Not really against capes but…

I admit falling into the superhero is comics trap thing before. But to be honest, it’s kind of ironic that some people perpetually forget that there are comics that many more people including normies read that isn’t Japanese. Webcomics are also shared throughout social media like Facebook and Twitter and you can go read newspaper strips online too.

Even if you exclude comics, there’ll always be things that normies actually read. Something like romance novels. Not because I like reading romance myself. But it’s something that sells and sells a lot more than even most manga do. No seriously, romance rakes in a billion dollars in the United States.

Not that romance is any more or less woke. But that there are things 20 times more popular than superheroes and manga, especially in print publications and the like which includes Harlequin books.

Being Jewish and a Superhero

Jews, whether as fictional beings or as actual producers, are very well-represented in superhero media. In fact, much moreso than Christians in the sense of the former seeking empowerment and the latter having a chronic malaise and distrust of any degree to even accept superheroes as they are. (As in not using them to preach or whatever that means.)

Since I think most Christians do have a tendency towards cynicism where if they’re to use superheroes at all, it’s cynical in the sense of the second definition (as in overly concerned with oneself and disregarding others) when it comes to informing or preaching. Whereas with Jews, it’s a genuine act of self-expression and self-empowerment.

It comes in handy as Jews do get persecuted a lot where they really need to uplift themselves and fight back. (With Christians, what you’re getting is calculated/learnt helplessness as well as using something else to their own advantage.) I still suspect that Christians do tend to be more cynical than Jews are, which an attitude they got from some Greeks.

(Hence why Christianity practically owes a lot more to Greco-Roman sensibilities to the point where I’d go on arguing that Christianity’s a simplification of it.)

The fact that Jews are so well-represented in superhero media and comedy are some of the more important differences between them and their Christian counterparts. Admittedly I know little about Jewish theology but since Jews are well-represented in those two that the differences are going to exist anyways even if they seem to lessen.

The answer to a Jewish Narnia

Like I said before, the real reason why you don’t observe Evangelicals do more superhero stories often is because they’re way too cynical to appreciate superheroes. It doesn’t help that not only do Evangelicals tend to doubt others’ good intentions a lot and do tend to be really, really harsh and punitive but that they got it from a certain subset of Greek philosophy that encourages such an attitude.

(I could go on saying that if Islam’s a simplification of Christianity, Christianity’s an amplification of cynicism where there’s no dearth of texts ranging from demonologies to blogs and transcribed sermons bashing a lot of things, really.)

Philosophical cynicism not only involves chastising people a lot (etymologically speaking, cynicism comes from the same root as ‘kynos’ or dog in the sense of a dog that keeps barking at strangers and attackers a lot) but also trying to lead a simple life as possible. The perpetually harsh attitude survives among a number of Christians really, though something most don’t really realise.

It’s not that Christians can’t appreciate and do superhero stories themselves but if Power Mark and Bibleman and a few others are any indication, it’s one thing to appropriate a seculara character it’s another to produce your own. And very few Christians do the latter. Either that the need for superheroes is redundant or that Christians find others suspicious to the point where Evangelicals writing superhero comics is going to be rare anyways.

Too dark for rockists

Whilst heavy metal and Goth make a better claim for being the ultimate rockists, the rockist’s rockist yet they’re generally not that well-received by music critics. If Nickelback’s any indication, it has to be the right sort of authenticity but one that’s really too lofty of an ideal to achieve for even most rock bands. Whether if they’re highly commercial (Nickelback) or way too dark (heavy metal), it has to be the right sort of authenticity even if most rock bands may sometimes fail to pass.

In this case, it’s also got to do with the right sort of emotional authenticity. You can write about what you feel but not to the point of glorifying darkness a lot since heavy metal and Goth music (from my experience as it may not be true for all) do honestly go deep in singing about dark subject matter. It seemed the ideal rock band’s supposed to be enlightening. Heavy metal (and Goth) tend to be more frank about darkness as much as they wallow in it.

That’s not to say the likes of Bathory and Sortilege aren’t well-received but that the real vice heavy metal and Goth have (when viewed from a rockist critic lens) is that they get too dark for their own good.

Rockism, heavy metal and Goth

I suspect that though heavy metal and Goth are in some regards more rockist than the Foo Fighters would ever be in the sense of distrusting mainstream music industry standards a lot and preferring musical authenticity. Yet they also have this air of cheesiness that makes it harder to take them seriously by mainstream rock critics. Maybe not all but still.

They’re nothing like Nickelback in terms of being a ridiculously mainstream rock band. It’s more like Goth and heavy metal take rockism to a logical conclusion where the obsession with musical authenticity and especially emotional authenticity gets paired with an obsession with anything dark and creepy. To the point of being off-putting to most rockist critics.

Maybe not all as Piero Scaruffi seemed very well-versed in heavy metal. But I suspect for most of the part, heavy metal and Goth turned rockism on its head where the demand for musical authenticity has become too much to bear. Especially when it comes to being too frank about dark subject matter.

Tigra–the original woke superheroine

Maybe not quite but given she was intended as a feminist character in the 1970s as The Cat the forthcoming cartoon promoting her as such might be bringing her back to her roots. Not to mention I think if the middling cartoon Avengers: United They Stand is any indication, she could easily be the poster girl for body positivity for being unabashedly hairy. For all its faults and frankly it’s a bit corny, it did her half-right in the sense of bothering to give her fur all the time.

Tigers are hairy so it makes much more sense for Tigra to be this hirsute. That even makes the parallels to Wolverine and Beast all the more appropriately consistent if because they’re allowed to be as hirsute as to be more bestial. There are times when Tigra herself’s shown to be hairy in comics and I feel that’s something she could practically pull off well enough to stick to it. It also helps that there aren’t that many hairy female role models for women to look up to.

(If I’m not mistaken, Madonna Ciccone got picked on for not shaving her armpits by being called ‘hairy monster’.)

Tigra could easily have the best chance at being the most high profile hairy superheroine when you think about it and that might be done right soon enough.

They’re like animals

Somebody did a phylogeny of the Pocket Monsters and I suspect whilst shocking to some, it also makes weird biological sense. Consider this. Terrestriality evolved twice, once with invertebrates and once with vertebrates. Bipedalism evolved thrice, once among marsupials, once among birds and once among primates. The cetids are monophyletic group within the artiodactyls. The birds are a monophyletic group within the dinosaurs.

It’s one thing to reimagine them as actual animals, it’s another to realise that they do evolve like actual animals. But in the biological sense of the word. It’s evidently that if the Grass types evolved from ungulates, it should be expected that the initial ones (Torterra, Venusaur, Sawsbuck) are quadrupedal animals with some plants attached to them. The subsequent ones are proper plant-animal hybrids.

(To be fair, there are real life plant-animal hybrids, plants sometimes accidentally attach themselves to frogs and algae do grow on turtle shells.)

Same for anything else to whatever degree really and since convergent evolution’s as much of a thing in real life (this should also extend to clothing as metalheads and Goths look similar but have different histories and sensibilities) as it is in the Pokemon world when viewed from this perspective.

(It’s parsimonious to assume that since most of the Fire Pokemon come from beings analogous to canids, since foxes developed traits similar to cats proper and hyenas to dogs the feline Incineroar’s an analogy to either one of them.)

Sort of makes sense really.