Far more people have died due to people who believe in the ideology behind the swastika than have died from a comic book movie.

It's simplistic to think that simply any image of violence against women out of any context is inherently misogynistic. I think it actually does some degree of harm to the cause of bringing to light actual misogynistic content because it's such a parody that people can point to that and not take it seriously.

There is a lot in the superhero comic industry that is far more worth pointing out like the ludicrously oversized breasts, a paucity of fully developed female characters (good or bad characters), lack of fully developed minority characters that aren't just off-shoots of existing characters (at least they've mostly stopped naming them things like Black Lighting).

[Warren DeMontague]

79. They're also not using actually blue actors to portray blue characters.

Strikes me as sort of problematic.

[Buddyblazon]

82. .

[X_Digger]

87. You mean they're.. *gasp* actors in blue-face?!??

Be right back, I need to start a petition on change.org...

[Dr. Strange]

95. The Blue Man Group was busy.

Also, they're men.

[opiate69]

104. Yet another slight for Tobias!

[Warren DeMontague]

105. ...

[Iggo]

83. Is anybody mad that it happens in the movie?

Or are they just mad that it's on the poster?

[Buddyblazon]

84. Who knows...

But one would assume if the poster offends them that the actual moment in the movie would offend them too.

I am not sure what the OP wants. Perhaps to keep female superheroes characters out of violent situations altogether.

[Bradical79]

115. The movie is different

I don't want to spoil things too much, but there's a lot more going on in the actual scene. That's just one aspect.

[Agnosticsherbet]

128. Within the whole scene where it happened, it works.

[lostnfound]

85. Now that you mention it, I'm disgusted with it too. Sick of it. So pervasive.

And young teenage boys eat it up. Not healthy.

[Buddyblazon]

88. What would your suggestion be?

Female superheroes not encounter violence? If so, what would you have them do in the movies if they never fight supervillans? And if suddenly female superheroes stopped fighting supervillans...would you not find that sexist?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

91. And how would one enact this hypothetical non-encountering of violence in movies?

How would this be done without, you know, stepping all over the First Amendment? To be clear--we're on the same side; I just didn't feel like addressing the poster you're addressing, so I tacked onto your post.

[Buddyblazon]

99. I agree...

If suddenly female superheroes were treated differently...I'm sure many more would be upset over this than for the hullabaloo drummed up in this thread.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

103. Some people thrive on drama. I can do without it.

[lostnfound]

158. Just don't show it as the centerpiece ad.

In the context of the plot of the movie, fine. But as THE image imprinting on the minds of every passerby, better to show a moment of triumph, or a moment of equal encounter. Not one where the female is represented as just an object to be strangled.

My preference, only, to be clear. Not into censorship or anything. I agree with the OP's core message that these images are too pervasive and are psychologically harmful.

Maybe it taps into an innate connection between sex and violence that is believed to be too closely linked in a subset of the male population. I think there's been research into that.

[romanic]

89. Everything is a trigger warning to the internet.

[linuxman]

107. I'll have you know rolly eyes are my trigger.

You've just made an enemy for life.

[romanic]

127. Sorry.

I'll make sure to check my emoji privilege from here on in.

[TipTok]

231. There's a line...

... And it starts ways back over there.

[linuxman]

106. .

What is the acceptable amount of violence for a female character to be involved in for a film, what ratio (giving/receiving) of violence is acceptable, and how does the above change based on participation with same sex characters?

Just your opinion, please.

[sheshe2]

109. You missed the point.

Question back at you.

What is the acceptable amount of violence you would tolerate on a female INL?

[linuxman]

116. Don't know what INL is,

But to me, the same ammount as applied to the males heros or villains in the movie.

Now please answer my question, rather than dodging it.

[sheshe2]

121. I meant in real life......

You want to talk about comic books. I want to talk about real life.

[linuxman]

129. Then you sure picked a shitty example to talk about it.

This is a comic/movie. You're the one wanting to drag fantasy/fiction into the real world.

In real life? I guess in an idealistic sense, I'd say none. No violence towards anyone by anyone is pretty ideal.

In a practical sense? When confronted with violence, each sex should have the right to match the violence they receive with a proportional response, up to the point at which the violence against them ceases.

