Here Here.
They also are making Shaggy black,
Daphne is Asian,
And no scooby.

So really, fuck this show, fuck the bitch directing it, and fuck hbo for allowing it to air.

Don't fuck HBO, you don't know where they've been.

Screw HBO for ALLOWING it to be made.

Scooby Doo without Scooby Doo?

That's worse than bringing Scrappy back as a legitimate character. (Scrappy as the surprise villain was fine, now we had TWO reasons to enjoy Scrappy getting beat down.)

Waite you're telling me they not only out of nowhere made Velma a lesbo, but they made Shaggy black, Daphne Asian, and the show is called Scooby Doo and Scooby has no part or role or doesnt even exists.

DA FUCK?!!!

*blinks* whah? Daphne Asian too, and Scooby!? NO SCOOBY!? I'm not even a fan of Scooby Doo, but how are you going to have Scooby Doo without Scooby?!

The show is just Doo. Appropriate, hmm?

Guess it goes, "Doo be doo be doo, where are you?" but that sounds weird now. *shrugs* I was never a big fan of Scooby Doo anyway so I was by default not interested in a new one. Shame for the fans though.

Indeed!

White people.

'Nuff said.

Stupid ignorant people!

'nuff said!

That seems rather vague.

Please be more specific, please.

Woke Folk, nuff said :P

See my reply to the Rabbi below.

Nah, when I posted that I thought you were being racist as a joke, I hadn't yet realized that it was probably real until I had scrolled down after, reading more comments. So I'm not interested in engaging you, sorry. Have a nice day.

I don't think that was racist at all. Perhaps by some stretch of the imagination you could call it biased or prejudiced, but I wouldn't personally consider it racist. I don't think you really understand what racism is if that's the case. Are you really going to dismiss me as being an anti-white racist? It certainly doesn't meet the definition of racism that you previously demanded from me and that I detailed quite well in my first response to you.

If we can't even be on the same page with something like that, so it goes... *Shrug* You're the one who asked.

This also seems like a pretty convenient excuse to just blow off all of my thoughtful replies to you here, some of which expressly point out things you said that I happen to think were racist.

Aww, the poor oppressed white people!

Also, if you actually read that reply you'd see that it WAS a joke, but with a point, which I explained there.

I simply meant that what he's talking about isn't just a "white people" thing, it's not a race or religion or gender specific thing.
It's a PEOPLE thing.
That's all.

Thanks for elucidating. I'll return the favor.

I was being a bit humorous and reductive there. No doubt There are things like lazy or crappy writing. I see crap that makes me cringe all the time. Any movie or show can actually be good if it's written and produced well. AUs and such are completely valid, as far as I'm concerned. They don't have to take away from the original.

It's a particularly conservative take to insist that there can only be one rigid interpretation of a story, though.

My point is just that it there always seem to be white conservative/right wing people whining about people of color or women having opportunities to be featured in people's beloved imaginary worlds. There's room for everybody.

One needs to be very careful to distinguish between crap writing, etc., which can be a valid basis for criticism in itself, and one's personal biases.

A lot of this is particularly suspicious because it frequently becomes a shitstorm of outrage before anyone's even seen the actual product.

Stupid, ignorant WOKE people!

'Nuff said!

Yo Jim, just a note to call you out once again for a lazy use of conservative/right wing buzz phrases. I think you just make yourself look stupid with this.

I realize you were just being humorous, my original point was an attempt at this as well.

The right is particularly skilled at taking words and phrases from the left and twisting and abusing their meanings until they become trite cliches that the left can't even feel comfortable using anymore. "Woke" is a particularly egregious example, because it comes from black culture, and by using it that way you come across as racist.

Similar examples are "SJW", turned into a trite cliche and used dismissively against people who are for social justice, which is clearly a good thing. Another more recent one is "CRT", a complete twisting of the original meaning of the phrase into a dumbed down signifier for anything that might refer to racism and weaponized against people struggling to educate people about racism and antiracism.

This sort of language is just trite and overused shorthand that just shows the laziness of those who employ it. There's always a better way to say the same thing without resorting to such tired rhetoric. I know you can do better. Buzz phrases really don't age well.

I used WOKE because its a more polite term. Though living in a severely politically correct area has taught me that the far left is the quickest to name call and insult those they disagree with.

I've been called fascist, nazi, klansman, colonist , abilist , slaver and environmental terrorist by locals that immediately come to conclusion because I am a white CIS male. Even here on FA and at cons. Whats more entertaining is being accused of shit I'm not even involved with, or hang out and associate with certain people thats currently the hot button of fandom hate. But sure as shit, I CLEARLY MUST BE!! In their opinions.

I love how people automatically assume that just because a person isn't sporting the BLM Banner on their page, or ACAB , flying the rainbow flag or displaying the trans colors, that they are against gay marriage, equal rights, a womans right to choose and want a return to slavery. Or place those people in internment camps or worse, killed outright.

I've had admitted SJWs openly try and cancel me, get me banned, even try and get me fired from my jobs. I've had a couple cases of them even lie to the police saying I was a threat to society and I must be detained and or arrested.

Me personally I don't care what a persons skin color is, religious choice, sexual preference , the second they treat me as a second class or in some cases, third class citizen, much akin to the caste system, I will treat them as what they are themselves...extremists. And I loathe both far left and right extremists. I will not tolerate extreme intolerance, nor kneejerk reactionaries.

The far left has fully and blown out of proportion use of the various 'buzz words' they love to toss about freely and willy nilly . There is no gray area in their logic, there is no "You have your opinion, I have mine and lets just agree that we disagree on subject X. ", to them its always "My way or the Highway" attitude.

A wise man once spoke so well, Judge not, least ye be judged! Sadly too many act as judge, jury and executor right out of the gate. I've put up with a ton of verbal abuse over the years, some from the right, but the majority from the far left. And you yourself stated The right is particularly skilled at taking words and phrases from the left and twisting and abusing their meanings until they become trite cliches that the left can't even feel comfortable using anymore. Funny, that shoe fits equally well coming from left as well.

Again, Lets just say "You have your opinion, I have mine, lets just agree that we disgree and leave civilized."

Yup, we disagree on some things, and clearly see things from a different viewpoint. We're all products of our own environments.

Clearly there are dumb people on both sides of the political spectrum all too willing to throw around stupid labels and rhetoric or behave like asses. Stupid knows no boundaries.

Difficult though it may sometimes be, I try to respect everyone as a person, and separate that from the things they say. Personally, I always try to take on these things on a much more precise and directed basis, and with a degree of nuance and a sense of humor. I'm not particularly interested in throwing around insults, that isn't really productive. That isn't to say that if someone comes at me with that sort of attitude I won't fire back, though. I can take it, and I can dish it out if I feel sufficiently motivated.

To be clear, I have an inclination to like you as a person. You seem intelligent and you don't just throw around insults and disregard my opinions/extreme lefty rants out of hand, unlike any number of other folks here. I have a feeling we'd get along just fine face-to-face. Hopefully we get to meet one day.

I do happen to think that some of these behaviors as exhibited by the right as opposed to those on the left are far more dangerous, though. A lot of folks on the right seem a lot more willing to impose their views violently and repressively against other people that they imagine that they oppose.

To be fair, the term "woke" may have started as a reference to African Americans of the 30's being exploited and citizens needed to be aware of it, the term has shifted over the decades, but came I to the forefront with media outlets of CNN and MSNBC using it to describe BLM activists during Trump's term, saying African Americans had finally woken up and would not stand for discrimination anymore. The left largely adopted the term and broadened the meaning to basically include anyone on the left, regardless of race.

