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.

More Reviews

One thing that happened after DC rebooted their universe is that I decided to read fewer DC titles than I'd been reading. I went from 25 or so a month, to three or four, and although I added a couple of titles over that first year of the New 52, I haven't come close to my previous totals of DC comics per month. But I do love reading comics, so I made a conscious effort to branch out in my comics reading.

I fell way behind, mostly because I have so much else to read, like books and magazines, and partly because I spend a lot of time playing online. Slowly, over the last couple of months, I've been digging out from under the stacks of unread comics. And I've even added a few new titles.

One of them is Vertigo's Astro City. I reviewed the first issue a short while ago, and now have read the second issue. This comic is sheer joy. It tells the stories of the civilians in a superhero world, with the superheroes typically supporting characters, not the stars. This issue, the first of a to-be-continued story, focuses on the folks who field calls for the heroes, acting as a superhero emergency call center, triageing the thousands of reports of possible villain activity and requests for help of all nature. The point of view is that of Marella, newly employed by Humano Global as a call station operator. Through her narration, we learn how difficult the job is, the rewards, and the frustrations. And when, at the end, a call she apparently mishandled ends up having dire consequences, we feel for her as much as we care that the heroes can fix things. By showing the human side of a superpowered world, writer Kurt Busiek and artist Brent Eric Anderson make us part of that world in a way no other superhero comic ever has, at least, none that I've read.

I also tried the new Lazarus, from Image, a science fiction title by Greg Rucka, with art by Michael Lark. The setting is a future where the world is strictly divided between the Haves and the Have-Nots. A few families have the power, evoking a feeling of Mob rule, and the people who work for them are protected. Everyone else is considered waste. Each family has a highly skilled, superbly trained, and scientifically enhanced protector, known as their Lazarus. Forever is the name of the Carlyle Family's Lazarus and in this first issue, she seems hesitant about what she's required to do. Hers is a brutal existence and she both commits acts of violence as well as suffers them, but the seed of doubt is creeping in, enough that the people in control of her family are concerned. This is a promising start to what I hope will be a thoroughly involving and thought-provoking series.

Captain Marvel 1-12 (2 volumes: In Pursuit of Flight and Down)
Way back in the '70s, despite being a devout DC gal, in the quest for more comics to read, I added in some Marvels. Howard the Duck. Killraven. Man-Thing. And Ms. Marvel. I didn't read them for long, and then in the '80s, due to Crisis on Infinite Earths, I stopped reading comics (heartbroken as I was over Supergirl's death). It never occurred to me to just switch to Marvel. Marvel just didn't have the family sense that DC had. And I probably was just worn out. I devoted my time to reading books, and even after starting back with comics in the '90s, Marvel didn't much interest me. Sure, I've been reading Dynamite titles, an imprint of Marvel, but nothing in Marvel interested me and that's in spite of enjoying their movies. It seemed that DC was best for comics and Marvel was best for movies. Until the glowing reviews for Hawkeye enticed me. And I love Hawkeye so much that I decided to give Captain Marvel a try. Yeah, the logic on that seems odd to me, too, but let's go with it.

Captain Marvcl, aka Carol Danvers, the former Ms. Marvel, has been getting a lot of positive reviews. That, and the fact that a woman is writing the book, appealed to me. The gorgeous cover art didn't hurt, either. I want to support a good female-centric book and I want to support female comics creators. And I can definitely say this is a good book. The art skews from very realistic to highly stylized, and each look works nicely with Kelly Sue DeConnick's stories. And, as with Hawkeye, you don't need to know all about the character to follow along. And if you want to know more, Volume 1 included a detailed biography on Ms. Danvers.

The first volume delves into Carol's history and what drove her to become a pilot, using time travel in a clever, twisty way. Volume 2, annoyingly for a collected edition, ends mid-story. Argh! Carol's got a brain lesion that means she can't fly without painful, dangerous consequences, and on the last page, we learn the reason, in the form of an old enemy. I can't wait to get my hands on what comes next. This book is definitely going on my pull list, to be read in the monthly issues, then bought again in the collected editions, because this is a must-keep title. My only quibble is that DeConnick has a tendency to jump a bit in parts, assuming we know what happened or who someone is, forcing me to stop and think or go back a bit and reread something. It might just be me, partly because I don't know all the characters. One thing I do like is how casually the rest of the Marvel universe is referenced. Tony Stark calls Carol. Other heroes drop by. Carol mentions the Avengers. Unlike DC where such references are either rare or carefully orchestrated as guest appearances, the mentions and cameos are so natural here. Coupled with the snappy dialogue, this all feels very real. As a devout DC gal, I'm impressed. This is one female-centric, written by a woman comic I'm happy to support.

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.

Well Into DCnU Now

And yet, I'm still working my way through a stack of DCU, aka pre-DCnU, books.

I'm taking my time with these "older" universe books, savoring them like the fine wine they are.

For instance, Batgirl. The Steph Brown BG. I love(d) this book. And Batgirl 24 epitomized all that was wonderfully perfect about this book. From the awesome cover to the last panels with Steph and Babs, this book rocked. Steph has her showdown with dear old dad who's now in prison, and has a lovely scene with her mother. But then, we also got to see amazing pages of her remembered hallucinations while under the influence of Mercy, the powerful hallucinogen her father doused her with, and well, this was a bittersweet sendoff for one of DC's best and brightest books and I can't begin to explain how much I'll miss it.

As for the new DC, I tried Grifter and Voodoo, two characters from the Wildstorm universe which I didn't mind seeing rebooted in the DCnU proper. Both diverged quite a bit from the original versions of the characters while keeping the flavor of who they were in WildCats.

Grifter shows the most promise of the two, with Cole being as badass as he was before and the book setting up an intriguing mystery. The art was nice, too, though there was more spittle in mouths than I like. Makes him look like he's drooling.

