Early on this week, Misty Lee (notable as the significant other of one Paul Dini) made a comment in a podcast that caused some uproar. She, repeating a statement made by an unidentified source, strongly suggested that complaints about the way women are portrayed in superhero art “usually” stemmed from “ugly, fat girls” and that she wasn’t bothered by the way women were drawn because she wasn’t threatened by them and enjoyed looking at them.
This comment has spawned the posting of pictures, the mincing of words, and some stunning commentary on how a woman’s worth in our society is tied to her physical appearance. I don’t have much to say about the comment itself, but instead I want to get into the metaphorical meat of this strawman, the assumption at the root of the comment.
See, what kills me with that comment (and some different and more polite opinions that stem from the same basic misconception) is the automatic assumption that the female fans are in some sort of strange competition with the female superheroes. That complaints about hypersexualized and demeaning images somehow stem from the natural insecurity of a mortal woman who compares herself to a goddess or, in the case of Ms. Lee’s statement, a downright unattractive woman who compares herself to the ideal.
It amazes me that it never occurs to certain people that the problem is not one of jealousy or lack of attraction, but of identification with the character.
When I was a girl I was an early bloomer, so to speak. Its not a pleasant thing, especially when you have shoulders like an ox and are told by the school nurse that your chest size makes a pink turtleneck inappropriate clothing for a sixth grader. I was awkwardly larger than my classmates and couldn’t find clothing that flattered me. I also had a hell of a time in gym class, even after I got the right undergarments. On day I was peering over my sister’s shoulder as she and her friends poured over each issue of Kingdom Come, searching out the Easter Eggs, and I saw an image that changed the way I looked at my body. It was a blonde woman in a white costume, drawing her arm back in threat of a punch that looked like it could shatter a brick wall once she let it loose. She had shoulders like an ox, arms as thick as tree trunks, and was so powerful and dangerous that Superman himself had to step in to stop her from punching the guy. This wasn’t the willowy woman with balloon breasts that was omnipresent in other comic books. She had muscles and a frame to support them. She also didn’t look freakish or awkward, but beautiful and strong and unashamed to be angry and loud. I did a little research, and found an image online I loved even more. The original Wally Wood design was not only beautiful and powerful, but featured hips to match the shoulders and that slight convex of a stomach for that fat deposit that was giving me so much stress.
Its a paper mirror, not a perfect mirror. These are idealized drawings. But in Power Girl, I found my idealized body type. I would probably never ever in my life look that good, and I’d probably have that boy before I ever dyed my precious dark hair yellow, so I could never actually look like that, but it was close enough to pretend. She reflected enough of me and what I wanted to be that the details didn’t count. I hunted down her appearances, and found she made a great fantasy.
I’ve had similar reactions to Lois Lane, Katma Tui, and Wonder Woman. Its not all appearance. For example, with Lois its mainly her personality (I found myself a fan of John Stewart for life when I saw back issues where he displayed characteristics I wanted in myself). But these are entry characters. Personal anchors, so to speak. When I see them in the story, that’s where I put myself because those are the characters I have some common ground with and who each have different places in their particular stories, depending on how I want to escape that day.
And as I identify with Power Girl, somewhere there’s a woman who choose Misty Knight or Black Canary. Someone is delighted to find someone with her hair and eye color. Somewhere a girl who feels awkward about her thin body is opening a comic drawn by one of the few artists who actually uses different body types when drawing women, and is amazed and encouraged by the image of a superhero with a relative A-Cup, and latching on to that character for life.
Sometime over the past few decades a large number of female fans, for their own reasons, latched on to Mary Jane Watson as their personal anchor to the Marvel universe. They got to imagine about romance and danger, and being married to the sweet nerd who was actually a god of a man underneath. They got to fantasize about being a fiery redhead, a famous model who could get mixed up in a superhero life and hold her own face to face with a supervillain and be able to count on Peter to get a happy ending.
Some of these fans must have habitually placed themselves in her position, or at least tried to, when they saw that a statue had come out. And they were freaked out, because that wasn’t just a statue they were looking at. It was someone they regularly pretended to be. It was a fantasy of their own, ripped to shred by the revolting thought of what it’d be like to wear that, do that, and be drooled at by the sort of strange, creepy man who fetishizes statues. It was unsettling, because they were used to identifying with Mary Jane Watson-Parker and here she was blatantly objectified.
