Good News!

The Wonder Woman direct-to-DVD animated movie is being cast:

Well, no firm release date, but the voice of Wonder Woman will be provided by Keri (Waitresws, MI: III) Russell, according to TV Guide’s Michael Ausiello. According to Ausiello, Russell is in “advanced talks” for the role in the animated feature, which is tentatively slated for a late ’08, early ’09 release. Russell was a favorite choice by many fans for the lead role in a live action Wonder Woman movie before said potential movie sank beneath the waves.

According to the original information Newsarama received in August, the Wonder Woman animated feature will be rated PG-13, and is described as follows:

On the mystical island of Themyscria, a proud and fierce warrior race of Amazons have raised a daughter of untold beauty, grace and strength – Princess Diana. When and army fighter pilot, Steve Trevor crash-lands on the island, the rebellious and headstrong Diana defies Amazonian law by accompanying Trevor back to civilization. Meanwhile, Ares (the god of War) has escaped his imprisonment at the hands of the Amazonians and has decided to exact his revenge using the mystical “Hand of Rage,” an ancient artifact with the power to raise armies from the dead and infuse them with a thirst for blood. Ares intends to start a world war that will not only last for centuries – but will wipe out every living being on the planet, starting with the Amazons! It is up to Princess Diana to save her people and the world – by using her gifts and becoming the ultimate Wonder Woman!

Russell will be the second actress to portray DC’s Amazonian princess in the company’s direct-to-DVD features, as Lucy Lawless is providing the character’s voice in JLA: The New Frontier, due for release on February 26th.

Well, I'm going to try and be optimistic about this one. I liked Superman: Doomsday.

They... umm... They misspelled Themiscyra in the press release.

"Hand of Rage" sounds pretty cool, though.

I need a distraction

(This'll be my seventh post, counting all three blogs, on this subject, but by now I'm pissed off. For the record, I wouldn't be posting so much if I hadn't made that resolution to post once a day.)

I was doing so well until I remember that artist who got a C&D notice over Batman. Then rage at the double-standards for male and female characters combined with rage at the fact that a lone artist gets bullied by WB goons but a big magazine like Playboy can get away whatever the fuck they want to really unsettle me for the whole night.

Fucking DC.

And the thing that kills me is once I chased Levitz down after a con panel to ask why Swamp Thing couldn't be in both DCU books and Vertigo books, just with different continuity, and he told me that he wanted to keep the all-ages books separate from adult books, so they try and keep the characters in their own imprints.

That's right, he wants to keep all-ages characters like their iconic superheroes separate from mature readers material.

But apparently it's okay for an all-ages character to be on the cover of Playboy.

Damn, I'm fuming.

Two more points on that WW cover.

(Continuing from my thoughts here and here)

1) For people who think I'm giving Playboy too much credit, Greg Rucka gives them more:

And, for those of you who consider such things, take a look at the banner on the Ms. cover. "Wonder Woman for President."

Do you really think it's a coincidence that Playboy chose this year, the issue for the month containing "Tsunami Tuesday," to run this particular pictorial? Do you really?

(ETA: But that's not the main point of this post. I'm not sure I can give Playboy so much credit for forethought. Still, another coincidence for the list has me trying to shake the crazy thoughts out of my head: the article is "Sex in America" and has a poll on voter sex lives and the upcoming election.)

2) DC has long complained that Wonder Woman just doesn't sell as well as it should.

Well, the original target audience for Wonder Woman was little girls. And here I'm about to have some commenter who has never read the Golden Age Wonder Woman stories pop up and tell me that she was created as kink material. Well, I've read the archives. I've read the interviews. Marston was kind of a nut (he was clearly turned on by female supremacy), but made her to draw in female readers. Check out the archives, guys. Read some of that old Marston stuff before you condemn him as nothing more than a creepy fetishist. He didn't have his bondage kink interfere with the ability of the reader to see her as inspiring, heroic, or strong. It wasn't humiliation and degradation. He wrote fun goofy adventure stories and rope tricks. He uses getting tied up a lot, but her main weapon was a lasso not a gun or a sword. It doesn't stop readers from seeing Wonder Woman as someone they want to be. He wrote a hero first.

The current target audience for Wonder Woman is not little girls. It's not even women. It's so hard to convince a lot of female readers to pick her up because a lot of people just think the character is nothing but kink material (I know a lot of feminists who question her credentials as a feminist character, and go back to that), and always has been. And stuff like this cover perpetuate that myth.

Problem with that is that the character's iconic traits demand that she be more than fetish material, so writing her that way just doesn't work. So people who go to her book for fetish material very likely put it back down too.

Basically what she has is a small core of highly dedicated fans who have loved her forever and were introduced through the television show, or their mother, or accident, or through a highly dedicated fan who went out of their way to show she wasn't just fetish material. While people outside of that small group of fans just write her off and resist reading her.

I have to wonder, does DC have any idea that this (stuff like that cover) is why they have trouble getting people to take her seriously? Why they have trouble getting women to read Wonder Woman, a character made for them?

If they're smart, they'll put their foot down and try and reclaim that image. Pink Raygun (NSFW) asked if we'd see a model as Batman in the same sort of thing. The answer's no. You won't see Batman in paint on the cover of Playgirl because DC protects their copyright to Batman, and goes out of their way to stop sexualized images of Batman. The character is money to them, they want to control how the public receives him.

Well, Playboy is considerably higher profile than the linked watercolor artist. But we don't see thing one from DC Comics about this cover.

If Warner Bros had any brains they'd realize they had the iconic female superhero in their company, and do something to prevent the public from randomly writing her off as someone's fetish.

Is it okay this time because Playboy is "Tasteful" (which could mean a) it's okay when it's done to women, b) it's okay because it's heterosexual, or c) it's okay because they have lots of money and have been around a while) do they just not give a damn about Wonder Woman?

ETA: More from Rucka

They won't. Playboy had to have permission to use the character, which means that, at the least, it was approved by Warner Bros., and at the worst, it was approved by WB and DC.

In that case:

Paul Levitz, Publisher
DC Comics
1700 Broadway
New York, NY 10019

Reason #256 the I enjoy time travel stories

I've been watching episodes of JLU this weekend, and I finally got to see the Once and Future Thing, where there's a time shift and John is replaced by Hal for a couple of scenes.

It's a really cool bit, because Hal steps right into the plot, and answers everyone's stares with "Another time shift. I'm Hal Jordan, I'm up to speed. Carry on." John doesn't miss a beat when he comes back. They're so natural about it.

They did this with Kyle and Hal in JLA/Avengers, too. I think I've seen it in a few other JLA stories. There's some sort of DCU law where for the purposes of a time travel story, any Green Lantern can replace any other Green Lantern, and they won't be fazed or confused by this.

I swear I've seen this in almost every time travel story where a Green Lantern appears. We can only hope the entire GLC never gets together during a time travel story, because the readers wouldn't be able to follow the scene with everyone changing positions. I imagine the characters would laugh it off, though. (It's all fun and games until someone get replaced with a Parallaxed version of themselves, after all.)

They try to do this with other characters, but it works best with Lanterns for the variety. I mean, you have 4 Earth-based Lanterns running around as it is. They've all been with the JLA at once point or another, and given the trouble with Earth it's reasonable to assume that any version of the JLA would have dealings with the local Lantern. Even going before Hal you have Abin Sur (and if you screw up the timeline enough, Donna Parker or Carol Ferris would work) and after Kyle there would be any future Lantern idea you could come up with. You can just randomly throw an alien in there from either way.

Anyway, there's not much point to this post. It's just a fun trait of time travel stories.

Responding to Cheryl Lynn

"Arrgh! I would have never seen this wack crap if not for you guys!"

Speaking only for my part, I would have let it go a little while and linked it in a normal WFA post but I needed a column and four people emailed me links. (Now I two days' worth of material spanning three blogs out of this. Go me!)

