Get Your Reviews Here

I'm really tired of hearing the phrase "Arctic Blast." Yesterday, I was huddled in my living room, under 2 layers of sweaters and a blanket and that's with the heat on. To say my apartment gets cold when the wind picks up and the temps are well below freezing is an understatement. I did read some comics, though my fingers got numb and my hands were shaking. ;)

Bitch Planet 1-2
I missed getting this when issue 1 first came out, bought issue 2, then read them both after issue 1 was reprinted. All I can say is "Wow." Kelly Sue DeConnick reaches new heights with this book and the art by Valentine De Landro is perfect. This is a smart, sassy -- and yes, bitchy -- book, a feminist manifesto in comic book form, and all too appropriate and needed given today's attacks on women's rights. Feminism, for those who believe the stereotype and propaganda, is not about women taking over or being forced to give up staying at home to raise children; it's about treating all people as equals, male and female and anything in between, however people define themselves. It's about more than equality based on sex identification, but also across race and religion. It's about all of us being in this together, all us humans. Bitch Planet takes the concept that women should comply with societal norms to an extreme, but given the political reality these days, not much of an extreme. Extremes are the bread and butter of science fiction, the way literature/art often makes a point. In this case, it's an important point, one that's wrapped in a darn good story. Women who don't comply are sentenced to the Auxiliary Compliance Outpost known colloquially as "Bitch Planet," a prison where the inmates are recorded and broadcast for the entertainment of Earth viewers. The characters we've met so far come alive in just a few panels and I'm looking forward to spending time with each of them, every month.

Harley Quinn: Valentine's Day Special
Conner and Palmiotti continue their series of Harley Holiday Specials, complete with dream sequences to allow wonderful fill-in artists to help out with the art chores and give the book some extra oomph. The overall story has Harley trying to win a date with Bruce Wayne during a charity auction. Fun as always.

Shutter 9
The saga of Kate Kristopher and her mysterious family gets even weirder, but we finally get to the actual mystery. Only some members can access the magical Porticullis Hypnos of Prof. Harold Rathborn. In the next issue, we get to see where it takes her and her wacky and dangerous sister she never knew she had, as they go through the porticullis to find Kate's mother, who might be the key to finding their father, and.... Just trying to describe this story gives me a headache, but it's fairly fun. Keatinge is a decent writer and Del Duca's art is appropriately weird. I just hope the story's payoff is worth it.

Captain Marvel
Carol returns to her ship -- well, Stark's ship -- only to find Tic and Chewie missing after an attack by Haffensye ships. For some reason, the Haffensye think Chewie can help them fight Mister Knife. I can't wait for the next chapter. DeConnick shared writing chores with Warren Ellis, and David Lopez's art is a dream. I love Carol's facial expressions.

Astro City 20
Continuing the tale of aging heroes, filling in more backstory, while being an excellent character study. The thing I most love about this series is how real the characters feel. You can actually believe they're real, that superpowers exist and the heroes with them are just like us. Busiek is a master and Anderson's art is wonderful. And it's hard to beat Alex Ross on covers.

Feminism vs the Status Quo in Geek Culture

A couple of really good articles on how females are excluded from geek culture by the companies that creature geek media.

• Author Peter V. Brett laments the lack of female role playing characters in DC's Justice League game.
• A look at how marketing geek media is exclusive by design.

I read a bunch of comics. I'll get reviews posted soon-ish.

Reviews and a Few Thoughts on Race and Gender

I read this article on ThinkProgress about how four legendary white male comics creators were dismissive of race and sex of characters. Michael Kantor, Todd McFarlane, Len Wein and Gerry Conway were at the Television Critics Association press tour and seemed to be making a case for race neutral, sex neutral characters in comics. McFarlane said:

"So we actually stereotype and do it to both sexes. We just happen to show a little more skin when we get to the ladies.”

He also said, according to the article:

“There hasn’t really been historically a comic book that has worked that is trying to get across a kind of message, if you will," ... "So the female characters that work are the ones that are just strong women that actually it’s good storytelling, and the odd character that is a minority that works is the one that is just a good strong character. They’ve tried to do minority characters and bring that label and that surrounding [debate] into it. You’re aware that you’re reading a minority comic book. I think it’s wrong.”

Now, on the face of it, this is incendiary, especially for the people being marginalized: Women and People of Color. But the thing is, he has a point. They all do. When you write about a woman or a character with an ethnicity other than white and you make that the point of the story, then, odds are, it won't be very good on a story level because there won't be much foundation and a fair amount of writers will either revert to stereotypes or run out of ideas without an actual story. And that's largely because, at DC and Marvel, the majority of the writers are white males.