With the Heroes for Hire cover, a lot of Misty Knight fans were angry because that character was a heroic fantasy. They bought the books. They followed the character. They were paying customers, buying a power fantasy from Marvel Comics, a company which sells power fantasies, and they looked at that cover and saw their heroic character stripped of her power, her heroism, and shoved into a sexual fantasy for sale to a completely different demographic. Of course they were angry. They identified with those characters. That wasn’t an object up there. That wasn’t just “their character.” That was, on some level, them. The point of buying the comics, and following the character, was so that they could have that fantasy. So they could be Misty, or Felicia, or Colleen for a few minutes a month and forget about the dreary realities of their lives. Forget the ugliness they met with on a daily basis and spend those few minutes kicking a little ass and that cover told them that no, Marvel was no longer in the business of selling the wonderful dreams of strength they’d come to enjoy, Marvel was now in the business of selling someone else’s sexual fantasy.
Some of the fans who backlashed, who didn’t understand why it caused so much anger and disgust, assumed that it had something to do with insecurity on the part of the complainers. Though I certainly can’t speak for the anyone but myself, I sincerely doubt that insecurity had anything to do with it. The posts I read implied that it was personal identification. The strongest and loudest complaints did not say “fat, ugly girl” to me, but “woman who said ‘Face it Tiger’ in the mirror until she had the same inflection as the voice actress in the cartoon” and “pretended she had a bionic arm as a little girl.”
I know how they feel. My mother stopped me from cutting the infamous boob-window in a white turtleneck years ago. To this day I still get irked whenever I see an artist draw her without the little fat deposit, or with shoulders and hips too slim, and I’m the first to get angry when I see Power Girl’s larger-than-life persona reduced to a pair of balloons on a stick-figure.
How can so few of the respondents seem to understand this basic idea? Surely all fans identify with the main characters on some level, that’s why they follow them. That’s why this is a fantasy. Are they really so detached from the female characters that they can’t imagine why someone would naturally put herself in that character’s place? That if a woman is upset by the depiction of the character, it is because she is insecure and jealous of the character and not looking at how badly she would not want to be in that character’s position?
Some of the loudest and strongest criticisms of artists and writers mishandling Power Girl are from large-breasted women. Why? Because we know what its like to have our personalities bypassed for emphasis on our bra sizes, and its painful to have that intrude on an escapist fantasy as strong as Power Girl (she’s effectively the poster girl for the informal “I’m More Than My Melons” movement).
A lot of women know what its like to apply for a job and not be taken seriously because it assumed you will get married, have children, and quit to do your husband’s laundry full-time. Many of us know what its like to get into a relationship with a seemingly perfect man only to discover that he expects you to be his housekeeper when you come over. It really hurts to have that intrude on your escapist romance.
And far, far too many women know what its like to be in a position of complete powerlessness, threatened by violence and having your pain viewed by others as a source of amusement, domination, and sexual gratification. And those of us who don’t know it personally have been warned repeatedly of the possibility every day of our lives since we were old enough that an adult might broach the subject with us. And not only is it painful to have that intrude in a hobby that serves as an escape from the feelings of powerlessness in one’s life, it is infuriating beyond measure.
Now, no doubt someone is reading this and reading to use this identification as “proof” that all of the feminist complaints are mere fan entitlement.
Well, here’s the thing. Marvel and DC are in the business of escapism, heroic stories, power fantasies and cheap thrills. That is how the product was conceived. That is how the product is viewed. That is what draws people to superheroes. That is what draws women, as well as men, to superheroes. That is what we started reading as kids. That is what we plop our three to five dollars down each Wednesday to read.
They do not sell sexual fantasies. Pornographers do that. If Marvel and DC were to suddenly take down their ratings and mark all of their books as pornographic materials, then I would be angry but I wouldn’t really have a leg to stand on here, but until such time as they do the public has a right to view superheroes not as sexual fantasies, but as power fantasies.
Now, a little cheesecake and beefcake every once in a while is one thing. Its an extra and so long as it doesn’t get in the way of the main draw, which is the heroic aspect of the genre, I really don’t think most people care.
But when an artist disregards his storytelling skills to replace a pose that should be grim and badass with one that is best seen in an ad hawking shampoo, the company is selling a sexual fantasy and not a heroic story. When covers show female superheroes as scantily clad victims rather than heroes, the company is selling a skeevy sexual fantasy and not a heroic story. When statues pay less attention to anatomy than they do to thongs and cleavage, the company is selling a sexual fantasy and not a heroic story.
