Wonder Woman Controversial Opinions Part 2

[Perseus]

And how exactly does Diana represent the experience of average women?

She was raised on a mythical island paradise where she's a princess, taught from birth to be both a great warrior and ruler, and is blessed by virtually a whole pantheon of gods.

There's nothing there a normal person can relate to. Diana is not supposed to be an Everyman archetype, she's not "Patty Parker" here. She's supposed to be aspirational, not relatable. Trying to make her "like us" just rips all the whimsical, fantastical, and fun out of her and her world. We connect to Diana because of her emotional bonds and responses, not because she has life experiences we can directly relate to. And much more importantly, we're meant to look at her life and her world and say "That's a better place than where I come from, and she's a better person than I am, and I can escape into this better world and get away from mundane reality." It's raw escapism, you're not supposed to relate to raw escapism.

And Diana has been a queer icon for decades, so DC saying she's bi or gay or whatever, and then maybe even doing something with that, is just them catching up to the rest of us. I'm still team Steve, but Diana being bi or whatever? That's not a threat to anyone. That's not taking away from her, or anyone else. And if most guys wish they were 6'2" warriors who got tons of ass, well doesn't that also apply to guys and girls who aren't straight? Do they not deserve their own escapism too?

This actually a very good explanation as to why more down to earth stories just do not work 100% of the time with her. Usually those more "human" stories take form in her side characters or even villains and its Diana that tries to show them a better way, ultimately making it their choice. I'm reminded of the Finch run where the first story was about Diana struggling to juggle all her duties. But, she's wonder woman, why can't she. People write stories about heroes speeding off to do multiple things in the blink of an eye, how does that not extend to Diana.

I do think you can relate to raw escapism however. Just depends on where Diana is escaping to, that you want to follow. Take part of her origin, imagine leaving your home that you have known for years to a new place that you really have only heard of. That's pretty relatable.

[Robanker]

Yea I don't see how Diana being with Steve currently means that she can't be good Bi representation. I feel like a lot of people see Bi individuals who have an opposite sex partner as not being "truly" queer, which is pretty harmful imo.

For my part, my criticism of it is more that she's being used as their LGTBQ+ icon but has only dated the opposite sex for 80 years. At most, she's only ever been with the same sex in elseworlds, and some (Bombshells) showcase nearly everyone being bi or gay, so it doesn't really conflate with her being an icon more than, say, Lois Lane who is with Supergirl in that universe. I like her with Steve (sometimes), but if they break up? She probably should finally be with a woman because DC keeps trying to pass her off on "trust us, it happened off panel." That's not real representation. I'm not saying she has to date a woman, but if they don't want to really deal with it more, then perhaps they need to focus on another character as they did with Batwoman getting her own show. That does a lot more for LGBTQ+ representation than "Wonder Woman is totally bi, she even dated some character for a while that has literally 0 panels of screen time."

I agree, the conceit that a character needs to date the same sex at least once in fiction to "prove" their orientation is not good, but it does become concerning when that history extends 80 years and never once has she swayed from the opposite sex as her partners excluding a universe where traditionally heterosexual characters are also in same-sex relationships. I'm not saying she even needs them to be her main love interest, but I don't even see her flirt or show much interest in women when she's single, unless my memory is hazy. There always seems to be some line of dialogue almost designed to say "Di and I are just friends" when she has a significant relationship with a female character. Again, it was just that one time early in Rucka's run where some Amazons mention she's had relationships on the island and she later name drops another to Steve, though it's someone I don't believe was ever even on-panel. She seemingly never shows interest in women. It's a bit mystifying.

Outside Steve and Clark/Bruce, she has no consistent love interests. They're usually someone the current writer makes up and disappears when that writer leaves the book, or not long after in any case. If that's to be the case and Steve is out of the picture, I see no reason why Diana can't be shown to be more open to women if not outright date one. I really want to stress I'm not saying she needs to date anyone to prove it, but it seems disingenuous if for some reason it once again never comes up or gets developed now that DC is supposedly not dancing around it as they used to.

[Ascended]

In my own head, Diana had girlfriends on the Island long before meeting Steve (and Rucka brought us that in Rebirth). And I'm very much in support of her and Clark having a brief fling early in their careers too. And I'd support Diana dating a woman or three once she's hit Man's World.

But in my head, Steve is the endgame for Diana just like Lois is for Clark.