Which brings me to the point these men don't get. Characters differ. They need more than strength. They need their differences, which is why we have so many characters starring in so many books, and not just because their strengths and weaknesses vary. Sure, Aquaman lives in water; Superman inhabits the dry, surface world. But Aquaman is informed by his background, growing up in Atlantis. Superman is a Krptonian, separated in infancy from his family and his world. Bruce Wayne, despite being Batman, is a privileged white male and while losing his parents brutally in front of him when he was young and impressionable, how he reacted to that might've been much different had he not had the advantages his race and wealth afforded him.

Len Wein argued for racial neutrality:

“I think every time you take a female character, a black character, a Hispanic character, a gay character, and make that the point of the character, you are minimalizing the character.” ... “I have written anything you can possibly think of. I have created Storm who was the first black female superhero. I created a number of other characters, and it never matters to me what the color of their skin was. I was writing about who they were as human beings, and it wasn’t Black Storm. She was Storm.”

Again, a good point made. She was a character, an individual. And yet, he denies the background that made her the individual she was. How can you write about who someone was as a human being without infusing them with a racial identity, or include how their sex influenced how they were raised, how they view themselves, how they approach life?

Not all people of an ethnic group are the same. Not all women are the same, nor all men. But comic books don't tell neutral stories. No one is walking around wearing the same neutral body suit as everyone else. The characters aren't all the same shade of green or purple. There are aliens (and that's often been pointed at as an example of non-white characters!) and humans, and males and females. If a comic is set in a real-world setting, for instance, Earth, then it should reflect that reality, as should the creative teams.

These male writers were dismissive of female superheroes as a genre girls will read. Well, let me tell you guys something. I was reading superhero comics when I was seven, over 50 years ago. By the time I was twelve, girl comics (Archie, Millie the Model, romance comics) bored me.

Conway said:

"And I think it’s a mistake to sort of, like, pigeonhole superheroes, or to add so much to superheroes that you’re missing the fact it’s a genre within itself. It’s like saying, ‘Why are there no medieval stories about female knights?’ Because there was only one, you know, Joan of Arc. It’s not it’s an inherent limitation of that particular genre, superheroes.” 

And McFarlane added:

“It might not be the right platform,” he said. “I’ve got two daughters, and if I wanted to do something that I thought was emboldened to a female, I probably wouldn’t choose superhero comic books to get that message across. I would do it in either a TV show, a movie, a novel, or a book. It wouldn’t be superheroes because I know that’s heavily testosterone — driven, and it’s a certain kind of group of people. That’s not where I would go get this kind of message, so it might not be the right platform for some of this.”

A lot of women, myself, included would disagree. Vehemently. First, it's fiction. Second, women have fought in wars while disguised as men. Women have been part of mythology from the beginning, and mythology has been part of comics for a long time, with Wonder Woman the most obvious example. You want to empower your daughters? Let them see role models in all media, comics, included. Let them see females are respected and powerful even in the comics field you work in, Mr. McFarlane. Don't tell them, sorry, but these aren't really for you. They're for boys who need to look at pictures of women with their boobs and butt sticking out.

Not that I mind much of the sexy art. It's the gratuitous art that bothers me. It's how the males are all muscular while the women look like they can be broken in half like a wishbone. Power Girl might have big breasts and shows off her cleavage, but she's no pushover. When written well, she's an excellent role model. We need more like her. And we need more like the Vixen mini-series, that showed how good a story you can have when you work in a black female superhero's ethnicity.

“'I think the bigger question is why are readers not interested in those?' Conway asked."

Good question, Mr. Conway. Maybe the answer has to do with what's actually available. Some people, like me, will read about white male superheroes, but not everyone will be satisfied with just that. It's a different world now. And there are some more good points made in the article, so go read it, if you haven't, already.

And this attitude that comics follow or reflect society and don't or shouldn't lead, is part of the larger argument of: Does art imitate life or does life imitate art? I think it's both, a mix, same as nature/nurture has proven to be. You simply can't separate the two. And as society is diverse, so should be comics, re: sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, on both the character and creator sides.

Gail Simone is writing The Movement for DC. It's political, dealing with societal and economic inequities. It has a lot of ethnic characters. Issue 4 shows us the background of many of these new superheroes. This comic reflects the social unrest of recent years, with the Occupy movement, etc. Yet it also is a move into new territory for a superhero comic, with many characters on both sides who can't easily be labeled all good or all bad. My only problem with this comic is the mice. I really hate mice and rats.

Gail's first issue of Red Sonja came out a couple of weeks ago and it's good. I've never read Red Sonja, so I can't compare what Gail is doing with her vs the past, but this is a woman who was beaten down yet not defeated. I won't say she's been empowered, because once freed from captivity, she claimed her own power. As if should be.

I also read the Hawkeye Annual, which focused on Kate Bishop. Kate, on the road with Lucky the Pizza Dog, bumbles her way into a big mess, then gets herself out of it. Kate is young and brash and capable, and she's written by a man, Matt Fraction, who gets it.

The Trials of Being Born Female

I don't usually post about this sort of thing. This is a blog where I review comics and sometimes chat about comics in general because reading and collecting comics is one of my hobbies.

