Friday, September 14, 2007

Yeesh

Take a look at this:
And frankly, anyone that has issue with someone complaining about the nonsense involved in Amazons Attack or is offended by members of female fandom expressing their displeasure over the event is the last person I would ever call a voice of reason.
Maybe its not the complaints so much that offend me but the attitude expressed there. The attitude that this is "The Feminist Position" and that certain fans are speaking for "Female Fandom" and people who disagree aren't legitimate feminists or legitimate female fans.

In case you haven't noticed, I have a pet peeve about people who have it in their mind to speak for all female fans, whether its "I'm a woman and it doesn't offend me" or "This offends me as a woman so it offends all women." Both attitudes are effectively the same, and that may be why this particular blogger pisses me off so damned much.

(Its much the same reason why I don't get along with a lot of Kyle-fans who say that Kyle-fans are being alienated by DC.)

I also have a big issue with people who imply I'm a gender-traitor when I don't share their fan reactions, and that is what this whole thing with Amazons Attack is over, fannish reactions not feminist reactions.

"Its not the end of the franchise" and "It doesn't destroy her supporting cast" is not the same as "There is no sexism." I've seen the sexism, I've noted the sexism, I've no problem with people being disgusted over it or dropping the book but the ideas that (a) the character is ruined or that (b) the company meant to destroy the franchise or that (c) the Amazons and the Gods are actually gone are all various forms of ridiculous. They aren't even statements of proper analysis, where a result that upholds an antifeminist ideal (the warrior women swarming DC to kill the men, the selective saving of the background characters, the mischaracterization of Diana) is pointed out, but these three complaints are assumptions of intent on the part of the creators that make no sense at all and there's no reason to put them forth as feminist analysis.

And I'll be as condescending as I want when I say so, particularly when I'm addressing my posts to someone with the presumptuousness to position themselves as the voice of the hive vagina.

10 comments:

  1. What it all comes down to in the end, is that we can only speak for ourselves. It is a shame that more people can't remember that, but I assume it is too easy to get swept up in the bombast sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I like to think the negative fan-reaction has just confirmed my impeccable taste, as I was ignorantly disinterested in the whole thing. Nice covers occasionally had me curious, mind.

    As an outsider looking in, I think it's definitely an incredibly valid point, though.

    If there's something I find regularly undermining the feminist agenda, it's a choir singing loudly in deliberate unison, unfortunately sometimes harmonizing with the same faults as other singers.

    The lines between a good point, and reactionary rants filtered through a narrow-minded agenda, can be pretty fine. And the agenda isn't always excessive "feminism" [re: fan reaction].

    Way to keep 'em honest.

    Now, about Hawkman...

    ReplyDelete
  3. ...voice of the hive vagina.

    Isn't that the plot of next week's Flash?

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. The denial of women's individuality is, to me, the DEFINING trait of misogyny.

    Anyone suggesting that there is, or even COULD be, anything along the lines of "What women think, or SHOULD think," is not worthy of the tiniest bit of serious attention.

    It's fun to laugh at them, though.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hive Vagina- Coming in 2008, from Bill Willingham and Howard Chaykin!

    (cough)

    I couldn't bring myself to call Bedard's Black Canary sexist. "Extraordinarily retarded" is as nasty as I'll get.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry, but I think you're reading something that's not there, this time. I've read the entry multiple times, but every time I read it, the sentence parses out to me as, "Anyone who would get offended by a woman speaking her mind is not a voice of reason." Which is, I think, a fair sentiment.

    She's not saying, "Anyone who likes 'Amazon Attacks' is not a voice of reason," she's saying, "Anyone who tells me I can't dislike 'Amazons Attack' or 'Women aren't allowed to have an opinion about comics' is not a voice of reason." It's not phrased particularly well in the entry, but I don't get a sense of didactism out of it.

    Which isn't to say that there isn't a strong contingent out there demanding, "Dislike 'Amazons Attack' or you're a bad (feminist, Wonder Woman fan, comics fan, human being, delete where applicable)." But I suspect that more than a few arguments with people like that might have made you a bit prone to see a fight brewing where maybe there isn't one.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Same point as Seavey: I think you misread the blogger you're complaining about.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Seavey and Anon -- I don't think I did, but its possible.

    UP -- I would call this taking it up with her, wouldn't you? She can completely ignore me from now on or respond.

    ReplyDelete