It is an interesting example of how terms shift over time. You have your own interpretation and application of the term that differs from many others. Is it wrong? No. It is just another version of it being used.

Jim's use is more aligned with the common meaning in use by those that choose not to let the media or activists control them. Your use is one meant to shut those same people down.

Again, neither is wrong. Your use does come off as highly confrontational. Perhaps approaching it another way might have helped.

In any case, it was an interesting read to see different opinions.

Words do indeed shift in meaning and connotation over time. Language is flexible and ever changing. The weight of their popular usage does seem to ultimately decide their meaning. That doesn't necessarily change deeper meanings, etymology or historic usage, though.

Personally, I'd trace the use of that particular term to being more rooted in black culture than corporate media. I heard the term used in black communities previous to any media popularity or its calculated co option by the right.

I doubt African Americans were using g it in every day parlance. It seems to be more of a self described social condition used to push an agenda by a limited few of any community largely unaware of their presence or care.

Today the term woke is pretty accurate, and regardless of prior meaning, the use by Rabbi here is a common social application. It does define certain groups that appropriate the term in a manner to wield over others in self affronted victimized. It certainly has not helped their cause and has served to denigrate the meaning and purpose.

In short, it was misused and overused now to change from the original intent and now serves to mock the people using it.

Interesting to see such a quick shift in usage and public interpretation.

Overall I'd agree with you here. The original use has been largely poisoned by its recent usage. I don't see black people using it to any extent anymore. This is what happens in these instances.

I've never seen black people use it in the context of being victimized though. I don't see that as making sense. It was always an affirmative phrase in regard to racial or political awareness directed at other black people or allies. I also don't even imagine that its use was all that ubiquitous to start with. If one did a word search, I have no doubt that the popularity of the word has increased dramatically since it was adopted by the right. Its very overuse is one of the things that rubs me the wrong way in particular.

My point was just that the word has been co opted, twisted, and weaponized by the right in a very cynical and manipulative manner which has racist overtones due to the origin of the word, and it just sounds cliched and stupid now to me. It sorta makes me cringe whenever I see it used these days. I'm a bit embarrassed for the user. I think they make themselves look bad.

A fictional character can be whatever it needs to be.

I have characters that I created and even I am not allowed to do whatever I want with them.

The hell you're not.

Examples please.

If I went too far off the spectrum people would be pissed.
Years ago they told Spiderman fans that the Spiderman, they were reading about for twenty years was a clone and it practically killed the sales.

Your reply has not made your objection clear to me. But, admittedly, I'm not particularly into that fandom at all, despite a certain bias towards Velma, and a willingness to make fun of any canon corporate entity. Feel free to elucidate on the subject.

As far as I'm concerned , AUs are completely valid as far as I'm concerned, but you need to be much more specific, at least in my case.

And once again, examples please.

As far as Spiderman, I really haven't seen much of it beyond the original comic and TV cartoon originals, so perhaps I'm not the best judge of that, but writers have to make progress somehow.

Seems to me that they've gone back to the origins enough times already that it's totally up to viewers which AU they choose at this point. There's nothing inherently wrong with any interpretation of it that anyone chooses as far as I'm concerned. People are free to choose their own, as far as any potential AU in particular. They can all be valid in their own reality.

I have characters in my EXTINCT comic some are Left and some are Right leaning.

Either or if I drew them having cub sex people would be pissed.

Without personal bias, having not seen this, I can make no personal judgment, for whatever the hell that's worth.

I like to judge everything on its own merits as far as I can, and at that point I may choose to make criticism of its apparent political content or not.

I'm STILL pissed about that!!!!!

My longest-running character, Hotspur, is the same way. Yet others have done fan art and such of him, including commissions from me, which are non-canon. For instance, he has no children of his own but Elfquest fangirls have bred him with their female avatars.
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/39865021/
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/39864995/
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/36769165/
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/35847810/
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/36953514/
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/35840716/
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/35840564/
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/35803069/

I always though of Velma as bisexual, and Daphne straight, while Fred was obviously in the closet still.

It's the ascot....

It's fashionable.

Please. Fred and Daphne have always been attracted to each other.

They wanted to ruin it for us, just like they ruined Animaniacs and probably Acme Looniversity.
With the A! reboot, I heard that the reson all the background chars look like Ren &Stimpy rejects is because many of the people who worked on Ren and Stimpy were taking it out on John K. As it's been said - they can say what they want, but that is NOT Velma.

Of course the woke judeomarxists hate it, straight white males created it, after all.

Please define "Judeomarxist".

I find no reference to that anywhere.

The creators of communism like Carl Marx.

That provides exactly zero context. Please elucidate.

You know the term "judeochristian"?
You know how and why it is applied?

Apply this term to communists, socialists, marxists, leninists, progressives of USA and other similar groups.

There's nothing inherently special or justified about "Judeochristianism". But, okay, granting you this, even if it's a stretch, how exactly is "Marxist" a negative thing?

It all really comes off as blatantly antisemitic, as well as ignorant of the reality of Marxism. Have you really studied the works of Marx?

You really need to explain this more in depth if you actually wish to avoid being accused of being antisemitic as well as a kneejerk antimarxist.

I listen to a variety of social speakers and some of them are Jewish! I have been impressed by the wisdom coming from Rabbis.

Remember that sixty people were run down by a terrorist at a Christmas parade. Six people were killed and about two weeks later some Hollywood Jewish people launched a anti white Christmas series! The hate is rather thick and easy to see!

Maybe your not tribal but some people are and are hell bent on creating division.

Nobody has to agree with everything Jewish people do just to avoid being labeled “anti semetic.”

I am sick of seeing whites being labeled as slavers when whites ended slavery. They just made a movie casting a slaving tribe in Africa as being “heroes!”

There is blood on the streets and I am done with the rather slanted views on history!

I've got no idea what you're referring to with your reference to "Hollywood Jewish people launched a anti white Christmas series!". Sounds pretty dubious and antisemitic to me.

I'd have to opt out from being tribal, but I'm distinctly for the underdog, wherever they are, and whoever is oppressing them.

Divide me from racists and bigots, please.

The Jewish people certainly haven't avoided this, the example of the oppression of the Palestinians in Israel being a very sharp example.

Many Jewish people inside of Israel and without oppose this oppression, but hardcore Zionists still brutally oppress the indigenous people of Palestine in an illegal and oppressive apartheid state bent on a clearly settler colonial genocide. And their influence in American politics is almost ubiquitous. The pro Zionist lobby has an almost complete stranglehold on politics here, whether Democratic or Republican. If there was ever an argument against lobbying as a whole, they would be example number one.

Until The war against Ukraine came along, they were by far our number one military benefactor, and a huge amount of that was used against the oppressed people of Palestine. Such are the moral costs of our country's politics. And that's not even counting our arming them with nuclear weapons, or considering our continued support for Saudi Arabia, for instance.

This is all particularly sad and ironic considering the long history of the Jewish people.

And I'll take a distinct issue with you regarding racism in the US.

Whites never really ended slavery. This is a pathetic claim. White supremacy continues to rear its ugly head here to this day. And all of the historic claims of "Africans, Indigenous Americans, etc. did it first" are just hollow lies and distractions lacking nuance that are an attempt to dismiss the wholesale exploitation of stolen and enslaved Africans by English, American, and other brutal capitalists who were only too happy to do that just to make money.

