What better way to take your mind off the current strife in the blogosphere than to post pictures of violence?
...
It made sense when Bahlactus first suggested it.
Friday, May 18, 2007
Friday Night Fights Round 10!
What better way to take your mind off the current strife in the blogosphere than to post pictures of violence?
...
It made sense when Bahlactus first suggested it.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Chorus Member
I'm watching all of the outrage I linked get described as herdthink, cliquish, and just a general hivemind. Honestly, though, herdthink? Don't these people know anything about comics or communities? Birds of a feather and all that. People with like minds link each other and friend each other and react in much the same way. So, people linking Devil Doll are, on the whole, reacting like she does. Communities build on communities like a chain. You read someone and someone else reads you, you link someone and that someone who reads you also links them and the someone who reads that someone links them and so on. Some posts don't get linked. Some get linked once. Some get linked multiple times and some things become an internet fad in themselves, to the point that ten years and ten thousand links later someone writes a quote on a picture of his cat and everyone laughs, but almost nobody knows the origin of the phrase.
This particular outrage went a long way and through blogs I've never seen before. It's burned fast and bright. I linked Lisa on Wednesday, Devil Doll posted on Thursday and Thursday night and it carried through the movie fandoms. When I got home I had so many links I had to take another day to compile them in a separate post (figured it would be easier if people could link it if they were interested in responses, and that it wouldn't detract from the other discussions). This didn't happen because of follow the leader, it happened because it resonated with a lot of people. A lot of people saw that post and had the same reaction to the pictures, so they linked it. And it travels on.
Its incredible, though, how some things can get people talking. A lot of these are new blogs, but a lot of these are people I read every day. Blogs I constantly monitor, some of them are regular WFA commenters. There's such a range of interests there, and opinions. One person likes cheesecake to a certain point, another thinks its all bad and a third is okay so long as the problem is writing. They post and rant and analyze and argue amongst themselves until something happens, something big, to make a large number of these different voices speak in chorus.
But to some people, all outrage is the same. Even though there are different players using different arguments in each fight. Even though there are alliances drawn and redrawn every day (I watch this every day -- I've seen bloggers engage in bitter fights with and then become the darlings of the Fan Feminist Community over a period of a month), somehow the last three major outrages are proof of a growing hive mentality and my website is somehow the center of this.
When I see people like Kalinara and Livia, who have completely different approaches to their Feminism debate on the same side, I don't call that a hive mentality. I don't call Colleen Doran and AriellaDrake using the same talking point (coincidentally, it was "feminists are not a monolithic entity") a hive mentality. I call it a fricking miracle.
Yes, there's been a lot of buzzing. There's all out rage over stuff I never thought twice over, which I don't mind. I enjoy watching a good fight (though I thought that the deleting of complaints was more offensive than the statue). Its annoying when its coupled with complete and utter ignorance of things I figured were pretty important. Plus there's the trashing of a hobby I love by outsiders. The fans who think that non-American comics are somehow less sexist are getting on my fucking nerves here. Have they never seen an anime or manga-based toy?
That's nothing, however, to the people who go through the links and think that there's a swarm a drones following some Alien Amazon Queen in her outrage. The communities doesn't work that way, not on this scale.
Anyway, the initial shock seems to be subsiding, and I'm seeing more thoughtful responses. I will admit I used to be more thoughtful, though.
I was thinking about it as I answered this person with a link to a previous post.
I think I may be at the point where, if I could muster the energy to sort through my archives, i could answer everyone with a past post, because we're seeing so many things I've seen since I started blogging. I just finished reading Where the Girls Are, which goes over the history of Feminism and the Mass Media from the 60s to the 90s. It all looked so familiar. Same old song, only I experienced those thirty years in just three years it seems with comics alone.
Kalinara and I are the only people who have read every link at When Fangirls Attack as they were posted. No one else knew us in those first couple of days, but we read everything as we posted and even if we were forced to skim we went back and read it.
I read every single link I linked on that stupid statue. I've read every single anti-feminist link I've put on there and I treasure them as I find them. They're conversation builders. People answer them, and rant and rave and rationalize and agree and disagree and keep talking. Someone asked me if I ever ran out of outraged. I told her I did all the time, but I enjoyed a good fight so that kept me going.
But I'm just getting so sick and tired of hearing the same stupid arguments over and over again from people who thinking they are new and haven't been addressed before. People who think they're clever and that such an "insight" will stop others in their tracks. People who are dismissive.
I'm losing my temper with them. I've seen it so damned often. I've seen it from people who have seen it themselves. I've seen the fannishness. I've seen the absurdity. I've seen the hypocrisy. I linked it all and fumed as I did.
When I started blogging Feminism, I got complimented on my patience and my accessibility. Now more often I'm described as crazy, overreacting, and over the top. I'm also getting linked as the feminist poster girl for conversations I never weighed in on. That's weird. I'm losing readers for my focus sharpening (to the point I'm livejournalling all of my non-comics stuff) even as WFA is gaining them. That's weird, because this blog was originally for everything and WFA was born of specialization.
Oh, and for those of you who don't think ranting about Power Girl's boobs ever did anyone any good. I got politically aware through the Fan Feminists I've met and the places my comic book articles were linked. So don't tell me this is a waste of energy. This kind of thinking reverberates into real life, whether you're the one carrying it from fandom to reality or you've taken it from fandom to reality.
They mirror each other. Just as we're in a backlash against the Women's Movement in the political media, we seem to be in the midst of the backlash from Women in Refrigerators still. As the companies and the fanboys get meaner, louder, and more explicit, so do the Feminists. They attack from all sides, so do the Feminists. The companies attack each other, the fanboys attack each other, the antifeminists attack the Feminists who attack other Feminists who attack antifeminists who attack fanboys and feminists who team up to attack the companies. Its become a wild repetitive dance where the music just gets faster and faster and we change partners and costumes in mid-twirl.
