We interrupt your regularly scheduled superhero-themed programming for an impromptu rant about a vampire book.

Okay, I picked up Anita Blake: Guilty Pleasures out of morbid curiosity.

I've heard a lot of nasty things about Laurel K. Hamilton, so I fully expected to be angry at her. I braced myself for it. (See, this is how you can tell I'm a superhero comics fan. I regularly pay for things which I know will piss me off.)

However, I wasn't quite prepared for this.



Five pages in, and the artist fucks up before the writer does.

I'm sorry, if the narration says "The button she's wearing doesn't bode well for the evening" you sure as hell had better make the button readable! Obviously, this is a difficult thing trying to translate a prose work to comic format -- but unlike most adaptations the writer is trying to use the medium and you are not helping.

And shouldn't the damned editor have made certain that translated properly when the pages were printed?

And how the fuck do you work in comics and not know that your 11x17 page is going to be considerably smaller when it's finally printed? How do you not compensate somehow?

Guilty Pleasures creative team, you are now officially on my shitlist. I have no fucking clue who you are, or what else you've done, but this panel just pisses me off.

Bastards.

That is all.

Just finished Birds of Prey #99

The lesbian subtext is strong in this one.

Just Because I Like It Doesn't Mean It's Good

Today I read something that looked like it could possibly have a good point, but the writer's objectivity had already been shot to hell in the previous posts on the blog. Couldn't even read it without thinking about the prior inconsistencies, but the start seemed promising. I ended up just skimming it.

The few words I did pick up had me looking for a point, and not just any point. I wanted a particular point that I hadn't been able to verbalize yet. I wasn't thinking so much of the post itself, but of the posts before it, and the inconsistancy seen in those critiques. It reminded me, and these are two things that won't seem related on the surface, of a point I'd seen elsewhere.

Bear with me, these are related. Days earlier on a different blog, I saw one hell of a point in the comments:

While your overall point is well taken - death and mutilation as a substitute for actual character development and storytelling re often a sign of bad or lazy writing, just like interpreting "action" to mean "fight scenes" is lazy - I see far more fans than creators obsessing over characters to the point of revering them more than real people. This preoccupation with "don't you dare do this and that to a character I like" tends to undercut the point of wanting to read better stories. If fans cared about real people - say, the real people working on the comics they read - more than fictional characters, there would be a better way of putting these entreaties.

(Emphasis mine)

I touched on this a little earlier when I got upset that so many found (and no, that writer has not yet answered me) a moratorium on female character death to be a good idea somehow.

I've stepped around this for too long, afraid I'd hurt my own arguments, my friends' arguments, or just plain too many people's feelings.

I've seen three forces at work over the past year, three forces that are always at work in any fan community. They are often at odds with each other, but right now it's getting ridiculous.

We all have an innate Fannishness when it comes to our favorite fictional constructs themselves. We see ourselves in them, see our mothers, our fathers, our significant others or just admirable traits we'd like to see ourselves, our families and our friends. As such, we can take the decisions made using these characters very personally.

Most of us have Creator Loyalty towards the writers and artists who handle our favorite characters the way we prefer. It makes us gloss over their mistakes, ignore even blatant problems in their work, and sometimes defend them to a ridiculous extent. Those of us with friends in the industry are especially vulnerable to this.

And lastly, everyone has some degree of Social Conscience. This where the actual analysis comes in, and we notice inequalities. The women only fulfill certain roles. This is where we notice that the nonwhite characters are being pushed to the background. Here's where we notice that all of the characters in samesex relationships are dying, or look to be dying very soon. It where we notice one writer has the same weakspot with all characters who have X in common. It's where we notice that our favorite characters that have X in common are all getting the short end of the same stick.

Fannishness and creator loyalty fuck up social conscience, beyond belief.

I know this, because I read just about every comics blog that touches social commentary in existence. (If you see someone blogging about race in comics or gender politics or sexuality that doesn't ever get linked at one of my blogs, please email me the post address.)

Over time, it becomes really obvious when the first two have overrun the third.

I guarantee I'm going to regret this post. Tomorrow, I will completely wish I hadn't written it. But Elayne's comment wasn't commented on in that thread. And it's not like this was a long comment thread.

It's an uncomfortable truth, because with out some fannishness and some loyalty, we're simply not fans. But how do we keep fannishness and creator loyalty from negatively influencing any social commentary on our favorite characters?

I really don't see a solution. At least, not one for a community. I can examine myself on a personal level and listen to what other fans are saying about my favorites. But I don't know about anyone else.

Plot Conveniently Removed

Yeah, like Beefcake/Cheesecake Appreciation Week was going to go by without a shot of Kyle Rayner in his short-shorts.

Queer Legion (QL) has more at Planetary Chance Machine.

The Point

I wasn't going to do an entry for this Carnival, but things change.

Specifically, things changed because I read this. I saw the obvious strange assumption in the review and I replied, perhaps a bit snarkily. (I'm known to do that. Marionette and a few shocked people on livejournal can tell unflattering stories about when I snark before I think. My social training is from Italian-American family dinners, military service, my macho job, and online geekdom. Sharp, cruel statements reign supreme and gain respect.) I received a rather exasperated reply, which went off into a tangent. I'm not going to talk about the conversation over there, I'm just going to address the tangent.

Let's clip a couple segments of her response to talk about:

That being said, witchhunts based on art that shows big tits or hookers or (sometimes quite clumsy and stupid) scenes of rape does not really make a huge difference in terms of making change outside a small corner of the blogosphere. Only bridges built between the male & female sectors of comix fandom will get any sort of real change accomplished.

(Strange, that's what I thought I was trying do with a linkblog that connected with no commentary and linked to all sides of the issue -- of course, I'm getting ahead of myself here)

At the end of the day, the only thing justifying writing a blog is to express honestly how you feel

The first part is important, but the last part is where I disagree completely.

I write, and I read other blogs, to learn.

If you look at my early archives, you'll find a number of opinions and posts you wouldn't see now. the wording is different, the subject matter is different. I think much of it is funnier. I used to just do reviews, and point out things from time to time.

The point where that changed is the point where I found one of my posts linked in the Sixth Carnival of Feminists (hosted by Reappropriate). I'd been at Philobiblon by random wandering before, and commented. I think that may be how they found my little Wonder Woman post.

Now up until that point I was in the community I was used to, comics fandom. Bloggers were mostly message boarders who had gotten sick of the free for all on message boards they didn't moderate, and decided to stake their own claim in cyberspace. It was very familiar territory, full of people I was used to dealing with. I'm still very fond of this territory, but the political blogosphere was new and interesting.

And the "personal is political" and sociological blogs were even better.

I was so excited I volunteered immediately to host an edition of the Carnival. I was actually very disappointed to have to wait so many months, but I got busy in the meantime.

From Reappropriate and Philobiblon I followed every link that looked promising. I absorbed as much as I could like a sponge. Prior to this I had just been dipping my toes in the waters of Feminist blogging with some of my "feminine view of comics" type posts. I was always up for critical analysis. This section of the blogosphere was like getting a brand new toolbox for Christmas after you'd been using just a screwdriver and a hammer. I applied these tools to my own area of expertise, comic books, and found that they were just perfect for what I'd wanted to say.

My writing was clearer, and more precise, but somehow just never clear enough. At the same time, Kalinara and I had started When Fangirls Attack. Other people were writing about the exact same subject that stirred my creativity. Most of the earlier ones used the basic tools, but eventually we found ones who were using tools so complicated there wasn't even room in my toolbox for them yet.

Through this larger part of the blogosphere, I was able to share what I knew with the rest of my community, and I was able to reach out to the small areas where the two communities crossed. As I did that, I was able to expand my own horizons, and refine the rougher ideas.

This is still going on.

This is more than simply self-expression. This is an exchange of ideas. This is interaction. This is communication.

Most importantly, this is learning.

It may only change things in this small community, but it does change this community.

More importantly, it changes individuals, and individuals change worlds.

Perhaps that statement is too optimistic. Perhaps both statements are optimistic.

I can say one thing is true. It has changed this individual.

And that change may not mean anything to world, but it means the world to me.

No, Kali, I haven't forgotten about Beefcake/Cheesecake week...

Here's a Wonder Woman picture that gave me a laugh.

Ion #10 Cover

Okay, this really spoilery cover just made me love the writer, the artist, everyone involved. I am having 90s editorial stunt flashbacks, and this time its a good thing.