I am a paying customer, and I’m here to read about and identify with characters in superhero stories. If I wanted to read about and identify with characters in sexual fantasies, I’d buy pornography. Indeed, for those of us who want both there is porn involving superheroes. It is properly labeled as pornography, and not superhero comics, though. Right now, however, I don’t want that. I want the product that is labeled as a superhero comic, because I am looking for escapism, heroic stories, power fantasies, and cheap thrills.
And until such time as Marvel and DC mark their books as “Mature Audiences Only” rather than “All Ages” or “9 and up” I reserve the right to complain when the escapist fantasies I bought are interrupted by someone else’s sexual fantasy. And no, it is not out of jealousy, or insecurity, or the fear that suddenly all men will only want women who look exactly like the drawings. Its out of the same blind shock that most people would have from reading first draft of a supposed friend’s novel, only to find the cute adventure story interrupted by two pages of BDSM fantasies involving you as the submissive party.
Now do you understand?
Very well written, personal editorial. I appreciate it. I think there are a lot of extremely good reasons for comic fans to get frustrated when characters are over-sexualized or placed into sexually demeaning scenarios. I also think that a sincere and respectful dialog on this issue is only going to improve the medium that we ALL love so much. Thanks for expressing yourself so genuinely and positively. I think this “argument” needs as much of that as possible before we start to see some real understanding and learning take place.
Comment by Erik G — June 15, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
Very good. I enjoyed reading this alot. I personally can’t believe that someone would assume that all complainers about the objectification of women in comics are ovedrweight or insecure females.
Personally I’m a male and I don’t agree with the objectification some women get. While I don’t get the problem with the Mary Jane statue(mainly becasue I feel the quality of the art,which is very high,makes up for the sexualized nature of it), I certainly understand the complaints about the Heroes for Hire cover. I’ve made several myself. And I in general don’t like it when females are objectified in comics.
What I like about all of my favorite comic book heroines,esepcially the likes of Power Girl,Mia Dearden(Speedy II),Tara Markov(Terra II),Linda Danvers(Supergirl 2.5/3 depending on how you look at it),and Rose Wilson(Raveager IV) is that they’re strong,indominable women with big personalities and sarcastic wit. When I see that taken away from them and turned into just objects for me to stare at,it insults my intelligence. Yes,I think they’re all exceptionally lovely(especially in the hands of good artists),but it’s their strong,fierce personalities coupled with their stunning looks that draws me in. To have them be just pictures without the personalities makes me feel shallow and empty and frankly pisses me off.
Comment by michealdark — June 15, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
I don’t necessarily agree that Misty Knight Fans were picking up the book or paying money for it. The tone of the book before that cover was as bad as the cover was.
If there were Misty Knight fans who had a identification of the character that was different than the cover, they have abandoned her a long time ago.
Comment by Pedro Tejeda — June 15, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
I’ll echo Erik G and thank you for expressing yourself so genuinely and positively. It’s very refreshing to read a viewpoint that is so different from my own.
My genuine response to your closing question is: No, I still don’t understand.
Or, more thoroughly: I understand that you are angry, and thanks to this post I know why; but it just doesn’t make sense to me.
Comment by David — June 15, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
You’re absolutely correct, but the bigger problem, as I see it, is that neither Marvel nor DC are actually in the business of selling escapist fantasies about heroes anymore, as you assert, since both companies have devoted the past several years to portraying the vast majority of their “heroic” characters as either stupid, weak, evil, or a combination of all the above.
Yes, I feel for the Misty Knight fans who have seen “their” hero reduced to a tentacle-hentai pinup, but then again, I also feel for the Iron Man fans who have seen “their” hero turned into a lying fascist, by a company whose creators and editors actually appear to believe that this is as heroic as any “hero” should be allowed to be.
Comment by Kirk Boxleitner, a.k.a. K-Box — June 15, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
A very good commentary about the body image of women and how it relates to the comic book industry. It’s unfortunate that you had to preface it with your interpretation of what Misty Lee said, thus setting her up as the villain of this article. Not what she actually said, but your interpretation: “strongly suggested.” Adam Hughes had a lot to say about this issue as well in the same podcast — why is he not quoted? Cut a Sister a break, won’t you? Or is Misty kicked out of the clubhouse?
Comment by Occasional Superheroine — June 15, 2007 @ 5:09 pm
Lovely of you to join us, Occasional Superheroine, and you bring up an interesting point but I need you to clarify something for me.