Voodoo also sets up a mystery, and introduces both Pris and agents hunting her. Hard to tell yet who's good and who's bad in this, and it might be more complicated than good vs. evil. Pris is an alien of some sort, but from where and why she's here, we have yet to discover. I'm hoping the journey to the answers are worth the time I'm going to give this because I did love Voodoo in Wildstorm. Sure, there's a titillation factor, but Pris, as I recall, was a very sexual woman, one who used all she had, including her body, as a means to an end, but she was no pushover. I do recall vulnerability in her and some self-confidence issues. It's been a while since I read Wildcats. But I'm willing to go along with this here, because the women working in the sex club, while stereotyped, are knowingly pandering to a class of men who objectify women and I want to see if Ron Marz will take this to something more empowering for women, especially Pris, who as an alien, clearly has other issues to deal with, too. And I so love the cover. So I'll stick with this through the first story arc.

Which brings me to the books I haven't read nor plan to read. The ones being vilified all over the comic blogosphere. Namely, Catwoman and that Red Hood book that Roy Harper is unfortunately starring in, Red Hood and the Outlaws) and all I can say is that I'm very glad I'm not reading either. You can find lots of links to posts about there on Dispatches from the Fridge because I can't begin to link to all of them, let alone the best of them.

So, for the record, I like when Bruce and Selina are romantically involved. I liked in the old DCU when they had sex, or it was at least, implied. I like that there was emotion there, and on Earth 2, they were actually married before she was killed, and the had a daughter.... excuse me. I got caught up in a moment of nostalgia.

But those panels/pages I saw posted were just ugly. Sorry, Judd Winick, but edgy they ain't. They sure weren't sexy, except possibly to teen boys and the men who never grew up. Aside from the art, which seemed odd in places, especially Batman's torso, I just didn't like seeing Selina like that. I'm no prude, no, that's not my objection here. But Selina of the DCU had come so far and was such a cool character, and while she took what she wanted, she certainly wouldn't take Batman like that. That Selina was above that, miles past it. She wanted Bruce, but she wanted him the way a mature woman wants a man. As an equal. As someone desired for herself and not her body.

As for the Red Hood book, I'm not reading it because I detest Jason Todd, but now, seeing how sexualized Kory is, based on the pages I saw, and how moronic Roy is, all I can say is, "Feh." Sorry, DC, but that's not how a woman who enjoys sex would act. That's how a damaged woman, a vulnerable woman would act. And the guy who goes with her is essentially agreeing to rape her. And while the old Roy would hop in bed with any female who was interested, I like to think he'd draw the line at taking advantage of someone clearly as vulnerable as Kory seems. They were friends, for crying out loud. And I can't see him hanging out with Jason, either, so he clearly isn't the Roy of old.

But then, that's why I'm not reading these books. Because I can't get what was out of my head. I can't get past who these characters are/were to me. I wish someone would just wake me when the DCnU is over.

A Comics Pioneer and Some Reviews

How did I not know about this amazing woman? I've been catching up on my Newsweeks and found this article about artist Lily Renee Phillips. She's led an incredible life, escaping to London from Nazi Germany when she was 14, then years later, being reunited with her parents, who also managed to get out of Germany, in New York. She worked in the '40s at Fiction House. having answered a newspaper ad for an artist. The examples of her art are wonderful. I'm sure I've seen these and another examples, but never realized a woman had drawn them.


Batgirl 13 had my least favorite cover of the series so far, but the story, featuring Clayface, was fun. I like how Wendy Harris as Proxy is fitting in and I appreciated the reference to Babs being on "Birds-related business." Continuity is a good thing, and so is remembering characters appear in more than one book.

Birds of Prey 4
This sorta concludes the first arc while setting up the next one, which is really a continuation of the first arc. The identity of the White Canary makes sense and fit in nicely, and I like how the story broke into three sections that paralleled each other, matching the danger and tension: Babs with Savant and Creote, Dinah battling White Canary, and Zinda and Helena dealing with the Penguin. The fill-in pages of art made the sections with Babs look just weird (and what's up with those big, pouty lips?). I also appreciated White Canary naming Roy Harper among Dinah's loved ones she planned to kill. But my favorite part: Babs telling Savant (about Creote): "Don't you know anything? He loves you, you idiot. He loves you." Ah, sweet romance. :)

And then I bought and skimmed something I swore I'd have nothing to do with: Titans 26. Roy was in it. Roy Harper, who I decided was dead to me. I had to peek. I haven't been reading this and I skipped all the pages that didn't have Roy in them, so I have no idea what's going on, nor do I care, but the continuation of the tension between Roy and Cheshire was okay, though I did not like the implication that Roy was on drugs, again and still. But he and Cheshire are up to something, so I'm curious. Damn it. And damn me for not being able to look away.

Abundance of Reviews

Playing catch-up.

Detective 853
I don't think I posted a review of the first part of this 2-parter by Neil Gaiman. That was, as I recall, in an issue of Batman. This was delayed, I guess since I've mostly forgotten the first half which I read right away. It had to do with Batman's funeral. A rather surreal funeral that continues here with all sorts of people talking. Bat foes all claim credit for killing Bats and by the end, I couldn't help wondering what the point was. This seemed to be Bruce reflecting on his life as he is dying, but given what we now know about his death, it makes no sense to me. Andy Kubert's art is nice. But I was expecting more from such a big name writer as Gaiman. Or am I missing something because the only Bat books I've read since returning to comics in the mid-'90s have been BoP, Nightwing, and an occasional Robin, plus the Huntress Year One and Robin Year One minis.

Supergirl 40
Okay, I didn't see that coming. Maybe because I'm not a regular reader of the Superman books other than Supergirl, but really, I was surprised by the big reveal. I will not reveal it here, not even with a spoiler warning. That just wouldn't be fair because it's hard to not see something like that even with a warning. I loved the cover, but I wish it had more closely matched the last panel of the story. Inside, Kara pulls off Superwoman's mask, having figured out who she is. On the cover, a shcoked Kara stares at Superwoman, seen from behind, who reveals herself. The cover is lovely, but I would've prefered an angry or determined Kara yanking off Superwoman's mask on the cover, without revealing her face.

Trinity 47
More of the same, not as good a weekly as 52 was, but as good or sometimes better than Countdown to Crisis was. Almost over now; I hope to see a big finish.