Now, there is a viable complaint about Diana being bi, especially in a continuity where Steve is set up as her main love interest. It's too easy for DC to give Diana's orientation empty lip service without ever actually exploring or using it. And that's largely what we've seen since Rucka and Rebirth made her being bisexual official. Diana's bi, but you'd never know it. It's shadow representation, and that's bullsh*t. But just because DC still lacks the balls to handle this right doesn't mean the efforts should stop. They'll catch up to the rest of us eventually.

[Ascended]

I do think you can relate to raw escapism however. Just depends on where Diana is escaping to, that you want to follow. Take part of her origin, imagine leaving your home that you have known for years to a new place that you really have only heard of. That's pretty relatable.

Exactly; and that's allegory. Good escapism has roots in the real world, so you can look at these fantastical elements in the story and understand how they fit together in a way that generates a emotional response. But you don't have to be able to directly relate to the exact situation.

So, like, Peter Parker is relatable right? You might get a Spider-Man story where he struggles to pay the rent. That's something most of us have experienced at some point, and we remember that sensation and translate it directly to Peter's story. We emphasize with his plight because we've been in the exact situation.

A Superman story on the other hand, might have Clark discover that the Fortress of Solitude is built on a fault line and the whole building is in danger of dropping into the center of the earth. None of us live in an alien mansion in a frozen wasteland; we can't relate to that. But we can relate to the idea of losing our home. It's indirectly relatable, so we get the same emotional response from this story as we do from the story about Spider-Man struggling to pay the rent. But the "how" and "why" and "what" of it all are well beyond human norms. Peter's tale is something any one of us could, and likely have, directly experienced. Clark's story is something un-earthly and fantastical that we can't say we've ever experienced firsthand, but the emotional situation is something we can relate to. We can't relate to our zoo of endangered alien animals falling to their deaths in the earth's core as our alien mansion collapses, but we can understand the stress and worry of having to re-home a cat or dog.

[SiegePerilous02]

That is fair. I guess there is just a subset of the fandom that wants to have the relationship with Steve to just end and then have her date exclusively women. But, she isn't Batman in that way, to me she's more like Superman. She isn't a woman that would have multiple love interests or who would jump from one relationship to another. Steve and Diana should be an idealized relationship.

But before Superman settled down with Lois, and even though she was always the main love interest, he still had Lana, Lori, Lyla Lerrol, etc.

I think maybe the setup with Steve could be similar to the classic dynamic of Clark/Lois: there is teasing and he is likely the endgame, but she can have flings with other men and women in the interim. Steve can too.

There always seems to be some line of dialogue almost designed to say "Di and I are just friends" when she has a significant relationship with a female character. Again, it was just that one time early in Rucka's run where some Amazons mention she's had relationships on the island and she later name drops another to Steve, though it's someone I don't believe was ever even on-panel.

That was Kasia, and she was actually on a couple pages in the first chapter of Year One.

Which still isn't much, but at least we have a name and a face and at least one conversation between them. I'd actually really like Steve and Kasia to interact and be friends.

[AmiMizuno]

I mean her being with Steve was in long hiatus. Why can't she be with him? I mean it was never part of her being with women. Now being bi is the issue. It at times feels like where do you take that.

[VonHammersmark]

I would argue that a character can’t be “aspirational” without being relatable first

Even in the old greek and roman myths, the Gods embody aspects of the human experience both good and bad, the poets made them in our image which is arguably why they have such enduring appeal. Their stories speak to us like frankly very few Wonder Woman comics do - often because she’s shackled to an ideology that’s divorced from reality plain and simple

And while you can certainly relate to a character with a different sexual orientation, it does put more distance between the character and you

[Agent Z]

That is fair. I guess there is just a subset of the fandom that wants to have the relationship with Steve to just end and then have her date exclusively women. But, she isn't Batman in that way, to me she's more like Superman. She isn't a woman that would have multiple love interests or who would jump from one relationship to another. Steve and Diana should be an idealized relationship.

Even Superman has had more than one love interest, it's just that Lois is the most famous.

I would argue that a character can’t be “aspirational” without being relatable first

Even in the old greek and roman myths, the Gods embody aspects of the human experience both good and bad, the poets made them in our image which is arguably why they have such enduring appeal. Their stories speak to us like frankly very few Wonder Woman comics do - often because she’s shackled to an ideology that’s divorced from reality plain and simple

And while you can certainly relate to a character with a different sexual orientation, it does put more distance between the character and you

Again, bisexual and lesbian women exist in real life. There are plenty of people in the real world who can relate to Diana for one reason or another.

