Wednesday Morning Follow-up

I'm too thinly spread right now to fully explain why I chose the post I chose for Monday's Feature, but I do want to see where the topic leads. After all, more than one commenter seemed to miss my point so elaboration is definitely needed. This paltry offering says nothing close to everything I want to say about Power Girl, but maybe it'll help you understand my reasoning. Here are three quotes from three very different people arguing for three very different reasons:

Erik Larsen, pleading for fans to stop complaining about Power Girl's breasts:

The Phantom Lady's only distinguishing characteristics are her ample cans. That's pretty much all she has going for her. Ditto Power Girl. To tone them down is to strip them of their identities.

Library Lass, explaining why she refuses to read Power Girl stories:

That's enough for me. I don't want to read Power Girl. I'm afraid that, if I start reading about her, I'll have to write a fic wherein PG goes through seven kinds of merry hell (in what would, no doubt, suspiciously resemble a fantasy-standard epic quest) to find some kind of alternate-Earth Kryptonite that would work long enough for her to have a breast reduction.

(Edit: Library Lass explains her true intentions behind the post here, but despite my own mistake I'm leaving this up because 1) The post sounds too real, 2) All of the people agreeing with it, and 3) we're getting good conversation out of it. There's still a lot to say on the subject)

James Lamb Jr, chiming in on why he feels Power Girl is an antifeminist character:

You really don't get nastier than this Pamela Anderson knock-off in mainstream comics, yet, what's most interesting about that LJ (and most feminist discussions of Power Girl I've come across) is that the massive chest automatically incinerates whatever feminist aggression the character may exude - even when Wonder Woman's chest rivals Earth-2's bountiful bosom. Power Girl's never judged on the content of her character by anyone - male or female - because of her titanic top-heaviness.

Now, readers, what's the common attitude in each post?

Second Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans

Kalinara's got the Second Edition of the Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans up, and I regret I haven't had a chance to read through it yet. But check it out, the next one will be at New Game Plus on August 3rd. Ariel hasn't put up her guidelines yet, but the main Carnival site has the guidelines used by the first two editions.

International Blog Against Racism Week

Livejournal's scrambling to sign up for International Blog Against Racism Week (with icons for livejournal users). I almost never use my livejournal for anything other than ranting or linking, but I'll see if I can come up with something for this blog.

1. Announce the week in your blog.

2. Switch your default icon to either an official IBAS icon, or one which you feel is appropriate. To get an official IBAS icon, you may modify one of yours yourself or ask someone to do so.

3. Post about race and/or racism: in media, in life, in the news, personal experiences, writing characters of a race that isn't yours, portrayals of race in fiction, review a book on the subject, etc.

Coffee and Ink starts out with How to Suppress Discussions of Racism.

Quick Links

Hey Alaska! Marvel as your Senator explains how the Internet works. (Hattip Techsploitation)

For Men: An excerpt from a book on sexual violence.

I'd totally redo his office in Garish Pink.

The Quick and Easy Guide to Not Writing Stereotypes

If you read independant comics, Kevin Smith thinks you're ugly.

Can I have a new banner, Chris, with guess-which-phrase on it?

DC in October Solicitations are up.

Tom Bondurant on Star Trek.

The Feminist Blogosphere is stuck on sex again.

"Hi, My Name Is Steve, And I'm A Sperm Carrier. May I Impregnate You?"

Salon examines the mentality behind Snakes on a Plane fandom.

Sufferin' Sappho!

Fanthropology plays with Elseworlds.

On Feminist_Fandom, they're discussing why the Responsible One tends to be The Girl.

At Feminist SF: The Blog, there's a post outlining some of the feminism highlights from this monster conversation on the meaning of feminism, testosterone, mechanical aptitude, SUVs, language origins, and knitting.

And this post on Obeisance Anxiety is interesting, too.

And I have linked to Nitroglycerin before, haven't I? Either way, Agreeable Comics.

Monday Misogyny

(Edit: Library Lass explains her true intentions behind the post here, but despite my own mistake I'm leaving this up because 1) The post sounds too real, 2) All of the people agreeing with it, and 3) we're getting good conversation out of it.)

From a livejournal post on Power Girl:

I don't read Power Girl. Don't know anything about her beyond: blonde, big breasts, related to Superman, !Supergirl, involved in the Crisis.

That's enough for me. I don't want to read Power Girl. I'm afraid that, if I start reading about her, I'll have to write a fic wherein PG goes through seven kinds of merry hell (in what would, no doubt, suspiciously resemble a fantasy-standard epic quest) to find some kind of alternate-Earth Kryptonite that would work long enough for her to have a breast reduction.

Hey, if I was Power Girl? I'd have a breast reduction. What am I saying? I *had* Power Girl's breasts. (I didn't have the rest of her body though. 'Tis a shame, really.) And now I have sensible C-cup breasts. Kryptonite was not involved.

I've given up trying to explain this line of reasoning to people. Most get stuck on "But you can't take away the boobies!" and then I stop talking to them.

(Edited to show entire post)

Potential Retcon Sighted

Well, this is a extremely spoilerish observation from Green Lantern #12, and I'm worried about messing up the surprise. I went back and changed the site feed to "Short" so I could post this and not mess anyone up, but I'm still paranoid so here's an Iconic View of Hal Jordan to make some space on the page.



Now, let's get down to brass tracks.

Green Lantern #12 Spoilers

I mean it.

Readers, this is Arisia:




Now, the short version of her unfortunate history is that she was a teenaged girl in the Green Lantern Corp who had a crush on Hot-Shot Hal Jordan. She was 14 in Earth years, but 28 in her homeworld's years. Hal wanted nothing to do with her romantically, she looked 14. So, she uses her ring to age herself so that she appears to be 28, as humans see it, and tells everyone she had a growth spurt. (I think Katma Tui raised an eyebrow at this, but the CPB AI thingy that the GLs used was down at that point so no one could check.) After a complicated story with her chasing after him and annoying him, and some mind control, and some general GL weirdness that brought them closer, Hal has the supreme lapse of judgment that accepts her advances.

Here's where things get fuzzy, because up to the point that Englehart wrote her, she acted like a teenager. As far as I could tell, under Englehart, she acted and thought like a 28 year old. He has been quoted in interviews as writing the story as a way of making the point that physical appearance doesn't matter, but it still sounds skeevy. Either way, this is the history they had to work with, and work with it they did. Arisia stayed artificially aged (which is something I think should have put her on the fridge list, because losing your childhood for a guy and never getting it back is an injury) until she died.

When Englehart left, most of them lost their powers and only Hal had a ring. Englehart had pretty much written her as an adult woman once she aged. Under Priest in Action Comics Weekly Arisia was the main love interest, and she was pretty much an airheaded sex toy (not that anyone acted like they had a brain in Priest's run) because she had no powers and apparently no sense. Jones brought back the Corps, but left Arisia powerless -- citing her use of the ring to age herself -- and established that mentally she was still 14. Then she got moved over to Warrior and Beau Smith made her into an extremely cool character before killing her. However, he laid the seeds for a resurrection by spending time during the series to point out her remarkable healing abilities (such as healing a broken spinal column in one week).

Now, I haven't read all the issues, but I love and hate the concept of this story. I love it because this is what a teenager would do. They would age themselves to get their crush. I love how Arisia behaved.

I despise how Hal behaved. He should have known better. He should never have come near her, not even Aliens do that overnight. I also hate the writer for doing this story and portraying it as though there isn't anything wrong about it. The only thing that saves Hal in my mind is that he was completely, and utterly, unattracted to her until she looked like she was approaching 30. That pretty much proves he's sexually attracted to a mature woman. But still -- He slept with a teenaged sidekick. That's fucked up.

If I had a chance, I would keep it, only I'd retcon it so Arisia was unnoticed as a teenager by Hal, and he didn't know that the artificially aged Arisia who approached him was the same as that teenaged elf person who used to follow Tomar Re and Katma Tui around on Oa. Granted, some people would tell me that puts a lot of wrongdoing on Arisia while taking the weight off of Hal's shoulders, except for the difference in behavior. How Arisia behaved, while very wrong, was acceptable as she was a teenager. How Hal behaved, while often defended by his fans, was unacceptable. He was the adult, he knew this.

Anyway, what I noticed was when I saw the above panel was the costume. Take a look again.

Yes, I saw the boobs. Stop looking at the boobs for a minute and think critically with me. Earlier in the story, Hal has a flashback that ends with seeing Arisia. Here are the pictures of that flashback.