Its all the same old song, a little bit louder and a little bit worse each time. Each time you hear the part where they throw us a great female character, its better than before. Each time they then kill her off, its just a bit worse than before. Each piece of cheesecake is just a bit worse than the last. Each part where someone waves their hand and dismisses someone with "Its just a comic book", "Its for men anyway", "You should be blogging about women in the Middle East instead" and "Well, I'M a WOMAN and I'm not offended" is just a little bit louder and a little bit worse than the last time I heard it, and that was the worst part of the dance to begin with.
There's one good point.
As I told someone earlier, I disagree with Girl-Wonder.org members vocally and regularly. But I don't dismiss them. Being dismissed unites people in rage against the dismisser. Douglas, in the aforementioned book, notes how being dismissed by the news media in the beginning of the women's movement drew women of many different ideologies together. They made a common enemy of themselves.
I think that's the driving force behind the recent surge in comic book feminist blogging. The companies are dismissing us. With every fetish statue, porn-inspired cover, male-focused marketing campaign, pink ghetto and closed fridge door they're dismissing women as superhero fans. Then when we stand up and say "We're here! We've been here! And it would be nice if you didn't actively try to run us out of here!" we're accused of asking for special treatment, and dismissed again. After you notice too much of that (and you can't stop noticing it) you either take the hint and leave or (held captive by your love of the basic concepts of the genre, your appreciation for the medium, and your desperate fannish need to cling to your childhood dreams) you decide you've had enough and write rude letters to Peter Tomasi about the lack of female characters in Green Lantern.
At the same time, a hundred other women decide they've had enough, and sent in postcards about the Spoiler.
Now, we have more women who've decided they've had enough. Some are probably taking the hint, while others are sending letters (ranging from the polite to disgusted to enraged) to the helpfully provided addresses.
I like that. That's progress. That means the dance hall's getting crowded, even as (or probably because) the music's getting faster. We haven't hit the breaking point, though. Or we've passed it. I'm not sure I'd recognize the breaking point, but I figure its some point after somebody sends 12 T-Shirts to a major publisher addressed to the most scantily clad female characters, or sends them pink printouts of the resumes of feminist sci-fi novelists, along with what series they'd be best suited to write.
In the meantime, once this outrage dies down and people return to their respective blogging habits, I'll appreciate having the variety back. See, not every WFA link makes it to the major news and commentary sites so many people may not realize it but there are a lot of very different people in the comics blogosphere, even fi they seem to turn into an echo chamber when united through special provocation. Even then, it lasts for a day or so and some of the most incredible things you've ever read come through once people get their heads about them. Some of the most amazingly stupid things as well. The variety returns.
This particular outrage went a long way and through blogs I've never seen before. It's burned fast and bright. I linked Lisa on Wednesday, Devil Doll posted on Thursday and Thursday night and it carried through the movie fandoms. When I got home I had so many links I had to take another day to compile them in a separate post (figured it would be easier if people could link it if they were interested in responses, and that it wouldn't detract from the other discussions). This didn't happen because of follow the leader, it happened because it resonated with a lot of people. A lot of people saw that post and had the same reaction to the pictures, so they linked it. And it travels on.
Its incredible, though, how some things can get people talking. A lot of these are new blogs, but a lot of these are people I read every day. Blogs I constantly monitor, some of them are regular WFA commenters. There's such a range of interests there, and opinions. One person likes cheesecake to a certain point, another thinks its all bad and a third is okay so long as the problem is writing. They post and rant and analyze and argue amongst themselves until something happens, something big, to make a large number of these different voices speak in chorus.
But to some people, all outrage is the same. Even though there are different players using different arguments in each fight. Even though there are alliances drawn and redrawn every day (I watch this every day -- I've seen bloggers engage in bitter fights with and then become the darlings of the Fan Feminist Community over a period of a month), somehow the last three major outrages are proof of a growing hive mentality and my website is somehow the center of this.
When I see people like Kalinara and Livia, who have completely different approaches to their Feminism debate on the same side, I don't call that a hive mentality. I don't call Colleen Doran and AriellaDrake using the same talking point (coincidentally, it was "feminists are not a monolithic entity") a hive mentality. I call it a fricking miracle.
Yes, there's been a lot of buzzing. There's all out rage over stuff I never thought twice over, which I don't mind. I enjoy watching a good fight (though I thought that the deleting of complaints was more offensive than the statue). Its annoying when its coupled with complete and utter ignorance of things I figured were pretty important. Plus there's the trashing of a hobby I love by outsiders. The fans who think that non-American comics are somehow less sexist are getting on my fucking nerves here. Have they never seen an anime or manga-based toy?
That's nothing, however, to the people who go through the links and think that there's a swarm a drones following some Alien Amazon Queen in her outrage. The communities doesn't work that way, not on this scale.
Anyway, the initial shock seems to be subsiding, and I'm seeing more thoughtful responses. I will admit I used to be more thoughtful, though.
I was thinking about it as I answered this person with a link to a previous post.
I think I may be at the point where, if I could muster the energy to sort through my archives, i could answer everyone with a past post, because we're seeing so many things I've seen since I started blogging. I just finished reading Where the Girls Are, which goes over the history of Feminism and the Mass Media from the 60s to the 90s. It all looked so familiar. Same old song, only I experienced those thirty years in just three years it seems with comics alone.
Kalinara and I are the only people who have read every link at When Fangirls Attack as they were posted. No one else knew us in those first couple of days, but we read everything as we posted and even if we were forced to skim we went back and read it.
I read every single link I linked on that stupid statue. I've read every single anti-feminist link I've put on there and I treasure them as I find them. They're conversation builders. People answer them, and rant and rave and rationalize and agree and disagree and keep talking. Someone asked me if I ever ran out of outraged. I told her I did all the time, but I enjoyed a good fight so that kept me going.
But I'm just getting so sick and tired of hearing the same stupid arguments over and over again from people who thinking they are new and haven't been addressed before. People who think they're clever and that such an "insight" will stop others in their tracks. People who are dismissive.
I'm losing my temper with them. I've seen it so damned often. I've seen it from people who have seen it themselves. I've seen the fannishness. I've seen the absurdity. I've seen the hypocrisy. I linked it all and fumed as I did.
