League of Substitute Superheroes

Project Girl Wonder has led to a number of shout-outs in comics in the year and a half since it began. We’ve had Rip Hunter wonder “No Trophy = Stephanie?” on his board of time-travel conundrums. We’ve had Tim remark in his inner monologue that she never had a memorial in the cave. We’ve even seen a future Bat Cave in Action Comics with a Stephanie memorial in it.

Batman #673 means so, so much more than any of these. Because, in two panels, we were told everything that mattered: that inside Batman’s heart, Stephanie was Robin, the same as Dick and Jason and Tim — her gender made no difference at all to that. That her loss is felt as keenly as those other losses Batman has been shaped by.

In those two panels, in that one gesture of Batman contemplating the Robins he’s lost in front of the symbol of those losses, that line of suits in cases, the glass ceiling keeping girls out of the red and green and gold costume at Batman’s side finally cracked and fell.

And, as a second gift to those who have stayed angry and stayed outraged all this time, the close of the issue saw a second acknowledgement the things which were so poisonous in the Batman comics a few short years ago: the idea of a hero being tortured to death by power drill. Issue #674 may not come out for another month, but it’s probably safe to say that the mistakes of War Games are unlikely to be repeated this time around. Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it, but those who do their best to correct prior errors face a future where something new and better can be built.

Grant Morrison, Tony Daniel, Mike Marts, Jeanine Schaefer, and every single one of the other creators who helped pave the path through the DCU to this moment: Thanks.

–Mary Borsellino is the founder of Project Girl-Wonder, and spear-headed the original girl-wonder.org website. She can currently be found at monkeywench.net, or in Australia, if you subscribe to that sort of thinking.

Before DevilDoll gained internet-notoriety by posting a sarcastic link to Sideshow’s Mary Jane Comiquette, I knew her as someone who regularly posted quirky, often comic related links to things I hadn’t seen. When I judged enough time had gone by that she’d recovered from the experience, I asked her for an interview about it, which she granted, and then took on a demanding volunteer position and broke her ankle. (I swear, the Hulk joke was timely when we started.) Now, finally, she is able to give her interview, and here it is!

: What’s your history with comics?

“I was a pre-school fangirl! Complete with a pillow case tied around my neck as a cape, and death-defying leaps off the porch in pursuit of bad guys (which usually just resulted in crushing my mother’s flowers).

“I read comics as wee child, both new ones I purchased with my practically non-existent allowance, and the ones I inherited from my father. (And boy, do I ever regret taking my crayons to those Silver Age books. I guess it was important to me at the time that all the women have dark hair like I did, and I was a little too young to fully appreciate the prospect of retiring early on the proceeds from my comic collection.) I was also a huge fan of any and all comic-related television shows such as Batman, The Incredible Hulk, and Wonder Woman. I had superhero-themed Halloween costumes, birthday cakes, the works.

“Then I became a teenager, discovered punk rock and hair dye, and focused much of my attention elsewhere for several years. I came back to comics briefly in the early 90s (I still have the hologram covers to show for it), then drifted away again until about seven years ago, and have been a steady reader ever since.

“I’ve attended a few cons, but I generally find them too expensive and too crowded. I work part time at my local comic shop, which usually fills any need I might have to be in the same room with other people who read comics.”

: Prior to thong-a-palooza, how would you describe your interaction with comics-fandom?

“I would characterize myself as more an observer than a participant, because I tend to be out of step with fandom both in taste (I would not walk across hot coals to read Grant Morrison’s grocery list) and timing (my big Batverse phase pre-dated the DCU fandom explosion on LiveJournal, so when I wanted to talk about that stuff, no one else cared, and then by the time they did, I’d moved on). And because I tend to get behind in my reading, I don’t participate in discussion as much as I once did. Reading a book two weeks after it comes out is practically an eternity in Internet time.

“I used to regularly post reviews of the books as I read them, but after a while you couldn’t swing a temporarily dead superhero without hitting a blog full of reviews, and it became a wall of white noise. I do still discuss comics, post news and pictures, and pimp things I like, but my days of steady reviewing are over.

: What was your view of comics-fandom as a gendered space?

“When I first started poking around on the Internet for other comic book fans, the pattern I immediately noticed was that men outnumbered women on the discussion boards, while the opposite was true in fan fiction-focused spaces. It took me a bit to come around to the idea of reading fan fiction, so I initially floundered about on the message boards, not making much of a connection to anyone, feeling put off by the spelling-impaired hostility that passed for conversation.