There is no Cleavage Slit in the earlier costume. I looked at the recent costume again. It seemed, awfully tight even with the cleavage slit. Even compared to the earlier one. Then I looked at the gloves.

On careful inspection, those gloves look too small. Take a look at the fingers, those fingers are a bit too small for the hands. Unless, of course, there are fingers beneath the cloth of the rest of the glove. And while he drew opera length gloves in the earlier flashbacks, in this picture Ivan Reis draws a cuff. A cuff that is practically on her palms.

This is an energy costume, it should fit like, well, a glove! Unless of course, she's been in stasis for a while yet has been growing all that time. Her hair has clearly gotten some length, because even in Warrior she was always shown with a pixie cut. And if she outgrew her clothing, it'd be easier for the Manhunters to just unzip or cut the front rather than sneak into her head and control her to the point she changes her costume. Especially given Arisia's will. She was the youngest member of the Corps (maturity wise she was the only Juvenile, I don't mean actual chronological age, there are likely some species that reach old age at a decade in Earth years). She's shaken off Hector Hammond, then gone on to kick his and Star Sapphire's ass. In this story she reached through whatever the Manhunters are using to keep her in stasis, through whatever they were using to put Hal through Flashback Nightmare Hell and helped Hal take control again.

So, anyway, I've come to the conclusion that this is 28 year old Arisia wearing a costume sized for 14 year old Arisia.

Now, it comes to the why, and what the implications are. We got two narrative boxes of information on Arisia, along with some dialogue telling Hal to forgive himself because she's forgiven him.



So we know that Beau Smith's death story is still in continuity.

We don't know what else is. Arisia came up in the flashbacks right after Hal was kicking himself for leaving Carol because of commitment issues. So, the romance could still be intact. But, he never specifically mentions that he dated her, and when he finds her later in the issue he connects his flashback of her with the idea that she was seeking him out (which is as good as true, given Hal's horrible track record with mind control).

So, I'm seeing some options here, and they aren't all good.

1) History as told is totally intact, and I'm misreading the art.

2) History as told is totally intact, and Arisia reverted to the physical age of 14 after she was revived by the Manhunters -- whatever they did to imprison her and tap her ring caused this. She's been growing since.

3) History as told is intact up until she loses her ring, then she reverts to 14.

4) She never artificially aged, and the romance never happened.

5) She never artificially aged, but the romance did happen.

Thoughts?

The Time-Honored Game of Nerd Superiority

You know, William just asked me why comics bloggers are so condescending, and I found a livejournal post that articulates why:

*Honest to God, there'’s a freakish sort of pressure when you'’re a woman buying comics. I can't count the number of times I've walked into my local store and felt eyes on me, discreetly appraising my comic book choices. I know guys get this same pressure too, which is part of the problem, but women are judged twice as harshly and we know it (here'’s where I wish I had more women friends who read comics, so somebody could back me up).

This is a self-perpetuating attitude. Geekier than Thou. This is why the first week or two at Blog@Newsarama, most of my posts were greeted with one-upper comments, with the exception of Amateur Art Appreciation posts. Because those posts exude snobbery. They condescension. They have Big Words and they discuss Symbolism. The Geeks who ventured across them feared to challenge them because they may have to deal with long-winded and difficult to dismiss response. But my newblogging, on the other hand, was fair game.

All the newbies get the treatment from the old guard, and realize that's the way you need to be to fit in. The only way to deal with judgment is to be twice as arrogant as the person doing the judging. It's like some weird pack-animal dominance exercise. If you win, you get to be in respected and look down your nose at the losers who read the unpopular books (you know, the ones that actually sell). If you lose, you can look forward to pseudo-intellectual mockery every Wednesday.

You are scored at the cash register:
+3 for each Independant Comic in your pull.
-2 for every superhero book not written by Alan Moore, Grant Morrison, or Warren Ellis
-3 if you are Female*
+1 for every complaint company direction
+1 for every complaint about art
+2 for every complaint about writing
+3 for every complaint about editing
+2 for pessimistic assumptions about industry news
+3 for gratuitous display of continuity knowledge
+4 if you win a Nerd Superiority Challenge with another patron
+5 if you win a Nerd Superiority Challenge with the clerk

*This limits your social standing to a choice of "Fluffy Bunny" or "Force of Nature" depending upon whether you score enough to be in the in-crowd.

Required Reading

Shelley blogs about Feminists working for Equality in Comics.

And inadvertantly reminds me that I haven't spent enough time posting pictures of Hal and Kyle's butts recently.

Why Reginald Hudlin Should Never Be Allowed Near the DC Universe

He proves in this interview that he has no understanding of the major personalities in that universe:

"Why did you choose T'Challa's [Black Panther's] first love over his ex-fiancee, Monica Lynne?

RH: Because Superman should be with Wonder Woman, not Lois Lane..."

(Hat-Tip to West)

This Again

I had this post on top for two days and figured I wouldn't revisit it, but the Feminist Community on Livejournal doesn't allow non-members to post and I had to respond to this comment.

But comics *art* different from "regular" art.

To compare comics to "regular art", you might look at the difference between Ingres and PP Rubens.

Ingres painted all of his "odalisque" paintings so that, if the woman existed in real life, she would have to have up to three extra vertebre. In the "Grand Odalisque", this is most true. The sitter is portrayed as disproportionate in order to convey the artist's personal aesthetic.

Rubens does much the same. His female sitters aren't technically real. They portray an aesthetic of beauty for the time and portion of the world in which he lived. Most of Rubens sitters are heavy hipped with a slightly rotund belly. However, Rubens portrays a slightly more realistic woman. She has wide hips, a belly, a more realistic bosom perhaps. But she's still just an image, a style of beauty.

I'm not sure which artist you're referring to when you envision a non sexualized or aestheic or realistic view of the natural form. Art does not depict life. Art depicts a vision of the artist. Picasso painted multitudes of women, but they were in his vision. He painted the parts he wished to portray in a way that he found aesthetically pleasing. Degas and Manet painted figures of an irreputable position, but in a aesthetically pleasing light, where they would not be under the usual circumstances.

Comic art is much the same. The artist isn't looking to recreate life. He's looking to present an aesthically pleasing subject. Whether that subject has breasts that are too large or legs that are too long, or a chest that is far too rectangular and a waist that is strangely small in comparison. It isn't life they are expected to depict, but a cartoon image of pleasure.

How many cartoons do you see that are real? Anime babes with huge eyes and strangely colored hair. A tomcat that stands on two legs. A sponge in clothing. Pink and purple ponies with glitter hair that talk.

Comics are just cartoons. They're images that reveal a certain brand of entertainment.

I'm not sure what the point of Rubens-Ingres art tangent she started off with was, but comics art is meant to present the best picture to support the story. Bottom line.

There are different styles, yes. But we're not talking about Looney Tunes or Manga here. We are talking superhero comics, specifically Marvel Comics. There's a certain style to that. Stylistic art is acceptable, wonderful even -- look at the Daredevil story by David Mack that Echo first appeared in, it was beautiful. But those stylistic elements are there because they fit with stylistic stories -- dreams and abstract concept pieces. There's a certain style that goes with it. Traditional superhero stories have their own atmosphere and artistic requirements. Some stories have soft, playful cheesecake like Terry Dodson's for a soft playful atmosphere. Some stories are sweeping epics that require a good cosmic background artist. Martial arts stories require an artist who can show the human body as a weapon. Art is necessary, in superhero books, for characterization and plot. Daughters of the Dragon is a Kung Fu/Action story. It's a martial arts book. Emphasis should be on the fighting and the skills of the characters.

If the artist wanted a more dynamic pose, that makes initial sense, she was very still in the first rough sketch. However, it was easy to tell she'd just landed solidly and skillfully and was planning to move again. She is peering into the window, reacting, even in the rough outlines to what she's viewing. There's room for the defined musculature of a well-trained martial artist. Her proportions roughly follow the ones traditionally used. The artist is clearly capable of skilled, balanced work.

The second picture, however, the landing is clumsy. I wouldn't describe it as dynamic at all. Her feet are skidding outwards beyond her control (her right foot even appears to be shaving wood from the porch -- was it changed so she would make noise on landing? Some martial artist!). Her back is bent in a painful and dangerous manner, you can see very little musculature. Her wrist is angled in a painful manner that adds no support to her upper body. This is not the landing of a skilled martial artist. This is an untrained girl who's gotten in over her head! Even her grip on the sword is loose!

The characterization is completely different for the two panels.

Which one do you think fits Colleen Wing, experienced martial artist?