Anyway, answering your question:

Two, is this really a big deal? I've guess I've seen enough ridiculous beefcake pictorials of men dressed as pseudo-superheroes that seeing the gender flipped this time around doesn't bother me. Think this doesn't happen to Superman and Batman? You just haven't been visiting the right sites.

No, that's not it.

See, the big deal isn't that she's "dressed" as WW. The thing's in the article. I know, no one reads Playboy articles but Pink Raygun scanned it so we all saw it.

The writer is calling a reality-TV-Queen the "modern-day Lynda Carter" without listing a single heroic role or action. This is just more of the mixing of feminine symbols up. I mean, you said it yourself:

The material should be kept separate though. Wonder Woman can't be all things to all people in the same book, comic or magazine. And DC shouldn't be seen as sanctioning all things either. That's where the trouble starts. Keep your fetish material out of my adventure comic. It's not like chocolate and peanut butter. They don't taste good together.

By listing a bunch of reality TV shows and calling her the "modern-day Lynda Carter" because they painted her into a WW costume, they presented the adventure story as fetish material.

A heroic and strong symbol is considered the same thing as a sex symbol, not because strength and heroism is sexy but because her appearance is sexy. It's related to what's going on in comics, I think, where the heroines are considered to be sexy first and heroic second -- because the guys writing the comics are like the person who wrote the Playboy article. They can't see beyond the sexy. They don't realize that there's a heroic aspect to the appeal of the character.

Zhinxy may have the best analogy:

Wonder Woman porn is fine in my book. Maybe even more than fine, from time to time. But that write-up feels a bit like… taking pictures in the “naughty nun” vein and then claiming you’re celebrating virtue?

I figure sex culture is okay as long as it doesn't try to be higher than itself. If it was just a Wonder Woman spread with some talk about her being hot, that'd be one thing. And if it was a superheroine spread where she was fighting bad guys in various costumes and/or she was an actress who typically played asskickers, and the whole thing was about how sexy that was, that would also just be one thing. I could go about my existence not acknowledging what was on the cover of or inside any issue of Playboy.

But it's not. It's the muddling you mentioned. They aren't putting out porn and saying "Here is porn. It has a girl dressed as Wonder Woman in it." They're saying "Here is Wonder Woman. She is porn."

Instead of presenting our hero as fetish material as the comics sometimes often do, they went and presented their fetish material as our hero.

It's a fine difference, but it's there and I think reasoning and writing about it now will help pin down the problems when adventure comics and fetish material collide elsewhere.

Friday Night Fights

(Is it just me or does Wonder Woman spend a lot of time fighting doppelgangers?)


Submitted for the weekly tournament.

What a way to start the day.

Damn, I just got three links about that Playboy cover with the painted Wonder Woman model. (NSFW, but that's the first link I got sent.)

It's not even the cover that bugs me (people will always fetishize everything) as much as the phrase "champion of truth, justice, and American sensuality" and the calling a reality-TV Queen the modern day equivalent of 70s role-model for little girls Lynda Carter.

At first I thought I didn't have the energy (especially given how crazy sexist and racist the election news has been over the past week) to rant properly at the moment, and was just going to link but.. then I got going. (And I'd had another post I ended up scrapping because this derailed my train fo thought.) I'm proud of myself. I didn't swear.

Two doses of Kyle this week.

Green Lantern Corps #20 was a weird experience when you take last issue into account. Last issue was like turning onto the freeway and finding the speed and direction of the rest of the traffic, and this issue was like making a U-turn in the middle of that freeway. I mean, he completely indicated last issue what Kyle and Guy were going to do with themselves, and then changed his mind in the first few pages here and went for a totally different setup. A bit disconcerting (though I prefer this setup for Kyle).

Countdown #16 was pretty cool. I really like this series when they focus almost completely on the Kyle/Donna/Jason storyline, and actually move it forward. It's fun and the ending makes me anxious for next week. This storyline was mildly amusing at parts when they did the specials (and I still found it the most interesting one), but it really got going once they got to Earth-51. I've already been amazed by how much I like Donna here. I've just realized that I've been liking Jason too, which is a weird feeling. He annoyed the shit out of me up until this week with the exception of the Gotham By Gaslight special. I'm glad I followed it this far.

It still puzzles me.

I've been reading the cross-community blogathon about the whole Spider-man thing, and I swore I wouldn't post on it but I broke that rule two days ago and I may as well get this one off my chest.

Admittedly, as a DC fan I'm probably more accepting of soft reboots, so I can get over the reset button and the regression. The problem is that I will never, ever understand what Marvel was thinking with Mephisto.

I mean, okay, so you don't like the marriage, you want to go back to fanland and you're too chickenshit to do a divorce (that's a rant for another day). That's one thing (). There are ways to do it without killing your character's moral standing.


There's The Scarlet Witch!, for one.

I mean, this character was ruined for a reason, right? Her powers were vague and unwieldy as a protagonist, so they made her crazy. That way she's available for use as a crossover villain and/or cheesy plot-device to make whatever the hell they want happen?

Ever since Peter took off the mask in Civil WAr I've been expecting her to pop up and fix everything. (It's not like anyone remembers what happened to her after House of M, anyway.)

Why the hell didn't they just do that? Have Peter or MJ personally piss her off.

*Sigh*

Stupid Marvel.

19th FSF Carnival!

Karen Healey has the 19th Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans up at Girls Read Comics (And They're Pissed).

She did a great job and there's a ton of reading there. Check it out at your leisure.

Looking for a host for the 20th issue. Please contact me if interested.

This bothers me.

And it's not just that Mark Waid's leaving the Flash:

And at this moment in time, I just ... in terms of superhero work, I feel frozen. I kind of... I feel like I'm momentarily out of step with what fandom wants because I don't get it. The same voices that are screaming that we gave Flash a wife and kids and family, because they say that's not what Flash is, are the same people who are screaming that they've broken up Mary Jane and Peter Parker. "How dare you take his family away!" I'm like, wait! Wait! What? Which way is it? So... growth and change good... or growth and change bad?

Hmmm. I've noticed that too. Of course, I'm a fan who thinks married with children works for Wally myself but yeah, I've seen this.

He's not taking into account (and this worries me that other writers might not take this into account either) that different characters have different stories that fit them, different books have different themes to them, and different companies have sincerely different feels. Add to that, different fans have different expectations for the characters. So these contradicting fan tastes aren't really so contradicting.

I've noticed people (and myself) annoyed that Quesada's anti-marriage for Spiderman but he was perfectly fine with Black Panther and Storm together. Well, we're being a bit unfair to him there. Spiderman and Black Panther (and Storm, but I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest he didn't give Storm two thoughts here. She's been really underused in the comics during Quesada's reign) are totally different characters. The same stories are not going to be told about these two characters. Fans expect different characters in the two books. Writers write different characters in the two books. The story goes in different directions.

You might disagree with those directions (and in the case of Quesada's choices there I do, early and often), but I don't see the inconsistency in expecting different things from different characters. I would hope that writers and editors would like to tell different stories with different characters, and would understand that marriage might not fit a certain character very well but that same character would suitably have to deal with their own biological children anyway, or guardianship of a niece or nephew. They'd understand that other characters would settle down and do the nuclear family thing (I think it suits the Flash very well), and other characters would settle into marriage and be married for a long time before starting a family. And, of course, there are still others who wouldn't think of children, or marriage at all.

I mean, the last thing we want is writers writing every character the same, what would be the point of reading more than one book?

Really, though, with the fan complaints it's all a matter of how fans take change. The Spidermarriage was status quo for twenty years, and that Wally's only had children (I don't think as many people are complaining that he's married as they are complaining about the twins) for a few storylines now. Spiderman changed by going backwards (which in my opinion, if you want it and you probably do because you're reading this blog, was kind of a shitty direction), Flash changed by going forwards (and in my opinion, that's a pretty good idea). Fans who have been reading the status quo for a while saw change and reacted. And in some cases they reacted badly. This makes perfect sense insomuch as the behavior of people makes perfect sense.

For me -- it just really bugs me that Mark Waid, the guy who wrote the definitive Wally West, talked about the Park-Wests and the Watson-Parkers as though they were the same couple. That just seems wrong.

