I just got out of Age of Ultron, the newest installment in the massive Avengers franchise, written and directed by Joss Whedon. For the uninitiated, Joss Whedon recently left Twitter, supposedly because of a massive amount of hate from “progressive” types in regards to his new film. I’d like to address this. First, lemme address the film objectively.

I thought, as far as sequels go, it was pretty good. It was on par with the last Avengers, which in my mind, is the best interpretation of a comic book film to date. A movie which doesn’t take itself too seriously, but is still interesting and engaging. Fun, but with a backbone. Not the overly serious Christopher Nolan type, but not the overly campy Joel Schumacher type. Not a perfect film, but wonderful entertainment. Age of Ultron was more of that. The action was spectacular (but is it just me, or did the CGI get a little worse? The best CGI is the Hulk, which granted is incredibly well done, but a lot of it seemed not as up to snuff). The writing with the exception of a bit at the end, is funny and clever and I did enjoy the story quite a bit. I loved the villain. I loved how they further developed the characters, especially Hawkeye. I definitely enjoyed it.

Moving on to the meat of the subject.

A lot of people, often referred to as Social Justice Warriors, have taken multiple issues with comic books and the films that are adapted from them. They complain about sexualization. About “excessive testosterone” or whatever. About the portrayal of women, the lack of minorities. And this film was no exception. Despite Joss Whedon often praising those feminsts, even he was not safe from them. I heard their complaints prior to seeing the movie. And at the very least, I assumed they’d be based in something, even if highly exaggerated and coming from a misguided sense of self-righteousness. But, in actuality, there is no basis at all. Because literally every complaint comes from an interpretation that can only exist if you take only the bare, context-free versions of the events in the movie, and then only see them from the worst possible lense.

First, let’s talk about Black Widow. I love Black Widow. I am not as avid a comic reader as many, but Black Widow is one of the few I read quite a bit of. She is interesting, she is skilled, she is powerful. Even next to what are practically gods, she holds her own fantastically. Which is why I was initially disappointed when people implied she’d been secluded to some kind of “support” role, as the romantic foil for Banner and a damsel in distress.

So I was pleasantly pleased to find that, really, that isn’t what happened at all.

The romance, and this may be an unpopular opinion, I felt was well done. It didn’t take up a lot of time. It was not overly corny. It was paced well throughout the story, and personally, I felt it was important to both Natasha’s and Bruce’s backstories. The Black Widow in the comics is no stranger to romances, in fact that is where her name came from. She had lovers, both as a part of her work, and seperate from it. It’s a part of her identity. Obviously the films can’t be overly explicit there, since they’re viewed highly by a lot of younger kids. But they explored it, and I’m glad about that. Both Natasha and Bruce have similar backstories, and often view themselves in similar ways. They’re good supports for each other, and I say each other, because lets be realistic, it was not just Natasha being the emotional support. Bruce had to be a voice for her as well. And frankly, there’s a certain badassness to being the one person on earth with the courage and ability to stand face to face with the Hulk, and bring him to earth.

The damsel in distress, didn’t happen. It just didn’t. I thought people were implying Natasha was actually kidnapped, except fans would’ve been in far more of an uproar about that because, please. Natasha Romanov does not just get kidnapped. What actually happens (spoilers) is Natasha is caught in the line of fire, protecting the body Ultron had designed for himself (which she retrived by jumping from a motorcycle into a moving van, which was lifted into the air, requiring her to fly it and herself from that into a jet, propelled by an explosion, where she was grabbed instead of the body by Ultron). Ultron was not holding her as a hostage, but rather a replacement after being abandoned by the Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver, as a testament to Ultron’s very human emotions which were central to his character. She was saved by Banner, but it wasn’t some dramatic savior thing. He unlocked the cage. She got out, then immediately did the one thing no one on earth could do and get away with: summon the Hulk. Intentionally. That isn’t a damsel in distress. Worse happened to the Hulk earlier in the film (while under the control of the Scarlet Witch). Hell, Tony Stark was held captive in a very similar way in Iron Man 3. Just because Natasha is a woman doesn’t transform this into a damsel situation. A damsel in distress is when a woman is intentionally kidnapped to be held as leverage. Natasha wasn’t kidnapped intentionally, nor a hostage. In fact, the only reason the Avengers knew where she was, in she concocted a way to contact Hawkeye while captured, using her own injenuity as an assassin.

Black Widow was not a passive support character by any means. She had a great deal of development, we caught a glimpse of her backstory, she got a considerable deal of development. In fact, her development was so drastic, it almost felt like they were prepping her for a film of her own, which is still rumored though never confirmed. But that could just be the hopes of a dedicated fan. I never felt she was played down though. As always, her biggest actions weren’t on the front lines. They wouldn’t be. She is an assassin, a spy. But she is also the only one who can truly control the Hulk (something Banner himself struggles with), the one who saved the body which resulted in the biggest turning point in the film (won’t give it away).

