New Unstoppable Wasp Series.

[Tiamatty]

There isn't a competition. Nadia just has more in her character arsenal than Jan, Scott, Cassie, and Tom Foster. What's the harm in saying it? You can like who you like. I will never like Nadia more than Scott Lang. But Scott doesn't have red room training. And he needed Nadia to rescue him from the microverse.

Ehhh . . . I like Nadia, a lot, but I don't know that I agree. Especially in regards to comparing her to Jan. They have different skill sets. It's not that one is better than the other, they just bring different things to the table. They all do.

[Kintor]

I just don't get why people dislike Nadia. You get a super genius female with red room training. She brings more to the table than any other Pym particle user while having ties to tales to astonish era comics. We should be rooting for her. If you don't like the tone of the book, ask them to change it.

For a supposed Red Room graduate I'd expect to see a lot more murdering. That whole "I never killed anybody, I was in R&D" excuse doesn't add up. No government runs an assassination program and let's one of the candidates shirk their duties. If anything the miniaturisation technology of the Pym Particles is ideally suited to assassination missions, Nadia could cause all manner of heart attacks and brain aneurisms etc. and a coroner would never be able to tell the difference. But instead we've got Nadia bumbling around with a junior science fair, such a waste of potential.

You do realize that only one of these is a legitimate screw up that actually mattered?

All those screw-ups matter, because quality control is the basic function of a competent editor. An editor that can't detect troll letters, blatant continuity errors or anti-Semitic symbolism isn't doing their job properly.

[Tiamatty]

For a supposed Red Room graduate I'd expect to see a lot more murdering. That whole "I never killed anybody, I was in R&D" excuse doesn't add up. No government runs an assassination program and let's one of the candidates shirk their duties. If anything the miniaturisation technology of the Pym Particles is ideally suited to assassination missions, Nadia could cause all manner of heart attacks and brain aneurisms etc. and a coroner would never be able to tell the difference. But instead we've got Nadia bumbling around with a junior science fair, such a waste of potential.

Nadia was of more use to the Red Room in a lab than she would've been killing people. It's not as if the Red Room was lacking in girls they could send on murder missions. Nadia wasn't shirking her duties, she had different duties. She was still tasked with finding ways to kill people. She just wasn't the one being sent out to do it.

[ed2962]

Nadia couldn't be Hank and Jan's daughter anyways, since they never had kids.

Nick Fury never had kids either until someone decided he did

[ed2962]

^There's no ownership issue, it was a continuity issue. Hank and Janet are younger in 616 than they are in the movies, and thus even de-aging Hope to 16, she's still too old to be Janet's natural daughter, as Janet hadn't even met Hank at that point. That's why they made Nadia Maria's daughter (which in turn is why they Russianised her name) and had Janet later adopt her instead.

I'm just speculating on the possible copyrights thing. I do think it would have been possible for Hank and Jan to have a 16 yr old daughter, but it would raise issues that Marvel probably doesn't want to deal with ( why haven't we heard of her before? why didn't they try to find her? etc).

[Mary Jay]

]Yeah, that wasn't an error, that was making a point.[/B] That, for a long time, heroes were pretty much men. In the '60s, it basically came down to Token Girls: Invisible Girl, Wasp, Scarlet Witch, Marvel Girl. A couple others here and there. But by and large, superheroes were men. There was a pretty small pool of women, and they were pretty regularly ineffectual, especially compared to the men. Things have gotten better, but they're a damned long way from being equal, even now. And, of course, that also remains true in society at large. Anyone who thinks women actually get treated as equal to men is willfully deluding themselves, because it still sucks to be a woman. And it especially sucks to be a teen girl. Which is, of course, the main point of that issue. That society has no idea how to deal with teen girls, and they're given too few good role models to draw inspiration from (and they know how few good role models they have), and they're forced to figure things out for themselves, and it just all-around sucks for them.