Surely the danger of turning feminist discourse into a mere catfight is matter of concern, but please explain exactly how ignoring a woman’s voice (particularly one which carries such weight on the subject of fan-character identification as a “real-life Zatanna” and one which has already inspired quite a bit of discussion) in favor of responding to a man’s voice is “cutting a Sister a break”.
Comment by Lisa Fortuner — June 15, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
I seem to be leaving the same comment on half your posts: “Thank you for posting this. It desperately needed to be said, and you have said it half-again more powerfully and eloquently than most writers could have.”
It still holds true.
I want to see more figures in comics that the current generation of girls can look at and see themselves reflected in: ones whose strength will encourage them to speak up and act out the way the heroines we grew up with–Power Girl, or Wonder Woman, or whoever you like–did for us. Instead, what we’re given is an era of silent, invisible women, mirrors that reflect nothing but thin air.
Comment by Rachel Edidin — June 15, 2007 @ 6:24 pm
But when an artist disregards his storytelling skills to replace a pose that should be grim and badass with one that is best seen in an ad hawking shampoo, the company is selling a sexual fantasy and not a heroic story.
I’m thinking of that Joe Benetez drawn Batman of several months ago. What was supposed to be a dramatic reveal (and a horiffic one at that) was completely undercut by the artist drawing Poison Ivy in a hoochie-mama bad-girl cheesecake pose that completely UNDERCUT the reveal.
The disconnect between story and art was such that I acutally burst out laughing.
I mean, I know that Benetez was an emergency fill in artist and I don’t know how detailed a script he got, but the end result was just MADE OF FAIL because he couldn’t have chosen a worse moment to draw cheesecake.
Comment by Katherine Keller — June 15, 2007 @ 6:29 pm
Hi Lisa,
Bravo, Friend. This is a wonderfully written, thoroughly engaging, *important* piece of writing. Thanks. Truly, thanks.
Ciao,
Amy
Comment by Amy Reads — June 15, 2007 @ 6:43 pm
“If there were Misty Knight fans who had a identification of the character that was different than the cover, they have abandoned her a long time ago.”
Not that long ago. I did stick around long enough to pick up the Daughters of the Dragon miniseries. Great post, Lisa.
Comment by Cheryl Lynn — June 15, 2007 @ 7:19 pm
Ms. Fortuner,
This was a brilliant essay and I agree with you 99%. I disagree with you on one point: Marvel and DC are most certainly not in the business of selling superheroism; they are in the business of making money. That’s all that matters to them. And if it means that they have to degrade Power Girl or Misty Knight or Black Canary or Ms. Marvel or Wonder Woman, reduce them to their breasts and facetiously, with a knowing smile, call them “superheroes” just so they can reach as wide an audience as possible, well that’s exactly what they’re going to do. And yes, they sleep just fine at night, too.
What we need to do, women AND men, is stop buying the comics altogether until these companies and their creators understand that sexism and misogyny, whether conscious or unconscious, are completely and totally unacceptable. Part of the problem, I fear, is that a truckload of guys actually love Power Girl for her breasts and can’t see past them (no pun intended). So in Joe Quesada and Dan DiDio, they have found kindred spirits, much to the detriment of the rest ouf us and the rest of the industry.
Comment by Robert Jones, Jr. — June 15, 2007 @ 7:54 pm
Beautifully put!
Comment by Kitty — June 15, 2007 @ 8:11 pm
Reading this makes me long for the days when chicks didn’t read comics. Chalk me up as one who thinks this is fan entitlement gone crazy. At least I can tune y’all out by avoiding the internet. But lord, am I glad I don’t have to read the mail Marvel recieves everyday. It must be whine after whine after whine, with an unhealthy dose of cheese-louise.
Also, I’ve been reading Spider-Man for twenty years (and now because he has brown hair like me…seriously, what a weird and superficial thing to identify with), and I’m a bit hard-pressed to recall when Mary Jane wasn’t being objectified. And freaking out about objectification that didn’t even occur in a comic book?
Maybe these ladies shouldn’t be reading comics. Maybe they’re taking them too seriously. If someone is going into a rage, or feels their self-identity is crumbling/under assault, because of a statue, or a cover illustration, then maybe it’s not comics they need, but therapy.
Comment by Ken — June 15, 2007 @ 11:43 pm
Maybe I shouldn’t chime in here because my comic book heroines are Krazy Kat and Zelda Zonk.
But… the issue for me is the dehumanization of women. I could say further dehumanization of women but that would give me away. I believe dehumanization is beyond objectification, because once a person becomes a thing any unspeakable act is conceivable. Look at what happens in war, in prisons, in countries where women are sequestered (honor killings, FGM), and the horrors visited on children all over the world.