And frankly, if the popularity of characters like Batman, Hannibal Lecter, Freddie Kreuger and Superman is any indication, characters do not need to be relatable to win over audiences. If most people can't relate to a bisexual Diana (which is questionable anyway), it doesn't mean she won't be popular.

[wonder39]

I dislike nowadays that Wonder Woman has to talk to turn on the lasso. I prefer when the lasso is touched by whoever it is, it glows and activated automatically.

I miss the days when it glowed constantly... but I'm all ol'skool...lol

[SiegePerilous02]

I would argue that a character can’t be “aspirational” without being relatable first

Even in the old greek and roman myths, the Gods embody aspects of the human experience both good and bad, the poets made them in our image which is arguably why they have such enduring appeal. Their stories speak to us like frankly very few Wonder Woman comics do - often because she’s shackled to an ideology that’s divorced from reality plain and simple

And while you can certainly relate to a character with a different sexual orientation, it does put more distance between the character and you

People can find ways to relate to characters of the opposite sex, let alone sexual orientation. Diana has men who can relate to at least some aspects of her, gay or straight. Phil Jimenez in at least one interview said he can relate to how she was raised by a single mom. Superman and Batman's fandoms also have female fans in it, who can relate to aspects of those two characters (depending on the version). People relate to different things.

What is this ideology she's shackled to that is divorced from reality? she really is no more divorced from reality than the other two, or even Spider-Man.

[lotchj]

I mean her being with Steve was in long hiatus. Why can't she be with him? I mean it was never part of her being with women. Now being bi is the issue. It at times feels like where do you take that.

Why can't WW be with Steve?? I would prefer Dc develop their relationship and leave no question that Steve is WW one and only love!! I have no interested in seeing the whole Bi thing being developed or be a focus!!

[Robanker]

But before Superman settled down with Lois, and even though she was always the main love interest, he still had Lana, Lori, Lyla Lerrol, etc.

I think maybe the setup with Steve could be similar to the classic dynamic of Clark/Lois: there is teasing and he is likely the endgame, but she can have flings with other men and women in the interim. Steve can too.



That was Kasia, and she was actually on a couple pages in the first chapter of Year One.

Which still isn't much, but at least we have a name and a face and at least one conversation between them. I'd actually really like Steve and Kasia to interact and be friends.

I blinked and missed her, but thank you. I must have forgotten.

[Ascended]

I would argue that a character can’t be “aspirational” without being relatable first

That's where the allegory and supporting cast come in.

And while you can certainly relate to a character with a different sexual orientation, it does put more distance between the character and you

I'm pretty sure if Diana liked girls, that'd *close* some of the distance between us. I like girls, if Diana did too then that would be just about the first thing we have in common.

[Robanker]

I would argue that a character can’t be “aspirational” without being relatable first

Even in the old greek and roman myths, the Gods embody aspects of the human experience both good and bad, the poets made them in our image which is arguably why they have such enduring appeal. Their stories speak to us like frankly very few Wonder Woman comics do - often because she’s shackled to an ideology that’s divorced from reality plain and simple

And while you can certainly relate to a character with a different sexual orientation, it does put more distance between the character and you

I'm a straight white male and I find Diana plenty relatable. I'm not an alien and I find Superman plenty relatable. I'm not a black Olympian and educator and I think Black Lightning is one of DC's best role models and someone I can relate to quite a bit. They're people. That's enough to find some connection. Todd Rice is a gay superhero with dark powers and his father's the golden age Green Lantern. I have no idea what that's like, but having a schism with your parent that you have to overcome to become close? That's pretty common. It doesn't have to be one-to-one so long as you're able to feel empathy and use that to relate.

I will never understand the narrow mindset of others that look at "different nationality/ethnicity/orientation/alien" in comics and find they can't relate when the characters are being written as human as anyone else. It shows an inability to look at the character as a person before looking at their circumstances.

They haven't been self-inserts since the bronze age when writing started becoming more sophisticated and character started coming more to the forefront (it was there before, but not as pronounced). You're not supposed to be Superman, Batman or Wonder Woman. You're following their adventures.

[VonHammersmark]

I didn’t say you can’t relate to characters of a different sex and/or sexual orientation, let alone a different ethnicity which I think is another matter. Race is not integral to our sense of self. Well, for most of us

You can...but most people certainly relate more easily to characters that reflect their values, experiences and fantasies. The more distance there is between the character and you, the less relatable they are and Wonder Woman is not the most relatable character to begin with. Making her queer would only make her even more removed from most of us, and for what purpose?