Are we really any different from sports fanatics?

[terry78]

There will always be that stigma. If you're into video games, comics, roleplaying and that type of thing, no matter how many thousands of others are into it, you will still be viewed as some kind of social pariah and more likely than a Giants fan to go off the deep end and serial kill somebody. Anybody that's way too into a fictional thing will have that pov upon them. Sports are a real tangible thing that's actually happening.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

So...you're saying that the greatness of sports is that those who are famous can help people because people already put an imagined greatness on sports????

Solid logic if I've ever heard it.

Once again you are giving a career supernatural powers. People can and are inspired by LOTS of people...people are even inspired by fictional characters...

Yes..."sports" is a real thing...they exist. Guess what..."art" is real too. It exists. The characters drawn dont have a personality of their own, but neither do the statistics of Bret Favre...unless you are giving his stats the same superhuman powers you are giving his career.

The statistics of Brett Favre really happened as in reality, not in a fictional world. The fact that I could meet Brett Favre, pick his brain, and that his life is as true and real as mine does make a difference between his fans and Batman's fans. If you're going to be obsessed with a world that doesn't exist, and moreover is based on false assumptions about our own, yeah, I'd expect some flak for it.

 

[Heretic]

here is the next corrupt part of the argument...

You are comparing the LIFE of Brett Favre...to the DRAWINGS of Jack Kirby. Why is that?? Instead, let's compare apples and apples...

What has benefited society more? Bret Farve's statistics...or Superman????
What has benefited society more? The life of Muhammad Ali, or the life of say...Art Spiegelman?

What sports fans MUST do in order to make their silly interest seem justified is make senseless comparisons...such as Lance Armstrong's survival of cancer compared with an issue of Aquaman...and that is an ABSURD comparison. Instead, we COULD compare the life of Lance Armstrong to the life of Michael Turner or Harvey Pekar...and honestly...I think Lance loses that comparison...

Also, I've noticed that people are comparing the LIVES (which is wrong) of ALL athletes against the WORK of ONLY comic artists. That is such a broken comparison it isn't even funny. When you include the lives and struggles of all athletes of all sports...and then restrict the artists to ONLY the work output and NOT the lives and struggles of ONLY professional comic book artists...well, OF COURSE sports wins...you have an insanely larger pool of people to cherry pick from. You are rigging the comparison.

When you actually even the playing field out...it is very clear that sports fans are just delusional...which is one of the main reason why they are the biggest losers in the kingdom of Dorkdom.

 

[BlackLantern]

but society doesn't view them as such and comic nerds get laughed at forever


and that is what makes Heretic a sad panda.....because everyone is just a bunch of uneducated Philistines

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

What has benefited society more? Bret Farve's statistics...or Superman????
What has benefited society more? The life of Muhammad Ali, or the life of say...Art Spiegelman?

My answer to both these questions are Brett Favre and Muhammad Ali. The media empires those people presided over make Marvel and DC look like a local pizza shop. They're accomplishments are farther reaching, Muhammad Ali is a far larger international icon than either Superman or Art Spiegelman.

Did you also really just compare Lance Armstrong to Michael Turner. Go get photos of both those people and take an informal poll on the street, you're argument would lose in a heartbeat, sorry.

And no one worships comic creators with the same reverence the comic fan community has for the characters, in fact we tend to berate the creators for getting things wrong.

 

[BlackLantern]

Jackie Robinson changed the outlook of a nation, showed people that just because someone was a different color didn't mean they were all that different

Lance Armstrong (maybe not individually) but his struggle with cancer probably saved a lot of people who were ready to just resign themselves to death

as much as I love my comics, they ain't changing the world....you can throw out those names like Harvey Pekar, but no one outside of people who saw his work knows OR even cares who he is

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

Jackie Robinson changed the outlook of a nation, showed people that just because someone was a different color didn't mean they were all that different

Lance Armstrong (maybe not individually) but his struggle with cancer probably saved a lot of people who were ready to just resign themselves to death

as much as I love my comics, they ain't changing the world....you can throw out those names like Harvey Pekar, but no one outside of people who saw his work knows OR even cares who he is

There is just a sense that someone who looses themselves in a world of superheroes and goblins is, in fact, wasting their time, and someone who follows or mimics the acheivements of REAL people is spending their time more productively. We aren't talking about people who have a healthy respect for literary icons, we're talking about people who have obsessions with fictional characters, most of whom are fictional characters aimed at children. This is not a case of comparing apples to apples.

