Written by Members of the comic industry recently got a little testy when Chuck Dixon and Paul Rivoche went to the Wall Street Journal about a bias against conservative creators in the industry. Marvel’s Tom Brevoort quickly assured everyone that no “blacklist” exists at Marvel (Can you name one openly conservative writer who is employed there?), and then surmised that it wasn’t conservatives that editors have a problem with, but certain kinds of “behavior” **cough** that might translate into not getting employment.
Sure, no “blacklist” exists, as long as you don’t consider The Amazing Spider-Man writer telling Christians to move to “Christ-land” as evidence that maybe — just maybe — Marvel isn’t too friendly towards guys like Messrs. Dixon and and Rivoche.
Here is Dan Slott’s response to the SCOTUS ruling on the Hobby Lobby case.
Imagine if I found out that my local pool was going to have very specific “women-only” hours for Muslim women, who don’t want to be seen by men outside their immediate family. We’ll use Seattle as an example:
Seema is from Pakistan. Sahra is from Somalia. Both are Muslim. They say having a women-only swim program allows them to get some exercise while observing their religious customs. Seema says their religion requires them to cover in front of men. “We don’t cover our heads in front of our husbands, our dads, brothers,” she says. “But when we go outside we’re supposed to cover for woman’s modesty.”
What if I pulled a Dan Slott-like move, stretched my bigotry muscles, and told Muslim women: “This is America. Go find pools in ‘Muslim Land.'” I’m pretty sure my employer would fire me.
And then there’s this gem:
The thing with Hobby Lobby and other small religious businesses is that they took their grievance to court — and won. They followed the rule of law and the highest court in the land agreed with them. That is not an “asshole” move, but yet Dan Slott likens Christians to “conquistadors” and “assholes.” It’s incredibly mean, but also cartoonish; it’s reminiscent of 1992’s Office Space, where the character Peter Gibbons says “You know, the Nazis had pieces of flair that they made the Jews wear.”
Speaking of the Jewish faith, it’s now well-known that Dan Slott is very protective of his ancestry (just don’t mention that his own characters get taken to task by Bleeding Cool for engaging in “Nazi-like experimentation”). How would the Marvel scribe react if someone went full-Dan Slott on Jewish people like he does on Christians and Americans who are strong advocates of the Second Amendment?
Here we see another example of Dan Slott’s intolerance:
Hube over at Colossus of Rhodey made a good point shortly after the tweet went live: How would Dan Slott react to someone who tweeted him in a New York Jewish accent about money?
The tweet was deleted — down the Memory Hole — Dan Slott’s go-to move when he gets caught saying things that reflect poorly on his employer. It’s a good thing the Internet is forever.
If you are a fan of Marvel comics who just so happens to be a Christian, a Second Amendment advocate or simply someone who just doesn’t like seeing bigotry broadcasted via social media, you should probably think twice about buying products put out by Dan Slott. You might want to also consider contacting Marvel. It doesn’t have many standards these days, but there are a few that are hanging by a thread.
Slow clap for Dan Slott. He’s the guy you want to find when you want tweets infused with anti-Christian bigotry, or Marvel comics that are consistently trying to see how low the bar can go.
Update: Dan Slott continues to read this little old blog and attack it from afar because, as we all know, it’s much safer to allow Twitter groupies to massage your ego than to actually defend the indefensible.
Question for Dan Slott: If I just had a beef with a few Jews over a religious issue with political implications, and I told them to go to “Jew-land,” how would you respond? How would my employer respond? That’s right — you’d go ballistic. And then my employer would fire me. But you get to tell a bunch of Christians to go to “Christ-land” without consequences. Hypocrite.
Update II: Marvel’s Tom Brevoort has weighed in. No response to the question “If Chuck Dixon told Dan Slott to go to ‘Jew-land’ over a religious gripe, would he still get work?” Telling.
Someone else brought up similar sentiments about Marvel’s creators over at the New Brevoort Formspring. It turns out that Mr. Brevoort really does embrace the the strange business model “needlessly alienate potential customers” to grow the company.
Douglas Ernst Blog 
Douglas!!!!!!!!! I was just finishing my article on this very thing! You beat me….but my article does look at other tweets so I may use it anyway. One of the great things is we have freedom of choice we can pick where to work or where to purchase items.
Great article!
Thanks, man. Be sure to add a link to your blog post in the comments section below.
I’m pretty sure I’d be fired if I sent out tweets along the lines of “Go to Christian-land…or Muslim-land…or Jew-land, etc.” I didn’t know Marvel tolerates anti-Christian bigotry these days. Sad.
Yes, under today’s tolerant movement it is okay to bash Christians (I think that it is in their rulebook). Remember it is only okay to bash things if a liberal says it.
Not to mention retweeting Wonder Woman giving the finger?? How does DC feel about their property being used like that??
How long would Dan Slott last at Marvel if he re-tweeted a picture of Wonder Woman giving the Middle Finger to CAIR in reaction to a lawsuit? How long would Dan Slott last at Marvel if he told Muslims to go to “Muslim Land”? He would be suspended or fired. There would be a “zero tolerance” policy that would be put in play, and he’d be toast. But yet Dan Slott can tell Christians who went through the courts to go to take a hike and move to “Christian-land.”
Again, since Dan Slott is so sensitive about his Jewish ancestry I find it interesting how quick he is to tell a group of devoutly religious people that they essentially don’t belong in their own country and should move to one populated only by members of the same faith. How ironic…
Thanks for sharing, Truthwillwin1. You bring up some interesting points.
I just don’t get how devout Christians — who followed the rule of law and won — are somehow now equated with “conquistadors.” Guys like Dan Slott scream about staying out of a woman’s uterus…except when he wants someone else to pay for their abortifacients. Classic!
Exactly, where are the baby’s rights? Who gives them the right to pick who lives and dies? They claim they are the “sane” ones. In their eyes, War is murder…but killing babies is okay?
No babies are killed by Plan B. No babies are killed by the IUDs in dispute.
Click on the links and read, they say otherwise.
As I stated before:
Once again read the comments that I have posted (the links) they show a little more information that tends to not 100% agree with your statement.
“findings proved that it was scientifically valid to believe that conception and pregnancy begin at fertilization, not implantation; in fact, three out of four American medical dictionaries supported this position until recently, according to one analysis. Furthermore, a number of drugs and devices included in the mandate have mechanisms of action that can prevent implantation; that is, they can cause an early chemical abortion. Examples include the morning-after pill and intrauterine devices (IUDs). In the case of one drug, “Ella,” the mechanisms of action can work post-implantation. For a more in-depth information, please see this study, specifically the section on “abortion inducing drugs.”
“There is a world of difference between a drug that prevents life and a drug that can destroy life in its earliest and most vulnerable stages.”
You should be more careful before making statements of 100% certainty.
Really
http://www.clmagazine.org/article/index/id/OTA0MA/
I guess you are wrong again.
I’m not seeing any science in that article. It mentions a sidebar, but that insert seems to be broken, at least in Firefox. Still, she also makes the claim that normal birth control pill is murder. The article is essentially Catholic propaganda. So I’m not sure what you think it proves.
Regardless, we’ve entered a loop, so as I said elsewhere, I’m going to drop it.
The funny thing is, this “loop” would have never happened if small business owners weren’t told by the federal government what benefits they have to provide for their employees. Score another one for limited government.
I think it would be best for you since they were providing information from scientific studies (which worked on my screen) and that was the one thing you wanted to grab on and that did not hold up. It also took down your talking point about how it does not murder rather easily.
Next time be more careful before you rush to judgement and especially before you call a large portion of people idiots.
I made the comment about the fact that we do not have the right to have FDA approved drugs because Slott tried to say people have a right to them, but it appears he removed that. I guess he realized that it is not a “right”.
Shameless plug:
http://truthwillwin1.wordpress.com/2014/07/01/hobby-lobby-and-conservative-christians-win-democrats-and-socialists-are-scrambling/
I am going to make sure I buy more from Hobby Lobby from now on.
Glad to know that if I ever go to work for Marvel, I’ll be able to spout slurs from the highest Internet mountaintops and feel no ramification from them since I earned them a few dollars. This is pathetic.
And here I was thinking of dropping my personal Slott-ban.
I can’t get over the fact that he actually thought telling a bunch of Christians to move to “Christian-land” was okay to tweet. What would happen if I had a religious disagreement with Dan Slott and told him to move to “Jew-land”? It’s unreal. The stupidity is mind-blowing, but yet … Marvel’s top brass will probably just shrug its shoulders and say, “Eh. It will go away.”
Dan Slott’s message to devout Christians translated: “Hey, get the heck out of my country! Go to Christian-land … but don’t forget to sign up for a digital subscription to the Amazing Spider-Man on the way out the door.”
People like Slott and Marz say they will not shop at Hobby Lobby, with that said I will use the same technique against books written by them. I will not support intolerant writers.
Mark Waid has commented (on Twitter) to those who disagree with him NOT to buy his stuff. He actually begged a guy not to purchase it.
Unreal.
Works for me, I never liked much of his work anyway. I also stated this in my blog.
“I would also like to address a key point that the liberals tend to leave out (the employees still have 16 types of birth control that is covered out of the 20). The only types of birth control they do not have to supply are the ones that are after the act not before.”
16 out of 20 are still covered yet the media acts like they will not provide any contraceptives.
Hube, thank you for the plug!
Wait what?
Or
In other words anyone that proves me wrong is blocked.
Hube took on this point over at his blog. I think he said it well:
So Mark Waid has a public Twitter account, where he makes sarcastic comments regularly, but if someone responds to his very-public sarcasm with sarcasm of their own, then they need to be blocked. Telling.
*Emphasis added.
I think God will be fine with the judgement. Last time I checked he was not big fan of kiling babies.
Maybe we should all call Marvel and complain about some writers offensive comments? Maybe they will get the message.
I made sure to tag Marvel in one of my tweets, along with Tom Brevoort. Deep down guys like Mr. Brevoort will know that they’re all a bunch of hypocrites if nothing happens. Again, someone please tell me Dan Slott’s head wouldn’t be spinning from a Human Resources beat-down if he tweeted that Muslims should go to “Muslim-land” — or that he would quietly sit there if someone tweeted that he should go find himself a “Jew-land.”
But anti-Christian bigotry is totally fine at Marvel, I guess? Got it.