But I guess making a point about the need to help teen girls navigate a difficult time is irrelevant because Cain didn't list every single female superhero from the '30s onward. Themes are less important than pedantry.

The poster gave very specific examples of things that have been written that don't make sense, and you say it's not an error but making a point? When you have to twist the truth and the facts to make a point, doesn't that make said point invalid? They mixed up the timeline in order to make a point. It was probably true that there weren't any female superheroes when Bobbie was a child, but I doubt there were many superheroes period. There weren't really superheroes when Tony, Bruce, Scott, Jean, both Hanks, Jennifer, Janet, Susan, etc... were kids either. When Bobbie was a child, Peter Parker and Johnny Storm were probably just babies.

Nadia couldn't be Hank and Jan's daughter anyways, since they never had kids.

They could have gone with a daughter from an alternate universe that would have slipped through the cracks after Secret Wars, or from a potential future.

I just don't get why people dislike Nadia. You get a super genius female with red room training. She brings more to the table than any other Pym particle user while having ties to tales to astonish era comics. We should be rooting for her. If you don't like the tone of the book, ask them to change it.

I think that's it. With Nadia's backstory, you'd expect a book heavy with psychological development, spying adventures and a more mature and serious tone. Her book just doesn't fit with her background.

But I disagree that she brings more to the table than everyone else. Being a successful business woman and CEO, multi-milloinaire world famous fashion designer with impressive leadership abilities shouldn't mean any less than being a genius scientist in my opinion. Both Jan and Nadia bring different things to the table and Nadia has a lot to learn from Janet. That's what makes their dynamic awesome. I love them both and frankly I want them to be associated often with each other in the universe from now on. They are big parts of each others' lives now and I want to hear about it in Iron Man and Chsmpions too

Exactly! Why does the go-to for accomplishments is science? There are so much more development that can be made in many other fields besides science. Like you said, running a business, being a leader, those are also traits that are traditionally associated with men and that girls and yound women should also be encouraged to pursue. Why does everything have to be science-related?

For a supposed Red Room graduate I'd expect to see a lot more murdering. That whole "I never killed anybody, I was in R&D" excuse doesn't add up. No government runs an assassination program and let's one of the candidates shirk their duties. If anything the miniaturisation technology of the Pym Particles is ideally suited to assassination missions, Nadia could cause all manner of heart attacks and brain aneurisms etc. and a coroner would never be able to tell the difference. But instead we've got Nadia bumbling around with a junior science fair, such a waste of potential.

I think that's what I feel like also. It seems like a waste of potential for a character that I don't dislike at all outside of her own solo.

[skyvolt2000]

I don’t like her because she only exists for movie synergy and is given opportunities as a character than Janet never got.

And how is that Nadia's fault???

That falls on management. Have an issue with Janet's treatment-ask management about it.

We got too many folks taking frustrations on other fans for actions that have nothing to do with the status of someone like Janet.

However the issue will be even if they do-Janet will get the same bashing Nadia and Iceman are getting. So it gets to a point at Marvel-why bother if there is nonstop complaining.

We have gotten to the point we got fans wanting Marvel out of business because of this book and Iceman. So everyone has to suffer? So Peter Parker, Thor, X-Men and Cap America fans should lose out because folks take issue with 2 books?

[The_Greatest_Username]

And how is that Nadia's fault???

That falls on management. Have an issue with Janet's treatment-ask management about it.

As long as Nadia is around with her series, Janet will obviously not get one.

We got too many folks taking frustrations on other fans for actions that have nothing to do with the status of someone like Janet.

However the issue will be even if they do-Janet will get the same bashing Nadia and Iceman are getting. So it gets to a point at Marvel-why bother if there is nonstop complaining.

We have gotten to the point we got fans wanting Marvel out of business because of this book and Iceman. So everyone has to suffer? So Peter Parker, Thor, X-Men and Cap America fans should lose out because folks take issue with 2 books?

Yeah, none of this is really making me want to buy Nadia’s book. Nor does it have anything to do with my reasons for not liking Nadia.

