New 52 WonderWoman is an attempt to make Diana more appealing to a male audience? Agree or disagree?

[Agent Z]

Silvanus post got me thinking. Well my mind rambling actually. Bear in mind with me that'l I'm throwing some thoughts into the air to see if they make sense in a good way, even if in a stupid = funny way



So Hippolyta and Zeus. Since the Gods in the book are just listening to prayers and not requests, what if that was the reason Hippolyta went to Zeus? If she couldn't have a child on her own, what if she therefor went to the god (who once upon a time impregnated a woman while being a swan... Figure's he'd get the job done eh?) that could give her such and then just be done with it? He'd come into her life, inside her and then disappear as the demi-god kid is on it's way.

Any other God would'v asked for something in return (which I think the book has made a point about, it not being wise to ask a favor from a God), Zeus is just one to leave. So basically he wouldn't be using her, she'd be using him in a (which is her) way. To add (a point) to this Hippolyta turns into clay (I have no theories on that). What for? Perhaps because to add to the point that: "clay or not, Hippolyta is still Diana's mother.". A point of sorts, that they're a mother and daughter no matter what --if Diana had a father of sorts or not. Something I think has been missing when people have discussed Diana's origin, that Hippolyta is her mother.

On reasons why Amazons (besides "Why not?") hate men. It's been called "old ways" (the myth) in WW#31, of which Diana also says "It's time to admit we're not perfect.". Which perhaps could be a key/clue Perhaps a great part why they'd dislike men is because men aren't perfect? Since perfection is something that often seems expected from women?

Amazons is just a good example of this, described as a people and a place where everyone pretty much is perfect. All women, perfect warriors, perfect scientists (with all the high tech stuff they're supposed to have), perfect in how they love and inspire everyone to do the same and so on. If they're just a bit human then that'd quite a lot to live up to. In real life having both children and a career can be tough enough for women to write books about.

Even if my post sounds a bit silly. Please do have a crack at it! I'd love to hear your thoughts on mine!

I'd prefer the idea that Hippolyta simply prayed for a child and had no desire whatsoever to sleep with Zeus knowing fully well what happened to women who did.

I'm not sure I like that explanation for the Amazons, as I prefer the Perez origin were they did start out as liking men but were burned by misogynistic persecution as that makes them more sympathetic, but that's just me. And again the Amazons have not been portrayed as perfect since Perez, but people who haven't read the book seem to describe them that way a lot. This results in writers trying to overcompensate with stories like Amazons Attack. "Why not?" seems rather simplistic and kind of thoughtless when you take into account the history of women as less equal citizens throughout history.

Please don't get the idea that I'm attacking you, because I'm not. I understand you like this run and I myself do to some extent. But I just feel there are things that need to be looked at more critically in it.

[borntohula]

analyse away i only wrote "why not?" as a joke, no worries

also, perhaps making a baby in clay inspired her to have one. even the cost. still having diana sort of made thanks to clay.

the expectations on women can be quite mysgynoistic. i think it could be a cool angle/twist. including cutting away the biggest imperfection, MEN

[Agent Z]

analyse away i only wrote "why not?" as a joke, no worries

also, perhaps making a baby in clay inspired her to have one. even the cost. still having diana sort of made thanks to clay.

the expectations on women can be quite mysgynoistic. i think it could be a cool angle/twist. including cutting away the biggest imperfection, MEN

Ah, okay then, sorry I took it too seriously. Thanks for the reply. I really do think this is a good debate.

[Silvanus]

I suppose that makes sense. Really the reason I ask is, as I mentioned before, Hippolyta's description of the encounter kind of felt like an example of an unreliable narrator making Zeus seem better than he was supposed to be, or 'romanticizing' him as you put it. My issue isn't even that Hippolyta and the Amazons are portrayed negatively but that the way they are portrayed just seems so pointless. I mean the Perez run at least took sometime to explore the Amazons' reasons for why they hated men without treating their misandry as a good thing. But Azzarello is the writer of this book and if he doesn't want to do that then I can't really fault him for it. Maybe somewhere along the road another writer can do that.

I agree with you, to an extent.