Thoughts

After four days, three nights, six full trashbags, three donation bags marked for Goodwill and twenty-two episodes of the 1991 live-action Flash series, I can finally see the floor in all of my closets! My storage areas are officially clean!

The rest of the place is not.

Baby steps, though.

Admittedly, the Flash was more of a distraction than a help. I popped the DVDs in because I'd seen most all of the episodes a long time ago, but I forgot that that was a long time ago. I had to stop and watch.

I really liked that this series had a different continuity than the comics. Part of the fun of was getting to see how much of which villains made it to television, and how much of which plots. The Flash series had some overt references to the Rogue's gallery (Trickster showed up in name and costume, but in personality he was Mark Hamill's audition for the Joker), some medium references (Mirror Master showed up with his civilian name, personality and tech intact, but no costume or villain name), and some subtle ones (the episode where three bad guys of varying degrees of evilness and competence team up to put the city to sleep -- The guy who makes all of the equipment has a green vest and bow tie). Everything's mixed and matched.

I do think they should've kept the comic book connection, though. Barry in the series came up with the lightning symbol on his own and the papers named him the Flash. Nothing really indicated he'd ever read a comic, and there's a few places in the series it might have helped him. In one episode, he gets an old classmate a job as Night Watchman at STAR Labs. See, anyone who's ever read a comic book knows that is the most dangerous job you can possibly get in a superhero city, but Barry thought he was doing the guy a favor (until the bad guy showed up at the lab and locked them in a death trap). Come to think of it, that should be logical by that point in the series. STAR Labs in Central City has no security. It was broken into every other episode. You'd have to be an idiot to think that's a safe place to be overnight. Night watchmen is a job you get your worst enemy.

Interestingly enough, we never saw the character again. (And there were a couple other injured STAR Labs Night Watchmen before the end of the series.)

Artist Iris was annoying too. She doesn't need to be a photojournalist, but man the girl in the pilot was a dull, shallow love interest. Very unlike the woman in the comics. (I prefer to think of her as some other girl named Iris, and that somewhere in that TV continuity there was another Iris West they would've brought in with Wally for the second or third series.) They were right to get rid of her for the rest of the show.

I also kind of wish the Nightshade had made it to the comics during the Golden Age Revisionist movement in the 90s. Yeah, he's only a TV cross between Jay Garrick and Wesley Dodds, but I think he could've been adapted as a Golden Age Central City counterpart to Jay in the comics.

Of course, I'm probably just disappointed he only got two episodes. It's a shame this series never caught on.

Amazons Attack 30 Second Recap

Yes, I'm pushing the deadline, but I worked on it so I'm posting it anyway.

In honor of the ISB's Third Awesomeversary, Ragnell's Written World presents...

Amazons Attack! (in 30 Seconds)

Friday Night Fights

And... Knockout!

Quiz time!

It was bound to happen eventually. Someone went and made a Lantern quiz with all seven colors.

I got a really good result:

Which Power Ring would come to you?

You have the ability to overcome great fear. Welcome to the Green Lantern Corps. Your ring will guide you to Oa where you will be instructed in the proper use of your newfound powers as Green Lantern of sector 2814. Take this quiz! Quizilla Join | Make A Quiz | More Quizzes | Grab Code

Kalinara didn't.

What did she get? Ask Batman:

Unhappy Meals

"Boy" Toys:

When I go to McDonald's and they ask the dreaded "Is this for a girl or a boy?" question, I'm always stuck. My daughter always wants the boy toy, but if I say it's for a boy, she freaks. If I say "It's for a girl, but we want a boy toy", invariably we get the girl toy anyway. Even if I just say "I'd like a boy toy, please", my daughter cries. "I don't want the BOY toy, mama, I want the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles toy! They're not just for boys, are they? Why do the boys always get the good toys?"

(That one's an old post so if you go there and comment there's no telling if you'll see the blogger reply or not.)

Quick Check-in

Soranik, Guy, and Kyle
Originally uploaded by Ragnell

Okay, I made one more resolution. I want to try to post daily because I leave this place for too long at a time. (I'm trying a "Watercolor A Day" calender as well, and the prospects for that one don't look any better. I'll give them both a try, though.)

I do have a post idea (I was going to explain which character I hated more than Jade and why) but my first resolution is cleaning my habitat so I'm too busy arranging a make-shift night stand with my shortboxes to do a detailed post. I just wanted to get one done before the day runs out. Here's a picture of my Soranik Natu mini-Barbie repaint (from back in August) instead. I threw in the Guy and Kyle figures for a vacation group photo feel.

Happy New Year

Almost missed the holiday again, but my only resolution is to keep the house clean and I was distracted by putting that off.

Ooo!

This is one of the most awesome things ever.

This page should make WFA link-farming more enjoyable.

Yeah, off-topic but I've been neglecting this blog.

Some interesting stuff in this thread about women and religion, particularly Artic Stranger's Post #40:

For men, women represent a loss of power. To fall in love is to give your heart away. If you give your heart away, you can be hurt...very badly. (There was a recent play where one character tells her daughter, "Don't be the one in the relationship who loves the most. That person gets hurt. You need to be the one who is loved the most. You wont get hurt then."

Throw in the sexual drive, and boom...you have a very threatened man. How does that song go? "When a man loves a woman..." (See song lyrics at the end of Post)

Then throw in the historical feeling of men that one of the worst things you can be called is "sissy" or "pussy" or some other term to denote that you were a feminine type man. (In ancient Rome homosexuality was rampant...well SODAMY was rampant, homosexuality did not exist... and it was considered fine to be the one screwing other men, but you did not want to be the one who was screwed by other men.) Sexuality is a fluid thing, and most women have some masculine characteristics, and most men have some feminine characteristics. Men are much less comfortable with their feminine side than women are with their masculine side. (These are tendencies, not iron clad rules.) So when the feminine appears in a man, he feels threatened, from within, but he can easily focus the threat outward to other women.

Now throw in religion. Let's take Augustine, one of the main culprits in the Christian wrong turn on sexuality. Augustine was a man obsessed with sex. He was the one who prayed, "Lord make me chaste, but not today." It was his attraction to his mistress that kept him from fully converting to Christianity. When he did convert he renounced her and his child he had with her.

Now as I was writing that last paragraph, I ALMOST wrote, "It was his mistress who kept him from fully converting." Notice how I almost put the blame on her. It was rather instinctual, and I had reframe my own thoughts. That "innocent" little slip is a habit for many men who want to devote their lives to God. The major impediment most will encounter will be their relationship with women. And since we are masters at self-delusion and self-justification, it is rather easy to see how the problem shifts from "I have a problem dealing with my desires about women" to "Women are a problem to me." When that move is made, men must be protect from women.

(And remember that sexual roles were pretty segregated at one time. A lot of what women did was a HUGE mystery to men. And we did not know as much about anatomy either, so even the way women were structured was a mystery. Where DOES that baby come from? What is the deal with all that blood?)

So eventually, to "protect" men from the effects of women, they eventually put them into one of two boxes; virgin saint, or whore. They are either helping us toward our goal of sainthood (usually by making an incredible sacrifice of their own sexuality, violently and graphically) or they are seducing us with their sexuality and are poison apples.

Blogosphere!

Cheer me up, dammit.

Kalinara has been regaling me with a list of unusual fictional properties that people will write male-on-male pornography about, but this just seems to be depressing me more.

(Though if she could find enough Lensmen slash I'd feel a certain justice was served for riddling the space opera genre with sexism. Sure, I probably wouldn't read it. But I want it to exist.)

Weird

My referral stat suggests that a number of people are reaching my sites through the Mary Jane Statue posts from May and June.

There must be a new post out there on this subject that I haven't found yet.

This is odd. (And annoying)

How is it that the last hour and a half that I've seen tonight is stuff parodying feminism?