Couldn't help but notice you STILL couldn't answer my question. I'm not sure why you find it so difficult. It's only a movie I want to talk about, not real life...

[sheshe2]

137. "In a practical sense."

In a practical sense? When confronted with violence, each sex should have the right to match the violence they receive with a proportional response, up to the point at which the violence against them ceases.

No no no. Have you been a victim of domestic violence? Violence against a spouse is not considered " In a practical sense?". You don't match the violence with more violence. OMG! What you do is run like hell and never look back.

[linuxman]

167. You weren't talking about domestic violence until this post.

*Sigh*

You seem desperate to find offense and indignation where this is no cause for it, you can't answer simple questions, and you seem intent on twisting everything to fit your preconceived narrative. The only conversation you seem to be having is with yourself.

I think we're done here.

I recommend you skip the movie, along with any other human interaction that isn't absolutely necessary.

[ismnotwasm]

108. This is what sells

All the squirming attempts to make it not about misogyny aside--Mystique is NOT a sympathetic character, she's a strong, well trained, devious and one hell of a fighter. And a very bad guy. Yet the ads wouldn't show that, because that's not what draws the crowds.

I'm not offended, I'm fucking sick and tired of it. This is old and tired recycled bullshit. Why not show Mystique kicking ass? Why show her in what amounts to a classically"vulnerable" position for a woman Character?

Because misogyny sells.

[sheshe2]

117. Sweet lawd!

You are here, ism.

Thank you, my dear friend.

They keep spinning and I am trying to fight back. Ya, alerted on as well....woman are not allowed to be strong here. Lol~ Ef that.

[ismnotwasm]

190. I know

Same ol same ol.

[melman]

118. Yet

it obviously doesn't bother you enough to not see the movie.

[ismnotwasm]

189. What's your point?

You think I should boycott the movie, rather than criticize the ad?

[melman]

237. The point is

You're sooo outraged but you still fork over your money. Which do you think means more to the studio?

[TheKentuckian]

151. Because you don't show your new villain getting their ass kicked in promotion

Rather you make them more imposing and ratchet up the stakes to impresses they are a serious threat.

How you build up a movie titled Apocalypse with Mystique kicking his ass I don't know.

[ismnotwasm]

188. We are talking about an ad for a movie

I am talking in general about how women are presented in said ads. Mystique kicks plenty of ass.

[sibelian]

157. ...

"Yet the ads wouldn't show that"

[ismnotwasm]

187. And what is the focus here?

Is she stomping around au naturel--or is she kicking ass?

[snooper2]

192. To Kick Ass, Or not to Kick Ass....

Context is what we need here

[ismnotwasm]

196. True.

I'm surprised they didn't use THAT shot.

[TipTok]

232. Using an attractive actress...

... Who was paid millions of dollars and agreed to everything to sell a product?

A product aimed at men none the less?

I am shocked... Shocked I tell ya...

[DonCoquixote]

130. what is really sad is

as comic book geeks know MYSTIQUE IS NOT A SHRINKING VIOLET. The movies portray her as Magneto's and Pocky's punching bag, and meek. This is one of the more feared killers and spies in the WHOLE X men universe, someone that has come close to KILLING both Magneto and Pocky.

Furthermore, even when she IS helpless, she is scheming, her and Logan met literally facing a firing squad and planning a successful escape.How is someone that can fast talk Logan into saving her while while facing death playing some shrinking violet?

But hey, Fox clings to it's marvel properties and wonders why they all are panned.

[LostOne4Ever]

139. They are all Panned?

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]Deadpool?

X-Men: Days of Future Past?

X-Men: First Class?

X2: X-men united?

X-men?

The Wolverine?

Seriously, this series has only had two duds: X-men 3 and X-Men origins: Wolverine. Neither of which had Bryan Singer. And while the critics didn't like Apocalypse the audiences have liked it quite a bit.

What is more, had X-Men been in Marvel's hands they would never have even made the Deadpool movie which is one of the best super hero movies made recently.

If Disney/Marvel ever get the X-Men back they will GUT the Deadpool movies of everything the fans of the series love just to get a PG-13 rating.

Though I have to admit I am more than a little furious with Marvel. They (Marvel) are intentionally trying to sabotage the X-men comic like the did the Fantastic 4 so they can buy the franchise back on the cheap.