Giving the benefit of the doubt, I'd call this sort of thing a bad artist covering his lack of skill with cheesecake, but here I'm going to judge by the potential of the first panel and say I see something much worse -- a good artist sacrificing characterization for sexualization. And that's the biggest problem. Breasts, skin, even flat out plastering She-Hulk's butt over half the panel doesn't really annoy me as long as it fits with the story (and they throw in a couple equivalent shots of the men). It's when the story and the character are put secondary to fanservice.

Art is vital to the medium, people. Artists need to get it right. There is room for cheesecake, room for beefcake but the character has to come first.

Green Lantern #12

I was going to blog about Wonder Woman tonight, but I was too blown away by the Utter Awesomeness of Green Lantern #12. I was expecting a mild peace offering with this story, but Geoff Johns managed to completely knock the base of my greatest annoyance at the franchise out from under me. It was wonderful. I didn't even realize I'd be this happy with it.

I mean short of resurrecting Katma and making it a mandatory artist mandate that 1/2 of all humanoid background GLs be female I don't see how he could make me happier.

I can even forgive the POW--Wait, I'm holding off on that one. But still, it was a Truly Beautiful Issue.

And it was drawn by Ivan Reis.

Older, but still relevant

This is from an old Newsarama feature on Daughters of the Dragon #1 back in January, but I've been meaning to point it out for a while.

The layout sketch:


Artist Kari Evans' judgement:

As you can see, there are slight changes from the layouts… panel three totally changed, and went for a more dynamic landing in the last from the layout version.

Completed page:


Allow me to repeat that with emphasis:

[...] went for a more dynamic landing in the last [...]

Another Necessary Point Omitted

An article on Leia's metal bikini from Return of the Jedi.

"I saw the movie when I was seven and I was absolutely thrilled by Leia -- what a wonderful character," says Amira Sa'id, a dancer who has used a Leia bikini in her performances. "Jabba put her into the outfit to humiliate her, but Leia was such a strong character, her will made the costume empowering."

I wouldn't say it was sheer force of will so much as her actually using the chain attached to the metal outfit to strangle the amorphous bastard who put her in the ridiculous thing to death.

Monday Misogyny: He Wasn't Even Trying This Time

The Immortal Words of Erik Larsen:

Oh, and if a creator brings his wife to a show, don't hit on her. If he ends up slugging you and busting his hand, he'll produce fewer comic books and everybody loses in that deal. And don't offer to let him ball your sister -- especially if his wife is in earshot. That can cause all kinds of problems.

Thank you, Erik, valuable advice indeed.

The Things I Do...

Okay, I've assembled all of my regular searchplaces for WFA into a single Bloglines Account, and added a few of my daily non-comics reads. There's 255 feeds there right now, and I've lost count of what goes where. (This is not counting livejournals, by the way, as I have most of them on my friendslist anyway)

Anyway, I did this over the weekend in the hopes of simplifying my linkfarming between the blogs. I will still look at my Technorati watchlist, of course, and search engines.

Should I lose my mind and not post anywhere over the next day or two, the methodology change may be why.

Should this be successful, I may just wipe out the entire blogroll and leave a link to my public Bloglines folder instead.

Or not, we'll see.

Anyway, Today's Monday, and it'll be the first night I get back from work to all of your at-work ramblings. Wish me luck.

ARGH!!!

So I just got into the pile from last Wednesday and guess what I find...

A comic book with a naked man in it.

A naked man, established to be very good looking by the dialogue.

Sadly, though, it was difficult to tell from the art, because this naked man was not drawn by Ivan Reis or Ed Benes.

No, this naked man was drawn by John Byrne.

Damn you, Simone, you did that on purpose.

Benefit of the Doubt

I received a link to this in the email (along with this livejournal post), and realized that a terrible error may have occurred. See, I've seen posts like that, and there is usually a very important element that separates the good ones from the bad ones. This article was missing that element. So I emailed the article's authors to inform them of it.

Ms. Hilary Goldstein & Mr. Richard George,

I read your "Ten Books for Your Girlfriend" article, and I regret to inform you of a terrible error that was missed.

The end of the article was cut. I read through the whole thing and didn't see the punchline where you let everyone know you were kidding, that they're supposed to talk to their significant other and find out what kinds of stories they like before making recommendations. It's an awful thing to omit, because without it, people might think that you're serious.

It seems obvious to me, but apparently no one else has brought it up because here we are nearly a month later and the last paragraph is still not there. You may want to discuss this with your editor.

Thank you,
-- Lisa Fortuner

I'll be sure to inform you of any reply.

Because A Thousand Words Wasn't Nearly Enough

My writing skills need work. I'm apparently able to entertain well enough, but when it comes to the true purpose of writing -- getting the message across, I've been falling short.

Case in point, yesterday's link to my cover analysis yielded this response. Kalinara's answer (originally found here) well-summed up my intention, but I can't help but wonder if this could have been avoided.

Take the tail-end of the comment, for example:

When you embrace this cover, you're not embracing a noble view of womanhood. You're embracing the view that a woman can only be noble if she rejects and battles against the sexuality that a male-dominated culture finds threatening.

You see, I agree with the base of Hippokrene's argument. The Femme Fatale is dangerous to men, she's a representation of male fear of female sexuality and the seeming control it has over them. She's an attempt to place responsibility for male actions on the female object of the actions.

However, there's a flipside to it, and that's the path of least resistance. I had a coworker once who tried to use feminine wiles to get mostly male coworkers to make things move a little faster for her. I hated watching it then, and I hate watching it now. Before she went overseas, she trained me to take over her additional duties (Hazardous Waste Disposal -- yuck) and advised me to do the same. I expressed my disgust and told her I'd be doing things my way (which involved scowling, growling and intimidation). But, I admit, it seemed to easy to do. So easy to play the game, play into their hands and expectations. All it took was an upward thrust of the chest, a suggestive tilt of the face, and you had that attention. You had what looked like power. It was a false sense of power, though, based entirely on the attention you got from the man you were speaking to. After you left, he'd not be considering you a coworker he did a favor for. You were an object of desire he got to look at a little while. He got to see your breasts and your smile and your eyes in return for a little attention. He got a little fantasy time, and when you came back, he'd expect the same.

Now, add a few years of doing that, and you sew on a stripe or two. Suddenly, you're Sgt Fatale. You go back to that guy, and he's still Amn Supply. You need something from him, and, according to military hierarchy, you are supposed to be the one in power here, not him. However, he's expecting that smile, that fantasy. Is it right to give that fantasy to him? It may seem harmless, but in order to do so you're sacrificing your own personal earned power of position over the situation for the illusionary power of your sexuality. Come crunch time, and he's breaking a safety rule or a security rule and you need to stop him -- How much authority will you have?

There's an internal struggle in that cover to me, the struggle between two parts of yourself -- the part that has valuable skills and dignity, and the part that wants to get something done the easy way. As I looked at that cover, I saw Osira, a supervillain. Supervillains always take the easy way. She used her sexuality to get ahead. Diana doesn't do that. She's clearly a sexual being, look at her outfit, but in the picture she emphasizes power and strength and rage, not sexuality.

The comment particularly got to me, though, because I suspect it could have been prevented. I wrote that analysis early Friday morning, and briefly played with a point. A point about the usual Good Girl-Bad Girl fight and how this doesn't conform to that dynamic. Normally, in such a cover, we see an emphasis on the Good-Girl's, well, "Goodness" and purity and "Niceness." Diana does not look nice. She looks like she's about to tear those snakes to pieces and then start on Osira. "Good girls" typically resemble pre-Hades Persephone. An innocent, good natural girl who is fighting to avoid being taken advantage of. She is defending her virtue. In such images, the "Good, Pure Woman" is always just as exploited as the "Bad Girl." If anything, with the "Good Girl" it's worse because there's an element of victimization. She's being swept away by unrestrained sexuality and must fight against it.

It makes me sick too. But this cover doesn't have that victimization. Diana shows some control here. She's not the victimized "Good Girl" defending virtue against the "Hussy." She does not represent an extreme. She's a normal, moderate woman who is fighting a twisted extreme of sexuality. Like all supervillains, Osira represents an unhealthy extreme, while our hero represents the healthy middle-ground. The image shows a perverted representation of femininity, of sexuality attempting to sweep Diana away, but she's not going gently or frightened or scrambling to get away. No, she's enraged, and exerting force, and ready to demonstrate not six kinds of violence on her enemy. As her creator himself points out, Diana always breaks free and overpowers her captor.