My agreement comes with a couple of reservations, of course. First, personally, I think Azz was right not to get into the Amazons' motives in issue 7 itself, or even during the many issues before the Amazons' return; the news was supposed to hit Diana (and us) like a ton of bricks, as part of deconstructing her world, and mitigating it by getting into extenuating factors would probably have worked against that purpose. Secondly, it seems pretty much self-evident why a nation of women warriors would have felt like men were making war on them and they needed to make war in response; judging by the attitudes of the male writers who wrote about the legendary Amazons, men probably saw them as monstrous and actually were making war on them, so they might have seen anything they did to the collective Nation of Men as retaliatory and justified acts of war.

But still--and here comes my agreement--it would have been nice to have at least a line or two in issue 30 or later. perhaps when the disgruntled Amazons were meeting around a fire; for example, Aleka or someone could have said that there ware reasons for the "old ways" that Diana sneered at, and that without taking a warlike stance against men the Amazons would have been wiped out by their hostile male neighbors. That, I think, could have just taken a line or two, and it could still happen, most likely in Secret Origins; but the more substantial piece, which might take more space and seems a little less likely now, would have been an explanation of why they held onto the old ways so long (for example, perhaps because of the influence of Strife or another goddess. I think they may have obliquely hinted at Strife's complicity a couple of times now, but I might be squinting a little to see those hints.)

For me, the point is to let Diana be the active hero who begins the epic work of beginning of converting these Amazons, who are like the Amazons of legend, into peaceful and enlightened Amazons like Marston's, rather than being the relatively passive recipient of pre-established Marstonian Amazon enlightenment. I really like how the Zeka and Amazon plots converge on this point; it's by committing the Amazons to protect Zeke that she begins to teach them to value even male lives.

[Agent Z]

I agree with you, to an extent.

My agreement comes with a couple of reservations, of course. First, personally, I think Azz was right not to get into the Amazons' motives in issue 7 itself, or even during the many issues before the Amazons' return; the news was supposed to hit Diana (and us) like a ton of bricks, as part of deconstructing her world, and mitigating it by getting into extenuating factors would probably have worked against that purpose. Secondly, it seems pretty much self-evident why a nation of women warriors would have felt like men were making war on them and they needed to make war in response; judging by the attitudes of the male writers who wrote about the legendary Amazons, men probably saw them as monstrous and actually were making war on them, so they might have seen anything they did to the collective Nation of Men as retaliatory and justified acts of war.

But still--and here comes my agreement--it would have been nice to have at least a line or two in issue 30 or later. perhaps when the disgruntled Amazons were meeting around a fire; for example, Aleka or someone could have said that there ware reasons for the "old ways" that Diana sneered at, and that without taking a warlike stance against men the Amazons would have been wiped out by their hostile male neighbors. That, I think, could have just taken a line or two, and it could still happen, most likely in Secret Origins; but the more substantial piece, which might take more space and seems a little less likely now, would have been an explanation of why they held onto the old ways so long (for example, perhaps because of the influence of Strife or another goddess. I think they may have obliquely hinted at Strife's complicity a couple of times now, but I might be squinting a little to see those hints.)

For me, the point is to let Diana be the active hero who begins the epic work of beginning of converting these Amazons, who are like the Amazons of legend, into peaceful and enlightened Amazons like Marston's, rather than being the relatively passive recipient of pre-established Marstonian Amazon enlightenment. I really like how the Zeka and Amazon plots converge on this point; it's by committing the Amazons to protect Zeke that she begins to teach them to value even male lives.

Thank you for your response. Now the bolded is something I wanted to get at. Yes the reason why the Amazons would feel persecuted by men should be obvious, but the way modern writers portray them these days you wouldn't get that feeling. In fact, some of them seem to be under the impression that the Amazons never faced any prejudice from men at all like any other woman. There's this issue of pre-52 Secret Six were Jeannette gets into this tirade about how she hates the Amazons for not doing anything to help women, which struck me as insensitive given the DCU Amazons were brutalized by men specifically for trying to make the world a better place for women. Now I don't know if the writer was aware of this or not, but it annoyed me nonetheless (then again Secret Six is a villain book so maybe I wasn't supposed to take it seriously). There also seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to such stories being misandristic as seen in some comments for these threads:

http://www.comicvine.com/hercules/40...gonist-722780/

http://www.comicvine.com/profile/tho...-reboot/80010/

The reasons for the Amazons's feelings towards men should be obvious but it feels like writers are less interested in telling such stories and would rather portray them as paranoid bigots. Like I said, I have no issue with female characters being written in a negative light as not all women are saints, but at least do it in a way that feels like some thought was put into it. And I know Azzarello could have done this, since everyone seems to praise how sympathetic he made Hera despite how deplorable she is.