When I started blogging Feminism, I got complimented on my patience and my accessibility. Now more often I'm described as crazy, overreacting, and over the top. I'm also getting linked as the feminist poster girl for conversations I never weighed in on. That's weird. I'm losing readers for my focus sharpening (to the point I'm livejournalling all of my non-comics stuff) even as WFA is gaining them. That's weird, because this blog was originally for everything and WFA was born of specialization.
Oh, and for those of you who don't think ranting about Power Girl's boobs ever did anyone any good. I got politically aware through the Fan Feminists I've met and the places my comic book articles were linked. So don't tell me this is a waste of energy. This kind of thinking reverberates into real life, whether you're the one carrying it from fandom to reality or you've taken it from fandom to reality.
They mirror each other. Just as we're in a backlash against the Women's Movement in the political media, we seem to be in the midst of the backlash from Women in Refrigerators still. As the companies and the fanboys get meaner, louder, and more explicit, so do the Feminists. They attack from all sides, so do the Feminists. The companies attack each other, the fanboys attack each other, the antifeminists attack the Feminists who attack other Feminists who attack antifeminists who attack fanboys and feminists who team up to attack the companies. Its become a wild repetitive dance where the music just gets faster and faster and we change partners and costumes in mid-twirl.
Its all the same old song, a little bit louder and a little bit worse each time. Each time you hear the part where they throw us a great female character, its better than before. Each time they then kill her off, its just a bit worse than before. Each piece of cheesecake is just a bit worse than the last. Each part where someone waves their hand and dismisses someone with "Its just a comic book", "Its for men anyway", "You should be blogging about women in the Middle East instead" and "Well, I'M a WOMAN and I'm not offended" is just a little bit louder and a little bit worse than the last time I heard it, and that was the worst part of the dance to begin with.
There's one good point.
As I told someone earlier, I disagree with Girl-Wonder.org members vocally and regularly. But I don't dismiss them. Being dismissed unites people in rage against the dismisser. Douglas, in the aforementioned book, notes how being dismissed by the news media in the beginning of the women's movement drew women of many different ideologies together. They made a common enemy of themselves.
I think that's the driving force behind the recent surge in comic book feminist blogging. The companies are dismissing us. With every fetish statue, porn-inspired cover, male-focused marketing campaign, pink ghetto and closed fridge door they're dismissing women as superhero fans. Then when we stand up and say "We're here! We've been here! And it would be nice if you didn't actively try to run us out of here!" we're accused of asking for special treatment, and dismissed again. After you notice too much of that (and you can't stop noticing it) you either take the hint and leave or (held captive by your love of the basic concepts of the genre, your appreciation for the medium, and your desperate fannish need to cling to your childhood dreams) you decide you've had enough and write rude letters to Peter Tomasi about the lack of female characters in Green Lantern.
At the same time, a hundred other women decide they've had enough, and sent in postcards about the Spoiler.
Now, we have more women who've decided they've had enough. Some are probably taking the hint, while others are sending letters (ranging from the polite to disgusted to enraged) to the helpfully provided addresses.
I like that. That's progress. That means the dance hall's getting crowded, even as (or probably because) the music's getting faster. We haven't hit the breaking point, though. Or we've passed it. I'm not sure I'd recognize the breaking point, but I figure its some point after somebody sends 12 T-Shirts to a major publisher addressed to the most scantily clad female characters, or sends them pink printouts of the resumes of feminist sci-fi novelists, along with what series they'd be best suited to write.
In the meantime, once this outrage dies down and people return to their respective blogging habits, I'll appreciate having the variety back. See, not every WFA link makes it to the major news and commentary sites so many people may not realize it but there are a lot of very different people in the comics blogosphere, even fi they seem to turn into an echo chamber when united through special provocation. Even then, it lasts for a day or so and some of the most incredible things you've ever read come through once people get their heads about them. Some of the most amazingly stupid things as well. The variety returns.
Its spreading beyond even the movie fans now.
Holy crap, we just got Boing Boinged.
This is after clearing Feministe and Pandagon (but Pandagon didn't link When Fangirls Attack!)
Given that the Batwoman fracas started outside the community in a huge venue like the New York Times, and this one flared up at a personal livejournal, I'd say its officially bigger than Batwoman.
Not bad for a statue that only got a few eyerolls two months ago.
This is after clearing Feministe and Pandagon (but Pandagon didn't link When Fangirls Attack!)
Given that the Batwoman fracas started outside the community in a huge venue like the New York Times, and this one flared up at a personal livejournal, I'd say its officially bigger than Batwoman.
Not bad for a statue that only got a few eyerolls two months ago.
What a way with words!
Eumelia:
The poor Boys have to deal with the fact that many, many Girls are entering (or already inside) the Comic Book Club Tree House and are rearranging the furniture, just a little, so that they don't have to sit on the floor or the other boys' laps.
Monday, May 14, 2007
Name That Troll!
I've been graced by trolls recently. They are poor trolls, however, for they were unable to afford even standard internet handles. Normally, I don't give gifts to the unnamed, but such brave words are truly deserving of a description sobriquette.
So, we're going to have a little contest. I'll give you the comment, you give the troll a name. You get points for wittiness, accuracy, and creativity.
Anonymous #1 is a comment I've been saving for a few weeks (that was left on a much older post):
Next up, we have Anonymous #2 from just a few days ago:
Moving on, we come to Anonymous #3 from yesterday:
That's all I found today, but these three brave persons are clearly deserving of names for their controversial opinions. What do you suggest?
So, we're going to have a little contest. I'll give you the comment, you give the troll a name. You get points for wittiness, accuracy, and creativity.
Anonymous #1 is a comment I've been saving for a few weeks (that was left on a much older post):
Get a grip folks - the new costume is 600,000% better than the previous. It's daring, it's provocative, and really not that much more revealing than the costumes of, say Wonder Woman or Namor.This person was referring to this costume, and seems to think that comparing a scantily clad woman to Namor in a discussion is a novel idea. I'm sorry Anonymous #1, but that complaint is so old its only Comics Community Anti-Feminist Cliche #8. We're on #305 by now.