But I'm a middle-aged, liberal feminist who has seen too much shit slung online and offline  that sometimes, I have to not ignore it the way I usually do. Some people will never get it and you'll never be able to convince them that they're bigoted douches. Yet sometimes, a person just has to try. Maybe someone might see themselves in my words and think next time before saying something stupid.

There's a war going on these days, and women are in the crosshairs. The post that inspired this post is on Stars and Garters and is about Kelly Sue DeConnick, a writer I know little about, though I did read her story arc in Supergirl a few years ago. It is a sad state of affairs that too many people, mostly male people, assume a woman's success is due to the men she knows.

At a time when men in Congress are trying to control the female reproductive system, and even a few women holding political office seem to have no clue how the female body works -- did they stop teaching basic biology in high school at some point? -- it seems silly to fuss over idiotic comments on social websites, but those mean-spirited, spiteful comments are symptoms of something bigger.

The internet allows for anonymity and it, like alcohol, strips away people's inhibitions. What they might be too cowardly or polite to say to someone's face, slips readily out through fingers on keyboards and touch screens, things I doubt they would say to their mothers. Now that male politicians and legislators are saying these stupid, hateful things, more men likely will feel encouraged to speak up in real life, too. And that's what really gets me. Every man and boy was born of a woman's womb. Even if that mother wasn't part of their life as they grew up, a woman was as responsible for their life as was a man, and to disrespect women is so very wrong on so many levels. The amount of hate and ignorance driving these people is mind boggling, especially when you add in the people who do it to fit in with their so-called peers. This is bullying, folks, plain and simple.

Some men who spew this sort of idiocy don't realize how hurtful their words can be. They're laughing and cyber bumping elbows with other idiots who share their immature, locker room mentality. They've never experienced the anxiety a woman might feel walking into a subway car full of men. In the same situation, they wouldn't be thinking "I could get raped tonight," but it's always in a woman's mind. They haven't had to deal with the discomfort of having men whistle at them and call obscenities at them. Those men think they're flattering the poor woman, but to the woman, those catcalls can feel like an invasion or worse, a prelude to something more, something worse, a threat or possibly a physical attack. Sure, there might be men who have experienced this -- the rise in gay bashing will attest to that -- but I doubt many straight men know this particular fear.

So, too, do the lewd comments feel like an attack, be they sneers at a cosplayer at a con or smack talk in a blog post's comments. Men take liberties with women, trying to put them in their place. But they'll do it to men they perceive as weak, especially the men who dare post in support of a woman.

To too many men, it is inconceivable that women are capable, competent, and talented. They can't believe a woman could rise to a high level success on their ability and talent alone. Sure, sometimes, it helps to know someone to open a door, but that's true for men, too. It's despicable for anyone to imply that anyone got ahead for who they know or who their relatives are, but it's an easy bet that this happens more to women than men.

All a true feminist wants is equality. Equal treatment. Fridge male and female characters equally. Objectify equally. ;) But also, more importantly, treat people, and characters, with respect. As you would want to be treated. Men can be feminists, too. Everyone has a stake in equal treatment and equal opportunities. And no one should be treated like a second class citizen. Certainly, they shouldn't be treated the way Kelly Sue DeConnick has been treated by the idiots, just because she happens to make a living writing comic books.

Feminism Again

Over at Pretty, Fizzy Paradise, Kalinara discusses a post and commentary over on Occasional Superheroine. There are Final Crisis 6 spoilers, just so you know.

Here's my comment on Kalinara's post (with spoiler, even though I haven't read the issue yet), revised a bit to fit here:

Wow. I went and read Val's post, plus all the comments to the one you linked to, then a bit beyond. I knew I had a good reason to stop reading Val's blog and this just reinforced that decision. Her analogy with the coffeeshop is a bit over the top.

I certainly don't think someone's enjoyment or lack of enjoyment of Final Crisis (which I'm enjoying but haven't gotten issue 6 yet, and I didn't mind having it spoiled -- although I hate spoilers -- because the thing with Bats was pretty much telegraphed) has anything to do with feminism or even DC Comics as a whole. (*See below for more about Batman.)

I consider myself a feminist and have since I was in college in the early-'70s, but part of that is the belief that women should have the right of choosing how to live their lives and not have that dictated to them by men. If they want to be stay-at-home wives, fine. If they want to be president, they should go for it. And if they want to read DC Comics, that's between them and their comics supplier.

* As to how I think the thing with Bats was telegraphed, the Batman RIP storyline in the Bat books pretty much dovetails it. Plus, word was out that someone major would die. Supes, we know, has some big, off-Earth adventures coming up and he already died in a major storyline, and Wonder Woman has a big storyline in the works that should run through the summer, last I read. But Batman is going to be missing from his books, for reasons not yet clear, while people compete for the cowl or some such, which means Bats/Bruce being dead or missing or simply nursing a galactic hangover somewhere is a logical candidate for the big death scene. He's one of the big 3, the DCU Trinity (and where that fits on the DCU timeline is beyond me), and he's available to be killed. Not that he won't be back someday.