I haven't read through closely yet.

They're up.

On first glance:
-- No Wonder Woman. It looks like bimonthly meant delays like the one that moved issue three to November, and issue four to December push books back an extra month anyway!
-- No Green Lantern mainbook.
-- No Firestorm.

But:
-- We get another Green Lantern Showcase. The issue with Katma Tui's first appearance will be inside!!!
-- Best case scenario, the cover to Manhunter means that Judd Winick's not working at DC anymore, if I remember the man's words correctly. Most likely, it's them playing around.
-- Captain Comet is still Captain Comet in the solicits!

Carnival Time!

The Sixth Edition of the Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans is up at the Hathor Legacy.

The Seventh Edition will be at Racy Thoughts on November 20th, details forthcoming.

And, as always, I am still on the lookout for hosts. Email me at ragnellthefoul[AT]hotmail[DOT]com.

(Also notable (though tangential): The political Carnival of Feminists is celebrating its first anniversary on October 18th with the catch-all theme of Feminist Blogging, submissions deadline is Tuesday Evening, I'd imagine GMT (since the host is in England).)

Please repost whereever you can!

Oh, and this is an especially notable item from the Carnival for Marvel Fans!

Link

I was looking for an excuse to link this post, but I can't think of one.

Kalinara had a suggestion, maybe a Beef/Cheesecake Appreciation Week is in order?

From the good artists, of course.

Since I'm doing memes anyway...

Courtesy Random Panels.

Memes you shouldn't answer while drunk.

Spencer unearthed an old Random Panels meme, and set out a challenge.

I have used the linked meme-machine to illustrate the most natural concept that comes to mind -- A Bearded Nun from Outer Space.



The Holy Feathered Order of Azjeeckle centers around a single convent on Tiricia VII. This convent is a training school that teaches spiritual discipline, character building, holy combat skills, and the arts of Tirican Energy Manipulation. One of their final vows is to leave the convent for several years to put these skills towards for the good of society. After a certain period of time, the survivors return to teach others these skills.

Sister Bluebeard has just left the convent for the first time in her life. She heads for the bright lights Baluzrom City, accompanied only by her wits, her weapons, and a Born-Again demonic cat.

(ETA: Yeah, I left a lot skin showing. I liked the skin template with the bandages and the cuts to much to cover it.)

Lost Girls

Someone posted a few NSFW pages, and the most brutal comics community on livejournal's giving it the once-over. I found this comment pretty much summed up my feelings:

Yeah. I found these scans about as unerotic as it's possible for porn to be. It feels like such a male fantasy of how women think and act (right down to the fact that Dorothy apparently has orgasms just from intercourse).

Or perhaps it's just the wrong kind of fantasy for me. If Alan Moore had written Lost Boys, all about the sexual awakenings of Peter Pan and Huck Finn and Christopher Robin, I'd probably shell out $80 or whatever it cost. So long as there was some Captain Hook/Peter Pan action, anyway.

That might be why I found it so uninteresting when the clerk showed me this in the store. He'd wanted to see me angry. It was pretty dull, for Alan Moore and for porn. I didn't find it nearly as rage-worthy as a change to Captain Comet's name.

Melinda Gebbie does have a beautiful storybook art style. Hopefully she'll get more work from the press.

(I saw the Tinman scene, though. It wasn't worth $80.)

Bask in the Williams Art!

The Seven Soldiers preview is up. Shining Knight looks just as awesome as I remember.



I hope this means its actually coming out this month.

For Science!

(Probably some Mild 52 Spoilers if you are afraid of those, as it's not the weekend quite yet.)

Yesterday morning I dropped three handwritten letters in the mail to DC Comics. One asked about those beach bunnies on Oolong Island in 52: Week 23. I wish I'd waited another day to write it though, because I didn't remember the new editor's name. It's Michael Siglain, and they have his first Q&A up at Newsarama. (It also has preview art. Looks like Ambush Bug's still off the Fourth Wall.)

I'm glad I sent the letter though, it didn't occur to Matt Brady to ask who the lady in the bikini coming on to Magnus was. I'm hoping Morrison found a female mad scientist I've never seen before, and she's not one of numerous ways that a mad scientist can get a beautiful woman who's interested in him (androids, cloning, mind control, alternate universes -- I think I came up with a couple more for the letter). I know Dr. Zeul (Giganta) and Mother Juno (The O'Neil/Adams Green Lantern run), but neither of them were there and I can't think of any others. Can anyone else?

This was when I realized Morrison was writing this week.

I miss his JLA.

Go read.

While I was probably damaging Geoff Johns approval ranting a bit more than I intended with my last post, Kalinara was making up for it by dispelling an annoying myth about Johns' Green Lantern.

And I'd like to take this occasion to point out again, that I can't understand why any Green Lantern fan would scoff at a bug-shaped, mind-controlling, yellow, parasitic, fear-inducing, monster (from OUTER SPAAAAACE!!). It's every possible weakness, rolled together and put into in a crunchy grasshopper shell.

I say this nice thing today because I sent him a message about the quote we were discussing earlier, and I may very well be too angry to say anything nice tomorrow.

So You're Erasing the Expiration Date to Prolong the Shelf-Life?

Update, Oct 11, 2006: I got a look at the context here. More on that later, but yes, this post is directed towards toward the reaction, not the quote itself (though the post explores the quote's implications). Because the reaction is alarming.

I'm a bit mad about this:

Well, what other character? Not Wonder Girl. Enough women had died in the DCU.

I'm not going to put up the money for the hardcover, because I have all of the issues and I don't really need this roundtable, but I am going to ask a friend to see this tomorrow. However, knowing fully that this is a quote taken out of context, I'm still going to rant about it tonight.

Because the direct quote, without context, annoys me a little.

Then, I see the people on that thread applauding this quote, and I get just a bit more annoyed.

Then, I see the people on the thread (and in the WFA comments) criticizing the statement, and I get pissed beyond belief.

They are complaining about the wrong fucking thing.

The quote itself, I don't see as hypocritical because it could signify a change of mindset, like Waid and Augustyn's professed regret at killing Ice, (that it was shortsighted and for the wrong reason). I strongly suspect that, whatever the actual context, this comment may be a result of some of the criticism we've leveled at the writers in the past year.

Sadly, it's the wrong result. It's a short cut.

To me, that quote says "I will treat female characters differently. I'm not going to use them in the 'real plot' where they run the risk of death."

See, death is a part of reality in the DCU and the Marvel U. Characters die, they get replaced, and they return to life. Sometimes it may take a few decades, but that's the reality they live in. To simply say, without qualification, that those rules no longer apply to female characters is ridiculous. Giving an expendable character a pass from death when you feel the story demands it only for the reason of gender is sexism, whichever way the pendulum falls. It breeds that attitude of "women = weak" that sends my blood pressure through the roof and keeps women out of believable lead roles.

I'm well aware of the quantity problem. There's less women than men in superhero comics. That's stupid, and should be fixed. A blanket statement promising no further death doesn't help anything.

We all know that there will always be characters dying in comics. It's to move the story along. There's an infinite number of ways to bring them back, death is not, has not been, and never will be permanent at DC.

I know some of you have heard me lament about the great characters who lost their lives too early and unfairly and plead for resurrection or at least a retcon away of the death, but this comment horrified me. I have at least two women on my "wish they'd die and stay dead" list, and I know I'm not the only one.

I'd sooner see some energy thrown behind resurrecting some of those dead women, like the men tend to always get resurrected, than see them have to be "protected" to a greater extent than the men.

It goes back to my complaints about rape, I suppose. It's an unequal threat, ever-present over the female characters and never-present over the men unless its in a "Mature Readers" book. If all our complaints do is stop them from killing female characters, we basically put a similar unequal threat out there. Death will hang like a shadow over male characters and never truly threaten the female characters.

I want to see both genders face the same trials, not inequality. I'm fucking tired of fucking inequality.

I'd be happy to shut the fuck up about rape in comic books if two conditions were fulfilled:

1) It must suddenly and immediately become as overtly present a threat in the lives of male superheroes as it is for female superheroes. If both Green Lantern and Black Canary are captured by a group of supervillains, and the writer chooses to have the villains leer and make sexualized threats -- they would be levied at both characters, not just Dinah.

2) A sexual assault scene for a female victim is drawn in exactly the same mood and manner as a sexual assault scene for the male victim. Meaning panel angles, point of view, emotions, and reasoning behind writing this.