The current system just continues to impose it through an ongoing series of racist policies. This system of racist police, state, and economic oppression and the carceral state just proves this.

And, in addition, all of that completely ignores the genocide of the indigenous population that was here before us.

You and I, as white people, both continue to benefit from this brutality. There's no justice in this.

I'm effing sick of all of these white "Oppressed" snowflakes. These people are living in an ignorant right wing information bubble. It's an idea that completely denies the actual history of the American exploitation of minorities that continues to this day.

The British fought on the high seas to end slavery for over five decades! It was a completely moral campaign!

Look at the Santa Inc series a lousy show who’s only redeeming quality was that it brought all kinds of people together in disgust of the show!

If you want to show me who the white oppressors are I would be interested in seeing them. But please don’t drop labels on some average joe.

All this talk about white oppressors sounds a lot like class warfare! A lot of people screaming out about racism seem to be very well off!

Oprah, Obama are they oppressed? Considering their money and influence they seem closer to being oppressors!

If you are referring to American Indians, which I am partly, let me assure you Indians were slaughtering each other long before the white man showed up .

It seems to me many people would rather enjoy ambiguous hatred of others rather than look in the mirror!

The British were indeed ahead of the colonists in their opposition to slavery, at least by a little bit. Say ten years or so? That's one of, if not the main reason that the colonists opposed them.

Don't know Santa inc.. I'd have to judge it on its own merits. But TBH, I don't have much motivation to do so. Still sounds suspiciously antisemitic to criticize it to me though, whoever might have made it. Christmas and the exploitation of it is certainly deserving of some criticism on many levels.

You and I and every other white person in the country are the oppressors whether we approve of it or not. Institutionalized racism is the ocean we all swim in. It's up to us to oppose and dismantle these systems of oppression. If you don't see them, do some antiracist research and reading.

Pointing out exceptional examples such as Obama or Oprah is racist in itself. they are both examples of the inherent racism in our system and how rare it is for someone of a minority to have achieved the level of fame and influence that they have.

The plain truth is still that the average black person here has wealth equivalent to about a tenth of the average white person, and a fraction of the influence.

Republicans continue on a calculated campaign to restrict the ability of black people and others they oppose to vote as just one additional and well documented instance as well.

And the example of indigenous people here having violent encounters with each other is an extremely poor example, however it might be documented. It was never a comparable thing.

People have always killed each other. It was never on the level of a dedicated racial genocide that it was once the European settler colonialists descended on the continent though.

Today is a particularly good day to be proud of that part of your heritage. I humbly suggest that you respect and honor that.

I'm a generic European and Scandinavian mutt, completely divorced from my indigenous roots, though they're of course back there somewhere. If there's any Native American heritage in my family, I'm completely unaware of it, in spite of having the deepest respect for that and a deep feeling of connection with this land. I hope that there is, but I have no evidence of it.

And none of us are fucking innocent.

Oh please, blm extorted millions and gave nothing back to the community. All this talk of original sin is a load of crap!

Do you think you could promote some manufacturing jobs to be placed in poorer areas?

That would work a lot better than just throwing blame around!

Way to change the subject, but OK.

"BLM" extorted nothing. Evidence please.

"Original sin."

WTF are you talking about? Please be specific. Are you really saying that the dominant white culture doesn't benefit from the blood and sweat of the underclass to this day?

The government could clearly promote some manufacturing jobs if they wanted to and weren't blocked by corporate capitalists/ Republicans and "Free market liberals" (Read people in the pocket of bankers), in the remote chance that they aren't really ultimately the same thing.

But there's also that little issue of industrial and manufacturing businesses being largely situated in or next to underpriveleged areas where they have negative environmental effects on the local usually POC community.

I live in one of these communities. I've seen the effects first hand.

Wouldn't mind you actually addressing the points originally raised, though.

You are playing a game that people in power don’t give fucks about…

I work in a factory with all kinds of people and nothing you say really matters.

I don't play games, friend.

If you actually care to make a point you'll need to be much more specific about it. This is preposterously vague.

I took the time to address your points seriously and in detail. You could do the same if you actually choose.

"Pointing out exceptional examples such as Obama or Oprah is racist in itself."

Define Racist please. Because you don't seem to use the word to mean what it used to mean.

Words are constantly redefined.

The best definition for racism that I've found is something along the lines of "The practice or effects of oppression from one group upon another based on a system of institutionalized racial discrimination."

This best distinguishes it from just discrimination, prejudice, bias, hate, etc., although there can of course be some overlap. I do prefer to be clear, so thanks for the opportunity.

I think it has been best described by Dr. Joy DeGruy (The most pertinent bit is towards the end of the clip, but the whole thing is worth watching, it's not very long): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNh4FTYZQ2U

Quoting you: "It was never on the level of a dedicated racial genocide that it was once the European settler colonialists descended on the continent though."

Look up "Jihad," the "Mongol Empire," "Tamerlane," or the Japanese occupation of China in the 1930s. Oh, and the 60 million+ Mao killed during his economic "reforms." I promise you, the New World got it easy compared to the Old.

And it seems to me that between the Thirty Years War and the whole Holocaust thing, Europeans were more hellbent on killing each other then they were anyone else.

But those things have absolutely nothing to do with the history here.

Those aren't what I'm referring to. Why do you bring them up? Do they somehow justify our shamefully brutal and oppressive racist history?

Plus it's also ignorant to say that Europe was out for the extinction of the Indian. The French and other lesser European powers didn't have the resources or time to fully develop their colonies in the New World, and so they often worked in conjunction with the native tribes *See the French Indian Wars.

And one of the motivating factors behind the American Revolution was that Britain had declared an uneasy truce with some of the local tribes, promising no more westward expansion from the colonies. The colonists disagreed with this, but the decree for amicable relations with the natives came from London. Yeah, real genocidal maniacs the bunch of them.

I never said that "Europe was out for the extinction of the Indian."

I'm clearly talking about the settler colonialists who were here, who were predominantly European, either by birth or recent heritage.

Our history is what it is. The genocide of the indigenous people isn't really something to be reasonably argued with. Luckily some of them survived.

My ancestry is of Irish descent. They were abused and attacked by Scandavian groups, taken as slaves, villages burned to the ground.

You claim heritage of those very sane Scandinavians.

I demand reparations. I will demand millions to be paid. And then I will demand it again. I will stop working, live in squalor, have too many children I cannot support and then demand you pay for it all because of your ancestors.

Now then, will you be paying personally by cash, check, or PayPal? You have zero excuse to back out. Your ancestors did a thing to mine and I will use that as an excuse for free stuff.

Pay up.

.... or don't. Because I don't let the sins of a person's ancestors define whom they are today. Time passes. We move on.

Well, most of us move on. As this discussion topic has shown, there will always be some that live in the past.

Cute, but there's a huge difference between that and the situation ongoing in the US today.

There's still ongoing oppression of black and indigenous people, for instance, and the lines are far more clear how those people were exploited for the benefit that still accrues to the white populace who are still the dominant culture here.

Hopefully one day we can leave all of this crap behind, but when the damage is ongoing, I really don't think we're there yet. There are things we can do to repair at least some of the damage. We might want to at least explore those.

It's pretty convenient to oppress and exploit people and then just go ""Oh well, that was the past, we need to move on" when you're actually part of the class that's still benefiting from that oppression. It's a pretty specious and disingenuous position to take.

As a little side note, my heritage is German, Dutch, and French on my dad's side, and English and Norwegian on my mom's. I've got no real connection to my heritage where it goes back to Europe or Scandinavia, but if any of my Norse progenitors happened to oppress any of your Irish ones, I personally apologize for that.