Funny how nobody ever objects to a guy in a scaly green speedo, but Star Sapphire, OH NO.
Next up, we have Anonymous #2 from just a few days ago:
I think I have finally figured out why we Americans are one of the most aggressive nations in history! We are TERRIFIED of sexuality! In most of the civilized world, this statue would not prompt the perverted, blue-balled, artificially hysteric revulsion to playful erotica as it does here in the good old USA. Is it "feminism's" fault? "Puritanism's" fault? I don't know, but "I tremble for my country" and all that...I'd wager that Anonymous #2 believes very strongly that bikinis made out of the American Flag are patriotic. And I worry about his sex life.
Moving on, we come to Anonymous #3 from yesterday:
Oh for god's sake. What the hell is wrong with you people? The idea for that statue is BRILLIANT, and it looks cool too, except for the eyes that seem to be of slipshod make.Anonymous #3 enjoys doing laundry by hand without even a washboard, wearing thongs and a shirt two sizes too small, bending over with a special joint located in the thighs, and smiling while in this position. Let's give a hand to Anonymous #3!
Anybody who gets furious over that statue officially hates FUN.
That's all I found today, but these three brave persons are clearly deserving of names for their controversial opinions. What do you suggest?
Editorial Simmering
If anyone wonders at my generally foul temper, my quick descent into condescension, and the gradually sharpening tone of my writing style, I have an explanation.
I read every fucking link I post on When Fangirls Attack.
Normally I can take some delight in the more spirited debates, and in widespread rages I can usually find some lovely new blogs that combine comics and feminism regularly. I always look back at the recent posts on any new blog to see if there's other posts that suit my interest, and if they are worth reading. Its my little joy.
Well, that and watching people rant at each other.
But this Mary Jane thing has been beyond irksome. I've logged over 150 posts on it (and I have twenty-some in the folder, and more places to look still), and at least two-thirds of those are blogs I've never seen before.
And out of all of those brand new (to me) blogs, I've gotten maybe two livejournals that are worth keeping an eye on. A few Feminist blogs, a lot of movie fans, but few of them seem to discuss comic books aside from this.
I want ice cream, and a comic starring Mary Jane Watson-Parker in which she uses Laundry Fu to kick the asses of a bunch of Nazis who have kidnapped Peter to experiment on him and clone a master race of Super-Aryan-Spidermen.
Written by Beau Smith, of course.
I read every fucking link I post on When Fangirls Attack.
Normally I can take some delight in the more spirited debates, and in widespread rages I can usually find some lovely new blogs that combine comics and feminism regularly. I always look back at the recent posts on any new blog to see if there's other posts that suit my interest, and if they are worth reading. Its my little joy.
Well, that and watching people rant at each other.
But this Mary Jane thing has been beyond irksome. I've logged over 150 posts on it (and I have twenty-some in the folder, and more places to look still), and at least two-thirds of those are blogs I've never seen before.
And out of all of those brand new (to me) blogs, I've gotten maybe two livejournals that are worth keeping an eye on. A few Feminist blogs, a lot of movie fans, but few of them seem to discuss comic books aside from this.
I want ice cream, and a comic starring Mary Jane Watson-Parker in which she uses Laundry Fu to kick the asses of a bunch of Nazis who have kidnapped Peter to experiment on him and clone a master race of Super-Aryan-Spidermen.
Written by Beau Smith, of course.
Sunday, May 13, 2007
Happy Mother's Day
Hey, I've got an hour left for a Mother's Day post, and I had work today.
And I sent Mom flowers and called her from work, so this is technically a blogging formality.
*Ahem* Anyway...
And I sent Mom flowers and called her from work, so this is technically a blogging formality.
*Ahem* Anyway...
More contact info -- to complain to Marvel
Angry at Marvel over something? Sadly, Quedsada's just the EIC and can't do anything for you if its not a comic book, but Guy has the goods on who can:
Quesada = Didio / Levitz = Dan Buckley. And yeah, I suspect the statue is something the comics side of the business has little control over; not unlike the movies.Oh, and since Dan Didio's only as powerful at DC as Quesada is at Marvel, those of you outraged over the Supergirl, Catwoman, and Barda statues might want to try here:
Contact licensing here or here:
Marvel Licensing Department
Marvel Entertainment, Inc.
417 5th Avenue
New York, NY 10016
Also, if you're serious about this, I'd suggest contacting
Alan Fine, President and Chief Executive Officer of Toy Biz and Publishing Division (same address), and their PR rep Jeff Klein (jeff_klein@dkcnews.com), Executive Vice President, Dan Klores Communications.
Paul Levitz, Publisher
DC Comics
1700 Broadway
NYC, NY 10019
Friday, May 11, 2007
Yeah, that's not going to work out.
About this shit (again). Found this comment:
I went to the Marvel comics website and Joe Quesada's blog. (Joe Quesada is the Editor in Chief, he writes about interesting things. His blog is here: http://www.marvel.com/blogs/Joe_Quesada/). I commented, asking him if he'd write about the approval process for this figurine.Marvel's silencing complaints too. Screencaps, people, screencaps.
Two hours later, my comment was deleted.
Do you think Marvel is trying to pretend the whole thing never happened?
Please, let this be good.
This one's due out June 6th. I really liked this character when I was a little girl. Please let this be a good story.
Debunk this.
Check out what a simple google search brings up:
And that's a report from just September of last year.
Now, I'm no marketing or television specialist but it supports my personal experience where I know both men and women who urge me to watch this show.
If there's an experienced person out there who can debunk this argument without resorting to stupid cliches about women watching to land a man, feel free.
At 9 p.m. ET, the debut of "Heroes" (5.9 rating, 14 share in 18-49, 14.3 million viewers overall) delivered NBC's highest 18-49 for any fall drama premiere in five years (since "Crossing Jordan" on Monday, Sept. 24, 2001). "Heroes" soared above the time period competition in the key demographic of adults 18-49, with a 31 percent margin of victory over second place (5.9 vs. a 4.5 for CBS' comedies). Pending updates, "Heroes" also won the hour in total viewers, adults, men and women 18-34 and other key measures.Hey, that flat out says that more women were tuning in to a show about people with powers and abilities beyond that of normal men and women than any other show that night. They won the overall "Adults" demographic, rather than just the "men." Why that would imply that there was an interest in superheros from both men and women.