(Please note: If you find these two options absurd because this treatment "emasculates" i.e. weakens a male character, do consider what it tells us about your attitudes towards women as a gender when it is perfectly acceptable for female superheroes.)

Which brings me to the second problem with the above statement.

It doesn't solve anything.

It's a way to bypass thinking about the actual issues, and throw a quick-fix on the problem. This is trying to manufacture a magic band-aid.

"I won't kill a female character" does not in any way mean "I will treat female characters with the same respect as male characters." It doesn't exclude female characters being 'damsels in distress,' being motivations/rewards for the hero, being shot and paralyzed, being impregnated mystically, being raped, being dragged through the mud, being used solely as eye candy, being retired from action indefinitely or generally being put through any of the shit we've been complaining about for the last seven years. If every writer and editor were to adopt such an attitude as is being cheered on (and alternately condemned as hypcritical, implying that the complaintants feel that this is the correct idea) would be a decision to take women one step away from the plot.

Chucking the Refrigerator and going to non-perishables does not stop female characters from being used as consumables.

It doesn't even come close.

Nice try, writers, but you're going to actually have to learn to use your brains when you write.

Action Comics #843 Realizations

This comic taught me something very important about the Phantom Lady.

She is made entirely of plastic.



Shiny, shiny plastic.

I wouldn't have been looking at it if not for Kalinara's post (my problem with Phantom Lady is not her cup size or the lighting, but the hideous and improbable pose she struck in the Brave New World Preview Art -- Yes, there is something for everyone to hate in that picture!), but there it is, the explanation for all of our woes. Plastic. As a plot point.

The Wizard: Basic Training scans don't completely shoot down this theory. I saw them in the magazine when I was a teenager and tried to learn to draw from them. They've been drawing off that advice for years and while they've produced some truly, truly awful parodies of the female form, there's rarely been something quite this bad.

And it's hard to believe that this is owed entirely to lack of talent of the designer, because the above image was drawn by an artist with a different style and a different inker, in a different book.

As much as we may hate to admit it, Phantom Lady could very, very easily be on purpose.

The option is intriguing. Not nearly intriguing enough for me to pick up Freedom Fighters and brave Acuna's faux-to-realistic art, but intriguing nonetheless. The whole senator's daughter thing could just be a good cover, and she's actually a plastic android built by Ivo, Morrow, or Magnus, and therefore sentient. That would be pretty cool.

Shame it doesn't make for pretty art.

Speaking of pretty, though, on the very same page of the very issue, we see Green Lantern:



I am not imagining this.

That character is posed so that we see both his butt and his face.

I'm prepared to throw out all previous theories. This can't be some attempt at equal objectification. There's no way its actually a running in-joke at DC over the last 45 years. And there is absolutely no chance that this is an accident.

Hal Jordan is purposefully trying to moon us.

He is consciously aware that he is being read, and he's been mooning us. There's no other explanation. And whoever told him, told the other Lanterns. They know too, that is how they always position themselves in such a way as to display their rumps. Collectively, the Green Lantern Corps has been breaking the Fourth Wall just to show us their hindquarters.

I'm sorry to end this post on such an abrupt and awe-inspiring revelation, but I think I need to sit down after this one.

Holy Cats!

It wasn't a joke.

They really had him in fishnets.

Thanks, Rob!

Monday Misogyny

Okay, everyone relax, this time, it's not our community (though I wouldn't be too surprised to find it here):

Why does every game that comes out nowadays revolve around a female main character? Yes I understand that you need female characters for eye candy.

It just gets better from there. (There's racism too!)

This is just one of the wildly entertaining links you'll find at Jade Reporting, a new blog that does for the gaming community what When Fangirls Attack does for the comics community.

Castration

The "decapitation as castration" idea has come up, and damned if it doesn't bug the living shit out of me.

The idea basically seems to go that your identity, personality, and power is all contained in your head. Therefore, losing your head makes for a particularly degrading death because your body's been separated from all of that. It's equated to castration because that's an obvious loss of potency.

To look at a decapitation scene and call it symbolic castration is awfully backwards to me.

You see, the underlying attitude is that castration is a loss of identity, life, or power. Its root lies in the hypermasculine society that devalues all femininity. It hinges on the belief that the very worst thing possible is not to have a penis. It's an idea from a society that places all value and power into the male sexual organ. The same sort of logic that considered sperm the "Seed" -- the carrier of all that was needed to make a person, while the womb was simply soil to grow a person in. In this mindset, he penis holds your personal power and identity, so losing it is like losing that heavy thing on your shoulders that happens to hold your mouth, eyes, face and brain. Castration is a symbolic decapitation.

Castration's equivalent for a woman is actually becoming barren -- which is what happened to Black Canary in The Longbow Hunters. Another symbolic decapitation.

Decapitation itself is not a sexualized or gendered death.

While the preferrred execution method of criminals in some cultures, decapitation is a warrior's death when it happens on the battlefield. The shame associated with such a death is the shame associated with losing a battle. And yes, a sexism and castration parallel can easily enter into it. In such an instance, the victor holds the severed head of his enemy in his hands and declares that his opponent was weak and soft, like a woman, because (according to a hypermasculine culture that equates strength with masculine prowess) loss in battle can be attributed to either being a manly warrior up against someone who far outpowers them, or a pathetic, effeminate creature not suited to the manly arts.

When a female character's death occurs by decapitation, in the heat of battle, the nature of the death is non-gendered because decapitation is a non-gendered warrior's death.

It's one thing, of course, to find sexism by focusing on the reasoning why, or the reaction of the other characters to this death. However, to focus on the method of death itself, and how humiliating and degrading it is and connect that with castration when it is a death that occurs no where close to the sexual organs, and occurs on a battlefield rather than a traditional women's setting, comes dangerously close to the attitude that one's identity, personality and power lies in one's sexual organs. It also, when all the shame connected with a death in this matter comes specifically from losing the battle and not one's gender role, comes infuriatingly close to equating "loser" with "woman."

That particular line isn't crossed by simply engaging in the intellectual exercise, and going through a Freudian reading of the text. The line's crossed when it seems like its coming not from analyzing someone else with Freud's theory, but when the analysis is shown by someone wit the attitude that "women" = "weak." It's the difference between an objective eye seeing that something "could be taken this way", and a fanatical devotion to "must be taken this way" to the point that all evidence to the contrary is rationalized away.

That would be is where the blinding rage wells up.

When the attitude of an analyst overcomes an analysis of an attitude, it becomes a bit difficult to debate the fine points of Freudian theory.

(Oh, and thanks, Revena, for the input on this post)

Mystery in Space #2

Twice.

Twice Captain Comet says something to the effect of "I've dropped the Captain, just call me Comet now."

What the Hell?!!

You can't take the Captain out of Captain Comet!

It's just Not Done.

Starlin, what are you thinking? What is he, a super-horse now? He loses so much of his early 50s Sci-Fi charm if you drop the Captain. That charm is what makes the character! You may as well turn Captain Marvel into a serious... mystical... *Ahem* Nevermind Captain Marvel.

My point is that "Comet" is way too modern a name for a character that belongs in another decade, and is supposed to be writtern as though he belongs in another decade.

And the de-aging? He's cute, but I preferred the other version. More of that early 50s placement. he should be a bit old-fashioned and crotchety. Played well off of Kyle in Rann-Thanager War. (The mere idea of the early 50s perfect person and the mid 90s everyman working together made the book worth reading to me. Could have been handled a bit better, of course, but I liked it.)

This whole thing seems like you'tre just trying to make Captain Comet seem young and sleek and sexy, and he's not really supposed to be that way. He's supposed to be like your genius Uncle who could do anything that your Mother told stories about.

"You'll never guess what Uncle Adam did now -- He industrialized a small tribal society in six months just to get a ride off the planet! He's such a character!"

Modernization isn't for everyone you know. Some heroes are period heroes. A flashy new name, a streamlined costume and a twenty-something body takes away the nostalgia factor that a period hero needs. Period heroes set in the modern era are quirky characters, and that's a lot of fun to read. Any attempt to update them risks losing the quirkiness. This issue had a lot of attempts to update Captain Comet. I swear, even the dialogue seemed less corny this issue. That's just not right.

On the other hand, the gold eyes are a pretty cool idea. The art made it tough to tell if his irises are supposed to be gold, or if his comments were just about the glowing effect. This book could use a different inker on the first part.