As a former fan of the series I can honestly say I am so angry with Marvel I hope every X-Men film breaks record after record and they never get the mutants back just to spite Marvel and Disney.[/font]

[NobodyHere]

142. Geeze

Some people must've really hated that Wolverine/Mystique fight from the first X-Men movie.

[craigmatic]

145. He's the bad guy in the movie it's supposed to be offensive.

[Rex]

146. They went with a cheap shot, but the entire industry is that way now.

Reading XMEN in the 80s and 90s is so different then the boring and predictable money making plot lines that are so stupid I won't watch these movies, including the new Star Trek or Star Wars movies.

Also, I have to say these movies are mostly violence and mass destruction. The enemy is so stupid and boring ie learns about the world and must destroy it (hello Ultron, boring) and if you ever read the Marvel Universe someone is trying to destroy the humans once every 30 seconds.

They have to, there are a BILLION superheroes, mutants, whatever, that the uniqueness of them being something special just turns into a super tank that can kill everything to a cool soundtrack.

Apocalypse is supposed to be a living evil god that seems to hate all life, a real winner...yet for the movie crowd they actually tame him down for PG-13 soundbites.

Not surprised they went with the cheap money maker. A 5 year old could have written the plot.

[Warren DeMontague]

147. Just imagine if it had been a picture of Spiderwoman's butt strangling her!

[Rex]

148. The marvel drawing heard around the world.

I think or is it DC...hell there are a zillion superheroes now and I get them all confused since both brands barfed on each other so that Batman and Wolverine could have fisticuffs.

Not that DC comics cannot pull off a butt shot and an epic hero pose.

[Warren DeMontague]

150. Full disclosure: Comics and superheroes, etc. were just never my bag.

Science fiction, sure. Fantasy, OK.. I have enough nerd cred that I should be on that part of the venn diagram, too... but the whole thing always struck me as a bit goofy.



I've enjoyed some of the movies and I respect the art, but it's never been my scene.

[Rex]

212. I was more a Piers Anthony nerd then an Xmen nerd.

The original story lines (60s and 70s) had depth and were meant to show how easily humans discriminate against each other, a nod to the civil rights movement...the movies however...are just extensions of Micheal Bay's idea of a movie (big explosions, cliche cliches and painful one liners).

[prayin4rain]

152. You're so brave for bringing this up on this board.

Yeah, of course Hollywood chose this still frame for the promotional poster. And OF COURSE most of DU just cannot possibly understand how you could possibly see anything in the world wrong with it. It's a shame.

[uhnope]

153. "brave" is the new...[insert adjective here]

[sibelian]

155. It isn't brave.

It's...just... silly.

[ileus]

154. Wonder if people are capable of rational thought? or if poutrage is the way of the future?

[truebrit71]

160. Good grief...

More fodder for the permanently outraged....

[SecularMotion]

161. They know their market

[Captain Stern]

164. I'm not offended by this at all.

Neither are my wife, or my daughter.

The point of the poster is to show how powerful, and bad, the bad guy is. Apocalypse is the bad guy, doing what bad guys do.

[Bluenorthwest]

166. I'd like the OP and the author of this piece to very specifically explain how they imagine a

" gay male being strangled by a hetero" would be depicted in a still image? Would they employ a Pink Triangle to mark the gay male? The author suggests that such an image could be easily presented. I wonder what sort of indicators of sexuality the author imagines would be used in such an image. I also wonder what the OP thinks that verbiage means?

Describe to me an image of two men fighting which tells us one is straight and the other gay. How does it communicate those facts in imagery? If you can't answer that, you have no leg to stand on.

The author seems to assume biased stereotypes would be employed.

[Odin2005]

168. Holy shit, which idiot thought this was a good idea?

[snooper2]

175. Oh Jesus S. Christ on a fucking Hoverboard- What stupid idiocy...

Now to read through this thread which I'm sure is just glorious

[apnu]

177. The irony is the film is very pro-woman.

Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence), and especially Jean Grey (Sophie Turner) are pivotal to defeating the monster that is Apocalypse. Women have prominent and powerful roles in the film.