Then it’s probably a good thing that emergency contraception doesn’t kill babies. It doesn’t end a pregnancy. It prevents one. PREVENTS. The idea that it is, in any way, shape or form, the least bit comparable to abortion is one of the dumbest, most insidious lies out there. It operates based on the scientifically false logic that conception occurs pretty much the moment of ejaculation. Sperm can survive in a woman’s body for up to a week before fertilizing an egg. Even when the egg’s fertilized, it’s still not a baby – it has to attach to the uterine wall in order for pregnancy to actually happen, and that is by no means a certainty.
Emergency contraception doesn’t kill a damned thing. Claiming otherwise is objectively, factually wrong.
xmenxepert, you and many others have a different opinion on when life is started. I suggest your learn about the 4 methods that were in question. Not comparing it to abortion is one of the dumbest lies out there.
Sorry xmenexpert but I do not think you are more of authority on this subject.
What Hobby Lobby will not cover are four contraceptive methods that its owners fear are abortifacients:
a. Plan B (“The Morning After Pill”)
b. Ella (a similar type of “emergency contraception”)
c. Copper Intra-Uterine Device
d. IUD with progestin
Rather than simply prevent sperm and ova from uniting, Hobby Lobby’s owners believe that these medications either kill human beings when they are fertilized eggs or prevent them from implanting themselves in utero, whereupon they die.
Hobby Lobby does not prevent its female employees from using any of these four types of contraceptives. However, since they believe these innovations kill babies, they simply require that any employees who want to use them buy them with their own money.
This came from Deroy Murdock
Remember this is the company and their are religious beliefs, who you or anyone else to tell them to spend their money on something they do not believe in.
Just in case you are too lazy to look some up:
http://ec.princeton.edu/questions/ecwork.html
Ella works after the egg is fertilized.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_contraceptive_pill#Mechanism_of_action
“The primary mechanism of action of progestogen-only emergency contraceptive pills is to prevent fertilization by inhibition of ovulation.”
I did actually make one mistake: It apparently doesn’t prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. It only prevents the fertilization from happening in the first place. You may recognize this as THE EXACT SAME THING OTHER CONTRACEPTION DOES. So Plan B, as a progestogen-based EC, is no more akin to abortion than a condom is.
Ella is similar. It’s more effective, but it requires a prescription. It may, possibly, end an existing pregnancy, but it would be an extremely ineffective way of doing it.
Copper IUDs, again, prevent fertilization: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IUD_with_copper#Mechanism_of_action
Progestin IUDs, also, prevent fertilization: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IUD_with_progestogen#Mechanisms_of_action
You’re right, I’m not an expert. So once again, I defer to the people who are. I defer to medical professionals.
(And before you criticize me for using Wikipedia as a source, those links do all cite other sources.
Emergency contraceptives are not “abortifacents.” They do not kill anything, because there’s nothing to kill during the timeframe in which they’re effective. To claim otherwise is a position that is directly at odds with the scientific facts. It is a position based on either ignorance or dishonesty.
The Hobby Lobby people can “fear” that these are “abortifacents,” but they’re idiots for holding that fear despite the evidence to the contrary. They are wrong. Absolutely, 100%, factually, scientifically wrong.
I suppose they’re just called “emergency contraceptives” because they’re contraceptives that a woman takes in case she needs them during the course of a fire.
I say again: Why don’t you address what this post was actually about — Dan Slott telling devout Christians to go to “Christ-land.” Should Dan Slott be disciplined by Marvel? Should he be fired? What would you do if you were his boss? How would you react if he told a Muslim-run business to go to “Muslim-land”?
They’re called emergency contraceptives because they’re taken in case she wasn’t on other birth control beforehand, and they’re taken to prevent fertilization. None of the four mentioned are actually designed even to prevent implantation.
I’ll just quote xmenxpert on this one:
*Emphasis added.
I talked about that in response to Truth. But fine, I’ll be generous, I’ll grant Ella as a potential, albeit highly ineffective, “abortifacent.” The other 3 are not. They are straight-up contraceptives, preventing fertilization, and thus preventing a pregnancy from actually starting. They prevent conception (which, as a reminder, does not happen at the moment of ejaculation, but can take up to a week after sex).
Once again “Hobby Lobby does not prevent its female employees from using any of these four types of contraceptives. However, since they believe these innovations kill babies, they simply require that any employees who want to use them buy them with their own money.”
It is their religious right to not buy something that they are against.
The science also contradicts itself with this on and has shown cases where it did cause abortions.
I would also be more careful before using the term idiot especially when you contradict yourself in your own post.
“They are wrong. Absolutely, 100%, factually, scientifically wrong.”
“Ella is similar. It’s more effective, but it requires a prescription. It may, possibly, end an existing pregnancy, but it would be an extremely ineffective way of doing it.”
Well how about that.
Ella works after the egg is fertilized which many believe is abortion.
You may not agree but the real component is the religious rights of the owners to not have to support things that are against their beliefs.
Ella is the only one that can even potentially end an existing pregnancy, and even then, it’s considered “unlikely.” Someone trying to use it to end an existing pregnancy isn’t very bright. They’d have better results letting someone punch them in the gut. Ella is still designed to prevent fertilization, not implantation. And actually, from what I read, it still doesn’t actually affect implantation – it simply carries a risk of affecting after implantation.
And I’m not commenting on the case itself. I’m saying the people are idiots for thinking that these things have any similarities to abortion. They don’t. They’re not “abortifacents.” Saying they are is flat-out false.
Please read the other comments they tend to show some other facts that you may not be aware of.
Even with that said, you are missing a key point.
“Hobby Lobby does not prevent its female employees from using any of these four types of contraceptives. However, since they believe these innovations kill babies, they simply require that any employees who want to use them buy them with their own money.”
They provide 16 methods already but it is against their beliefs to use the other 4.
They are entitled to their beliefs it is their money not yours.
Like I said, this isn’t about the case. This is about facts. The fact is, Plan B and the two types of IUDs prevent fertilization, not implantation. They don’t end pregnancies, they prevent them.
Once again read the comments that I have posted (the links) they show a little more information that tends to not 100% agree with your statement.
“findings proved that it was scientifically valid to believe that conception and pregnancy begin at fertilization, not implantation; in fact, three out of four American medical dictionaries supported this position until recently, according to one analysis. Furthermore, a number of drugs and devices included in the mandate have mechanisms of action that can prevent implantation; that is, they can cause an early chemical abortion. Examples include the morning-after pill and intrauterine devices (IUDs). In the case of one drug, “Ella,” the mechanisms of action can work post-implantation. For a more in-depth information, please see this study, specifically the section on “abortion inducing drugs.”
“There is a world of difference between a drug that prevents life and a drug that can destroy life in its earliest and most vulnerable stages.”
You should be more careful before making statements of 100% certainty.
The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics disagrees – they concluded that it doesn’t prevent implantation of a fertilized egg: http://www.figo.org/files/figo-corp/MOA_FINAL_2011_ENG.pdf
There’s actually quite a few links here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levonorgestrel#References to various articles and studies that show that it doesn’t prevent implantation.
I’ll take the word of IFGO over that of FRC.
xmenexpert notice what you said, you chose what YOU want to believe. Hobby Lobby has the same right.
Looks like you just put a whole in your whole view again.
So lets review, you admitted that Ella can cause abortion.
Now you admit their is an opposing scientific view which disproves your 100% theory.
Now you admit you chose one over the other (and that is okay because you have that right).
Hobby Lobby deserves the same right.
Hobby Lobby can believe babies are delivered by storks, but the science says they’re wrong.
Let’s set aside Ella, which is the only one that has even a chance of affecting an existing pregnancy. Over the past few years, one study after another has found that the others don’t affect implantation. They prevent fertilization. That’s it. That’s all.
So once again to be clear it is all based on what you believe.
I believe in God that is my right, you can believe you came from dirt if you want, that is your right.
How fair and tolerant of you to pick which studies you would like to trust….that happen to fit your view.
Notice how you skipped around admitting they have a right to their view just like you. Also what happen to your 100% story..Boom!
So to be clear they have a right just like you, and they do not stop anyone from purchasing it themselves. They only chose to not pay for it for them because they do not believe in it which is their right.
If you own the business you can purchase it for them if you like but since you don’t it is not your money to spend.
They have the right to their views, obviously. But, from a scientific perspective, their view is incorrect.
And again, THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE CASE ITSELF. THIS IS NOT ABOUT HOW HOBBY LOBBY SPENDS ITS MONEY.
This is about whether the argument that Plan B ends pregnancies is valid. It is not. It does not end them. It prevents them. That is what the scientific literature says.
So that’s why you play apologist for Dan Slott so much — you both turn to caps lock abuse when you think screaming makes your point more valid.
I was simply making it crystal clear what it was that I was arguing, since Truth seemed to ignore my previous statements that I wasn’t debating the case.
No, you only believe the scientific studies that side with your views and you neglect all of the rest that show otherwise.
That does not mean they are incorrect. You do not get to say 100% when the scientific literature says otherwise.
From a scientific view the data is not conclusive, that is fact.
The only invalid argument here is yours because even the very science that you cling to does not support your view in its entirety.
The Family Research Council isn’t a scientific organization. Actual scientific organizations say three of the four don’t prevent implantation, and the fourth only might prevent it.
Even your statement that you just made goes against your previous statements.
Actual scientific studies have had conflicting studies. the FRC provided information on that. It seems you like to twist to get out of things.
Hey xpert: Irrelevant, irrelevant, irrelevant. You can keep bringing up the “science” about the drugs/devices HL doesn’t cover in its health plan; it doesn’t matter one bit. It goes against their religious beliefs, and as another commenter said, the SCOTUS upheld precisely what the Democrats did in response to a different religious rights decision.
Can you for once stick to the freakin’ POINT instead of trying to make yourself look smart on points that don’t matter?
At the end of the day, what is the bottom line? Answer: Small business owners should not have to pay for benefits they don’t want to pay for. It’s their company. It’s their money. They set the rules because it’s a business they started. They took the risk. They invested time, energy and resources and they are in charge. They are not preventing one single woman from having access to the drugs she wants, and if an employee doesn’t like the benefits package at Hobby Lobby then that employee doesn’t have to work there. Call me back when Hobby Lobby starts forcing women to work for them.
My bottom line has nothing to do with the case or the decision or any of that stuff. My bottom line is that calling Plan B an “abortifacent” is objectively wrong.
So is this going to be like the other thread, only this time you’re going to ramble for three days about abortifacients instead of Global Warming?