I do feel it necessary to identify as a white American though, and I do my best to do as well as I can for all of my brothers and sisters here. As far as I know, none of my ancestors ever had anything to do with the direct oppression of black or indigenous people here, but being of the dominant oppressive culture here, I feel I have some responsibility due to the institutionalization of racism that continues to affect those people negatively here. If it comes down to some sort of truth and reconciliation or reparations program, I'm down for that. We need to get beyond this somehow.

In addition and in particular your statement here: "I will stop working, live in squalor, have too many children I cannot support and then demand you pay for it all because of your ancestors." strikes me as particularly troubling, and at least potentially racist and classist.

Do you really think that anyone chooses to live that way and that you can blame them for it? Do you really think that people who find themselves in such circumstances aren't there because of racism, discrimination, and oppression imposed on them by the dominant class? I sincerely don't think that any argument for that hold any water.

Sounds like victim blaming to me.

"Cute, but there's a huge difference between that and the situation ongoing in the US today."

Oh no, you don't get to arbitrarily get to choose to dismiss prior actions of your ancestry like that. If you are going to do that, then you *must* also dismiss the same issues with African Americans and slavery.


You are not willing to be held liable for your own ancestors' slavery and murders so dismiss it out of hand. How convenient for you. But you do focus on holding white Americans responsible for the same.

That sir, is the definition of of hypocrisy.

How about we accept times have changed and work on the present and future instead?

By the way, I appreciate your discourse being civil and non-inflammatory. No screaming or name calling, which is something those following h your opinion have gained a reputation for. Discussing different ideas in a calm manner has been entertaining.

Thank you.

I think your premise, while amusing, is completely specious here. There's really no comparison.

There's no particular animosity between people of Ireland and Norwegians today that I'm aware of. There are no Viking raids of the Isles, The Norwegians aren't oppressing the Irish.

The situation here i the US is ongoing, and we have yet to seriously confront and deal with it

There's nothing hypocritical about it. The situations aren't even really remotely comparable.

Times here have changed somewhat. Some things are better than they were when I was a kid. Jim Crow and segregation were still the law of the land then.

We then had the battles for civil rights of the sixties and seventies, integration, the Voting Rights Act, etc., but due to backlash and concerted actions of the right wing as well as the general institutionalized racism here, these advances have also eroded. This is a process, more of a three steps forward, two steps back sort of thing than any type of steady progress.

The youth have a tendency to be much more progressive and much less racist, and they are our shining hope here. There is clearly much more work to be done. Progress is achingly slow, and ignoring that is no solution.

Burying your head in the sand and ignoring history or the ongoing effects of racism get us nowhere. Until we actually confront and deal with this injustice honestly, we just put off the day that there is true equality and justice here.

And thanks for the civil discourse as well.

Funny, but I've frequently found myself attacked with lame insults here, and I've been blocked by easily over a dozen right wing cranks here at this point, so that certainly isn't the purview of the left. Personally I've never blocked anyone. I don't tend to insult anyone unless they insult me first. There are others who are adult enough to have a discussion or argument without getting pissy. Thanks for being one of those. As I said, I can disagree with someone without hating them as a person. There are a few folks here I have these discussions with regularly that I genuinely like as people. I don't mind being challenged. I can take it, and if I say something, I hope that I can back it up.

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing with somebody. I think it's a good thing for both sides to have these discussions on controversial topics across ideological lines.

And, by the way, I'm a long time follower, and I really enjoy your art.

And, er, Just to be absolutely clear, "...for the underdog, wherever they are, and AGAINST whoever is oppressing them."

How exactly Marxism is a negative thing?

Do you happen to know the communistic regimes all over the world and their death toll to their own citizens?

So, if you guys (yes, YOU GUYS) are going to deflect critisism of the atrocities you commited by labeling yourself "Those were not communists they were trotskits, socialists, progressives, leninists, stalinists, etc." and whichever quixotic defense you are going to come up to avoid responsibility, then I am free to label you under one term, the term that describes both your creators name and dogma.

Let's be honest. They're not true Marxists. True Marxists go out and kill anyone who defies their belief system. They risk the hangman's noose. They are willing to die for their beliefs, as misguided as they are.

What we have now are a bunch of spoiled, hypocritical apologists for communism who will sue a city at the first instance of a police officer looking at them the wrong way. Turns out, if you want to scare modern Marxists away from a location, place a bunch of job applications around it. They'll run for the hills.

That's a really bizarre twisting of Marxism.

And your second paragraph there is just making you look like an ignorant bigot. You seem to have absolutely zero grasp of history or nuance.

Bigot? Nothing in their comment even suggested that. I think you are mixing up whom you are responding to.

Your interpretation of history is twisted to fit your viewpoint, and that's fine. It is your interpretation, not fact.

Is it really difficult to accept there can be different perfectly valid positions or viewpoints about a subject? It really doesn't have to your viewpoint alone or nothing, which is how you present yourself. It may be why you find yourself offending so many people here.

You have some interesting opinions and positions that differ from others. I accept that and can learn from them even if I do not share them.

The first definition I come across for bigot in a quick search is "A person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group."

His proclamations about communists and Marxists in that paragraph seem to rather neatly fit within that description to me.

I'm neither a communist nor a Marxist, but I've read enough and discussed politics with enough of them to not see them as being some simplified monolithic entity as he seems to do.

I have some strong opinions based on more than a half a century of study, research and discussion with people whose philosophies agree with mine and not. I embrace contradiction and nuance, but I'm not afraid to call things as I see them.

Some things can just be disagreed on, sure, but I'm willing to discuss and challenge things and be challenged in return. I actually enjoy having my mind changed.

I would hope that if I take a strong stand on something I can back it up.

Also, you might be surprised how many people there are out there that tend to agree with me. We are legion! -They just don't tend to be on Alex's page.

But I am a bit of an iconoclast, and I'm not afraid to challenge those who I tend to agree with, either. Through discourse, we challenge ourselves and, at the very least, strengthen our arguments, even if we don't change them.

Thanks for your engagement and willingness to regard what I say with an open mind.

I hate to say it, but your definition of bigot above describes you almost perfectly based on your own comments.

I am dropping out of this conversation. You are just trying to bait people and spout rhetoric, and I won't be a party to that.

No comments further will be seen by me, so enjoy shouting into the void.

Bye!

Oh well. I thought we were having a reasonable conversation.

Best wishes to you anyway.

You are, of course, welcome to choose to engage with me or not.

I was going to just laugh this off, but I've been accused of being a racist and a bigot here now, and on thinking about it, this just might deserve a more detailed and thoughtful response.

To paraphrase George Bush, don't misunderestimate me.

My primary reason to be here is to enjoy and share cute, sexy, thoughtful, or quirky artz, and to promote and give respect to artists who I think deserve such. I prefer to be silly and playful.

But I've also been engaged with politics and social justice/human rights issues for over a half of a century. It's something that I'm serious about, and I'm willing to put myself out there and discuss things with people whose views I oppose.

I don't hate anyone, at least not without a damned good reason. I really try to proceed from the basis of loving everyone, -difficult as that might sometimes be- even if I might vigorously oppose something that they say. There are plenty of folks that I genuinely like as people who I disagree with on any number of issues.

I've been a dedicated antiracist for decades now. I oppose bigotry.

The only things I can honestly think of at the moment that I am that truly biased against are these: Racism, the far right/fascism, and hate/oppression/domination by force in general. I'm proud to oppose those things.

