Because it’s helpful info! XD
Remember, I was replying to where you were saying that:
People often complain about sexism, but then posit solutions which involve perceiving or treating people differently based upon their sex. Which kind of amounts to a sort of reverse-sexism, and doesn’t address that what sex anybody might have been was not relevant to their equitable treatment in the first place.
It’s what I thought about when I read this. I am tired and probably not explaining it well.
Well, given that the Internet has the most comprehensive index of information about comic books and comic book characters ever created – some call it “Wikipedia” – I searched for this.
Per Comics Lore I can only find that Black Widow slept with, in the comics, Iron Man and Daredevil. Where is the comic book evidence that Black Widow slept with 2. Thor, 3. Hawkeye, 4. Bruce Banner (not Hulk because get your mind out of the damn gutter already), 5. Captain America?
Where is this four out of six number coming from? Space?
http://community.comicbookresources.com/archive/index.php/t-824.html
Iron Man: Tony Stark is the #1 slut of the Avengers, with a list that includes no less than Sunset Bain, Meredith McCall(?), Madame Masque, Marriane Rodgers, Bethany Cabe, Kathy Dare, Veronica Benning, Black Widow, Lt. Colonel Yelena Bremment, Mantis/Space Phantom, Pepper Potts, Countess De La Spiroza, Calista Hancock, Rumiko Fujikawa, She-Hulk, Emma Frost, Jessica Drew, Gamora, and Maria Hill. Nicole and Sheila, from Marvel Comics Presents. Plus Wasp and Tigra are speculated, but unconfirmed, too. (12+, and that’s a conservative estimate)
Vs
Black Widow: Red Guardian II, Hawkeye, Daredevil, Iron Man, Bucky, and some guy in her Marvel Fanfare story (Michael Corcoran.) She also dated Hercules, and he has listed her among his past conquests. (5+)
So, there ya go.
(Oh, I see, he is bitter because Black Widow did sleep with Hawkeye, but maybe not the movie one.)
I tried posting a reply to that involving a certain pseudo-state, but it would appear the post was crass enough that it disappeared in a don’t-push-your-luck smelling poof of smoke.
I will posit that you are tired and not understanding well too.
Because it was shit.
You’re probably right, and I won’t argue. I dashed it off without really considering exactly what I was trying to say.
Unfortunately the line ‘…hiding the zucchini’ is uttered by none other than Mr Iron Man himself in the film. Rule 34 peeps went wild.
Euch!
It’s easy enough to say that somebody does or doesn’t understand, but it seems more honest/accurate to actually audit their reasoning.
I can and do denounce sexism, but I cannot accept using sexism to accomplish this - ie responding to sexual double standards with a different set of double standards.
After that, why is the Hulk so improbable?
After all, Lou Ferrigno played both in film and television*.
*Badly.
Please explain my double standards.
I can’t tell for sure, but the way I perceive it, is that a woman is seen as something a man must ‘conquer’. In this, a woman’s inhibition to sleeping with a man is the obstacle to be overcome, and that that is the natural state of women. If a woman sleeps with multiple partners, then she lacks that obstacle. This means that ‘conquering’ her is no real feat, and thus there is no accomplishment for the man relative to others. The act itself is secondary to the pursuit.
Now if a woman initiates the relationship, or the ‘relations,’ well that will just send the world into chaos.
I didn’t say that they were your double standards necessarily, you might merely expect to encounter them in others, for all I know.
Saying that being a “slut” becomes an accolade “because he’s a guy” assumes a lot. It assumes that being a guy is a real, relevant attribute. And it assumes a sexist norm of polyamory as lived by “men” and “women” evaluated with two distinct standards of values. I use the quotes because I don’t doubt that there are actual differences, but rather what most people refer to appears to be a construct, a stereotype. What I am trying to do is lose the double standards and stereotypes by keeping relationships explicit, and not assuming anything about people.
Conversely, if I interpret discourse on sex by assuming that factor N is relevant “because person X is male/female” then I risk internalizing some of the same sexist values which I am trying to be critical of.
If we are to accept the fundaments of our language game insofar as to identify common tropes within the substrate of efficacy from which we can associate synchronous ideation, can we not then propose a bridging idiom out of which the natural progression of language abridgement may furnish a universally identifiable behavior so described?
Y’know?
wheeze…back in my day we had comicgate to worry about…wheeze… young whippersnappers…
I am inclined to add my two cents:
Renner is responding to a question from another source, where he’s actually surprised, neither saying that she slept with 4 out of six avengers, and not actually calling her a slut. His response, though not eloquent, is dismissive.
If Hawkeye, Stark, or any other team member had casual sex with the majority of the team, wouldn’t we consider that to be unnecessarily promiscuous, and perhaps detrimental to the relationships and function of the teams duties. Would this not be somewhat deserving of a negative title or critique? If not, in the casual vernacular: “slut”, then what?
Dont be too hard on our buddy.
He is doing his job of libsplaining for one of his ilk who went off script.
Disruptive influence eh?
No, I wouldn’t. Whether a person helps or hinders the team’s duties doesn’t have anything to do with how promiscuous they may be. People who would be overcome by jealousy or aversion probably lack the emotional fortitude required of them. And how do you decide what is “necessary” level of sexual involvement?
No, it wouldn’t. A title’s negativity is strictly subjective, it is only your intent which would be negative.