Since this is a blog post about Dan Slott’s behavior in the aftermath of the SCOTUS decision, at some point I’ll view a person who shows little to no interest in talking about those things as a troll.
I have commented on Slott’s comment. However, since the debate about Plan B is now going in circles, I’ll bow out.
Xmenxpert, instead of talking about “scientifically false logic,” (Didn’t you previously say you didn’t want to talk about science because you’re not a scientist?) why don’t you address what this post was actually about — Dan Slott telling devout Christians to go to “Christ-land.” Should Dan Slott be disciplined by Marvel? Should he be fired? What would you do if you were his boss? How would you react if he told a Muslim-run business to go to “Muslim-land”?
The whole “emergency contraception is abortifacent” lie is a pet peeve of mine. I refuse to let that nonsense stand when I see it, because it is so totally at odds with the truth.
As far as Slott’s comment goes, though, I feel pretty meh towards it. I have trouble getting worked up about any criticism of Christians in the US, because Christians still hold most of the power. The persecution complex they cling to got old a long time ago. Christians are the majority of the population. They make up the overwhelming majority of Congress. Every president has been a Christian. It’s hard for me to feel bad for the poor oppressed US Christians when less than half of voters say they’d be willing to vote for an atheist. (I’m an agnostic, which is like an atheist with a fear of commitment.)
My overall view is that it’s always OK to punch upwards, but not downwards. I’ll refer to a Chris Rock routine: A short person can insult a tall person, but a tall person insulting a short person is being a jerk. Basically, the bigger you are, the fairer you are as a target. And Christians, right now, are still very, very big in the US. This makes them much more acceptable as a target of ridicule than a group like Muslims, Jews or Buddhists.
This may seem a bit self-serving, since, as a Christian, I’m not one of the people being mocked. But it goes beyond that. I’m a straight white male – I recognize that it’s people like me who control the Western world. So I also know that gays, minorities and women get a whole lot more leeway in making fun of me than I get in making fun of them.
So, if I were Slott’s boss, I would probably warn him to be a little more careful with his language. But any disciplinary actions, ultimately, would depend on how much controversy was kicked up. A couple people writing indignant blog posts, with all due respect, isn’t something that Marvel has to give the slightest bit of a damn about. “Someone on the Internet is angry? Run for your lives!” Letters and emails would get a little more attention. A larger-than-expected sales drop, with a significant number of people citing Slott’s Twitter behaviour as a primary reason for dropping the book, would definitely get Marvel’s attention.
I’m glad you feel that it’s acceptable for Dan Slott to be a bigot, so long as his bigotry is directed at the right group (i.e., groups deemed “big guys” by xmenxpert).
So it’s not about doing the right thing — it’s about doing the right thing when there is no other option. I’m glad we’re establishing the world according to xmenxpert. It’s telling.
I doubt Slott’s a bigot. I suspect he has no problem with Christians; he simply objects to dogmatic Christians – especially Evangelicals – who try to, essentially, make their own beliefs trump the law. Of course, there’s plenty of room for debate on what falls under that. Slott, obviously, thinks the Hobby Lobby situation does.
But he’s not saying Christians are bad. He’s saying that conservative Christians want to pick and choose which laws they have to follow. Whether you agree with his position or not, I don’t think it’s fair to call it bigotry.
As far as the right thing goes, I’d say it’s more complicated than you’re painting it. Marvel’s a business – their primary legal responsibility is to make money for their shareholders. If they have reason to believe that Slott brings in more money than he costs them, they’re actually legally obligated to make use of him. To that end, he’s allowed to say what he wants on Twitter, up until it reaches the point of giving Marvel bad publicity.
Rick Remender, after Uncanny Avengers #5 came out, said on Twitter that anyone who disagrees with Havok’s speech in the issue “can drown in hobo piss.” This rather justifiably angered a lot of people who actually did disagree with the speech. As a result of the controversy, apologies were issued (including by Remender), but because Remender makes Marvel money, no action seemed to be taken (although I assume he was told to be more careful about what he says on Twitter).
It’s just how the world works: You can be as offensive as you want until you bring the wrong kind of attention.
The U.S. Constitution is the highest law in the land, and the Supreme Court ruled that it was the federal government that was trying to trump their religious rights. I find it funny guys like Dan Slott are terrified of the Christians … who fight their battles in courts, but yet every time there is a terrorist attack or crazy radical Islamic group gains attention we’re told to pause and remember that “most Muslims are not terrorists,” or some other drivel.
Again, I have a feeling you would feel quite strongly if Dan Slott starting telling Muslims to go to “Muslim-land” or if I told Dan Slott to go to “Jew-land” during the course of my writing. That you set aside different rules for different groups as it pertains to acceptable dialogue is the key takeaway. That’s liberalism in a nut shell. It doesn’t matter what you say to “group x” because I don’t like group x, or I don’t like the money they have or the power they wield. It’s not about principle — it’s about “punching” the guy who you perceive to be bigger than you.
You’re right, I would react different. Because Muslims and Jews are less privileged than Christians. Here’s the Chris Rock routine I talked about (warning for language): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVIs0D2acgw
The groups with the most advantages are the ones it’s most fair to talk smack about. Christians still dominate the US, no matter how much some of them may whine to the contrary, so they have to be prepared to be the targets of the most criticism. It’s the same reason why, the more famous a celebrity is, the more they have to be prepared for ridicule.
The reason why you refuse to believe in the Political Correctness police is because … you’re one of them. If some groups are permitted to say mean and nasty things about another group, and some aren’t, then there must be “thought police” like you, Chris Rock, Dan Slott and other liberals who set the rules. What a coincidence that all the people who get to determine what is said are liberal. Classic! It’s strange how that works, isn’t it?
I would actually argue that conservatives do the same thing. Family Guy makes fun of a lot of targets, and conservatives tend to laugh at anyone who gets upset – until they had an episode with Down Syndrome, at which point Sarah Palin got angry at them. I’ve seen plenty of cases of conservatives making misogynistic comments about liberal and Democratic women, and those same conservatives get outraged – outraged! – at comments about conservative and Republican women. Or they’ll make anti-Islamic comments, and then be quick to accuse others of anti-Semitism.
Hypocrisy is non-partisan, non-denomination, and is a sin that every single person in history is guilty of.I suppose the difference is that I’m willing to admit to ti, and to admit that I find some targets more acceptable than others.
That said, a good joke is a good joke, no matter who the target is. Slott’s comment is made more offensive by not actually being funny.
Really? Family Guy is the show that conservatives should consider an equal-opportunity offender? Heh. Okay…
Watch the South Park episode “Cartoon Wars.” It exposes Family Guy without mercy, and it is glorious.
For the record, I have watched that episode of South Park. I kinda lost patience with South Park before that – I find them too often to be mean-spirited with their satire – but I did agree with their take on Family Guy. I stopped watching Family Guy after it came back from cancellation specifically because it became just one cutaway gag after another, and I just didn’t care.
South Park is mean-spirited, but Seth MacFarlane, who makes fun of Sarah Palin’s child — yes her child — with Down Syndrome, isn’t? Wow… The Down Syndrome joke didn’t throw you off, but the Gary Coleman cutaway jokes did. Got it.
Side note: I updated your comment so readers don’t get confused with my own correction (i.e., accidentally referencing South Park when I meant Family Guy).
I didn’t say the Family Guy episode wasn’t mean-spirited. I didn’t say Palin was unjustified in her anger. I was just making the case that conservatives are just as picky about what’s considered offensive, being fine with jokes about things they don’t care about and taking issues with jokes about things they do. And I’m not saying conservatives are wrong for that – it’s just a part of human nature.
All I’m saying is that I’m at least honest about my selective outrage.
But you leave out that one small difference — conservatives don’t say that hypocrisy is a good thing. Whereas you admit that you think certain groups should just be able to “punch” others, myself and others on this blog believe there should be a standard a decency that applies to everyone. You inserted the “punching” metaphor because you’re okay with certain groups getting punched. I don’t think anyone see “group x” and start “punching.”
You favor the government telling small business owners what to do with their own money; I do not. Yes, everyone is guilty of hypocrisy from time-to-time, but liberals like yourself excuse it. Conservatives fall short of the standards they set for themselves and cringe, while liberals simply say, “I’d feel a heck of a lot better if I just did away with the standards all together.”
The usual suspects are babbling the expected nonsense on Twitter.
Harry Reid: It’s time for five men on the Supreme Court to stop deciding what happens to women.
Elizabeth Warren: Can’t believe we live in a world where we’d even consider letting big corps deny women access to basic health care based on vague moral objections.
Nancy Pelosi: Supreme Court took an outrageous step against the rights of American women.
Sigh. This is actually a very specific and narrowly defined case, no matter what the demagogues want you to believe. The court made a distinction between “big corps” (publicly traded corporations) and businesses owned by individuals or small groups. Waid and Warren are both trying to portray this as a case of the rank-and-file being persecuted by Big Business.
And, of course, women have not been “denied” access to birth control. They can still buy OTC contraceptives. The products are inexpensive, and widely (and legally) available. (And that’s if they want one of the four contraceptives that the insurance does not cover, as opposed to the sixteen that are still covered.)
Hobby Lobby’s objections were specific, not “vague,” as the court’s decision very narrowly and carefully explained.
The only “right” denied was the “right” to have something provided at someone else’s expense. Maybe the NRA should demand that private employers provide free assault rifles and automatic pistols to all employees. Then, if SCOTUS rules that they don’t have to, we can can all start ranting about the “big corps” denying Americans the means to defend themselves, and how it is an “outrageous step” against the rights of gun owners.
Right on point. No one is denied “access.” They have just been told that if they choose to work for Hobby Lobby they can purchase certain contraceptives and abortifacients on their own dime. Go wild, ladies and Dan Slottian males. Buy enough to last 100 years and store it all in an underground bunker if your heart desires. Just don’t expect Hobby Lobby to pay for it.
I find it amusing that, despite being writers, both Dan Slott and Mark Waid do not appear to have an appreciation for irony; because if you look at the history behind the passage of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act–which Hobby Lobby used in their argument against the Obama Administration and the Health and Human Services–it is dripping with it.