Wizard Alternate Covers

So there were 3 covers that I saw and this is the issue I got. Notice there is no banner across the top that proclaims this is a man's magazine. The cover with the banner is one of the alternates. The content seems pretty much as usual, but I haven't read the issue yet.

It would be nice for them to do an alternate cover sometime proclaiming Wizard is tops among female magazine readers, but I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting. Still, the fact that there were viable choices for me to choose from made this less annoying than I'd expected.

I'll be away for a long weekend starting tomorrow, so I probably won't be blogging here. Reviews to resume after I return home on Monday.

Wizard's Folly

So, Wizard is claiming to be the number one men's magazine? I read it first here, and then again, here. And both make valid points. But to be honest, I'm not sure I would've even noticed. Sure, it's a big banner across the top, but I would've seen the latest Wizard on the rack, checked to see what alternate covers there were, and picked the one I wanted. I like Wizard. Not because it's a great magazine -- far from it -- but because it's got nice illos and updates on books, with some useful reviews. There have been good interviews, too, especially with DC creators about upcoming projects. Should I not buy it because of the asinine, sexist proclamation? Should I not buy it because they're proclaiming something that writes off their female readership? Do they even realize or care that they have a female readership?

I might not have ever bought Playboy, but I've read it. I remember my mother asking my father to pick up the recent issue on his way home from work, so she could read the Mel Brooks interview. I've read many issues of Playboy over the years. The interviews were topnotch and the cartoons were mostly funny. And of course, there were plenty of laughs in the advice columns.

But, you say, Playboy is designed to appeal to men primarily, while a mag covering comics is designed to appeal to comics readers and these days, that's both sexes. Should I boycott Wizard because of this foolishness on their part? Would a boycott change their mind, hit them where it hurts, be noticeable? Would they care? Because, after all, I and my fellow females, aren't the intended audience, because, after all, *everyone* knows women don't read comics.

Or do I continue to read what I want, regardless? Because tomorrow when I pick up my comics, a new Wizard will be waiting and there will probably be an article or two in it I'll want to read and I don't know any men who will have it for me to borrow.

*sigh*

When is it Gratuitous?

This post over at Blog@Newsrama asks what we think about the controversy re: the women in refrigerators syndrome, which by the way, originated not with The Killing Joke, as I understand it, but with the body of Kyle Rayner's girlfriend being found by him in the fridge.

I've been mostly ignoring this latest "outrage" over an old story, but since a lot of people believe, and rightly so in many cases, that women are still not respected in the DCU, I figured I'd write yet another *insightful* post about it. At any rate, this is my opinion and not intended to be treated as anything other than that.

Aside from crippling a sidekick to a character, Batman, who already had Robin, The Killing Joke helped revitalize Barbara Gordon as she transformed herself into Oracle and went from sidekick/guest star to Major Player. She can literally appear in any story in continuity. She has her own book with her own team. Rather than be the helpless female, Babs fought back. True, that was after the fact, but Babs was stuck down at home, in her civilian life, not as Batgirl. So, no, she wasn't given anything heroic to do in the story, because in that story, she was a supporting character. The story, sorry, wasn't about her. It was about Jim, the Joker, and because he's who he is, it was about Batman and his friendship with Jim. Batman was the frontrunner. He was and is one of the "Big 3." Babs, especially then, was not a headliner.

Which brings us to the issue that she was attacked as a helpless female to get back at a male. So what? Jim Gordon has one person in his life someone wanting to get to him could go after: Babs. And Jim, himself, was nabbed and tortured. And has had to live with the guilt over what happened to his daughter. In some ways, Babs had it easier.

It is a fact, unfortunate perhaps, that the best way to strike at someone indirectly, is to go after a loved one, and if there are mostly females in that person's life, it's the females who get to suffer so the males can suffer emotionally. But sometimes, a male gets it. Jason "Robin II" Todd got to die. Even if we'd voted for him to live (I voted for death), he would've had a rough recovery given his injuries, or at least, he should've. Who knows how DC would've handled it. Probably with him bouncing back next issue, as obnoxious as ever. But the fact remains that Jason was a male character getting blown up.

Suffering is part of drama. Sue Dibny gets raped because that's a horror people can relate to in the real world and because neither DC or comics readers are ready for male rape. It was a horrid act that could logically lead to the mindwipe that led indirectly to Identity Crisis. Sue was one of the very few civilians who could have been in that role. Jean, who turned out to be the killer, was one of the few others, someone with inside info, but not one of the team. And Sue was one of the few characters who could have been in the satellite and been unable to fight off Light. Story-wise, it fit.