[JackRiddler]

271. Good for the movie. The poster is not.

[Act_of_Reparation]

182. Is Mystique female?

Bear with me here; major nerdiness ahead:

Mystique's mutant power is the ability to reorganize her body on the cellular level to take on the physical appearance of anyone she so wishes. Mystique is usually assigned female personal pronouns because she was biologically female at birth, but her ability to shapeshift makes her sex somewhat ambiguous. Her lack of nipples and generative organs goes beyond the need to censor nudity and, in my interpretation, gives the character an air of sexual ambiguity that is reinforced her mutant supremacist sentiments. Constrained gender and constrained sexuality is for lowly H. sapiens, while H. superior can be whatever it wants at any given moment.

For those unfamiliar with the X-Men, this poster may appear tasteless. No argument there. But the character of Mystique is well established with those familiar with the preceding X-Men films. What they see is a very powerful mutant at the mercy of an unknown assailant. To see a character that has faced Wolverine, Sentinels, and Stryker's special ops units and come out no worse for the wear every single time, in a position of helplessness. No one familiar with any of the preceding X-Men films should see Mystique -- a hardened killer of men -- as a helpless victim of male aggression.

At the end of the day, context is important, and Fox seems to have forgotten that when placing this ad. They should not have assumed that every passerby would be familiar with the depicted characters, and probably should have given more thought to how it would appear to those unfamiliar with this IP.

[ismnotwasm]

193. Now *that* is an interesting point

Although you'll notice the ads with Mystique in them always empasize her basic femaleness--Part of the attraction so to speak-- and actually the core of the argument

[DesMoinesDem]

184. Anyone that is deeply offended by this is pathetic.

[MohRokTah]

186. Fuck this crap.

If you cannot handle super hero comic standards, then don't go see the film.

Bad guys choke good guys like that from time to time.

Good guys choke bad guys like that from time to time.

Gender doesn't enter into the equation, it's bad guy vs. good guy. In this case, the bad guy is coking the good guy.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

194. You can't demand women be equal combatants and then complain about violence against them.

[phleshdef]

199. More over the top people looking for imaginary sexism

[ismnotwasm]

202. "Imaginary sexism"

Interesting.

[phleshdef]

203. There is real sexism. Idiots who go off about nothing burgers...

... like this are an insult to the cause of taking on real sexism.

[ismnotwasm]

205. And who decides?

[phleshdef]

206. ME.

[ismnotwasm]

208. Okey dokey.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

215. For someone griping about violence against women you have an interesting choice of signature imagery

[ismnotwasm]

218. My favorite fucking movies

Guess which my favorite scene is?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

220. A movie where a woman fleeing a violent partner is shot through the head.

She is then repeatedly raped for money while in a coma and buried alive by a misogynistic bouncer who sedates her and employs a sexist to aid in the deed before she goes on to fight her romantic rival and she's trained by a racist misogynistic Kung-Fu master.

Tell us again about your concern over images of depictions of violence against women.

[ismnotwasm]

221. See that's my favorite fucking scene

Where she fucking slams a door on her rapists head over and over and over until he goes into seizure and dies.

Are you saying that racism and mysogyny shouldn't be depicted in movies? Make it all, what, comfortable? Pretend it doesn't..mercy me..exist?

Tell me more about your concerns about my opinions or my sig line.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

223. Are you saying, because Beatrix is able to not remain a victim but ultimately gains the upper hand

that redeems the movie from it's otherwise misogynistic depictions?

[ismnotwasm]

224. I consider it a fable of sorts

In reality Women far too often do NOT get justice, do NOT have a voice and are routinely subjected to violence. The movie's outcome is satisfying

"Depictations" of misogyny are valuable, because they are true. Are you saying you consider the movies themselves to be misogynistic, because the bride goes through a series of trials--caused by misogyny, and overcomes them with violence?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

227. No, what I'm saying is you're protesting the movie in the OP even though

it has far fewer depictions of misogyny and -- as in Kill Bill -- the would-be victims ultimately overcome their oppressor.

By the way, much of the violence in Kill Bill is acted against Beatrix because she is a woman and it is perpetrated by men actively engaged in misogyny. Apocalypse has no such concerns he's simply out to enact his plans. That Mystique is a woman is merely incidental.