Justice League of America 32
All I can say is, huh? Which beats my first reaction: WTF? A lot of people have recently decried the boobification of DC's covers lately. Oracle is viewed from above, her cleavage on display. And there have been others. But the Oracle cover didn't bother me. The GA/BC cover was simply ugly, which fit nicely with the story inside, so it didn't bother me, either. But I don't get this cover at all, as in Why is Dr. Light on the cover representing the JLA when she's just joined the team and isn't a big name, hardly a selling point. As in Why is she in the grasp of the latest big bad who is biting her neck while she appears to be unconscious. Yeah, that'll pump up sales, among the Love to See Women Victimized crowd. Seriously, sexy women? Not a problem for me. Show some cleavage/skin? Fine as long as it's a grown woman and not a teen girl like Kara. And while showing our heroes in danger is always a good way to hook readers -- the Ooo, how will they get out of that deathtrap? factor -- it is preferable for the good guys/gals to actually be fighting to survive. She tried to fight back in the story, so why not on the cover. Why is she ... uh... out like a light? This annoys me. Not the sexy art (provided it's anatomically correct/possible/doesn't defy the laws of physics/anatomy), but this crap that demeans Dr. Light, while giving no real sense of the group aspect of a group book.

As for the story, half is talking heads talking talkity talk. So nice to hear Supes explain to Dinah why they made her leader and why the JLA needs her and then to see the remainder of the team she disbanded get together to keep it going and talking about Dinah, yadda yadda yadda, so that by the time the actual story starts, we have time for Shadow Thief to resurrect Starbreaker who drains Dr. Light's power or much of it, for himself, and then disappear with her going after him. And now Roy isn't in the book, away on leave, so why am I still reading this? I know people didn't like how Brad Meltzer paced his stories, being that he's a novelist who is used to having time for setup, but McDuffie is a practiced comics writer and his pacing is as bad or worse. At least Brad wrote interesting things happening and his talking heads scenes were on-target characterization.

Even the art by Rags Morales (pencils) and John Dell (inks) was ho-hum. Feh.

Zorro 10-12
This just gets better and better as California history and Spanish politics meets the superhero genre where the good guy wears a mask and a cape and carves a Z as a calling card, sometimes on the face of the enemy. This is a novel in comics that is paced just right.

The Lone Ranger and Tonto 2
This is a standalone followup to the first non-continuity Lone Ranger and Tonto. Not as strong as the Lone Ranger title, but a well told story about a town of monsters. Maybe. A good jumping on point for people curious about this new version of the beloved character.

Jack of Fables 32
Wherein Jack learns something that changes well, everything he knows about himself and puts a new spin on his relationship with the Page sisters. I so love this comic.

Battle for the Cowl: Commissioner Gordon
Always nice to see Gordon, especially when he's on his own, but really, was this actually necessary? It isn't memorable enough for me to be glad I got it, but it wasn't a waste of money, either.

Green Lantern 39
Agent Orange brings another color to the mix. heh I think we're gonna need a color chart before this is done and we're into Blackest Night. Another solid installment from Geoff Johns and Philip Tan's penciled art (inked by Jonathan Glapion) is stunning.

WildCats 8-10
Issue 8 featured Maxine, with fill-in art by Pete Woods whose art I like better on the book than Googe, although Googe does a nice job. I just don't like his style on the book and it seems Woods was aiming to keep to that style as best he could. Maxine isn't my favorite WildCat, but she was quite enjoyable in this story focusing on AIs and robots just trying to survive post-Armageddon. The next two issues continue the story of a lunatic Majestic. I love these characters, even if every carnation of them seems different than the last, and it's nice having them back on a regular basis.

Simon Dark 17-18
There had been no indication that the book was a limited series, so I don't know if this was planned to end here or it was canceled, though probably the latter is the case. In any rate, it all read like a horror novel and it ends in just the right way/place. It wasn't a favorite book, but I did get sucked in and will be sorry to not see it next month.

And that's it, until I read some more. Next up, a couple of issues of Madame Xanadu, and a whole lot more.

P.O.W.E.R.-ful

I joined Ning, a social networking site, a year ago and had no idea what to do there. Fortunately, P.O.W.E.R. (Promoting: Ownership, Writing & drawing, Editing and Reading) came along. I joined immediately upon seeing a blog post about it (so quickly, I forgot to make note of where I saw it mentioned). It's about networking to find ways to promote those good concepts in the parentheses for women and minorities in comics. If that's something you agree with, join. Now. You'll be glad you did.

I added a link to P.O.W.E.R, hereafter to be referred to simply as POWER, in the sidebar.

Random Bits

Now, I've never been a member of the Michael Turner can't draw humans bandwagon, even if many of his females look anorexic, but I've got to say that this cover for JLA 10 that Brad Meltzer is showing off on his MySpace really gave me a WTF? moment. I mean, is it really possible to push so much mammory gland tissue through an opening in a spandex top so as to form an actual, physical shelf Power Girl could probably use as a tray? Her boobs keep getting bigger and bigger like this, I'm gonna suspect tumors. I'd hate to be her when she has to get a mammogram. Oh, right. She's super and probably can't get cancer, so it's not an issue. sheesh. The thing that really bugs me is that she wasn't created with such huge breasts. Nice and full, but not abnormal like these things.

~~~o0o~~~

Spoilerage. So much has been said all over the comics blogosphere about spoilers in wake of the Captain America death (is there anyone who hasn't seen the news?) that, despite never having read any comic that included him, I have to say there was some good that came out of the controversy. I now know the Cap's name was Steve Rogers. More seriously, I've thought about this and while I hate having things spoiled for me, unless I seek out the spoilers, I think there are degrees of spoilerage. I will now outline mine.

Not for me:

• Spoilers that hit you in the face before you even know they're coming. Hey, give me a warning so I can avoid the thing if I want. It's hard when it's in the newspapers and on the local newscasts, along with blog and website headlines.
  
• Revealing reviews without spoiler space. Pretty much making sure I'll never read your blog again, eh?
  

Okay by me:

• Covers that reveal too much. Recent examples include Ted "Blue Beetle" Kord on Manhunter and Supernova revealed as the supposedly dead Booster Gold on 52. For the first, we now know it was misdirection and not Ted at all, making it a neat bit of gotcha. In the second, it might've given away the secret, but there was still, for me, the whole, huh? how? why? really? questions going on, so I had to read the story to get the answers. Yeah, I missed the clues. I'm middle-aged, easily distracted, and forgetful. So sue me (an expression we "geezers" still use).
• Reviews with ample spoiler space. Cool. I haven't read the book yet, seen the movie, whatever. I'll come back when I do to see if we agree.
• Teasers. This refers to the tidbits Don DiDio has been handing out at cons and the posters that are now ads in DC's comics for the upcoming Countdown. I think they're fun, especially the clues being dropped nearly everywhere, including the books. It's fun to try to figure out what's going on, especially when I'm so lame at figuring out these things. Like, take 52, for instance. it supposedly means something. Now, I've pretty much figured it simply referred to the 52 weeks of the missing year between the pre-52 situation and the OYL titles. So I didn't pay all that much attention to anything that might remotely be a clue to something more. I was simply enjoying the story. Silly me.
  