I am not disgusted by stories that have women harmed, maimed, tortured, or raped. Nor am I disgusted by stories that have those things done to male characters. I AM disgusted by stories that do any of that to either sex for the sheer fun of doing it without a story reason, without a story to go with it. Without a purpose, without the follow-up. Black Canary was tortured in the original Green Arrow series, but then, so was Ollie. Was it less horrible when it was Ollie hanging from the rafters with blood dripping down his body?

All we need, IMO, is to even things out a bit, balance the suffering between the males and the females. But mostly, we need more books with female leads and vulnerable males in their lives. Now, are they bringing back Kate Spencer, the Manhunter, or not?

What it is to be a Woman

I want to point out a post by Kalinara that everyone should read. Not because I agree with her. Not because I don't agree with her. But because she makes some valid points about her experiences/views of what it is/can be like to be female and how that applies to the treatment of women in comics and why it matters to her and many others, even me at times. ;)

I am a child of the '50s and '60s. Born in the decade when women had their place and it was at home cleaning and taking care of the kids, reaching maturity in the '60s when everything got questioned: politics, religion, freedom, equal rights, race, and yes, what it means to be a woman, debates that continued on into the '70s.

Kalinara offers this:

(DISCLAIMER: Despite the title, the following is not the universal experience of all women. This is very specific to MY experiences. We're not actually all the same.)

And here are my experiences. I can honestly say I experienced very little of what she mentioned. I got the whole "improve your appearance" crap, but it came from my mother, not my father, and she gave up after a while. It was my younger sister who gave me the most grief about my not wearing makeup. Except for trying it for a few months in high school, my wedding, other weddings I attended years ago, and maybe one or two other times, I never have worn makeup. Not even to cover the pimples of acne.

I'll polish my nails, but I won't put crap on my face that makes me feel uncomfortable. I'll wear fake tattoos on my arms, but I won't slather on mascara or rouge or even lip gloss, because that stuff bothers me and I don't like what I look like. That's not ME.

And not wearing makeup didn't stop my husband from liking me and wanting to marry me and thinking I'm cute.

Yet, the fact that this is even an issue for women and had been an issue for me when I decided, fuck this, I'm not going along with the expectations that I'll shell out hundreds of dollars a year on cosmetics, is the thing that sticks in the craw. Because how many boys and men have to face this issue?

Sure, boys have peer pressure. They should be athletic. They shouldn't cry. They'll compare how well their body parts are maturing. Well, hell, girls go through that stuff, too. They aren't supposed to be athletic, they can get what they want if they cry, and damn it if they don't compare boob sizes in the locker room before gym class or at camp.

Things are changing. A lot. Girls can be athletes and boys can be artists. Hell, if they draw comics, they get rewarded and more opportunities than the girls who can draw. So, there's still room for more improvement. For both sexes.

Kalinara discusses the whole how to dress to get ahead and I can honestly say that I can get away with wearing jeans (every attempt at a dress code for ALL has failed thus far, beyond the need to wear shoes, no sweatpants, that sort of thing), while my husband has to suffer the indignities of a tie and suit. I can do pretty much anything I want with my hair, though shaving it might not go over well, while my husband gets looks and comments if his hair gets long enough to touch his collar. It's because of our different professions with different values, and not a factor of gender.

So, no, we women aren't cut from the same cloth. We aren't the same. I wouldn't expect any one man to represent all men, nor should anyone expect any one women to represent all of us with two X chromosomes. MY experiences are such that I see a problem, but not one of gender. I see a people problem.

However, my experiences and those of friends have shown me that until a profession reaches a certain level (variable, by profession, it seems) of integration, ie percentage of women or minorities, the problem IS usually one of gender. And the treatment of women, until those professions/workplaces reach that percentage and subsequent enlightenment usually falls somewhere between paternalism and outright hostility (passive and aggressive forms). And in the case of the comics industry, I suspect women need to gain a few more percentage points on the creative end before there's a proper balance and sensitivity to the issues. I do give the industry points for sounding as if they're trying.

The one thing that is not forgivable is belittling someone's feelings or experiences. Telling someone something is no big deal. Or asking them what the fuss is and not out of a true curiosity. Yes, I often advise people to ignore much of the crap. It usually is better for the blood pressure. But if they can't do that, so what? We each, every one of us humans, have our own reactions, our own thresholds, our own tolerance levels. And blogging is a great way to express our opinions, especially when our thresholds are reached. We get to vent here in our little corner of the web.

Just don't expect us to agree. And don't be surprised when we don't. We're all different, after all.

But not so much. Because we all seem to have opinions. We own them. They help define us. Even when some of us see the same problem, we are as likely to see different solutions as we are to agree on a single remedy. Because, in reality, there is no one-size-fits-all solution to most problems.

Kalinara says this:

"I'm not writing this to condemn men. I'm not trying to say "only men are to blame." Women also do their own part in oppressing one another as well, after all. This is something bigger than that. This is society. This is something built by generations of traditions and ideas that are indoctrinated into us from birth and passed down to our children. It's something that we're all a part of, even when we don't realize it. This is something that we do to ourselves as much as each other."

