Spider-Man comics treatment of women

[Celgress]

I do wonder if there is a degree of misogyny among those in Editorial who oversee Spidey comics, especially in the post-OMD environment. None of the female characters are treated well nor are they given agency or relevancy to the story except directly via a male character (usually Peter or another hero). MJ is the worst example with her demotion from wife/main love interest to occasional love interest who at times acts very OOC.

Oh, for the days of MJ's & Felicia's friendship/partnership and Aunt May helping out (later on). Too bad those dynamics were sacrificed on the altar of character regression for Peter.

[Snoop Dogg]

everything that ever happened to gwen was about how it would effect peter, felicia flopped for decades because of being stitched to peter, aunt may only gets attention to get reactions out of peter, betty is not a character unless she has something to do with peter, debra was driven insane on the altar of peter, mary jane was used as a pin up doll for peter and she only occasionally got an undercooked B plot because she was there, this franchise does not treat women well

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I do wonder if there is a degree of misogyny among those in Editorial who oversee Spidey comics, especially in the post-OMD environment.

Historically there has been elements of sexism and misogyny in Marvel editorial (not just Spider-Man but across all titles). And of course not just Marvel editorial but also DC (which actually seems to be worse if you consider stories about Julius Schwartz and Eddie Berganza). Marvel editors were known for meeting and holding shop-talk in strip clubs and so on. Jim Owsley who was editor of Spider-Man comics openly talked about this in his essay (https://lamerciepark.com/legacy/comics/spidey.html).

As for whether there was sexism and misogyny specifically in 2008 in Post-OMD environment...I am sure that everyone on board will say that they never intended to be so and so, such and such. Whether you as a reader can locate that in the pages of the comics itself of course is open and fair. It's possible for someone not be a sexist and misogynist in their personal life and still not write female characters very well (or for that matter write any characters well).

I personally think the Post-BND and Slott eras had some of the all-around weakest characterizations and writing of female characters, with maybe a few exceptions (Norah Winters but only when Kelly Sue DeConnick wrote her, which I think points to the problem at hand).

[WebLurker]

Superhero comics in general treat women badly. It can get better (and I think creative voices being more aware in general and the industry getting more women in creative roles helps), but it's still pretty systemic.

[Celgress]

...I personally think the Post-BND and Slott eras had some of the all-around weakest characterizations and writing of female characters, with maybe a few exceptions (Norah Winters but only when Kelly Sue DeConnick wrote her, which I think points to the problem at hand).

My thoughts exactly. Other than arguably Norah and Anna Marie, female characters were treated as an afterthought during that era but what else should we have expected given the very public "swinging single" mandate as a lead-in?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

My thoughts exactly. Other than arguably Norah and Anna Marie, female characters were treated as an afterthought during that era but what else should we have expected given the very public "swinging single" mandate as a lead-in?

The entire BND era was a total and complete misreading of the character (which explains its overall failure). They made Peter more homosocial than before, someone who socializes with male friends, and hyping up Harry as his best friend and so on, and they made the story closer to a male point-of-view and you read interviews it's pretty obvious.

Slott's run was even worse in that regard mostly because he's not able to write characters who aren't the most extreme versions of themselves.

[Spiderfan001]

everything that ever happened to gwen was about how it would effect peter, felicia flopped for decades because of being stitched to peter, aunt may only gets attention to get reactions out of peter, betty is not a character unless she has something to do with peter, debra was driven insane on the altar of peter, mary jane was used as a pin up doll for peter and she only occasionally got an undercooked B plot because she was there, this franchise does not treat women well

He was the main character.I'm not saying that this isn't true, just saying that it wasn't nearly as bad as you make it out to be.Specially in the present.
Gwen had her own character in the short span she was alive(specially for the time period).If you remember her just for death then thats on you.
Black cat got famous because of Spidey.If she wasn't part of Spidey's cast do you think she would be as popular.Again as for her current success i don't know where it started and I don't know exactly when so if you know please tell me.I'd he happy to be proven wrong.
Aunt May has other things like feast.She has more stuff than Alfred.Do you think Alfred is a bad character because he only gets attention when something happens related to batman.?
To be fair Betty is part of the supporting cast and not one of the main ones.We can't have issues dedicated to her and keep the plot going on side by side.
Again Debra's entire arc was with her obsession with Peter and Spider-man.
MJ one is straight up a lie.She had character from the start.Remember the iconic panel of her choosing to help a friend rather than take the easier route.She has had character since then.She had a solo for crying out loud.BND was a F-up but you can't judge a characters from just an era that is so out of character that they are barely recognizable and ignore decades of comics.

Also Norah,Anna,Jean de-wolf and Ashley Kafka are examples of good female supporting casts

Also are you telling me these are worse than X-men(way too many to count),Daredevil(same) and Avengers(The carol sleeping with her own son storyline was disgusting is an example).
I agree that comics in general were not good for females at certain time periods but this really has nothing to do with Spider-man.
Hell I would say Spider-man has treated women better than other lines or atleast on par.

[Spiderfan001]

The entire BND era was a total and complete misreading of the character (which explains its overall failure). They made Peter more homosocial than before, someone who socializes with male friends, and hyping up Harry as his best friend and so on, and they made the story closer to a male point-of-view and you read interviews it's pretty obvious.

Slott's run was even worse in that regard mostly because he's not able to write characters who aren't the most extreme versions of themselves.

Agreed.BND shouldn't be used to judge characters.Even if we have to acknowledge OMD I think BND is much more ignorable and unimportant.