And that's a report from just September of last year.
Now, I'm no marketing or television specialist but it supports my personal experience where I know both men and women who urge me to watch this show.
If there's an experienced person out there who can debunk this argument without resorting to stupid cliches about women watching to land a man, feel free.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
That won't do at all.
I've been tracking the commentary sparked by this post (which was itself sparked by this post, which was itself sparked by this obscenity) for When Fangirls Attack when I saw this update on Devil Doll's entry:
(And send me that link, as this is a lot of rage to keep track of for WFA.)
ETA Again 9PM Central: Several people have left comments in the thread at Sideshow. They've all been deleted at some point in the last hour or so.I have a solution to that. Screencap your complaint after you post it, print out the screencap and fax/mail it to the company through the contact information Impertinence provided:
Sideshow CollectiblesI also advise posting the screencaps on your blogs and journals if they delete your comment.
2630 Conejo Spectrum Street
Thousand Oaks, CA 91320
toll-free: 1-800-474-3746
ph: 1-805-214-2100
fx: 1-805-214-2190
(And send me that link, as this is a lot of rage to keep track of for WFA.)
*Twitch*
Remember what I said last post about arguing from a reasoning point of view?
Forget it, its time to rant.
What pisses me off more than anything here, more than the oft-repeated argument, is she's trying to sugar-coat it with "I know you like them honey, but its a pointless fight" which is what she has been telling us on her blog for months. Note her last paragraph:
Either give me that irrefutable argument, tell me what in Skadi's name is so exclusive in its appeal to male fans and is so inherent in the genre that they are justified in repeatedly alienating female fans, or shut the fuck up with this "superhero comics are for boys" meme because it is pissing me and a lot of other female superhero fans off greatly and I'd wager you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
Forget it, its time to rant.
What this girl is is unusual or non-standard or atypical or whatever adjective you’d care to use. (She reads superhero comics and wants to know what that makes her, since they “aren’t for girls”.)Now, on first glance you might think this argument is a parody, but I'm afraid she's said it before in just as condescending a manner.
“Superhero comics aren’t for girls” is true the same way “romance novels aren’t for boys” or “action movies aren’t for girls” are. They’re gender-identified genres. The people who make them and the majority of the people who consume them know who their audience tends to be. Recognizing that doesn’t make you sexist or invalidate anyone’s tastes; it’s just realism. “Chick lit” and fashion mags are aimed at women; Mack Bolan books and gun and car mags are aimed at men.
What pisses me off more than anything here, more than the oft-repeated argument, is she's trying to sugar-coat it with "I know you like them honey, but its a pointless fight" which is what she has been telling us on her blog for months. Note her last paragraph:
I’m sure there are occasional males who read romance novels, too, but if one started blogging about how the genre needed to be overhauled to be made more attractive to men, they’d be giggled at… and rightly so. Everyone wants to think that they’re a reasonable model to use to represent the general public, that everyone else is just like them down deep, but in some cases, it’s just not so. As an old friend once told me, “weirdness is a compliment”. Be glad you’re unusual, and realize the “mainstream” will rarely suit you.Now what I want to know, before I Hulk out, is what in the genre inherently makes it male. Give me a reasonable argument, something that is fundamental to superheroes that can not be removed without gutting the basic concept of a superhero (sorry kiddos, sexist art doesn't cut it because 40s and 60s superhero comics didn't look like porn and they still worked), something that can not work with genders reversed, something that I can't link an post countering it to prove that it is actually gender-neutral or even appeals to our feminine cultural experience more than it does to a masculine cultural experience.
Either give me that irrefutable argument, tell me what in Skadi's name is so exclusive in its appeal to male fans and is so inherent in the genre that they are justified in repeatedly alienating female fans, or shut the fuck up with this "superhero comics are for boys" meme because it is pissing me and a lot of other female superhero fans off greatly and I'd wager you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
This needs a more solid stance
Recently it was revealed that Dan Didio wanted to keep Isis alive, which has spawned a number of bemused and confused reactions that I think need to be addressed.
1) From everything I've seen and heard them say or publish -- the editors, the writers, and the artists on the whole do not think about how women are portrayed in comics. They don't think about the patterns. They don't think about the subtext. They don't think about how it looks. They are, in general, clueless, and have been for a long, long time. That is the problem. That is what needs to be fixed. You can't assume awareness because even their recent attempts to reach female readers have betrayed their cluelessness on a number of issues.
So, Mr. Didio wanting to off a character or save a character is most likely based on whether or not he likes that character, or whether or not he feels he can sell that character. I believe that "we can't sell girls/gays/minorities" comes into the equation when deciding whether or not a character can be sold or is liked, but its highly unlikely that this is a conscious train of thought.
This is not indicative of a change in attitude of Dan Didio's, or a criminal record of Mark Waid's (he has a genuinely mixed record at handling female characters, hardly Miller's rap sheet). I haven't seen any evidence that they think on that level.
2) This is not indicative of Gail Simone being part of the problem. I don't know this came up, as she had shit-all to do with 52, but it was mentioned a few times. Anyway, just to point out, she had shit-all to do with 52 and likely couldn't have saved Isis.
3) Real people are not perfectly good or bad. They are not even consistently good or bad. Someone who writes an awesome character such as Soranik Natu may kill off a female character in as pathetic a scene as Jade's. Creators have ups and downs. Someone who's decisions you usually dislike holding an opinion you agree with, or someone you usually like doing something you dislike really isn't this big a deal.
4) The treatment of Ralph Dibny and Isis is not a good case for the double-standard. Dibny's an established fan-favorite with a few decades of history behind him, and in his little ending they tried their best to rectify the beginning of Identity Crisis which caused much outrage way back when. Isis was a character completely contained within the story of 52, based loosely on an old character who had some popularity from her TV show. The treatment of Isis and Daniel Carter? There you've got an argument.