I'll add only that we might not even agree on the problems. For me, my hope for society is simple, that we all treat each other with respect, compassion, dignity, but I'm not above saying some people forfeit that right. But we should start with giving them each a chance first to prove themselves unworthy, not the other way around. I just don't think we should judge another on our own standards of proper attire or appearance, or whether we want children or not, or any of the other ways people legally go about their lives. And if I or someone else, male or female, wants a bit of sexually explicit entertainment, that's fine. Just make it fair.

Feminist Issues

I'm about to be long-winded. Deal with it, read it, comment, or just move along. ;)

While I was away, a lot of the comics blog posts I read had to do with a certain cover to a certain comic I don't read. Coming right after the MJ statue controversy, it's been a busy time for feminist bloggers, fanboys, and everyone else who enjoys an online ruckus. I would have more to say on the topic if I was more familiar with both Spider-Man comics and Heroes for Hire. But as I have just general knowledge of the former (never read the comics, did sometimes read the newspaper dailies, did see the first movie) and no knowledge of the latter (beyond seeing listings for it in CSN), I'll just post some general observations and opinions.

First, Kalinara linked to a nice defense/explanation of the H4H cover. Well worth reading for how to react to a controversy. The official and unofficial defenses that I read over the last week didn't cut it.

If someone is offended, then a thing is offensive on some level, as Kalinara explained previously. Saying it can't be offensive because no intent to offend existed is to avoid the issue.

Not everyone will be offended by the same things. Same as not everyone will like the same things. If I think Hemingway is a boring, annoying writer (which I do), does that mean he's a boring, annoying writer? Depends on who you ask. Artforms are like that. Sometimes, it's helpful to turn the argument around to something opposite to see how ridiculous some defenses can get.

I think better than saying the work is offensive can be "the work offended." Or that some people found the work offensive. The work exists on its own merits, but because it's an artform, its qualities are subjective. Offense is subjective. The more people who find something offensive, the more offensive it is. The audience ends up defining the work.

Bigotry works like that. Biases are everywhere. Stop a black man on a street for a random check without cause, but not the white men, that's bigotry. Stop the black man because you're looking for a mugger described as a black man wearing similar clothes, there likely isn't bigotry, unless you unnecessarily rough him up. Stop all men, regardless of ethnicity or race, and you probably aren't displaying bigotry, either. Context is usually everything. And no, I tend to not deal in absolutes, because I've learned in my 54 years (and counting), that exceptions can be found for just about everything.

My brand of feminism, as I believe I've stated here before, is about self-determination. It's about equality. Equal rights. Equal opportunities. Equal chances to fail as well as to succeed. Many years ago, I read a wonderful quote (I forget from who, but he was an education official, I think) that had to do with the concept that equality won't be achieved when the top people all have equal opportunities, but when the mediocre ones and those below that do. I agree with him. Equality will be achieved when ethnicity, religion, race, and sex will cease to be factors determining opportunities. Only abilities will.

Exploitation is something else. Is it exploitation when someone willingly allows it? When they control it by going into what's been labeled exploitive situations/jobs? Is someone above the age of consent being exploited or exploitive when they choose to sell their bodies? Is it demeaning if you don't feel demeaned? I would certainly not make the choices others do. Sure, prostitution is an extreme example, but how about something less obvious? Librarianship. The traditional domain of women (straight and gay) and gay men. Where, when I was in library school anyway, straight men were looked at funny when they wanted to be a librarian. Like male nurses. Did I settle for something I was programmed to be or did I become something I truly enjoy being? We all make choices based on upbringing, cultural influences, and our own minds.

What does this have to do with comics? Why am I posting it here instead of on my more political blog? Because the issue is pervasive in comics. And it is that way because comics have long been in the control of men, some of whom get women and some of whom don't. Which isn't to say women creators are all made of the same cloth, either. But in large part, men make the decisions, even if a woman ran DC Comics for a long time prior to Paul Levitz succeeding her. It affects how females are portrayed and how they are viewed.

One more thing before I get to the specifics here. I'm also a believer in Wittgenstein's concept of... well, concepts. That there are core concepts just about everyone will agree to and then nebulous, movable borders to those concepts that are placed differently for each person. So, we all might agree that shooting someone in cold blood is murder, but we might disagree that euthanasia is murder.

So, specifics. The MJ statue. Who hasn't seen a pic of it by now? Is it offensive? I dunno. I wasn't offended by it. I thought it was ridiculous looking and a poor reproduction of the sexy illo it was based on. It looked painful for MJ to be bent over that way. But I also thought it was a poorly executed attempt at a playful poke at a traditional and outmoded image of women, whether or not that was the intent. I don't deny that people were offended and anyone who mocked them for it missed the point.