Krazy Kat isn’t human in the traditional sense, but I can’t think of any reader who’d want to do her a bit of harm. Zelda Zonk is your friendly neighborhood dominatrix, which pretty much says it all. She’s sexy, in control, and very human.
The MaryJane-thing statue is a fuck-toy. It’s there to be abused. The Misty Knight-thing on the cover of HFH 13 is a rage receptacle. It’s there to be destroyed.
What’s that famous line from Silence of the Lambs? “It put the shampoo in the bucket or it gets the hose?”
Living in a world full of misogyny and gynophobia really sucks, so it’s injury onto insult when the copyright holders of our heroes pimp them to the lowest, basest and most disgusting regions of the human psyche. And, no, the whole entire world is not misogynistic and gynophobic, but it sure seems that way sometimes.
Now do you understand?
Comment by Ginger Mayerson — June 16, 2007 @ 12:30 am
Wonderful article, so important.
A short personal anecdote:
I remember getting into a conversation with some guy about the merits of Carwoman’s various suits over the years. This guy said he liked the purple suit with the stiletto heals and tails best. I said, but it doesn’t make any sense, she can’t actually do anything it other than give cheese cake poses and anti-gravity stuff. He said: “Yeah, but she looks really Hot!!!”.
Just another example.
Comment by Mel — June 16, 2007 @ 3:51 am
Nobody seems to object at the fact that 90% of characters in comics are super-muscular males and the male readers don’t seem to have a problem with it. I never felt bad because no X-Men looked like me (well, except for maybe Nightcrawler).
TV is filled with lots of pretty people. Studies show pretty people get better jobs and make more money (maybe because they’re the ones getting on TV). Therefore, it’s not really surprising that corporate comics do the same thing.
If you don’t like it, read Love and Rockets, Optic Nerve, Strangers in Paradise, or Eightball. Really, there are so many great comics out there with honest and real depiction of people. I mean, I don’t watch Paris Hilton shows and complain they’ve got Paris Hilton in them, I try to watch stuff that doesn’t suck!
Oh, and anyone who doesn’t think Catwoman could do anything in those heels has never been to a strip club. And let’s face it, ever since Watchman had a superhero die by getting his cape stuck in a door, I’m not sure capes are “realistic” either.
I do think a lot of the gripes are legitimate- I don’t mean to dismiss them all, but a lot of this is putting the blame where it doesn’t belong.
“Fan service” shots are there to sell original art and make an artist rise on the Wizard hot artist list- editors need to control that stuff and boards of directors need to put heat on publishers and editors to expand the audience instead of strip mining the fan boys through the publishing equivalent of mountaintop removal. Unfortunately, large corporations ONLY care about short term profits so most of these complaints end up as useless bitching. Just like when I complain we don’t need an entire aisle of toothpaste at the grocery store…
Comment by Joe Willy — June 16, 2007 @ 9:29 am
My above comments were more of a general commentary on the overall topic of “sexism” in comics as has been bandied about for the last 3 or 4 weeks in the comics blogosphere, but I also want to address specifics in the essay. Contrary to what you might think, I do agree with some of what was said.
First, not every artist is Wally Wood- if only they were, but it’s also funny to point to Wood as a positive example of comics art since most of his women look like 1960s Playboy Playmates as Wood is well-known for his more adult work. It’s also odd that Power Girl is pointed to a positive figure when many women point to the “boob hole” as an example of sexism in comics no matter how “realistic” she is portrayed.
Many comics artists simply cannot draw more than one facial or body type. In the assembly line nature of corporate comics, artists are cogs in the machine replaces on a sometimes monthly basis.
Comics are filled with examples of characters being drawn “off model” but each artist has their specialty. I don’t ever hear a lot of complaining about one artist draws Superman as a hulking figure (Quitely) and another may draw him with more of a lithe, swimmer’s physique. If there is, it’s more just a matter of taste and not an accusation of some political agenda to make anyone feel bad about not having Superman’s body.
I do wish editors would do a better job of placing artists in books they are right for and companies were better at putting out a range of material for a vast and varied audience- but a corporation is going to maximize profits with the least expenditure of resources in order to provide the best quarterly earning report for Wall Street and share holders.