I've come to my beliefs and political philosophy over decades by a lot of study, thought, and practical experience. There are countless people who more or less agree with my views.

That being said, I'm just an old white dude. all of these things are a part of a process of growth and learning, not some fixed and calcified self-righteous ground that I stand on. I don't deal in thoughtless parroted rhetoric, I speak from my heart and personal convictions, and I would hope that I could back up anything I say with a solid argument and/or facts.

People are welcome to challenge or question what I say. That's one of the reasons that I don't block people. If any of you think I've said something racist or bigoted, please point it out specifically. I don't see it, but of course I'm not perfect. I would hope that I could further clarify anything I've said, or if I've misspoken or I'm wrong, I'll certainly try to be honest about it.

Communication and language can be hard. I do try to be clear with what I say, though.

Unfortunately, the main audience on this page often feels like a void that I'm shouting into, due to Alex's overall political leanings. I thought for a little while that you were an exception to that and willing to discuss things on their own merits. C'est la vie.

Pretty bold of you to label me one reductive and inaccurate thing in an effort to accuse me of being responsible for a bunch of crap that I've never had a thing to do with or wouldn't support when you clearly don't know me.

Anyone who starts throwing around phrases like "YOU GUYS" so loosely is someone to be regarded dubiously.

Your willingness to resort to the tired anticommunist/Marxist tropes just shows how ignorant you are of the realities of politics and social systems. Lumping "Communists...trotskits(sic), socialists, progressives, leninists, stalinists, etc." together just proves your ignorance of the subject. And blaming them as a group for being responsibile for what Stalin did, for instance, is just stupid.

The USSR under Stalin was never really communist, whether they adopted that label or not. -That's as stupid as the people who insist that because the Nazis used "Socialist" in their name it automatically made them socialists- The Stalinist Soviet state was a totalitarian/authoritarian state. About as far from true communism as one can get.

Pinning the guilt of Stalin on me is a lame-ass joke.

I'll be upfront with you. I'm essentially an anarchist, but there's a heck of a lot more to my political/moral philosophy than such a simple and reductive label. Essentially I believe in a more true Democracy; horizontal or bottom-up organization as exemplified by far left philosophy as opposed to the oppressive top down organization as it is practiced by the right.

The only thing I really take from Marx, for instance, is his general economic/political analysis, which is still the best overall framework for an analysis of economics I've seen to this day. Of course he wasn't perfect. No one is. His work is still remarkably brilliant and incisive, and holds up really well, particularly considering how long ago he came up with it. And his work has been built on by many good thinkers since.

Scooby-Doo show without Scooby is worthless.

This should be banned.

But, Garfield without Garfield is priceless.

True dat.

You have a completely valid point here.

Well done, that's why you should be hired by HBO Max and make big bucks.

They can bitch that she's a lesbo all the want and even force it with shity cartoons and such. But im pretty sure she and Shaggy had a thing once so it's already too late for them to say she's this or that.

Really?

I never seen the Shagster hook up with her!

Scooby-Doo Mystery Inc. They cannonly hooked up.

That's not to say that she couldn't have decided that she's lesbian since then...

She was 60 years too late to decide that, after 2 toons and 2 movies (Halloween and Summer Vacation movies).

Admittedly I'm late to the details of the franchise, but it seems to me that updates and AUs are entirely valid.

Who are you to decide that someone might discover their own true (Or AU) orientation after whatever period of time, even assuming that it would jibe with your own? Don't be a buzzkill. You're still entitled to your own headcanon ferchrissakes. This is a cartoon and a fantasy world, after all.

And if they piss off some bigots, even better.

Who I am to decide that something that goes against every established fact about a character's character is contradictory to all the established elements of his or hers story and actions?
Well for starters, I am not the one penning bad fanfiction and try to pass it as canon.

Why shouldn't it, really?

But hey, everybody is entitled to their own headcanon or AU, eh? Why shouldn't there be room for every one of them?

Remember when cartoons weren't sexualized? (I know, wrong site for that statement.) But seriously. Remember even having a straight couple on screen was seen as risqué? Maybe children's cartoons shouldn't be sexualized to any degree. Maybe they should be about entertainment and comedy.

Unfortunately if you don't jump on the bandwagon and declare your property to belong this or that group, make statements about social or political issues, then some idiot out there will start making accusations that you support or don't support this or that issue. We have sports stars and actors making social posts to avoid being accused without knowing anything about a topic. It is sad that they feel pressured to make statements that don't even relate to their particular field.

Look at the cancel culture attempts to shut down Paw Patrol for example.

History never repeats itself but similar situations do occur (I forget who said that first.)

I'm reminded of the French Revolution and The Years of Terror when being a moderate became a capitol offense. Yes, once upon a time in France you could get sent to the guillotine for being a moderate. If you're not with us, you must be against us. Now listen to some of the rhetoric from far leftists in American today like the halfwit AOC. It's frightening how close it is to the old revolutionaries and their beheading fetish.

The phrase is "History Does Not Repeat Itself, But It Rhymes". It's usually attributed to Mark Twain, but there doesn't seem to be any proof that he said it. This seems to happen with a lot of witty sayings.

Your hyperbole is getting the best of you here. AOC is a hero, and a genuinely good person. Neither she nor almost anyone on the left is calling for any violence.

This is in strong contrast to so many armed and violent people on the right that are currently even going so far as to threaten or call for civil war, and engage in violence and murder on a regular basis.

Uh... AOC has indeed called for shutting down city council meetings, campaign rallies and other gatherings by the right through shouting, interference or physical means. Even other Democrats don't want to be associated with her.

She is indeed a hero to those that believe in her. But reality has proven she is ignorant of due process, law, the US Constitution and has been caught making up threats by Capitol DC police that never existed.

In short, she's a politician. :)

If nothing else, I think she's a good person and her heart and ideology are in the right place, even if she's not as schooled in the nuances of the law that she might be. She IS young and relatively unexperienced. I'll take a good person like her over any number of other politicians though.

I'm not aware of the incidents you're referring to in your first paragraph, so I can't really evaluate them on their own merits without further research, but perhaps she had reasons or her passion in the moment got the better of her. In any case it scarcely compares to the behavior of any number of Republicans I can think of.

Politics is a pretty tough biz. It's hard for anyone involved in it at a high level not to make some blunders or missteps, and with the level of scrutiny they're under, it's going to be under a spotlight.

Politics by their very nature are a game of power and compromise, which cause people to do some pretty strange things.

Many people in entertainment or sports have pertinent and intelligent opinions on politics, as well as having been gifted with a platform to broadcast them. They're entitled to their opinions, and are hoping to use their position of power to make the world a better place for everybody. They have as much right to speak out as you or I do.

I also find it rather amusing and ironic that many of the people whining about "Cancel culture" with one side of their mouth are using the other side to promote the banning of books, the banning of the teaching of factual history, and discrimination against gay and trans people and kids from the other.

By your comments then you are completely against the Biden Administration's attempt to create the Department of Disinformation where that group, solely on their own, would decide what was or was not misinformation on any topic, and arrest and charge those that they found guilty without any sort of trial as federal criminals?

I know, scary stuff. I don't know of anyone that could possibly support such censorship and abuse of power, likely why it never got into effect.

As a matter of fact, from what I've heard of that I am against it. I'm against most types of censorship. But if I'm not mistaken, that idea was dropped. There have been other recent episodes of censorship that I'm against as well.

It seems to me that it's been pretty well established that the government has no right to censor speech unless it's specifically and egregiously calling for violence.