“Then I stumbled across a fan fiction archive that had a message board, and lo and behold, it was full of women talking about comics. The topics ranged from the serious and thought-provoking to the completely shallow, and we certainly did our share of complaining about the books (what fan doesn’t?), but we did it without insulting each other at every turn. That was the first place I interacted regularly with other comic book fans, and had fun doing it.

“Not long after that, I opened an account at LiveJournal, which was intended to be more of an online diary than anything else. As luck would have it, shortly thereafter a sea change resulted in a large fannish migration to LJ, and it’s been my base of operations ever since. I like it there. It tends to be a female-friendly, civilized place; we certainly argue, and we disagree all the time, but we don’t threaten to, you know, rape each other over a difference of opinion.”

: Has [your view of fandom as a gendered space] changed? If so, how?

“The biggest change, and the one having the most noticeable impact, is the explosion of women blogging about comics, and doing it from a feminist point of view. This has led, predictably, to an increase in the backlash associated with that kind of commentary. [...] I think Lester Q. Fanboy was okay with us playing in his sandbox, and even critiquing comics, until we began critiquing them in relation to ourselves. Saying you think a story line sucked might spark a debate, but saying a story line treated a certain group badly causes a whole different kind of uproar.

“Has there been progress in bringing those issues to light, and in getting them addressed? Absolutely, on both creator and fan level. But for every person who has had their mind opened, and realized that just because something has always been a certain way doesn’t mean it’s the best way, there’s another person digging in their heels and refusing to be enlightened.

“Because of this polarization, because of the rising level of resentment, I think some forums are even less welcoming to women now than they previously were.

“On the plus side, we don’t need those forums. The number of fannish spaces welcoming or catering specifically to women is increasing every day. And the dialog is there. People are bringing attention to feminist issues, and the Powers That Be notice. They might dismiss it publicly, but they notice, and in some cases are forced to acknowledge it. (I mean, really. The fact that Joe Quesada had to make a statement to the press about the Mary Jane statue because of something I said in my blog? That will never stop being funny.)”

: Tell me about any positive experiences you’ve had with men involved with comics.

“One thing I find really interesting is how many great guy friends I made as a result of the MJ kerfuffle. I’m sure those lovely trolls who spent days sliming around in my journal during that time would like to think I made an enemy out of every comic fan with a Y chromosome, but that’s just not true. I actually have way more men on my LiveJournal friends list now than I did before.

“And I like it. I like seeing what interests them and what makes them angry, and I like having proof, right there on my screen, that fanboys and fangirls can get along.

“And of course I have to mention Craig, who co-owns the shop I work at (Neptune Comics *plug plug*). Not only is he a really nice guy who runs a really great shop, he gave me a job. :)”

: Do you remember your first reaction to the image of the Mary Jane Comiquette released by Sideshow?

“I think it was a combination of “Ugh!” and “Is this seriously official merchandise?” I couldn’t believe it was real, because it was so over the top. The pose, the thong, the laundry. It looked to me like the sort of thing you see on a custom figures forum, something some dude made for his own personal enjoyment (the kind of personal enjoyment you don’t want to know or think about). The fact that it was a licensed product–unbelievable.”

: What kind of reaction were you expecting when you posted about it on your blog?

“That some people on my friends list would comment, we’d talk about how incredibly over-the-top it was, and life would go on. I didn’t think it would be any different from any other post I’ve made.”

: Your post seemed to get linked all over the place. What was your impression of the people who linked to it?

“In the beginning, it was mainly women who were as put off by the statue as I was. As word spread, and the gender divide widened, the one thing everyone had in common was that they felt very strongly about it, but the longer it went on, the fewer people seemed to actually understand what was going on. I saw a lot of “This bitch wants to ban sexy statues!” and the like. Yes, that was exactly what I was saying. Except where I wasn’t saying that at all.

“So, a lot of hysteria, a lot of really repugnant commentary. But also a lot of indignation from both men and women who were able to spot a nasty gender stereotype when they saw it. Strong reactions, either way.”

: What kind of audiences did it find?

“That was probably the most surprising thing–the level of interest from people who normally don’t give a passing thought to comic books. It was immediately evident that it had struck a chord with women outside comics fandom, because the comments and the linking were coming from all over LiveJournal. It then made a similar jump outside LJ, where it went from a comic website topic to being featured on feminist blogs, and then to MSNBC, Fox News, and EW.com.

“Some people scoffed at the attention it got, calling it a slow news day thing (and I don’t discount that completely), but I think the defenders of the statue really, truly don’t understand what something like the Mary Jane comiquette looks like to a person who isn’t in comics fandom. Comic fans are so used to seeing things like it (and worse), that they’ve lost the ability to see it from an outsider’s perspective. And that’s part of the reason why it got so much attention–for someone who has never heard of Lady Death, and thinks manga is a fruit, that statue was a shock.”

