Look man, I'm not tryna argue, but spreading false information about a black character to paint them as more violent so that a white character looks better by comparison is racist because of the pervasive stereotype that black people are dangerous thugs, which we already have to deal with in real life. It doesn't matter that she didn't bring up race, Russel's black, she tried to make him look more violent than he actually is to make a white abuser look good; it's racist even if unintentionally.
Hey it’s cool, I’m not black myself so yes I am open to other people’s- and the black community’s- views. And I am incredibly sorry if I sound really far off and just like some random white and biased idiot, because that has never ever been my intention to portray that kind of ignorance. I really do not care what skin colour people have, I never judge anyone based on their skin colour, and I do believe myself that I am not racist, and I really do try to be open minded.
Now I’ve heard (and sorry for not having any links to what I’m referencing) some black people (who were anonymous) that they didn’t think it was racist, while some do. And I am slightly confused on the matter, because maybe this whole argument lies on a blurry line?
So, what I saw the author of the posts explain, was that they were not trying to make amends for Murdoc’s behaviour by comparing him to Russel, they were not at all trying to compare that much, I think, they were simply observing that Russel has a bit of a “violent” side. And I want to add that I did not know the gorillaz bitez were staged. Still, there is that time where Russel broke Murdoc’s nose again, although that was because he was being with 2D’s girlfriend. But still, that is a bit of a violent reaction, innit? And also, nobody are saying Murdoc is inherently good nor bad, and that also accounts for all the other characters. Nothing definitive was being said about them. They both have their own kinds of demons to fight like all human beings and they both tackle them in different ways, I think that was what the author was meaning, or at least that’s how I understood it.
Also, Murdoc doesn’t even really fit into a race, his skin colour is green, and I do believe it has been confirmed that he’s half Romani. So there’s that.
People say that because the character is black, you can’t describe their personality (which doesn’t need to be dependent on their race, btw), unless it avoids all the stereotypes that has ever been created around this race. If that’s the case, then I think that’s inequality just as well. If you can observe that a white, japanese, italian, hispanic or whatever other race character is slightly violent, then I don’t see why you shouldn’t be able to do it with a black character. And also, I do believe the author of the post never made any correlations to the character’s skin colour, and neither do I think they ever had a thought about it. And they definitely never went so far out that he could be compared to a thug. Some people decided to apply it to the character analyzation, and went on to call them a racist, and basically cyberbullied them. That was not- and will never be- an acceptable response.
I’m sorry if I come off as someone being cross and a complete idiot, but this is my honest opinion on the matter, and I am glad that you wrote so that I could clear it up, and thanks for having such a polite tone (not being sarcastic, I’ve just seen some people be more aggressive when they messaged some of the others). Now if what I’m saying is some racist bullshit, I need to clarify that that is not my intention, I really never read any of those posts and thought that “yeah, Russel’s gotta have those violent responses (and at said time I thought the gorillaz bitez were real) because he’s black.” No, I thought it probably was from all the tough traumas he had to live trough in his life - the same way I think Murdoc is the way he is because of his tragic upbringing, and not JUST because he got shit for being green (and come on, he was bullied a lot, people probably have judged him based on his skin colour just as well). Never did I ever think of race, and neither did the author of the post. Now we’re not racist if somebody else out there reads the post and connects it to race. We can’t control how other people read into any of it.
I hope this was an adequate enough response
But the OP blantantly pointed put Russel’s behavior during the staged g-bite in an attempt at a “gotcha, see, Murdoc’s not the only violent one here” in one of their posts, so one would believe that they were trying to make Murdoc look better by spreading misinformation about Russel—otherwise, why bring up Russel at all? Why not just focus on Murdoc if the intention was to defend him or whatever? Russel’s “violent” behavior being brought up in conjunction with Murdoc’s violence getting downplayed is largely why people are upset.
And yes, Russel has been violent, as they all have, but all but one time that I can remember was as a result of someone else being in the wrong. Russel punching Murdoc for having sex with 2D’s girlfriend is not comparable to Murdoc hitting 2D just because he wants to. So it still doesn’t make sense to bring up Russel’s behavior when he acts violent in response to wrongdoings. Most people would react poorly if they saw someone sleeping with their friend’s girlfriend. But then you look at Murdoc, who harms people for no reason, and it becomes even more questionable that Russel reacting angrily to someone being a dick is a point of discussion here.
