How can sexism in WW be faced?

[Alpha]

And again, Diana's power levels haven't actually changed much. Flash is all about speed and that's an area where he we always be amping up. The durability of Green Lantern constructs changes from story to story. Who the hell knows how strong Shazam is? Aquaman gets some bones thrown at him from time to time.

It seems like to you Diana has to clearly overpower everyone except Superman, but there's nothing sexist about this not being the case. People can just disagree with you bro. It doesn't mean women can't be strong or that they can't challenge male characters.

There is actual sexism that affects Wonder Woman, this isn't an example of that.

[Agent Z]

To be clear, I believe one of the arguments here is that many of the complaints OP brought up aren't a case of sexism.

Good examples of how DC been sexist towards Wonder Woman is how they have tried to make her barbaric and added a sword and shield to most of her modern depictions. This is both a case of DC being insecure about female superheroes, as well as not believing in the themes of the WW franchise.

That isn't sexist. It doesn't even mean they are insecure about female superheroes (if that were the case, where are Supergirl, Black Canary, Jessica Cruz and Naomi's swords?).

The barbarian take on Wonder Woman is simply a case of bad writing. It is not an example of sexism. It's certainly far less of an example of such than frequently portraying her as being weaker or less competent than her male peers.

[John Venus]

That isn't sexist. It doesn't even mean they are insecure about female superheroes (if that were the case, where are Supergirl, Black Canary, Jessica Cruz and Naomi's swords?).

The barbarian take on Wonder Woman is simply a case of bad writing. It is not an example of sexism. It's certainly far less of an example of such than frequently portraying her as being weaker or less competent than her male peers.

Why can't it be both?

[Agent Z]

Why can't it be both?

For it to be sexist writing, it would have to perpetuate some kind of sexist stereotype about women.

[Alpha]

That isn't sexist. It doesn't even mean they are insecure about female superheroes (if that were the case, where are Supergirl, Black Canary, Jessica Cruz and Naomi's swords?).

The barbarian take on Wonder Woman is simply a case of bad writing. It is not an example of sexism. It's certainly far less of an example of such than frequently portraying her as being weaker or less competent than her male peers.

Naomi, Jessica Cruz and Black Canary aren't strength based characters on the level of Superman. Supergirl is tied to Superman himself and that is supposed to be enough for her to be a threat (though most of the time she is weaker than him).

The reason why Wonder Woman has been written like a barbarian and uses a sword is because those things are seen as threatening. A woman with a sword is much more imposing than one without a sword.

What makes this sexist is that Diana was already strong before she had a sword. Superman is strong enough without a sword, why did DC think Diana needed a sword in order to be imposing?

[Perseus]

Naomi, Jessica Cruz and Black Canary aren't strength based characters on the level of Superman. Supergirl is tied to Superman himself and that is supposed to be enough for her to be a threat (though most of the time she is weaker than him).

The reason why Wonder Woman has been written like a barbarian and uses a sword is because those things are seen as threatening. A woman with a sword is much more imposing than one without a sword.

What makes this sexist is that Diana was already strong before she had a sword. Superman is strong enough without a sword, why did DC think Diana needed a sword in order to be imposing?

This means nothing, you can make the same argument for a man with a sword.

This isn't just sexism or bad writing, its both. There is this underlying question of why Diana needs a sword in the first place but she's been seen using them since the golden age. My problem is not that she uses them, though it is more then she honestly needs to and there isn't a strong justification for it outside of "she's a warrior, that's what they do", but that she's some how worse with a sword and shield. Diana with weaponry should be 100 times more dangerous then without and yet she's portrayed as clumsy and ineffective. How many times has she "lost" her sword or had it knocked out of her hand? how many times has she still been hit by an attack she could clearly block but just didn't bring the shield up in time? or that stupid "should have gone for the head" moment in Dcceased. Let Diana use the dang sword and shield from time to time, but it has to mean something to the story not just because.

Lets not forget the "I am willing to kill, only if absolutely necessary and there are no other options/some monsters do need to die" part of her morality comes into play and she's about to do just that only to have Clark stop her just to play the moral high ground in the worse situations, which also happened in DCceased.