I was bothered by the comment, a bit discouraged, and genuinely annoyed because I figured that leaving in what I'd discarded would have cleared it up, even if it had disturbed the flow of the writing. I talked it over with some friends. Tekanji, who I remember when she first saw the picture mentioned her eye was drawn to the large snake around Diana's thigh, mentioned there was some Virgin/Whore dichotomy in the picture, Kalinara brought up the awful emphasis on Diana's "virginity", and Soyo perceptively pointed out the extreme polarization of sexuality in our society (which she'd already covered in this essay a few weeks ago). We managed, between the four of us, to pinpoint the difficult position of the artist. You couldn't avoid polarizing the subjects, Diana would not be seen as a moderate persona and it would bring up the Virgin/Whore dynamic if there was no sexualization on Diana's part. But, truly, in a cover with bondage and tentacles is it possible to de-sexualize a woman in a bathing suit? Not a chance. If any more sexualization was added, the Dodsons ran the risk of crossing the line to objectification and truly brining in the Good Girl-Bad Girl imagery as Diana would clearly be exploited. Kalinara and Soyo argued that the complaint of Diana being the pure and chaste woman up against the evil temptress would be less likely in that case, but it would have killed any appreciation I had for the cover. The best possible situation was the one there, with Diana powerful and ready to attack and Osira exploited, but by herself.

Promises, Promises

(I'll address comments sometime soon -- I've gotten some good ones on old posts even. In the meantime, I offer this meager piece of writing as an apology)

Green Lantern Mystery

Kevin Church, Writer, Editor, Photographer, Smut-Merchant, Muckracker, Interviewer, Perpetrator of Far Too Many Trangressions to Mention in a Month of Mondays, Cruel Taskmaster, Carrier of the Handbasket to Hell, Joker, Smoker, Midnight Toker, and All-Around Fun Guy sent me a present this week.

And it has me worried that my memory is going.

You see, I know the Green Lanterns very well. I can usually easily distinguish them, and tell you the differences, and tell you when a story is off or a personality doesn't work. I have a very clear picture in my head of all of the human Green Lanterns. If I had talent, I could draw them myself. But Kevin managed to stump me.

Kevin found a picture, somewhere on the Internet, of a Green Lantern I can't place.

He looks very familiar, though, and the most distinguishing features are prominently displayed. I should have no trouble identifying the superhero in question but I can't. I've racked my brain over it, I've looked at my records, my back issues, my archives, my private... art collection, and studied each lantern closely. I can't make a match.

But dammit, he looks so familiar, I just can't place him. Please, help me out.

Can you recognize this Green Lantern?

Steve Trevor -- In Uniform

I can see where you're coming from here, Diana. He never listens, you're not planning on marriage and he's unfit for the institution himself... But he's so damned cute, fun and charming you can't bring yourself to just blow him off.

And he gets the pilot's hat instead of the fast-food worker hat. That's a major plus.

Happy Independance Day!

What better way to celebrate the Fourth of July than with vintage war propaganda? Above is the last panel of All-Star Comics #16 -- a single-issue World War II Propaganda Extravaganza from 1943.

Hello Again, Hal

Since Scipio blogged about gender issues today...

Monday Misogyny

The Damned Depressing List linked at Newsarama.

The reaction?

Which list does "my childhood" go in?

Inward Looking

Looking back on my last two or three days weeks of posting, it strikes me that I may have become just a tiny bit self-absorbed.

Just a tiny bit.

But I don't get our society's condemnation of self-reflection. I think it's important to examine our inner selves. Our motives. Our feelings. Internal focus helps you, and it's not hurting anybody else. I can't imagine the the instance where someone would be so lost in their own moody troubles that serious harm might come to another person as a result.



I mean, you'd have to be a complete and utter moron to let that happen.

So We Only Get One Question

The night before Kalinara left for HeroesCon, she asked me if I wanted her to ask Dan Didio anything for me. I had three questions, and told her one was infinitely more important than the other two.

Why was this particular question so important?

Because I was absolutely convinced that no one at DC had even had the idea to do this.

See, I'm a big believer in ingrained cultural sexism. I think empathy and respect, these need to be taught. Our culture simply isn't set up to teach empathy to women. Everything is masculine, everything is for boys. That's why "sissy" and "throw like a girl" and such as insults. When we're raised, we're taught to identify with the masculine. That's where the traditional values of society are placed. You need to teach yourself to identify with the feminine. You need to teach yourself to value the feminine viewpoint.

That's why I stories are set up that way. Male heroes, the story revolves around them.

And I really don't understand why having this viewpoint shaken puts people on the defense. I mean, that's what Feminism's for, to shake the narrow viewpoint that centers on the male. To focus on the female for a change. It's not considered a revolutionary philosophy anymore, but really it is. The point is to change the basic wiring of society. To make Women the Norm. It's not anything against men. It's just to introduce another way to view things, a way that doesn't center on men.

So, when I see the unconcious cultural sexism, I like to call it out. I like to single out cluelessness and make people think about it. Because if you're dealing with a good hearted person, I really think they'll go "Wait, I didn't think about it from that point of view," and think differently from that point on. It's revolutionary in a little way. Sometimes it puts someone on the defense, sometimes I get caught up in my point of view, sometimes we lose our tempers, but sometimes.. Sometimes it works.

And I don't think comic book writers are bad people. I just don't think they've looked at it from the other angle. We all get stuck in our boxed stories, our rotes, our formulas, our viewpoints. Rather than be defensive, we should welcome a fresh idea!

But I digress. My point was, I really don't think that Dan Didio or his massive creative writing factory are bad people. Not at all.

I really honestly figured that they'd just never thought of what I had. And I figured, if we got it out there, it might just happen because no one had thought of it before.

So, being unable to go myself, I asked Kalinara to prove it for me. And, like the wonderful friend she is, she used her one chance to ask my question:

"Will we ever see Major Force beaten by a woman?"

It's not that there's anything wrong with the concept of Major Force as a psychotic misogynistic villain. It's a fair idea, and it works.

Nor do I have a problem with Alex DeWitt's death, or the Green Lanterns being angry and white-knight about it -- because that rings true. Men react that way. Especially heroes.

It's not even that we have this horrifically misogynistic villain who specifically seeks out female characters and hurts them, not because he wants to get at them personally but because he thinks that is the best way to hurt their male relations, and he's not a Wonder Woman villain.

Because that's a kickass concept for a Wonder Woman villain.

And to be honest, while he's just too perfect as a Wonder Woman villain, he does work elsewhere. He can be a Green Lantern villain fine without bothering me.

No, the problem, is that every time I have seen him up against a female character -- He Has Won.

I saw him fight Wonder Girl in Battle for Bludhaven, and he beat the crap out of her.

He fought a depowered Arisia in Guy Gardner: Warrior and killed her.

He fought Alex DeWitt in what is possible the most one-sided fight in Green Lantern history, and, while she put up a fight (a better fight than Cassie Sandsmark did), she had no chance at all.

To be fair, as far as I know, he's never been up against Wonder Woman, Queen Hippolyta, Artemis, Supergirl, Black Canary, Huntress, Batgirl, Power Girl, Manhunter, Donna Troy, Lady Shiva, a live Katma Tui, Brik, Boodika, Soranik Natu, or even Jade. He's never to my knowledge fought a fully-powered, fully-grown, non-civilian woman.

Because he's Kyle's villain. He's Guy's villain. He's a generic Green Lantern villain and there are no female Green Lanterns on Earth. This I understand.

But here we get back to the proper structure of the story, and the payoff. The sexist jerk who offends/hurts/threatens a female character in Act I needs to have his ass handed to him by the same female character in Act III. Not by her boyfriend, or her brother, because that's the male protector fantasy. No, it has to be by her.

And if she should die in Act I, well, if the villain's actions are based on misogyny he still needs to have his ass kicked by a woman.

I've got no problem if a writer decides to write his characters equal, treat his female character the same as his male characters and not make a distinction -- as Ron Marz seemed to be doing in Witchblade when he wrote Sara as Kyle. Kyle's has his victory, when he was personally insulted, taken by the guest star. No problem.

But when you introduce a villain that is marked as evil because he is sexist, a sexual predator of some degree (the sexual harassment in Witchblade #89), you've just brought the inequality of gender into it. And to complete a satisfying story to a female viewpoint, that inequality needs to be refuted.

The Sexist Asshole in Act I Must Have His Ass Handed to Him By a Woman in Act III.

Because if it's just a man, then it's the fulfillment of the male fantasy alone -- the WhiteKnight Protector and the injured female becomes a prop.

Even women, though, get raised with the male viewpoint and need this shaking up sometimes. I was truly surprised when I first realized it, but it fell into place and explained some of my vague disappointment with some stories.