: Talk about the response your post got. (Any hilarious trolls you want to share?)

“Well, the charming fellow who suggested some nice anal rape would straighten me out was one to remember.

“While the threats and the insults were by no means pleasant, I couldn’t have asked for the trolls to prove my point any more thoroughly than they did. “Degrading and sexist images are not harmful! They don’t have any affect on society as a whole! And to prove it, I will make degrading and sexist statements about you! Wherever could I have learned that’s acceptable behavior?”

“I mean, ya gotta admire the level of cluelessness being displayed there. It’s something you probably have to work on full-time in order to keep it so perfectly honed and impenetrable to logic.

“Toward the end, people began sort of boggling in general at just how nastily I was being treated and just how long the whole thing was going on, and I did get a nice wave of “hang in there!” comments, which countered the trolls quite nicely. The support that came pouring out was phenomenal. I’m far from a Pollyanna about fandom, and I think sometimes we treat each other horribly, but when the chips are down, man, you can count on the fans.”

: How long did it take before people stopped popping up to comment?

“About two and a half months.”

: Has the reaction to your MJ post affected what and how you post on the internet?

“Not really. Previous to this I had a very low-drama internet personality (no, really, I swear! That’s why it’s so funny that I still get singled out as an example of strident feminist harpies who bitch about everything!), so there was really no profile to lower or anything of that sort.”

: Has it affected your view of fandom?

“It’s reinforced my belief that a fuss needs to be made. The images we see and the things we read do make a difference, and they definitely influence how we see the world around us, and the way we treat the people we share it with. I don’t think anyone can look at the things that were said to me in that post and deny that.

“Am I trying to suck the fun out of everything? No. But I personally have a hard time taking enjoyment from something that I know offends or demeans a specific group of people. I don’t think the status of something as entertainment gives it a pass on offensiveness.

“The majority of our entertainment is geared toward the white, heterosexual male gaze. It’s so pervasive, and has been like this for so long, that most of us don’t even realize it. I didn’t realize it for years, and I can completely understand why someone wouldn’t notice the bias–it’s what we’re taught to like and identify with from the time we’re young children. I don’t blame someone for not realizing it, if it’s never been pointed out to them.

“But once someone points it out, well, that’s your cue to pick up the ball and run with it. Take an honest look, ask yourself some hard questions, consider what it might feel like to be on the other side.

“I’ve been in that position, too, and still find myself there. Just because I’m a woman doesn’t mean I’m exempt from perpetuating sexism, and I can be just as thick-headed about spotting racism and homophobia as the next straight, white person. So don’t think I don’t know how it feels to have to accept an ugly truth about something you enjoy–I have to deal with it, too. It’s hard, and it sucks, and it means you have to face unpleasant things about yourself and about the things you like, and I absolutely respect anyone who has done it, because I know how difficult it is.

“I don’t always agree with accusations of sexism or racism or any other ism, but I always do consider them, and if I disagree, I take an extra second to think about why I’m reacting the way I am, and ask myself some questions.

“1) Am I just being cranky because someone criticized something I like?

“2) Do I feel like I’m being called a sexist/racist/homophobe because I like something that has sexist/racist/homophobic overtones?

“If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then I know I’ve got my head up my ass and I need to remove it.

“And sometimes… well, sometimes I know the complaints are valid, and I have to suck it up and deal with the reality of that.

“Here’s what I know: liking things that other people find offensive doesn’t automatically make you a bad person. Threatening to rape or kill someone just because they don’t like those same things? Makes you a very bad person.

“Being active in comics fandom on the Internet is sort of like a form of role play, where you get to choose your own level of lameness. Some people are incredibly lame, some people are barely lame at all. Aspire to be less lame, is what I’m saying. It’s totally doable, and we all have things we could work on in that respect.”

: If you could shoot one Marvel character into space, who would it be?

“Sabretooth. Yes, I know he’s currently in that spoilery state where Jeph Loeb put him, but we don’t really believe that’s permanent, do we? I’d love for it to last forever, though, because every time he shows up, there’s a woman in peril. (Usually a woman connected to Wolverine, and even writers I like to think are above that kind of thing fall into that trap. I’m looking at you, Greg Rucka.)

“X-Men #28 hits the trifecta in that respect. Sabretooth attacks Jubilee in a dream sequence, overpowers Pyslocke, and is shown threatening Jean Grey on the cover. Jean eventually owns his ass at the end of the book, but the sheer number of pages devoted to portraying Sabes as a particularly potent source of fear and physical violence for the X-women is pretty telling.