On top of that, there was considerably MORE representation of female characters. Maria Hill makes several appearances, and is basically confirmed as an official member of the Avengers, rather, in a behind the scenes roll. The diplomat of sorts. More notably, Helen Cho, a brilliant doctor who is introduced in the film, makes significant contributions (and is also considered an official member) and is another major player in the turning point, even putting herself in the line of fire to stop Ultron. And of course, there’s the Scarlet Witch. She’s introduced with Quicksilver, but let’s face it, she is pretty much more awesome in everyway. She is the one who makes the decisions, who sees the reality of who Ultron is. Quicksilver was cool, and funny, I will admit. But Scarlet Witch was significantly more badass. To make my point, Scarlet Witch is more like Black Widow, whereas Quicksilver is Hawkeye, but unique in their own way, but Black Widow far more interesting and seemingly useful (though for the record, major props for making me actually like Hawkeye in Ultron — his character improved tremendously. I almost forgot why I hated him in the first one).

So what about the “too much testosterone” complaints? The only semblence I can make of this is the action.

To which I have to say: what kind of fucking sexist would you have to be to see a bunch of action and immediately assume “OMG HYPER MASCULINITY”. I loved the fucking action. I’m sure a lot of women would say the same. That has nothing to do with testosterone. It is an ACTION movie. There is going to be ACTION in it. The only other thing, perhaps, is Stark’s usually tough guy persona. And let’s face it, that’s nothing new, and as always, it isn’t portrayed as a good thing. In a way, it’s Stark’s abrasive personality that caused every bad thing in the film. Ultron is frequently portrayed as possessing a lot of Tony in him, all the worst parts to be precise. And he’s the villain. The rest of the heroes, if we’re gonna go with typical gender roles, are practically feminine. That isn’t to say girly, that is to say, protective. Putting the people first, willing to sacrifice themselves, putting aside pride for the sake of the mission. Now I personally don’t find those traits strictly feminine, I find them humanitarian. But in terms of how feminists view the world, you’d think they’d have appreciated that. You’d think they would’ve loved the greater representation of female characters. You’d think they would’ve lavished in Black Widow’s importance, not ridiculed her.

Which is why I think I know what the actual problem is. Think of the story of Age of Ultron. Stark creates a super powered being, with all the intelligence in the world, with the intention to save humanity. That being, Ultron, sees humanity, sees the destruction they are capable of, and decides the key is to destory it. Ultron is a representation, albeit exaggerated, of “social justice” culture. I’m sure Whedon didn’t realize this at the time, because his support of that culture is out of naivety, and believing they are just liberals fighting for rights. He doesn’t realize who they really are.

Who they really are, are self righteous individuals who believe the world so horrible, that given the power they would happily implement any system, even downright destruction, to eliminate what they view as “evil”. Ultron does the same. Even sacrificing the very values he claims to be evil. And yet, in his eyes, it is not destruction. It is “evolution”. Evolution here, being fairly synonymous to “progress”. Social justice warriors hated Age of Ultron, because subconsciously, they were looking in a mirror. The Black Widow was a target, because rather than fighting monsters with anger, she fought them were understanding (in terms of her relationship with the Hulk). They ridicule what they call “testosterone” because what they think is just masculinity gone amuk, is the exact thing that could stop them. A desire for life, for freedom, for true unity. For people able to work together, live together, amend their differences, to make the world better. It is their kryptonite, if I may mix my comic giant references. Recently, infamous “feminist” Anita Sarkeesian decried free choice as being detrimental to feminism. It isn’t a wonder her and her handler, Jonathan McIntosh, would hate a film like this, where free will throughout is the most important. The choice to save a child, and sacrifice yourself. The choice to hide, so you aren’t a burden to the ones you love. The choice to give up a happy life, to complete the mission.

And the realization that, really, there isn’t evil. There are evil choices. Evil actions. But Ultron, at his core, wasn’t evil. He was programmed, he had a set goal, which deep down, he believed correct. Like SJWs. This is something the Avengers toys with constantly, this idea of what evil truely is. And while the good and evil paradigm is still very present, there is a sophistication to it. People aren’t inherently evil, they do evil things as a means to reach an ultimate goal. A goal they view as good. And to stop them may mean to destroy them, but it may also mean to recreat them. Spoilers, but towards the end Thor finds a way to use the eternity stone, which Ultron tried to use to make himself fully human, in combination with Jarvis’ code, to create a new, powerful being. The core opposite of Ultron. One who protects life, above all else, who is rational and calm, and who assists the Avengers in shutting down Ultron for good. It is the same power, but channeled in a different way.

Again, this could all be unintentional, but art is all about interpretation. SJWs, consistently, interpret things in such a way that they’re guaranteed to be offended. They’re not the only ones, but they tend to take it a great deal more seriously than a lot of other groups. They chose to interpret Age of Ultron as being sexist.

And I choose to interpret it as the opposite. Or maybe, not the opposite. But just differently. As a metaphor for humanity, and how they view it. It doesn’t matter to me what the intention was, which most likely, was neither to be sexist nor philosophical, but just to be an action movie.

But frankly, I feel that outlook is going to help society a great deal more than constantly trying to find reasons to be angry.