The RFRA was written, in part, in response to another controversial Supreme Court ruling from 1990, Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon vs. Smith. This case involved one Alfred Smith and Galen Black, who were members of the Native American Church in Oregon, being fired from a drug rehab clinic for using peyote. which he said he took during his Church’s religious services. Because using peyote was against state law, he was denied unemployment benefits. His lawyers sued and the case was appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court. The ruling was 5-4, with the majority opinion written by Justice Antonin Scalia, who argued that the Freedom of Religious expression as entitled under the First Amendment did not allow a person to use their religion or religious beliefs as an excuse violate applicable laws. “To permit this,” he wrote, “would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.” Thus, the Court encouraged Smith to appeal to the legislature if they wanted to change the law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith
In response to this ruling, the RFRA was drafted. It was introduced to the House floor in March 11, 1993 by Chuck Schumer, and was passed unanimously in the House, near-unanimously in the Senate with only three votes against, and was signed into law on November 16, 1993 by President Bill Clinton.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act
In short, the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby that have Democrats and liberals like Slott and Waid up in arms about, was to uphold the RFRA–a law which passed by a both a Democrat majority in both the House and the Senate, and signed into law by a Democratic President.
To quote Ned Flanders: “Whoopsie-doodle!”
Thanks for the substantive reply, Mike. I really appreciate it. That’s the kind of comment I like to see around here! 🙂
As you astutely point out, the case is a bit more nuanced than Dan Slott would have his Twitter followers believe. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the ruling, I would hope that most measured individuals would agree that telling Christians to go to “Christ-land” is totally out of bounds.
“So, if I were Slott’s boss, I would probably warn him to be a little more careful with his language.”
Therefore, to be clear you would wait to do something until it is a PR disaster. That is not good leadership.
Just for the record:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/381685/abortion-advocates-downplaying-science-abortifacients-jeanne-monahan
I would also suggest people read this:
http://www.frc.org/testimony/testimony-of-jeanne-monahan-before-us-house-judiciary-committee
“A recent article published in Annals of Pharmacotherapy stated “[t]he mechanism of action of ulipristal in human ovarian and endometrial tissue is identical to that of its parent compound, mifepristone.”[9] Numerous other research studies confirm ulipristal’s abortifacient mechanism of action.[10] In one such study involving ulipristal’s action in macaques (monkeys), four out of five fetuses were aborted.[11]”
100% sure xmenxpert…….
Really?
Douglas where have I seen an article about selective tolerance before…hmmm
http://truthwillwin1.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/the-lack-of-tolerance-from-the-self-proclaimed-tolerant/
xmenxpert- ” I have trouble getting worked up about any criticism of Christians in the US, because Christians still hold most of the power. The persecution complex they cling to got old a long time ago. ”
What…. Long time ago…. Do you have a clue what is happening to Christians around the world?
You really should stop calling other people idiots.
Nothing to see here.
Nothing to see here.
Nothing to see here.
Move along… Move along…
There’s a reason I specified “US Christians.” In the US, Christians have the most power of any religious group, and their persecution complex is tiresome. Bringing up other countries is a red herring.
No, it’s not. Do you really think Jews are persecuted in the America? Seriously? Are you going to go that route? I guarantee you that if I worked at Marvel and told Jews to go to “Jew-land” I’d be gone before I could even log out of Twitter.
Whereas I have a standard of behavior that applies to everyone, you have shifting standards that apply only to the groups you feel need protection. You get to pick and choose who gets treated with kid gloves and who doesn’t. You get to pick and choose who society can say mean and vile things about, and who is off limits. And when guys like me, Hube and Truthwillwin1 call you out on it, then we’re suddenly overreacting.
I do appreciate your comments, though. Like I said, they’re very educational.
I would argue that, yes, Jews do face far more persecution in the US than Christians do. “Jew” is still sometimes used as a catchword for cheapness. “Don’t Jew me, just give me five bucks.” “Don’t be a Jew, share your candy.” Maybe you’ve never heard that sort of thing. I have. I have never in my life heard anything the least bit comparable for Christianity. I’ve seen Jews talk about how awkward they feel around Christmas. And we’re not really that far removed from even more blatant discrimination against Jews – there are still people alive today who can remember when Jews were outright oppressed, even in the US. And we’ll just not talk about hate groups like those Stormfront assholes.
So, yeah. I think antisemitism, even in the US, remains a much greater concern than anti-Christian sentiment.
I’m all for being respectful to all groups. I don’t bash Christianity, myself. But I think it’s always important to consider context. Dan Slott said something mean about conservative Christians (though the sentiment is one I’ve seen from just about every group: “If you don’t like it here, go live somewhere else!”), but Christians still pretty much define the law of the land, so I have a hard time giving a damn when someone criticizes them, any more than I would care about a black guy making comments about white people. Even if I disagree with a comment, I’m just not going to be able to get worked up about someone from a group that faces some degree of discrimination getting angry at the people who are doing the discrimination.
I tend not to see most things as absolutes. I always try to see as many sides of an issue as I can. Do I agree with what Slott said? Part of it, yes, part of it, no. Would I have phrased my opinion the way he did? Absolutely not. For one thing, I clearly wouldn’t have been able to keep it within 140 characters. Do I think Slott deserves some sort of punishment for his comments? Probably not.
I should also mention that I did find his comment both pretty tame and really unoriginal. “If you don’t like it here, move to ___” is such an old, idiotic argument. I want to slap upside the head just about anyone who uses it.
I’m so glad that the Court of Xmenxpert has ruled, and Jews are still off limits for “Go to Jew-land” Slottian attacks because they feel uncomfortable at Christmas. And even though Christians are persecuted all over the world — now — that doesn’t count as a reason to refrain from practice in America.
Translation: I hold just enough positions to allow me to say whatever they heck I feel is right in any given moment. I can never be held accountable for my beliefs because they’re subject to change at any given moment. The luxury of thinking this way is that I can always pat myself on the back for how intelligent and wise I am.
I suggest you read Chrissy Stockton’s blog. I have a feeling you two would get along perfectly. Maybe she’d even fall in love…
Well, I do reserve the right for my opinions to change. I do actually try to be consistent, but sometimes further thought will lead me to re-evaluate an opinion. Seeing a different side doesn’t mean I agree with it, it just means I try to understand why someone holds the view they do.
There are certain views I reject out of hand: Plan B as an “abortifacent” is one. Eating pizza with a knife and fork is another. Donald Trump is a third. These things are, to me, so contrary to to reality that I simply have no desire to see both sides.
So under xmenxpert it is okay if Christians are persecuted in the U.S.
How telling.
Under his very logic we could persecute liberals and it should be okay since we are punching up.
xmenexpert your logic astounds me.
“So under xmenxpert it is okay if Christians are persecuted in the U.S.”
No. My position is that Christians aren’t persecuted in the US.
You said it was okay to “punch” Christians because other groups were “punching up.” When you use violent metaphors to excuse ugly attacks on Christians, you’ll have to forgive me if I consider that a de facto green light to persecute the majority. No, guys like you and Dan Slott aren’t stoning Christians like they do in other parts of the world — you just use and excuse deplorable rhetoric. I get it.
Depends on the rhetoric. I actually have objected to certain language I’ve seen used in reference to Christians. One of the reasons I dislike Bill Maher is because I think his criticisms of Christianity go way too far.
If you object to my use of the word “punch,” fine. Replace it with mocking upwards. Or satirizing upwards. The point is that the people at the bottom get a lot more leeway in making fun of the people at the top than vice versa, because the people at the top making fun of the people at the bottom are just being mean.
Is that right? So, under no circumstances can humorous mocking come at the expense of those at “the bottom?”
Doug is 100% correct — you ARE the speech police. YOU should be mocked. And roundly so.
“under no circumstances” Only if it’s genuinely funny. A good joke is a good joke. The problem is that it’s really, really hard to make a good joke about someone less fortunate. I mean, it’s theoretically possible that I could come up with a hilarious joke at the expense of blind people, but it’d be really, really tough.
Part of the difference is a matter of catharsis. I’m poor, so if I make fun of rich people, it makes me feel a bit better about the fact that I’m unemployed and stuck on welfare and living with my mom. If I became rich, and made fun of poor people, then that’s not catharsis, it’s just dickishness.
Uh huh. There’s no reason whatsoever to rip people who sit on their asses of their own free will and live off of the hard work of others, eh? (And no, I don’t presume that is the norm, just a legitimate criticism/mocking of some poor folks.)
Criticizing individuals who do that would be one thing. Making generalizations would be a problem.
Do you see anything strange with the fact that you’re taking cues on what is and is not acceptable from a Chris Rock skit? Since you’re a liberal guy, I’m sure you’re familiar with the “anti-bullying” campaign. Whether someone is being mean to a “fat” girl or a “skinny” girl — it’s still unacceptable. Whether someone is making fun of a “tall guy” or a “short guy” (I’m just using the skit you shared as an example) — it’s still wrong. Try and tell the kid who was mocked his entire life for being a skinny and tall (to the point where he considered attempting suicide) that the mean things said to him weren’t a big deal…
What you want to do is to be in charge of who gets leeway and who doesn’t. You want to put yourself up on a moral pedestal as the defender of “group x,” when in reality all you do is sow anger and resentment. Christian guys like Truthwillwin see blatant double-standards, and then they get angry. And the best you can do is, “Oh, you have it okay in America. Pipe down.”
For someone whose faith is extremely important to him — perhaps the primary driver of everything he says and does — your message just comes across as a condescending mish-mash of pseudo-intellectual gibber-jabber.
It’s not that I’m taking cues from the Chris Rock routine, it’s that I see it as being a good, and funny, indicator of my position. On the whole, society looks down on being overweight, and places an emphasis on being skinny. While there are girls who worry about being too skinny, it’s by far much more common for them to worry about being too fat. Likewise, among men, being tall is seen as better than being short. So fat girls and short guys have a lot more leeway for talking about skinny girls and tall guys. Gays have a lot more leeway for talking about straights. A black comedian can do an “ever notice white people are like this,” but a white comedian doing a similar routine about blacks has to be a lot more cautious.
It’s not about bullying – that’s always wrong. It’s about blowing off steam and voicing resentment in order to eliminate it.
Comedy is very cathartic, but it’s always important to keep in mind who the target is. Ideally, the target should generally be someone of equal or higher standing. You need to be very, very careful when the target is someone of lower standing, because it’s very easy for those people to feel like they’re being bullied. That can lead to anger and resentment.
I think it’s also always very important, when one’s group is the target of ridicule, to really consider the status of the group in society.
And I’m not even saying that you and Truth are wrong to object to Slott’s comment. I’m just saying that I can’t care about it, because I see Christians are being a group with a lot of power, and as a result, a group much more open to criticism. It’s the same reason why Harry Reid is a more valid target than a city councilor from Springfield, Wherever.