“Feminist concerns aside, the Sabretooth-as-threat-to-all-women plot was already over-used years ago, and no matter what they do to him, writers keep bringing him back to do it again. Obviously, the only way to stop it is to shoot him into space. Though that didn’t work so well with the Hulk…”

: Your dream comic: Who draws it? Who writes it? What’s the solicit?

“The Adventures of Mary Marvel, written and drawn by Jeff Smith.

“”If you thought the Monster Society of Evil was bad, that’s nothing compared to grade-school teachers and know-it-all brothers! Mary Marvel lets the bad guys have it, shows her brother Billy just how tough girls can be, and somehow gets her homework done, too, in this new, ongoing monthly book that picks up where the Monster Society of Evil series left off.”"

Hannah Dame, Girl-Wonder podcaster and general overachiever, was able to secure an interview with Jim Rugg, co-creator of Street Angel, and artist on PLAIN Janes. You can also catch him at his blog!

When did you become involved with the comics medium?

RUGG: I started reading comics when I was 12. Decided at that time I wanted to be a comic artist. But didn’t start really making comics until 2000, after I finished school.

One could say that your style, like some other artists’s, is not the typical style of most comics put out by the two major publishers today. Do you feel that’s limited your involvement in the comics industry, and if so, how?

RUGG: I don’t think my style is too far removed from what Marvel/DC publish these days. In some ways, my style tends to be more influenced by older Marvel/DC comics than many of the cartoonists they currently publish. I have a hard time thinking about my style. Most of it is not too conscientious but certainly guys like Kirby, Miller, and other “mainstream” cartoonists have had an influence on my style.

As for limiting my involvement in the industry, I don’t think it has. I’ve done a little work for Marvel and DC/Vertigo. Maybe if I were trying to draw Flash or the Avengers I would find it limiting, but at the moment I’m not too interested in those characters.

How did you become involved in Street Angel?

RUGG: Brian and I used to work together. We were collaborating on zines and mini-comics, and Street Angel came out of those efforts. We did a mini-comic. We liked working on it, and the response was good, so we decided we’d send it around and see if anyone wanted to publish it. SLG was our first choice for the book, and Dan Vado liked it enough to give it a chance.

Street Angel’s tone is at times serious or humorous. Did you and Brian Maruca necessarily intend one or the other and did the violence in Street Angel influence that choice?

RUGG: We decided early on to incorporate different tones in the book. That’s something I enjoy in storytelling as a reader or viewer. Including violence didn’t influence our decision about tone. The violence is just another element in the work, like humor.

PLAIN Janes is a huge departure, both in tone and thematically, from your previous best-known work, Street Angel. How did you adapt from ninja, gunfights, and blood to the slower, more character-development-based Janes?

RUGG: The pace and character development come from Cecil’s script. I think it’s easier to draw the Janes because it’s so grounded in real life. If I need a reference for a car or house, I can just walk around my neighborhood. With Street Angel, it’s a little more challenging working out foreshortening, dynamic poses, blood splatter, etc. Both involve adolescents, both emphasize setting, so it wasn’t as much of a departure art-wise as it may seem.

This often appears as a criticism of comics: “Why, all these women look the same!” Yours are very unique. How do you go about differentiating your female characters and breathing personality into them?

RUGG: With the PLAIN Janes, I approached their design the same way I would any character design. I wanted each to look distinct, no matter how simply they were drawn (like in silhouette for example). There are a ton of variable elements that make up a character design (eyes, nose, hair, height, weight, jawline, etc.), so it’s just a matter of mixing and matching until the combination feels like the idea/character that is in your head. One of the nice things with the Janes is that they each have very expressive and unique body language. That’s another element we use to make them stand out from one another.

MINX was from its inception met with skepticism. How do you personally feel about such targeted efforts? And on that topic, what, if anything, do you feel is important in attracting young female readers?

RUGG: I have mixed feelings about targeted marketing efforts. On one hand, it’s necessary if the medium is to reach a mainstream consumer base. On the other hand, part of what I like about mixing tone in storytelling is that it subverts that mainstream marketing approach in favor of creative choices. I think targeted marketing requires certain uniformity that relies on business edicts rather than creative impulses and the results can suffer in terms of complexity, focus, personal expression, etc. I think attracting young female readers can work a few ways. One is to give them stories that feature characters that they can relate to. Another way is to create good stories. I don’t think character-driven, compelling, and imaginative stories are gender exclusive. And once the books have been created, retail and marketing must be used to place the books in easily-accessible-to-the-audience places.

Changing topics: How did you first find out about Girl-Wonder.org?

RUGG: I found out about Girl-Wonder.org from Rachel Edidin.

As a professional, how do you feel about organizations like Girl-Wonder.org? What made you choose to support them specifically?