DC vs Marvel: My Half of the Population

(I'm going to address this over here because it is almost completely off-topic from the original post, and I don't want to interrupt his comments conversation with my own concerns *ahem* again.)

While discussing why Marvel gets more criticism about LGBT character treatment than DC does, Dorian points out something else:

Just as a counterpoint, we seem to be having the inherent misogyny conversation about DC far more often than it comes up with Marvel.

Now, I know that the majority of Feminist, Comics, and Feminist Comics blogs I farm for When Fangirls Attack are DC. That's because I'm primarily a DC reader. I know there's a huge and vocal contingent of DC fans discussing how female characters are treated.


But I am wondering why now. Is it an effect of the blog community demographic? More DC blogs than Marvel blogs, so more discussion about misogyny at DC than at Marvel. Is it because less Feminists read Marvel? I'm not sure that's true, because I know more than one fan who reads primarily about Marvel but blogs about women at DC more often. Does Marvel treat its female characters better? Not that I've seen.

Or is just that the conversation feeds itself, and the issues being brought up are associated with DC, so people address DC more often in response?

So, I'm curious. I know why I blog DC more often, because I read only two or three Marvel books and one of them is inching towards the drop pile (the other two I put on the pile, and often put off reading them for weeks at a time). In the meantime, I'm just picking up more and more DC. But I do blog Marvel when the occasion to rant or rave presents itself. I'd like to know, though, from everyone else who blogs about women at DC instead of women at Marvel -- Why?

Is that who I think it is?

On page two of Ion #6, we may have a cameo:

Bear with me.

In case you guys haven't noticed the lull in insightful posts here and at my other blogs, I've been a little overworked over the past couple months. My writing seems to be suffering for it. Once I get rested up, things should pick up again.

I just need a chance to get rested up.

Gruesome Challenge Time!

Let's put this one to the test.

Name three male characters who have been decapitated on-panel in DC Comics since January 2006.

I can't believe they sent that to her.

If anyone misses that old Monday Misogyny feature...

Here's at least a month's worth. The majority of them are quite proud of it, and probably consider themselves very clever for their old, tired jokes. Granted, there are some decent people commenting there, but the rest of the posters are making fun of them. And it is not a good sign that this inane thread had reached ten pages by the time I saw it.

One repeated answer amazes me. In a community where it is not only perfectly acceptable to dress in tight spandex with a felt mask, but encouraged by picture-taking, we have a bunch of men who are embarassed to go to the store and buy tampons.

Not only that, but its a thread full of men desperate to flaunt their virility and tampons are one of few purchases that prove without a doubt that you live with a real, live woman.

It boggles the mind.

Carnival Time!

The Fifth Edition of the Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans (Yes, I very much like the unwieldy name, and typing the unwieldy name) is posted at 100 Little Dolls. This issue covers Comics, Webcomics, Writing, Video Games, Television, Anime, Books, the Incident at the Hugos, and Adventures in Fandom!

The Sixth Edition of the Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans will be at The Hathor Legacy on October 16th. The Call for Submissions is out already, here's a quick rundown:

Deadline: October 13th
Submissions: robyn[dot]fleming[at]gmail[dot]com (or use the submission form)
Suggested Theme: Gender: Roles, Identities and Transgressions (This is only a suggestion, however, off-theme posts still eligible under the guidelines will be considered)

Posted everywhere I could. Please post everywhere you can.

White Tiger Preview

Dammit! Why didn't anyone tell me this was up? Popcultureshock's newsfeed is on the fritz, I almost completely missed the two preview pages for White Tiger #1.

They've even got the blurb which I hadn't seen (as I don't really bother too much with Marvel Comics Solicits).

A HERO’S COMPULSION
Roaring out of the pages of Daredevil, the new White Tiger makes a ferocious debut, courtesy of the dynamic scripting of NY Times best-selling fantasy author Tamora Pierce (Trickster’s Queen, The Will of the Empress) and masterful penciling of rising star Phil Briones (La Geste des Chevaliers-Dragons, Les Seigneurs d’Agartha). Angela del Toro knows pain: Her uncle Hector Ayala, the former White Tiger, killed. Her FBI partner, murdered. Her career, ruined. Her mentor, Matt Murdock, jailed. And the hurt is just beginning….The Yakuza’s bloodthirsty Sano Orii returns, a genocidal shadow organization appears, and a new-but-old super-powered madman is looking to put the squeeze on White Tiger. Armed with mystical amulets—and finally in costume—White Tiger demands answers! But will she survive long enough to ask the right questions?
40 PGS./Parental Advisory …$2.99

Looks like she's playing off the Bendis Daredevil run. And 40 pages is a lot longer than I expected, which could be very good if the book is very good.

I'm just surprised I had to find this when tracking down information for another blogger. It should have come up in my regular rounds days ago. I mean, is nobody watching to see if this can redeem Marvel for Quesada fumbling the questions about female writers, giving Greg Land work, the Storm wedding, and the Invisible Woman giving her hubby a tumble before leaving him?

Okay, admittedly that looks like a pretty tall order. How about we just hope its good and sells enough to get her more comics work?

Well, that sucks.

Came across the Thrilling Detective website after overall liking the sixth John Taylor book but still wanting to talk to people who hated Shotgun Suzie as much as I did.

They have a list of Horror/Fantasy Detective characters. Since that combination is why I like Taylor, I bookmark it for a reading list.

And I see that there's only two women on it.

Anita "Hardboiled Porn" Blake is one of them.

And I can't think of any other woman to add.

Fuck.

Somebody help me out here.

It's especially not funny when an outsider says it.

I hate to see mainstream Feminists discuss comic books. I mean, I used to wish they would, back when I first started blogging, but then the Batwoman thing happened. Then I was willing to pay to get them to shut up. Because the idiotic stereotyping would start. You'd realize just how much they ignored not only the feminist comic book readers hanging around reading them (who were commenting in comment threads), but the very good Feminist comic book bloggers hanging around. I don't mean the criticism for aiming comic books at adolescent boys, but the assumption by the bloggers and commenters that only adolescent boys read comics. The same assumption the companies and professionals are making that's causing the sexism that they are blogging against.

Those blanket insults towards readers really made discussion of the issue over in the larger community impossible (well, that and having to explain things about comic books to a bunch of people who've never read them or spoken to anyone who read them).

One joke, in particular, makes me rolls my eyes. It happens to be in every thread, on every feminist post about comics that leaves the comic book community. I saw it today:

Hrm. And, comic book nerds wonder why they can’t get laid…

Sigh.

And I bet they don't even wonder why Feminist comics bloggers don't comment on their posts.

Prove it!

Dan Didio during the 52 interview:

Zatara - old name, new hero with a family connection, and, in my opinion, looks better without the fishnets, which were in his original designs…. true story.

What? Please don't be joking. Please say we almost had a male character with fishnets.

They were probably his sleeves, though.

Oh well, there's always fanart. Anyone up to designing a Zatara with fishnets for me?

Finally got my comics...

His name is Damien?

Audience Participation

This week's art feature is a bit unusual, and pretty short, but I want to hear what you have to say about it.

For Future Reference

Okay, I'm not a believer in the fabled Batman/Robin subtext. I've never seen the subtext, it just seems to me like Wertham was overreacting to seeing the strongest relationship in Batman's life with a male character and people have picked up on this since.

I'm actually pretty difficult to argue this point with.

I can see where you're coming from if you're going to argue specific interactions between Dick and Bruce that seemed slashy, you can argue if they are fatherly affection vs romantic affection. That's cool. I'll usually fall on the side of fatherly affection, unless the scene is written by Devin Grayson. But she's only one writer in sixty years worth of writers on page and screen, and she's the exception when it comes to this. Other writers tend to be very careful about how they portray the Batman-Robin relationship.

I can see where you're coming from when arguing how either character interacts with women vs how he interacts with men to argue that they are homosexual, but honestly I'd need a long road paved specifically with Dick Grayson interaction to convince me of that particular pairing. (I also find that arguments about Bruce's interaction with women indicating anything other than a repressed heterosexuality, sexuality which has been pushed aside for his War on Crime, are barking up the wrong tree -- but if you think you have a good one, you're welcome to try.)

Those, and others, are still reasonable points.

However, there is a sexist argument that I've seen drummed up in these discussions, and if I see someone use it, I'm calling them on it.