I still disagree with the basic premise that comics are “only” power fantasies. When I was a kid I sure had a thing for a few female characters, but unlike a lot of male fans I moved on and don’t read comics to get turned on- but as long as comics are sold mainly to young men they will continue to do what they need to appeal to the base desires of that demographic in the same way Maxim always has a half naked girl on the cover. And while I may glance at Maxim, I sure don’t bother reading it and then complaining it’s full of half naked women.
I know people feel ownership over corporate comics characters but at some point I quit reading them because I got sick of how each change of creator team would change the entire nature of the characters and how the serial nature meant a constant stream of endless “tragedy” which would be erased by next month’s attempt at oneupmanship. Eventually, it became obvious that the company didn’t care about “character” or my identification with them but only about trying to get me to give them as much of my money as possible.
I now read comics driven by the creator’s artistic intent and not the stock holders’ desire for maximum share price and dividend check and so these arguments seem like a waste of time to me even though I agree with the very valid criticism.
Comment by Joe Willy — June 16, 2007 @ 10:12 am
//Reading this makes me long for the days when chicks didn’t read comics.//
There never were those days.
I’ve been reading comics for at least as long as you and I know I’m not the only woman who has. It’s simply that now there is a forum (the internet) for female readers to connect and talk and be heard that wasn’t around 20 years ago.
Now, you’re aware that we’re there. Before, you weren’t.
Comment by Dawn — June 16, 2007 @ 10:18 am
-Oh, and anyone who doesn’t think Catwoman could do anything in those heels has never been to a strip club.-
Q.E.D.
Comment by Mel — June 16, 2007 @ 11:27 am
Well, two things…
Reading this makes me long for the days when chicks didn’t read comics.
Women were reading and writing into the letters column of the mid-70s Jonah Hex run. So women have been reading comics for at least the past 30 years.
Trina Robbins recently said: “The direct market kills all comics that are not boy-oriented superhero comics!” http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/features/96900120031612.htm look out for the pop-up, there’s a hot chicks ad in it (irony stalks me).
So, until the direct market took over, when we could buy comics at the grocery store or 7-11 or whatever, superhero comics were more woman friendly and less boy-oriented and the industry did not implode. I wish comics were sold at spas and nail places. I ask you, what could be better than getting a pedicure and reading Silver Surfer? But for that kind of utopia to happen, the direct market will have to sell to more than comic book stores.
Oh, and anyone who doesn’t think Catwoman could do anything in those heels has never been to a strip club.
Mel, I can’t tell if you’re using Q.E.D. ironically or not. I’ll assume not, in which case you’ve just summed the whole issue up by completely missing the point. Thanks? And I don’t have anything against strippers if they like their job, which some of them seem to. Probably beats working in an office, unless you like working in offices. Und zo on.
Comment by Ginger Mayerson — June 16, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
superhero comics were more woman friendly and less boy-oriented and the industry did not implode.
‘Tis true, ’tis true. I’ve been reading comics since the 1960’s - was looking through my old Amazing World of DC Comics the other day, and I was getting every super hero book they offered (unless you count Our Army at War or Jonah Hex, which I only read sporadically).
Oh, and anyone who doesn’t think Catwoman could do anything in those heels has never been to a strip club.
My cousin’s a stripper, but she doesn’t wear heels when she wants to get anything athletic done. Heels are a handicap, and only an idiot deliberately self-handicaps without good reason. And when the choices are “look sexy” or “improve my odds of escape,” most sensible women are going to go with improving the odds.
That said, I liked the dress and heels outfit, but that was back when the DC world was very fanciful and kind of romantic. Catwoman lives in a grittier world now, and the dress no longer makes sense. Random and unnecessary fanciful elements work better in a fanciful romantic environment than in one that is considerably more hard edged.
Comment by shilohmm — June 16, 2007 @ 5:10 pm
Forgot to say I thought it a brilliant essay, Lisa. This is precisely why I bailed on Marvel for years - they took strong women I identified with and turned them into helpless wimps (Ms. Marvel reading out the Avengers for not saving her from her rapist, for example) or delustional psychotics (Scarlet Witch and the twins).
Surely all fans identify with the main characters on some level, that’s why they follow them. That’s why this is a fantasy. Are they really so detached from the female characters that they can’t imagine why someone would naturally put herself in that character’s place?
I think some people I’ve read must be that detached. They think the female characters are there for decoration and sex and honestly resent anyone questioning that idea. Some guys “just don’t get it”, for whatever reason (I suspect a fair percentage because they don’t like change and don’t want to make the effort to see why they should care), but I’ve seen some others in conversations pointed enough that, yeah, there aren’t many other options left. Female characters with any agency at all ruins their fantasy and they’re outraged that anyone wants anything but that.