RUGG: I think retail/marketing is an essential component to the resurgence and growth of comics. As more and more comics and graphic novels are published, organizations like Girl-Wonder will play a vital role in helping readers find material they will enjoy. I also want a more diverse industry and a group dedicated to promoting comics to a female readership will help achieve that diversity.

Could you speak a little more on your own contributions to the auction, like say, why you chose those Kirby sketches over anything else from his body of work?

RUGG: I’ve been pretty busy for a few months, and that was something I had handy that I thought someone might like. If I had more time I might have done a Street Angel drawing or something Janes related. I’ve inked a few Kirby drawings in the last few months for fun, including those Wonder Woman pieces. The reason I inked them was because I liked the drawings. They were obviously Kirby, but a little different too. I had a Gene Colan Wonder Woman sketch that I was inking too, but didn’t get a chance to finish. I thought all 3 would be a cool little set, but too few hours in the day.

How would you feel if the PLAIN Janes were living in your own hometown?

RUGG: I’d probably be oblivious to them if they lived in my hometown. I don’t get out much and I don’t follow local news much. If I knew them like in high school, I probably wouldn’t have liked them.

You have total creative control with any publisher over any one book, existing or to be developed by you. Anyone can be brought in to work on the book. What would you do, and why?

RUGG: Okay. This is interesting. I’ll give you a few.

Aquaman – cause he should be the greatest eye-candy, all-ages global adventure comic in the world, and well, have you seen Aquaman lately? I think this book has the potential to be incredible and like nothing else on the stands. It could really take advantage of all the breakthroughs in production that comics have undergone in the last 25 years and it could serve as an ambassador to capture new, young readers…

Punisher – I’d like to do a more political take on the Punisher that would be a cross between Alan Moore’s Brought to Light, the Wire, crazy conspiracy theories, and gun love. I don’t think anyone’s written him as anything but a hero or anti-hero, and I’d like to see him depicted as a less romanticized, self-loathing, psychotic killer. He should have no human emotion whatsoever, just the hollowed out shell of a former person who has been devoured by war. I think writers make him way too functional. Also, if I were writing the Punisher with no editorial interference, I could finally publish the Galactus vs. Punisher story that Brian and I wrote.

Afrodisiac – given total control over this, I would do a series of books with different publishers and artists (I’d draw many of them myself but I’d collaborate with some different artists for coloring purposes, and also with different artists for different eras of the character). I would want it to be very easy for readers to find some of his stories, but very hard to find all of them. And each book would paint his character’s portrait a little differently so it would be impossible to break him down in simple terms.

A character from one of your books is going to be interviewed. Who would you like to see interviewed? Furthermore, by whom and in what media would you choose for them to be interviewed? Why?

Afrodisiac interviewed by Terry Gross on NPR’s Fresh Air. I think those two would be very amusing together. Jesse Sanchez on Letterman, maybe make her do some skateboard tricks and show the two of them completely unable to understand each other (plus Jesse would destroy the green room spread, and y’know, she deserves something like that now and then).

I’m not sure how long this is going to be, so I’m going to make it easy for those of y’all reading and tell you my point right up front. Ready? Here it goes:

Heroes shouldn’t be built on fear, or on all the niggling insecurities that can make us poor, workaday humans sometimes behave like pricks to our fellow humans. Heroes, one hopes, are made of the best parts of ourselves, our higher urges, our dreams, and that which is left once we strip away all of the things which make *us* too afraid to step in when injustice occurs.

Can we agree with that? Can you roll with me for a little while?

I hope so, because this is where I’m going to lose a whole bunch of you:

Frank Miller doesn’t write about heroes. Frank Miller kind of misses the point entirely.

You’re protesting already, I know. I can hear you heading to your bookshelves and longboxes, and you’ve got a bone to pick with me. Luckily, none of you can get into my apartment, so I’m just going to keep talking.

Read the rest of this entry »

Rachel: Have you not heard about the Bratz thing?

Karen: I have not.

Rachel: Oh, my God.

Karen: Italics, eh? Must be bad.

Rachel: So, the producer, Avi Arad, said–get this– That Bratz “is like X-Men for girls.”

Karen: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA NO, X-Men is like X-Men for girls.

Rachel: X-Men is like the one comics superhero property that has almost as many female as male fans.

Karen: Exactly! Oh my God, their powers are “singing, fashion, soccer and cheerleading”. Laser-eyes are a superpower. Not fashion. I’m instantly reminded of those Supergirl “saving the world can be glamourous!” cards, where girls can do great things as long as they’re pretty. One of the young actresses is quoted saying “we were told that the reason the head is so big and the body is so small is to show that you don’t have to be perfect to be beautiful. We love that message.” Why must they be beautiful at all?