Murdoc has never been confirmed half Romani. And his skin is green, but he has still been described as caucasian in canon. (Which isn’t to discredit nonwhite headcanons for him, I have one myself, but there is a reason people call him a white man so often.)
But that’s the thing, Russel isn’t even a particularly violent person, so this isn’t even a case of describing his personality because… he isn’t like that. And no one said that personality is dependent on race. So that whole paragraph doesn’t really fit into this arguement. Besides, different races are stereotyped in different ways. For black people, it’s usually that we’re more violent. So when someone is making a big deal about a black character being violent (especially when they aren’t), that doesn’t hold the same offense as someone saying, for example, that a white character is violent because white people don’t get stereotyped in the way that we do. Not to mention the fact that in a lot of cases, the source material itself is racist by “thugging up” the black characters in their canon. Speaking of which, the “black people are violent” stereotype and the “black people are thugs” stereotype go hand in hand. By calling him violent when he isn’t, especially to make a white man look good, they were “thugging him up”. Which isn’t acceptable.
It’s not okay to cyberbully obviously, but if someone says something racist (intentionally or not), it’s not the end of the world for them to be called racist because we all learn and grow. All they have to do is fix the offending behavior and move on, but instead there was not even an acknowledgement that the comparison was incorrect and stereotyping. That only solidified the belief that the post was racist even further.
The sentiments are still racist even if that was not either of your intentions. We are socialized to view black people as more aggressive, so even if “Russel’s black, that’s why he strangled 2D” was not at the forefront of your mind, it’s still a harmful course of actions to defend a white character’s violence by comparing him to a not even violent black character. The idea is still racist because the precedent of black people being portrayed violently in real life and media in order to demonize or take us down a peg is there and utilized in the post. Perpetuating stereotypes is still racist. Portraying black people as violent is inherently a racialized action because of the demonization we experience in real life because of that harmful labelling.
As an aside, I highly doubt that Murdoc has been bullied for being green. He used to have a normal skin color and he has never mentioned getting picked on for his skin color since becoming green.
There is a way to talk about Russel’s flaws. Using a racial stereotype that he doesn’t even fit to make Murdoc look better is not the way to go about that.
No one is saying that you or OP meant to be racist. It was an honest mistake, but you can’t just go “well, I never brought up race, so it’s not racist” when that’s not how it works. Microaggressions exist. Racism doesn’t stop and end at wearing pointed white hoods and spouting slurs, there are many more factors that go into play than that.
I think why people get defensive is because they’re called racists, when they’re not. I know for a fact that I don’t think lesser of anybody at all because of their race, but apparently I came off as a racist because of these microaggressions which I do apologize for. And being called a racist, when you never even thought about race when you wrote whatever message you wrote, feels bloody awful. I am so sorry that things I wrote appeared in that way. And also, I’ve never seen violence as a stereotype for anyone, I think all humans do have a violent bone and in some it’s more protruding than in others, again, no matter what race. But if that is a stereotype for black people, which I’m sure it is when you’re all pointing it out, you’re right, I can’t just sweep that away.
But not being able to call a black human being or character violent, but able to call some other race of a human being or character violent, doesn’t seem equal to me. That’s like saying you can’t say a japanese character enjoys sushi, because that’s a stereotype, and therefore you can’t point out that this character does in fact actually like it, but you could point it out if it was a character of some other race than japanese. Like, where is the equality in that? Where is the equality if some races have to act against stereotypes set up against them, even though they might enjoy some of the stuff? I’m not saying all people in a race secretly live up to their stereotypes, I’m just saying that some do, and that’s okay, we can’t help how we are, no matter what stereotype we live up to. I probably live up to a lot of white stereotypes, but like, I’m not shying away from being who I am no matter what stereotype I fit or don’t fit. That is definitely white privilege that I’m able to say I can do that(yet I could still get mocked for it), but I also think all other races should be able to do so, and we should probably not go about getting them to get that equality by decisively trying to steer non-white characters completely away from their stereotypes. Stereotypes shouldn’t be demonizing, stereotypes shouldn’t even be, and that’s what we need to work ahead for. Also, I still don’t read it as an attempt at defending Murdoc.