You're demanding a standard you yourself set aside when it is inconvenient but you refuse to extend considerations you would claim for what you prefer. To be blunt, it has every appearance of hypocrisy.

[ismnotwasm]

228. First, I'm not protesting the movie

I'm critisizing an ad. Second, if the fact the Mystique Is so women is so incidental, why all the shots of her as a sensual female figure? She can do a sexy dude just as well. She also wins a lot. And third as I pointed out elsewhere, there is no fear in her face--and that is classic Mystique--she always has an out, And I wish the ad didn't show her as helpless. She's not.

Incidently, brush up on that hypocrisy arguement--it makes zero sense to me, unless one assumes the women are NOT victims of misogyny. Decent attempt though. Sort of.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

229. An ad that is trying to show the magnitude of the threat posed by the villain by showing

that one of the best known, bad ass characters has been rendered helpless. Mystique is no shrinking violet. She's a superb fighter and extremely cunning. That anyone can capture her when even the US government has failed shows just how threatening Apocalypse truly is. That is the context of the image.

Second, if the fact the Mystique Is so women is so incidental, why all the shots of her as a sensual female figure?

Because some women can be sensual and some men can be exploited by sensual women. Does that reflect more poorly on Mystique or the weak men she exploits?

Incidently, brush up on that hypocrisy arguement--it makes zero sense to me, unless one assumes the women are NOT victims of misogyny.

Perhaps you should brush up on the term "straw man."

[ismnotwasm]

249. WTF???

[Nuclear Unicorn]

255. That sounds more like your problem.

[hughee99]

209. I think maybe they need to stop casting women in these kind of movies.

As offensive as this poster may be to some, I'm sure the movie has even more depictions of violence against women. I'm not exactly sure how they could go about having female superhero roles without the fight scenes, so the best course of action may be to remove them from the film entirely in order to avoid promoting violence against women.

[ismnotwasm]

210. It's not fight scenes

I'm not even offended as I said before, just sick of portrayals of violence on women's bodies to sell shit.

In "The Hateful Eight" Jennifer Jason Leigh gets smacked around a lot--in fact it's a punchline (pun intended) of the movie. It's brutal. Real brutal. Brutal humor. I don't see it as sexist, she played a particular character in a particular point in history with a director who makes action comic-book type plots come to incredible life.

To sell the movie, there's no shot of her character getting smacked out of a carriage. Although admittedly that would not represent the movie.

One thing I do notice about Mystique here is the total lack of fear--she's getting ready to do...something, because she almost always has a backup action. Still, I wish the ad didn't make her look helpless--because she's anything but. And that I do find sexist.

[hughee99]

213. I have not seen "The Hateful Eight" but it sounds like one could make the argument

that it also promotes violence against women.

I think the thing that causes so much debate over this type of issue is that violence (like it or not) is a significant feature in many movies and television today. Some people would argue that most depictions of violence are promoting violence, and along those lines, depictions of violence against women promotes violence against women. There's no clear line for people to say "that's okay / that's not", so it's very subjective. The only way you can guarantee that someone isn't going to be offended by depictions of violence against women is to remove all women from any sort of action role. I don't think that's the best way to handle this problem, but I think it is the only way it would be fixed for good.

[ismnotwasm]

214. That reality doesn't exist, and is part of the point

Violence against women is epidemic, and is a cultural norm. In other words, we expect it. It doesn't shock us, although if violent enough it horrifies us.

Ads like these are either subtle reminders or actual promoters of that standard--thus the criticism. We use that standard of violence to sell everything from movies to perfume. It should be criticized as far as I'm concerned--it doesn't help change the standard, which all would agree is a desirable thing.

I'm not "offended" in part because I know the character of Mystique, and this appears to be the con argument others are trying to present--she is no helpless female, and as one poster pointed out, is not even female when she chooses not to be. It could even be argued that if one is going to see an X-man movie, one would have a basic sense of the characters.

But To me, this makes the shot more inappropriate rather than less.

[Heeeeers Johnny]

222. #MutantLivesMatter!

Seriously, the shit people offended or butthurt about is getting out of control.