Oh, no, here’s another of the actresses saying: “We definitely feel like superheroes in this movie. We fight peer pressure, so I guess we are superheroes.” It’s great that these young women are embracing the self-confidence to fight peer-pressure. That’s a neat message. But why is that supposed to be the girl version of a superpower?

Rachel: Ewww. Self-confidence shouldn’t be a superpower. EVERYONE should have it. Which brings a pretty alarming idea: that ordinary life skills and competence are considered superpowers when girls have them–because the neutral point for girls is so much lower than the one for people.

I know you’re not a huge Shadowcat fan, but that’s part of what I like about her: she’s really smart, and THAT’S NOT HER SUPERPOWER, and it’s not presented as her superpower. It’s just–her. Or Sofia, from the current New Mutants, who’s bilingual, terrifically confident, and really self-assured, and all of those are remarkable, but none are her superpowers.

The best example, though, is Storm, who spent a fair amount of time depowered in the 1990s. There was a lot of exploration about how much of her identity depended on her powers, and the eventual and obvious conclusion was that she was every bit as exceptional–and, in a very real sense, powerful–without them.

Karen: I like Kitty just fine, I just don’t like the way she’s held up as this untouchable ideal of geek love. But yes, I loved that whole Storm arc where she beat Cyclops single-handedly without her powers, and took on the Morlocks and led them - that was while she was depowered, right? And Sofia is awesome.

See, there’s X-Men for girls. X-Women for girls, rather.

The Bratz aren’t superheroes! They’re dolls with a “passion for fashion”. It’s neat they have a variety of interests and that they’re ethnically diverse, but so is Barbie now, you know? In the end they’re still selling this terribly restrictive idea of beauty. It’s okay to like singing and cheerleading and soccer, but you must must must buy into fashion too. And that’s what the heroes for girls are supposed to be.

I can’t get over that tagline. Did you know that the Ghost World movie was sold to the studio as “Lolita, from Lolita’s point of view”?

Rachel: Mean Girls: Satyricon for fashionistas! Stardust: Moby Dick for hedgehogs!

Karen: Cinderella: Waiting for Godot for pumpkins!

Rachel: Superficial Beauty: Content for girl-creatures!

Karen: X-Men for girls, my ass. It just comes back to the same stuff over and over again, doesn’t? 1) Girls aren’t interested in heroes, 2) Superheroes aren’t *for* girls and 3) You know what’s for girls? Striving to be pretty.

I had a look at the clips, and it looks like it could be a cute movie. I don’t discount that peer pressure is tough, and that promotion of the courage to fight that is a good message. It’s the base assumptions built into this tagline that bother me.

Rachel: Yeah. Courage and a sense of identity aren’t superpowers–even for girls.

I don’t care if Bratz is a cute movie–I’ll still take Outrageous Fortune any day. Now *that’s* a movie for girls.

You see what they did here?

My approach to reading the Marvel and DC solicitations this month was a little different than previous months. This time around, it wasn’t the overhyping text or vague promises of importance that I focused on, it was the covers that really had my attention … after the MJ zombie and Heroes for Hire hentai bruhahas over the last few weeks, I looked at all the images and wondered, “So what cover’s going to drive people nuts this time?”

Apparently I’m not the only person thinking about this, as I had several people point out to me some covers that are possible contenders for “Internet controversy of the moment.” I’ll let you guys decide which one we should freak out over, if any. Place your bets and let’s spin the wheel…

My first thought on reading it was… well, okay. My first thought was: I really wish I’d seen this cover before using up my monthly quota of dinosaur/sodomy jokes.

But my second thought was, Oooooo. Clever.

There is currently a bit of backlash against feminist comics bloggers, but it’s pretty obvious where most of it is coming from.

This article, however, is subtle, and the message is hidden underneath a layer of humour. (I do love humour – it’s a great weapon. The initial response of an audience is to align themselves with the joke teller, because, hey! Jokes are a social thing, and not laughing at the punchline is akin to admitting that we don’t belong ‘round these parts. The last thing we want to admit to being is humourless.

And there’s a social contract there. By laughing, we agree to dismiss what the joke teller is telling us to dismiss. We agree to agree with what they aren’t saying. We are laughing after all, and the second to last thing we want to admit to being is dishonest. )

Here’s the underlying message in the article:

• Feminists bloggers ‘freak out’ – that is, they are not rational in their response to issues they deem objectionable.
• The images that feminist bloggers choose to respond to are as random as a game of chance.
• Feminist outrage is in fact a game - and it is a game for the benefit of spectators, rather than one for participants. The discussions are best understood as for the amusement of the people watching from the outside.