[Silvanus]

Thank you for your response. Now the bolded is something I wanted to get at. Yes the reason why the Amazons would feel persecuted by men should be obvious, but the way modern writers portray them these days you wouldn't get that feeling. In fact, some of them seem to be under the impression that the Amazons never faced any prejudice from men at all like any other woman. There's this issue of pre-52 Secret Six were Jeannette gets into this tirade about how she hates the Amazons for not doing anything to help women, which struck me as insensitive given the DCU Amazons were brutalized by men specifically for trying to make the world a better place for women. Now I don't know if the writer was aware of this or not, but it annoyed me nonetheless (then again Secret Six is a villain book so maybe I wasn't supposed to take it seriously). The reasons for the Amazons's feelings towards men should be obvious but it feels like writers are less interested in telling such stories and would rather portray them as paranoid bigots. Like I said, I have no issue with female characters being written in a negative light as not all women are saints, but at least do it in a way that feels like some thought was put into it. And I know Azzarello could have done this, since everyone seems to praise how sympathetic he made Hera despite how deplorable she is.

Good point, thought I think that since issue 30 this book has been moving away from portraying them as just "paranoid bigots." First, we heard them say that they are rarely all of one mind about anything, implying that there must be some differences of opinion about their misognynistic ways. Then, Wonder Woman helped Dessa saw the error of her ways and Aleka apparently sacrificed herself to save Zola and Zeke.

In the most recent issue, there is--at least as I interpret it--a scene that gives a little glimpse at reasons that Amazons must have had for leaving the world of men and then "raiding" that world as if they were in a long, covert war with it:

fbhippy.jpg

Right before this, the First Born faulted the ""island without men" for arrogantly separating themselves from men, never realizing that the world (i.e., men) might come with or "for" them. But now he makes this ugly, grotesque threat, which I think is just his "god-scale" version of the threat of sexual violence that women have faced throughout history, and it's not hard to imagine that this kind of threat was at least part of what pushed the Amazons to turn away from and against the world of men. And if that's the case, they were motivated not so much by arrogance as by self-defense against the kind of "lusty desecration" for which he is the voice at that moment.

And there's also that bearded son of Paradise Island in the panel, maybe there to remind us that the Amazons have, as of Aleka's speech in the previous issue, begun to welcome their brothers into their ranks, and so they are really no longer the "arrogant...island without men" to which the First Born referred.

[Pinsir]

Was there ever a time WW ever had a female majority audience?

[Darius]

I'd say a younger audience more than specifically men ... DC is aware that there is a growing number of female readers, but they are also clearly trying to make WW, SM and other characters more appealing to younger audiences across the board. You could argue that N52 Diana seems more aimed at men because young women of today display more stereotypical male traits than young women of the 1940s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, or 90s ... gender roles have evolved and thus the role and portrayal of WW should also change. What use is a WW who reflects the social norms of a woman from the 1970s to a young woman of today?

[Silvanus]

Silvanus post got me thinking. Well my mind rambling actually.

So Hippolyta and Zeus. Since the Gods in the book are mostly listening to prayers and not requests (First born's origin is quite evident of that.), what if that was the reason Hippolyta went to Zeus?

If she couldn't have a child on her own, what if she therefor went to the god (who once upon a time impregnated a woman while being a swan... Figure's he'd get the job done eh?) that could give her such and then just be done with it? He'd come into her life, inside her and then disappear as the demi-god kid is on it's way. Since it seems quite like a power of his that, leaving demigod-bastards behind in his trail.

