Think you can take a look on this video on villains like Magneto? To say she misses the point is an understatement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YouOhoCDVkw&pp=ygUUbGlseSBvcmNoYXJkIG1hZ25ldG8%3D
Oh fuck I saw the thumbnail of this video manifest a few times and I avoided watching it because I knew it was going to make me mad.
I'm going to do this one as a "real time reaction." Unlike the Harley video, I'm going in blind. Might edit a bit after I'm done writing it all out, but.
Lily Commits Elder Gay Mutant Abuse, feat. "Eldritch Lily" (Part 1)
Get ready DILF fuckers. We 'bout to go to war for our beloved magnet man.
-0:30: Lily rambles about dumb bullshit to do with tropes, and fandom, and inventing problems. . . Oh my god, why.
So like, right at the beginning here she's just . . . Making noise? Waisting oxygen? I THINK what she's trying to say is people like tropes . . . And that's illegal if it isn't the tropes she likes . . . I don't . . . Lily.
She's using way too many words to say, in essence, I presume, Magneto is dumb, "fanboys" just like him because they like "sympathetic villians." But her rational here is a degree of reductive it makes it almost impossible to respond to. Lily is arguing against a theoretical hivemind of a strawman from another dimension - totally divorced from the one the rest of us live in.
I may hazard a guess that I, conceptually, as someone who both likes sympathetic antagonists and likes Magneto, am from Lily's point of view a part of this "fandom" hivemind she's hallucinating.
I don't know what to say to that other than, no Lily. No. That's not why I like Magneto. I am much more likely to enjoy sympathetic antagonists, as that is my personal taste. I am less likely to enjoy mustache twirling cartoon villans, for as it were, that is not my personal taste. But that is not the beginning and the end of my preferences. Bby grill, I don't know what to tell yah.
Also, a "sympathetic villian/antagonist" isn't really so much a trope as it is a description. I understand why like, TV tropes and for other cataloging purposes the definition of "trope" gets stretched a bit-- however. It's like calling "first person limited" a trope.
-1:21: Lily's "favorite villains,"
I try not to roast Lily on her just strictly expressing her personal taste (when she's not trying to argue her personal taste is superior), but considering the topic of the video-- I gotta laugh. Lily's examples for villains she likes is that one fucker from Kingdom Hearts who's only notable trait compared to the rest of the antagonists is him not being an evil twink (or Pete, or Maleficent) and the Lich King.
I have played at least most of the Kingdom Hearts games. I played WoW when Wrath came out. I played the Warcraft games where he was originally introduced as Arthas.
I guess I can see in a very superficial way why Lily identifies with Fabio Night's King maybe . . . Hot Topic Heidelberg though, I'm at a loss. I can't even remember his name, and I don't care to look it up.
-1:30: "Sympathetic villains are a double edged sword [ . . . ] you can only make them so sympathetic before their status as a villain starts to be questioned."
Might as well bring this up now-- Lily is currently engaging with one of my all-time pet peeves with media discussion: calling all antagonists "villains."
I try to be careful as to when I correct people on this. I don't like nitpicking the language people use. If their meaning is getting across just fine, what ever. I don't want to make them feel stupid for confusing to very similar concepts. Sometimes, my brain shits out too, and I use a suitable substitute even if it's not exactly the right word for the thing I'm trying to refer to. Everyone does it sometimes.
However, villains and anotagonists aren't the same thing. The exact definition as to what makes a character a true "villain" is very subjective-- more often than not vibes based. Where as an antagonist is very concretely the protagonist's foil and/or a source of external conflict. A villain is more defined by the framing, an antagonist is identified by their utility in a narrative. You can have protagonists who are arguably villains and antagonists who are arguably heroes as well. Stories where there isn't enough moral framing and judgment either way, so the protagonist and the antagonist can't really be described as heros or villains. Before we get into discussing whether or not Magneto is truly a "villain" or not, I have to point out Lily's confusing those two concepts. I'm going to surmise the majority of her arguments in this video could have been dismissed if she understood the difference.
So, yes, if you make a villain too sympathetic, they're no longer a villain . . . They're just the antagonist.
I also need to preface all this by saying that Magneto is a particularly complicated case in this regard. He's been around as the "Malcom X" analog in the very messy civil rights allegory of the mutants since the 1960s. He has, in a lot of ways, mirrored the very challenging feelings people have had towards more aggressive and violent forms of activism.
I don't think iterations of Magneto where the narrative condemns his methods outright are wholly invalid-- though I have personally soured towards them. That doesn't align with my perception of what Magento represents. And on a narrative perspective, I think it's always more interesting when the moral question as to whether the X-Men/Charles's position is correct or the BoM/Erik's position is correct is left as ambiguous as possible for the audience to decide for themselves. I think both forms of activism Charles and Erik represent are equally flawed as they are important. Fighting for civil rights is a thing of chaos historically, and there's no real clear "right answer" in most circumstances. A lot of messy incoherence of effort and resistance that slowly over time collectively move the dial-- often in a round-about way.
It also doesn't help that most non-comic reader's perceptions of Magneto are so heavily colored by the movies. As much as the ever effervescent Sir Ian Mekellen elevates that version of the character with his outstanding performance. . . That Magneto is a much messier bitch than his comic counterpart. Much less calculated and considerate in his violence. Same thing overall by the Michael Fassbender version, though he's characterized a little better.