This is kind of like the people in Washington who say that the best way to deal with America’s debt is to go into more debt. Regardless, it doesn’t work when you start saying, “black people can make fun of white people, but white people have to be verrrrrry careful about what they say about black people.”
No. Screw that. Like I said, people who try and arbitrarily set up word-policing guidelines end up just pissing people off.
On the other hand, everything pisses someone off. Apparently, there are even some crazy lunatics who get pissed off at people eating pizza with a knife and fork.
You can make jokes all you want, but at the end of the day you have still demonstrated that you very much consider yourself a member of the word police, even while denying that political correctness exists.
I agree it is their money and it is their right to not spend it on things that are against their beliefs.
If this were ANY OTHER industry, Slott would’ve been dropped on his ass for his reprehensible and outright nasty behavior. Mark Waid might be a little touchy about certain subjects, but let’s be honest: We can block whoever we want on social media. It’s social media. If you disagree with somebody’s opinion, that’s all well and good, and as the Rabbit from Bambi once said:
“If you got nothing nice to say, don’t say nothing at all.”
See? There’s a distinct difference between the two: Mark makes it clear that if you disagree with his opinion, that’s fine, but he won’t put up with your crap either. Dan Slott will not only let you know, but he will go out of his way to single you out and sick an entire fandom onto you to do it. And if he loses in that endeavor, he gets the moderators and other internet police to get you blocked, banned, disabled, or otherwise.
Professionalism vs. non-Professionalism. There are ways to go about it. It’s already a bitch for want-to-be-Professional Comic Book writers like myself trying to sell scripts and hire decent artists to draw and publish your work and get it out there, then we see twats like Slott at the top writing Spider-Man and getting away with the shit he gets away with? There are no words.
Oh and he gets to be a bigot on top of that? So let me get this straight, you preach tolerance then reject and insult a couple of social and religious groups all because they’ve been the ones who have been made into scapegoats and “controlled the money” as one would say for the past few centuries? Yeah, fuck you bud. I am not a Christian, or a Jew, or a Muslim, Pagan, or even Athiest. And most would laugh off my religion as “fake” but that doesn’t stop me for believing in it. So fuck you for making other people feel like they need to conform to YOUR ideals to “fit in” Mr. Slott.
Agreed. He’s made the right friends, and they’ve made it abundantly clear that they simply do not care how he conducts himself online, provided he spews nasty stuff at the right groups (i.e., conservatives). He might delete comments that will be used in blog posts like this (I snatched “‘Murica” before that happened), but in general he has no leash. Again, I would be fired if I told him to go to “Jew-land” or a Muslim to go to “Muslim-land” over a political disagreement.
Oh yes…I know this well. I know this all too well. 😉
I feel for you, man. It is rather bizarre to know that go to “Christ-land” is writing Spider-Man. If enough guys like you keep plugging away, perhaps there will be a day when I actually plunk down a decent amount of change for comics again.
“Again, I would be fired if I told him to go to “Jew-land” or a Muslim to go to “Muslim-land” over a political disagreement.”
Correction: You’d be fired if there was enough of an outcry about it. If there were only a couple blog posts by people who had already been writing critical posts about you for a while, you’d probably be fine.
xmenxpert
“I’m all for being respectful to all groups”
Really…last time I checked you called many people idiots just because you did not agree with them. This is just like how you said you never offended anyone in a post and you were proven wrong.
I think you only believe in being respectful for people that agree with you or else you wont listen to their views or studies.
I suggest you take more time looking at yourself before you start calling people names that disagree with you.
There are some groups I have a lot of trouble being respectful towards. People who compare Plan B to abortion are one of them. That’s a pet peeve of mine. It comes across, to me, as being primarily an attempt at controlling women, and more specifically, controlling their reproductive rights.
I see that is your right and they are still allowed to have theirs even if you do not agree. You must also be fair and consider they still provide 16 types and they do not force any women to not use anything they just will not pay for it, which is their right.
Therefore they do not control anyone they just make it their responsibility for their actions.
I eat pizza with a fork.
Truthwillwin1, I must say that this is disconcerting news… 😉
If we were ever eating pizza together and you did that I might be forced to gently tease you.
I am okay with that, it saves my shirt.
So if I’m reading all this correctly, we have a repeat of the climate change mess where an expert in xmen takes possibly dubious articles/journals of things he’s not an expert in; declares they are accurate, won’t listen to a thing anyone tries to tell him, then gets angry that he’s caught in a loop that he started in the first place and has to have the last word….wow.
Doug and Truth, I must commend you on your patience.
I have to agree with Truth, I prefer eating pizza with a fork…..perhaps the two of us can be issued a spork with our Doug Crony tee-shirts!
I didn’t get “angry” at the loop. I simply stated that there was no point in continuing it. Truthwillwin thinks the Family Research Council is a valid source of respectable scientific opinion. I think the International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians is going to be a vastly superior source. I go with scientific organizations, he prefers the same people who equate homosexuality with pedophilia and who have a very strict religious perspective on everything. There’s no point in further discussion, so I let it drop.
Oh, you’re talking about the FRC article that linked to things like official FDA documents to back up the Congressional testimony of the organization’s legal council? Yep. Totally no science to be found there.
The last time I checked the FDA dealt with science. I guess it’s just not the science you agree with, so you’ll just not see that “side.” I suppose it’s like your reference to Donald Trump earlier, a reality you flatly dismiss because it doesn’t conform to your belief system. You may not agree with Truthwillwin1 on when life begins, but he most-certainly has a well of science at his disposal to buttress his opinion.
A lot of medical groups want the FDA to change that label. I don’t know exactly why it was given that label originally, but I’m assuming it was because there wasn’t enough research at the time to conclude that it didn’t inhibit implantation. The research since then has found that, no, it doesn’t, and thus the FDA’s label is outdated and inaccurate. The European Medical Agency already removed a reference to it. The World Health Organization has stated that it doesn’t prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. Even an FDA spokeswoman acknowledged that the research shows it doesn’t prevent implantation: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/11/us-usa-court-contraception-analysis-idUSBREA2A07720140311 (near the end of the article; she says the FDA simply hasn’t had a chance to review the research yet).
So, no, the science over the past 15 years consistently shows that Plan B doesn’t inhibit implantation.
Your last commented was deleted. If you want to start swearing at me (or any of my readers) you will be banned.
With that said, the point was that there you flat-out dismissed an article simply because it linked to FRC — despite the fact that its legal council has plenty of science to back up its claims. So much so that the Supreme Court agreed and ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby and the small businesses that took joined its lawsuit.
I have no desire to argue about abortion drugs with you (especially since I’m married to an OB-GYN and would destroy you). I will however, point out that you preach about open-mindedness when, like most liberals, your tolerance only extends to the point where the conservative worldview begins.
Fair enough. My apologies.
With that said, I’m now done with this topic. So whatever your response is will be the last word.
It is my blog…so I always get the last word if that is what I want. I don’t need your blessing to make that happen, but thanks for the heads up anyway.
Thank you Patrick. I would love a fork with my shirt but to be fair my wife will also make fun of me for using it with pizza. I had more items ready to show xmenxpert that pocked holes in his logic (for example where IUD’s were used for abortion purposes by planned parenthood) so it may have been in his best interest to bow out.
I think we need an intervention here.
My wife would agree with you.
I wonder if Slott has had any sort of counselling session by his HR department as this isn’t an isolated incident. It is actually getting to the point where very few comic book sites take him seriously (most seem to prefer to keep Slott at arm’s length or deal directly with editor Nick Lowe instead).
At the end of the day, I think it is important for Marvel to ensure all employees put their best face forward when dealing with the media, especially in this day and age with social media (and the professional issues associated with it).
Personally I think what Slott should be doing is keeping comments like that to himself and instead playing to the strengths of social media (which is generating a fan buzz through sneak-peeks and positive discussion).
I’m wary of going that far. While I think Slott should definitely tone down some of the rhetoric he uses, I have no objection to him – or anyone else – expressing their opinions in whichever forum they choose. What I will say is that Slott does seem to behave rather unprofessionally on Twitter. He’s a major writer, he should be more willing to let criticisms of himself slide. If he views someone as being a jerk, he should probably refrain from engaging with the person.
You’re absolutely right that Marvel needs to make sure their employees are presenting a good image for the company. But part of the complication is that, for a lot of comic fans, the writer is at least as important as the characters. One reason Peter David’s fans are so devoted to him is because he writes a lot about stuff other than just his writing – for years, the recap pages on X-Factor (and now All-New X-Factor) have included updates on his personal life. That personal connection to creators is something that means a lot to a lot of fans – it’s why they get followers on Twitter and Tumblr. That includes when creators say stuff that’s snarky. And plenty of people do like following people who like to be controversial.
Another factor is that I think most of them are friends, and it’s really hard to come down on a friend. When Remender made his infamous “drown in hobo piss” tweet, I’m pretty sure the response from (I think) Brevoort was basically that it was “Rick being Rick,” and that he’s got a weird sense of humour that he just occasionally takes too far. It’s pretty rare for comic professionals to really say anything bad about each other (with only a few exceptions).
All that said, yeah, Slott does seem like he can be a bit abrasive at times, and that’s something he should work on. I’m not sure the tweet here really falls under that, because I just found it utterly banal, a repetition of a depressingly common sentiment: “If you don’t like it here, go somewhere else.” I think I said earlier that the greatest sin of that tweet is how unoriginal it is.
As an aside, I’m not sure about the comic sites keeping him back. A quick search shows that he seems to get interviewed pretty regularly. Nick Lowe, as an editor, is going to get interviewed more often simply because of his position. In general, editors do more interviews than writers, with a few exceptions. Lowe’s also probably gotten a lot of attention lately simply because he only just recently became the editor of the Spider-office, taking over from Stephen Wacker. (Who was a huge troll, though a really funny one.) Since editors generally have a fair bit of control over the creative direction of the books they’re editing, people want to know what direction he has planned for the books coming out of his office. (I’m just glad he left the X-office, personally. I disliked the way the franchise, under his oversight, focused on Cyclops and Wolverine to the exclusion of everyone else, with a lot of characters shoved off to the side and kept on the sidelines. Luckily, Mike Marts is already making changes I approve of.)
I’m sure if the NAACP had joined Hobby Lobby’s lawsuit and Dan Slott told this small percentage of black people as a whole to “go back to Africa” you would have called it a “utterly banal, a repetition of a depressingly common sentiment” among white males.