[Captain M]

And how is that Nadia's fault???

That falls on management. Have an issue with Janet's treatment-ask management about it.

We got too many folks taking frustrations on other fans for actions that have nothing to do with the status of someone like Janet.

However the issue will be even if they do-Janet will get the same bashing Nadia and Iceman are getting. So it gets to a point at Marvel-why bother if there is nonstop complaining.

We have gotten to the point we got fans wanting Marvel out of business because of this book and Iceman. So everyone has to suffer? So Peter Parker, Thor, X-Men and Cap America fans should lose out because folks take issue with 2 books?

People who want Janet to get the attention she deserves and people you describe are different groups and there really aren't many fans that fall into both categories.

I totally know how to fix this. Have 2 Wasp books going on at the same time. Problem solved. Thank you for coming to my TED talk guys, we can end the arguments in the thread now.

[KurtW95]

The poster gave very specific examples of things that have been written that don't make sense, and you say it's not an error but making a point? When you have to twist the truth and the facts to make a point, doesn't that make said point invalid? They mixed up the timeline in order to make a point. It was probably true that there weren't any female superheroes when Bobbie was a child, but I doubt there were many superheroes period. There weren't really superheroes when Tony, Bruce, Scott, Jean, both Hanks, Jennifer, Janet, Susan, etc... were kids either. When Bobbie was a child, Peter Parker and Johnny Storm were probably just babies.

Exactly. If you have to lie to make your point, your point probably isn’t a very good one. And going back to the post you’re replying to, it’s pretty ludicrous to consider all of the female heroes created prior to 1988, “tokens.” And the argument that “it still sucks to be a woman” is pretty ludicrous coming from a dude. So, I’ll ask you... does it suck to be a woman?

They could have gone with a daughter from an alternate universe that would have slipped through the cracks after Secret Wars, or from a potential future.

Yes. That would be much better if she had to exist.

[Mary Jay]

Exactly. If you have to lie to make your point, your point probably isn’t a very good one. And going back to the post you’re replying to, it’s pretty ludicrous to consider all of the female heroes created prior to 1988, “tokens.” And the argument that “it still sucks to be a woman” is pretty ludicrous coming from a dude. So, I’ll ask you... does it suck to be a woman?.

I dunno. Personally I never suffered from it Got into sciences, got my B.Sc. in biology and R.T. (registered technologist) without anyone telling me I shouldn't because I'm a girl. I do get cramps from time to time, and shaving my legs is a pain, but otherwise it's been pretty good

Just trying to lighten the mood here

[Tiamatty]

The poster gave very specific examples of things that have been written that don't make sense, and you say it's not an error but making a point? When you have to twist the truth and the facts to make a point, doesn't that make said point invalid? They mixed up the timeline in order to make a point. It was probably true that there weren't any female superheroes when Bobbie was a child, but I doubt there were many superheroes period. There weren't really superheroes when Tony, Bruce, Scott, Jean, both Hanks, Jennifer, Janet, Susan, etc... were kids either. When Bobbie was a child, Peter Parker and Johnny Storm were probably just babies.

In the '60s, boys had all sorts of superheroes to look up to. Nerds and jocks, Reluctant heroes and heroes who embraced it. Serious heroes and fun-loving heroes. Students, inventors, soldiers, lawyers - a wide spectrum of people were covered within male heroes.

Female heroes? Not so much. Almost all of them just wanted to be models or actresses, and they were all pretty heavily defined by the men around them. Where were the female scientists at the time? How many female heroes at the time had military backgrounds? The women in the '60s were, let's be completely honest here, horribly written. We can blame it on the standards of the day, but that doesn't change the fact that the standards of the day were really gross. So female characters had nowhere near the range the men had. They were absolutely Token Girls, and their main purposes were as love interests. It is undeniable that this was the case in the '60s. Things started to improve in the '70s, especially with Storm's introduction, and they've continued to improve since then, with some ups and downs along the way, but in the '60s? The way women were treated in those comics is just painful to read now.