I mean, seriously, two sexual harassment storylines and a gender-separated education storyline that all have "The feminists are overreacting" as a major plot point. (Well, I've seen the last one before and I guess it's fair to say the theme there was "The feminists are being naive" but the other two paint feminists as jumping the gun and men as needing women to civilize them which pisses me off too) Those stories as irritating on their own, but three in a fucking row is infuriating.

It's especially bad because I don't get a night off to just watch television very often, so it really sucks when it's the night of the antifeminist backlash.

Time to put in a DVD, I suppose.

I almost skipped the whole holiday.

Anyway, since there's about ten minutes left of this one, have a Happy Christmas and here's a cute video for you.

Seriously?!

Rich Watson has gossip for John Stewart fans. (hattip)

Create a superheroine?

Newsarama:

According to Shadowline editor, Kristen Simon, “I’d been hoping to see a super-hero book with a strong female lead to act as a counter-point to our popular Bomb Queen series, but none were forthcoming. So I decided to come up with a contest to create a super-heroine for the 21st Century.”

As with any writing job, I see two downsides to submitting: 1) They could reject my idea. 2) They could accept my idea and let everyone know how stupid it is.

The upside is that whatever I can come up with will NOT be the dumbest thing on the pile.

(And that if it is, only I and the Shadowline editor will see it.)

Of course they're playing cute for the Cluemaster's daughter.

Well, Didio's little hint just tosses another clue on the pile. Apparently Stephanie Brown is coming back to life and the reason is obvious:

DC will do anything to avoid redesigning the Batcave.

Who wants to push for a Batcave Katma Tui memorial next?

Wow.

For the approval of the internet, I submit the following definition of courage from Will Pfiefer's blog:

Meanwhile, I almost forgot to mention that the AMAZONS ATTACK hardcover was due in comic book stores last week. (I forgot mostly because I haven't gotten my box of comp copies yet -- c'mon, DC!). It's all six issues for a mere $24.99, complete with a lovely slipcover and sketchbook section, both by artist extraordinaire Pete Woods. Just the thing for under the tree!

As always, if you have any questions, comments or criticisms, feel free to air them here. I really do want to hear 'em.

Yes, even about AMAZONS ATTACK.

*Ahem*

[unpracticed attempt at self-promotion] I believe I've mentioned in the past that I sold a small story for inclusion in the Ruins: Terra collection.

Well, after a slight delay that collection is now available on Amazon.com.

It contains two whole pages of my fiction writing (written for today's attention span), along with many substantially more involved stories.

In case you have some last-minute holiday shopping, you can go for the good shipping and get it by December 24th. [/unpracticed attempt at self-promotion]

Dear god, it's back.

Kadymae discovered the odious "Nice Guy letter" making the rounds, and linked a few reactions to it. I found hers was the best:

If you agree with, or would possibly write, "You ignored the nice guy. You used him for emotional intimacy without reciprocating, in kind, with physical intimacy."

You are not a nice guy. You never were a nice guy. You will never be a nice guy.

You, are the text book definition of a user and that mean, thankless, heartless bitch (of either sex) is on to you like white on rice, so unsubtle is your approach. And, as an aside, an in kind reciprocation would be returned emotional intimacy. What you're asking for is not a like exchange.

The world owes you neither a living nor a lay.

Okay, I've dated this guy. Multiple this guys, actually, before I wised up. This is the guy who pretends to be your friend until he gains your trust and your sympathy, then he manipulates you into dating him. Then he tries to manipulate you into bed.

And if you are honestly, sincerely not interested -- he counts on your guilt and softheartedness to prevent you from turning him down. He turns you into the evil bullying bitch in his sob story if you do turn him down right away. If you go out with him once or twice to give him a fair chance, then let him down easy, then he turns you into the evil bullying bitch who led him on for so long in his sob story.

"Nice Guy" is a dirty word in the feminist community because that's how this guy describes himself, as a "Nice guy who can't cut a break." In reality he's a world class bitter manipulator.

"Nice guy" is just when a bitter manipulator puts on a mask to pretend to be a decent fellow.

I'd much rather a decent fellow, a guy who is actually honestly your friend. Yes, those guys exist. They don't whine about that not being rewarded with sex for being friendly. They are friendly when they actually want to be friends. When they want sex, they don't play up their pathetic sob story, trash all other women, and use guilt to get it from a girl who just wants to talk.

God help you if you're shy or anxious yourself. Because then he's out to assassinate your self-esteem just so he can get a lay. See, being firm and clear and making an enemy of the "Nice Guy" is probably the only way to get rid of him. He knows this, so he plays on any part of your behavior to make you think he's really a decent fellow and you don't want to hurt his feelings. And you want him to be a decent fellow. You need to believe he's a decent fellow, because otherwise your mind is worthless. Otherwise, the only reason anyone would want to talk to you is to get closer to your body. You want so badly to believe he was genuinely interested in you as a person that you go and make excuse after excuse for this guy and let him manipulate you into that relationship. You do this until the circumstances are dire, and you may be stuck with him forever.

Then you finally drop him, and feel like you're a bitch for doing so. And he goes ahead and reinforces that.

I'm sure by now that some "Nice Guys" don't think they're being malicious (just as the shy anxious girl thinks she's being nice by not nipping this thing in the bud). One of Kadymae's commenters talks about how he used to be one and is now learning to be a decent fellow.

Here's the thing, though. It's not really being "nice." It's not really being decent. It's not really being personable in any way. It's being jealous of other men and assuming that all women reason exactly alike (thinking "Hey, that asshole has a girlfriend. I don't. Maybe all women only like assholes" and letting confirmatory bias work its magic). The best I can judge from the writings and whining of professed "Nice Guys" is that this is wanting to be an asshole but having such low self-esteem you feel you can't get away with acting like an asshole. It's this horrible combination of cynicism, cowardice, and pessimism that acts like flashing sign to ward off any chance of procreation.

Honestly, you having trouble getting laid and want to? Stop forwarding the misogynistic emails. Stop trashing your ex-girlfriends. Stop trashing your would-be girlfriends. Stop being fucking sneaky about your crushes.

Read a self-help book. If you can't implement the advice there, see a psychologist. Work out your personal issues before blaming women for your problems.

Then go to the local singles scene.

I know that this is harsh advice and that some of you may doubt my credentials in this area. So for the end of this post I have prepared some brief answers to predictable responses. (These answers will likely not prevent anyone from insisting that I do indeed blame men for everything, but fuck them if they can't read the rest of this blog or even the rest of this post.)

"I'm too shy and nervous around women!!" It is not the job of a girl to help you with that. That is what the shrink is for.

"Only losers go to those mixers and use online dating services!" So you're saying that scheming to get close to a woman by pretending to be her friend makes you NOT a loser somehow? At least with a dating service you're an honest loser, and you have a shot at being a winner.

"It's not worth the trouble." Then don't do it. But don't blame the rest of us for not having a social life.

"My ex-girlfriend really is a bitch." Bitch is a pretty misogynistic insult to be throwing around when you actually mean it. (Yes, I've used that insult about five times by this point, but I'm illustrating attitudes not expressing my actual opinion.) That aside, some ex-girlfriends are genuinely unpleasant people. Have you noticed a pattern of unpleasant ex-girlfriends? Do you feel that these girlfriends were all unpleasant because of your pleasant nature? Do you expect women to be inexplicably unpleasant in reaction to your pleasant nature, and blame the women for it? Do you feel that your ex-girlfriend was an unpleasant girlfriend specifically because she withheld sexual intimacy? If your answered "no" to these questions, then your girlfriend was probably just an unpleasant person. If you answered yes to all (or just the last one) of these questions, you are the unpleasant person. (If your answers are mixed, I suggest soul-searching and not taking my posts so personally.)

"Ragnell, you bitter repressed feminazi bitch -- you're a fucking comic book blogger. What the hell do you know about socialization?" I know who is to blame when I spend a Saturday Night blogging. When I spend a Saturday Night blogging, it's because I didn't put the effort into stepping outside my door. Even if I have a date and it's canceled or a I have a crush and it wasn't reciprocated there are plenty of places to go and plenty of people to see where I live.