Or not…since they’re part of the Xmenxpert Protected Class and to say mean things at a protected class is a big no-no.
I can tell you from experience, Dan’s method of maintaining a good public face online is less “preventative” and much more “retroactive”. Instead of “I’m going to be professional, and if people don’t like my stuff, I’ll keep my composure” he goes for the “Why not just act like a jerk when I can just erase it from the internet afterwards?” method.
It’s quite interesting that the guy who demanded I say “I’m sorry” to him for over a year goes around deleting anything that makes him look bad. In Dan Slott’s world you never have to say “sorry” because any time something out of line or mean is said he just hits the delete button. The message becomes: “What are you talking about? I never said that. It never happened. Do you have a screen shot? Well, then no apology for you.”
So it seems there is an acceptable hitlist in the eyes of xmenexpert. God forbid if you are a tall skinny white Christian or he is going to rip the piss out of you endlessly. That’s ok though, I expect as a Christian he will be forgiven.
I find it laughable that xmenexpert has previously stated he doesn’t believe political correctness is an issue but it seems its a major part of his viewpoint.
Believe it or not the skinny person you see and make fun of might have anorexia nervosa. They are so convinced they are fat that they see your skinny taunts as mocking them for being fat. Well done.
That tall person mocked for being 5 inches taller than his classmates probably doesn’t like it anymore than the short people do. But that’s ok, he’s tall, he can reach high things.
Why is it acceptable to mock anyone for anything?
There can only be equality when people stop clinging to the sins of the past and embrace all of us as one species.
Dan Slott gets away with it as American Christians are acceptable targets. However Dan Slott is followed on Twitter worldwide. His comics are read worldwide.
My point exactly, Andrew. In Xmenxpert’s world, people can just be lumped into large groups that are fair game for relentless ridicule because they’re too powerful or rich or white or Christian or whatever. In our world, you treat everyone with class and dignity. That’s not to say that the standard isn’t always successfully held, but it’s still “the” standard we are expected to strive for.
Again, bingo. Dan Slott and Tom Breevort can make blogs like this one, Hube’s, etc. all day long because here’s the bottom line: people are reading our stuff. Sometimes I really want to do a chart of all the page views of my Dan Slott pieces just to rub it in their smug faces that word is definitely getting out about their behavior. I view life as a marathon instead of a sprint. I’d rather have a steady flow of traffic over years than one big rush and then nothing.
Fair-minded individuals who run across this blog post and compare what I’ve said to what Dan Slott said could see that he is an immature think-skinned clown who hides behind his buddies like Breevort and his Salacious B. Crumb-like Twitter followers.
Great timing, Andrew. This story on the postponement of Adman Richman’s “Man Finds Food” hits on the point you mentioned. Richman is now much thinner, but he’s very sensitive about his weight. However, he’s also been taken to task for his online behavior by Travel Channel. Dan Slott? Eh. He can say whatever he wants because his buddies at Marvel will just cover for him and make snarky jokes.
I congratulate the Travel Channel for taking that action. “Celebrities” need to understand that what they post online is seen all over the world and looks bad on them. It is actually in my employment contact that my behaviour online should not be offensive.
I would also say that I’m pleased the guy is losing weight. He often looked ill after completing those food challenges.
As far as Marvel are concerned they are a group of 30-40 year old man-children writing for the same audience. Its why I don’t bother with their current product.
Imagine what the industry would look like if creators like Dan Slott didn’t go out of their way to alienate huge numbers of people who just-so-happen to disagree with them politically. They have to know this, and yet they don’t care. It’s this incredibly selfish “I got mine” attitude. “Hey, we’re the ones in charge…who cares if our behavior is detrimental to the long-term health of the industry. Someone else will deal with it.”
The big problem is that the comics writers today have not got a clue what to do with the mainstream characters. A lot of these characters are 50+ years old and these modern creators try to change them when it isn’t necessary or desireable. At the same time, bizarrely, they try to keep them tied to the past.
As we are talking about Dan Slott let’s stick with Spider-Man. This was a character who had suffered the death of his first love yet he had managed to move on and marry someone else. The relationships used to be believable, MJ and Peter had relationship issues but they were always there for each other. Then along comes Quesada who having suffered his own divorce growls angrily “marriage bad! me no want spidey married” And you get OMD.
I can’t help but feel the storyline to MJ and Peter not being married anymore could have been a lot more. Why didn’t they make it about 2 people going through a divorce?
Its crap like OMD and the constant events that get shoved down our throats that make it impossible to be enthusiastic with Marvel anymore. And wouldn’t it be great not to have a “Death Of…..” story every year?
The first big Marvel event, Secret Wars, actually had ramifications. Spidey’s black suit, The Thing not returning home, a new Spider-Woman. Now an event is nicely tied up at the end, probably with time travel. Yes someone may die, but they are normally back within a few months.
If creators want to bring back sales and encourage new readers they need to get back to basic good vs evil storylines and leave out the politics.
Heh. I’m not laughing at his divorce, but your psychoanalysis, which may be pretty accurate. 🙂
I just look at the movie sales and then compare it to the comics and no matter how you slice it, what’s going on is an embarrassment. These movies are pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars, but it doesn’t appear that they’re parlaying the interest in the movies into an interest in comics. You’ll notice that the Marvel movies, more or less, try to not get under the skin of roughly half the audience with petty politics. That’s because they need guys like us to see the movies.
These days, it’s almost as if the comic book creators know that they’re the D-squad in terms of sales for the company, so all they care about is doing their own thing. “Oh, Marvel comics aren’t going anywhere, but everyone knows it’s the movies, toys and cartoons that drive sales. We might as well be liberal jerks. Our jobs aren’t going anywhere. As long as we do a decent story here-and-there that can be used as a cartoon episode or sell a new action figure, the top brass will leave us alone.”
My nephew loves Spider-Man. He has toys, watches the films and cartoons. He’s never picked up a comic. Granted he’s only 5 but he can read.
Maybe the characters have outgrown their original media. Special effects are such that films can now realise Spider-Man’s webslinging, Superman’s flight and Ant-Man’s shrinking and have them look like real. Films are also more bankable as they can be family events. People who would never pick up a comic will watch Spider-Man.
The comics try and emulate the movies. There are Star-Lord and Rocket Raccoon comics out now purely to cash in on Guardians of the Galaxy. They bring back Peter Parker just as the latest Spider-Man film is released.
You know that around May 2016 the X-Men will be facing Apocalypse. Ant-Man will get his own solo title in July next year. Ultron will be back next year. The comics have become too predictable. It wouldn’t be too bad if they effectively shared one universe, but they don’t.
The dream for comics book writers now is that their story gets picked for a film adaptation. Cue a producer credit and a paycheck for consulting. In fact so many comics have splash pages now with no dialogue that you can see the writer thinking “this would look GREAT on the big screen.”
I would say though that I have witnessed kids get put off buying comics by their mother. In my local newsagent you can buy reprint books of selected year old Marvel titles. Each one has 3-4 comics in it for the same price as a single comic so they are good value. The mum’s always put the kids off but then give in when they get to the DVD section. Why? The cynic in me says its parents who can’t be bothered to read with their kids anymore and they would rather they were quiet in their rooms watching films.
I’ve been in a rant like mood today. Sorry
It’s funny you should mention that. Some of my earliest memories are of my brother reading Iron Man and Spider-Man comics to me. He’s the one who got me into Marvel comics in the first place. And guess what? He’s turned off by the way guys like Dan Slott behave. That is yet another long-time loyal customer who sees what’s going on and doesn’t like it. The response by Marvel’s editors is to scoff and resort to sarcastic comments, and that’s fine — but anyone who isn’t a raving partisan lunatic can see that they’re being incredibly short-sighted.
Feel free to rant any time you want, Andrew. You make a lot of good points. 🙂
“which may be pretty accurate.” I’m pretty sure it’s the generally accepted explanation for why OMD happened. That kind of thing is at once the beauty and tragedy of comics: The people who grew up reading these stories get to bring their own vision to them. Sometimes, that vision is pretty similar to the original, like Mark Waid’s excellent Daredevil run. Sometimes, it’s vastly different and wonderful for it, as with Grant Morrison’s incredible New X-Men. Sometimes, it’s vastly different and ends up being lame, as with Hickman’s current Avengers run (well, I think it’s lame, at least).
And sometimes, you get something like OMD. An attempt to reset things back to an old status quo, which doesn’t end up working well. In the case of OMD, it wound of killing Amazing Spider-Man’s sales – they had to ship twice a month in order to claim it was selling better than it had been. The interesting thing to see will be if the new Amazing Spider-Man has decent sales in the long term, on an issue-by-issue basis rather than a month-to-month basis.
I will say, though, that I’m not sure alienation is the biggest problem comics are seeing. There’s a lot of comics and creators out there who don’t try to alienate anyone, but still don’t sell well. Avengers Assemble was a book that was actually designed to cash in on the movie audience, but while it lasted two years, it had low sales for most of it. It was launched with Brian Bendis as the writer, and was taken over by Kelly Sue DeConnick – two writers who are funny and inviting.
I think there are a few problems. One, price. Most comics are $4. That’s a lot of money for 10 minutes of entertainment. To make it worse, the price is the same online, where manufacturing and shipping costs don’t come into play. Of course, that part ties into the second problem: By and large, comics are only really available at specialty comics shops now. So there’s a problem with accessibility. (It doesn’t help that comic shops have a reputation for being uninviting.) Third, there’s the perception – an incorrect one, I believe, but a common one – that mainstream superhero comics are simply too convoluted to be able to follow. That if you haven’t been reading for 40 years already, you won’t stand a chance. Fourth, the focus on events probably doesn’t help. The events sell well, but I think they also wind up turning some people away. Events are especially frustrating for people who don’t want to read them. I loved the previous volume of Captain Marvel, but I hated that, right after a major, dramatic arc with an ending full of major consequences for the character, the series then jumped straight into Infinity, an event I hadn’t cared about from the moment I heard about it. I dread a little bit the day Ms. Marvel ties in with an event I’m not interested in.
One thing I think Marvel should be doing is telling the people who watch the movies about the Marvel Unlimited service. It has over 13 000 issues for a reasonable price. Just put an ad before the movies saying, “If you like the movie, check out the comics it’s based on with the Marvel Unlimited service!” And then a list of the benefits. If they can get some people reading some older comics, they might be more comfortable checking out some new ones, too.
