|
Post by zaku on Nov 25, 2023 17:08:05 GMT -5
Sue Richards dresses like a tart. Sue has always been the mom of the Marvel Universe and this change was jarring to say the least. Some opine that this was a reaction to the Image guys and their over the top depiction of characters, and some say it was just Defalco mocking that era. Either way, she joined Powergirl with a Boob window in her suit. They should do this more often to male characters. Replace Batman's chest emblem with a manboob window, with the bat shaved out of his chest hair. Ditch the tights and turn the trunks into a black g-string. Also make certain to twist him around in all sorts of implausible positions so we can see all the goods as often as possible.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Nov 26, 2023 4:30:14 GMT -5
The rape aspect of Avengers #200 has become deservedly infamous over time. It's puzzling that Michelinie added that element at all. It's not even suggested by the art, just a caption. Two captions really: once for Immortus courting a woman he rescued from the Titanic, and once for Marcus courting Carol Danvers. The mention of the "subtle" effect of Immortus' machines is completely unnecessary in either case. Why not just say that both men practiced successful seduction, or even sincere courtship? It's the Marvel Method gone awry, a few extra words needlessly damaging the story. Was this an editorial emendation by Jim Salicrup, on grounds that Carol never would have fallen for Marcus? And you can't even give him the benefit of the doubt by saying "It was a different era, social sensitivity on these topics has changed etc etc". Avengers #200 came out in 1980, the essay The Rape of Ms. Marvel came out almost immediately after that and Avengers Annual #10 in the 1981. So even for contemporaries it was very clear how totally f@@@ed up the whole thing was. It's not like with Superman, who today we say that his making an intelligent woman believe she's crazy because she was always right about his secret identity is a very clear example of gaslighting and patriarchy. But at the time everyone said that he did very well and it was the right way to treat women. And the women said it too. The other incredible thing is that on Avengers #200 there were 4 people working on the story and no one stopped and said "Um, guys, what the hell are we doing?!?" By the way, in every author interview I found on this subject the answers were some variation of: a) Uh, I don't remember b) Surely it must not have been my idea, but the other guy's.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Nov 26, 2023 12:13:27 GMT -5
Didn't know that Marie Antoinette was a seamstress and lady-in-waiting when she wasn't a queen. And apparently the definition of true love is what happens when Dad and you use a "subtle boost" from his "ingenious machines" to get things started.
|
|
|
Post by james on Nov 26, 2023 14:06:11 GMT -5
They should do this more often to male characters. Replace Batman's chest emblem with a manboob window, with the bat shaved out of his chest hair. Ditch the tights and turn the trunks into a black g-string. Also make certain to twist him around in all sorts of implausible positions so we can see all the goods as often as possible. What’s worse, Boob window or whole Malice look?
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Nov 26, 2023 15:58:38 GMT -5
Didn't know that Marie Antoinette was a seamstress and lady-in-waiting when she wasn't a queen. And apparently the definition of true love is what happens when Dad and you use a "subtle boost" from his "ingenious machines" to get things started. It was the 80s. Too much coke.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2023 16:32:43 GMT -5
This is why I say the 70's was the best decade...the costumes were the OG when it came to skimpy, but at least it was "equal rights".
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2023 16:38:31 GMT -5
Peter finds out Osborn got some pie from Gwen. I'm not posting Doc Ock getting pie from Aunt May *shivers*
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2023 16:41:46 GMT -5
There should be a "perma ban" from comic book creation for stuff like that.