The "Free speech" that a lot of folks on the right are talking about is that which is exercised by private parties such as Twitter or FA, etc. Private parties clearly have the right to moderate or restrict speech as they choose, and there are many good reasons for them to do so.

Mystery Inc was the series that Shaggy and Velma had the romance tension.

That's what I was thinking.

Not to mention there's always this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbUCVVRZQpI

Jinkies!!! Velma is into old dudes!

I just saw someone argue that Homosexuality is not a natural thing but a choice. x_x the intellectual consistency on this topic is staggering. Like Democratic Leadership and Establishment Politicians, say the best thing for the moment is all you do in arguments. x_x

Regarding homosexuality being a choice, it's amazing how long this fallacy has persisted. You'd think that in this day and age people would be beyond that. The same thing is still being applied by some to trans people as well.

The one I've seen coming up even more recently is people who maintain that being gay or trans is an ideology. That's even further removed from reality. If it was, you'd think you'd see gay or trans people proclaiming such things, but instead, for some reason, it always seems to be homophobes or transphobes.

I thought she used to bang Scooby?

There’s a lot of porn showing that relationship!

(anime falls)

I like the way you think!

You asshole, Velma was and is ALWAYS Lesbian, Daphne is a ginger slutcakes, Freddy is the closet jock, Shaggy is the stoner and Scooby is a figment of Shaggy's imagination.

And Scrappy Doo needs to horrifically die a violent death...repeatedly.

I seriously doubt fifty years ago they wanted lesbians in cartoons.

Oh, you sweet summer child...

Oh that’s low!!🤪

I can go lower if you'd like.

That will require a back-hoe.

That's not out of the question.

I've got an extend-a-hoe at my disposal.

And Bugs Bunny wasn't a gay/cross dresser pre- HRT trans rabbit.

Oh we all know Bugs is totally homo!

We all learned that Bugs was the gay when he kissed Elmer Fudd on the lips!

They also made her Indian in one of the new series in addition to being lesb

Uh oh remember Apu!!

I should send them a reminder of who Velma was, use FA's search for "puma demon velma".

Don't forget that Daphne is now sorta Asian.

Agreed!

Yes propaganda but what pisses me off even more is the sheer fucking pandering, same with the race swapping. Like the minority you're trying to hook isn't good enough for their own original material so you can have these crumbs. Like they're saying " You should be happy we're even giving you that, you trash."

I think they race and sexually swap to cover for bad writing!

How many movies and shows preaching diversity always seem to a Mary Sue blond white woman!

Oh it's absolutely to cover bad writing. See anything recent from disney. Fuck they were throwing up the racism defense a year before they even posted the trailer for their latest CGI shit show...I mean Melissa McCarthy as Ursula? Just because she's a big girl doesn't mean she can pull that off. It's a perfect fuckin' storm of Tokenism and not your shield bullshit all in one.

That's not a completely invalid interpretation.

Not according to the ratings….🤪

Eh, ratings only mean so much.

Says Amazon about Rings of Power...

Ratings mean money, and if you don't got that, it doesn't matter what you are showing.

Sadly, this tends to be the case. Sometimes it's the wisdom of the crowd, sometimes an unfortunate consequence of capitalism. Sometimes something is even redeemed by history.

How DARE they remove the FAT TITS from my ANIMATED BUNNY in my FILM FOR KIDS!
lmfaoooo

They removed Minerva entirely….😥

and what about Pepe?

The rapist??!!😯

Way too heterosexual to be turned gay so he had to go!

Heh.

Well they did remove him because he was too "rapey" but then wanted him back in when they learned how they were going to put him in the movie.

Sorry your animated cartoon for children isn't sexy enough for ya

Dude, they are giving porno to children in grade school.

And you're mad that the animated cartoon for kids ain't sexy enough, lmao

Look if they want Thor to be naked in Marvel movies then giving women breasts shouldn't be that big of a deal.

They can spend millions if they want.

Are they making Thor naked in an animated film for kiddos?

Does that matter?

Space Jam was an animated cartoon for kids so I'd say it does

Well now I'm just sad.

Back when I was in grade school we had to find our own porn, and there wasn't even teh interwebz yet.

Well now you have perverted teacher s….

I actually sincerely doubt that.

At least any more than there ever were.

I will send you links later!

Feel free.

Just look up on YouTube "libs of tiktok youtube teachers."

I might consider it for amusement's sake, but libs of tiktok are notorious toxic right wing propagandists well known for spreading dangerous lies. They're really not to be trusted for reliable information. I'll rely on reputable news sources that can back up their claims with facts and documentation, thankyouverymuch. You're not going to convince anybody of anything unless you can come up with documented reliable sources that can be corroborated as opposed to folks like them.

Do you really believe everything you see on the internet? You're constantly recommending notoriously unreliable sources.

You really need to look into critical media literacy (Sometimes referred to as media literacy) and learn to apply it. You're just playing yourself. Seriously.

Lotus eaters, Tim Pool, the Quartering, Michael Knowles yes there are many!

I don't know the Quartering or Michael Knowles, but Lotus Eaters are abysmal if you want facts as opposed to sensationalist outrage. They're also notorious for spreading groundless right wing slanted lies and propaganda. They're not a reliable source for corroboratable facts at all. Tim Pool is maybe only marginally better.

You really need to broaden and deepen your news sources beyond right wing propaganda. You can do better. Seriously, look up critical media literacy. It would benefit you immensely to observe it.

Well I don’t get my news from corporate tech companies that march in lock step with government interests. All my people are independent and if one of them steps out of line the others will call it out.

I really don't tend to have the greatest trust in corporate media either, I tend to look a lot more at reliable noncommercial/independent sources that are not bought by corporations or spouting government propaganda. I at least look at all kinds of things, though, and then check them for reliability. You need to take anything on a case-by-case basis and apply the principals of critical media literacy to help determine their reliability as factual sources or stories.

An awful lot of the "Line" that you seem to be buying is suspiciously far right wing biased and much of it is documented as being particularly unreliable when it comes to verifiable facts. These things aren't really that hard to look up and confirm one way or the other these days.

Free speech has become “right wing” due to people on the left endorsing de-platforming.

Sorry but I grew up hating censorship!

Nah.

I'm not for censorship either. But there's a difference between the government censoring things, which they mostly don't do, and the common complaint of the right wing about private platforms censoring lies, hate speech, harassment, bullying, etc. That's legal for plenty of good reasons.

There are always other platforms people can go to to do that stuff if they want. There's no right to do that just anywhere.

It's also more than a little ironic that many of these right wingers that whine about this are the very same people who are trying to ban books, the teaching of our true history, educating kids about sex, etc.

Hate speech is free speech! Defense of speech even when you disagree means you believe in free speech!

I disagree. Hate speech is not free speech. It doesn't belong just anywhere, and the law has never supported that.

That's why there's a difference between the censorship of speech by the government and the censorship of speech by a private party.

I support free speech where it's not hurting anybody. People are free to exist in spaces where they aren't subject to hate.

As I said, there are always spaces where people who wish to engage in hate speech are free to go.

In general, I would respect free speech, but if people object to it, say if it's hateful or racist, for instance. I would also respect people's right to oppose it.

Who gets to decide what is hate speech? I draw porno and love bad taste jokes so of course someone will be offended. However people either believe is freedom or tyranny.

It's not such a black-and-white issue. It's ridiculous to ignore the nuance. It's an issue that should always be discussed and challenged from all sides, and ultimately decided by those most affected. Harm must be a critical component of any discussion, however. It often comes down to questions of power and personal rights and space.