[PCN24454]

Agreed.BND shouldn't be used to judge characters.Even if we have to acknowledge OMD I think BND is much more ignorable and unimportant.

Actually I thought Betty and Carlie were pretty good. Lily having sex with Norman was pretty ridiculous though.

[marhawkman]

Actually I thought Betty and Carlie were pretty good. Lily having sex with Norman was pretty ridiculous though.

Hmmm Does Norman have a superpower like that maybe? I mean seriously.... How many children does he have at this point?

[Spiderfan001]

Actually I thought Betty and Carlie were pretty good. Lily having sex with Norman was pretty ridiculous though.

I meant characters who were drastically changed in BND.Carlie was new and Betty wasn't changed that much.
The Norman stuff specially with Gwen is so isolated that it can easily be considered stealth retconned.A reference or 2 doesn't change that.

[Spider-Tiger]

Spider-Man comics has had a lot of melodrama but I wouldn't say bad things happen to characters compared to the awful nightmarish things that happen to characters in Daredevil and X-Men comics.

On the whole only one major supporting cast has died (Gwen). You can argue Ned Leeds is a second but I don't think he was ever a major supporting-character. The rest have come back to life at some point.

Spider-Man comics exist in a fairly sanitized corner of the Marvel Universe. If you compare Spider-Man to Daredevil or X-Men comics the stuff that the latter two deal with -- genocide, sexual assault, prostitution, human trafficking, child abuse -- aren't dealt with at all in Spider-Man comics. So it's an open question in terms of how bad things get in Spider-Man comics, really?

That's fair. It really depends how you define "bad", but even Spider-man's "bad" is pretty tame compared to other comics.

everything that ever happened to gwen was about how it would effect peter, felicia flopped for decades because of being stitched to peter, aunt may only gets attention to get reactions out of peter, betty is not a character unless she has something to do with peter, debra was driven insane on the altar of peter, mary jane was used as a pin up doll for peter and she only occasionally got an undercooked B plot because she was there, this franchise does not treat women well

Mary Jane and the amount of development that she was given in the 70s and 80s under Stern, Defalco, and Conway is probably the best argument against this. Conway actually bothered giving Mary Jane a character arc which didn't happen often with lead female characters (let alone non super-powered supporting ones) in the genre at the time. And Stern and Defalco had no intention of making MJ "the one", but still crafted a compelling backstory to flesh out her characterization. MJ's characterization was also pretty revolutionary in the 60s (even if inadvertently on Stan's part.)

There has been good representation and poor representation, but I think this is something that has been mostly writer dependent. And as others have mentioned, I'm not sure you can limit that to Spider-man comics or just comics in general.

[NC_Yankee]

Historically there has been elements of sexism and misogyny in Marvel editorial (not just Spider-Man but across all titles). And of course not just Marvel editorial but also DC (which actually seems to be worse if you consider stories about Julius Schwartz and Eddie Berganza). Marvel editors were known for meeting and holding shop-talk in strip clubs and so on. Jim Owsley who was editor of Spider-Man comics openly talked about this in his essay (https://lamerciepark.com/legacy/comics/spidey.html).

As for whether there was sexism and misogyny specifically in 2008 in Post-OMD environment...I am sure that everyone on board will say that they never intended to be so and so, such and such. Whether you as a reader can locate that in the pages of the comics itself of course is open and fair. It's possible for someone not be a sexist and misogynist in their personal life and still not write female characters very well (or for that matter write any characters well).

I personally think the Post-BND and Slott eras had some of the all-around weakest characterizations and writing of female characters, with maybe a few exceptions (Norah Winters but only when Kelly Sue DeConnick wrote her, which I think points to the problem at hand).

you
Anna Maria was done well by Slott, but that is the exception rather then the rule

[FFJamie94]

I think it mostly does depend on the writer.
I have an idea to retcon Sin's Past that includes retconning Norman to being a Clone (basically the Jackal cloned him during that 90's saga that shall not be named to get his revenge on him for killing Gwen) and the "Children" were simply just clones.
The Felicia thing was weird, Kevin Smith had a problem with Women in the early 00's.

I think a bigger problem is how editorial treat Peter. Like MJ was a problem that Marvel had because everyone liked her and even with the marriage gone, People still want her back. But that was an issue less about MJ and more about how they saw she was getting in the way of Peter.
This may sound even more sexist, but my solution would be let May die peacefully. Let her go in old age with Peter knowing he did his best for her. The problem is we've already had this story and it didn't stick.

Silk was a lowpoint and that... thing they had is part of the reason I don't really like her all that much.

[marhawkman]

I think it mostly does depend on the writer.
I have an idea to retcon Sin's Past that includes retconning Norman to being a Clone (basically the Jackal cloned him during that 90's saga that shall not be named to get his revenge on him for killing Gwen) and the "Children" were simply just clones.
The Felicia thing was weird, Kevin Smith had a problem with Women in the early 00's.

I think a bigger problem is how editorial treat Peter. Like MJ was a problem that Marvel had because everyone liked her and even with the marriage gone, People still want her back. But that was an issue less about MJ and more about how they saw she was getting in the way of Peter.
This may sound even more sexist, but my solution would be let May die peacefully. Let her go in old age with Peter knowing he did his best for her. The problem is we've already had this story and it didn't stick.

Silk was a lowpoint and that... thing they had is part of the reason I don't really like her all that much.

yeah, I suspect Silk was part of why they wanted Pete to be single. That sort of extreme flirting on a married man? nOPE! Pete would have none of it and MJ would have things to say to Cindy. Heck if it was one of the versions of MJ with powers we might get a Cindy vs MJ fight.