So, I didn't figure that by not understanding this little rule I've outlined, and by being used to the typical White Knight Protector cycle, that the writers were bad people. I figured they genuinely had never considered this. So, a simple, innocent question might change things.

How did they react? According to Kalinara:

Well, I asked during the lightning round, so it was kind of funny because it was all "Yes! No! Ehhhhnnn! (buzzer noise)" then I asked and there was a very obvious stall.

Like in the old cartoons...the record getting pulled off?

And there was a sort of group stutter and Rucka says something like "Uh...sure...why not? Just...might have to wait a few years..."

And Didio recovers and quips something like "beaten by a woman? Sure! He can be just like the rest of us!"

It's sad, but I get a vain, self-centered pleasure out of being right -- even about things like this.

Besides, this is Greg Rucka who answered. He probably started plotting it in the back of his head with Sasha or Renee or Kathy right there because we know he lives vicarously through them. And I just have to wait and I'll get to finally see this jerk get beaten to a bloody pulp by a superheroine for all his stupid sexist little comments. And it will be immensely satisfying.

I am a bit disappointed, as this does mean that Kalinara's hypothesis that Phantom Lady will get to hurt him in Battle for Bludhaven #6 is wrong.

Oh well, it'll come. Maybe it'll be a resurrected Katma Tui or Arisia. That would be downright awesome. Or Soranik cutting her teeth on him. Or Brik -- Hehehe, I'd like to see him just try and hurt Brik.

(Of course, this is no excuse not to keep calling out the little things like this. If anything, it tells us it works.)

In the meantime, we get to see him piss off Hal Jordan.

First Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans

Ragnell the Foul, vainly and ridiculously wearing all of available Lady Monster traits for this event, adjusts her twin-tailed red and white striped jacket underneath her borrowed wings. She perches her tophat on the mass of hand-me-down snakes between her vintage antlers, and hops onto a makeshit, outdoor stage. She clutches a shiny new brass-tipped cane in her shiny new brass-clawed hands and before you have a chance to ponder the symbolism of this artifically amalgamated abomination, she speaks.

Step right up, folks, step right up. Welcome to the First Edition of the Carnival of Feminist Science-Fiction and Fantasy Fans! We have a lovely show today, full of many fine writers and a few artists!

First up, the featured fight of the evening: Magical Goth Princess Pretty Karen vs. the Giant Robot of WEEE. Enjoy!

Our next act, Kalinara, takes us Where No Woman Has Gone Before:

One thing though, I was always disappointed in the treatment of women. I mean Deanna Troi? She was there to bang male aliens like Riker did the women, but with idiotic babble about romance instead. And Beverly Crusher's main purpose was to be the will-they/won't-they love interest for Captain Picard.

And Raqua gives us something "for all female Star Trek fans, because most of the time, we never get what we want on the show."

In an old Looking to the Stars column, Matt Morrison offered the following send-up of "Get Your Girlfriend into Comics" articles:

Now, I know there are some people out there who may object to the idea that you should enter any relationship looking at the other person as a fixer-upper opportunity. They'll tell you that attempting what I describe here makes you no better than those women who clip articles like "How To Trick Your Man Into Taking You To The Opera" out of Cosmo. But let me tell you something. Most of these people are alone and unhappy, so who are you going to believe?

Breena Ronan shows a Must See Video, then relates it to video-game genderbending:

After listening to Joss, I have to make the connection between his comment that strong women characters are valuable for men as well as women, and the phenomenon of men taking on female avatars when they are gaming. For some reason, research shows that women gamers rarely switch genders when gaming. Because games are so populated by male avatars, women frequently play games with male avatars , but when given the choice they rarely choose gender bending.

For those of you who skipped watching the video and went straight to the text, Mr. Loodyvillanopolis kindly transcribes that speech for you and the Divine Goat has made livejournal icons out of the highlights!

And now, I must pause for some important information. Those of you who are unfamilar with the basic tenants of Feminism (which makes me wonder how found your way to this tent) are welcome at the show. Browse at your leisure, but I must caution you against pestering the performers unecessarily. They do not suffer fools lightly. There are simply too many fools to waste the time with them! Karen, after finding herself surrounded by pests, offers this helpful primer for anyone interested in actual discussion. For those who aren't interested in anything worthwhile and simply wish to be annoying, she has a few words:

I am profusely irritated that such clarification is necessary, but I shall point out that this isn't Feminism 101. Nor is it a place to whine about how feminists want to take over the world / they've already taken over the world / men are raped TOO! / you can't get a date.

This is a place for pointing out sexism in comics with white-hot rage and acid-tongued venom. I am not required to explain feminist principles, theory, or aims to you, much less endeavour to wearily soothe your ego while I explain that I don't hate men. I am not obliged to do your homework for you.

Unsure why the lady in the previous booth is so angry? Well, next up is a gentleman who might be able to clue you in:

Recent discussions about objectification of women in comics have tended to bring up the corollary question of whether men are equally objectified in comics, and if that isn’t “just as bad.” I think we’ve all seen the remixed covers by now that feature the Green Lantern’s Power Battery among other heroes’ attributes. Alas, it is but a dream, a hoax, an imaginary story. Truly it takes more than spandex over muscles to bring the objectification even close to in line with the way that women are presented by default (two of the most important words to remember in discussions such as this) on the comics cover/page.

Jeff tears down The Realism Defense:

In addition to simply being glossed over, all of these examples of sexism in RPGs also get defended by portraying critics as valuing “political correctness” over “realism,” a defense that’s especially pernicious because it goes outside the game to make claims about the world in general.

Over towards the ADD Theater, Shannon sounds off on would-be "allies":

The idea that we somehow need 'allies' that can only be satisfied if we are silent drives me batty. The whole point of allies is to stand up for people when they are exhausted from dealing with the issues or talking among their group to help soften attitudes.

Tekanji takes us through the ups and downs of gender in the CG movie Ark:

So, I finally got around to watching the movie Ark today. The first half hour or so got me really excited. The rest… well, let’s just say that the movie could have benefitted from an education regarding Women in Refrigerators.

The rest of the article is cut for massive spoilers that will ruin your ability to ever watch this movie if you read them. That being said, if you have already seen the movie or never intend to see it, please read on.

Behind this curtain, you see 100 Little Dolls contained in one woman! Note that they speak in unison as they respond to an article on female gamers:

One of the main points of his article is “that the majority of games we play don’t enforce sexual stereotype, gender biases or sexist principles”—that rather, instead, our conceived notions that video games are just for guys has been fed continuously by the media. True enough that the media treats geek girls as anomalies, but are the majority of the games out there asexual (?), or rather, unbiased, instead of being in favor of men and masculinity?

Moving along, take note of the Aquarium. Inside, you'll find the Amazing Drama Turtle questioning the Feminist_Fandom livejournal community as to personality differences between male and female villains.

Diagonal to the Aquarium, Alianne ponders the complexity of villains:

Well, I've never really been content with most non-anime cartoons because the villains in most of them are evil simply because they are. There is no complexity involved and reality isn't that simple. Take the story snow white, for example. The evil stepmother decides to do away with the princess because said princess is prettier? I mean, come on! What happened to them killing the current heir to get the throne for themselves. That reason, I would have accepted but for something as superficial as beauty? Evil for the sake of having someone to be evil.

Over in the concessions area, you'll see comics artist Lea Hernandez generously offer four grants to talented female webcomickers:

In order to foster women publishing independently, with economy, and as owners of what they create, I will award FOUR grants annually, of a year's free hosting at WebComicsNation.com, to women making a regularly-updating new or existing webcomic of any genre or style.
The recipients will have unlimited data storage and bandwidth, the ability to choose to support their work with ads, and a storefront for selling merchandise.

In response to criticism of this gesture, you can see a defense by fellow artist Colleen Doran, along with a little personal information on how she got into reading and drawing comic books,

As longer as we're looking at professional comic book creators here, earlier this month writer Gail Simone weighed in with her views on Fan-Fiction.

In an exhibit with no actual man-on-man action (I'm sure those of us seeking it know where to find by now, though -- this is the Internet after all), Lis Riba muses on yaoi/slash fanfic written by women for women.

Jess McCabe is reading an erotic graphic novel with an interesting premise:

The book concerns Dorothy (from the Wizard of Oz), Alice (in Wonderland) and Wendy (from Peter Pan) - all grown up, the three characters meet in a hotel and embark on a sexual adventure. Part of this involves retelling their stories - the ones we are all so familiar with - as tales of sexual awakening.