Also also, Murdoc’s dad was green, so genes, and I’m pretty sure there’s a canon picture of Murdoc as a baby lying in a pram, holding out a green arm
Again, no ill intentions with any of this. Just getting things for me(and perhaps others) cleared up, and thanks for being so polite and descriptive in your explanation. I really truly did listen and thought a lot over my response, hopefully it doesn’t sound disrespectful
I'm just going to come out and say bluntly that you don't seem to understand what I'm saying because of your white privledge. Hopefully you don't find that impolite or rude, but there are some things we will never be able to fully understand because we will never be able to live that experience.
Moving on—the post was unintentionally racist. People were calling it racist. If one is getting defensive over their post getting called racist, the next course of action should not be to stand their ground when they have made a mistake, it should be to not be racist. Getting called racist and fixing your behavior is not nearly as bad as getting called racist and then continuing on with the racism out of spite, and it's especially not as bad as being the target of said racism.
I think it would be worthwhile for you to look up the concept of equity versus equality. Black people have been oppressed historically for centuries in the west. White people have not been oppressed on the basis of being white (though a white person may be oppressed for other things that they are) in the west. The fifties and sixties are largely when black people finally were allowed to make an attempt to get on equal ground with white people, and as you see today, we still haven't made it there yet and some sources say that racism is actually getting worse. We have been afforded a much lesser amount of time to even make an attenpt to be equal to white people and yet people act as if we are all on equal ground now despite that not being the case. Equality is at most a surface level goal for marginalized groups. We want our land back, our family back, our culture back, our history back, our money back, our lives back. We don't get those things returned to us just because lawmakers go "it's legal for blacks to vote now." Think of it this way: there is a short man and a tall man standing in front of a fence. The tall man can look over, the short man can't. Would you give a stepping stool to the short man and the tall man (who already has an advantage) or just the short man? The shorter one, of course, because the taller one doesn't need the extra help. If you give a stool to the tall man, he still has an advantage over the shorter one. The same applies to issues such as these. Racial minorities need extra consideration because of how we have been placed at a disadvantage by systematic oppression, white people do not. That is why it's more important to avoid stereotypes with marginalized identies than those of the majority.
And another thing; you point out sushi and Japanese people as if that's equivalent to black people getting described as violent. Being seen as violent gets us killed and discriminated against, liking sushi while Asian does not (though they may get mocked for it, which is also racism, just a different flavor). Not to mention the fact that "violent thug" is not a harmless stereotype. It's dehumanizing. Like I said, we already get that in real life. It's not "steering away from stereotypes" as much as being annoyed and afraid that people keep calling us inherently violent and acting fearful or violent toward us as a response to that stereotype. And as far as seemingly ""harmless"" stereotypes go, no one is saying that real life black people have to steer away from, say, rap music and chicken, but we don't like being defined by those things and mocked because of them. Real people don't have an obligation to rebel against stereotypes because we are people, but people attribtuting stereotypes to their characters based on X marginalized trait needs to be knowledgeable about avoiding harmful stereotypes. Those stereotypes in tandem with the ones that get us killed and profiled add insult to injury. And very, very, very few black people want to be seen as a thug. That doesn't make sense. So the "no one should have to steer away from stereotypes" point doesn't even apply here.
Plus, there is nuance to these things. An Asian character liking sushi isn't inherently bad, but if the character profiles look like this:
John: "I love reading, biking, and cats."
Nina: "I love chocolate, writing, and dolphins."
Suki: "I love sushi, karate, bonsai trees, origami, kimonos, and math."
Then that is negative stereotyping. There is a delicate balance. You can make your Asian character like math as long as you balance it out, you can make your black character like fighting as long as you balance it out, so on, so forth. There are layers.
You're right, stereotypes shouldn't exist, but they do and they always will. We have to deal with the reality of that and it doesn't get dealt with by just igorning it.
None of this even matters in the case anyway because Russel... isn't overtly violent. Again, he doesn't even fit that stereotype.
It reads as an attempt at defending Murdoc because it compares his abuse to Russel's "outbursts" in order to "point out that Russel is violent too", contrasting how Russel doesn't get criticized for "being violent" while Murdoc does. It reads to me as though OP was trying to point out the hypocrisy of people criticizing Murdoc while leaving Russel uncriticized even though "they're both violent." This is especially brought to my attention by the emphasis OP put on how innocent everyone sees Russel in comparison to Murdoc.
In phase one, Murdoc was brown. The pictures depicting him as green were drawn after his transition from brown to green. In essence, they retconned (or perhaps it's a plot hole) his normal skin tone, but he was still once a normal color in canon.