~~~o0o~~~

Fill-in issues are, well, fill-in issues. Will Pfeifer is a good writer and he writes credible, strong female characters, including Catwoman, but it seems even he can't make a fill-in any more than a fill-in. Sure, Wonder Woman 5 is a nice story about female empowerment, which given the lateness of the Wonder Woman comics the last few months, landed it directly in Women's History Month. But Wonder Woman is a larger than life character, from the gods, one of the big three, so the story seemed kinda ordinary. And given the first story hasn't yet been completed, it seems out of place, too. Just can't disguise a story that was stuck into a tight spot like that, but kudos to Pfeifer for producing something readable, and even moving, even if the excuse to get Diana to the shelter was seriously lame.

~~~o0o~~~

There are thousands upon thousands of names in the world, so why are there so many Kates / Katherines / Katarinas / etc. in the DCU? For that matter, we had Jade as the codename for a superhero and the real name of Cheshire. We've got Cassandra Cain and Cassie/Wonder Girl. I'm sure there are others. I think they repeat names just to confuse me.

For a Good Cause

Some cool items in this list of eBay auctions to benefit Lea Hernandez and family. As you might recall, she's the comic creator whose house burned down last year.

Wonder Women

Just read the interview in the February 2007 Wizard with Jodi Picoult who will take over Wonder Woman. I'd like to say soon, which it is issue-wise, but time-wise, who the heck knows?

Anyway, I was happy to read that she was a comic book fan, though mostly of Marvel, and that since getting the WW gig, she's read all the Wonder Woman comics she could get her hands on:

"...But I read everything from the stuff back in the '40s to the [Greg] Rucka stuff and things that have been much more modern."

I was heartened by her comments that show a true understanding of the character:

"The fun thing about her is that she's not like Batman, who is human. She's more like Superman. You can adore a group and fight for them, and still know in your heart that you're not like them."

Now, it can be argued that Superman is more human than Batman in that Supes as Clark has married and formed close relationships with the people in his life from his adopted parents to the people he works with, while Bruce has kept emotional distance between himself and anyone who does care, including Alfred and Dick and Tim even while using them, even exploiting them as suits him. To me, Diana is somewhere in between, someone who is alien like Supes, but who never quite fit in with humans the way he does, probably because even when she used a secret identity, she never really lived the life she'd assumed in the way Clark became that reporter he was playing.

Picoult gets that, too, or at least, part of it:

"One of the things that I'm trying to do is talk about how hard it is for her to maintain this secret human identity for the first time in a very long time."

I'm eager to see how she handles Diana Prince, agent for the Dept. of Metahuman Affairs, especially given that she is a metahuman.

She also mentioned issues remaining for Diana regarding her mother, the "archetypal story between any woman and a daughter," which brought to mind Black Canary's own mother issues as explored most recently in Birds of Prey 100 in the solo Black Canary story when she tells Sin about her life. Both Dinah and Diana lost their mothers and both took up the role their mothers played. I'll be interested in seeing Picoult's take on it re: Diana.

Picoult expressed surprise that such a strong female character has had only one other female writer, something I don't remember, so it must have been when I wasn't reading comics. And while I think a good writer can write characters of either sex -- and indeed, women like Gail Simone have written wonderful stories with male characters, with the men of Secret Six at the top of the list, and Ed Brubaker and now Will Pfeifer writing a great Catwoman, among other men who write strong females -- a character as iconic as Wonder Woman who has never achieved the status of her peers, Batman and Superman, could benefit with a woman's perspective. Gail Simone made BoP a "must-read" and I'm hoping Jodi Picoult can do the same for WW.

She showed a sense of humor, too, saying she'd expected to be cast as WW in the upcoming movie as part of her deal with DC. Now, if she can just meet deadlines, I think we'll be in for a treat. I'd been hopeful since first hearing she'd gotten the writing gig on WW, but now I'm really looking forward to her run on the book. If we can only get through the current one.

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.

DC's Minx Line Update

So, there is a woman on the team. Cecil Castellucci. I feel pretty silly, not to mention judgmental for jumping the gun, especially since I've encountered one other female Cecil over the years, but it was an honest conclusion that the creators were all male. She has writing credits for YA novels, which is a step in the right direction. I really hope the line succeeds and spawns more, while bringing in a whole generation of new readers for comics. Who knows? Those targeted teen girls might decide to try some superhero comics, too.

Comics for Teen Girls

I've been reading a lot about DC's announcement that their new imprint Minx will specialize in graphic novels for teen girls. A lot of what I've read has bemoaned the fact that the books will be written and drawn by men. And it's a valid point. True, men can write female characters; after all, women manage to write male ones fairly well. But with all the women in the creative end of the business now, albeit not exactly at the big companies, there must be some talent DC can entice to work for them. Not that I think Supergirl is the worst book out there -- it's been better with Joe Kelly writing it, and there have been far worse Supergirl stories/versions out there -- but I don't think she's the best character to emulate in the new books.

Birds of Prey will be getting an all-female creative team. In all these years, a book focused on women has been in the hands of men until Gail Simone took over writing chores. And I'm not complaining about the job those men did; the early stories were mostly wonderful. But Gail brought a certain sensibility to the book that most male writers can't grasp, the way women generally are with their friends, the way they talk to each other. The things that make them laugh when there are no men to overhear.

I hate to generalize, and I won't, but there is something to be said about the way BoP is being written now vs before Gail's tenure began. Some men might get that special camaraderie same as some women writers can capture that special guy friendship, male-bonding thing. But wouldn't it make more sense for books aimed at pulling in teen girls be the best possible to attract that demographic, meaning being something they can relate to? Wouldn't or shouldn't you try to get the odds as much in your favor as possible?

"'It’s time we got teenage girls reading comics,' said Karen Berger, a senior vice president at DC Comics."

and