Jenn finds a dismissive reaction to her criticism of a truly worrisome new comic book character:

I was incredibly disheartened to read this treatment of the criticizing voice of the Great Ten. This paragraph ignored the bulk of the criticism, which has been levelled primarily at the characters of Thundermind and Mother of Champions. The use of the phrase "mislabelled as a misogynistic creation" and the sentence referring to MOC as a Divine Mother archetype not only makes it sound like critics like me who firmly believe MOC to be a sexist caricature are speaking out of our asses (i.e. haven't done any research) but suggests that we couldn't possibly have said anything worth repeating.

Here's a basic single-issue comic book plot:

GA #54, the short version: Green Arrow and Black Lightning are looking for evil Doctor Light. Evil Dr. L. is conveniently only a few blocks away attacking Kimiyo Hoshi, the good Doctor Light. Evil Dr. L steals Kimiyo's powers and flies off cackling. Green Arrow finds Kimiyo in the hospital and is attacked by Mirror Master and Killer Frost, and runs off to fight them. Kimiyo is left bleeding on the floor and never seen again.

Except for the last line (which in a serial medium like comics happens), it doesn't sound so bad, right? But a brief synopsis takes quite a bit out of the execution. Marionette explains exactly what was wrong with the execution, up to and including the points that may need Trigger Warnings for sexual assault survivors in Incandescent: Losing the Light

Next door, Valerie examines another single issue, one that involves an actual sexual assault:

"Squadron Supreme" #4 is all about the rape that made Edith (Inertia) a warrior. Because when yer dealin' with women there has to be a reason, and more likely than not that reason is...you guessed it, sexual assault.

I strongly advise everyone to continue reading the comments, at least to this point.

Alau offers thoughts on discovering that she tests as a "Catwoman" personality. (And this person better answers her question about Wonder Woman)

Collie covers a lot of ground in this post on objectification, body image, clothing, inequality, gaming, comics, sports, and more:

If we had to pick one word to describe superhero men, it'd probably be "strength." Male supers are taller, stronger, shown with wider shoulders and narrower waists than normal men. Their abs are ripplingly developed, their jaws are square, their upper arms and thighs are well muscled. Those things may make them seem sexier, but it doesn't reduce them to sexual icons — they are active, and their muscles underline their power within the world. In effect, they are presented as exciting ideals to identify with, rather than as sexual toys.

If we had to pick one word for superhero women, though, it would not be strength — it would be "sex." Women have impossibly huge breasts (sometimes larger than their heads), strangely long and usually bare legs which are lengthened with high heels and slender or bare hips, large full lips, and imposing masses of unruly long hair. This might be fun in the bedroom, but it's likely to get them killed in a fistfight. Heck, were I a super-villain in such a world, I'd keep a minion working in the emergency rooms of all the local hospitals. Their sole job would be to record all the athletic women coming in with broken ankles — as possible super-heroines who'd fallen off their heels in a fight!

In addition to a mind that puts Paula Von Gunther to shame, she has pictures to go along with her many other points!

Though not directly in response to Collie's minor mention of hosiary, but still close enough that I can't resist giving them neighboring stages, Stephanie Chan stands up for fishnet stockings:

I wanted to wear all black! I wanted a black swimsuit, a black jacket, black buccaneer boots, and fishnet stockings. I don’t know why, but Alex Toth’s Black Canary absolutely captured me.

I must admit Black Canary captured me too, particularly what she stood for in her unusual outfit. So much so that I dedicated my first weekly feature when I joined Stephanie at Blog@Newsarama to explaining the feminist significance of this panel:



Next up, you see Liz's mixed reaction to the third X-Men movie:

First Mystique, then Rogue, then Jean, it’s like the raging anxiety about women being in touch with power had to hammer itself right off the movie screen. I enjoyed X3, but it pissed me off, especially the end!

Just across the fairway, Mickle lets you know what Eva Peron has in common with Jean Grey:

However, ALW didn't think that a musical with a woman as the lead, rather than just a lead would work (for whatever reason). He didn't think her husband's character was really the right one to pull it off either, so he created Che, Antonio Banderas's character.

She finished just in time for another act at the same booth as the first X3 review: LeGuin, Boys’ Own Adventure, and the Fine Art of Genderfucking

This book was written in 1968.

And nothing else written since has carved such a significant place for itself in both popularity and sheer genderfucking.

I repeat: this book was written in 1968

Elizabeth answers the above:

Lemme see. Okay, very few modern books period (nevermind SF novels, nevermind feminist SF novels) have entered the canon to the extent that The Left Hand of Darkness has, so frankly I think that's a straw man. If you set up a definition of success that more or less only includes TLHoD, it seems to me a little disingenuous to then disallow Joanna Russ for being less accessible than Le Guin. I think there's an unexamined catch-22 in that argument: Russ doesn't count because she's not popular; she's not popular because she's offputting; she's offputting because she's radical.

The normally political Maia geeks out for us:

So in honour of the greatness of Joss I've made a list of the top 5 most feminist episodes of Buffy, and just to show I've realised it wasn't all destroying phalluses and overturning stereotypes I've also listed the top 5 least feminist episodes of Buffy.

The author of this Chris Lightfellow story describes it best in her submission email

I wrote this 'fic to get a better grasp on the character Chris Lightfellow, from the video game Suikoden III, and to play around with ideas of how she (one of the few female knights in her country) might feel about gender roles in her society. Please do _not_ confuse the game character with her manga incarnation, as for the manga her spine was removed to make room for heaps of insecurity, daddy issues, and enlarged tear ducts.

Constance Ash of Deep Genre relates a ballet to Buffy the Vampire Slayer in a multi-part series that forces me to fudge the nomination cut-off, from Part IV:

In a sense, Mina is a foremother of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. In Buffy it is the male characters who are changed into monsters by sex. In the place of the Brotherhood of True Men who destroy Lucy in an ecstasy of voluptuous force, Buffy slays these monster males – or, on occasion, transforms them.

The whole series is brilliant.

Ariel shares some thoughts stemming from a presentation she made on Racialized Trafficking of Bodies in World of Warcraft:

I’m happy my first presentation to a big group (outside of the classroom) went so well. I closed by saying although I believe video games in many ways are sexist, racist, and classist, it’s okay to both critique and enjoy them, and that I’m optimistic people like us can demand games become more progressive.

With all of these lovely submissions and nominations, I wasn't sure whether to include something from this very blog, or if the analysis of the panel earlier was sufficient. It felt unfair to hog two posts on the Carnival even rationalizing it as "two different blogs". I broke other rules such as the date restrictions with stretchier rationalization ("It's the first one," I told myself, "Technically everything ever written falls under your submission period). I agonized over it, and as I am a shameless attention seeker who loves to see her own writing -- and I do write at more than one blog -- I chose to do the unforgivable and offer a second sample of my humble efforts, a stream of conciousness scribbling that touches on why I personally felt an event like this was needed. My sincerest apologies to those of you who submitted more than one nomination and saw it cut out. Takes off top-hat and bows her head apologetically

And with that, (Replaces Tophat) our unfortunately short show draws to a close. I'm more than pleased with the turn-out, especially as this was the first-ever carnival. My When Fangirls Attack partner Kalinara has graciously decided to host the Second Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans at Pretty, Fizzy Paradise on July 18th, details here.

If your craving for thought-provoking reading is still unsatisfied, there are other venues of feminist reading out right now. The Second Erase Racism Carnival has been up for over a week now. And the Second Carnival to End Sexual Violence is up at Abyss2Hope. And the big one, the The Mainstream Carnival of Feminists is expected on the Fifth of July. Bitch|Lab hosted the previous edition and if you haven't seen it I urge you to drop by.

Hat comes off again, takes a bow.

I'd like to thank everyone who submitted, nominated, and spread the word about this Carnival. And I'd like to thank you for reading. Please come by again, and please, feel free to link this and the future editions whereever applicable.

After another slight bow, the monstrosity replaces her hat and hops down from the stage.

((EDIT: In my sleep deprived state this morning, I left out 4 wonderful posts that had been on my list -- My apologies for that. Merc Wanderer's Chris Lightfellow fanfiction, Valerie's review of Squadron Supreme #4, Constance Ash's piece on vampire ballet, and Shannon's article on Allies are edited in as of Sunday afternoon. Sorry!))
((And, for those of you wondering, this is why I skipped my regular Saturday feature on this blog. Figured it more than made up for it.))

Does This Sound Like An Answer?

Sweet Lord Ares on an Alaskan Fishing Trip, I take one Friday night to catch a late show after work and I come home to this:

NRAMA: Noticeably absent (and for some time) is a female creator in that group. Big picture wise, why hasn't a women creator made it into the tight circle of Marvel creators?