Now, none of the above points is a reason not to criticize the work in question, even though personally I'm not bothered by Isis. She's got Egyptian symbolism, is tied to a character who's getting his own series, and the Editor-in-Chief wanted to keep her alive. That's a recipe for resurrection. Plus, we had enough (Montoya, Batwoman, and the Dibny resolutions) to balance it out in this series. Sure, if they'd offed Natu instead I'd be mailing catshit to Tomasi right now, but I'd like to think I can keep some perspective on exactly what to criticize. I can see where you're coming from, just exactly what you're poking at is awkward here.
Anyway, I recognize that there's an argument to be made from her death. I'm just asking you to please, please, when you criticize matters of social issues in creative works, don't assume a conscious pattern. This is a problem that lies at the base of societal gender roles. Never attribute to malice what can be better attributed to laziness. Its considerably more likely unconscious and you can argue a better reason for change from a wider base of evidence without alienating the people who are capable of making the necessary changes when you lead it back to cliches and trends.
Plus you just look better in the long run.
1) From everything I've seen and heard them say or publish -- the editors, the writers, and the artists on the whole do not think about how women are portrayed in comics. They don't think about the patterns. They don't think about the subtext. They don't think about how it looks. They are, in general, clueless, and have been for a long, long time. That is the problem. That is what needs to be fixed. You can't assume awareness because even their recent attempts to reach female readers have betrayed their cluelessness on a number of issues.
So, Mr. Didio wanting to off a character or save a character is most likely based on whether or not he likes that character, or whether or not he feels he can sell that character. I believe that "we can't sell girls/gays/minorities" comes into the equation when deciding whether or not a character can be sold or is liked, but its highly unlikely that this is a conscious train of thought.
This is not indicative of a change in attitude of Dan Didio's, or a criminal record of Mark Waid's (he has a genuinely mixed record at handling female characters, hardly Miller's rap sheet). I haven't seen any evidence that they think on that level.
2) This is not indicative of Gail Simone being part of the problem. I don't know this came up, as she had shit-all to do with 52, but it was mentioned a few times. Anyway, just to point out, she had shit-all to do with 52 and likely couldn't have saved Isis.
3) Real people are not perfectly good or bad. They are not even consistently good or bad. Someone who writes an awesome character such as Soranik Natu may kill off a female character in as pathetic a scene as Jade's. Creators have ups and downs. Someone who's decisions you usually dislike holding an opinion you agree with, or someone you usually like doing something you dislike really isn't this big a deal.
4) The treatment of Ralph Dibny and Isis is not a good case for the double-standard. Dibny's an established fan-favorite with a few decades of history behind him, and in his little ending they tried their best to rectify the beginning of Identity Crisis which caused much outrage way back when. Isis was a character completely contained within the story of 52, based loosely on an old character who had some popularity from her TV show. The treatment of Isis and Daniel Carter? There you've got an argument.
Now, none of the above points is a reason not to criticize the work in question, even though personally I'm not bothered by Isis. She's got Egyptian symbolism, is tied to a character who's getting his own series, and the Editor-in-Chief wanted to keep her alive. That's a recipe for resurrection. Plus, we had enough (Montoya, Batwoman, and the Dibny resolutions) to balance it out in this series. Sure, if they'd offed Natu instead I'd be mailing catshit to Tomasi right now, but I'd like to think I can keep some perspective on exactly what to criticize. I can see where you're coming from, just exactly what you're poking at is awkward here.
Anyway, I recognize that there's an argument to be made from her death. I'm just asking you to please, please, when you criticize matters of social issues in creative works, don't assume a conscious pattern. This is a problem that lies at the base of societal gender roles. Never attribute to malice what can be better attributed to laziness. Its considerably more likely unconscious and you can argue a better reason for change from a wider base of evidence without alienating the people who are capable of making the necessary changes when you lead it back to cliches and trends.
Plus you just look better in the long run.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
I admire the overall attitude, but...
Y'know, Valkyrie, its nice to inspire your teammates but there's a fine line between leadership and dickery and you're getting pretty close with the puny males comment.
(I need to get my hands on some Defenders back issues.)
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
New Carnival Announced
Courtesy of Willow, the People of Colour SF Carnival:
Because Lt. Uhura should have had more lines. (ST: TOS)Tentatively scheduled for June 15th. Submission Guidelines at the link.
Because Kevin Sorbo was jealous of Keith Hamilton Cobb and wrote him out. (Andromeda)
Because among other butchery, the SciFi Channel made Ged white. (EarthSea)
Because Forrest was a plot point and Graham was an extra. (Btvs)
Because Ronon Dex is not a savagely sexual wild man. (SGA)
Because Ford deserved better. (SGA)
Because Goliath showed up only to get killed. (Marvel: CW)
Because Vixen should have been more than the other woman. (JLU)
Because it can feel isolating among other journalers and bloggers.
Because it could encourage other People of Color to speak up more.
Because Carl Lumbly should be remembered for MANTIS.
Because Milestone Media deserved more love.
Because there should be more shows like Afro Saumrai.
Because there should be more heroines like Jade and Juniper Lee.
Because Bianca Lawson tried out for the role of Cordelia Chase instead of Kendra. (BtVS)
Because Pete Ross drowned in a sea of nothingness (Smallville)
Because there are illustrators of color who don't get to put faces like theirs on the front of a SF book.
Can you think of more reasons? I'm sure you can.PoC SF Carnival: We Exist. And We Are Not Invisible
Undergarments of the Gods
BreastBlog 2007 is winding down, but it can not die until some poor woman has blogging specifically about underwear.
Its my turn this year.
And, as I have been shown this dreadful "Public Service" Announcement which blames female bloggers for creepy street harassment on the part of people who should be acting more professional, this post will involve me discussing my taste in underwear specifically, as well as that of several well-known superheroes. And if any of you should approach me on the street and mention my underwear in the hopes of creeping me out, expect to hear a 3-hour talk on the virtues of granny underwear. It will be far more detailed than you wish to know, and shall involve a tangent about two men kissing and the opportunities to view such an event, as well as a lecture on how the yellow weakness was the greatest arbitrary weakness conceived of in the Silver Age, a rant on George Perez's Wonder Woman reboot, and complaints about people who think Frigga and Freya are the same goddess.