"Teenage girls, Ms. Berger said, are smart and sophisticated and 'about more than going out with the cute guy. This line of books gives them something to read that honors that intelligence and assertiveness and that individuality.'"

Karen's got it right, of course, and DC has the distinction of having been run by a woman, Jeanette Kahn, for a lot of years before she stepped down and Paul Levitz took over. DC has been reasonably fair when it comes to females, with some of the strongest female superheroes and other characters out there. They've tried to improve on their diversity with minority characters, too. But come on, DC! Can't you find some talented women who can make these newly proposed books fly off the shelves when published?

I hope the books do well enough that more books are needed and there will be room and money to bring in women writers and artists, maybe some unknowns who will get their big break. I've said many times that things won't change until the creative teams are more equalized. It's not enough to have a few female editors in the business.

Meanwhile, the whole thing had me thinking bizarre thoughts. What if the whole DCU got turned on its ear and the male and female characters swapped roles? There would be Superwoman and Superboy; Batwoman and her sidekick, a girl named Robin, and a sometimes helper called Batboy. How different would the stories be? How different would the characters be?

Another Crossover Writer

I just discovered Denise Mina writes comics and books. She's writing Hellblazer and I just finished reading her mystery novel Field of Blood, which I greatly enjoyed and have reviewed on my book blog. Always nice to find another woman writing mainstream comics.

Women and Writers and Women Writers

First in a maybe series of rambling posts, streams of consciousness, whatever. And this one is long.

Here's a Gail Simone interview that is worth reading. And almost anything by Ragnell at the Written World.

I blogged a bit about feminism and comics before, but since the topic is important and is at the fore right now, I figured it was time to discuss it again. I don't do the carnival thing. There's something about blogging on a schedule that I mentally rebel against. Even memes are passive. I either do one or not; I haven't made a commitment to do any, except the one I started over on Shelly's Book Shelf. So my lack of participation in the Feminism in Comics carnival, or whatever it's called, is not from lack of interest.

I agree there's sexism in comics and yes, it's ingrained, to the point that the majority of the people in the comics industry, especially on the creative side, don't see it. They do see what sells and of course, the more females are exploited, the more the core audience will buy the books. Seeing an audience that isn't there yet is a tough concept for the bottom-liners. They don't necessarily get "make them and they will come," meaning, make more comics female readers can enjoy (and I don't mean a return of romance comics and that ilk, necessarily, or the comic equivalent of "Sex in the City") and girls and women will buy more comics, improving the bottom line. And women like me who have long bought male dominated comics or female comics with a male sensibility are under the radar in that we're lumped in with the general readership that supports the concept that what's selling is what will keep selling.

A number of years ago, I managed a neighborhood library with almost no science fiction but a lot of fantasy books. I was told there were no science fiction readers in the neighborhood. Being a devotee of SF who doesn't read much fantasy, I continued to buy fantasy at the then current levels, but upped the SF titles. They slowly found an audience and the 6-7 regular SF readers who started coming in via word of mouth (Hey, they got SF there now!) borrowed those books heavily.

I was also told there was no need for home and furniture repair books. We were, after all, in Manhattan, land of apartments. But I bought some general repair books because I know men have a tendency to not ask for something if they don't see it. Those became very popular and a few men took the time to tell me how much they appreciated the collection changes. The additions I made to the sports section was equally appreciated by our male readers, and even some of the women. See, any group can be marginalized. In some areas, it's the men. Same as it's people of color regardless of sex.

From Merriam-Webster's online dictionary.
Exploit: "1 : to make productive use of : UTILIZE (exploiting your talents) (exploit your opponent's weakness)
"2 : to make use of meanly or unjustly for one's own advantage (exploiting migrant farm workers)"

Exploitive: "function: adjective
: exploiting or tending to exploit; especially : unfairly or cynically using another person or group for profit or advantage (exploitative terms of employment( (an exploitative film)
- ex·ploit·ative·ly adverb"

Exploiting someone or something isn't necessarily good or bad. It is often a good idea to exploit something to one's advantage. But exploitve has become a negative. The problem is getting a consensus on what's exploitive.

I've encountered a lot of disagreement over the years as to what is exploitive or what is stereotypical or what is a negative image. When is something sexual and when it is sexualized. And there is no easy answer because we each have our own definitions of a concept (as per Wittgenstein).

Is a woman who takes advantage of her sexuality, her beauty, her femininity to further her goals an anti-feminist? Or is she simpy a realist, using what's available to her? Is she setting back the cause of feminism or is she clever? Is a woman who is agressive, acting in a manner people have described as masculine simply a feminist not wanting to be pigeonholed as a weak, or is she trying to be more like a man, denying her true nature?

The truth is all that in-between ground. There are men and women at both ends of the spectrum and a fair amount of overlap. True equality is when people can be who they are and folks don't criticize them for it. It's when a woman can be feminine or masculine without it being an issue for anyone. It's when a man can show feminine or masculine aspects of his personality without being criticized, either. Someone (I can't recall who, but he was in education) once said that equality isn't about the best and brightest having equal opportunities to succeed, but when people with mediocre skills get the same chances as other people with similiar skills.

I've said before that I don't want to eliminate cheesecake shots (though appropriateness for the situation should be considered). What I want is my equal opportunity to see beefcake shots. I don't think having a sexualized media, in comics or otherwise, is bad. I do think we need to have alternatives to it. If all comics were oversexed, then yes, it's a bad thing because there is no choice.

Artists seem to like drawing the female body and showing off a characters physical attributes. I don't begrudge them a little fantasizing when they do that. Same as when they show off the muscles of the male characters, perhaps a bit of wish fulfillment on their parts. Who knows. As a writer (alas, still amateur in status), I can certainly relate to fantasizing and going for the angst. I just give it more to male characters than females. I actually expect that sort of thing to go on.