I feel it's pretty safe to assume Lily's going to be arguing mostly against her vague memory of Fox movies while confidently being wrong about the comic version being the same.
Oh my god we're fucking 2 minutes in.
1:52: "It's a very dated metaphor for racism in the 60s, and the film are a very dated metaphor for LGBT youth in the 2000s."
Sorry, we're nitpicking Lily's word choices again. She's getting allegory and metaphor confused. The X-Men are intended as an allegory-- traditionally. Not always, but traditionally.
And as a blanket statement I'm sort of in agreement with her . . . But also not really. Again, the X-Men have been around for so long there's a diverse range in the ways the civil rights analog has been handled. I think typically the mutants are at their best when they are being treated more as a metaphor than an allegory, and for no real specific civil rights issue. Something more organic to the Marvel universe itself the audience can take away from as a meditation in a none-direct one-to-one.
My favorite X-Men Rogue is a character I deeply identify with on multiple layers personally as a queer person, a survivor of abuse, someone who's had struggles with both platonic and romantic intimacy. There's a lot of ways someone could connect with her that aren't direct translations of who she is in canon.
Also, the 2000s Fox movies was not the first time the X-Men were interpreted as a queer allegory instead of a racial one. I can't tell you when the first time was, if there is an official "first time" as POC and LGBTQ+ rights issues have overlapped quite a few times-- but the Legacy Virus was quite literally mutant AIDS. Unambiguously.
I'll sort of agree with Lily, just a little, as a treat here-- a fair bit of X-Men shit is real dated.
-2:32: "Now while Magneto was around since the 60s, this wasn't an established part of his character until about 1980s. 10 years after the man who created him Jack Kurby left Marvel."
Magneto wasn't always a holocaust survivor-- that is true. Quickly googling it, that element of Magneto's backstory was first established in Uncanny X-Men in 1981. Some part of me feels like it was at least hinted at earlier, but let's just call that about right. It doesn't really matter.
This quote from Jack Kurby is so ubiquitous I knew I could find it just by going to Magneto's Wikipedia page:
"I saw my villains not as villains. I knew villains had to come from somewhere and they came from people. My villains were people that developed problems." -- Jack Kurby, Jack Kurby Collector #22
Not a surprise but, this tells me Lily is not familiar with Kurby's work as a whole.
And guess what, this wasn't the quote I was looking for, but it was right underneath, and the source checks out:
"[Stan Lee] did not think of Magneto as a bad guy. He just wanted to strike back at the people who were so bigoted and racist...he was trying to defend the mutants, and because society was not treating them fairly he was going to teach society a lesson. He was a danger of course...but I never thought of him as a villain." --Marvel Spotlight: Uncanny X-Men 500 Issues Celebration, pp. 5-7
You're now arguing against BOTH Magneto's daddies, Lillian.
3:16: " 'You're just one bad day away from being me' - Erik Killmonger, probably"
Oh haha yes Lily so funny you put the Punisher line but said it was Killmonger, that's so funny--
EXCEPT THAT QUOTE IS A REFERENCE TO THE JOKER'S FAMOUS MONOLOG IN THE KILLING JOKE. LILY NOT AGAIN WITH THIS, OH MY GOD, YOU'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY KILL ME. JUST ADMIT YOU HAVE NOT READ A FUCKING COMIC EVER.
3:28: "Where even though Magneto has long since stopped being a Villian in the comics. . ."
According to Lily's definition of "villain," that is not true. As in, he's still mostly used as an antagonist. And he was arguably never really a villain, he's just become less villianized, evolving with our cultural perception of activism-- but I'll give Lily this one.
3:30: " . . . in film adaptations, he's still a holocaust survivor, and still the bad guy for no reason."
LILY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE FUCKING COMICS OR THE MOVIES!? I take issue with how Erik is characterized in the movies too, especially in the Bryan Singer (fuck him btw, he's a predator, look it up) movies. BUT YOU'RE ALL OVER THE PLACE HERE LILY, GOD DAMN. Is Magneto as a concept bad, or do you not like the FoX-men movies, which is it!?
3:49: [The prelude to the Kevin Bacon coin murder from First Class.]
Lily, people criticized the choice to make Charles argue with Erik here and how it's framed when this movie came out. Who are you arguing with?
With the themes of the movie they tried to play the angle of Charles' more privileged life giving him the luxury of the pacifist position that Erik does not have. I really like this in concept, this has been explored before in other X-Men media, but they fumbled the bag here with the framing. There's some issues with the cinematic language used. I don't blame people for getting the impression you're supposed to wholly side with ol' Chuck here, even if the text implies otherwise. I agree with her that this is a problem with mainstream films overall havin' a hard time kicking bad habits from the Hays Code.
But that's not really the argument She's making. I don't know if Lily knows what argument she's making.
God forgive me I am at the four minute mark and this post is already this long. Okay, I'm gunna have to split this up into 2 or 3 posts. I'll add the various links to each part as I finish them to each post. Lily gishgallops this fucking badly. . . Stay tuned for part 2.