I’m a big Misty Knight fan, going back to the 1970’s, and she and Colleen have always been sexified, but so long as they were strong enough to laugh it off that didn’t bother me. Because, hey, in the real world, guys tried to turn me into a sex object all the time, and I’d laugh it off by being stronger and more competent than they were, y’know? What infuriated me about the HfH cover wasn’t that it was tentacle rape (tentacle rape’s par for the course), but that Misty wasn’t black anymore, and that neither of them looked angry and ready to do something about the situation. Turning Misty Knight and Colleen Wing into terrified frails is what got me riled.
Comment by shilohmm — June 16, 2007 @ 5:25 pm
Thank you for putting this so eloquently and rationally. I have far too much of a tendency to just sputter incoherently and then burst into a stream of profanity when confronted by this stuff.
This is a brilliant article. Thank you again for writing it!!!!
Comment by Sirriamnis — June 16, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
I echo everyone who’s said this is a great essay, Lisa. One of your best.
The only thing I’d add is that, to most of the people who create comics, they’re (hetero) MALE heroic fantasies, not heroic fantasies in general. And hetero male heroic fantasies are basically “I want to BE LIKE this guy and HAVE this woman.” Presenting a woman that readers want to BE LIKE violates this idea, because so many creative comics folk still can’t conceive of the paper mirror being for women at all. Likewise, presenting a male that readers want to HAVE also violates it, which is why yaoi has such appeal to female readers.
Oh, and sorry for feeding the troll, but it’s worth noting that anyone who whines about longing for the days that never existed when women didn’t read comics then follows that up IMMEDIATELY with another whine about fan entitlement seems to be very lacking in the irony department.
Comment by Elayne Riggs — June 17, 2007 @ 9:12 am
Thank you for looking at this topic from a perspective different than “Her boobs are too big.” which is,unfortunately, where this ends up 99% of the time.I think this topic in general really shows you where people’s heads are at.When I saw the Mary Jane statue I thought”What a waste of $120.”, not “There’s MJ doing Peter’s laundry and showing her sexual availablity.”And the H4H13 cover most certainly didn’t make me think of “tentacle rape/porn”.But a lot of people obviously disagree with me.Maybe I’m just not enough of a pervert to see what is so obvious to other people.I’ll gladly ignore the MJ statue and I’ll actually read H4H13 before I pass judgement on it.
Comment by MarkSmart — June 17, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
Great essay.
I wanted to add that personally, I can deal with the sexual fantasies. I’m used to them. It’s when they’re combined with sexist fantasies that I get peeved.
Comment by mapletree7 — June 18, 2007 @ 11:53 am
What amazes me is that even after a carefully presented, well-thought-out piece like yours, in which you explain your desire for superheroes and how you came to find yours in an exquisitely clear and mannered fashion, you still have Male Entitlement Bunnies who come to say “We don’t get it; if you gals don’t like it, go read Love and Rockets.”
::cough:: We don’t want to read Love and Rockets for our heroes. HELLO! You don’t have to be a MEB to want to transplant yourself into the idea of heroics, to want to best the bad guy and save people, to get the accolades and know you’ve made a dent in the mess the world is today. And since we are paying, and since the Big Two claim to offer us heroes theoretically in the female mold, we are entitled to speak our minds when we have problems with us. Fanboys whine about Iron Man’s latest turn or David Banner’s new approach to life at the drop of a hat, but God forbid women or express problems with violence and hate inflicted on characters who are female heroes.
Sorry, Lisa–didn’t mean to shanghai your column. It wasn’t a failure of your most excellently clear and thoughtful prose that some people didn’t get what you were trying to say. They came in not wanting to understand, and as true Male Entitlement Bunnies, they hopped out the same way.
Comment by Tamora Pierce — June 18, 2007 @ 12:31 pm
Tamora, the problem with this logic is that they are not YOUR heroes any more than Coke is not YOUR soft drink- they are corporate properties. So, WHO feels entitled? I also don’t care when fan BOYS piss and moan- but they aren’t calling everyone a sexist pig just for disagreeing with them (like your use of the word gals- really sums up your lame attempt to put words in my mouth to win your argument).
Comment by Joe Willy — June 18, 2007 @ 6:40 pm
Joe Willy @29:
Funny that you should bring up Coke as a “counterexample.” Are you too young to remember New Coke?