It's the "What kind of a 35 year old single millionaire would adopt a teenaged boy?" argument.

This assumes that men of a certain age are natural sexual predators, unable to interact with any children other than their own without being watched. It's a prevalent idea in our society, one that keeps men out of professions like teaching and childcare. It comes to a basic devaluation of fatherhood in early years, one that discourages men to be actively involved in parenting. It plays on the idea that dealing with children is for women, and any man who would dedicate any time with a child that he doesn't have to has something wrong with him.

Basically, it leads back to confining gender roles. It tries to shame men away from nuturing duties (because they are "woman's work" and no "real man" would do "woman's work"), and it contributes to a lot of the bad stereotypes associated with homosexual men in our society.

It is cultural, yes, but it is also wrong. It's wrong in real life, and it's simply incorrect in Batman continuity (because we know why Bruce tries to help angry young men, he sees himself in them).

It's a really sexist attitude. Now, yes, it's probably what's been printed in the Gotham gossip columns, and whispered around WayneTech Water Coolers. But come on, we've all read and watched Batman. We know Bruce Wayne far better than the extras who gossip about Bruce Wayne.

So, find something more specific, Batslashfans, because that stupid generalization just won't wash.

Oh, and if someone tells you that one of your arguments is based on a sexist stereotype, and you go "Oh, no! I don't think that about Shazam or Green Arrow" but keep coming back to the generalized argument to support your point, you're still using a sexist argument because you haven't called to mind anything specific about Batman over, say, Green Arrow or a professional wrestler, just a generalization about 35 year old men.

Satire.. in.. SPAAAACE!!!

For my pile of overwhelming evidence that women are definitely a viable target audience for comic books:

I almost roffled. "I assure you, sir, NASA is an equal opportunity employer, and we have strict rules against sexual discrimination..."

He cut me off. Typical. "Oh, really? Then why are all the astronauts women?"

"Uh, last I looked, there were quite a few astronauts who are men."

"What, like, five precent?"

"I believe the correct total is closer to fifteen percent..."

Go read the whole thing, it's brilliant.

(Via Feminist Sci-Fi: The Blog)

More Linkblogging

As my boss is evil (he made someone cry today), I'm not up to posting much new content today. Instead, here's some more links.

Sandicomm, Karen-El and SallyP worked up some Arisia Makeovers.

Chris of 2GBC gives us a page-by-page rundown of Civil War #4.

Courtesy of Chris Sims -- Bob Haney vs Bob Kanigher.

Jenn talks about the racist implications of Drow Cosplay.

Kevin delivers the Doc Savage post he promised.

In an older post I've been meaning to link, Claire on describing eyes as "Almond shaped".

And if you haven't been following the dual-blog discussion on Class and Superman, you've been missing out.

I'll be back to substantial content as soon as someone finds a soul for my boss. It doesn't look good. We looked everywhere today.

Links

1) Submissions for the Fifth Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans at One Hundred Little Dolls are due Today. May I direct you to the submission form or 100littledolls[at]sbcglobal.net -- the hostess' email address. You have until the end of the day. Carnival will be up on October 2nd. And I'm always looking for more hosts, email me if you're interested.

2) Been procrastinating about sending people over there, but Heidi's trying to get a letter campaign going over Wonder Woman's chronic lateness. The object is to annoy DC enough that they'll put timeliness higher on their priority list, and light a fire under their creators. Maybe, if enough people suggest it and they think there's a fanbase to support it, we can get another book to fill in the every second month (A Sensation Comics revival?).

At the very least, we can annoy them enough that they'll think twice before hiring another writer who can't keep the commitments he already has.

She's got the contact info:

DC Comics
ATTN: Matt Idelson
Wonder Woman Editor
1700 Broadway
New York, New York 10019

3) We're starting an Arisia Makeover Meme at Zamaron if anyone's interested. Anyone with actual talent, or even just delusions of talent is welcome to show off their fashion sense.

Leave a comment on the Zam post with a link, or email me if you want em to host it on Zamaron. If you're shy about giving your email, but have a drawing and some webspace to host it, leave a comment (with a name so I can give credit) with the link below and I'll link it on Zamaron.

Not my usual sort of post

I don't normally repost chat conversations, but this one had a good point to it.

Willow: Why is Wanda looking like she's about to have a heart attack?

Ragnell: Where?

Willow: http://ratcreature.livejournal.com/175099.html

Kalinara: Because it's sexy.

Ragnell: I worry about what they consider sexy

Willow: Y'know the sexiest image of a comic heroine I've seen in the past year?

Ragnell: What?

Willow: Wonder Woman at the White House, sword in hand, in her formal dress, in a semi-crouch with one leg extended forward for balance - preparing to kick Gorgon butt.

Ragnell: Drew Johnson drew the best women

Willow: A beautiful extended leg, a ovely martial arts position and the way the clothes draped?

Willow: Oh yeah.

Preview!

Newsarama has a few preview pages for Manhunter #26 up. Special (Hattip Elayne)



Not an official Wonder Woman comic, sadly (though at the rate we're going we'll see it before we see Wonder Woman #3!)

Amateur Art Appreciation Addendum

(Oh, my art feature is up. Take a look, then come back for some quick thoughts.)

How many artists are using teenager logic to show that their characters are mature thinking women?

Most of us will know the obvious answer to that question. Most artists seem to design costumes by the "less is more" style of fashion, where being able to show off skin indicates an autonomous thinking being (the logic being that with no one watching your clothing choices, you obviously don't live with your parents) to them. But I realized it was worse than that when answering this comment:

It was almost like the more she grew up, the more she [b]matured[/b], Arisia wanted to show more of herself rather than hide behind restrictions.

So, I answered him as I would a teenaged girl who thought that:

Except that's not a sign of Maturity, Zeb. That's something teenaged girls do to make themselves seem older. They wear less to make themselves look older. The artists have been doing this, drawing her with less to make her look older, using a young girl's logic, without adding any mature woman logic to balance out the costume.

Look, I'm not saying that a mature woman wouldn't dress revealingly. But a mature woman would dress appropriately for the work she does. That's a miniskirt she's wearing to fight evil.

And a mature woman would dress to emphasize certain personal characteristics, but not to the detriment of the rest of her body. That costume emphasizes the breasts, and makes the rest of her body into an afterthought. The combination of light-colored, front-loaded top and dark, short, tight miniskirt imply that she is not comfortable with her shape, particularly her hips and breast size. Again, teenaged girl characteristics. These are tricks to compensate for a small bust and large hips. I know these tricks because we tried them in High School (though, within the dress code standards). There was another set for girls who felt they were top-heavy, broad-shouldered with skinny hips. A whole list of ways to make your waist smaller. Teenaged girl tricks.

This is not a grown-up costume. This is something a teenager thinks is a grown-up costume. Honestly, if they were going by your train of thought, a bikini would have been a more suitable choice (though still eye-rollingly exploitive). Freedom of movement and complete comfort with body image.

Then it occured to me that comic book artists may be more like teenaged girls than teenaged boys sometimes, because Arisia's not the only superhero dressing up to YM Fashion tricks (only she's using three tricks where one would suffice).

And seriously, while I would've rolled my eyes at the excessive skin for a bikini, I wouldn't have put her costume on the complaint pile -- probably for the same reasons Starfire's costume never bothered me and the Amanda Connor Boob Window is my favorite Power Girl costume. Weird how less material can make more sense, when it's put in the proper places.

So Polly did take a Time-Trip

On the Newsarama thread for EAglesham's interview, Geoff Johns showed up to clarify some things (this thread pointed it out):

Actually, the only one who remembers events like that is Power Girl.

Everyone on the JSA, from Earth 2, have vague recollections that there was a multiverse but that's it. DCU history is nearly identical to what it was.

Why is Power Girl the only one with real Earth 2 memories will be explained in Justice Society of America. I think some confusion has come from interpretation of interviews more than the comics themselves.

Hippolyta was a member of JSA, Matrix Supergirl did exist, Etc.

Assistance Required

I'm sure I've mentioned before that my favorite Volume III Green Lantern storyline was "Emerald Knights" where a time-traveling Kyle ended up bringing a past version of Hal home with him. I read it when I was a teenager (it's where I elarned to love Hal), so I had to buy the trade paperback after I got out on my own. I thought I had the entire crossover, but it seems I've missed at least one issue.