Interesting! If that were the case, though, wouldn't she have told Diana that in #3? "I went so him so that I could bring you into the world" seems like an easier story to tell your daughter than "he and passionately fell for each other, and then you came along." Also, she seems to imply that she would have kept Zeus if she could; she says "I soon learned that capturing a god has scant to do with keeping him," or something like that. And I got the impression that Azz really wanted Hippolyta and Zeus to be a story of passion--not just someone using someone.

To add (a point) to this Hippolyta turns into clay (I have no theories on that). What for?...

One guess I have at the moment, somewhat along these lines, is that Hippolyta was secretly made of clay in the first place--maybe, for example, by Athena, who animated her by infusing her with the spirit of Gaea (let's say), making a her a powerful protector/queen for the Amazons. This could be why Athena thought of the lie that Diana was made of clay, and it could be why Hera failed to turn Hippolyta back; she may have willed Hippolyta to return to her original form, not realizing that clay actually was her original form. Whatever enchantment animated her might also have made her powerful enough to be a possible threat to Zeus, which might explain why he came to see her (if he did come to her and not the other way around) and how she was able to match him "sinew for sinew" and all that. It could also explain why Wonder Woman, even before becoming War, was more powerful than the other non-enthroned children of Zeus; she brought together the power of Zeus and Hippolyta. Perhaps Zeus realized that this made Wonder Woman potentially powerful enough to defeat the First Born, so he engineered events so that when the FB came back, he (Zeus) would be absent and Wonder Woman would be on her way to becoming War and colliding with the First Born.

Something like that?

On reasons why Amazons (besides "Why not?") hate men. It's been called "old ways" (probably as in a myth) in WW#31, of which Diana also says "It's time to admit we're not perfect.". Which perhaps could be a key/clue to why they'd dislike men. Perhaps because men aren't perfect? Since perfection is something that often seems expected from women?

The problem of perfection does seem to be a big theme--besides 31, there's also 23, where Diana tells Orion that she started to become "better" when she stopped trying to be "perfect." It also reminds me of 2, when Hermes said that Wonder Woman was the ultimate Amazon because she was untainted by male seed. It seems like some of her peers--at least Aleka--might have resented Diana's "untainted" perfection, so what you're saying would make for a nice, awful symmetry; while resenting Diana for being "perfect," they also resented men for having the freedom to be imperfect, and also for, by oppressing the Amazons, forcing them to be perfect in order to survive.

[brettc1]

Is this even a question?

Most comic readers being male, this can be said to be true of ANY character.

[Silvanus]

Is this even a question?

Most comic readers being male, this can be said to be true of ANY character.

It seems like what we've really been debating is not so much "are men the target audience of the comic?" as "did the the comic grossly masculinize the character in order to attract straight male readers? If so, did this violate the core principles of the character and/or the book?" To which I would answer "not really" and "no."

[SofNascimento]

Azzarello's work on Wonder Woman is a materpiece. And that shows... the DC film universe will use his 3 years old origin instead of the classic one. Why? It's not because the Clay origin was bad, it's just that making her a daughter of Zeus is better (considering that it's given the same amount of care Azzarello did).

[brettc1]

It seems like what we've really been debating is not so much "are men the target audience of the comic?" as "did the the comic grossly masculinize the character in order to attract straight male readers? If so, did this violate the core principles of the character and/or the book?" To which I would answer "not really" and "no."

Which comic are we talking about? Wonder Woman, or Justice League?

I suppose if you say that having a primary motivation to kill evil things and going crazy and cutting your friends with a sword is a masculine trait, there is a point to be made.

Personally I think it's more true to say that in JL and Superman/Wonder Woman, she has been presented as a female character that most male readers find appealing and non-threatening.

[brettc1]

Azzarello's work on Wonder Woman is a materpiece. And that shows... the DC film universe will use his 3 years old origin instead of the classic one. Why? It's not because the Clay origin was bad, it's just that making her a daughter of Zeus is better (considering that it's given the same amount of care Azzarello did).

To me, and with many, I think this is saying that buying McDonald's is "better" than home cooked meal because it it's less work.

[Lax]

If you're saying she's being designed to appeal to 90's bad girl cheesecake fans, then no. Or if that was the intent, then take it from one of those fans, its a failure.

That's pretty much how I see it.