New Romance* comic from Rebellion - Kickstarter

[Colin YNWA]

Hi Funt, it's absolutely nothing to do with comicsgate. Whilst I do think identity politics is the enemy of class struggle I don't think I have to be inappropriately politically labelled just because I look at a list of creators and think 'Christ, nothing for me there'.

It might be the way you say 'types' of creator as if there is some unified 'thing' about that list that is why you don't like them. Rather than stating there is no one on that list of individul creators whose work you enjoy.

[M.I.K.]

Hi Funt, it's absolutely nothing to do with comicsgate. Whilst I do think identity politics is the enemy of class struggle I don't think I have to be inappropriately politically labelled just because I look at a list of creators and think 'Christ, nothing for me there'.

You know what I usually do when I don't think something's for me?

I ignore it and move on.

[BPP]

The unified thing is that knowing the work of some of them and looking at the art of others I get huge 'this isn't for me' vibes which is, from my own perspective, a shame as normally I'd support Rebellions endeavours.

[BPP]

Hi Funt, it's absolutely nothing to do with comicsgate. Whilst I do think identity politics is the enemy of class struggle I don't think I have to be inappropriately politically labelled just because I look at a list of creators and think 'Christ, nothing for me there'.

You know what I usually do when I don't think something's for me?

I ignore it and move on.

Like you did with me? Cool, cool.

[M.I.K.]

"usually do" "something"

[Funt Solo]

Hi Funt, it's absolutely nothing to do with comicsgate. Whilst I do think identity politics is the enemy of class struggle I don't think I have to be inappropriately politically labelled just because I look at a list of creators and think 'Christ, nothing for me there'.

I have to take you at your word - it's only fair. It's odd, though - because when people aren't abundantly clear about what they mean, then I use inference. So, my in-head translation of what you said, I'll add below.

Women can't draw, and they hounded Ed Piskor to his doom.

I honestly don't understand why Rebellion hire women. Women's work has never connected with Rebellion's existing base (of men) and women don't belong in the UK scene.

[M.I.K.]

Yep. That's pretty much what I was getting.

[GordonR]

Ditto.

"This isn't for me, so I don't know why Rebellion are doing it" is an especially great touch. 

[IndigoPrime]

I think it's fantastic Rebellion continues to constantly explore new territory for the IP it owns, and creating new work based on it, rather than just churning out reprint. And I think it's exciting that the company is now exploring crowdfunding, which isn't always great but can sometimes be an excellent way of creating new work and funding relatively niche collections. (And by niche, I mean stuff that won't sell insane amounts – Boom is largely in the same space.)

[BPP]

Ah, there he is, Ken piling in on his readership. Always a delight.


Plenty of great female talent out there in the industry - Katie Skelly, Joelle Jones and Zoe Thorogood to name three I'd welcome into the Prog anytime. But obviously some people here relish throwing '-ism' accusations around.


And Funt can you remove the false quotation box, I find that a particularly bad faith display and beneath you.

[Funt Solo]

[Responding to IP]

We definitely need new talent and new content circling the Rebellion nest.

I'm not the target audience for Monster Fun - but my step-mum buys it for my three nephews. I don't know the numbers, but I sometimes imagine that 2000 AD is a sort of niche, prestige product - and it needs supported by other content - which may feed into it later. While Regened (eventually) flopped, the idea behind it (trying to reach a wider audience) is eminently supportable.

So, glad to see this effort being made to expand Reb's horizons.

[Funt Solo]

And Funt can you remove the false quotation box, I find that a particularly bad faith display and beneath you.

Well, you perhaps hold me in too high esteem. But - look closely - it says "BPP translated in Funt's head" - I'm not sure I could make it any more obvious that it's not a word-for-word quote. Nobody else seems confused, there.

I'm glad to hear you're not a blanket misogynist. I am incredibly wary, though, of anyone jumping on the "Ed was bullied to death by witches who must now be punished" bandwagon. So, y'know, you should probably reel that in - or start up a thread on that particular topic (although I'm not really suggesting anyone does that here because it would be a complete shit-show).

[BPP]

Sorry Funt but your 'as translated by' isn't going to wash. You're still using a format on here to attribute offensive remarks directly to me. Translation still makes me the source. If you want to remove them from the box and say this is what you think I'm thinking then that's fine. Wrong but fine.

[Jim_Campbell]

Well, you perhaps hold me in too high esteem. But - look closely - it says "BPP translated in Funt's head" - I'm not sure I could make it any more obvious that it's not a word-for-word quote. Nobody else seems confused, there.

No, sorry... I speak as an argumentative bastard who's done plenty of stroppy stuff online over the years, and I think that's out of line. There are plenty of forums I frequent where putting non-legitmate words inside a quote tag would get you banned.

[Funt Solo]

BPP - no no - you're absolutely right - it's me that's in the wrong. Nothing you said is at all problematic, and it's not as if you're splitting hairs at this point. Admins - feel free to remove/edit my posts or admonish me in any way you see fit.

And Jim's right too - I should definitely be banned.