Sally tells me she found it on Scans_Daily.

I have all of the tie-ins from Green Lantern and Green Arrow. This scene does not occur in either book. If anyone recognizesd the above scene and can point me to the entire story, I'd greatly appreciate it.

I'd also appreciate any other tie-ins from that storyline that I may have missed.

Thank you.

Eaglesham on JSA

Over at Newsarama, JSA artist Dave Eaglesham shoots his mouth off about the new characters. Here are some key points:

Click for SpoilersPower Girl

NRAMA: A couple other members who command respect are Power Girl and Mr. Terrific. How are you approaching them?

DE: Power Girl is an interesting draw because she has such a large chest, and that's something I don't usually do. I don't go for that kind of, you know, "T and A." But I think what really offsets that large chest is her muscularity, because she's really got big arms and such. I'm trying to soften her character up a little bit, but at the same time, she's taking on more responsibility in the JSA as a leader. So she needs more stature, she's got to stand up taller and be less punky.

Ma Hunkel

NRAMA: Oh yeah! How could we forget her?

DE: You know, people don't think of her, but I want to make her such a character that Geoff will want to use her a lot. Because I think she's really interesting. I'm doing a totally different take on her. Once again, I was hoping they would like it because I sort of sprung it on them. She greets Maxine at the headquarters and she's wearing a three-piece suit instead of an apron and all that stuff.

NRAMA: A suit?

DE: I want her to be more sophisticated. I'm drawing her very tall. She's a big woman. Six feet tall, broad shoulders. I want her dressed really nice, really sophisticated. She's very capable, and she could go out for adventures on her own anytime she wants. She knows how to use all the things in their facility, so she should dress like the respectable person she is.

NRAMA: So you said you sprung it on them. What did Geoff say when he saw her in a three-piece suit?

DE: He loved it. Now, she doesn't have the tornado symbol on her chest anymore, but that's fine, because Maxine's going to be taking over that.

Maxine Hunkel

NRAMA: Let's start with one of the brand new characters who was announced by Geoff in San Diego. Her name is Maxine Hunkel, the granddaughter of Ma Hunkel. She's really young, right?

DE: She's about 19 years old. But she's very bubbly and energetic. She's so positive and yet she's also isolated because of the way she talks and the way she is. People don't want to be around her.

NRAMA: She's almost too positive?

DE: She's almost too positive, and I think she experiences a lot of rejection because of that. When she's asked to join, it's a great moment in the story. I was so looking forward to drawing her. And you know, I never know what's going to happen when I take on a new character like that. I hope that the writer gives me enough cues as to where he wants me to go. And I drew it, and I sort of did a slightly different take from what Geoff indicated in the script. And I was like, "Oh, I don't know if he's going to like it." But he loved it the second he saw that first drawing. I put freckles on her face, and she's absolutely adorable. Everyone's going to love her. I'm sure of it.

Starman

NRAMA: At the Toronto Comic Book Expo, you told us that your favorite page you had drawn in Issue #1 was one where Starman is dancing through a building. You've said you can't reveal too much about this character, but if he's dancing, it sounds like he's a fun character.

DE: He is a fun character, and the funny thing is, I had no idea it was going to turn out that way. It's not in the script for him to dance or anything.

NRAMA: Really? It wasn't in the script?

DE: No. He just enters this building. It's almost like the character dictated to me what he was going to be, and I just sort of went with it. And I thought, he's going to be dancing. He's just so much fun. But he's a huge guy. The stars and the glowing eyes mean you don't really see his face. So you'd expect him to be very heroic and threatening, but he is quite the opposite.

And he's a close talker.

NRAMA: He's a what?

DE: A close talker. He stands about two inches from your face when he's talking to you.

NRAMA: Is that also something you came up with?

DE: Absolutely. And it becomes so funny, every scene I draw him in. You'll see when the first issue comes out. There's a few scenes where he's just really close to Mr. Terrific, and they're like ... not sure what to make of him.

NRAMA: That's another one that you don't have a face to play with.

DE: No. He's even more of a challenge because he's got a star field in his costume. You don't want to bring too much light on him, so he's more of a challenge. He will require posturing.

NRAMA: Bigger actions? Or not bigger really, but his actions will have to show his emotions and reactions instead of his face?

DE: Oh, for sure. It will be his posture, but at the same time, he doesn't react to things like other people, so it's a little different.

NRAMA: You said in Toronto that he's your favorite character you've drawn so far.

DE: Oh, I was surprised how much fun I'm having with him. Like I said with the dancing scene -- I didn't know that was going to happen. That to me is priceless in comics, when there's a certain unknown element that's undecided until you actually get in and work the material, and it pops up and surprises you. And suddenly you know: That's where I want to go with this guy. And it's great if everybody else likes it too! [laughs]

Less significant characters were also mentioned, if you'd like to take a look.

Required Reading

Over at Seeking Avalon.

Sensational Reactions

I'm not naming names, I'm not linking links. I saw it today, and I've seen it way too muc over the past year. I know that DC has pulled a lot of freaky stunts recently with your favorite characters, and some of you are on edge because of this. I have seen the "I am Queasy" lists on people's sites as reasoning for why they believe that obvious sensationalistic marketing ploys might be serious.

However, it is a necessity of the genre for superheroes to be in danger. There will be cliffhanger endings. There will be wicked writers dropping hints. There will be bloggers and message board posters speculating. There will be covers that show people in life-threatening situations, at the mercy of evil villains, and even with their names on gravestones. This has been going on for 60 years. It doesn't necessarily mean anything. More often than not, these are fake-outs. Half the time, the serious deaths are reversed anyway.

It's one thing to get upset and sad when your hero actually dies. It's another entirely to see a cover, or a solicit, or a cliffhanger ending and freak out as though they are.

If you can't take seeing "This Issue -- [Your Favorite Character] DIES!" on a cover four months in advance you are a wuss.

Find a new fandom, you aren't cut out for superhero comics.

This Probably Won't Count

For Week 18 of 52, Douglas Wolk issued the following challenge:

Actually, here's a challenge for 52 Pickup's readers: design a card for a Rider-Waite-style tarot deck whose image is an unaltered panel, or fragment of a panel, from a DC comic.

I wasn't going to participate, since it's hard to find the right symbols in a panel that wasn't working for representing the tarot, but this was irresistable.

Normally, The Fool would include a cliff for him to walk off of, and a dog nipping at his heels. I went for charm over symbolism here.

We're Back

The Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans has returned from hibernation. We've found a Fifth Host-blog and the submissions call is posted at One Hundred Little Dolls! The Deadline is Sept 25th for an October 2nd Carnival. Everything from August 24th forward will be eligible.

Email 100littledolls[at]sbcglobal.net or use the submission form to nominate or submit posts. All previos submissions will be forwarded to that address.

(If anyone else wants to volunteer to host, please email me)

Please post this everywhere appropriate.

Two Points About Slash

Indigoskynet just updated her Disclaimer, and I noticed she had a very sensible policy on slash (she offers this handy definition: "Slash, for those unfamiliar, is a type of fanfiction usually taking two same-sex characters not canonically homosexual and making them so") that deserved attention.

There are two points in particular that bear repeating.

Point One:

And the slash I have seen [because I had to have seen it to have developed my strong distaste for it] is mostly misogynist. There's very little involving getting the two boys together without slamming the girl[s] one [or both] of them was canonically involved with.

I've noticed this a lot. Hell, I've noticed it with favorite heterosexual couples. And this is not limited to fanfic communities (Hell, I've probably been guilty of it myself).

I've seen male characters trashed over it too (I think I've directed some insults at Roy Harper in the past), except they don't tend to get gendered insults and slut-shaming like female characters do. And when you go with slash, which tends to be male-male pairing, you have the danger of the only female character in the whole story being made unrecognizable because she interferes with the preferred male-male pair and needs to be taken out of the way.

It's entirely possible that this sort of mindset affects the writers, and explains some out of character behavior we've seen. Could Ben Raab be a Donna/Kyle fan? I'm pretty sure that Dave Gibbons preferred Kyle/Jennie.

Point Two (which cannot be said enough):

Writing/drawing slash does not make a slasher a homosexual rights activist. Wearing your rainbows, going to the rallies, lobbying the government is what makes an activist.

And judging by some of the yaoi and slash debates I've seen through When Fangirls Attack, writing slash doesn't necessarily make you the slightest bit sensitive to homosexual issues.