[TheSarcastinator]

225. 2 or 3 idiotic bloggers do not = "the internet"

So is it the opinion of this brilliant cultural analysis that women should never be portrayed as superheroes? Or, if they are portrayed as such, that they never experience combat, or even temporary defeat? How about violence against women in the older forms of superhero narratives: folk and fairy tales and mythology? BAN ANTIGONE NOW!!!!!!! LITTLE RED RIDING HOOD IS DEEPLY OFFENSIVE! OMG, im serries!111!!!!

[Warren DeMontague]

242. Anybody aware of what "the internet" has brought the collective overmind over the past 20 years

would realize that it has an extremely high bar for finding things "disturbing".

[Egnever]

233. So female super heroes can't fight?

Good lord people need to get over themselves.

[Arkana]

239. It's Apocalypse.

He's not strangling her because she's a woman, he's strangling her because she's in his way. Same as every other mutant, male and female.

[Warren DeMontague]

243. THIRTEEN MORE DAYS!

And I, for one, think it's healthy that people are planning ahead and trying to figure out what exactly they're gonna do with themselves once primary time is over.

[IronLionZion]

241. 20th Century Fox has now apologized for the ad called "casual violence against women."

In a statement to The Hollywood Reporter, Fox apologized for the billboard: "In our enthusiasm to show the villainy of the character Apocalypse we didn’t immediately recognize the upsetting connotation of this image in print form. Once we realized how insensitive it was, we quickly took steps to remove those materials. We apologize for our actions and would never condone violence against women."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/rambling-reporter/rose-mcgowan-calls-x-men-898538

"It's gratuitous, it's offensive in completely useless ways. Offensive isn't always necessarily bad, but this is offensive in ways that serve absolutely no purpose, and while it does depict a scene from the actual film, it's also a terrible representation of the movie as a whole," Edidin notes.

[sheshe2]

244. Thank you.

I hope you don't mind. I am going to post this, IronLionZion.

[Warren DeMontague]

246. Thank God, Our Long National Nightmare Is Over.

[Warren DeMontague]

247. Maybe some folks here should just pretend she's a Millennial Bernie Sanders supporter

then it wouldn't be such a big deal, huh.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1967046

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1967096

[opiate69]

262. For reals

[Orrex]

264. Two shitty posts that should have been hidden

I wonder if anyone alerted on them.

[PersonNumber503602]

250. I can't agree with it being offensive due to violence against women...

She is a super hero and super heroes fight and get beat up sometimes. Right? Yes, I am right. Do not argue with me.

However, I had to do some quick research to see what other movie posters for these types of movies looked like. I was expecting/hoping to see similar posters of a male heroes looking defenseless as they get manhandled, but I couldn't really find anything. Although I'm not a comic person, so my search was rather quick and superficial. So while I do not agree with the violence against women complaint, I can see how there might be a question why the woman hero is shown as being in distress on the poster. I'm sure in the context in the movie she kicks ass and takes names in the end, but why does this poster deviate from the standard practice of showing the hero 'standing tall' or whatever you want to call it?

[sheshe2]

251. Well....

20th Century Fox just apologized for it. For that I am glad.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

256. Probably just to console the inconsolable.

[Warren DeMontague]

257. When the cost of the apology is balanced against the free publicity generated by the "outrage"

I suspect the Studio is laughing all the way to the bank.

[Shandris]

254. I have yet to see anything whatsoever that 'the internet' is upset about...

...that is worth 3 seconds or more of consideration. Ever. I now see that that trend hasn't changed in the slightest.

((Note: This doesn't include actual outrages that outrage people both on and off the internet in large numbers, like the Bundy occupation (for example), only things that have a primary vector of 'internet'.))

[GummyBearz]

258. Thanks for the trigger warning

That was a god awful article to read. I mean, the writer must both be looking under every rock for something to get offended over and at the same time have absolutely no knowledge of the X-men story lines. The combination of the two come together in a very horrific way that is definitely worthy of a trigger warning.

[Nevernose]

263. There is no context in the ad, just a woman getting strangled.

"There is no context in the ad, just a woman getting strangled."

I don't see any genitals, just gendered stereotypes. The only way to know if it were a woman and man would be to know something about the scene in context, or to be incredibly sexist and automatically believe that women look one way and men look another (and totally ignore the fact that one person is blue and the other silver).

Shit like this completely trivializes domestic violence.