Unless, of course, I don't have three hours, in which case I will mercilessly taunt your visible physical flaws.
Anyway, I've been recently made aware that a bouncing chest is considered a stumbling block, something very trying for men who are attempting to stare open-mouthed at a perfectly innocent young woman and keep their thoughts pure at the same time. I feel no pity or sympathy for a man I've caught staring when my chest moves, because whatever awkwardness is felt on their end can't be anything compared to being attached to the dreadful things. Oh sure, as a body part there's a certain amount of unconscious comfort to it. A Bounce Tolerance, so to speak. It differs for every woman, based on her size and her choice of support, but there's a certain amount of bouncing that is to be expected and can be ignored. Even then, however, we are all well-aware of the bounce and know that nothing can be done to stop it (to be honest its quite rude to remind us of that fact, because its uncomfortable enough to know that your flesh is bouncing without some person calling attention to it!). Some women don't give a damn either way, but most women will take steps to minimize the bouncing. I'm one of those women who care very much about minimizing the bouncing.
For me, its a matter of comfort as well as self-consciousness. I don't like feeling that bounce. I don't like thinking about that bounce. I don't like others watching that bounce, and seeing others watch that bounce just makes me think more and more about how I don't like feeling that bounce or thinking about that bounce. This puts me in a foul mood and leads to a great deal of unpleasantness at work and on the internet.
Yes, that's right, Ragnell the Foul is cranky because her chest bounces too much. And here I bet you thought my shoes were too tight.
After evaluating various bras on comfort, dressing time, amount of movement, appearance, and durability, I discovered the perfect bra for me a few years ago. It has a racer back, a back-closing clasp, and an underwire. It happens to be about two cup sizes too small right now, and distributes my flesh into what my sister refers to as the "uniboob" but trust me once I get that contraption fastened there is as little bounce as possible and that is precisely how I like it. I find bouncing to be very unpleasant.
It may be surprising (well, to new readers at least -- "Hello to any perverts out there who googled women's underwear and came up my insane ramblings!") that I looked at Amanda Conner's Power Girl costume design and thought of that bra.
Its the creases, actually, and the fact that the costume does not appear to separate the breasts but instead distributes them into the aforementioned uniboob and looks a couple cup sizes too small. Adjusting for artist interpretation, I'd say an actual Power Girl costume would not dip so low on the breasts and instead would have the same effect as my favorite sports bra -- as much restriction of bounce as possible. There's still going to be some natural jigglyness, but absolutely nothing can be done about that with our society's support technology.
Which brings me to Wonder Woman. She is from a society of women that has existed independently of men for three thousand years, and has access to divine magic. If anyone can make a better bra, its the Amazons.
When Jodi Piccoult was hired, she was quoted as asking to change the costume because she thought a bustier would be difficult to fight crime in. A bustier is an undergarment which supports the bust from underneath, usually with plastic ribbing. I'm with Piccoult in that I think a bustier such as the red top that Diana wears would be difficult to fight crime in. Honestly, I think that a bustier such as the red top Diana wears would be difficult to do anything in. Diana's costume, however, was designed by the Amazons who must have superior brassiere technology.
By that logic, I propose that Wonder Woman is not actually wearing a bustier. Her bust is supported by the gold breastplate that lies on top of the red material.
It only makes sense. That belt is the girdle of Gaia, a major divine artifact. Those bracers are forged from Aegis, a major divine artifact. Her tiara is forged for Amazon royalty. Surely its not too out of the question to assume her breastplate has magic properties as well?
Some artists draw a tiny, tiny WW, but the Byrne years depicted the WW (and the classic eagle) with a decent amount of coverage. The eagle could clearly be a bra in itself, but the WW probably works with the red material to lift, cradle, and stablize the WonderTwins as well as protect Diana's vital organs. In most drawings it molds to her chest shape and likely has an attached underwire threaded through the red part of the costume. There's probably a decent amount of padding for comfort underneath the gold and surrounding the underwire. Add Diana's gift of flight and magic properties associated with any of Wonder Woman's gear and that bra must feel like an extension of her body, never too restrictive, never too loose, an undergarment forged by Hephaestus himself!
Yes, I have considered this at great length.
But there can always be a better bra. I think the capabilities of one are in the hands of Lorna Dane (Polaris) and Francis Kane (Magenta) of Marvel and DC respectively.
When I first saw the X-Men trailers a few years ago, I watched a clip of Magneto spontaneously create a bridge with random plates of metal as he was walking across it and was struck by the potential breast-tech applications of magnetic powers. From how I've seen magnetic powers used, a person can tear metal apart and assemble a costume over their body that fits their form absolutely perfectly. As this is made entirely of metal, there is no chance of it moving, and if those breasts are snugly contained and supported in the metallic bra there will be absolutely no bouncing. Its form fitting, so it lifts and separates if you want it to. No need for an underwire, as the entire outfit is an underwire. With the right kind of padding it could be very comfortable, and since you made it on your own it certainly wouldn't restrict breathing. And in addition to all of that you can reasonably expect it to withhold against most attacks.
I'd go so far as to say that if I could have any superpower I wanted, it would be magnetic powers to aid in the construction of the Ideal Support Garment.
In retrospect I suppose this is the mentality that led to the corset.
It would cut down on bounce, though. I certainly wouldn't want bounce if I was fighting crime.
Its my turn this year.
And, as I have been shown this dreadful "Public Service" Announcement which blames female bloggers for creepy street harassment on the part of people who should be acting more professional, this post will involve me discussing my taste in underwear specifically, as well as that of several well-known superheroes. And if any of you should approach me on the street and mention my underwear in the hopes of creeping me out, expect to hear a 3-hour talk on the virtues of granny underwear. It will be far more detailed than you wish to know, and shall involve a tangent about two men kissing and the opportunities to view such an event, as well as a lecture on how the yellow weakness was the greatest arbitrary weakness conceived of in the Silver Age, a rant on George Perez's Wonder Woman reboot, and complaints about people who think Frigga and Freya are the same goddess.