 

[BlackLantern]

on a base level, both are the same and unhealthy obsessions with either are bad....just one is more socially acceptable than the other

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

on a base level, both are the same and unhealthy obsessions with either are bad....just one is more socially acceptable than the other

Basically, this is true, but then we aren't just talking about 'unhealthy obsessions' because if that was the only issue, it would be an easy topic. Fanatics don't necessarily have 'unhealthy obsessions', but sports are a more socially engaging activity. You can play them, and they're also enough of a media juggernaut that they bring lots of spectators together in a fassion typically reserved for religions. There is no comic book character or creator who can claim this type of influence.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Athletic obsession is socially acceptable. Comic book obsession is not. Thats the major difference.

 

[Lunar_Wolf]

What if, Hobgoblin, what if, someone wore a superhero costume and played sports?

:Twilight theme:

 

[jnewton57]

All i'll say is follow what you love

 

[hopefuldreamer]

The statistics of Brett Favre really happened as in reality, not in a fictional world. The fact that I could meet Brett Favre, pick his brain, and that his life is as true and real as mine does make a difference between his fans and Batman's fans. If you're going to be obsessed with a world that doesn't exist, and moreover is based on false assumptions about our own, yeah, I'd expect some flak for it.

The storylines of any comic book hero REALLY WERE WRITTEN... by REAL PEOPLE... it is these IDEAS that we are obsessing over, and those ideas a very real creative inventions that are worth something... something much more than some sport statistic.

I mean, you can analyse it in terms of human psychology, philosophy, literature... anything you want. If I say 'Superman is COOL' it's just a short way of stating the intellectual reasons why I enjoy the character and his storylines - and why don't I say it in longer terms? Because nobody cares to listen.

What has benefited society more? Bret Farve's statistics...or Superman????
.

This.

And if more people recognised the impact that the ideas of Superman have on people, when their growing up and in their adult life, the world would IMO be a better place.

I really don't see how sport fanatics make the world a better place...

There is just a sense that someone who looses themselves in a world of superheroes and goblins is, in fact, wasting their time, and someone who follows or mimics the acheivements of REAL people is spending their time more productively. We aren't talking about people who have a healthy respect for literary icons, we're talking about people who have obsessions with fictional characters, most of whom are fictional characters aimed at children. This is not a case of comparing apples to apples.

Have you ever seen books like 'The Tao of Pooh?', a philosophical look at the implications of Taosim in the tales of Winnie the Pooh?

There are plenty of instances in which children's fictional characters have been assessed as carrying wonderful spiritual messages.

Look, i'm not saying that every comic book fan considers the characters on an intellectual basis. In fact many, if not most, simply like to indulge in fantasy, in escaping into another world; one that is perhaps more comforting than the real world, because the good guy always wins and the nice guy does get the girl.

I just don't understand why something like that gets such a bad reputation, and something like obsessing over whether or not a football team wins a game is considered a rite of passage.

 

[Chris Wallace]

There will always be that stigma. If you're into video games, comics, roleplaying and that type of thing, no matter how many thousands of others are into it, you will still be viewed as some kind of social pariah and more likely than a Giants fan to go off the deep end and serial kill somebody. Anybody that's way too into a fictional thing will have that pov upon them. Sports are a real tangible thing that's actually happening.

Two words: Fantasy football.

 

[Hobgoblin]

What if, Hobgoblin, what if, someone wore a superhero costume and played sports?

:Twilight theme:

Probably the same thing that would happen if an immovable object met an unstoppable force. The universe would explode.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Athletic obsession is socially acceptable. Comic book obsession is not. Thats the major difference.

BUt why? Who set this rule? And why can noone seem to see the hypocrisy that lies beneath it? Women give us flak for our "obsession" while following the exploits of soap opera characters just as religiously. We get taunted by wrestling fans, which makes absolutely zero sense to me. And what about the guys who faithfully play sports video games? And another thing I find funny is that many seem to pick and choose which ones are ok to follow. Back in '93 I got so much flak for wearing a Spider-Man t-shirt by people who thought nothing of someone sporting Batman. Why id that? Because one was in movies at the time and the other wasn't? Nevermind the fact that many of the "cool" people are in line right beside us "geeks" on opening day, waiting to see the same movies.

 

[Immortalfire]

I'm a sports fan and superhero fan. Live with it!

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

The storylines of any comic book hero REALLY WERE WRITTEN... by REAL PEOPLE... it is these IDEAS that we are obsessing over, and those ideas a very real creative inventions that are worth something... something much more than some sport statistic.

No, it's the characters. Not many say "hey, lookat Batman, doesn't he show how creative humans can be". Not many comic book fans obsess over creators, the real people behind the comics, in the same way they obsess over the characters. Anyone who continues to make this point is erecting a straw man argument. Sports fans primarily concern themselves with the exploits of real people, comic fans primarily concern themselves with fantasy worlds. The deference given to fictional characters, as if they were real, is not found in sports fandom.