JK Parkin positions him or herself – and any rational reader - as outside (and dismissive of) the sphere of feminist comics debate, and does so in a manner to make the reader uncomfortable with objecting to that categorization.

See what I mean? Clever.

“Of course women have equal power. If a girl applies — ”

“You just switched to girl.”

“I… well, yes, but it doesn’t offend me, it — ”

“It matters what you call people.”

Why, yes, yes it does. Thank you, professor and student, for giving me such an apt lead-in.

Superman. Supergirl. Power Girl. Batman. Batgirl. Batwoman.

“And Adam said, ‘This is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man’” (Gen 2:23, KJV).

Ever noticed that most female heroes pick up the name they use because of a male hero?

(There are exceptions. Storm, Black Canary, Oracle, Spoiler, Vixen, Big Barda, Misfit, Huntress, Fire, Rogue, Marrow, Ice.) Most of these exceptions also have gender-neutral names.

But have you ever noticed that when female heroes do take male names, it tends to be lessened? “Man” is higher in status than “boy”. “Woman” is higher in staus than “girl”.

How many -woman can you think off of the top of your head? Go on, I’ll wait.

Done yet? Here’s mine. Invisible Woman, Batwoman — stabbed off-panel, currently inactive — and Wonder Woman. Now, I am sure there’s more, but off the top of my head that’s *three*.

How many -man?

Spider-Man, Batman, Superman, Aquaman, Hawkman, Sandman.

How many -girl? Top of your head, keep in mind. No cheating.

Marvel Girl — old, but still valid. Spider-Girl. Batgirl. Supergirl. Power Girl. Wonder Girl. Stargirl. Aquagirl. Hawkgirl.

And that’s nine. I am sure here, too, that there are more, but that’s all I thought of in ten seconds.

Now, admittedly, most of these characters are girls. Kids. Wonder Girl is seventeen, Stargirl is about that age, Batgirl is about that age, Supergirl is sixteen, Marvel Girl switched to Phoenix a while back, Spider-Girl is probably still in her mid-teens.

Power Girl? Mid-*thirties*, easily. She is not a girl. She is a woman. Hawkgirl? Also not in the first flush of youth.

How many -boy?

Power Boy. *One*. That’s it, that’s all I can think of, and he’s an abusive jerk who doesn’t actually have any relation to the name he’s hijacking.

Girl:

1. a female child, from birth to full growth.
2. a young, immature woman, esp. formerly, an unmarried one.
3. a daughter: My wife and I have two girls.
4. Informal: Sometimes Offensive. a grown woman, esp. when referred to familiarly: She’s having the girls over for bridge next week.
5. girlfriend; sweetheart.
6. Often Offensive. a female servant.
7. Usually Offensive. a female employee.
8. a female who is from or native to a given place: She’s a Missouri girl.

Young. Immature. A child.

Is that really Power Girl? is that really Hawkgirl? Is it *really*?

It matters what you call people. Even fictional ones. Because if you think a woman is a girl — with that attendant youth, that attendant foolishness, that attendant childishness — in ink, what’s your problem with women being girls in flesh and blood?

Dear Ms. Lee,

In Episode Four of “Almost Live with Paul and Misty,” broadcast on June fifth, you say

And you know, also, someone raised the point in, I don’t know if it was in a forum I was reading but it’s something I’ve heard a million times before - but usually, the strongest and loudest protest over sexy things come from ugly fat girls. And now I don’t necessarily agree with that and I’m probably going to get some awesome flame mail as a result of this, but as somebody who’s relatively secure in her sexuality - I don’t think I’m the hottest broad out walking around - I definitely don’t think I compare to some of these comic book chicks - but that doesn’t mean that I don’t like to look at ‘em. I find the feminine form very appealing and I’m not at all offended by that…

I was raised to believe that the weight and appearance of a person were irrelevant to the justice of their argument, but I am willing to defer to the customs of your people and have recorded the following:

 

 Since it's important to you [1:08m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Sincerely, the Editor.

I bought the first volume of the Runaways collection when I was down at WisCon and I just wanted to make a short post on my initial feelings after reading it. Once I finish my WisCon writeup for Cerise I might return to the subjects I touch on here and do a better analysis (oops, I got my rant on by accident… I think I’m almost incapable of doing short posts).

So, first off, I’m definitely buying the next two volumes. I have no idea where I’ll put them, as my bookshelf is filled to the brim, and that’s not counting all the books I bought at WisCon, but, that’s life I guess. The first story arc was fun, the art was overall pretty cool, and I think I have a soft spot in my heart for rebels with a cause. Or maybe it’s just a soft spot for a team that’s mostly kick ass women, or girls in this case. I also like the clothing, and if I knew how to tie a tie I would so be wearing the shirt and tie getup that Nico was in for a bit.