As I said, and as the law states, there's a huge difference between government enforced censorship, which should clearly be on the side of maximum freedom as long as it isn't causing actual harm, and speech in private forums, where whoever runs the forum clearly has the right to establish rules that protect the participants of that forum from whatever sort of speech they choose. I would also extend this to public spaces, where members of the public have the right to oppose hate at least as much or more than someone has the right to speak it.

By your logic, you are inviting me to come into your house with a bullhorn and insult and threaten you 24/365.

There are sites with no moderation or censorship. If you think hate is cool, go patronize those. I won't stop you.

Hate is a ambiguous term that can be applied anywhere and anytime.

And it's up to all of us to define it and apply it.

But that's no excuse for using "Free speech" as an excuse to use it against people who have no reason to put up with it.

By giving a blanket permission for "Free speech", you're literally giving permission for the abuse of people, usually by a clearly oppressive class.

Ahh and rich people censor news isn’t a example of a “oppressive class?”

I wouldn't agree with censoring news either, as I clearly said previously.

But there's a huge difference between real news and verifiable facts and propaganda and disinformation.

Media censorship is a really complex subject, and ultimately up to every individual to parse.

See my previous references to critical media literacy, which you clearly don't practice.

But public and private spaces aren't the same thing.

People have at least as much right or even more to be free FROM hate speech as to be free to use it.

Critical media literacy seriously needs to be taught to every kid growing up, as well as everybody else these days, so that they can determine verifiable facts from lies, disinformation, and propaganda for themselves, instead of believing whatever crap that some bro with a blog on teh interwebz says.

If someone says something that is “hate speech” isn’t it better than a lie? Aren’t you better off knowing the truth about someone?

As Malcolm X said, he'd prefer the wolf that was clear about their hate to the fox who hid it.

But you're proposing a false choice here. The people pushing hate couldn't care less about the people they're assaulting with it. They couldn't give a shit.

It's not like some sort of warning would matter. They're all about the hate.

People have every right to be free from that.

Remember X hated liberals and thought they were back stabbing the Black community!

Saying he "Hated liberals" might be a bit hyperbolic. I'm not so sure that the term meant quite the same thing in his era as it does today. He certainly had an incisive mind and a way of spotting a hypocrite, though.

I'm not particularly fond of the generic liberal myself.

I respect him more than many of them, TBF.

All too many folks who consider themselves "Liberals", in my opinion, are milquetoast centrists, and a prime example of the fox vs. the wolf as mentioned above.

Never change that icon....I LOVE IT!!

It amuses me too. Enjoy it while you can though, I change my icon almost every Wednesday. If I get enough positive reactions to it I might hold it over for another week. Yours is the first, so we'll see.

Removing Scooby is just proof that they're acting in either ignorance or malice. Probably both.

Is it really that hard to do something original?

I have over a dozen EXTINCT comics floating in my head I’m just dying to get done!

Is it hard to do something original? No! Is it hard to get something quality and original made when you hire writers based upon diversity instead of talent and ability? The proof is in the pudding.

Also there is some really warped values in their “heroes.”

E-stein and W-stein weren't outliers in Hollywood. They were just sacrifices to sate and distract the public.

Or when the holders of the IP contractually retain enough control to mandate design by a committee of marketing executives more concerned with having a profitable return than an entertaining story.

Don't give in to the "fan baiting".

Doing this woke crap gets them social media hits and they deem that as free advertising and "engagement".

If they were just doing a regular Scooby movie they'd get about 5 comments on social media.

But turn shaggy black, make someone gay, and "adult" a kids show, and all of a sudden they get millions of social media comments.

It is nothing more than "Fan Baiting" they are manipulating you.

The best thing people can do is look at garbage like that and go "BORING!" and never mention it again.

If they can't learn from the insane amount of 'engagement' Amazon's LOTR disaster enjoyed and contrast it with the performance? Then they're too dense to learn from people going silent either.

The problem is that with the "engagement", you also get a ton of "spite watching" so people see it just to see how bad it is, then get on social media and complain about it even more.

It's all a vicious loop that was designed and tested to work this way.

All they care about is "Social media numbers go up", they also get more ad revenue and exposure that way, then when the show itself fails they can scream about "reeeeecism" and "phobias".

I just don’t have any time for spite watching!

I would not honestly care at all if not for the fact that this is all forced political agenda bullshit, If Velma or Daph where lesbos I'd say "fine you do that, it's your take on the characters/show" but you can't say "it's ALWAYS been this way" no, no it hasn't this is just YOUR image of it. So sure Black shaggy Asian daph ect, that's fine for you... But that's not the characters to me and many others. Not that their race/sexual prefrence matters at ALL because we don't watch scooby doo to learn about gender identity and crap we watch it for the fun dumb obvious plot of how scooby and shaggy are gonna get used as live bait for the 80,000,000th time.

I simply don't care any more.
For myself, I make it easy. Either I like something or I don't. I'm voting with my wallet.
They can do whatever they like. If they want my money, they have to make something I want to spend it on.
All this outrage is not worth the time any more in my opinion.

They want to go broke? None of my beeswax.
As for fanart? It's easy to write around copyright if you want.
It's even easier to create something similar of your own. Even with the big companies. Anyone remember the other Ghostbusters?

↑ That! All of that!

I didn't like Scooby-Doo when it premiered on Saturday mornings back in 1969. I was only 12 and it felt immature.

I do find it interesting that Joseph Clemens Ruby and Charles Kenneth Spears, co-creators of Scooby-Doo, both died two years ago. Just long enough to write a PoC movie for 60-year-old 'kids' without stirring up the creators and getting sued.

Actually,they pretty much fucked themselves on this one. I'll sum up.

Trick or Treat Scooby Doo: "Velma's a lesbian,now and forever! No backsies!"
HBO Max Velma: "Velma's got a crush on Fred."

So,yeah,pooch status: Screwed.

But in the end,what always happens is a company will announce a character is gay now. Everyone sees it for the virtue signaling bullshit it is. Which is a sign of hack writing. So even if you want that character to be gay,you still know it's going to be crap because it's a total hack move. Nobody wins with hack writing.

Also,it proves these dumb suckers don't listen to anyone,not even each other.

I wonder if Mindy Kelling is gonna have a meltdown because Velma's her self-insert character and the company wants her to be gay.

Even if the woke liberal clowns did no turn Velma into a lesbian, Shaggy into a black weed smoking trope and Fred into a non binary metro sexual with They/Them pronouns, a Scooby Doo Show without Scooby Doo in it is guaranteed to fail.

And when it does fail, fans and straight people will be attacked and blamed for not watching it.

I admit I skipped the “Bros” movie….😳

Even gay people skipped the "Bros" movie. I guess they hate Rom-coms as much as everyone else does.

Yeah, the sales did not reflect the gay communities population!!

I am watching Rocky Horror and loving it!

Here's a question that isn't allowed to be asked. Do Woke Folk consider Black People uncreative? Unable to artistically create things? We know they didn't really develop written language, or technology like the wheel until white colonials gave it to them. Maybe their gene pool just never developed the knack so Woke Folk are trying to fill in that gap they don't know existed so they keep black washing everything?

Nah, more likely Woke Folk just keep forgetting black people ARE HUMAN BEINGS TOO not incapable dogs, or apes needing human guidance at every step of their lives. (smh)

I was referring to the Blackwashing part of this... but now that I've read the comments and stuff....