And yeah, it is still harder to be a woman than to be a man. I shouldn't have said it sucks, that was the wrong phrasing. But it's definitely harder to be a girl than a boy. (And it's harder to be a teen girl than a teen boy.) And that was the point of the issue.




Back to the editors making mistake thing: Marvel once put out an entire whole-ass comic collecting some of the dumb mistakes they'd made. The No-Prize was actually invented as a response to readers pointing out mistakes they made, and it got a loooooooong history of use before editors pretty much dropped it. In fact, you know what? If your response to continuity errors is to bitch about them, rather than write a letter explaining how it's not an error? I have to question your fan-hood. There, I said it. True fans explain the errors, as any true fan of the old-school comics should know. Sorry, not sorry.

[DragonsChi]

In the 60's girls had comics that girls as a whole at the time were interested in. Girls had comics that where geared for them titles like Patsy Wlaker, Archie, Sheena and so on.

It should also be noted that by enlarge superhero comics as a whole were items look upon for boys under the age of ten and those boys who did not grow out of that "habit" were often times considered immature, nerds, and/or weird.

I know it's popular to pull out the violin when talking about gender inequality but I have to admit that it gets annoying to read pages of arguments that omit the fact that the popular vibe "back in the day" of men reading comics were those who weren't dating women.(IE. not getting laid) Therefore, weren't popular and uncool for anyone over the age of ten. But now that the Super Hero comic genre is "popular" it has all these purposely outrages errors that needs to be fixed. When it truth Super Hero comic companies , for the most part, did the best that the could with inclusion while also trying to appeal to the only people buying their comics. (IE. The nerdy white boys who were probably not getting laid.)

In the present Marvel is trying to push out all of these characters for more inclusion but the truth of the matter is they are doing it in a fashion that is "Cutting off their nose to spite their face" and as much as some would like to get around that it's the truth.

[KurtW95]

Every single female hero in the 60s, 70s, and 80s was written better than a vast majority of female (and male) superheroes today.

[Mary Jay]

In the '60s, boys had all sorts of superheroes to look up to. Nerds and jocks, Reluctant heroes and heroes who embraced it. Serious heroes and fun-loving heroes. Students, inventors, soldiers, lawyers - a wide spectrum of people were covered within male heroes.

Female heroes? Not so much. Almost all of them just wanted to be models or actresses, and they were all pretty heavily defined by the men around them. Where were the female scientists at the time? How many female heroes at the time had military backgrounds? The women in the '60s were, let's be completely honest here, horribly written. We can blame it on the standards of the day, but that doesn't change the fact that the standards of the day were really gross. So female characters had nowhere near the range the men had. They were absolutely Token Girls, and their main purposes were as love interests. It is undeniable that this was the case in the '60s. Things started to improve in the '70s, especially with Storm's introduction, and they've continued to improve since then, with some ups and downs along the way, but in the '60s? The way women were treated in those comics is just painful to read now.

And yeah, it is still harder to be a woman than to be a man. I shouldn't have said it sucks, that was the wrong phrasing. But it's definitely harder to be a girl than a boy. (And it's harder to be a teen girl than a teen boy.) And that was the point of the issue.

I get what you're saying, and those are facts that can hardly be disputed. However, trying to pass that message through a comic book by having Bobbi Morse say that when she was a girl, there were only male superheroes like Johnny Storm or Spider-Man, that's a straight-up lie and a twist from the timeline.

I agree with the paragraph you wrote and that I quoted. But one can not alter the time line of the Marvel Universe to make a point. That point becomes invalid because it's not based on facts (the facts being the superheroes present when Bobbi Morse was a little girl). Those are two separate things.

And you're telling me, a woman, that it's harder to be a woman? Clearly you can't know this first-hand... There is not a single thing in my entire life that would have played out differently had I been a man. I can guarantee you this.