JQ: Because currently there aren’t any female writers working on any of our major titles. That said there are female editors at the summit.

So basically you didn't invite any female creators to the editorial meeting that plans your creative direction, because you haven't hired any female creators?

Excuse me, I need to go dig out my clue-bat.

Dammit Lois

After seeing Superman Returns, one thought nags at my brain.

Mild Spoilers

Lois Lane, you utter moron, don't you know that when you're in an airplane and the oxygen masks come down you're supposed to put your own mask on before you help others?

I mean, seriously, that air pressure thing affects you getting drunk. Better safe than sorry.

Anyway, even including the laughable aeronautical errors in that scene (which made me laugh), I really enjoyed this movie.

Even Lex's stereotyped girlfriend was a riot.

Damned List A Side Progress Report

If you thought we'd dropped this, you haven't been reading long enough. We're still compiling a list of all characters at DC and Marvel superhero Comics that have been sexually assaulted. The whole story's here, and here. The last updates are here and here.

Once again, this is just a preliminary list. The Clear list is just to jumpstart your memories.

We have a host being set up, and we plan on visually verifying everything on this list. This project is far from over.

But here's a progress report on the women. Please peruse, correct, and add as necessary in the comments. Then head over to Kalinara for the men.

Our List So Far

Attempted;
Secret (YJ#7)
Diana/Wonder Woman (WW#10)
Diana/Wonder Woman (WW#51)
Jenny Hayden/Jade (GL#109)
Shining Knight (SK#4)
Spoiler (Robin #111)
Hawkgirl (Hawkman, ish # needed)
Storm (forced marriage, X-treme X-men 11-16)
Kitty Pryde (Forced marriage, Uncanny X-men 179)
Lara of Krypton (false pretenses, forced marriage; World of Krypton trade)


Actual:
Felicia Hardy/Black Cat (SM/BC mini)
Elektra (Elektra: Assassin #1)
Grace Choi (Outsiders #17)
Jessica Drew/Spider-Woman (Ref Needed -- Perpetrator was the Purple Man)
Mia Dearden/Speedy II (GA #42)
Crazy Jane (DP)
Swift/Shen-Li Min (The Authority #27)
Engineer/Angela Spica (The Authority #27)
Rogue (Ref Needed)
Carol Danvers/Ms. Marvel (Avengers#200)
Abby (Ref Needed)
Red Sonja (Kull and the Barbarians #3)
Emma Frost (Ref Needed)
Big Barda (Action Comics #592-593)
Cora (Atlantis Chronicles)
Mirage (NTT -- Need ish #)
Calliope (Sandman)
Catwoman (Her Sister's Keeper)
Queen Hippolyta (WW#1)
Atlanna (Incest, Atlantis Chronicles)
Sue Dibny (IDC #3)
Helen Bertinelli/Huntress (Huntress miniseries ??)
Jennifer Walters/She-Hulk (SH#7)
Engineer/Angela Spica (The Authority #21)
She-Hulk (Sens. She-Hulk ish # needed)
Kate Bishop (YA Special #1)
Katherine Anne Summers (Uncanny X-Men 156-157)
Saturn Girl (false pretense, forced marriage, ref needed)
Sally Sonic (Statuatory, Bulleteer #4)
Spoiler (Statutory, ref needed)
Terra (Statutory, New Teen Titans v1, issue 39, page 11)
Cassie Sandsmark/Wonder Girl (Statutory, TT Annual #1 -- Age?)
Dazzler (False pretenses, Longshot's luck power, ref needed)
Marrow (Weapon X: The Draft)


Implied/Subtextual:
Lian Harper (Outsiders #19)
Dinah Lance/Black Canary II (GA: The Longbow Hunters)
Arisia (Warrior #42)
Elektra (Daredevil #181)
Dream Girl (Universo Project)
Phantom Lady (IC#1)
Alicia (Fantastic Four #255)
Cobweb (TS#1)
Barbara Gordon (The Killing Joke)
Starfire (Ref needed)
Debbie Darnell/Star Sapphire (JLA #115)
Salamandra (Fantastic Four #515)
Supergirl/Kara Zor-El (Incest, SupergirlV5#5)

Symbolic:
Arisia (GLC #213)
Susan Richards/Invisible Woman (FF Annual #23)
Susan Richards/Invisible Woman (FF 278)
Jessica Jones (Alias 25)
Dinah Lance/Black Canary II (GA/GL #76)
Helena Bertinelli/Huntress (JLI#30)
Rachel Summers (Mind control, Ref Needed)
Power Girl (Zero Hour buildup -- Ref Needed)
Donna Troy (WW #136)
Oracle/Barbara Gordon (BoP #85)
Imra/Saturn Girl (Mind control, Ref Needed)
Donna Troy (RoDT)
Catwoman (CW#50)
Debbie Darnell/Star Sapphire (IDC/JLA-SSoSV Ref Needed)
Carol Ferris/Star Sapphire (Pretty much all of Vol 2 GL)
Dawnstar (Forced transformation, Ref Needed)
Zinda Blake (Mind control, Ref Needed)
Kitty Pryde (Mind cotnrol, Ref Needed)
Dr Light II/Kimiyo Hoshi (GA #57)
Jean Grey (Dark Phoenix Saga)
Diana/Wonder Woman (WW#160)
Courtney Whitmore/Stargirl (Mind control, ref needed)
Supergirl II/Cir-El (Forced transformation, ref needed)

Perpetrators:
Martika (GG: Warrior)
Tarantula (Nightwing)
The Mist (Starman #16)
Psylocke (X-Men, ish # needed)
Circe (Wonder Woman)


Mentioned, but even circumstances still unknown -- Sharon Ventura


Clear List:
Lois Lane
Ma Hunkel/Red Tornado
Maggie Sawyer
Renee Montoya
Hope O'Dare
Cassandra Cain
Sandra Woosan/Lady Shiva
Wasp
Andromeda
Katma Tui
Black Widow

Quick Notes

I've been saying for a while that I was mad about Wonder Woman supporting cast member Etta Candy becoming Dietwoman, Slim-Fast USAF Officer, Wife of the Man Who is Rightfully Diana's Love Interest, but I didn't realize just how much superior the Golden-Age Etta Candy was to the watered-down version until I saw these panels.



I hereby reinvest my hope that there's room in the relaunch for a retcon/regression of Etta Candy to her Golden Age incarnation.

Anyway, this week: Kyle Rayner. Here's hoping the artist smartens up about the panel angles in Ion. Nobody is reading to see his face. Stop giving us the front view.

Jenn's thoughts about blogging, and her new Wiki project on Ethnic Stereotypes in Comics. She's requested some help getting it off the ground, but all I can really give her is Italians and she doesn't have a spot for them. Any other experts?

I'm really liking Planet Karen lately. Not sure Can't imagine why, though.

I got Justice.

And Dora's got a feminist manifesto... feminifesto... womanifesto... Ehh..
Dora's got a cool idea.

And for those of you still curious about Yesterday's Quote -- Anon, a moose gave it a guess and nailed the quote's origin in the comments. You may speculate on the meaning of this development, or you can go with my explanation.

I'd also like to reclaim the term "Harpy" for feminist empowerment. Anyone else?

Reminder

Deadline for the Carnival of Feminist Sc-Fi Fans is only 2 days away!

After-Monday Misogyny: The Quote

I was saving this for next week. Tonight I was thinking of a post on the impending return of Egg Fu, how Judd Winick screwed over John Stewart, or why I love Hal Jordan (and no, the main point wasn't his butt -- or any of the other physical parts that Ivan Reis draws so prettily). I changed my mind.

You see, some of the reaction to yesterday's post -- indeed, some of the reaction to the WiR-list, girl-wonder.org, pro-women projects and feminist posts in general convinced me that another learning post was in order.

I'm going to give you a quote this morning. It's several months old. Tonight, after work, I will post the link to where I first saw it.

Most likely I'm especially vicious for lack of a true life target. In nearly every other office there has been "The Woman I Hate." I only work with one other female since I was moved across the hall to actually work again, and she's fun to be around.

Until then, please, discuss.

Monday Misogyny

I'll acknowledge that Misogyny may not necessarily be the most accurate term here. The comment in question is so confusing it's difficult to make an exact classification, though it does strike me as a definite form of anti-feminism, which is why this one goes under this heading today. You see, Passive-Aggressiveness can be a greatly confusing tactic. It results in offense, and it becomes difficult to pin down precisely where the offense came from. So, I've prepared a training exercise.