I've been reading about the backgrounds and experiences given to female characters vs males in comics, mainly the rape scenario. It's hard to come up with something for females to overcome. Sure, death of parents is available, if a bit overdone (ie, Batman et al), or last survivor of a planet (Superman, but then they diluted that with Supergirl, Krypto, Argo City, etc). But rape is easy because it's more likely statistically to happen to females than males. It's a theme used often in novels, and that includes by women writers. Yes, I'd like to see some more imagination here, but I also don't want to eliminate the desire to give characters built-in angst. Perhaps more male characters who were abused as boys, perhaps by their uncles, priests, etc, right out of the headlines.

The issue here for me isn't what is being done to females, but the uneven distribution of angst between males and females. When are we going to get the boyfriend's body in the refrigerator, or when are we going to get enough of them to help even the odds.

Yet I don't want the male supporting characters to be wusses to help balance out the weak female supporting characters. Both can be strong, really. Or maybe just individual characters instead of types.

Actually, I want to skip right to equality. In books and movies, I've seen the backlash, the strong female character, the repressed males (I'm reading a science fiction novel like that now). I've even read science fiction which exagerated the issue with female slaves and male overlords to show how harmful such attitudes are. It's all so been there, done that to me. I want strong characters and weak ones, regardless of sex. I want interesting characters with interesting backgrounds and adventures. I want characters who react as individuals and not as stereotypes to what their fictional lives throw at them. I want writers and artists to be able to express themselves without being second guessed re: motives. I want art and stories to not reek of cliche and sensationalism, where the creators seem to be thumbing their nose at the sensibilities of the audience, rather than expressing themselves. I want to get to the good stuff and I want it to all be good, with the understanding that I won't like all of it and that's okay.

Because right now, every word, every angle of a woman's body, every millimeter of exposed comic art skin is being scrutinized way too much for my taste. I get why it's being done and I get why it needs to be done. But I just want to get back to enjoying comics and for creators to be able to create. And if someone doesn't like something, they can speak with their wallets. Which, when you think about it, is what's going on now. Only the people who like that exploitive stuff get to speak louder because the other stuff isn't out there yet in sufficient quantities. We need to fix that by creating it, not change what's already here.

Anti-Women Bias in Comics?

I tried to comment to this post on Written Word, but after 3 tries, the &%^=*! comment box wouldn't come up, so I'm commenting here. In a discussion about a former Wonder Woman artist's comments on a BDSM-type website, Ragnell (commenting on yet another blog post about this issue) said:

"You see, the quote had got me thinking back to this writer's tenure on the series. And it got me thinking about all of the various problems I'd had with his run, problems I mentally pushed aside because, on the surface, he'd seemed like one of the better writers she had. I still disliked what he did, but I hadn't considered any sinister personal motives behind it. I'd attributed it to standard societal problems with portraying female characters. Problems even female writers tend to have."

Now, first my disclaimer. I didn't read WW during his tenure on the book, so I can't comment on it. I have read his comments on other characters in books of his I did read and my problem with some of those comments is that I didn't agree on some of the decisions that were made re: story. Take for ex, the time he spent on Teen Titans/Titans (whatever it was called then). He wasn't exactly enthused about Speedy who was deliberately kept out of the book til the drug stories. I had a real problem with that, but then, I had a problem with Mike Grell keeping Roy out of Green Arrow until as it turned out, issue 75, but I'd given up on the book at issue 40 or so. Excluding characters that are clearly part of the title character's life bugs me.

I also have to say that I've met the artist/writer in question, a number of times. Once, when I visited his home with a friend who was in the Titans APA (she was drawn into the Donna Troy/Terry Long wedding, along with others of the APA, as a guest), and twice when he gave programs at libraries where I was working. All three times, he was friendly, gracious, and amazingly willing to help out teens looking to join his profession. So yeah, I'm a bit biased here, because back then, in the '80s, he was a comics god.

I'm one of those feminists who came of age in the '60s. I was born in 53, making this the year I turn 53. I am glad there is still a feminist mindset out there, but as in the '60s, it has many voices. I grew up not knowing what I wanted to do. My role models were as often male as female. I went through and rejected careers in law enforcement (my love for the police came from cop shows of the time), teacher and librarian (the only non-housewife careers I saw women really in), and some that were so fleeting that they've gotten lost in the deep recesses of my brain. I ended up being influenced by my college advisor/psych professor to decide to be "just like her" -- a college professor of psych! That I realized, before I got too locked in that it wasn't the life I wanted, is now something that no longer carries regret and disappointment, nor do I still feel I settled by going back to one of my early goals: librarian. Yes, the profession where straight men who go into it are looked at skeptically (perhaps not so much anymore) because "everyone" knows it's a job for women (het and lesbian) and gay men.

And I would prefer more attention be paid to the weakening of Roe vs. Wade and other issues that affect the lives of women than their depiction in comics. And yes, while you can argue that comics can foster attitudes that lead to those real world issues, the same was said about violence and TV and I don't really see that, either, not if kids are given a well-rounded environment and if not, well, TV or comics won't be the real problem, neglect and other issues will be.

Women have been sexualized for, well, forever, it seems. Good girl and bad girl art goes way back. The cartoonists of the first half of the last century excelled at the artform of calling attention to a woman's uh, curves. Where the line between sexualized and objectified comes along, I don't know. I think it's one of those concepts with nebulous boundaries around a core idea in a Wittgenstein kind of way. My definition and yours might be different, same as murder for some folks includes abortion and euthenasia and for others, don't, and varieties within.