And actually, it’s probably worth noting that superhero comics aren’t the only ones who face trouble getting readers. The Walking Dead is one of the biggest shows on TV, but the comic doesn’t sell any better than most of Marvel and DC’s output. Red did well at the box office, but how many people even knew it was based on a comic? The Sin City movie was a hit, but I don’t think that translated into a particularly big boost in sales of the collections. Comics, as a medium, just aren’t doing well these days.
Thank you. I’m actually quite glad that you admit that. At the time I said that on the Marvel message boards. The moderator made up a story about me “swearing” (as you know, I’m not a fan) and banned me for at least six months. When everyone wondered where I went, he said that it happened during the afternoon. Odd, because I was working and didn’t have a job that allowed me to log in and just randomly swear on Marvel message boards. Regardless, Marvel denied this obvious truth. It’s nice to know other fans still remember this.
I never said it was the “biggest” problem. You’ve acknowledged that the industry is not doing very well these days, so then the question becomes: “Why on earth would guys like Slott focus on weird political screeds that just turn guys like me, Hube, Truthwillwin, Patrick, Andrew, MagneticEye, Riablo, etc. off to Marvel?” I’ve said before that I used to drop a serious chunk of change on comics. At this point, it’s almost zero. My buddy usually buys me some stuff for Christmas and my birthday, but aside from that Marvel is pretty much dead to me. I’ll review Spider-Man because he’s always been my favorite character, but that’s about it. I’m definitely not alone.
Yep. This is a big one. It’s really not worth $4.00. I don’t know how they justify that price, but my guess is that Marvel’s comics division is not managing its resources very well. Either they’re paying people way too much money, or they need to sell the NYC real estate and publish out of Jersey … or something. Would I buy Marvel comics and put up with Slott’s insulting commentary at $2.00? Perhaps. Will I do it at $4.00? No way.
Eh. Not buying that one. Almost everywhere I ever lived there was a comic shop within driving distance. Germany was a hard one…so I put up with Marvel’s horrible subscription service (which I think still might be as rotten as it was in the 1990s!).
That dovetails with something you mentioned earlier regarding prices:
This makes no sense. I was seriously going to consider the digital version so I could review comics, but there isn’t a chance in hell I’m going to pay the same exact price as I would for the hard copy. What is the justification for that? Can someone give me a good reason why digital should cost the exact same as a version that needs to be printed and shipped?
Anyway, it’s time for me to eat. You made some good points there.
I think being turned off of the entire company because of a single writer is unfair. Most of Marvel’s writers are really cool people. Brian Bendis, Kelly Sue DeConnick, Kieron Gillen, Peter David, Al Ewing – and that’s not getting into the artists, inkers, colourists, letterers, editors, and just the general people. Most of the people at Marvel don’t get involved in fights.
Beyond that, well, there’s plenty of fantastic indie comics, too. Kieron Gillen and Jamie McKelvie, whose two volumes of Phonogram (and run on Young Avengers) were great, just launched The Wicked and The Divine. Kelly Sue DeConnick and Emma Rios have Pretty Deadly, and DeConnick’s also launching Bitch Planet soon (and with a name like that, how can you not be interested?). Saga, by Brian K. Vaughan and Fiona Staples, has gotten rave reviews. So if you enjoy the medium, there’s plenty out there. I guarantee you can find something that will be worth the money.
Keep in mind not everyone has a car. Also, there were a ton of comic shops in the ’90s, I’ll grant you that, but when the bubble burst, a lot of shops did go out of business. So there are people who don’t have a shop handy. As for the subscription service – yeah. I live in Canada, and I stopped subscribing because getting comics three weeks after they came out was just annoying.
I think the logic for digital comics being the same price as physical ones is actually to keep a good relationship with the shops. The concern is that, if digital comics have a lower price, enough people will switch over to them that the specialty shops won’t have enough business any more, and they’ll close down. The comic book industry unfortunately hasn’t learned the lessons of the record industry: People like the Internet, and they like paying less for things on the Internet. Most people are willing to pay to support the things they love – there’s no shortage of people who will buy an album they could’ve just as easily downloaded – but only if the price is fair. iTunes shows that. People are willing to pay a buck a tune, but charge them $20 for ten songs (only four of them actually worth listening to) and they’ll just steal it. The comic industry needs to learn that same lesson: Lower the price on digital comics, and more of the people stealing them will be willing to spend money on them.
Yes. That would be unfair. Unfortunately, myself, Hube, Avi, Carl and others have demonstrated at length that there is a systemic problem at Marvel and within the industry at large.
Usually that’s what I count on my buddy to provide. He hooks me up during the holidays.
I get this, but I don’t “get it.” It’s like the industry is just trying to resist the inevitable. There used to be switchboard operators who literally had to connect you to the right line when you were calling someone. When technology advanced a whole lot of nice ladies were out of a job … and today we have cell phones.
I downloaded a digital comic from comixology and had the worst experience ever. The comic wouldn’t work on a single browser, and when it did pseudo-work it took 30 minutes to view three pages. I spent hours trying to get it to work. I called my buddy and he had an illegal version in about 30 seconds. I told the guy at Comixology who refunded my money that Marvel/Comixology are doing everything in their power to encourage people to rip them off. I actually want to do the right thing by them, but I’m not going to spend hours trying to get a $4.00 comic to work when it can be stolen in 30 seconds. I just don’t read comics unless my buddy buys them as a gift or I just so happen to be by a comic shop when I have free time on my hands.
Tell your buddy to pick you up Pretty Deadly Vol. 1. It’s my favourite comic ever.
But yes, the pricing on digital comics is a mistake, I think. Like I said, it’s repeating the same mistake the music industry did by refusing to accept the times.
It looks like we are not alone:
http://truthwillwin1.wordpress.com/2014/07/02/people-on-twitter-rise-up-against-the-intollerant-dan-slott/
Nice post, Truthwillwin!. 🙂 It was funny to watch Dan Slott back-peddle on what it means to “impose” a religious belief on another, and then to hem and how about corporations being businesses. Then, when it was pointed out that the law does few certain businesses as “people” (and has for quite some time), he needed an escape hatch. Cue his offense at being called “Danny-boy.” Dan Slott can slime anyone who sides with Hobby Lobby with all sorts of nasty rhetoric, but a light-hearted jab like “Danny-boy” is too much for him to handle.
“Danny-boy” can dish it out, but he can’t take it. Time for him to say something to his Twitter followers that will get them to lather up his ego…
I am still waiting for “Dan you ignorant Slott”
You may have to be older to get that one.
Nope. 😉
I am going to Hobby Lobby to buy materials to make signs today, Tomorrow I will go to Chick Fil A to get a chicken sandwich. From there I will go to a public park to eat my sandwich while displaying my signs for my Second Amendment rights.
From a 1979 “Stan’s Soapbox”, an interesting last paragraph:
“None of us is all that different from each other. We all want essentially the same things outta life, – a measure of security, some fun, some romance, friendship, and the respect of our contemporaries. That goes for Indians, Chinese, Russians, Jews, Arabs, Catholics, Protestants, blacks, browns, whites and green skinned Hulks.
So why don’t we all stop wasting time hating the “other” guys. Just look in the mirror, mister – that other guy is you”.
I’m down to just 2 Marvel titles now and 2 DC titles. Plenty of great indie titles out there, but I’ve also stopped buying them because of budgetary restraints.
There are some other Marvel titles that I would like to afford, but I’m now diverting a lot of my surplus income from my regular job towards very expensive audio equipment for my small recording studio and video edit suite as I’m picking up a fair bit of work in those areas too.
So as much as i enjoy reading comics, I’m spending my money on other things I’m passionate about which in return make me money.
I do think $4.00 for a comic book is a bit rich. It would be great however if books were actually that price here in Australia. I pay $5.00 for a $2.99 book and $6.00 for a $3.99 book. I had a field day buying up books when I visited Midtown Comics in NYC at the beginning of the year. 🙂
To be honest though, I’m really not enjoying Marvel comics the way I used to anymore and it’s not an age thing, ( I turned 50 this year ). I guess invariably it’s titles like ASM and the permeating philosophies and stupid changes behind such other books that has turned me from being a loyal customer since 1975 to someone who almost doesn’t care anymore.
I have a collection of over 5,000 books and collating them alphabetically into short boxes with new backing boards and sleeves is keeping me busy enough. I do spend a bit of money buying silver and bronze age books as well, but it’s all a matter of prioritizing what is more important to me now.
Welcome to the world of home recording….I have around 50K in my studio….I am lucky my wife is supportive.
Side note, my wife also works in the medical field so I had a bit of an edge in the debate with xmenxpert as well.
Thanks Truthwillin1……my wife is very supportive too. Wow! I haven’t quite spent around around 50K but it’s getting close. My space is still a bit of a mess, (organized chaos) 🙂 so I’m using a friends’ recording studio more at the moment which is wired up correctly and fully decked out.
It was easier in the 80’s and early 90’s when I was working for a couple of established studios around town unfortunately both have folded in recent years. These days I tend to look after audio/visual duties at church as well.
If you don’t mind me asking, what audio interface and software are you using?
BTW, I forgot to mention on my last post, I hope you guys had a great Independence Day.
Thanks! Sometimes I wonder where I’d move if I ever left America, and I think that Australia is right up there at the top of the list. It seems like some of the last bastions of sanity in the world reside there. Unfortunately, it also seems as though you guys have an inordinate amount of plant/animal/insect life that can kill a man…
I use several audio interfaces, a Roland 2480 and an A&H mixing board for one. A lexicon something….forgot the unit name, and a presunus and a Focusrite…cant remember off the top of my head.
As for software I use several as well but I have really liked Reaper…and the price is great! I also run a lot of hardware rack gear….I am a bit old school mixed with some new tech.
I have 10 guitars 2 drum sets, 2 keyboards and 11 amps at this time….I also have a decent mic collection (nothing too expensive) and more odds and ends than a person can count.
Lots of fun, I have the 3rd story of my house as a music studio. It has 3 small rooms and one very large live room with a high hardwood ceiling. It has been neglected for the last year and a half due to my little boy, but I cannot wait to get back at it again.
Unfortunately, it also seems as though you guys have an inordinate amount of plant/animal/insect life that can kill a man…
LOL, yeah that’s true 🙂 but also perhaps a bit of an exaggeration. Where I live in Adelaide, South Australia, we have more of a Mediteranean climate, probably quite similar to Los Angeles. We’ve got Brown snakes which are ranked as one of the most deadliest and are more common in the Adelaide Hills, but sightings do occur in metropolitan areas.
