The strong history of sexism in the industry.

[CaptainEurope]

Interesting how you Ignored all the evidence presented in my post. And didn't even say anything about the other examples i gave.

He tends to come in with criticisms of threads he did not start.

Anyway, I think the treatment of characters depends very much on which editor and which writer is involved. My bigger issue is actually with the treatment of many female creators. I mean, I really want to like Julie Schwartz, but he very clearly was a sexist who abused his position of power towards women in the industry.

[Zelena]

Tradionally, it may be true: female characters tended to be side characters in comics, weaker than their male counterpart although you can find many counterexamples now…

But writers tend to be more creative with female characters, these are more interesting, richer.

[CaptCleghorn]

I thought I would find something different in this thread, like this:

https://www.ranker.com/list/sexist-m...hannah-collins

I'll see your ranker article and raise you a Hawkeye Initiative.

https://thehawkeyeinitiative.tumblr.com/

[hyped78]

I'll see your ranker article and raise you a Hawkeye Initiative.

https://thehawkeyeinitiative.tumblr.com/

Haha, the Wizard magazine one at the end is the "best", IMO

[WonderLight789]

You've never actually read any X-men comics, have you? The very first thing we see Jean do is picking up Beast like it was nothing and spinnning him around helplessly. That becomes a regualr thing for her. She just picks up and moves people, sometimes entire groups of people, with no effort. Meanwhile, one of her teammates is ... Angel. He has wings.


EVERYONE in Kingdom Come had lost themselves. That was the point of the series. As for "children" she doesn't HAVE any children in the series. In fact your whole description of this is so off, I'm fairly sure you didn't read it either.

I guess yoou didn't read how she was usually treated by her boyfriend.


I am pretty sure they had kids in KC. Anyway. The other part of what i said was about Justice also writen by Ross. The art is very similar pretty much the same. So i got confused.

[WonderLight789]

They are two instances...

They do not "Prove..." something's existence any more than the five "Wildstorm..." related instances that I mentioned disprove there being sexism.

Some instances of sexism, maybe, playing into things?

That is not really proof of a "Strong..." history of something.

Past that, let's take one of the examples in this post I'm quoting...

Batgirl/Batman

Batman having been on the job longer and having a far wider breadth of training could account for him being "Smarter..." just as easily as sexism, no?

It's not like there is no logical bit of storytelling that gets you to Batman regularly being smarter than Batgirl, and the only possible reason for that being the case is sexism.

So you say i didn't give examples of sexism? Interesting.

Nothing to say about the long history sexist treatment of WW? Carol?

I guess i should have included more examples since you feel my post is lacking. user hyped78 beat me to it.

https://www.ranker.com/list/sexist-m...hannah-collins


But here are more.

https://www.ranker.com/list/sexist-c...lectionId=1708

Of course i can find more. My internet is not working well. So i was in a rush to post this thread. But if you feel i need to work more on it. I will.

[CSTowle]

He tends to come in with criticisms of threads he did not start.

Anyway, I think the treatment of characters depends very much on which editor and which writer is involved. My bigger issue is actually with the treatment of many female creators. I mean, I really want to like Julie Schwartz, but he very clearly was a sexist who abused his position of power towards women in the industry.

I come in with criticism where criticism is warranted. Some people are so emotionally fragile that they have to respond to that with passive aggressiveness and petty insults. Which is fine, it's the internet and hardly my first rodeo.

But if the OP wants to talk about sexism in the portrayal of female characters or women in the industry there's a plethora of examples to choose from that are legitimate and should be discussed. To condense it down to "my favorite fictional character doesn't win enough fictional battles with other fictional characters" does the topic a disservice.

[WonderLight789]

I come in with criticism where criticism is warranted. Some people are so emotionally fragile that they have to respond to that with passive aggressiveness and petty insults. Which is fine, it's the internet and hardly my first rodeo.

But if the OP wants to talk about sexism in the portrayal of female characters or women in the industry there's a plethora of examples to choose from that are legitimate and should be discussed. To condense it down to "my favorite fictional character doesn't win enough fictional battles with other fictional characters" does the topic a disservice.

Of course. Power level is a topic. Because historically, female characters have been portrayed as weaker than the male ones. And you would be fooling yourself, if you think sexism has had nothing to do with it.


How would you call this?

https://twitter.com/hawk738/status/1584963736510423041


Also, it's pretty clear that you didn't read my whole post. Because my post goes beyond power level. Interesting how you ignored all of it.