[Alpha]

This means nothing, you can make the same argument for a man with a sword.

If Shazam starts carrying around a lightning shaped sword, I can guarantee you that it means DC thinks he can't be imposing enough without it. The thing is though, DC is much more willing to make Shazam as strong as Superman than they are with Wonder Woman.

But if you want an example of DC trying to make a male hero seem more imposing, remember Aquaman and his fish hook. DC no longer thinks Aquaman needs it, but for some reason they think Wonder Woman needs a sword in irder to be imposing.

This isn't just sexism or bad writing, its both. There is this underlying question of why Diana needs a sword in the first place but she's been seen using them since the golden age.

Diana used a sword when it was part of the challenge (like in the contest vs Nubia) not because she needed a sword. Wonder Woman never carried around a sword until recentl

[John Venus]

The first Wonder Woman film not being a good movie is a very hot take. WB not creating a cinematic WW that ALL WW fandom could get behind (which will never happen anyway) does not take away from the fact that WW was a critically acclaimed hit that even landed on the annual list of best ten films of the year that the American Film Institute released in 2017 (WW was the only superhero film that year to land on the list). If people were so "desperate for a female led superhero movie," Captain Marvel, released by Marvel Studios at the height of their can't-do-wrong critical peak, would have gotten reviews as glowing as the ones Wonder Woman got; it did not. And CM's middling reviews led to Marvel getting rid of the directors when it was time for the sequel, replacing them with Nia Dacosta.


Anyway, I am on the camp that wants Diana to continue using the sword and shield, but only in situations that using them might be more effective or required.
I DON'T want her to have them on her at all times or to have her wielding it on the covers every month. I also want the writers to use the lasso in creative ways.
I think that yes, Diana has been underpowered and undermined for far too long (the recent story in which she joined forces with Batman to investigate the death of an Irish deity made me cringe. Diana is smart, sharp, and clever enough not to need Batman to do her detective work for her).

I also want the Daddy Zeus thing to go away. Instead, it should be her Olympus Aunties who bestow her with her powers. And no, not even Hermes should be involved.
I also want the book to put a moratorium on any Amnesiac Amazon and/or Depowering Diana stories for the next 20 years.

That's not even a mildly hot take. A lot of people came out of the movies thinking Diana is some boy crazy heroine who gave up everything for a man. Even yesterday, I've had to explain to them that that's not what the character is about. Meanwhile a lot of dudes seem think Diana's only value is in how many heads she can chop off. Step outside of that fandom bubble to see what people had to say about the movies.

I credit the movie, especially Patty for capturing Diana's curiosity, optimism and love for others but I cringe every time I watch an action scene. The CGI is terrible. David Thewlis over acting as Ares was unbearable. I nearly turned off the tv when I was watching it. Gal is fine when she is portraying the happy cheerful Diana but absolutely unconvincing in any scene where she has to be sad, dramatic or even angry.

As tempting as it is to defend Captain Marvel's success. I'm not going to take the bait as that's unproductive and we are better off with CM and WW having solo franchises. If you want to defend the WW movies, defend it on it's own merits and in comparison with other WW media not by tearing down another heroine.

[WonderLight789]

And again, Diana's power levels haven't actually changed much. Flash is all about speed and that's an area where he we always be amping up. The durability of Green Lantern constructs changes from story to story. Who the hell knows how strong Shazam is? Aquaman gets some bones thrown at him from time to time.

It seems like to you Diana has to clearly overpower everyone except Superman, but there's nothing sexist about this not being the case. People can just disagree with you bro. It doesn't mean women can't be strong or that they can't challenge male characters.

There is actual sexism that affects Wonder Woman, this isn't an example of that.

Yes they have. And based on actual feats. Currently Aquaman has bettewr strength feats than WW from the last 10 years. Without scaling WW barely has any impressive feats nowadays.

[WonderLight789]

That isn't sexist. It doesn't even mean they are insecure about female superheroes (if that were the case, where are Supergirl, Black Canary, Jessica Cruz and Naomi's swords?).

