io9 
Enter your username and password.
-
posts about #iamcuriouskrypton more → 
Uncovered: Superman's Secret Racist Past?
San Francisco, 4:12 AM
Tue Dec 1
26 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors: tips@io9.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz | Email
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders | Email
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner | Email
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis | Email
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan | Email
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier | Email
Ed Grabianowski | Email
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan | Email
Lauren Davis | Email
Chris Hsiang | Email
Lynn Peril | Email
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins | Email
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox | Email
Interns:
Tim Barribeau | Email
Julia Carusillo | Email
Alex Eichler | Email
Cyriaque Lamar | Email
Caitlin Petrakovitz | Email
Mary Ratliff | Email
Josh Snyder | Email
| posts about #iamcuriouskrypton more → |
Uncovered: Superman's Secret Racist Past? |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
01/08/09
Pale maybe, albino no. As a father of two albinos I can tall you the genetics in it are misunderstood by those who believe that lack of need for extreme pigmentation causes albinism. Also (and I am willing to write an article for I09 on this) Hollywood has it wrong albinos aren't trained killers. If in Di Vinci Code a real albino had shot the curator. Nothing in the museum would be safe ALBINOS ARE BLIND.
(But the way Hollywood treats albinos IS important to this discussion. Albinos are a small demographic so who cares if they are offended.)
I usually like my science fiction to make sense. I also want it to reflect something of value. The inclusion of people of color is important because on Earth, there are people of color. Perhaps Krypton had no indigenous people of color, perhaps they migrated. It is also possible that Metropolis could have had people of color.
Comic books had no idea what to do with people of color once they existed.
Most characters were horrid stereotypes with cleaver names like BLACK LIGHTING, Black Goliath,
Vikin the Black, and in the issue John Stewart was given the ring he declared himself BLACK LANTERN.
Most Black heroes were full of street slang and usually needed the help of an established (white) hero to help them.
Superman may have a questionable past, in reguad to positive portrayals of non white groups, but so has all of comics.
It is a positive sign that the people of color in comics now are usually people first.
01/08/09
01/07/09
[thisamericanlife.org]
01/07/09
and making Krypton racially diverse (to somehow match up with the USA) is stupid in the first place...
01/07/09
[www.myspace.com]
01/07/09
I'm so mad I clicked on that ;)
01/07/09
01/07/09
They have a frozen planet -- no 'hot zone' so no different geographic areas where life developed. It didn't appear that Krypton had major environmental variations that gave rise to different skin colors on earth.
Of course one could also ask why Kryptons had beige or pinkish skin -- under a red sun -- with less UV, they would likely have been albinos -- little need for adaptive skin color to shield them from UV.
Why do we have to super-impose our primitive beliefs of "race"[sic] on alien cultures? Wouldn't they be just as likely to have had red skin or green skin, anyway?
01/07/09
01/07/09
01/07/09
While I understand your logic you're reading into this far too much. Bottom line, these people thought they were being progressive by having an "Advanced Black" population. It's a backhanded way of racism, but racism nonetheless.
01/07/09
The relatively small African-American market of that time was further diminished by the lower than currently attained economic status of the group.
01/07/09
01/08/09
01/07/09
01/07/09
...oh....oh, my.
01/07/09
It's a very simple litmus test, it is.
By the way, we as black people officially kicked out that guy from the picture. He is now Tongan.
01/07/09
01/07/09
@スッパー！monkey!: South Pacific Islander... but read as: Not Black
01/07/09
01/07/09
01/07/09
01/07/09
Don't talk about race if you don't know history. It's just embarrassing for everyone.
[en.wikipedia.org]
01/07/09
I don't think that's a fact sir. Was there some sort of massive black person emigration after 1930 that I never read about?
01/07/09
01/07/09
01/07/09
Point, you're missing it.
He was talking about how if America was marketing to its "native population" it should be indigenous americans not white people.
@braak: Well, da-yum, he shoulda said that before.
01/07/09
01/07/09
01/07/09
01/07/09
[www.cdc.gov]
01/07/09
@Shamoononon has hebetudinous dog ★★★★★: That whole "No one is native to anywhere" line don't cut the ice with me son. Too many people have fought too hard and too long to expand history beyond the "parade of white people bringing jesus to the savages" approach.
01/07/09
01/07/09
Ditto, but I think, unfortunately, a lot of those factors can be filed under "racial issues." It is a broad term, but things like religious affiliations make a big difference in birth rates. I get what Tetracycloide was getting at, but stats like this reek of biased testing to me. It's unavoidable though.
01/07/09
01/07/09
This was actually down/up from 1870: 86.5 / 13.1.
01/07/09
Srsly, where are these stats coming from? They don't even make sense. Why would they be down from 1870 and up after 1930? I just want some actual historical context.
01/07/09
In the 1980 Census, the U.S. was 11.5% black and 83% white.
01/07/09
compunding the problem is racism, of course, on two fronts. first, racism could have engendered a desire to minimize the importance of blacks by introducing bias against them. second, these are voluntary statistics so it's possible what races individuals would be willing to self identify as has shifted over time.
01/07/09
Honestly, that's what I figured. It's just kind of annoying to have people citing something that's obviously flawed. A dramatic increase, decrease and increase again doesn't come without historical context. And yes, I was just going to bring up the whole "voluntary" thing. It just adds another layer of confusion to the mix, doesn't it?
@92BuickLeSabre: The 1980 census sounds pretty logical, but the one from 1931 and 1870 seems to have some serious skewing of information going on.
...what was this thread about again?
01/07/09
A. Not your son
B. Not young enough to be your daughter
C. Who gives a crap about cutting the ice for you.
I simply elaborated on the definition of native, whether you like it or not, none of us are 'native' to the Americas.
01/07/09
My mother was a Blueberry and my father was a Maple.
01/07/09
Go look at the censuses for the intervening decades to track the various populations' rises and declines. It will likely look much less abrupt.
01/07/09
Is a flu epidemic really the cause of half of a population dying in the US? Doesn't seem likely. As far as I know, there isn't any major significant event responsible for the decrease or increase of blacks in the U.S.
01/07/09
01/07/09
01/07/09
01/07/09