[Shalla Bal]

Well, of course there's sexism, or at least stereotyping of women, in comic books. Creators are human beings, and for the most part have historically been men--why should they be expected to be particularly enlightened? They're getting paid to work in an industry that focuses on fiction, fantasy, etc. In general they're going to write/create women characters that conform to their own viewpoints/fantasies, whether it's 1960s women who loved shopping and were often dependent on men (original 1960s depictions of Sue, Jean, etc.) to today's women can do everything! while wearing skintight/very little clothing! mode. In other words, for any given era it's men's stereotyping of that generation's "perfect woman."

And let's face it, it's also what the comic book-reading target audience wants, and the target audience for superheroes is still largely composed of men. One need only take a look at, say, the CBR Community Cover Contest and note the frequent posting of cheesecake (putting it mildly) covers that blatantly objectify women and reduce women to sexual fantasy stereotypes.

[WonderLight789]

Well, of course there's sexism, or at least stereotyping of women, in comic books. Creators are human beings, and for the most part have historically been men--why should they be expected to be particularly enlightened? They're getting paid to work in an industry that focuses on fiction, fantasy, etc. In general they're going to write/create women characters that conform to their own viewpoints/fantasies, whether it's 1960s women who loved shopping and were often dependent on men (original 1960s depictions of Sue, Jean, etc.) to today's women can do everything! while wearing skintight/very little clothing! mode. In other words, for any given era it's men's stereotyping of that generation's "perfect woman."

And let's face it, it's also what the comic book-reading target audience wants, and the target audience for superheroes is still largely composed of men. One need only take a look at, say, the CBR Community Cover Contest and note the frequent posting of cheesecake (putting it mildly) covers that blatantly objectify women and reduce women to sexual fantasy stereotypes.

Interesting. Because some people here suggested that Sue, Jean etc were never treated in a sexist way.

[Shalla Bal]

Interesting. Because some people here suggested that Sue, Jean etc were never treated in a sexist way.

Let's call it "stereotyped."

I don't know that I expect comic book creators to be especially enlightened or progressive, especially not back then in the 1960s. Using Lee and Kirby's 1960s work as an example, remember that Lee and Kirby in the 1960s were middle-aged men who grew up in the '20s/'30s/'40s/'50s. It' s not surprising that Lee and Kirby depicted women in dialogue and art reflected L & K's upbringing, environment, etc. Sure, Sue and Jean had strong & interesting powers, but in terms of characterization they were depicted in a stereotyped way. Lee and Kirby grew up in an era when women were expected to be housewives raising the children, keeping the house clean and fetching their husbands' slippers, so of course this informed their comic book work back then. Kirby always maintained he was the one plotting the FF and other books; well, let's take a look at how he portrayed Sue or Jean: he frequently drew Sue and Jean serving meals to the boys, or Jean pushing the Prof's wheelchair. Kirby had Ben spank Sue a couple of times. He often drew Reed physically carrying Sue; likewise Scott or Warren carrying Jean. Kirby often showed Sue and Jean looking exhausted, sinking to the floor, after they used their powers. Not exactly portrayals of strong independent women.

[armlessphelan]

I feel like the New 52 incarnation of Wonder Woman (the bloodthirsty savage of Justice League) was more sexist than any of the examples I've seen in this thread. I mean, yeah, I know the writing for female characters in general sucked during the silver age. But in the golden age, Wonder Woman was a juggernaut because her creator was a man who wanted to have matriarchy run the world. And Wonder Woman being weaker than Superman means nothing because she has training in combat whereas he just has brute force.

And while female characters in the 90s went through a rough patch because the target audience was horny teenage boys, that doesn't mean that there weren't highly beloved runs. Look at Top Cow: Witchblade, Fathom, and Tomb Raider were all massively popular with girls and boys alike despite (and also because of) the skimpy clothes. And the characters were all three dimensional and badass. Hell, I've read most of the Fathom comics Aspen MLT put out and the women are often the drivers of story and never need rescued. The Tomb Raider series from Top Cow had a confident Lara who adventured around the world and never needed to be rescued. And Sara Pezzini from Witchblade is honestly an icon. Her book is the second longest running comic with a female lead, behind only Wonder Woman.

Times change, and the attitudes around them change. I LOVED the first Ms. Marvel run where Carol was a feminist magazine editor. But I absolutely loathed the Brian Reed run because Carol spent most of it being completely unlikable. But I was introduced to the character in the Kelly Sue DeConnick run and fell in love with her. She made Carol a feminist icon again, and she stayed that way. And the rape has never been brought up since Claremont addressed it in a POWERFUL X-Men annual where she got to tell off the Avengers for what happened to her.

It just seems disingenuous to complain about sexist writing that occurred 60+ years ago and ignore how much progress that has been made since. And, yeah, Elseworlds stories are not bound to the rules of regular canon. Red Son had Superman raised as a weapon of the Soviet Union: does that make it insulting to Superman's legacy? It's interesting to see different interpretations of characters.