Unless someone is foolish enough to disturb them or try and pick one up instead of calling a snake catcher, then they’re going to suffer the consequences. Having said that though, there are less fatalities from Brown snake bites these days. I’ve only seen them in rural areas and that’s when I was a kid.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/snakes-slithering-into-the-suburbs/story-e6frea6u-1226238981168
The other one is the Redback spider. I’ve killed a few of those in my time. In fact I found some in our back yard shed. It’s ironic, I love Spider-Man but real spiders creep me out. 🙂
http://www.adelaide.edu.au/news/news56101.html
http://www.livingin-australia.com/spiders/
Northern Australia and the north eastern tropical regions of Australia have more deadly wildlife, especilally with crocodiles which makes the alligator seem like a happy snapper. The giant jellyfish is up there too, plus manta rays, stingrays and great white pointer sharks can be found in all of our coastal waters. The western part of our state is notorious for great whites.
I do admire the surfers who go out into those waters. I for one won’t swim out too deep in the ocean anymore. It’s funny the things we did as teenagers without giving it a second thought, but I’m teaching my kids to be careful and respect the ocean and the creatures that lurk within it.
I just came across this in my Facebook feed this morning. I’m not alone! “Ameristaralia is The Greatest Nation on Earth.” I knew I wasn’t alone. 🙂
What do you think of your BeesNeez Arabella Tube Mic? I was considering one.
The large live room with a high hardwood ceiling is ideal as a recording space, I bet it’s a nice sounding room. With the other 3 rooms, do use one as a control room and another as a vocal booth? My space is a lot smaller and if we ever move house again, I would make having a larger recording space a priority.
Audio Interface: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 – am saving for a Prism Sound Titan although I could change my mind again, but I’m definitely after a pro high end interface. Antelope Audio, Lynx and Metric Halo are other brands I’m thinking of.
At my friends studio we’re using a Digidesign 003 Rack modded by Black Lion.
Monitors: Tapco S-5 by Mackie
Headphones: Audio Technica ATH45 + various generic brands
Software: Reaper. It’s a great program isn’t it? Also Pro Tools 9 at my friends’ studio but he’s using Reaper more often. He’s also got all the UA plug ins.
I would love to have a hardware control surface. Allen & Heath are great. I remember using one of their older analogue desks back in the day doing live sound mixing. I have been looking at the Audient range of consoles but their ASP4816 console is 16K AUS.
I don’t have instruments and I’ve only got one guitar amp. Again my friends’ studio has 4 amps, 6 guitars, 6 keyboards, samplers, drum machines, 4 mic pres, Behringer & Mackie summing mixers, compressors, reverbs & delay units.
I’m also saving for some dedicated mic pres. So many to choose from. 🙂
Microphones: This is where I’ve invested a fair bit of money. AKG C12A, BeesNeez Arabella Tube Mic, BeesNeez Lulu matched pair, MJE 384 matched pair, Avantone CK40, Rode NT4, Heil PR40, Beyerdynamic M201, Studio Projects B1 x 2, Shure SM57 x 2, AKG D222, Audio Technica 813, Sennheiser ME66/K6.
The smaller rooms- One is a vocal room, the other is a isolation room for loud amps, and the other is for sitting and waiting (I prefer to be in the live room with isolation headphones).
Sounds like you have some fun gear! I have Warfdale diamond pro 8.2A monitors.
As for cans I have extreme isolation and other good ones, and a few cheap ones as well.
I love reaper, I left Protools for it!
I just love old school faders it works better for me. I also have several mic pres and other effect gear…some would say too much. Mic pres are tricky it depends on what you want for recording Harp (my wife plays the harp) I like the most clean and uncolored thing I can afford.
I have good mic collection as well, and every studio needs at least SM57! I was surprised on how good the MXL mics are for the money (I have several of those) I got them for free because they sent me a shipment on accident and I returned them. They could not believe it (they had a shipping issue and sent mics to the wrong people and I was the only one that returned them). They told me to pick anything I wanted and they sent them to me for free.
The Studio projects mics also surprised me. I would still love a ribbon Royer mic.
“Ameristaralia is The Greatest Nation on Earth.”
Douglas, that was very funny 🙂
I replied to some dude called Brandon Harris-Faison regarding his brash comment.
Ameristaralia F.. yeah!
I think the first person to respond to him was spot on: “There’s always one of you guys.”
Hey Truthwillin1,
The BeesNeez Arabella is an expensive condenser tube mic but a great all rounder on what ever source you put it on.
Ben Sneesby (yes that is his name) modeled it on the Neumann U47/U48 but it’s far from being a clone. It has a character all its’ own and provides a rich big open sound.
I like the quote on their website “It’s like a mansion with the entire front wall missing, open and huge with a classic expensive sound”. I would try it out before you buy just to make sure it’s the right kind of mic to suit your needs.
Ben had previously refurbished my AKG C12A. He re-skinned the dual diaphragm, put a new tube in and built a brand new power supply for it. It’s very clean and transparent.
The other great thing they do is allow customers to put down a deposit and then take however long you want to finish paying it off. I did that with the Arabella when they had a 20% special on all their range of mics a couple of years ago. I just did it again with a matched pair of Lulus where they offered a 50% discount on that mic only. Still waiting for those to arrive.
I think Ben is doing incredibly well for a small boutique manufacturer. He’s not competing with Rode and has had promotional exhibits at AES Conventions and NAB shows in the US.
The other guy I’m really impressed with is Michael Jolly from Cape Cod, Massachusetts. He modifies a range of mics including MXL and his prices are very good.
http://www.oktavamodshop.com/product_info.php?cPath=2_30&products_id=224
Do you have Grace Design or Millenia mic pres? I’ve read they are very clean and transparent.
I have the Grace 101 and it is very clean, I love it.
I have found that my studio work has changed over the years as well. I am now considering expanding into audio books (particular college text books). I remember the days when we would go to an expensive studio…things have changed.
Yes! absolutely.
Hey, Doug, Hube…. just want you guys to know that I’m still alive. I had computer problems for the past few weeks and had to get a new laptop, so that’s why you haven’t heard from me. Had to delete my old e-mail but my new email is in the URL. However, I will be taking time to finish my book but I’ll drop in and comment every now and then.
Good to hear from you, bro!
I figured you guys might think I was dead, since I wasn’t answering any emails.. I had to delete my Yahoo account… it was infected with some kind of virus. And my old laptop died about a month ago, so I was sharing my parents’ computer and didn’t get on as much as I’d have wanted to.
Drop me a line when you have a sec so I have your new e-mail.
Glad to know you’re doing well, Carl! Sorry about the laptop. It’s never fun when those conk out…
Hube: I’ll do that.
Doug: That laptop lasted six years. It was a Dell, and the last Dell I ever intend to use, as I’ve had one bad experience after another with their products. Today I bought this HP Pavilion 23 for about $600 from Wal-Mart and so far it works remarkably. It cleaned out my wallet but I think it’ll be well worth it.
Welcome back Carl, I must say that I have had great luck with Dell computers (I still have one that is 11 years old and works great). I also have 2 Del laptops and my wife has a Dell tablet pc. The shortest life I have had from a dell was 6 years…not too bad.
Thank you, Truth. I’ve never had great luck with Dell, or Apple computers, for that matter. I think Dell definitely benefitted from the great advertising, such as the “Dude, you’re getting a Dell!” ads from the early 2000s. Every Dell I’ve had has melted down completely after a certain period of time.
That sucks Dude..sorry I could not help it. I hope your new computer lasts much longer.
xmenxpert, you were lucky I missed this one earlier “he prefers the same people who equate homosexuality with pedophilia and who have a very strict religious perspective on everything.”
As stated the data does not support your case at this time and you jump to conclusions about my beliefs (which were wrong). Once again please be more careful before you make rash judgments they usually show your intolerance.
I think this old cartoon still teaches things well:
Good stuff, man. I remember watching that when I was a kid! Sometimes the Tom & Jerry cartoons would have others mixed in. 🙂 Sadly, I can’t imagine anyone making this today.
It would never make it today…that is why it is up to people like us to spread the message. We have to show people the truth and expose the “everything for everyone” mentality for the sham it is. Someone will always have to pay for it and the more we want for free the more freedom we lose. It is not always easy but look at what we have done, we had the biggest surge of success in history and now we are abandoning the very principles that led us to success. Look at other nations they are embracing our methods and they are growing while we condemn what made us great. How is this mistake not obvious? Simple people have never heard, do not understand, or they have been misinformed? It is our duty to stand up and spread the truth. Challenge: attempt to inform at least one person a day and the message will spread!
Love that cartoon! And yeah, you’re right in saying that it wouldn’t be made today. Way too many people today are of the mentality that the cartoon criticizes. It’s one of several educational cartoons made by Hanna-Barbera in the 1940s.
Shameless self-promotion
https://wordpress.com/read/post/id/53324643/290/
Here’s the latest example of the Obama administration’s hypocrisy: they go after law-abiding Christians and try to force them to provide something that goes against their religion, but defends an Islamic convert on the basis of “religious freedom:”
http://www.redstate.com/2014/07/13/obama-defends-religious-freedom-muslim-extremist/
Confucious obviously wasn’t a fan of Superior Spider-Man
“The superior man understands what is right; the inferior man understands what will sell”
Reblogged this on Patriot News II.
So your argument is a Tu quoque fallacy? You seem to feel that because he insulted a religion, you can ignore the issues the hobby lobby decision caused:
http://civilrightsca.com/?p=1474
No. What argument is Dan Slott making in his tweets aside from telling Christians to go to “Christ-land?” He makes none. He simply throws out an insult and runs, Jacob. I can’t be making a “Tu quoque” fallacy if all Dan has provided us is a bigoted insult or two. Nice try, though.
To the extent that Dan Slott makes an argument at all, he is using a gigantic Straw Man — as he usually does. How convenient that you didn’t mention how weird it is to liken modern American Christians to Spanish conquistadors…
Again, nice try. You throw out an imaginary argument that I never made and then react to that. Good one. I give you an ‘A’ for effort.
As I said, if I conducted myself like Dan Slott does online, my employer would fire me. But because Dan Slott has the “correct” politics, he gets a pass. Call me when there are any openly conservative writers hired at Marvel who are just as politically vocal as Dan Slott. Marvel says it cares about “diversity,” but apparently ideological diversity doesn’t count.