Okay, sometimes there's a damned ice storm to blame.

Help me out here.

I'm looking for what you call it when in a TV show/movie/book the main cast members are all white, but there's a black person in a minor part that's a respected position of authority (the rarely-seen boss, the Judge, the Doctor, the local police officer) so that the producers can claim positive racial diversity without having to actually spend time writing plot and characterization for someone who's not white.

I can't be the first one to notice this, so I know there's an easy snappy name for it.

(This isn't for a project, I just saw a movie where they did this and it was really obvious and it has me trying think of the name for it.)

ETA: No, Token's not the word I'm thinking of. There's no importance on what role is played by the character when you use that term. (I also hate that term because too damned many people use it to bash John Stewart.) I'm thinking of when the only person who's not white only appears in one or two scenes and they are specifically in a position of authority. None of the plot can center on them. They aren't even necessarily helpful. They just show up and function as the authority figure for the main character's plot.

ETA #2: Thanks, Matter-Eater Lad. Black Lieutenant Syndrome

And Notintheface? I blame you for my being on Youtube instead of collecting WFA links tonight.

*Ahem* HAMMMMMMEEERRRRR!!!!!!

Initial reactions to Green Lantern #25 (Vague Spoilers)

(This is your best chance for a happy post this week.)

Hey, is that Arkiss?

Ooo... Pretty Colors...

Are all the violet ones girls? Dammit! Okay, its in character for the Zamarons but still pretty-groanworthy given what purple equals.

Ooo, but Kyle's mask is drawn properly.

Hey, that sappy sequence kind of worked.

RAKER!!!!

Hey, cool, his partner's a girl.

Her uniform is not completely ugly. Exploitive and impractical (no possibilities for a bra at all), but it does not make you want to throw up from the hideousness in addition to the exploitiveness as the last two Reis-designed female costumes did. Maybe its just because she's Apokoliptian and that dominatrix shit is kind of the style there.

(Yes, I do think about these things on the first reading.)

Aww, John and Guy look so cute.

Holy shit, someone remembered Leezle Pon.

And that Guy is good with kids.

(I'm sure this particular sappy sequence is meant to state that this is Hal's extended family.)

Ahhh.. Like any good superhero story there's a feeling of accomplishment and the hint that things are going to worsen considerably by the time anyone notices that the problems still exist.

No, seriously, I consider that a good thing. Its traditional for serialized storytelling. The most important part, though, is that feeling of accomplishment so that the reader believes the heroes can handle the little bit louder and little bit worse of the next time around.

And... No, I wasn't expecting those last four pages. I should have seen that coming, because that really is about the worst way for that new rule to backfire, but I didn't.

News

From Paul Kidby's website:

AN EMBUGGERANCE
Folks,

I would have liked to keep this one quiet for a little while, but because of upcoming conventions and of course the need to keep my publishers informed, it seems to me unfair to withhold the news. I have been diagnosed with a very rare form of early onset Alzheimer's, which lay behind this year's phantom "stroke".

We are taking it fairly philosophically down here and possibly with a mild optimism. For now work is continuing on the completion of Nation and the basic notes are already being laid down for Unseen Academicals. All other things being equal, I expect to meet most current and, as far as possible, future commitments but will discuss things with the various organisers. Frankly, I would prefer it if people kept things cheerful, because I think there's time for at least a few more books yet :o)

Terry Pratchett

PS I would just like to draw attention to everyone reading the above that this should be interpreted as 'I am not dead'. I will, of course, be dead at some future point, as will everybody else. For me, this maybe further off than you think - it's too soon to tell. I know it's a very human thing to say "Is there anything I can do", but in this case I would only entertain offers from very high-end experts in brain chemistry.

(Via)

Oh, here's where we differ.

I got linked on Tamora Pierce's blog as a rebuttal to her previous post, and yet another comment got my attention. This one from Tintin about female superhero fansites:

Ah, all right, I think, to be more precise- ironic considering my earlier choice of words- I'm tired of the sense of embattlement I get from these sites. To have to constantly fight to be able enjoy something...I don't understand it.

I'm answering this one here because I think I've zeroed in on the thing people can't seem to understand about feminist superhero fans, and its important enough that I need everyone to read this one:

Enjoyment is the default state.

Once again, I really really like superhero comics. (Particularly Green Lantern.) I get a lot of joy out of them that I don't bother to blog about because I'm too busy enjoying my comics to do so.

And most of the feminist fan bloggers I know feel the same way. When things are good, they are happy and you get one-line posts saying "This is SO AWESOME!" and some incoherent giggling if someone bothers to look up from the issue.

The problem comes when you are reading along, enjoying your comic, and something interferes with that.

That something being a disgusting new costume, a looming refrigerator, a sexist joke, an out-of-character scene, a really fucking stupid editorial direction, the inclusion (often creation) of a character who is nothing but a sexist caricature, a professional saying something unbelievably stupid, a butt/boob/crotch/leg/open-mouth shot that is totally unnecessary and interrupts the flow of a story, an awesome character getting shit on to make a male character look better and so on and so forth.

And when that happens, I stop reading and I fume for a bit. Then I boot up my computer, write about what bothered me, say a few rude things about the professionals, unload a bit and go back to the parts I like. Sometimes the bad outweighs the good in a particular book and I drop it, but on the whole there's usually a lot I like. That is why I keep reading.

Sometimes it takes a bit longer to go back to the parts I like. A day or two. A week. Until the next issue of something else I enjoy comes out. Until a certain creative team change occurs. I know a few people who are waiting on Editor-in-Chief changes to get back to what they like. Usually I just need to unload and analyze a bit, maybe rearrange my purchases or write a letter. (I have to write a letter or email or make sure I post in a place the creator'll find it, because I go into Happy Mode at a convention and know I'll never think of anything that pisses me off there.)

Sometimes I'll enjoy something incredibly on the first reading, and see a problem on reflection of the work or on the second reading, so I'll write about that when it occurs to me. Sometimes I will greatly enjoy something, but criticize a weakness of it anyway because the weakness exists and the story would go from pretty good to FUCKING AWESOME if not for that weakness.

And all superhero fans are like this, to a point. It just gets worse when the complaint or weakness is sexism, though, because that brings a whole bunch of people with stock answers of "Of course you're annoyed by that, superheroes are for guys", "That's the way things are, have been, and always will be," "I LIKE it that way so get lost" "Who invited the GIRL?!" and the ever popular "Sergeant? Throw this smelly little lesbian over the side."

That's where the battle comes in. We want to rant like all fans do. We want to write to the publisher like all fans do and let them know what's going on. But because of the nature of our complaints, that certain things are offensive to women, our opinions get invalidated by a culture that claims that superhero comics are male power fantasies.

So what it all comes down to is not constantly fighting to enjoy something. What it all comes down to is fighting constantly in order to be able to express our opinions about why we didn't enjoy something we should. Its fighting to have those opinions listened to so that our natural enjoyment of the genre will not need to be interrupted again.

That's an important distinction.

Its probably one that someone who doesn't automatically like these stories and characters may find hard to understand. Its definitely one that someone who only knows me through this blog -- my place of venting -- may find hard to understand (though I think I've thrown enough love at Green Lantern that it should be clear). But that's the base of it.

Understand?

FemWatch Episode 1

No, not a superhero video. Its a selection of choice interesting surprising horrifying fucking incredible comments found in the feminist blogosphere.



(Via)

A comic book for which I feel nothing.

I got a comment that I wasn't expecting:

BTW, could you please pass on the comics that you picked up at Wizardworld on to someone who actually does care about female comics creators? If you stated you absolutely hated and loathed the independent comics I write and publish but linked my website to let people decide for themselves, it'd least get some server hits, but it's been over a year now. Thank you.

For starters, I do remember Stephanie. I bought her comic at Wizardworld in 2006. I did not like her comics. I thought I was being nice by not reviewing them at this site, because there wasn't much to say. I'd made sure to pay for them so she wouldn't lose money because she was very nice in Artist's Alley, but I didn't have the heart to give it a bad review. I didn't really have the inclination to give them a bad review.