I mean, you can analyse it in terms of human psychology, philosophy, literature... anything you want. If I say 'Superman is COOL' it's just a short way of stating the intellectual reasons why I enjoy the character and his storylines - and why don't I say it in longer terms? Because nobody cares to listen.

Yet, ultimately, comics are for children. They may have made great strides in terms of getting more 'adult' stories published, but they're still mostly a childish medium. The stories, like Sandman for example, which have reached outside acclaim are not the norm for the comic book world. It puzzles me how you cannot see how collecting comics may be viewed in the same light as collecting toys. We all know you could admire the scuplting on an action figure, but we also know that's not really why most people collect them. It's honestly the same with comics. Comic collectors are not fine purveyors of artistic acheivements, they're people who obsess over fictional cartoon characters aimed at children.

This whole discussion would not be unlike claiming that Comic Book collectors deserved the same respect and social acceptance as Wall Street investors because they both make investments.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

BUt why? Who set this rule? And why can noone seem to see the hypocrisy that lies beneath it?

First of all, comic fans are hardly an oppressed minority. Two, if you lived in England or Ireland and liked American Football, you'd be as much on an outlier there as comic fans are here. Three, It's not hypocrisy, but seriously can you not appreciate how silly it must be for outsiders to watch you fawn over a fictional character in a bat costume?

 

[Danalys]

the fictionalness of the character is beside the point. james bond for example is mainstream cool. if he'd started in a comics rather than books then would fans of his adventures be as accepted? sure if someone's nuts for bond and fills their room with bond stuff it's going to be weird. but someone who likes bond as someone likes anything else to a normal degree isn't going to be stigmatized or be assumed to be obsessive.

but because comics only used four colours and grew out of silly newspaper funnies, they're ignorantly seen as childish still, in a day were no child should be reading most comic books. in fact there needs to be specific lines for popular characters that are child appropriate.

so comics get a bad rap compared to movies which all the arguments against fiction in this thread apply to as well, when compared to sports.

so the argument is really fantasy verses more real world stories. sport is most interesting when the game tells a story after all.

 

[Chris Wallace]

First of all, comic fans are hardly an oppressed minority. Two, if you lived in England or Ireland and liked American Football, you'd be as much on an outlier there as comic fans are here. Three, It's not hypocrisy, but seriously can you not appreciate how silly it must be for outsiders to watch you fawn over a fictional character in a bat costume?

It is hypocrisy if they're just as bad with it. They argue over which sport is better, which team is better. Many are committed to the brand rather than the players themselves or the lineup or any particualr accomplishments when chances are, that team that they hate so much has at some point in time defeated the team that they love. But they will still shout from the rooftops how great their team is and how much the other sucks.

 

[Hobgoblin]

BUt why? Who set this rule? And why can noone seem to see the hypocrisy that lies beneath it? Women give us flak for our "obsession" while following the exploits of soap opera characters just as religiously. We get taunted by wrestling fans, which makes absolutely zero sense to me. And what about the guys who faithfully play sports video games? And another thing I find funny is that many seem to pick and choose which ones are ok to follow. Back in '93 I got so much flak for wearing a Spider-Man t-shirt by people who thought nothing of someone sporting Batman. Why id that? Because one was in movies at the time and the other wasn't? Nevermind the fact that many of the "cool" people are in line right beside us "geeks" on opening day, waiting to see the same movies.

Let's face it, comics are outlandish. Two grown men in funny looking costumes and super powers beating each other up while saying ridiculous things. ("Shazam!" "In brightest day, in darkest night...") What grown ups talk like that? Its something that little kids find appealing, yet grown ups like us are just as fascinated (sometimes even more so).

Compare that to James Bond or a football star. They're doing "real life" things. Running around, kicking a ball, scoring touch downs, dating cheerleaders and driving fancy cars. Those are things that a person could potentially do. I will never, ever become Spider-Man, no matter how much I want to and no matter how many radioactive spiders bite me.

People are attracted to the realism. The sci fi, fantasy part of comic books turns many people off. I dont think anyone made up any rules, its just human psychology and our psyches as nerds are a little different from other people's. Not to say that its bad, but people dont like people that are different from them.

Thar said, I still want a goblin glider dammit.

 

[Danalys]

there is worth to fantasy though.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Yes but I think people have more respect for realistic fantasies.

 

[Sundancer]

When I was at Stan Lee's panel last year a guy said that comics helped him deal with his autism.


Food for thought.