1985, Marvel’s SECRET WARS

Iron Man (James Rhodes) and Reed Richards.

THIS is EXACTLY what is meant by “colorblindness.” This is what superheroes taught kids in the 80s. Reed has *exactly* the right attitude. Image
This *can* actually be done. It isn’t even that *hard* to do. This is how I have lived my life.

I have taught students of every ethnicity, faith, and continent in the world.
I've had students tell me, on numerous occasions (“students of color” we are supposed to say today), that they were VERY appreciative of the way I treat everyone just the same. That wasn’t their default experience (liberal professors what be embarrassingly patronizing to them).
I don’t say this to praise myself for moral virtue. I say it because I always found it an ODD thing to be thanked for—because it had simply NEVER OCCURRED TO ME to treat any of my students differently.

My parents and Reed Richards taught me better than that.
I have related before that Black Panther was my favorite Avenger when I was very young. I didn’t *know* he was black. I was too young to understand any political meaning of Black Panthers (I just really like Bagheera in the Jungle Book)—even Shere Khan was a bit afraid of him.
When, eventually. we saw Black Panther remove his mask, and I found out he was black, my reaction was pretty much like Reed Richard’s. “Oh.” It was just another fact I filed away about him, not super important.

And it was partly COMICS that had taught me that.
Many comics fans like Rogue, from the X-Men. I had gotten out of reading comics, but she got me back in—when I read X-Men 171, the issue she joins the X-Men.

She was a SUPERVILLAIN, literally a member of the BROTHERHOOD OF EVIL MUTANTS. Image
Rogue was a villain, but she came to the X-Men, her enemies, to ask for help. She had badly hurt Carol Danvers, taking her powers and memories—and Carol was very close to the X-Men, having stayed with them (and fought beside them) as Professor X helped her to regain her memory.
What the X-Men didn’t know was that Rogue’s theft of Carol’s powers and psyche was an ACCIDENT—more precisely, a set-up that Mystique had tricked Rogue into to power her up more. But the schism in Rogue’s mind was driving her slowly insane.
The X-Men, led by Storm, REFUSE to help Rogue. They are too angry at what she did to Carol.

Professor X proceeds to tear them apart.
Professor X gives one of the best speeches in comics. He basically says HE is going to HELP ROGUE, and if every single X-Man quits, then not to let the door hit their asses on the way out.

Here’s how THAT plays out: Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Eve Keneinan 𝛗☦️ن

Eve Keneinan 𝛗☦️ن Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @EveKeneinan

16 Feb
Critical Race Theory: An Introduction ImageImage
“The Critical Race Theory (CRT) movement”

A theory of something is not a movement UNLESS you are using the Marxist sense of “Theory.” This ALREADY gives the game away. This is IDEOLOGY, not SCIENCE or SCHOLARSHIP. Image
This (Marxist) Theory/movement RETHINKS traditional CIVIL RIGHTS ideas and concepts.

So CRT is NOT going to be about CIVIL RIGHTS — AS WE NORMALLY UNDERSTAND THEM.

Not at all. It turns out that it is like Communist country’s that define “democracy” as “Communist Party Rule.” Image
Read 22 tweets
15 Feb
The framing of this is dishonest. He did assault the man during the “$9 robbery.”

BUT this is another example of what goes wrong when you make it illegal for JUDGES TO JUDGE. It’s a “three strikes” law effect.

I’ve been teaching my students what’s wrong with this for 25 years.
The LAW states something universal that applies to EVERYONE.

But no CASE is universal. It is PARTICULAR.

JUDGMENT is the application of the universal law/rule to a particular case.

In these laws, the legislators pass a “one size fits all” law that FORCES the judge to do this.
Yes, this is an OBVIOUS injustice.

This has nothing to do with the man’s race.

In fact it is utterly NON-RACIST since the judge had NO CHOICE AT ALL about the sentence. The man’s race COULD NOT have played a role in this sentence. It was mandatory by law.
Read 7 tweets
14 Feb
I was once in the state finals in Lincoln-Douglas Debates. I *eviscerated* my opponent’s case in the semi-finals. L-D is like a court: if you are the negative, you don’t have to prove innocence; you just have to show the affirmative has FAILED to make his case.
When I learned I lost, I actually asked them to double check to make sure our names hadn’t got mixed up, because I had not lost. It was a decisive victory. But no, I really lost. I waited all day to get the judge’s reasoning back.
Her reason?

“While you completely refuted all your opponent’s arguments, you failed to make a case for your side.”

THIS IS LITERALLY DIRECTLY OPPOSITE OF THE RULES OF THE DEBATES. The negative has NO burden to make ANY case.
Read 4 tweets
14 Feb
Yes, she absolutely is.

But FFS we have to GET PAST this idea that progressives USE DOUBLE STANDARDS.

Yes. Always. IT IS PART OF THEIR DOCTRINE THAT YOU CAN DO BAD THINGS TO THE “EVIL PEOPLE.”

STOP POINTING THIS OUT LIKE IT’S A REVELATION.
I’m getting pretty tired of:

Progressive: *uses double standard to fuck over Non-progressive*
Non-progressive: “That’s a double standard!”
Progressive: *uses double standard to fuck over Non-progressive*
Non-progressive: “That’s a double standard!”
Progressive: *uses double standard to fuck over Non-progressive*
Non-progressive: “That’s a double standard!”
Progressive: *uses double standard to fuck over Non-progressive*
Non-progressive: “That’s a double standard!”

ETC.
Read 11 tweets
14 Feb
THE NIHILISM OF WITTGENSTEIN

[Long; Hard] ImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImage
Read 7 tweets
13 Feb
You were too busy learning from Very Smart People at the time, I take it?

I used to do something similar. I used to *argue* with Campus Preacher. I never tried to 'throw sand in his gears’ — *he* wasn’t acting in bad faith, although I thought he was misguided.
Years later, I learned that he eventually converted to Orthodoxy, leaving behind his cramped and narrow version of American Protestant Evangelical Fundamentalism.

We both got to the same place by very different routes. ☦️
I find it an odd take that you think a Campus Preacher (by that very fact) has NOTHING to offer in the way of wisdom or moral guidance that could be better than other “teachers" … ON A MODERN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS.

I think your anti-religious bias is showing here.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!