See, I didn't loathe or hate them either. I usually hate something because it is remarkable in its horribleness or something that could be awesome but was ruined by incompetence. But instead I found 21st Centurions bland and unimpressive.

The story was unmemorable. I didn't care about it. It certainly seems like something I should like. But I can't get into it. I start to read and lose interest halfway through the page. I put it down, distract myself and wait for a moment I might like to read it. The same thing happened again. I forced myself to continue and resented the book for bring forced to continue reading something that doesn't capture my interest. I can't even remember the character's names, and there's nothing I found remarkable about any of their personalities.

I'd say I needed recognizable characters, but I never saw Omega the Unknown before I picked that book up and was instantly hooked. I devoured Dynamo 5 with the first issue. I've read tons of teambooks with no prior emotional investment in any of the characters. All they have to do is hook you early enough.

This did not.

And it didn't hook me later on, either.

It is possible that the artwork is distracting me. This isn't unskilled or untalented artwork (which would definitely be noteworthy) but there is a generic and uninteresting quality to it. It tries to be dynamic artwork. It doesn't fail spectacularly at being dynamic artwork. It merely doesn't succeed at being dynamic artwork.

The first time I read it, I placed it to the side after getting to the last page and found I couldn't remember what I'd just read when I finally finished it. I promptly forgot about the entire book. I went to next thing I'd gotten at that convention, which didn't impress me either. I'd bought several interesting-looking indie works, thinking I'd just do a post with one or two sentence reviews of all of them. I optimistically thought I might find something like Pop Gun War there. I was wrong. I didn't find anything worth writing about when I got home, so I gave up on that idea and spent my money on toys at the next convention. I went back to the advice of indie-saavy bloggers and the guy at the comic book store for what non-mainstream comics are worth checking out. Such people are more adventurous than I.

Here is Stephanie and Mark Heike's website, in case you see something you like. If you feel I have no taste in art, or constantly find yourself uninterested in what excites me (in which case I have no idea why you are reading this blog) you may enjoy 21st Centurions.

An Open Letter to the Comics Blogging Community That Anyone Can Respond To But Probably Shouldn't Bother

Please stop with the open letter format before it gets too old. I know that it is the nature of the internet to take a joke, stretch it beyond recognition and run it into the ground over the course of a decade but we should think about nipping this one in the bud. I also know this joke hasn't spread to too many blogs, but I've seen at least four posts with the title which means its probably time to put it to rest.

I'm all for cross-blog talk, but it would be nice if we got back to a little variety.

While we're at it, the phrase "hive vagina" finished running its course a little over a year ago. It was inhumane to force it to do the first extra lap, let alone pushing it so far beyond that. This phrase is wheezing rather pathetically and needs to be allowed to pass to the other side now.

And before anyone makes an anonymous comment, I know the irony of complaining about this format in a blog post using this format. That is the joke. Thank you.

19th Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans

Where: Girls Read Comics (And They're Pissed)
When: January 5th
Deadline for Submissions: January 3rd
Contact: ten[dot]karen[at]gmail[dot]com and submission form

Submission Call

Notice: Accepting Volunteers to Host the 20th Carnival. Email Ragnellthefoul[at]hotmail[dot]com if interested.

Give up all this?

Karen Healey:

I fully support any woman who turns her back on the Big Two and makes her own comics, and I sympathise entirely with the frustration and rage that engender that "If you won't change these comics, I am willing and eager to make my own" decision.

The thing is, as a reader, I'm not prepared to cede that territory. White Tiger is *mine*. Power Pack is *mine*. Rogue and Storm and Emma Frost are *mine*. Insofar as they belong to any fan, they belong to me, just as much as to those protesting feminist activism in the comics. And I don't want to write them. I want to read them without being disgusted or wearied or saddened by the sexism with which they are portrayed.

I can't believe that nothing will ever change, when so much has changed already. I have to believe in a future where sexism in artworks, like sexism in general, is considered as outdated and bizarre as a "democracy" where women aren't entitled to vote - superhero comics included. It won't be in my lifetime, but I can do what I can now.

I can support indy creators *and* work for change in the Big Two. Because I won't be satisfied with less.

Karen's answering Tamora Pierce, the latest person to chime in and second Elizabeth Bear's Dear Patriarchy as a call to leave the mainstream and create more entertainment free of the stresses of mainstream gender-based assumptions.

The people who roll up their sleeves and say "Lets just do our own" are people who would probably be inclined to make their way in the published world whether they were satisfied with the entertainment out there or not. They are writers who have stories to tell. That is awesome.

However, even those of us who like to tell stories like to listen sometimes. And a lot of us have our favorite characters and settings that we grew up with, that we learned to love, and that we are very very attached to. We like those characters and settings. We want to escape with them.

Those characters and settings are legally owned by someone else. That's all right. We want to give those people who own the characters money for stories with them. We want to support them and keep the stories coming.

And there's things that fans love and hate, little directions and fannish things and characters. And then there's the stuff that's bad for everybody. There's the insulting messages, the confining cliches and stereotypes that are nearly everywhere in the world and that slip into these stories with these favorite characters. They piss us off too.

But we would like to give the owners of these characters money. And we know they would like money. So we, as readers and fans and customers tell them what needs to happen in order to keep that money coming.

And sometimes it is ignored. And sometimes it is listened to. Sometimes we shout. Sometimes we whisper. Sometimes they insult us. Sometimes we get pissed off. Sometimes we don't realize we were insulted. Sometimes they try to pander to us. Sometimes we love that. Sometimes we get angry anyway. Sometimes they laugh with us. Sometimes they make us so happy we can't write anything but nonsensical little fangirlish words. Sometimes they piss us off and we can only write obscenities when describing what they did. Sometimes they play on our insecurities and fears and anger to get more money anyway.

And some of us give up and go off to make their own stories.

But some of us stay and keep complaining and reading and talking and buying. We stay because we remember when we are listened to. We remember when they at least tried to pander to us for a change. We remember when they laughed and joked with us. We remember putting down the issue and dancing. We remember when we were so happy we could feel the joy and excitement rise in our chests and stop our vocal chords from forming the words to describe it. We remember being so excited after reading a first issue just to try something out that we went straight back to the comic book store to catch up on the entire series. We remember when they played on our insecurities and fears and angers but understood why we felt that way and wrote what they did because they felt that way too. We remember when we cried because the story was just so good and it was that good because we went in knowing the character and caring for them already.

Some of us remember all of that even though we get pissed off at times. And so while we drop series and follow writers and try to minimize the bad as much as possible we don't truly leave. We don't leave because we know the good things will happen again.

And we complain because we know those things would be happening more often, but the company forgets that women are reading too. The company forgets that there's a lot of shit out there in the entertainment world and the real world that's getting called up by the writing and the art that's interfering with the story. Writers and artists forget that when we point that out, we're telling them a better way to communicate with us and get those good moments that keep us shelling our money.

So every once in a while someone tells the mainstream to "Fuck off" because they can write a better story themselves. Good for them. The bad outweighs the good for them, and they feel they're better off working on their own stuff.

Good for us, because we can read their stuff and grow to love it too.

Still, for some of us the good does outweigh the bad. Its just the bad is so pervasive and distracting and just plain wrong that we have to talk about it if we want to have any way of keeping sight of the good.

So yeah, go off and write good stuff. I'll read some of it. I may even try and write some of my own. (I wouldn't hold your breath, but its an idle fantasy many of us have.) But give up reading the stuff I love completely? No, fuck that. I'll continue to enjoy what I enjoy and complain about what interrupts that enjoyment.

And sometimes the industry won't listen, but sometimes it will.

Heard about Ultimates #3

Wow. Wanda can't even cut a break in parallel universe.

Friday Night Fights

Diana is all business:

18th Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans!

(This one has three parts!)

Part I: Women, Gaming, and You!
Part II: These Things We Love, And How We Interact With Them
Part III: Reviews, Reactions, and Recommended Further Reading

Animated Lantern

I missed the episode of The Batman where Hal Jordan showed up, but Kung Fu Rodeo has a few screenshots so we can see how he looked.