Matinee

When I was a teenager, I remember E! television. Much of it was the same crap we all know today, gossip and awards shows and general stupidity, but there was one really good show there. Mysteries and Scandals, hosted by AJ Benza. I was addicted to that show. I admit it, I like "True" Crime, documentaries and fiction. It's why I took the Criminology elective in High School. We got to watch a lot of those as course material. The first time I saw the Hollywoodland preview on a blog, I knew I'd have to see it as soon as possible. Shortly thereafter, I learned of an upcoming Black Dahlia film.

Today, I ventured forth from my comfortable Subterranean Cave (a lair deep beneath the storm shelters of Oklahoma City) to the movie theater for a double-feature. They were both playing in the same place, and spaced far enough for a lunch break.

I do not regret the expenditure of time and money, but I left the theater saddened. Not in the good, "I just watched well-done tragic story" way. No, this was the "I was feeling down during the previews" way.

You know why? Because each movie had five previews in front of it.

Not a single preview was for a movie with a female hero.

All the King's Men, Catch a Fire and The Last King of Scotland seem to be historically based, so yes, leeway is to be given there. I think out of the three of them there were two female characters, and both was The Girlfriend/Wife type.

Man of the Year is about a comedian who was successfully elected President after campaigning as a joke. Laura Linney seems to be the female lead, his wife (who didn't vote for him). No female campaign workers or politicians of enough note to be shown in the preview.

The Prestige looks pretty damned good. 19th Century Magicians. The female lead is a girlfriend.

A Good year is an uplifting story from the viewpoint of the man who finds an exotic foreign love interest as he discovers the true meaning of life.

The Departed (which aired in front of both movies) pissed me off because it's a modern era set undercover police drama with not only no female hero, but no female cops in the background! Not even in the Academy shots!!

And then we get to the last preview, which also aired in front of both movies. It was a post-apocalyptic story where every woman on the planet is infertile (They don't mention whether the men are shooting blanks or not) and have been for eighteen years now. It seems to be about trying to get a pregnant woman from the middle of the country to the coast in a world fraught with violence and danger and desperate people, so she can go someplace safe to have her kid. It looked promising, because they show Julianne Moore coming to get the male hero and enlist him into the cause. But she's not in any of the action/travel shots. The pregnant woman is simply there as a womb, a treasure to be moved from one spot to another. But hey, Moore could still be a hero, right? Well, the overview says One Man and dashes that hope. Oh, and the title is Children of Men.

Most of these are action movies. Not a one of them stars a woman. They just have women there as part of the plot.

And the two movies that I saw? Well, they are historical/true crime fiction so of course, the leads were male.

I liked both movies, they are good movies. I like watching movies with male leads.

Just not all the time.

Remember what I said before about maybe we'd be better off if the Wonder Woman movie wasn't made?

Well, fuck that. We need that movie, and we need it now. And we need it to make a bazillion bucks so that a bunch of knockoffs get made the next year.

Because this year, we got nothing. Movies like The Devil Wears Prada. Or action movies were male-led solo movies with love interests, or team movies with weak-ass token women who surrender leadership to the attractive male loner and misogynistic villainesses. My Super-Ex Girlfriend, a movie about a fucking supervillainess who was basically a romantic interest.

We had more than this in the 90s. We had a few kickass action heroines. Ellen Ripley, anyone? Sarah Connor? Hell, even those stock horror movie girls like Nieve Campbell and Jennifer Love Hewitt were tough as nails and the story was centered on them. It should have grown from there. The cliches should have been smoothed out, the disrespectful parts should have been fixed. It should have gotten better. We should have more than we had then.

I shouldn't see ten previews without a single female lead. That's just not right.

(And Hollywoodland? Bring tissues.)

Try Somewhere Else

Nothing new for you right now on this blog. I have an Amateur Art Appreciation feature up, and a couple of posts (Spoilery) on Zamaron, but aside from that I don't have the energy tonight to write here.

If you're looking for entertainment, try here instead, much of the interesting stuff is deleted but you can get the gist.

Wonder Woman Casting Rumors Threaten My Mental Health

(Via Blog@Newsarama) Does it make me a bad Wonder Woman fan when I see crap like this and think that I'd rather they not make the movie?

Bilson has already proved her suitability for the iconic part, after she donned a Wonder Woman outfit for a sexy seduction scene in 'The O.C.'. A host of Hollywood stars had been tipped for the role, including Catherine Zeta-Jones, Cameron Diaz and 'Van Helsing' actress Kate Beckinsale, who turned down the part saying she "did not want to embarrass her daughter" by wearing the revealing outfit.

Dawn put it better than me:

Has she displayed strength? Athletic prowess? A memorable character? Perhaps a beauty that’s more handsome then pretty? Does she give off a warrior vibe?

No. She, “she donned a Wonder Woman outfit for a sexy seduction scene.”

Because the KEY part of Wonder Woman’s character, as we ALL know, is her power of sexy seduction.

Oh geez. Oh frig. I need a beer.

(Well, I'd go with Great Hera, rather than Oh Frigg)

Anyway, I don't believe it for a moment, because I live in denial. I mean, the mere rumor is my worst fears about the movie come to life, all too plausible given Joss Whedon's confession that he bases his heroines on Kitty Pryde.

I'd rather they shelved it until the patriarchy's been pelted with high heels, then ground into the dirt with sensible shoes than go with a hot looking brunnette with pipe-cleaners for arms. (And if I can't get enough henchwomen, or the funding for that purple death ray, that means it'll be a long time...)

A Rare Treat

Hal Jordan, from the neck up and not being hit by anything.



I got my hands on Legend of the Green Flame the Superman/Green Lantern special by Neil Gaiman and a bunch of different artists.

This picture's from a sequence spent in Hell, pencilled by Eric Shanower and inked by Arthur Adams. I'm just especially fond of Hal's face here. The hair is well-done, and so are his eyes. I think I'm attached to the expression right now because of the emphasis on this character and fear. Fear is special when it comes to Hal, so it's fun to see him freaking out. Plus, I just don't like the Van Schiver face that he had for Rebirth, or the toughened one the artist drew at the beginning of Volume III. I like a certain softness to Hal's face.

And in light of the Spectre years, I find his dialogue very amusing.

Oh, cool!

I was nominated for an Okie. I didn't even know about these. I should pay more attention to local blogs.

(And this is my 401st post, by the way, in case anyone's keeping track)

Black Panther #19

I sat down and read Black Panther #19. It was the most enjoyable reading experience of my lifetime. The main event was a confrontation between the Royal Couple and Dr. Doom, which included an iffy sequence where T'Challa ordered Storm to stand down and let him fight it while she was kicking Doom's butt for him. But that wasn't what I loved about this issue. What I loved was the aftermath of the battle -- Ororo and T'Challa's first fight as a married couple.

It was cute that they both started saying the same thing. T'Challa's rant about personal honor and his image as King made sense, I suppose, but I really couldn't get behind him there. Sure, he has to be commanding and strong as leader, but isn't she Queen? Shouldn't she be commanding and strong as well? And how was she second-guessing him by helping him out?

Ororo's reaction totally made up for it, the look on his face when she interrupted him was priceless. As was the line "I thought you wanted a Queen, not a mindless concubine" and the other line about how if he wanted "window dressing that could kick ass on command" (a bit more Americanized than Storm usually speaks, but hey, she's been in the country a while) he could have his bodyguards for henchmen -- but she was his partner. What others may find corny, but I especially liked, was the speech about marriage meaning that their lives were together, and that T'Challa's difficulties weren't just his own. His enemies were hers also, because they'd agreed to share their lives together. She wasn't there to take orders or to give them, but to make decisions with him, as wives and husbands are supposed to. She was never again going to stand by when she felt he needed help, no matter what his foolish pride had him saying, because no good wife would let her husband go into danger unaided like that.

I thought I loved Storm before this issue, but I had no idea I would be so overjoyed when she gave him the ultimatim. "Marriage for me is an equal partnership, T'Challa. If you don't want to be together on those terms, then we can not be together." That was.. That was beautiful.

The moment of silence, three panels of them sitting together, was perfectly timed. Then T'Challa answered, in a beautiful way.

"It's going to take some time, beloved, for me to get used to this idea, but I'll try." I particularly liked the panel angle on his face at this point.

"Don't worry," Ororo's smile was subtle but noticeable as she said this, "I'll be here to help you."