I remember when Ed Benes was drawing Supergirl and got flak for showing the panties on teenage girls in a high school locker room scene. It was a bit much for that book, but the editor allowed it or didn't care. To me, having seen his work in Codename: Knockout, his Supergirl was tame in comparison. When he was drawing Birds of Prey and there were comments about his depiction of the birds, Gail Simone explained that in his country, there was a different attitude about sex and sexuality and she'd explained to him and asked he tone things down a bit for the US market. I read this on the DC BoP message board which Gail visited and commented on quite often. Was he fantasizing as he drew those women? Who knows and I sure don't care.

BoP had its share of bondage, when Dinah was held by Savant. Dinah triumphs, and more recently, Savant got his chained-in-a-dungeon-and-tortured scene. Fair is fair after all. Even way back when when Dinah was captured and tortured, Ollie was a bit later, too. I like fairness in my reading material. Were the writers and artists fantasizing at all in creating those scenes? I would've. I did as a reader.

Yes, some poses are gratuitous and yes, I'd like to see some/more ordinary looking women in comics, women more like, uh, me. But I also enjoy seeing beautiful women. And I want to see more sexualized men. There's a reason I like looking at Hawkman and it's not because of that hawkhead thingie.

Ragnell also said:

"It made me tempted to pick up his old stories, go back and reread them, and then pinpoint where his professed fantasies had affected his work. And that, I think, is where the comments may have crossed the professional line. The earlier writer who had expressed support for WFA? Her comments could not be twisted beyond comparison to support someone's accusations that her run had an anti-man agenda. But this other guy? This is going to come back to bite him in the butt. Because now that that opinion is out there -- that everyone knows that not only did he fantasize, he fantasized while writing the book -- there's nothing to stop a fan from linking to his comments to support the idea his run may have misogynistic undertones."

Well, d'uh. All he did was admit to something few people have or will admit to: that they have fantasies and it can affect their work. Pretty much most of fiction can be viewed that way. I remember reading some science fiction novels in the '70s and '80s by women that had a clear anti-male bias. If the author intended that or not didn't matter. I saw it. They could admit it or not; an admission would just lead me to a "oh, so it was intended." My feeling is if you see it or can read something like that into it, that's your experience. As a writer I've learned that writer's intentions and readers' experiences of that writing are usually far apart.

I wrote fanfic. For comic book characters, they were just short pieces trying to straighten out Roy and Ollie's relationship way back when, but I had trouble "hearing" comic book characters, a necessity for me to write fanfic. TV, with live actors playing the parts and "talking" to me, was much easier. And in my fanfic and now in my original fiction, I fantasize all the time about my male characters, doing my share of male rape and torture scenes. Because, well, turnabout is fairplay and I'd much prefer fantasizing about men helpless and hurting who need comfort than about women. That the women in comics these days don't usually need rescuing after being tortured is progress. Because, well, it does have a sexual undercurrent for most of us. I've had this discussion with other fan writers. When I was 11-14, watching Man from UNCLE, and Illya, my then-current lust object, got hurt, I felt it in the core of my being. I got, well, hot. I learned from talking to friends that my reaction was not unique. Given that this was the mid-'60s and I was undergoing puberty where the most I knew about sex was the talk my mother gave me when I was 9 and what I read in James Bond books, I can't say this reaction came from anywhere but me. I don't think sex can really be separated from all of fiction, nor would I want it to be. And much of it is what the reader/viewer brings to the table.

What does bug me is when different writers take over a book and change the character. Devin Grayson got a lot of flak for her version of Nightwing. Devin's a fangirl writing out her fantasies about her fav characters. In essence, as with many writers, she's doing pro "fanfic" work. I got what she was doing with Dick and enjoyed much of it. I thought the mob storyline crossed a line because it didn't seem to follow from the rest and I thought the previous arc lost its direction. But I still believed that was Dick Grayson as Nightwing, even when the new Tarantula had her way with him. But now, Nightwing is awful, because I can't believe that boytoy is Dick Grayson. He's been completely emasculated, and a man is writing him!

It is unfortunate that Wonder Woman is a character that never had a clear direction that followed from writer to writer, editor to editor. Batman had his incarnations, from camp in the '60s to intense in the '70s, detective one minute, nighttime vigilante the next, but at his core, he was always Batman, the Caped Crusader. Superman, from Earth's protector to everyday guy and even the angstful times, has always been noble (okay, maybe with a few bumps on the road). I've never felt an identity to Wonder Woman, the 3rd of the big 3, that is anywhere close to that strong. Everyone tries to remake her because they know best. Very few makeovers like that work. The only one IMO that really took was Green Arrow's transformation by Denny O'Neill and Neal Adams. Probably because Ollie needed it so much so he could come out of Batman's shadow (Don't get me started on the whole arrowcar vs batmobile thing). Wonder Woman's had so many of them, I don't really know who she is. That's more of a concern to me than whether or not an artist fantasized and drew her according to his fantasies.

In a way, the whole medium, and probably every other artistic endeavor, is a fantasy of someone. Comics is a collaborative fantasy, if you will. Freud would have a field day with this.

Which doesn't mean I'm not aware that there are inequities. A case might be made that Spoiler's death was more sensationized than Robin II's. Yes, the guys still die more heroically than the women, but change won't happen quickly there until more women are on the creative and editorial end. The better chance to effect change is usually from within. It's getting women into the profession that's tough when they don't see it as viable because the books don't speak to them. But there seem to be many more female fans now than when I was ostracized by my friends for reading superhero books. Back then, I hardly ever saw women in comic shops here in NYC (in the '70s and '80s) and now I see them all the time, at least a third of the staff and public in my main shop. I consider that progress.