Never thought I'd say this, but...

Anyone wanna play BINGO?

Yeah, I can't believe I stooped to that one (though I'm not sure I remember a Gay Comics BINGO card, I'm sure every argument in that post is on it if there is one). I've been of the opinion that the BINGO cards are good for a one-time laugh, but actually used they tend to be conversation killers, and just off-putting and arrogant. Its an inside joke often presented to an outsider at the offset. Not a recipe for actual learning.

I used to be so thoughtful, I'd break down every argument and engage every idiot -- but there's a point where what you read is just so tired and overused you can't take the argument seriously enough to concentrate on debate anymore. You either want to pound your head against the wall in despair at the endless barrage of blindness or point and laugh at the person who doesn't realize that everything he's said has been addressed and debunked ad nauseum, to the point people are sick of arguing it anymore. The latter option is considerably less stressful.

Trolls often count on the former, and play ignorance long after they should. (And there's the not-exactly-small percentage of the population that simply doesn't absorb this stuff, no matter how often they see or -- or even bother to read it.)

So we'll make BINGO jokes, or something similar. It passes the time and relieves the stress. Some people use them too often and only ever make fun of the opposition, some people don't lighten up and make fun rather than debate often enough.

Its a tool for keeping sane rather a tool for persuasion. In my day job the toolbox has both a hex driver and a scribe, because different aspects of the job require different tools.

Friday Night Fights

CHAPOW!

Blue Beetle indirectly named second-most competent superhero.

City Crime Rankings:

The study ranked Mission Viejo, Calif., as the safest U.S. city, followed by Clarkstown, N.Y.; Brick Township, N.J.; Amherst, N.Y.; and Sugar Land, Texas.

El Paso was ranked the second safest city with cities of a population of 500,000 or higher. El Paso was the third safest city in the same population grouping last year.

Ooo..

Kalinara found news on the Dresden Files comic book.

Butcher's writing the adaptation. (Which could be good or bad -- I like that the author of the books is adding a new plot to the series, but novelists don't always translate well to comics.)

I'm with her that I'm a bit disappointed Morgan's white in the comic. I got the impression somewhere in the first book he was black and was actually surprised when people pointed the casting out as a change. And Murphy's back to blonde.

The series is awfully whitewashed to begin with, and its pretty bad in the early books. Like Butcher didn't notice the only character who wasn't white was Susan for several novels and so started to filter in the Knights, the Council, Rawlins and Carlos when he got the off chance. All relatively minor characters.

Catching Up

I just got back from an exhausting Thanksgiving visiting my sun-worshiping mother. She keeps the most ridiculous hours, up and about at times no sane person would consider, and expected me to conform.

Hopefully, the daylight didn't do too much damage to my skin and eyes. I normally avoid the stuff if at all possible, so my resistance is probably pretty low to it.

Posting should start again when I catch up on the blogs and the news and get bored of the new doll and the cookbook I found back home.

To pass the time until my inevitable next post, you anonymous commenters can fight each other in the comments of this post.

Ugh!

Just when you thought it was safe to return to Green Lantern:

They're using that hideous porn costume in the Star Sapphire action figure!

And this is, of course, the only female figure in the new batch. There's no Soranik, there's no Iolande, there's no Arisia, there's no Laira, there's no Boodika, there's just an old Kingdom Come Jade figure (funny how they made a Jade figure only for the Elseworlds where she got a costume with a glowing boob window) and a Katma Tui animated figure that won't stand up because she's wearing fucking high heels!

I'm filing down the jewelry on Fairy Barbies to try and get R'amey Holl and they give us porn-costume Star Sapphire to play with.

Bastards.

Last Lines: Wonder Woman #14 (Spoilers)

I realize now that I'm the only one who hasn't blogged a review. Well, it was really good and I am not very good at the positive reviewing thing. I tend to just go "ooo..." when I react to something I like and that's not very interesting to read.

But I feel a bit nostalgic for when I did do weekly reviews, so let's examine the last line of the issue.

"Kill all you find!"

This is said when arriving on a particular island.

Those of you who read the issue, stop and think for a moment about who is on that island. She was right in the opening part of the book.

Think about the speaker. The leader of a bunch of Nazis.

Now, think about this character's history and the team membership that seems (at least according to lines dropped in JSA and one conversation with Wildcat last issue) to still be in continuity. Then think about how likely she is to react to a bunch of Nazis who intend to kill her.

Think also about this character's history of lacking restraint in battle.

There are very few ways that this encounter could suck, even fewer of which tend to be found in a Gail Simone comic.

Booster Gold #4

I consider myself a jaded superhero/science fiction fan, but I'll admit the setup for next issue threw me for a loop. I was expecting Melodramatic Superhero Time Travel Plot Cliche #4, which gives the protagonist the exact opposite objective.

That is a way to make things interesting, though. Its highly unlikely DC will let them succeed, which means we'll get to see the good guys deal with failure and scramble to fix what they can. However, if they do succeed (and we get a sliver of a chance of this because DC has a big crossover coming up and we know they like to juggle shit around when they have crossovers planned) we get to watch several DC writers frantically try to adjust to the new timeline.

Granted, both options could result in the writers and editors falling flat on their faces, but success really wouldn't be the least bit impressive if there wasn't a decent chance of screwing things up very badly.

Eh.

In kind of a bleh mood lately. Will to blog hovering slightly above nonexistent. Motivation at subterranean levels. Absent-mindedness currently in the stratosphere, so ideas are not really surviving long enough to reach actual blog post form.

Not dead.

Managed to semisubstantially meet at least one blogging commitment.

WFA updates will happen before the end of the weekend.

Pleasantness

I went to the store today expecting Simone's first issue of Wonder Woman, and was surprised by a new Courtney Crumrin story, the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen trade at a discount and All-Star Superman.

Wonder Woman starred a version of Diana I like, a version of Nemesis I like, and Themiscyra is not forgotten.

There was a one-page characterization scene between Kyle and Donna in Countdown this week.

Concept art for a Dresden Files comic book. (And a teaser blurb for the tenth book.)

Oh dear.

Umm....

Hey, don't blame me. Blame society. For better or worse, geeks (and here, I mean male geeks) are considered cool. Not as cool as guys who, you know, are good-looking and have lots of money. But still pretty cool. Obviously, girls can be geeks, too, but they're slightly more limited in what interests they can pursue and still maintain respect in the eyes of the world. Girl gamers? Cool. Girl comic book fans? Cool. Girl doll collectors? Not so much.

Okay, who told this poor guy he was considered cool? Because that was not nice.

Submission Call!

18th Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans

Where: Trouble: More Than Bargained For
When: November 30th
Deadline for Submissions: November 28th
Contact: anna[at]annaoverseas[dot]com and submission form

Special Request:

I'll be looking for any posts that fall into the idea of Feminist Sci Fi and Fantasy, but I'm hoping espeially to see a lot of posts on gaming this month - from Tabletop to LARP, from MMORG to MUDs, from Let's Pretend to CCGs, anything that you'd define as gaming is of interest!

Notice: Accepting Volunteers to Host the 19th Carnival. Email Ragnellthefoul[at]hotmail[dot]com if interested.

Numbers

Kalinara was writing her post about Thunder when she messaged me asking how many college-aged/teenaged black female superheroes (not fully-grown career-aged women like Storm and Vixen, but early 20s/teenagers). I could come up with.

She were stumped at two, Thunder and Empress (Empress who will never be seen again because Peter David couldn't resist making a dumbass pun with her name). I thought of XS, and then realized bitterly that neither she nor Kid Quantum (who was a pretty cool character and the fucking leader of the Legion of Superheroes for a while) counted because they were retconned out in the last reboot in favor of the New Diverse Legion of Super-Heroes (also known as "a large group of white kids, a green kid, a blue kid, and a black kid who almost never gets panel-time").

So we were still at two. We consulted the Museum of Black Superheroes.