|
|
|
Post by tonebone on Nov 28, 2023 10:34:05 GMT -5
It's not like with Superman, who today we say that his making an intelligent woman believe she's crazy because she was always right about his secret identity is a very clear example of gaslighting and patriarchy. But at the time everyone said that he did very well and it was the right way to treat women. And the women said it too. I (like you) disagree with the premise of this comparison. I think that era of Superman was not just a power fantasy, but an eight year old boy's power fantasy. Girls were icky and had cooties, and that was an eight year old boy's way they should be dealt with. Weisinger's huge success in that time period is due to the fact that he could tap into what made boys tick at that age, and delivered up the goods on a silver platter. And lest anyone should then say "And that's why boys grew up to treat women like Superman treated Lois"... I don't think anyone really believes that, although it would make a really convenient scapegoat for bad behavior.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Nov 28, 2023 10:48:52 GMT -5
It's not like with Superman, who today we say that his making an intelligent woman believe she's crazy because she was always right about his secret identity is a very clear example of gaslighting and patriarchy. But at the time everyone said that he did very well and it was the right way to treat women. And the women said it too. I (like you) disagree with the premise of this comparison. I think that era of Superman was not just a power fantasy, but an eight year old boy's power fantasy. Girls were icky and had cooties, and that was an eight year old boy's way they should be dealt with. Weisinger's huge success in that time period is due to the fact that he could tap into what made boys tick at that age, and delivered up the goods on a silver platter. And lest anyone should then say "And that's why boys grew up to treat women like Superman treated Lois"... I don't think anyone really believes that, although it would make a really convenient scapegoat for bad behavior. Unfortunately, Superman was not an outlier in how he treated Lois. Most TV shows and other comics were the same. Jan Van Dyne, Sue Storm, Betty Brandt, all treated like crap.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Nov 28, 2023 11:07:16 GMT -5
It's not like with Superman, who today we say that his making an intelligent woman believe she's crazy because she was always right about his secret identity is a very clear example of gaslighting and patriarchy. But at the time everyone said that he did very well and it was the right way to treat women. And the women said it too. I (like you) disagree with the premise of this comparison. I think that era of Superman was not just a power fantasy, but an eight year old boy's power fantasy. Girls were icky and had cooties, and that was an eight year old boy's way they should be dealt with. Weisinger's huge success in that time period is due to the fact that he could tap into what made boys tick at that age, and delivered up the goods on a silver platter. And lest anyone should then say "And that's why boys grew up to treat women like Superman treated Lois"... I don't think anyone really believes that, although it would make a really convenient scapegoat for bad behavior. I disagree with your disagreement because a) The comics were not written by 8 year olds but by adults. Adults whose concept of power fantasy was this b) Any serious child psychologist will tell you that there is no "natural" male-female aversion in young children. Any hatred between the genders is fueled by family, society and comics that say women are psychopaths to be kept at arm's length. c) I don't think we can then justify everything by just saying "That's what the readers wanted! Humiliating women and pointing to patriarchy as the only way!" and then pretend that Superman was the embodiment of Truth, Justice and the American Way. This just means taking away the responsibility of the writers. And let's remember that Superman was virtually the only one who behaved like a psychopath with the opposite sex, while, I don't know, a contemporary Barry Allen was a relatively balanced person for the time. So it's not like a different behavior was unthinkable.