That being said, I had two major issues with what I read. But since they are spoilers, especially the second one, I will put them behind the jump. SPOILERS AHEAD. You have been warned. Read the rest of this entry »

I have to start this story with the third Robin, Tim Drake. In his first appearance, A Lonely Place of Dying, by Marv Wolfman, I’d found Tim a bit too conveniently competent. I was supposed to believe that a thirteen year-old boy could do all that? Oh, I believed he had figured out Batman’s identity, that never seemed like a terribly well kept secret, but I couldn’t believe he’d traveled to New York and back, and more incredibly to me, made it outside of city limits to watch Batman fight over the reservoir, all on his bike!

(This, by the way, is the story-line in which Tim bluffs his way into the manor, and then, against Batman’s direct order, steals the Robin suit from Jason’s case and wears it out to fight crime, becoming Robin of his own resort, as it were.)

I first fell in love with Tim Drake in Rite of Passage, a mini by Alan Grant. In this story, I found the Tim I would imprint on like a young duckling. Tim was entirely aware of all the ways he was inadequate; he was supposed to be a partner to Batman? Tim was terrified, had nightmares of being eaten by a giant looming bat, and reacted by training harder. He knew he wasn’t good enough, but he was determined to be the best he could be. No one was harder on Tim than Tim was on himself. He was determined to be a Robin worthy of the name, but half-certain he would fail.

And then Stephanie Brown showed up. I resented the hell out of her. Tim hadn’t considered himself worthy of the name of Robin until he’d travelled the world training from the living masters; Steph thought a cape and a code-name was all she needed to be a costumed vigilante. Tim was willing (and eager!) to learn from those who had been in the business longer than him; Steph wanted to do everything her own way, and frequently screwed up. Oh, how she screwed up. She couldn’t climb as well as Tim, she couldn’t fight as well, she wasn’t as meticulously devoted to detail– in fact, she seemed to think the whole thing should be fun!

And, the most petty reason of all for disliking her, she stole panels from Tim. She shared the limelight! She sometimes got whole story-lines dedicated to her stupid family. She pestered Tim to have a social life, when I wanted to see his freaky crime-fighting brain.

A diversion: some women of my acquaintance just can’t identify with a male character. They can like, enjoy, or sympathize with them, but they can’t identify with them. I think I’m being clear here that I’m not one of those women. It’s not really something I consider a special ability, but I’m actually more likely to identify with male characters than female.

I eventually got over my resentment of Steph, a little. She seemed to be making Tim happy, and she was getting better at the vigilante gig, which did a lot to reconcile me to her. She got some really good story-lines, from Peter David in Young Justice, in Batgirl, and from Jon Lewis in Robin.

But when I heard that Stephanie Brown would be replacing Tim as Robin, all my resentment came back. How did she think she could even compare to Tim as Robin? Why was DC taking away the best Robin ever (I don’t claim to be impartial) and replacing him with someone who was still learning how to use a grappling hook? It didn’t help that the textual reasons given for Tim leaving the position of Robin depended on Tim making a series of mistakes I saw as stupid and uncharacteristic of him.

I would later learn that editors at DC had mandated that Steph be killed, and Robin writer Bill Willingham had decided to make her Robin before her death. Thank you, Mr. Willingham.

My point is: DC, I was on your side. I didn’t like Steph as Robin. I half-resented her. I wanted her out of there.

But even I, who had a low opinion of Steph, could not believe how badly she was treated in the story leading to her death and the aftermath. I could not believe that she was tortured to death, slowly, over multiple issues. I couldn’t fathom that Steph would set in place a plan that she didn’t really understand, and which clearly had so much room for drastic, fatal error.

And I could not, and still do not believe that Batman would use her as a tool to get Tim Drake back as Robin. I was baffled that the Batman who appeared in Detective Comics after her death would agonize over whether he shared responsibility for the death of Cassie Wells, a walk on character with whom he shared a brief conversation. Had he completely forgotten that his lack of faith in Steph was instrumental in her death? It seemed calculated to rub in how unimportant Steph was; one poor young blonde girl dies, no one talks about it, a rich young blonde girl dies, she gets a twelve part exploration of Bruce’s guilt.

Kevin at beaucoupkevin says: “A glass case being drawn into a single location won’t change anything substantial in the medium, will it? It’s not a solution; only a reminder that there was a problem.”

Shoving it under the carpet isn’t a solution either. There needs to be a reminder. DC comics seems all too eager to forget.