![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chanticoToday I am very cranky and easily angered. I keep working myself into a self-important lather over silly things (and some not so silly ones) for no good reason other than it's easier to surf on a wave of pre-existant seething than fight the tide. Which is no excuse, of sourse; that's why I'm making a deliberate effort to be congenial today.
I've got my feminist side all riled up over the last few weeks for various reasons:
This article, paired with a recent report in the IDS last wekk (which I now cannot find, curse it, though I still have the physical paper) about the steady wage gap. I guess as I come closer to the reality of A Job, I'm starting to pay a little more attention to the problems that I know are there (which is kind of a sucky of me, actually, to pay attention to something only when it's directly confronting me). Not that I plan on getting into corporate America any time soon, but these are still issues to be concerned about. And then, of course, there is the, erm . . . kerfluffle surrounding the Mary Jane statuette.
Oh, you hadn't heard? Here's a link to the main page where it mostly began:
http://devildoll.livejournal.com/750924.html
Scroll down a bit to get to close ups (and the link to the Bingo card is great). Certainly on the lighter side of OMG OPRESHUN, but a little disturbing none-the-less, at least to me. Mostly because it highlights an argument I got into after seeing Spiderman 3 about women's portrayal in comics, RE: They suck. That was probably fueled by my UNDYING hatred of Greg Land, but also my irritation of MJ's representations in the movies (and in this statue) because, well, yeah, she's a fairly cheescake character, but she has spark, too-- and that's *not* something I've seen in the movies at all. Three instances of the boring "woman falling from building so Spidey can save her" thing is a little much for me, thanks-- feminism aside, it's *tired*.
This is followed by a great thread on Scan_Daily when there is a post with a *ridiculously* beefcake Wonder Man. The ensuing comments are fairly intelligent once they get into debate and cease the OH GOD MY EYES. (The cover, by the way, is actually a fake, worry not).
Of course, in all fairness, here's a good rebuttal to the dramaz: http://tcj.com/journalista/?p=355
This link requires some scrolling down until you hit the Comics Culture section. Overall, I think he's claims are at least *somewhat* valid. I agree with his stance on economics, in that women are not great supporters of American comics, therefore publishers do not cater to them. I don't agree with his knee-jerk labeling of entitlement on all of the fangirls, because that just perpeatuates the name calling on both sides, when intellligent debate brings up good points (and bad) on both, and neither is fully right.
I do take a fair amount of issue with his assertation that if women want good women portrayed in comics, they should write them themselves, as in the Manga takeover in Japan he refernces. He makes it sound deceptively simple. Breaking into comics is *stupidly* hard no matter *who* you are . . . and breaking into comics as a woman is even harder. the playing field is incredibly male dominated, and to make it as a woman writer or artist in the Big 2 means to conform to their standards.
Secondly, the Shojo manga from Japan is not a particularly good example . . . because shojo manga still often fits within a the box of acceptable female behavior. The Shojo thing was acceptable *because* the feminie, pretty styles fit into the perception of 'girly' that was appropriate. I'm a fan of equality, dammit, not *segregation* of the genders. "Girls can read these comics because they are made for them, boys can read these other comics made for them" don't fly in my book. I fucking *hate* Shojo-- I want my power fantasies and explosions and people in tights, dammit.
That's really the problem, I think-- building another sandbox because we're not allowed to play in the main one does not work.
Of course, all of this vitrol *could* be because I woke up with a double shot of adrenaline latte this morning. Mmm . . . being startled out of sleep. Feels like a burning sensation in my chest and a lingering twitchiness all the day long.
I've got my feminist side all riled up over the last few weeks for various reasons:
This article, paired with a recent report in the IDS last wekk (which I now cannot find, curse it, though I still have the physical paper) about the steady wage gap. I guess as I come closer to the reality of A Job, I'm starting to pay a little more attention to the problems that I know are there (which is kind of a sucky of me, actually, to pay attention to something only when it's directly confronting me). Not that I plan on getting into corporate America any time soon, but these are still issues to be concerned about. And then, of course, there is the, erm . . . kerfluffle surrounding the Mary Jane statuette.
Oh, you hadn't heard? Here's a link to the main page where it mostly began:
http://devildoll.livejournal.com/750924.html
Scroll down a bit to get to close ups (and the link to the Bingo card is great). Certainly on the lighter side of OMG OPRESHUN, but a little disturbing none-the-less, at least to me. Mostly because it highlights an argument I got into after seeing Spiderman 3 about women's portrayal in comics, RE: They suck. That was probably fueled by my UNDYING hatred of Greg Land, but also my irritation of MJ's representations in the movies (and in this statue) because, well, yeah, she's a fairly cheescake character, but she has spark, too-- and that's *not* something I've seen in the movies at all. Three instances of the boring "woman falling from building so Spidey can save her" thing is a little much for me, thanks-- feminism aside, it's *tired*.
This is followed by a great thread on Scan_Daily when there is a post with a *ridiculously* beefcake Wonder Man. The ensuing comments are fairly intelligent once they get into debate and cease the OH GOD MY EYES. (The cover, by the way, is actually a fake, worry not).
Of course, in all fairness, here's a good rebuttal to the dramaz: http://tcj.com/journalista/?p=355
This link requires some scrolling down until you hit the Comics Culture section. Overall, I think he's claims are at least *somewhat* valid. I agree with his stance on economics, in that women are not great supporters of American comics, therefore publishers do not cater to them. I don't agree with his knee-jerk labeling of entitlement on all of the fangirls, because that just perpeatuates the name calling on both sides, when intellligent debate brings up good points (and bad) on both, and neither is fully right.
I do take a fair amount of issue with his assertation that if women want good women portrayed in comics, they should write them themselves, as in the Manga takeover in Japan he refernces. He makes it sound deceptively simple. Breaking into comics is *stupidly* hard no matter *who* you are . . . and breaking into comics as a woman is even harder. the playing field is incredibly male dominated, and to make it as a woman writer or artist in the Big 2 means to conform to their standards.
Secondly, the Shojo manga from Japan is not a particularly good example . . . because shojo manga still often fits within a the box of acceptable female behavior. The Shojo thing was acceptable *because* the feminie, pretty styles fit into the perception of 'girly' that was appropriate. I'm a fan of equality, dammit, not *segregation* of the genders. "Girls can read these comics because they are made for them, boys can read these other comics made for them" don't fly in my book. I fucking *hate* Shojo-- I want my power fantasies and explosions and people in tights, dammit.
That's really the problem, I think-- building another sandbox because we're not allowed to play in the main one does not work.
Of course, all of this vitrol *could* be because I woke up with a double shot of adrenaline latte this morning. Mmm . . . being startled out of sleep. Feels like a burning sensation in my chest and a lingering twitchiness all the day long.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-05-17 05:01 pm (UTC)Re: cheesecake -- that was my response, too. I wouldn't mind the cheesecake half so much if it were one corner of a diverse spectrum of female depiction in comics. But when female characters, even female superheroes, are routinely reduced to nothing more than the sum of their parts, then it's a problem, because then my choice isn't cheesecake or these twelve other options over here; it's cheesecake or nothing. So I choose nothing, and now we're back to business again. It's no accident that I don't think I've ever bought a superhero comic. Give me Elfquest, or Fables, or Transmetropolitan, or something else where the women are there for more than providing T&A.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-17 06:03 pm (UTC)Of course, some . . . many . . . do.