No.

(A) because you kept misrepresenting what I was saying. I think you were looking for a fight, and you were going to get one come hell or high water. Maybe I was a proxy for Katharine, who wasn’t going to respond to you here.

“It’s a positive and progressive step forward within science fiction television, but their actions show that this isn’t something that happens by accident: it’s a deliberate series of decisions that are made to make this happen.”

That’s a whole lot of mental gymnastics to rationalize spending all day misrepresentong my position, which was exactly what repearedly I said it was and will never be what you said it was no matter how many times you say it. Hope it made you feel better, and that the air on top of your horse isn’t too thin.

While I agree that substantively our positions are ultimately close on this, what I don’t appreciate was your consistent straw manning of my position. If your first post had said “I see you’re giving more credence to this rumor than me, we disagree on that point.”, we could have wrapped this up before dinner. Instead,…

“What I’m saying, and have always said, is that IN THIS ONE SPECIFIC INSTANCE, there is no reason to think that it’s true. I’m not saying there isn’t a pattern, I’m saying that there is no indication that this is actually a part of that pattern.”

If you’re asking whether when it comes to women’s issues I give equal standing to Ann Coulter as I do Jessica Valenti, I do not. So while I hear you (which you must admit it true that I have gutted through every word), as a minority which you have now pointed out more than once, think this rumor flies in the face of…

“I do not understand how you can so passionately argue on the side of the oppressed, but still think it’s ever OK to presume guilt.”

“Why is it so important that this one specific example be treated as true, even if, frankly, all evidence and logic suggests otherwise?”

This thread is good Kinja.

“When faced with an unconfirmed and unsubstantiated rumor, it is generally considered good practice to give the benefit of the doubt to the word of the accused, even over their personal history.”

I wasn’t using denial to try to prove the truth of the rumor, goakes was essentially trying to assert that the denial meant something substantive when my point was only that the denial was meaningless . . . It’s a big corporation. Standard operating procedure to deny isn’t some grand conspiracy, it’s the day to day…

“The thing is, the only reason you or anyone else believed the rumour might be true is it fits the “marvel is racist” [history of decisions].”

“The article lists all of two actual cases of whitewashing.”

If it was a rumor that flew in the face of what we knew to be Marvel’s MO when it comes to characters that are women & minorities, I’d be very likely to agree with you. But as I led with in my first post to this thread—it’s not. The rumor is in fact very much in line with Marvel’s course of business to date, which is…

Another option: If you haven’t listened to the full production audiobook, it’s fantastic.

(A) WTF did you think he was going to say? Makes my point better than me. (B) That was an artfully worded tweet that doesn’t directly deny the rumor.

“since Greeks are often shown going into battle with a helmet and shin guards...and nothing in between.”

That’s the whole damn point flying right over your head. It’s the pervasive, systemic biases tilting the entire playing field that lets people get away with rationalizations like “They didn’t *intend* to be racist, so what’s the problem?”

Characters that have already appeared in TV and film, and casting that has been announced, isn’t rumor and speculation. And do you really expect Marvel to officially confirm they’ve whitewashed another character?