Unless, of course, I don't have three hours, in which case I will mercilessly taunt your visible physical flaws.
Anyway, I've been recently made aware that a bouncing chest is considered a stumbling block, something very trying for men who are attempting to stare open-mouthed at a perfectly innocent young woman and keep their thoughts pure at the same time. I feel no pity or sympathy for a man I've caught staring when my chest moves, because whatever awkwardness is felt on their end can't be anything compared to being attached to the dreadful things. Oh sure, as a body part there's a certain amount of unconscious comfort to it. A Bounce Tolerance, so to speak. It differs for every woman, based on her size and her choice of support, but there's a certain amount of bouncing that is to be expected and can be ignored. Even then, however, we are all well-aware of the bounce and know that nothing can be done to stop it (to be honest its quite rude to remind us of that fact, because its uncomfortable enough to know that your flesh is bouncing without some person calling attention to it!). Some women don't give a damn either way, but most women will take steps to minimize the bouncing. I'm one of those women who care very much about minimizing the bouncing.
For me, its a matter of comfort as well as self-consciousness. I don't like feeling that bounce. I don't like thinking about that bounce. I don't like others watching that bounce, and seeing others watch that bounce just makes me think more and more about how I don't like feeling that bounce or thinking about that bounce. This puts me in a foul mood and leads to a great deal of unpleasantness at work and on the internet.
Yes, that's right, Ragnell the Foul is cranky because her chest bounces too much. And here I bet you thought my shoes were too tight.
After evaluating various bras on comfort, dressing time, amount of movement, appearance, and durability, I discovered the perfect bra for me a few years ago. It has a racer back, a back-closing clasp, and an underwire. It happens to be about two cup sizes too small right now, and distributes my flesh into what my sister refers to as the "uniboob" but trust me once I get that contraption fastened there is as little bounce as possible and that is precisely how I like it. I find bouncing to be very unpleasant.
It may be surprising (well, to new readers at least -- "Hello to any perverts out there who googled women's underwear and came up my insane ramblings!") that I looked at Amanda Conner's Power Girl costume design and thought of that bra.Its the creases, actually, and the fact that the costume does not appear to separate the breasts but instead distributes them into the aforementioned uniboob and looks a couple cup sizes too small. Adjusting for artist interpretation, I'd say an actual Power Girl costume would not dip so low on the breasts and instead would have the same effect as my favorite sports bra -- as much restriction of bounce as possible. There's still going to be some natural jigglyness, but absolutely nothing can be done about that with our society's support technology.
Which brings me to Wonder Woman. She is from a society of women that has existed independently of men for three thousand years, and has access to divine magic. If anyone can make a better bra, its the Amazons.
When Jodi Piccoult was hired, she was quoted as asking to change the costume because she thought a bustier would be difficult to fight crime in. A bustier is an undergarment which supports the bust from underneath, usually with plastic ribbing. I'm with Piccoult in that I think a bustier such as the red top that Diana wears would be difficult to fight crime in. Honestly, I think that a bustier such as the red top Diana wears would be difficult to do anything in. Diana's costume, however, was designed by the Amazons who must have superior brassiere technology.
By that logic, I propose that Wonder Woman is not actually wearing a bustier. Her bust is supported by the gold breastplate that lies on top of the red material.It only makes sense. That belt is the girdle of Gaia, a major divine artifact. Those bracers are forged from Aegis, a major divine artifact. Her tiara is forged for Amazon royalty. Surely its not too out of the question to assume her breastplate has magic properties as well?
Some artists draw a tiny, tiny WW, but the Byrne years depicted the WW (and the classic eagle) with a decent amount of coverage. The eagle could clearly be a bra in itself, but the WW probably works with the red material to lift, cradle, and stablize the WonderTwins as well as protect Diana's vital organs. In most drawings it molds to her chest shape and likely has an attached underwire threaded through the red part of the costume. There's probably a decent amount of padding for comfort underneath the gold and surrounding the underwire. Add Diana's gift of flight and magic properties associated with any of Wonder Woman's gear and that bra must feel like an extension of her body, never too restrictive, never too loose, an undergarment forged by Hephaestus himself!
Yes, I have considered this at great length.
But there can always be a better bra. I think the capabilities of one are in the hands of Lorna Dane (Polaris) and Francis Kane (Magenta) of Marvel and DC respectively.
When I first saw the X-Men trailers a few years ago, I watched a clip of Magneto spontaneously create a bridge with random plates of metal as he was walking across it and was struck by the potential breast-tech applications of magnetic powers. From how I've seen magnetic powers used, a person can tear metal apart and assemble a costume over their body that fits their form absolutely perfectly. As this is made entirely of metal, there is no chance of it moving, and if those breasts are snugly contained and supported in the metallic bra there will be absolutely no bouncing. Its form fitting, so it lifts and separates if you want it to. No need for an underwire, as the entire outfit is an underwire. With the right kind of padding it could be very comfortable, and since you made it on your own it certainly wouldn't restrict breathing. And in addition to all of that you can reasonably expect it to withhold against most attacks.
I'd go so far as to say that if I could have any superpower I wanted, it would be magnetic powers to aid in the construction of the Ideal Support Garment.
In retrospect I suppose this is the mentality that led to the corset.
It would cut down on bounce, though. I certainly wouldn't want bounce if I was fighting crime.
Personally, I'd prefer to call the whole month Breastfest 2007
From the comments of Breastblog 2007, on Power Girl's costume:
I don't mind her flaunting, I do mind artists and authors flaunting her *at* us.
Precisely. That's why I don't see why the window requires any explanation at all. Plenty of buxom women wear low necklines without expecting - let alone wanting! - to be leered at. It's the men that are the problem, not the choice of clothes. The comic book equivalent to that is that it's the way artists draw PG that is problematic, not the design of her costume per se.
Trying to 'explain' the costume just draws unwarranted attention to what isn't, in fact, the problem. And covering up her cleavage would, I'd argue, be conceding the sexist point, just as women shouldn't have to cover up just because some arseholes won't look them in the eye.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)