The Heroes for Hire cover. Again, I didn't see it as offensive. I do agree the expressions made them look fearful, not a positive image, to be sure. I had no problem with the placement of the tentacles. More on that in a bit. Lea Hernandez reworked the cover on her LJ. She also posted this interesting letter from a retailer.

Re: the reworked cover. First, I don't think the middle woman looked all that frightened. More calculated, like she was biding her time before she could act. Anyway, in the reworked version, they look eager. I commented that they looked eager for the tentacles to attack them. Now, I'm a literal-minded person. I take what I'm given. If I infer something, it's got to be really clear. I didn't infer that they were eager to kill the tentacle creature, because that really isn't in the picture. What interested me was the comment my comment that they looked like they were enjoying it got: better to enjoy than to cower in fear... Yeah, right. That's so much better. Gonna rape me? Bring it on! I love being raped! Yeah, that works. NOT.

I don't get the whole tentacle porn/rape imagery in that. I'm a literal-minded person, mostly. I didn't see it, but that doesn't mean others didn't. They did, so on some level, it's there, intended or not. Lea changed hair and such, because it wasn't realistic. Heck, these are comic characters who, I presume have superpowers? Why would they be realistic? But I digress. I would never blame the artist, who worked freelance, I believe, according to specs she was given and her own cultural mores. Marvel bought it. Marvel didn't return it to be reworked. If that's the image Marvel liked, that's where the complaint should lie. And it wasn't nearly as suggestive or exploitive as many other covers on mainstream or non-porn books in comics shops.

Covers (see, I am getting to that) generally fall, as I see it, into one of two major categories: Heroic and Jeopardy. The more dangerous the situation, the more dire, the more eager we readers should be to see how the heroes get out of trouble. And for women (though it would work for men, too), rape is viewed as very dire, indeed. It's sure not on my list of things to experience (<-- Note of sarcasm here.) So, while the expressions could've been improved, I'd have made them look angry.

From another cover in recent months: Star Sapphire ready to stomp Hal/Green Lantern = Hero in jeopardy! Star Sapphire wearing the skimpiest costume in history for her negates the image somewhat because it detracts from her ability to pose a legit threat and therefore is viewed by many to be exploitive. The story rose above it.

Unfortunately, I don't know H4H, so I can't know if my "improvement" for it would make sense. But I would swap out one of the females for a male. Make things more equal.

Where do I sit in this controversy? Probably somewhere in the middle. I'm not all hot and bothered by the art in both the cover issue or the MJ statue. I don't think they're evil or misogynistic, nor do I think they're all that exploitive, though they do cater to a certain audience. But that's how marketing works. Doesn't make it right, not when companies claim they want to expand their audience and definitely not when they want to appeal to more females. Sad, but they don't seem to grasp how to do that, though I'm hoping DC's Minx line helps. But getting females reading superhero comics should be a goal, too, because right now, comics are losing out to other media and bringing in female readers can improve the bottom line.

The dialogue these controversies have generated can be good if the creators and the publishers pay attention. The goal is to keep print comics viable (at least through my lifetime because I hate reading comics online because my eyes don't like it) because it is a wonderful media. I want to see it healthy and thriving. I want to see it appeal to everyone, young and old, boys and girls, men and women. I want people to think of comics and smile fondly. I don't want them to think of comics and frown or turn their nose down or make derogatory comments. Comics shouldn't be just for kids. The sooner the publishers realize they need to make some adjustments to bring this dream to reality, the better.

Okay, I rambled on long enough. This post. Maybe some other time, I'll post something about role models. But one thing I won't do here is claim any issue is simple or that it has one perfect solution, though in this case, more women editors and writers and more women who get to make the decisions couldn't hurt.

Super Follow-Up on Supergirl

An update/follow-up from Occasional Superheroine. This is encouraging:

"The System has to change. And it stands a better chance of changing from without than within. Within the System, you're sort of trapped. I could not do a damn thing for "women in comics" of any value until I was out of that particular System. All the articulate, empassioned bloggers and posters out there who agitate for change is what's going to change this System. Letter-writing campaigns are what's going to change this System. Voting with your wallets is what's going to change this System."

Because sometimes, it feels like spitting in the wind. But I do think we need to get more women into the system, in decision-making roles. We need to put the pressure on from both ends, within and without.

As I've said before, I have no problem with sexy women in comics, but Kara is a teen girl and the rules have to be different for her, especially when the whole role model thing is taken into consideration. And from scans I've seen around the blogosphere, an increasing number of females are being drawn in more and more provocative ways, or so it seems, to the point where underwear seems to be optional. Go too far, and the backlash will be deserved.

I'm against censorship. I love Ed Benes' art. It wasn't/isn't appropriate for Supergirl. Nor was Michael's Turner's style, but I have more problems with his anorexic look than anything else. Freedom comes with responsibilities. Intention goes only so far, if the intent isn't clear or contradictory in practice. I'm not out to vilify anyone, so you won't see insults here, though you will see "What were they thinking?" posts, because even the best intentioned creators and editors can screw up.