You say “fan entitlement,” I say “customer feedback.”
(Sorry for feeding the troll.)
Comment by Pete — June 18, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
Very nice post, you’re just the type of gal I plan to dedicate my comic to. Sorry about the asshats.
Comment by Amy (salymander) — June 18, 2007 @ 9:51 pm
Hey, sorry, I’ve skipped ahead here, so I don’t know if this has already been covered, but:
You hit the nail on the head with the identification issue, because I don’t consciously identify, in the way you describe, with the characters I read, and I used to assume that other comics readers weren’t like me. I won’t get into speculations on the reasons for this difference between types of fans, but I do see a rough gender divide, and I see it apply to fans of TV shows too.
I don’t really remember identifying with the virtuous qualities of characters, I remember getting teenage kicks from the revenge fantasy, and cynical kicks from Spider Jerusalem (the last character I can think of with whom I identified a little). But I’m demographically mainstream, so I can get those needs filled in any medium at the switch of a dial. I appreciate that’s not always an option for others.
Regardless, ignorance of this difference in fan attachment has not helped the discussions about sexism.
Comment by Eric Grant — June 19, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
But… why don’t more people (men and women) want to read “Love & Rockets” rather than just focusing on the mainstream superhero stuff? It’s written better and drawn better than practically everything out there in any genre and it’s ridiculous that it doesn’t sell better as well.
Beyond the false dichotomy inherent in the “go read L&R if you don’t like what Batman is up to this month,” what is it about the superheroes exactly?
Why always Superman and Spidey and the X-Men doing the same ol’ same ol’ when there are so many other genres out there?
Comment by Joel — June 19, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
Because anyone who simply disagrees with you is either a “troll” or an “asshat.” I forgot that on the Internets the key to winning an argument is to be the first one to go nuclear with the name calling. I guess you win since I don’t want to invoke Godwin’s Law.
Comment by Joe Willy — June 19, 2007 @ 7:05 pm
Response to Joel:
You can get any other genre in any other medium (and therefore comics in any other genre compete with works in all other media).
Comics were the only viable genre for super-heroes until the video games, and later movies, got the computer power to compete.
Comment by Eric Grant — June 19, 2007 @ 7:18 pm
Joe Willy,I have to agree with you.I find the internet to be a negative,hateful place.As for Mrs. Pierce’s comments,the fact that this article was written by a woman does not place it above criticism or disagreement,even by “Male Entitlement Bunnies.”Fanboys tear into each other just as hard.Anyone who blogs and puts their name out there should expect positive AND negative feedback.
Comment by MarkSmart — June 19, 2007 @ 7:31 pm
Ragnell: You may have just made the ultimate statement in this issue. This argument, I would think, is almost impossible to counter.
Joe Wily, you are a shadow demon of the Anti-Monitor.
By this I mean that you want to destroy superhero comics by preventing the expansion of their readership.
Thereby dooming us all of the joys of superheroics and condemming us, men and women, to a superheroless exsitence full of misery.
Only a being of foul evil would do that.
Comment by universalperson — June 19, 2007 @ 8:33 pm
Sexist pigs always want the right to be sexist pigs, but never want to be labelled as such. I think Mavis Leno said it best:
“Bigots always have the same modus operandi. First, they declare you inferior; then they systematically make it illegal for you to prove you’re not. In their hearts, they know you’re not inferior- they just want a huge slice of the pie.”
Comment by Robert Jones, Jr. — June 20, 2007 @ 12:26 pm
Daid said: “Or, more thoroughly: I understand that you are angry, and thanks to this post I know why; but it just doesn’t make sense to me.”
It’s difficult for me to tailor an example that will help you understand, because I don’t know who the superheroes you love are, or what qualities they have that make you love them and want to follow them. Even if I try to give a general example, sexualization of women is so much more prevalent in our culture (compared to men) that you probably haven’t spent the last twenty-odd years trying to claw out of it a few figures to identify with (as I have).
Still. Try to imagine… a cover for ACTION COMICS showing Superman, wearing only the red bits of his costume, bent over double, with Lex Luthor standing behind him and leveling a poison-dripping sword at his lower back region. Then imagine seeing another cover almost exactly like it the next month. And the one after that.
Can you imagine this?
Comment by Lea — June 20, 2007 @ 1:56 pm
Tell the story, Lea!
Comment by Robert Jones, Jr. — June 20, 2007 @ 4:42 pm
*claps*
Comment by "Starman" Matt Morrison — June 23, 2007 @ 9:15 am