Managed to come up with Bumblebee and that one X-woman Grant Morrison introduced (the one with the fly wings who had kids with the chicken-boy).

Beyond that we had Peekaboo for a supervillain who could be redeemed.

Reaching past DC and Marvel properties, I can think of Tesla Strong, the Rocket from Icon and Slingshot from Dynamo 5.

Oh, and that woman who flew in Major Bummer. (I think her name was Val.)

That brings us to 11 total. 4 in limbo (only 1 that I've seen in the last two years). 2 retconned out. 1 a villainess (also in limbo). 1 in a universe no longer published. 3 active in ongoing series.

For blonde college-aged/teenaged women alone I can think of Supergirl, Secret, Arrowette, Spoiler, Wonder Girl, Saturn Girl, Speedy, Arisia, Terra, Buffy, Dagger, Dream Girl, Rose Wilson, Flamebird, Husk, Valkyrie, Dolphin, and Andromeda.

18. Without looking. 6 active in ongoing series. 6 in limbo (4 that I've seen within the last two years). 3 dead. 1 retired. 1 retconned out. 1 retconned into adulthood (but still active).

Now, the white superheroines I listed are just the blondes. That is not counting characters with red, black, or brunette hair. That is just young women with yellow or white hair.

And I didn't have to look up people to come up with 18 blondes. But I had to find a website to jog my memory to think of more than 4 black women.

Something's off here.

Wait a minute.

Isn't 2.5% of "not significant money" not significant enough money to hurt the company if you fork it over?

They currently receive nothing from the use of their content on the Internet; and they are asking for a flat percentage of 2.5% of revenue. The AMPTP wants to pay .3%, and they claim that it's too soon to tell if they can make significant money from offering content on the Internet. Writers and much of the known universe understandably find this a little absurd, especially as members of the AMPTP continue to tell their stockholders about the millions to be made from new media.

Recommended Reading

How the Bitch Stole Comics

This illustrates my point better than I could.

In a recent comment section I said that comparisons between the recent Wizard cover blurb and segregation based on the "Continuum of oppression" fell under the "Slippery Slope" logical fallacy.

For those of you who are curious as to exactly what is meant by "Slippery Slope Fallacy", see the second half of this post.

Also on that website is a great example of a parallel made between the Civil Rights movement and feminists who want better comics of the sort I was complaining about earlier.

Obsidian got a speaking part?

Why wasn't I informed? Why did I have to wait to read JSA #10 a week late to find this one out? I mean, he was talking for at least three pages there. That's HUGE for this character. That's more panel-time than he's had the entire series.

Maybe they'll actually use him in a fight in a few issues.

Okay, maybe that's too much to expect. But wow. Obsidian actually got a speaking part.

Tangibly close now.

Wonder Woman #14 preview's up!

(I can't believe it, since I whined so much when they got picked up for the book, but I really missed the Dodson art.)

Finally caught up on my comics.

Countdown Week 26 has what is now my favorite "Donna Troy Dodges Death" sequence.

Jason deserves to be hit on a regular basis for being a jerk all the time.

I think I'm starting to love Donna Troy.

She's just so casual about this sort of thing by now. She punches Jason (Actually, his still having internal organs on the inside of the chest after she hits him twice is evidence that she has excellent control over her strength) and then scolds him for being rude, and rather than reassure Kyle (who is, wonderfully, the only one who didn't realize she wasn't a goner and is pretty thrown by the whole revelation) she seems to just roll her eyes at him and rattle off some exposition.

"Yeah yeah, Jason's a really big asshole but not that big an asshole. Bob helped. Let's get on with the multiverse-wide scavenger hunt."

She's coming off (over all the specials and the weeklies) as this bland sweet-natured person who has just enough flexibility in her character to be temperamental when the writers need her to be, and is resilient enough to always be good for either a fake death or a real death. I can honestly see the appeal now.

In fact, I think its safe to say I'm reading Countdown for Donna right now almost as much as Kyle.

I want to see her die and/or hit Jason again.

Oh, for the love of little green leaves!

Stop making segregation comparisons when talking about sexism!!!

Please.

It makes you look like an asshole, which makes any further conversation awkward and/or hostile.

Oh, and while I'm here...

Everyone who read this post and thought that "lowest common (male) denominator" means "men are the lowest common denominator" needs to retake English next semester.

You fail reading comprehension.

Seriously, that's really fucking bad because I specifically added the "(male)" because presumably the lowest common female denominator would involve pushing a completely different set of stereotypes. (I don't know, bodice rippers or boy bands or whatever stupid insulting stereotype of fangirls you figure is the worst.)

To be honest, I made a mistake by not specifying "straight male" because a "lowest common (gay male) denominator" would be quite different as well. I apologize for that oversight.

But the prevalent idea came out of fucking nowhere.

I mean (and I know I'm repeating myself but dammit some people seem to need that), the very reason I added the (male) is because if I had put "lowest common denominator" in reference to a magazine that caters directly to men, that is calling men the lowest common denominator. By adding the (male) I was leaving room for an equal low involving an all-female audience or an audience of mixed gender. (Note to those seeking a lowest common mixed gender denominator: Explosions appeal to everyone.)


Still, some unbelievably idiotic readers read that and thought I meant the opposite.

Now, I admit, I've put out my poorly worded phrases and my mixed messages. There have been miscommunications that are entirely on my shoulders in the past.

This is all on the distant end, though. I don't know how anyone fucked up reading that one.

Onslaught (Slightly Altered)

I can't believe I have to make this post.

(And one last Wizard post. This one is entirely tangential anyway.)

I've seen several places that people have been saying "Well, the Feminists have SAID that if DC and Marvel want to be male-only they should put it on the cover, and now that Wizard does it they're all pissed."

Yeesh. Here's the thing about DC and Marvel and I'm going to say it before some dumbass at one of those companies (probably Marvel) thinks this might be a good idea. I was a teenaged reader in the 90s, lured by my sister with the X-Men Saturday morning cartoon. I never got the "boy's club" impression off of comics even in the midst of the Image craze. Growing up with the animated series I grew up thinking superheroes were for everyone and you know what? The Archives, Essentials, and Showcases support me here. They're loaded with sexism but the same sexism you find in gender-neutral and female-aimed entertainment from the same eras, just look at old 60s sitcom plots involving women and compare them to plots involving girls in the comics.

These things were for everybody, and they still should be.

Here and now I freely admit that if Marvel and DC were to brand their stuff officially as a "boy's product" I would be seriously pissed off for two big reasons:

1) They would be taking something away that I enjoyed as a child, taking it away from me as an adult and any young female relatives I would have wanted to introduce to the hobby I loved. Oh, I would be free to buy it if I chose to do so, but my honest reactions as a paying customer would not be welcome because of my gender.
(Arguably, this is the unofficial state of the industry right now.)

2) Because they would be telling me directly that despite having been a loyal paying customer they don't care for my money anymore and don't give a shit if they offend me and I stop reading. I would not be welcome because my money is not as good as a man's.

This is why I can emphathize with the Stephanie Brown-fans. I'm not a Spoiler fan, I'm not a Robin fan, I could give two shits about what's in the damned Batcave. I'm a casual Batfan, no more.

However, these women had a hero, a favorite comic book universe, and a number of elements in the Batverse told them girls were welcome there.

And they were taken away. Not just Stephanie, but Leslie and Onyx. Montoya, Dinah, and Barbara went to other parts of the DCU. Selina stayed, but Selina is a slinky antihero/villainess who fulfills a lot of fanboy fetishes.

Effectively, Gotham went from being for everyone to being for boys.

If you really think anyone'll be happy seeing that spelled out on the cover, you're in for a surprise.

If not, and you are bringing up an argument that basically states "They weren't for boys when I started reading! Why am I being pushed away?" as a "See, you got what you wanted!" gloat, you are a jerk.

And if you are saying "Its always been this way," you're being an ass. If that's true, then how did all of these people who are so "easily offended" by the "natural state of comics" ever get to the point of being regular fans?

Something got worse.