I feel the need to point out I'm actually not a fan of Scooby Doo, never was. But uhh, so Daphne is Asian now too... and they don't have Scooby Doo in Scooby Doo huh? o_O

I was never a particular fan of that franchise either. It was after my time, so I wasn't the target demographic. The bit that I've caught here and there had it's moments. I don't particularly have an opinion one way or the other. Not bad characters or setup, but the whole thing seems to have become really formulaic, which is my main criticism of much mass media entertainment, TV in particular.

Crap writing is crap writing, but a project needs to be judged on its own merits. An awful lot of people seem to be awfully quick to jump on a project before they've even had a chance to see it.

There's nothing inherently wrong with a different version, an update, or an AU of an existing franchise per se, it all depends on how well it's done. It doesn't have to take away from the original, it can just build on it or exist on its own next to it. Putting people of color or women in roles that they didn't previously have is fine if it's done well. People need and deserve to see themselves represented.

Gotta call out your use of "They" above and the examples of written language or the wheel as blatantly racist and ignorant, though. You seem to wish to credit people of color with being intelligent and capable with one side of your mouth and accuse them of being historically incapable of those things with the other. Pretty effin offensive.

As far as minorities and people of color being able to produce their own work, we're seeing more of that all the time. It's still difficult under a system which continues to be dominated by the entrenched white culture, but even those folks are seeing that it can be profitable to them to back or green-light such projects. Such is capitalism...

We're in a time of transition regarding that for a lot of social and economic reasons, these minorities are increasingly getting chances to prove themselves, and a lot of it is proving popular as crossover material as well.

The minorities are also becoming less minority all the time, and a lot of the current hostility towards them is caused by some whites feeling threatened by this. Hence the current right wing backlash.

It isn't "Woke" people holding the minorities back or not giving them enough credit. It's the racist white power structure.

I kinda wonder why Fred Perry’s “Gold Digger” was never picked up!

Then again he does do porn!

I am unfamiliar with the series. The art looks really good. ^_^

I have quite a few of his books.
Fred Perry is the Ultimate Fan creator. He does porn of all kinds of franchises and also pays homages in his Gold Digger series.

Oh I am familiar with a lot of Fred Perry's works. I think he spreads himself thin on how many projects he seems to work on at the same time but, they are pretty good. But I hadn't seen the Gold Digger series before, definitely one to look into! ^_^

I suggest getting the big tomes he puts out.

Yes Sir! ^_^ *GOLLUM!* oh sorry I just had a frog...like creature in my throat.

No one has the drive to make anything new. Everyone wants to change the past and remake it.

i wish the woke crowd would stop appropriating the work of past creators and bastardizing it into something nobody likes...but i guess its the only way they can be creative...after all, if they made something new and shaped whatever it was to the ideal woke image, they know it would bomb harder than Hiroshima. appropriating other people's work is like meeting in the middle i suppose

Dude calm the fuck down and go outside holy shit lmfao

This is calm…
I find these things to be funny! They can’t write anything original so they fuck up other people’s work.

I’m laughing too!🤪

Take your own advice.

Ooof. Someone's been triggered. Hey, how about you take some relaxation tea and go for a walk outside? Might calm you down.

Did you like that? No profanity or unintentionally ironic initialisms.

You know, I miss these posts of yours. They let me vent.

*PSSST*

Fred is secretly in an affair with Scooby-Doo. Shaggy doesn't know his lover and Fred are going at it. Turns out Fred is in it for the Scooby Snax.

Also, Scooby self identifies as a penguin.

Daphne is exactly as she appears, a rich vapid pretty girl whose only goal is to get Fred's wealth in marriage.

Velma... well, she has always been the sensible one of the entire group. She has a future ahead of her, and the gang would be likely be in jail for their numerous trespassing, abductions, vandalism, taunting, harrassment, slander acts they have committed.

Now THAT 'Movie,' I'd be interested in seeing!

browsing the comments and watching so many people lose their shit over this and trying to politicize it... i can't decide if that's funny or just sad

so this is directed not necessarily at Alex but also at all the folks who left comments here:

are you really this invested over a scooby doo spinoff? 'cause i never got "I'm a super huge scooby doo fan" vibes from you...

whatever happened to "if you don't like it, don't watch it"?

you americans are a strange and weird people...

y'all need to learn how to chill

I hope they spend millions...

you americans, always so melodramatic...

well, if you don't like this new Velma show, good news: you can simply rewatch any Scooby Doo show of your choosing on... pretty much anywhere on the internet if you so desire.

or you can re-read the Scooby Doo Apocalypse comics... you remember that one, right? the comic series that featured Scooby Doo as a cyborg, the gang as battle hardened apocalypse survivors and Scrappy Doo as a genetically engineered anthro super soldier/assassin hunting Scooby Doo?

yeah, that one

That stuff sounds awesome!!

I am in no way 'Invested' in this remake. I'll never watch it, much less invest any of my real, meager monies funding/supporting it.
People like to chat about things. That's why these 'Journals' exist. I see no harm in using it for that purpose, and certainly wouldn't be trying to admonish folks for having a conversation.
I keep thinking of that Olde Saying, "Pot, meet kettle." (slightly paraphrased for brevity)

I think the people who own trademarks and copyrights tend to make these decisions.

corporations...

Yep! And they aren't the people who created the characters. (Unfortunately, the people who created all the old good stuff are no longer with us.)

So....from one extreme to another in the comments....

That said, what can I offer? Well, HBO cancelled the Venture Brothers. They're in the process of being gutted by Discovery to become more profitable, and their response to all of this is the release a new Scooby Doo that literally spits on any nostalgia that remains. I say, bring it on. Nothing quite like the last gasp of a desperate set of idealogues to make any remaining validity to their claims burn to ash.

Big picture aside, this is never about the content. I remember watching Scooby Doo interact with the Harlem Globetrotters when I was young...and now they want to be trendy by making one of their core characters LGBTQIA+....lord knows I'm missing some letters there. It's not about actually defining these characters in a new way.
If you want an example look no farther than what they did with Batman. Harley Quinn went from a tragic character torn between the Joker and wanting to help people, to an idiot who wants to take over the world. Bad writing is forever. We'll just need to sweep all of this away in another decade, and put it all in the memory hole. It can chill with bat credit cards, Ghostbusters 2016, and all the other terrible things people did to cash in on trends for money.

All the while we can at least enjoy those shining few examples of good characters. I hate HBO for killing what was good, but at least I know it's already bearing the fruits of its own destruction. Hopefully the good people who believe in ancient aliens can help fix the network that forgot what it means to serve their customers... Lord knows that even if it can't, there'll always be a certain irony in the people filming illegal alcohol production competing for resources with those who want to rewrite character sexuality because it serves "the message" rather than a valid or ostensibly reasonable purpose.

I have never endorsed or supported the literal rape of classic stories/characters in a very obvious and lame effort for anyone on *Pick an orientation, ANY orientation/perspective* to shove it in people's faces and demand they like, much less respect it?!
If folks want to promote their orientation/perspective, they can create their own stories/universes and have at it! If their stories/movies are good, people will like them. If not, that should be telling them to step back and seriously rethink what it is they're trying to shovel.
I am in no way dissing gay, bi, trans people, but as another example, I will never be forced to utter invented words of convoluted/changing definitions in another lame effort to force me to comply.

Respect is earned, not demanded. Until they figure this out and get it through their thick skulls, they're going to continue slamming said skulls into very hard surfaces (ie reality), and only do their goals of being accepted/respected a monumental effort of self-defeat.