And I'm aware of the argument that role models are needed, along with providing examples of healthy interactions. I agree. But as with TV, I enjoy what I enjoy and I don't want things changed because someone else says they need to be changed. What sells will always control the product. Sex sells. TV has had its backlash, so now we have cable. It's one thing when something comes to you vs you going out to get it. I just don't like censorship, though I'll go along with parental controls and oversight. Yes, we need more comics for kids, but Wonder Woman and the rest of the superhero books aren't really them anymore and haven't been for decades, not for the little kids. I want more variety, but I also have no problem with sexual fantasies, including BDSM, being played out in comics. I just want my chance to lust after the guys in the same predicaments as the women. To me, it's the context, the quality of the writing, the skill of the artist. I don't want a steady diet of any one thing, but I'm an adult and can decide what I enjoy reading. Or writing, for that matter.

Okay, I wandered on and off topic. And this got way longer than I'd planned, but I'm going on vacation, so this might be it here for about 10 days.

Gratuitous Ass Shot

I've followed a few links to Lea Hernandez's LiveJournal post, Why I Quit Comics. First, I respect Ms. Hernandez' decision, and yes, that panel (I haven't read the comic yet) is a bit much. Does it work in any level in the story? I won't know til I read it, but I suspect the shot could've been done a bit differently, not be so in your face, and still portray Vickie Vale as a sexual creature and make her the focus of the panel. However, when you tell Jim Lee you want an ass shot, by golly, you'll get a ass shot, and it was certainly well drawn.

I've only skimmed the other blog entries about this (I'll read more closely tonight), but off the top of my head, I have a few thoughts.

Not since I started reading comics back in 1960 (I think I saw a few in '58 and '59, but my real comic reading began when I was 7), all through the '60s and '70s, more than half of the '80s, and steadily since the mid-'90s, have I ever really been bothered by how women are portrayed. I tend to pay more attention to the male characters, and there were always a few females to provide role models or whatever, not the least of whom were Lois Lane, Wonder Girl, and Supergirl back when I was growing up. The latter 2 were also teens, and I could relate.

Sure, I know women are objectified in comics. That won't change til there's something close to a balance in male and female writers, artists, and editors. Teenaged boys have always been the main target and girls who, like me, like(d) superheros were/are the exceptions. The comic book publishers want to court female readers to keep the medium viable in the age of electronic entertainments, but with comics aimed at girls, not by revamping the superhero realm. Which makes the upcoming switch of the Hawkman comic to Hawkgirl an interesting development.

What really always drove me nuts was the lack of equality for female readers. I didn't want to read just Archies and Katy Keene and romance comics. And when I read superheros, I liked seeing the guys in tights and the occasional crotch shot (unlike Ragnell, I'm not much of a butt shot lover). I love that Hawkman not only has a muscular, hairy chest, but that we get to see it. All the time he's in costume. I thought it was silly that some male characters had to run around in short pants, most notably Robin, because their legs didn't interest me as much as a peek at the "package." (Just how glad is Superman to see Lois, anyway?)

Sex sells. I don't know that there was ever a time when it didn't. And most superhero books aren't for little kids. They're aimed at teens. And well, teens think about sex, a lot. And the average comic book buyer is a fanboy, not a fangirl. Not til the readership levels off to something resembling equality will the publishers even consider that they should change. Or they lose too many readers to other pursuits and then they create more of the tamer "female-oriented" comics and we're back to the nothing for girls/women who like superheros dilemma. What to read?

I'm a Modesty Blaise fan and there wasn't a storyline I can think of where she wasn't stipped down to her undies at some point. If we were lucky, we got to see Willie's chest. And that didn't stop Modesty from being one of the strongest female characters who ever carried a comic strip or book series and could probably do well today in a regular comic book with the right author.

I'm also a Codename: Knockout fan, where I first saw Ed Benes's art. What he drew in Supergirl and Birds of Prey was tame by comparison. I mention him because someone else did as an example of gratuitous art re: females and I think that's unfair. He's a wonderful artist and Gail Simone has said in interviews (I can't recall where so I can't get the links) that he's from a culture where people don't make a fuss about revealing the female body the way we do in the US.

And of course, sexism isn't unique to comics. For the longest time, female science fiction writers used pseudonyms that were neutral or masculine in order to get published and have the reading public buy their books. Not til she died did many people discover that James Tiptree, Jr. was a woman.

I suppose people can say that such gratuitous art and the objectification of females in comics doesn't bother me because I was raised with it and I'm an example of why it's bad, that I'm a repressed female or some such. And nothing can be further from the truth. I insist on being referred to as Ms., both when I was single and now that I'm married. I did not take my husband's surname when I married, nor did I hyphenate my name. I have kept a credit card in my name to maintain my individual credit rating. I still have the Ms. Magazine Opening Doors keychain I got as a gift for subscribing to the magazine 30 years ago (I dropped it when it got boring) and prefer movies and TV shows considered male-oriented and like few things considered female-oriented ("Sex and the City" made me want to barf.)

And I believe true liberation means that people of either sex can be what they want, provided they can see to their own needs. If you can't support yourself without working, then you should work. And if that means a stay-at-home wife with a working husband or a stay-at-home husband with a working wife, then whatever. No one should be put down for the choices they make in life. Even if that choice is to dance semi-nude in the laps of people of the opposite sex. As long as society hasn't pushed them into that role, then who I am to say they shouldn't do it.

To get a better balance in comics or any medium, we need to change perceptions and that entails hard work. It means pushing. It means getting girls reading comics and demanding more. It means getting more women into the creative and editorial end. Remember, before Paul Levitz, the person running DC Comics was a woman, Jeanette Kahn, and when she got the job, it was big news. And she knew where the money was and what sold, yet I have to believe that she's part of the reason DC has had some amazing female characters, because I want to believe that she created an atmosphere that allowed them to be developed.

Would another woman have come to the same conclusion/decision Lea Hernandez has? Maybe. Maybe not. Would I? I don't know. That would depend on the actual situation I was in. What I can't do, because I'm not walking in her shoes, is say that she was wrong, even if I wish she'd done differently.

Okay, so maybe this has been more than a few thoughts. :)