In the exchange below, I'm going to reproduce one of Kalinara's posts in it's entirety (she's given me permission to do this), and then I'm going to quote you from somewhere around the thirtieth comment. The commenter names will all be obscured, but the actual content is completely reproduced so you can judge what happened without looking back at the names.

What I need you, dear readers, to do for me is to explain to me precisely what Fan #1 is talking about, and what in the original post prompted such a comment. And then I need you explain exactly what point Fan #3 inadvertantly proved, how she proved it, and was she too hard on Fan #1?

This is a long one..Original Post:

An Open Letter to Male Comic Fans:
Recent developments over the cause of comic-book feminism have gotten me thinking. I don't know if a lot of guys really understand what feminism's really about.

At least what *my* brand of feminism is really about.

So I'll tell you.

It's not really about the costumes, be they midriffs, boob windows, fishnet stockings. Yeah, some of them are silly. Some of them are stupid. And yeah, when I think they are, I'm gonna damn well say so But I don't want female characters to go around in shapeless tracksuits any more than you do. I like most of the costumes, and while I might prefer it more if Kara Zor-El wore the Matrix Supergirl's costume and cheered when Huntress changed to the non-midriffed bodysuit, that's not what I really care about.

It's not about breast size. Look women come in all shapes and sizes. And in general, when it comes down to it, I like the variety in comics. I'd like to see more variety in comics. I certainly don't want Power Girl or Phantom Lady to suddenly become a b-cup or anything like that, (though I much prefer Phantom Lady in the recent BfB art style than the Freedom Fighters.) Regardless of what certain folks might think, I like Power Girl's breasts.

It's not about making comics less fun for guys. I don't begrudge you your action, attractive characters and power fantasies. I like them too. I don't begrudge you your eye-candy, though I want more male eye candy to balance out.

So what is it about?

It's about:

# Rape/Sexual Assault Storyline being few and far between. It's got incredible evocative power. But only when used sparingly and subtly. It loses all sorts of impact when everyone and her mother has it in their backstory. It should Never be the default method of establishing strength and development in a female character.


# Female characters being defined as more than just their male counterparts with boobs. Having two X-Chromosomes is not a sufficiently defined personality. Female characters should be as complex and developed as their male counterparts.


# Female characters being no more or less sacrificed for a storyline than their male counterparts. Characters have to die sometimes, we understand that. But a hero character should neither be specifically targeted nor specifically spared because of their gender.


# Female characters being on average of an equivalent competency level with their male counterparts. For every Steph Brown there should be an Oracle. For every Jennie-Lynn Hayden a Katma Tui. The woman should not always be the weakest of her ilk.


# Writers caring as much about the consistency of the characterizations of their female characters as they do their males. We love these characters for their personalities as much as their appearances and powers, these should be kept consistent. Growth is a good thing, rampant out of character-ness for the sake of the plot is NOT. For a man or a woman.

# Gender not being used as a crutch to stick to the same old archetypes. Men can be nurturers, women can be ball-breakers. Men can be sensitive, women can be sex-crazed. Variety is a wonderful wonderful thing.

It's about respect.

I don't want to spoil your fun. I don't want to make you feel bad or defensive. I don't think you're all misogynists and sexist jerks. I don't really see anything wrong, for example, with you liking to see attractive female characters in revealing clothing.

I just want the gals to have personalities, brains and skill to go with their beauty. I want female characters to have the same respect and consideration as male characters. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Our desires aren't mutually exclusive. We've got no reason to be adversaries. It would be very easy for us both to be happy. Think about it

This post gets to thirty comments before I see one that really sticks out to me, so I'll be nicknaming the commenter "Fan #1"

Nice piece. Of course, the two main things that would need to change is there to be more female leads (either in their own book or another series) and more female creators (not always working on female characters, either).

But the thing feminist comic fans need to remeber, is that it's going to take time. Rome wasn't built in a day, neither was the comic industry. Things are changing to the better for women in comics (both in the books and in real life), but there is still more to be done. Guys understand that. But it seems that a good bit (not all, because not everyone is the same) of comic book feminists are a VERY impatient lot (and concidering the patience of "regular" comic fans, that's saying something).

We know you want to make things better. We even want to help where we can (because, I'm sure it wasn't just feminist comic fans who wrote in and saved Manhuter and Spider-Girl). But when you get impatient, you really hurt the cause more than help it. This is just a little something you should keep in mind, when you want to go off on rants about something you don't like. Normal comic book fans look stupid when they do it, having a "cause" behind you doesn't make you look any less so.

Let's keep making those strides to make better comics for men and women (has anyone here been reading Witchblade lately? Man, that is some good stuff.). But don't let the passion you feel for the issues, cause you to turn people sour to your points, simply bacause of your tone and attitude in expressing them.

When someone is screaming in your ears, the reflex is to cover your ears. Not listen more intently.

Just a little something to think about... :)

Within ten minutes, Fan #2 replies (With a slight edit for the name):

[Addressing Fan #1], you remind me of Terry Long.

It's a full hour before Fan #3 comes along, and feels a need to point something out:

When someone is screaming in your ears, the reflex is to cover your ears. Not listen more intently.

Conversely, when someone continually refuses to listen, the reflex is to raise your voice.

You're very quick to take this opportunity to point out the shortfalls of feminist comic fans, when none of these shortfalls apply to Kalinara's post.

The original poster returns:

[Addressing Fan #1]: Female Leads and Female Creators are all well and good, but the thing is that respect should be across the board. Many male creators clearly respect women, many female characters are written respectfully even when not the star. There's no reason to segregate ourselves to just stories with female leads written by women.

[Addressing Fan #2]: Heh.

[Addressing Fan #3]: Conversely, when someone continually refuses to listen, the reflex is to raise your voice.

There's definitely that factor. We've spent centuries not being listened to, being overlooked and disregarded, so it's perhaps understandable that now that we're actually getting somewhere, well, we're impatient.

Fan #1:

[Addressing Fan #2]: How so? I'm genuinely curious.

[Addressing Fan #3]: True enough. But then, some people won't hear you, if you had the "voice of God" telling them something. Sometimes, you just have to chalk some people up as a lost cause and focus on finding those who aren't.

And I think it fit in fine with Kali's piece, insomuch as she seemed to think men don't understand "the cause". While I think many do, but get turned off by some of the tactics and attitudes some feminist comic fans employ. It's yin and yang here. Both sides have their weak points.

Kali: A key factor in respect if equalit and/or balance. And the comic industry isn't (although it is much better than it used to be). With each new generation of creators coming in, I think things will only imporve. Afterall, a lot of the creators who hold on to those sexist conventions, also grew up in thimes when that was considered "normal". Today's younger creators know that's not true anymore and act accordingly (both in their writing and personal lives).

But as I said, it's still going to take time. I understand the impatience (some) women have. But that doesn't mean it should be acceptable, anymore than the sexism they deplore should be.

I think what it really comes down to, for me, is exactly how women express the issues. Sure, everyone jumps on something that's "wrong." But how many also praise what's "right?" Not nearly as many. I know you, Ragnell and a few others do, but you guys hardly make up the whole of "feminist comic fans." There is very much a lack of "respect" from the feminist comic fan movement, IMO, by that lack of "fair play" in reporting events and issues. If all one does is complain about the bad, but never acknowledges the good, how can you expect someone to really listen to you, no matter how LOUD you get? Who listens to someone who is always complaining about something?

As I said at the start, a key point to repect is balance. But it's not just men who need to work on it, but the women, too. Perhaps that is something to think about for another "open letter" style entry. I certainly think you are up to the task (as this entry showed). :)

Fan #3 reads more than enough:

True enough. But then, some people won't hear you, if you had the "voice of God" telling them something. Sometimes, you just have to chalk some people up as a lost cause and focus on finding those who aren't.

Good point. I won't even bother reading or responding to your comments anymore.

Fan #1:

>>Good point. I won't even bother reading or responding to your comments anymore.<<

Thank you for proving my point for me.

For today's Monday Misogyny, please readers, explain to me what exactly happened here and weigh in -- impartially -- on whether this is misogyny or a hair-trigger in action. Both Fan #1 and Fan #3 used passive-aggressive tactics when arguing, as those tactics are the bane of the candied civility that tends to replace actual civil discourse and productive debate. But what exactly in the original post was Fan #1 responding to? What set Fan #3 off? Was Fan #2 justified in his comparison, and was it an insult or a misguided compliment?

The original comments are still intact back at Pretty Fizzy Paradise so that you can check them for accuracy, but I'd prefer you not take the names into account while trying to explain. Although if you go over there, you'll see Fan #3 broke her promise.