The art was wonderful, the writing was wonderful. I found myself taking back all the things I said about this pairing before. It could work out. It could be done with respect. So long as they kept to this promise of portraying an equal partnership in this book, they would have a fan in me! It was the best thing I had ever read...

...and then I woke up.

For what actually happened in Black Panther #19, see Loren and the Fortress Keeper.

I'm going to go hit something.

What's Distracting Patricia?

A meme courtesy of Dave --


What else could it be?

And, oh yes...

Today is my One-Year Blogiversary.

So I celebrated with a rare update of the sidebar.

Justice Society Preview Art

This week's 5.2 About 52 column at Newsarama has a preview page for Justice Society of America at the end. If there was any doubt left about who was wearing the Liberty Belle costume, it's resolved now.

"And telepaths who can bench-press a buick?"

I read Mystery in Space, feeling a little worried. I was afraid I may not like it, since the only other Jim Starlin work I've read was Cosmic Odyssey (a storyline that filled me with mixed feelings).

But what was I thinking? It has Captain Comet in it! It's in outer space!! Of course I was going to enjoy it.

Still, it would have been nice to get the four dollars.

Mild Spoilers

Anyway, Starlin is a better penciller than Shane Davis. Davis pencilled the first story, Starlin the second. Davis is not a bad storyteller, or bad with anatomy -- My main problem with the art in the first story actually had to do with the lines on Capt. Comet's face, which is Matt Banning's problem. I think his face would have been better looking with a different inker. It didn't make it difficult to read, though I liked the art overall on the second story much more.

The story's intriguing, it gives the promised cosmic mystery while giving us the basic history of Capt Comet (which is complex and definitely necessary) in a natural, and the history of the Weird in a natural way. Good for new readers who are unfamiliar with the characters (I'd never seen the Weird before), and for old readers who missed a few issues or have forgotten a lot. Both stories end with a cliffhanger, of course.

They do very well with the two main characters in each story, but neglect to tell us about the yellow-skinned woman. She looks like Stealth from L.E.G.I.O.N. but I don't have all of that series so I'm not sure what happened to Stealth, or why she would have an eyepatch right now. They don't give a name for her.

The setting reminds me of Deep Space Nine.

There is also a talking dog in the first story. He is impressively drawn.

Oh, and like with Rann-Thanagar War, I'm well-aware that I am one of maybe five people in all of fandom who like this one. So, stuff it, Sims!

Help Me Out Here.

I should have joined in the conversation in this post, but I'm trying to keep to my "Don't Comment While Angry" rule. It's difficult, because whenever I read the discussion, I get to a single comment and freeze in my tracks.

It's a very condescending comment, one that goes out of its way to oversimplify the opposing argument (and completely disregards my oft-stated opinion on Steve Trevor). I try to pass by it, but I can feel my fingernails turn to claws and snakes rustle in my hair. That comment colors every comment after it. It brings out the monster in me. I read through the rage and neutral statements seem like unprovoked attacks. I'm licking my fangs as I formulate my responses, until I realize that if I join in I'll find myself attacking every commenter and making no headway in the process.

To prevent this, I wait a few hours, look again, and freeze again.

The only way to solve this, is to take that comment out of the conversation and study it directly. And I need some help with this.

Once again, finding male companionship is equated with marginalization of female characters.

Sad.

What do you think, readers?

Hernandez Housefire

An open letter, reposted from Newsarama:

LEA HERNANDEZ'S HOUSE BURNS: HOW YOU CAN HELP

Early this morning, the Texas home of award-winning writer/artist Lea Hernandez, my friend and co-creator of the graphic novel Killer Princesses, caught fire and burned. Half her house is now gone, and the rest is smoke-damaged. In addition, she lost at least six of her family’s beloved pets, two dogs and four cats. If you knew Lea, you’d know how devastating that is.

She’s lost a great deal of her family’s possessions, including irreplaceable art. She doesn’t yet know the full accounting of what’s been lost at this time.

Most know Lea as the brilliant creator of such works as Rumble Girls and Cathedral Child. She drew the Marvel Mangaverse Punisher book, and has drawn for Transmetropolitan, among many other accomplishments. She is also the co-founder and original editor for Girl-A-Matic, one of the most important venues for female-friendly comics created to date.

She’s also my friend, and it’s entirely possible I wouldn’t have a career in comics if she hadn’t asked me to write Killer Princesses for her to draw.

And finally, Lea is one of the last great firebrand hellraisers in comics.

Lea has two (wonderful, amazing) special needs children and right now they need a place to stay and some clothes to wear. More than that, they need
some help, and fast, in the form of donations to her paypal account. Lea’s a proud person so I’m going to ask FOR her. This is important, and a great chance to do a wonderful thing for a creator who has consistently enriched this industry we all love so much. Please, take a moment and send WHATEVER YOU CAN to Lea’s paypal account and help make this time a little bit less painful for someone who would do the same for you if the positions were reversed.

If you’re a retailer, I ask that you set up a donations jar. If you’re a creator, I ask you to think of how devastating this would be to your career and donate what you can. If you’re a reader, I’m asking you to take a moment and hit the paypal link. You’ll be doing something heroic and you’ll feel great about it, I promise.

Read what Lea had to post on a neighbor’s computer while wearing her pajamas at: Livejournal.com/users/divalea

Donate (PLEASE) to her paypal account at: divalea@gmail.com

Finally, if I understand the story correctly (as told to me by Lea’s good friend and current Girl-a-matic editor), it was Lea’s daughter hearing the smoke alarm that allowed the family to get out in time, so for God’s sake, do everyone you love a favor and CHECK YOUR SMOKE ALARMS.

Thank you so much for helping. Really, any amount you can send will make a difference. That’s all I can say.

Sincerely and gratefully,

Gail Simone

Sandicomm needs her own blog...

...But until then I'll quote one of her comments to draw attention to it:

And on a completely unrelated note, I had a mini-epiphany when I was walking my dogs this afternoon. The worst thing that can happen to a comic book woman is to be raped, as if the death of a loved one or contracting a horrible disease weren't worse. (And don't get me wrong, rape is an incredibly bad thing, but if you really want to hurt a character, surely there are other things to do.) But the best thing that could happen to her is that she gets a mate, particularly a superhero. So there's a blinding double-standard, and the only thing a woman is good for is sex, even in a world where women can be just as superpowered as men. This is something you've known and thought about for a long time, I'm sure, and it's something I understood self-consciously, but I never really realized it until now.

52 Week 17 Interview

(Okay, this one's serious) With Amy's question in mind, I looked around for some information on that sequence in 52: Week 17 with Starfire. Here's what I found:

NRAMA: Is allowing one’s top to be torn off a part of negotiating in a vacuum? Because if it is, earth is screwed, as the bulk of our astronauts are dudes…

SW: Male breasts are used as currency on Venus, so we’re good.

NRAMA: A joke about the collective net worth of fanboys could be made here…

SW: But we won’t. As for the scene, Tamaraneans have historically been shown to be very open about their bodies, ashamed of nothing - much like George Pérez, who I’ve heard draws wearing only old issues of Swordquest. So as I reread the issue for the interview this week, I had one regret about that scene: Kory probably should not have covered herself after Lobo pulled her top off, it made her look too vulnerable and victim-ish, which isn’t the truth in the least.

(And forget it, Internet, her “Code Unapproved” parts would have still been covered artistically, this ain’t Vertigo!)

That’s not to say anyone can rip off Starfire’s top and live to tell about it. In this case, she needed Lobo to do something for her and her team and wasn’t going to be stopped by a torn top. She knows she has plenty of time to get him back for that.

I do have to say I'm very glad he noticed this -- "Kory probably should not have covered herself after Lobo pulled her top off, it made her look too vulnerable and victim-ish, which isn’t the truth in the least" -- though it would have been preferrable before the issue went out.

Any other thoughts?

52 Week 16 Interview

Steven Wacker: How ya doin’, Geoff?

Geoff Johns: Awesome.

SW: That’s great!

GJ: Awesome.

SW: Thanks for coming on as a guest this week.

GJ: Dude!

SW: What?

GJ: Sweet.

SW: Umm…I think we’re going to need you be more expansive.

GJ: Awesome.

SW: “Awesome” what?

GJ: Dude. It’s just so sweet.

Ladies and Gentlemen: Geoff Johns, Writer

(Whole interview here)