The barbarian take on Wonder Woman is simply a case of bad writing. It is not an example of sexism. It's certainly far less of an example of such than frequently portraying her as being weaker or less competent than her male peers.

Supergirl and Jessica are 2 characters that have performed better feats than current WW. And they more likely than not, get to have that thanks to being characters that come from male counterparts. Aka Superman and the male Green Lanterns. So they sort of get a benefit from that. Even Aquaman has had better strength feats than WW these past years.

[WonderLight789]

If Shazam starts carrying around a lightning shaped sword, I can guarantee you that it means DC thinks he can't be imposing enough without it. The thing is though, DC is much more willing to make Shazam as strong as Superman than they are with Wonder Woman.

But if you want an example of DC trying to make a male hero seem more imposing, remember Aquaman and his fish hook. DC no longer thinks Aquaman needs it, but for some reason they think Wonder Woman needs a sword in irder to be imposing.


Diana used a sword when it was part of the challenge (like in the contest vs Nubia) not because she needed a sword. Wonder Woman never carried around a sword until recentl

That is sexism at its best.

[I'm a Fish]

That's not even a mildly hot take. A lot of people came out of the movies thinking Diana is some boy crazy heroine who gave up everything for a man. Even yesterday, I've had to explain to them that that's not what the character is about. Meanwhile a lot of dudes seem think Diana's only value is in how many heads she can chop off. Step outside of that fandom bubble to see what people had to say about the movies.

I credit the movie, especially Patty for capturing Diana's curiosity, optimism and love for others but I cringe every time I watch an action scene. The CGI is terrible. David Thewlis over acting as Ares was unbearable. I nearly turned off the tv when I was watching it. Gal is fine when she is portraying the happy cheerful Diana but absolutely unconvincing in any scene where she has to be sad, dramatic or even angry.

As tempting as it is to defend Captain Marvel's success. I'm not going to take the bait as that's unproductive and we are better off with CM and WW having solo franchises. If you want to defend the WW movies, defend it on it's own merits and in comparison with other WW media not by tearing down another heroine.

Lol, but their not wrong if we’re talking about Golden Age Diana.

[Agent Z]

That's not even a mildly hot take. A lot of people came out of the movies thinking Diana is some boy crazy heroine who gave up everything for a man. Even yesterday, I've had to explain to them that that's not what the character is about.

By a lot, do you mean a vocal minority that hated the film or just misunderstood it? Because every movie, no matter how well enjoyed, has to deal with people like this. If you were to ask certain people, Captain Marvel was a boring movie about a murderous, invincible sociopath and Disney actually the box office numbers.

Meanwhile a lot of dudes seem think Diana's only value is in how many heads she can chop off.

See above.

Step outside of that fandom bubble to see what people had to say about the movies.

I have. Most people think it's great, okay at worst. That some people disliked it or others misunderstood what was actually shown on screen does not make it a bad movie, let alone a bad WW interpretation.

[Agent Z]

Naomi, Jessica Cruz and Black Canary aren't strength based characters on the level of Superman.

Naomi is.

Supergirl is tied to Superman himself and that is supposed to be enough for her to be a threat (though most of the time she is weaker than him).

Again, if the existence of the sword (which she has used since the Perez run) was about them being insecure about female superheroes, they would have given swords to all their female heroes. The more likely explanation is that Diana was given a sword is that as a character based in Greek mythology it made sense. You're free to dislike it but accusing DC of being insecure about female superheroes is inaccurate given the evidence.

[Alpha]

Again, if the existence of the sword (which she has used since the Perez run) was about them being insecure about female superheroes, they would have given swords to all their female heroes. The more likely explanation is that Diana was given a sword is that as a character based in Greek mythology it made sense. You're free to dislike it but accusing DC of being insecure about female superheroes is inaccurate given the evidence.

They aren't necessarily insecure about all female superheroes, but the reason why they gave Wonder Woman a sword is definitely because they thought that she didn't seem imposing enough, and the reason why they thought that was because she is a woman. Hercules is from greek mythology, how often does he carry around a sword?