You connecting both points is your perception of it, not the reality. One editor's past bad behavior (on all accounts I read about, that happened 4 years ago) isn't related to one other editor from another department being laid off. And at that point, I think we should remember that to the better of our knowledge, no one has been prosecuted, and DC took measures with Berzanga until they thought he was back to professional shape. If people don't want to forget or forgive someone wo has expressed regrets and went to counseling, that tells as much about them as it does about him if not more. I was merely highlighting the fact that our perception of this "case" mosly comes from gossip sites and that we sure aren't privy to all sides of the matter.

Personnaly, as someone who really came to comics with Vertigo and as I've explained in my previous post, I can't say I'm sad to see Bond go. She seems to be responsible for the emo-ization and HPoter-isation of the line. Vertigo still publish good books, sometimes, but those aren't Vertigo books anymore, at least not in the sense of what was going on throughout the golden 90ies. To me, the book that really showcased the shift was 100 Bullets ( A book that enjoyed as much as I found it frustrating).

But all in all, I realy don't think we should care about any of it. The only upcoming book I'm gonna get from DC is the Rucka WW one, one that was specifically possible with the rule that Berzanga wouldn't be alowed to work on it, since it appears that his "victim" was Rucka's girlfriend. I really don't think I need to know more about that, and maybe that already is too much. If DC or vertigo put out books I'm interested in, I'll be heppy to buy those no matter what, until then, Image is getting most of my money. But I don't think that's likely to change since DC and Marvel comics are structuraly aimed at kids and teenagers at heart.

Image strikes me as a bigger caterer of the female crowd, though Sandman still remains fairly popular with the same group

That's what you got from his reply?

Because...that's not what *I* got from it.
Interesting how people can read the same thing and walk away with two different things from it.
huh.

This is a tricky one for me. Part of the problem is that we have so little information. Why wasn't he prosecuted, for example? If it's because no one came forward, that's a tragedy. If it's because DC somehow protected him or intimidated those who would have pursued this, that's outright dastardly. And if truly nothing inappropriate happened, then DC has a significant PR problem that needs to be addressed by them.

Assuming something did occur, it's one thing to do your time and seek forgiveness, but it seems like he never faced any kind of justice for what was done in the first place.

In the end, it's a separate matter from this new decision. But, suffice to say, DC should have been aware of the message this would send on the heels of such an upsetting unresolved circumstance. They have a right to promote and fire whoever they please, but they absolutely should have expected a serious backlash from this announcement, as well as the possibility that they'd be alienating many many fans who firmly believe that the sort of behaviors alleged to have occurred have no role in the modern workplace.


And the calendar is reset: hasdcdonesomethingstupidtoday.com/

Some of you guys truly have NO IDEA what it is like for victims of sexual harassment/assault. How hard it is to FINALLY come forth. And then when you finally do work up the courage, after you have wandered through ALLLLLL the wondering if you did something to cause it (because NO ONE victim blames a victim more than the victim her/himself), and then appropriate punishment RARELY is the end result.

The case still is that all we got are rumors. But the guy wasn't protected BY Warner/DC : he was demoted, forbidden to attend cons, forced to attend therapy, and that's just what's been rumored by gossip sites. Still, no one has stated what he actually did. So we can all act high and mighty, but the guy had to go through four years of heavy scrutiny and therapy. DC now seems to deem him workplace compatible. The fact that some mirror this to the firing of a female editor who constantly lost market share for over 15 years, had one of the highest salaries of the company and contiuously seemed to head the label in a niche direction, well, I can't help but think that is misguided.
There recently was a discussion about those artists whose work we love but dislike the personae. How is this different?!
BTW, I was twice in my early 20ies subjected to sexual harrasment from teachers. They had the power, and I couldn't do much about it. Believe me I knew that telling the chief of department at University would have caused a huge ruckus. Yet, I decided not to tell anyone. Not because of shame, not because of fear, only because I realized they gave me the upper hand. It was harrassment, not assault, but still pretty hardcore. I only told my commrades from cursus at the very end of the last year. And indeed few believed me. But really, that was more useful than traumatizing, as I guess my head sat pretty steady on my shoulders. So what I believe is that there is not one way to handle those situations, every single case is unique. Berzanga self confesed that he was over compensating for still being in the closet and having tremendous pressure because of that and his sociological background, him being a double minority.
I don't see why I should care if editors of books I like are female or male, but last I checked, the first name you see in DC's book corporate credits is the one of a woman, its president, I don't see that in any other big comic book company. So to suggest that DC has bias against women is IMHO quite dishonnest or at least misguided. And shortly before that, DC had a female publisher for over a quarter century and its biggest subsidiary has also been run by women for the past 24 years or so.
DC is THE company that has fought against the boys club syndrome the hardest since the late 70ies, saught out women who initialy didn't want nothing to do with the mainstream funny papers. If one of their employees misbehaved, I salute them for punishing him AND helping him, that is the values I was brought up with. So again, considering how little we actually know of the facts behind those rumors, the outrage seems way out of proportions.