|
|
|
Post by tonebone on Nov 28, 2023 11:47:06 GMT -5
I (like you) disagree with the premise of this comparison. I think that era of Superman was not just a power fantasy, but an eight year old boy's power fantasy. Girls were icky and had cooties, and that was an eight year old boy's way they should be dealt with. Weisinger's huge success in that time period is due to the fact that he could tap into what made boys tick at that age, and delivered up the goods on a silver platter. And lest anyone should then say "And that's why boys grew up to treat women like Superman treated Lois"... I don't think anyone really believes that, although it would make a really convenient scapegoat for bad behavior. I disagree with your disagreement because a) The comics were not written by 8 year olds but by adults. Adults whose concept of power fantasy was this b) Any serious child psychologist will tell you that there is no "natural" male-female aversion in young children. Any hatred between the genders is fueled by family, society and comics that say women are psychopaths to be kept at arm's length. c) I don't think we can then justify everything by just saying "That's what the readers wanted! Humiliating women and pointing to patriarchy as the only way!" and then pretend that Superman was the embodiment of Truth, Justice and the American Way. This just means taking away the responsibility of the writers. And let's remember that Superman was virtually the only one who behaved like a psychopath with the opposite sex, while, I don't know, a contemporary Barry Allen was a relatively balanced person for the time. So it's not like a different behavior was unthinkable. As a former child, I can assure you that among a certain age of boys, girls are "icky" and, low key, are the enemy. Now, kids obviously grow out of that stage, and then BAM puberty, but that's how I remember it, and how I have observed it among kids. As for "it was written by adults".... I can't believe I have to make this argument, but writers don't always write "in their own voice", especially when writing for kids. I firmly believe that middle aged suit-wearing cigar-smoking men at DC sure as hell "wrote what they thought kids wanted to read". I don't think Mort Weisinger was very concerned with the fragile psyches of America's youth, or their future relationship issues. I also believe the mantra of "that didn't age well" and that "we are in a more enlightened time" is pedantic and futile, and sucks the fun right out of all pop culture. If we are always looking down our nose at the entertainment of the past, we won't see what made it fun for past generations, or ourselves in a younger age.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Nov 28, 2023 12:11:29 GMT -5
As for "it was written by adults".... I can't believe I have to make this argument, but writers don't always write "in their own voice", especially when writing for kids. I firmly believe that middle aged suit-wearing cigar-smoking men at DC sure as hell "wrote what they thought kids wanted to read". I don't think Mort Weisinger was very concerned with the fragile psyches of America's youth, or their future relationship issues. I'm sorry, but if anyone thinks that the humiliation and objectification of women is the perfect entertainment for youth, it's not the fault of the readers. It's the author who had the idea. I also believe the mantra of "that didn't age well" and that "we are in a more enlightened time" is pedantic and futile, and sucks the fun right out of all pop culture. If we are always looking down our nose at the entertainment of the past, we won't see what made it fun for past generations, or ourselves in a younger age. There are limits to ethical relativism. Some things are wrong no matter how much one wants to contextualize them. You cannot, for example, justify "Birth of a Nation" by saying "it was a different era etc". It is a racist work full of historical falsehoods. We can obviously appreciate the technical aspects, but if someone said "Don't judge it with modern eyes, when he says that blacks are subhumans who only want to rape white women you have to put it in the historical context and just enjoy it and have fun!" I would ask him if he is in the right mind .
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Nov 28, 2023 12:23:09 GMT -5
As a former child, I can assure you that among a certain age of boys, girls are "icky" and, low key, are the enemy. Now, kids obviously grow out of that stage, and then BAM puberty, but that's how I remember it, and how I have observed it among kids. Ops I forgot this one! I have to say that this is something quintessentially American. In other European cultures and languages there isn't even the equivalent of "girls have cooties!!!" There was an American YouTuber here in Italy who was amazed at how the groups of friends included people of both sexes, while in the States there is a tendency to only have exclusively male and female groups. There seems to be some kind of barely understandable gender apartheid there. I mean, what is the most stereotypical image of American high schools? Real men end up on the football/basketball team and women end up as cheerleaders. Gender stereotypes are deeply rooted even in the public education system, which should train new generations in equality.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2023 13:30:12 GMT -5
As a former child, I can assure you that among a certain age of boys, girls are "icky" and, low key, are the enemy. Now, kids obviously grow out of that stage, and then BAM puberty, but that's how I remember it, and how I have observed it among kids. Ops I forgot this one! I have to say that this is something quintessentially American. In other European cultures and languages there isn't even the equivalent of "girls have cooties!!!" There was an American YouTuber here in Italy who was amazed at how the groups of friends included people of both sexes, while in the States there is a tendency to only have exclusively male and female groups. There seems to be some kind of barely understandable gender apartheid there. I mean, what is the most stereotypical image of American high schools? Real men end up on the football/basketball team and women end up as cheerleaders. Gender stereotypes are deeply rooted even in the public education system, which should train new generations in equality. You are WAY broad-brushing American life. The diversity of experiences growing up here in different times, regions, genders, etc. are way beyond those generalizations. Don’t do it bro, it’s offbase.
|
|