I also don't expect to agree with every feminist point, nor do I expect everyone to agree with mine. Here are my hot buttons:

• Don't tell me what I think.
• Don't tell me what to think.
• Don't tell me I'm not a feminist (fill in with any other "type" you wish) if I don't adhere to the entire agenda.
• Don't label me by things I cannot control (my race, my heritage, the religion I was was born into, the way I look, my sex, my height, my weight, the fact that I wear glasses, the shape of my nose).
• Don't judge me or make assumptions about me due to any of those or any other labels. The labels I can't control do not define me. They are merely contributing factors toward the person I've become.

That's my brand of feminism.

I don't hold the media responsible for how kids turn out. I hold the parents responsible and that doesn't mean parents should censor their kids' reading. It means making sure they are mature enough for the material and that comes at different ages for different kids. It means being aware of the content of the material.

But be the content violence or sex or language not usually reserved for polite company, there's a difference if the audience is a mature adult or an impressionable child. Comics reach a wide audience and each title has a particular target audience, ranging from wide (everyone) to narrow (adults or teens or younger children) and the content should be geared to that audience. With Supergirl, it means make up your f'in minds already. A book for young people adults can also enjoy? Or an adult title that isn't quite at the Vertigo level of adultness?

It would also help to remember Kara is a teen and there are some ethical issues re: her behavior. Having her date an adult is problematic in a book for teens. It's an issue in any book when one of the couple is underage, but if it's handled properly (Deathstroke and Terra where it was clearly shown to be wrong, back in Titans), it has a place in a book geared to an older audience.

I really hate cutting off any option because it might or does offend someone, but for a company and editor wanting to get more girls/women to read Supergirl, they're going about it the wrong way. Trying to find the one common denominator for we female readers might be impossible, but clearly, the majority of the ones blogging are in opposition to the decisions currently being reflected in the book, which has changed, it seems, issue to issue. Make a choice and stick with it and the audience will follow, with one caveat, and it's a biggie, so I'm gonna use a bigger font.

Good, well-written stories and good, appropriate art.

It really isn't much more complicated than that.

And while you're at it, why not put some ethnic supporting characters into the book, to help that whole diversified DCU thing?

Now This is Fine

Turnabout is always fair play, especially when it comes to cheesecake and beefcake. Thanks to
Kalinara for the link.

Sexism?

Tamora Pierce, co-author of Marvel's White Tiger mini-series with Timothy Liebe, poses some good questions and points out a troubling double standard on her LiveJournal. I haven't read the first 2 issues, yet, but they are sitting here on the stack. I hope to get to them soon. Her comments about how people have reacted to the comic and her are worth reading.

Feminism in Comics Redux

Tom Foss continues to show he's a thoughtful, intelligent comics blogger. His post
Walkin' on, walkin' on broken gla-a-ass is must reading. And here's my comment, so I can preserve it here.

------
Well, I've always felt that feminism means making the world a better place for everybody. It's not to make things better for one sex or the other. I can see that the pressures on males is often unfair, too. While there are gender differences, there are also individuals within their gender who don't fit the so-called norms and therefore are under great pressures to conform. Sexuality isn't one thing or another; it's likely a bell curve for each with the 2 bell curves overlapping. Some women will be stronger than some males and some males will be stronger than all women, and so on.

And if a man beats his wife, but also his son, is he a woman hater or simply hateful? And does a wife beater hate women or is he simply a self-hater lashing out at the most convenient target? Misogyny is a tough label to apply, IMO, so we end up with people's impressions of what's presented in the media and since we each have our own definitions, we vary greatly in their application. A bit of Wittgenstein here. Disclaimer: I was a psych major with a minor in Philosophy.

And while we all would probably agree we want well-rounded characters, that does include seemingly two-dimensional ones, ones who are cliches, because cliches exist because people like that do exist. It's hard at times, especially with supporting characters, to flesh them out when they get so few panels per story. Some writers excel at it, others not so much.

And when so many different people get to write/interpret these characters, it muddies the water, so to speak, because they write and develop characters differently, have different foci in their writing (ie story-driven vs character-driven) and sometimes, we get outright contradiction, not just confusion.

I still firmly believe that if more women were writing and drawing mainstream characters for the major publishers, things will improve. But I don't want scantily clad females to disappear, anymore than I want bulging muscled males to disappear from comics. That's part of the superhero genre and I'm not ready to say goodbye to it.

I suppose if so many people weren't so uptight about sexuality, this would be viewed differently. What I want is to see more variety. But it's hard to differentiate a woman who flaunts her sexuality because she's proud of it vs one who does so out of insecurity vs a woman who doesn't flaunt her sexuality because she's insecure vs one who doesn't because she is secure and sees no need. The surface appearance is flaunted sexuality vs not flaunted, yet the reasons are much more varied.