Recently, a podcast held by Paul Dini and Misty Lee has been causing a bit of a stir, most of which centers around a particular quote spoken by Ms. Lee. (The podcast can be found here, and the link is courtesy of Thom Wade at In One Ear…
Point:
Tamora Pierce strongly disputes Ms. Lee’s statements.
Excerpt:
Would Ms. Lee care to explain what person of intelligence, whatever their appearance, in proper possession of her or his mental health, is jealous of comic book characters? Are we talking the same hyper-sexualized, anatomically incorrect, over-inflated, fatally `roidally ripped, negative-ribbed, under-genitalized, nipple-less, balloon-breasted, spinally deformed, ball-jointed-backed, out-of-plumb, spider-ankled, football butted, collagen-pumped-lipped, shallow-socketed eyed, permanently-affixed made-up, uterus-, bladder- and colon-less, kelp-haired wild hair fantasy as ever came out of a creator/creatrix’s sleep deprived imagination?
Counterpoint:
The Video Store Girl points out a different interpretation to Ms. Lee’s statement.
Excerpt:
RETRACTION: After a closer reading of this passage, pointed out by the David the G. Esquire, I find that my interpretation of it was incorrect and taken out-of-context.
Misty Lee is NOT saying that “ugly fat chicks” are the only ones who complain about cheesecake in comics. She was saying that *she has heard* that other people on the Internet have said this (and that she does not necessarily agree with that)
So what do you think?
June 15th, 2007 at 6:46 am
The Video Store Girl also added this in the comments section of her blog:
I just sat through the whole podcast, and while I can see how the ‘cast in its entirety would piss off certain people, Misty did *not* say that “fat ugly girls” are the only ones who complain — only that it’s the perception of some people. I do think it’s ironic that she spoke so much on the podcast about people who are singled out with their words taken out of context and then she’s singled out with her words taken out of context.
June 15th, 2007 at 6:51 am
Yes, the occurrance of additional information/argument at the source site is the reason why I always make certain to include the suitable links.
However, I was remiss in not including my usual notation that the blockquoted portions were excerpts of the whole. This has been remedied.
Thank you.
June 15th, 2007 at 8:49 am
I am not fully up on this particular thing, but I have to say, having met Misty many times, she is incredibly kind, generous, and very very down-to-Earth. I adore Tamora Pierce also and have tremendous respect for her fierce intelligence. So in this case, my uninformed guess is that there’s a misunderstanding here somewhere. These are two really strong, admirable women, both of whom I’m proud to call friends. I strongly suspect that there’s either something in the telling or the reading that was not quite as intended.
Gail
June 15th, 2007 at 12:56 pm
Well Gail, there’s always the possibility that otherwise nice people occasionally say stupid things.
June 15th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Gail — I was with a group of friends discussing weight loss once. One of them had a thyroid problem that I knew about (but tended to forget), and she was complaining about how a third friend thought that weight loss was all about diet.
I blurted out, without thinking, “Its exercise too” and got a look that would sour pasteurized milk and, of course, yelled at.
Did I mean to offend? No.
Did I like my friend? Yes.
Was it still an unbelievable stupid and offensive thing to say to someone with a diagnosed medical condition that prevented weight loss? Yes.
Was she perfectly within her rights to be offended and upset? Yes.
Did it deserve to be corrected severely and quickly? Hell yes.
Am I still friends with her? Yes.
June 15th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
Thank you, Elayne, that of course had not occurred to me.
I’ve said many things myself that were thick with a peculiar brand of jackassery and it’s entirely possible that in this case that this comment is as bad as it sounds, but was not intentionally meant to be so. Reading it cold out of context, I’m not crazy about it, certainly, and I get why smart people of all body shapes are annoyed by the implications. My only real point here is that that reading doesn’t seem anything like the Misty Lee I know who is endlessly kind and gracious to virtually everyone, so it seems a bit off to me.
Has she responded to any of this yet, does anyone know?
I’m not trying to whitewash anything, it’s just that something seems a bit hinky and I’m open to the possibility that there’s a contextual component not included here (I’ve spent my outrage foolishly in the past and am a bit more careful now).
Best,
Gail
June 18th, 2007 at 9:45 am
Val, I don’t think saying “some people say” is really superior to a bald assertion; it’s just another form of “the lurkers support me in email.”
If I were to say “I’ve heard on LJ that Val is just defending Misty Lee because they’re having a wild affair. Now, I’m not saying I necessarily agree…,”* that would frankly be worse than simply alleging it.
*I have heard no such thing on LJ, that was randomly manufactured, and a falsehood.
June 18th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
I’ve said stupid things too, God knows, particularly when I get jacked and am talking and open my mouth too big. But I could not let a remark that implied a sane human being might be jealous of a comic book character’s physique go by; I just couldn’t.
And let’s face it, Gail, you are a WAY better, nicer person than I am! You do bring out the good in people!
Tammy
June 18th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Bleah, Tammy, if I were half as smart as you, I’d be twice as smart as me. You know I adore ya and admire you to no end.
And I don’t think I’m any nicer–I say stupid things about as often as I hit the keyboard. Ask Rick Olney if I’m nice.
I’m just giving someone I know to be a good person the benefit of the doubt until I can talk to them. As I’ve said, on the face of it, I’m not crazy about the quote, but I’d like to hear from Misty about it, is really my only point.
Gail
June 19th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
I will side with Betty; “some people say” is a form of what is sometimes called “weasel words,” phrasing an argument so as to allege that it’s supported, without ever specifying who it is who supports it or why.
Hats off to Little Miss Ad Hominem.