[WonderLight789]

I feel like the New 52 incarnation of Wonder Woman (the bloodthirsty savage of Justice League) was more sexist than any of the examples I've seen in this thread. I mean, yeah, I know the writing for female characters in general sucked during the silver age. But in the golden age, Wonder Woman was a juggernaut because her creator was a man who wanted to have matriarchy run the world. And Wonder Woman being weaker than Superman means nothing because she has training in combat whereas he just has brute force.

And while female characters in the 90s went through a rough patch because the target audience was horny teenage boys, that doesn't mean that there weren't highly beloved runs. Look at Top Cow: Witchblade, Fathom, and Tomb Raider were all massively popular with girls and boys alike despite (and also because of) the skimpy clothes. And the characters were all three dimensional and badass. Hell, I've read most of the Fathom comics Aspen MLT put out and the women are often the drivers of story and never need rescued. The Tomb Raider series from Top Cow had a confident Lara who adventured around the world and never needed to be rescued. And Sara Pezzini from Witchblade is honestly an icon. Her book is the second longest running comic with a female lead, behind only Wonder Woman.

Times change, and the attitudes around them change. I LOVED the first Ms. Marvel run where Carol was a feminist magazine editor. But I absolutely loathed the Brian Reed run because Carol spent most of it being completely unlikable. But I was introduced to the character in the Kelly Sue DeConnick run and fell in love with her. She made Carol a feminist icon again, and she stayed that way. And the rape has never been brought up since Claremont addressed it in a POWERFUL X-Men annual where she got to tell off the Avengers for what happened to her.

It just seems disingenuous to complain about sexist writing that occurred 60+ years ago and ignore how much progress that has been made since. And, yeah, Elseworlds stories are not bound to the rules of regular canon. Red Son had Superman raised as a weapon of the Soviet Union: does that make it insulting to Superman's legacy? It's interesting to see different interpretations of characters.

Wonder Woman's skills do not save her from sexist treatment. As her battles against Superman have mostly been one sided in Superman's favor. What's the use of hyping one of her strong areas, if when the push comes to shove it never really matters and never makes any difference? That is the typical empty lipserive scenario that involves WW all the time. You need to look carefully at things. Beyond ambiguous compliments. You think it is not insulting for WW's legacy to be treated as fodder next to superman? Or to have her portrayed as a barbarian? The rapist amazons? Daddy Zeus?

[CSTowle]

I've never been a fan of Wonder Woman because I find the character to be boring (in fairness, most of the "big 7" of the OG Justice League tend to be pretty boring to me most of the time). If you upped her powers to have her easily slapping around Superman, Lobo, Captain Marvel, and the entire GL Corps but kept everything else exactly the same I'd still have almost zero interest (writer/artist aside) in buying her book.

There are dozens of more interesting (to me, if that needs to be said) DC female characters, including half a dozen or so Bat-women, all far below her power level, but whose stories I would be more likely to pick up and read because of their histories (and the Bat-verse has a lot of great villains, I'd put their D-tier level villains above WW's A-tier in terms of interest).

I don't think power level has anything to do with sexism. I don't think DC wants anyone who has a spotlight to clearly be better than Superman and Batman, who are their icons. Wonder Woman is a lesser icon, as is Aquaman/Flash/Green Lantern/etc. I don't expect any of them to clearly outshine (either through power level or otherwise) those two because they want to protect the faces of the franchise. I'm not a fan of the character in the DC movie universe, but Harley Quinn is at least a more complicated and interesting character and often is overpowered or has setbacks. I think she's been handled better than WW, and (on the topic of the thread) has moved on from emotional/romantic attachment being the core of her character where we saw in '84 what even a modern mega-corporation with a female director no less thinks of Wonder Woman.

I'm sure that's sad for WW fans, and I'd say that's definitely an example of sexism and diminishment of her potential that you should be upset about. For me it just reinforces my disinterest in the character, and has me questioning who's looking out for the perception of even their lesser icons because (whatever else you might say about the DC cinematic universe) people seem to be really on-board with Gal Gadot and Jason Mamoa in their respective roles despite the spotty track record in terms of quality.

[JackDaw]

He tends to come in with criticisms of threads he did not start.

Anyway, I think the treatment of characters depends very much on which editor and which writer is involved. My bigger issue is actually with the treatment of many female creators. I mean, I really want to like Julie Schwartz, but he very clearly was a sexist who abused his position of power towards women in the industry.

That's a good point. (That treatment of the real women in the industry is much important than portrayal of fictitious characters.)

Sorting things out in the real world would probably result in more positive portrayals in the comics anyhow.

One thing I'm surprised there hasn't been more change in the comics themselves: costumes.