DC Extended Universe (POST NO SPOILERS HERE!)

[FIFTY-TWO (52)]

I understand the "Zeus as a misogynist" argument, and I prefer the older origin. I just don't think it ever undermines her feminist mission to such a dramatic extent. Though I suppose her character-based stories that flesh that dynamic out must irk fans in a way Barry's dead mom irks me whenever a story harps on it. Then again it's a contradiction I kind of like in her case, because nobody forms their morals from perfect situations. She's still raised with and by Amazons, in a woman-only culture, and totally rejects any attempts by men to control or define her. Zeus being her father doesn't define who she is, and assuming she does undermines her character from a reader's perspective.

Thanks for taking the time to type all that out though. It's definitely true the Greek myths are sanitized to a large extent.

Well, the female goddesses aren't exactly a benevolent bunch. They were a jealous, crazy bunch, starting wars over beauty contests and targeting innocent children who had no say in their parentage. They're just as messed up as the guys and painting them as the "good gods" is also a sanitation of their myths.

[MadFacedKid]

Really awesome cosplay

[John Ossie]

Really awesome cosplay

Nice cosplay.

[Vanguard-01]

Well, the female goddesses aren't exactly a benevolent bunch. They were a jealous, crazy bunch, starting wars over beauty contests and targeting innocent children who had no say in their parentage. They're just as messed up as the guys and painting them as the "good gods" is also a sanitation of their myths.

True. This is another reason why I don't mind the changes as much as others do.

Although, in the case of the goddesses and the Amazons, Dr. Marston created his world as a subversion of the classic myths. His whole idea was "What if the Amazons WEREN'T the bloodthirsty man-haters that the myths make them out to be? What if they were really an enlightened society who could've brought the world together under a banner of peace and equality thousands of years ago, if only the men in charge hadn't feared giving up their power so much?"

Marston didn't spend much time (if any) exploring the personalities of the goddesses, but it would also make sense to continue this subversion by saying that the goddesses were also misrepresented in the myths. The myths were written by men. In Marston's world, those men would have a vested interest in portraying these women with "strange ideas" as bad people to be rejected.

This is another reason why Azzarello's run was so hated by many long-time WW fans. For him to undo one of the central tenets of Marston's vision comes across as yet another middle finger. "Nope! The myths were right! The Amazons really WERE just as horrible as the Ancient Greeks say! Deal with it!"

[Rogue Star]

True. This is another reason why I don't mind the changes as much as others do.

Although, in the case of the goddesses and the Amazons, Dr. Marston created his world as a subversion of the classic myths. His whole idea was "What if the Amazons WEREN'T the bloodthirsty man-haters that the myths make them out to be? What if they were really an enlightened society who could've brought the world together under a banner of peace and equality thousands of years ago, if only the men in charge hadn't feared giving up their power so much?"

Marston didn't spend much time (if any) exploring the personalities of the goddesses, but it would also make sense to continue this subversion by saying that the goddesses were also misrepresented in the myths. The myths were written by men. In Marston's world, those men would have a vested interest in portraying these women with "strange ideas" as bad people to be rejected.

This is another reason why Azzarello's run was so hated by many long-time WW fans. For him to undo one of the central tenets of Marston's vision comes across as yet another middle finger. "Nope! The myths were right! The Amazons really WERE just as horrible as the Ancient Greeks say! Deal with it!"

This is how I feel about it. I don't like the almost utopian existence apart from "man's world".

[JediKage]

I understand the "Zeus as a misogynist" argument, and I prefer the older origin. I just don't think it ever undermines her feminist mission to such a dramatic extent. Though I suppose her character-based stories that flesh that dynamic out must irk fans in a way Barry's dead mom irks me whenever a story harps on it. Then again it's a contradiction I kind of like in her case, because nobody forms their morals from perfect situations. She's still raised with and by Amazons, in a woman-only culture, and totally rejects any attempts by men to control or define her. Zeus being her father doesn't define who she is, and assuming she does undermines her character from a reader's perspective.

Thanks for taking the time to type all that out though. It's definitely true the Greek myths are sanitized to a large extent.

Its not really an argument. Zeus was pretty terrible in the Myths.
Ares was incompetent and in no way had a chance at beating all the other Gods. He wasn't strong enough or smart enough.

I think its more of a problem if you are familiar with Greco Roman Mythology. I agree with Vanguard-01 for the most part. It causes me seriously cognitive dissonance when looking at supposed spoilers painting Zeus as a swell guy and Ares as a competent Big Bad.

JL/U used Hades...which really is probably better in the sense that Hades was actually not nearly as bad as Zeus or Poseidon.

[Atlanta96]

True. This is another reason why I don't mind the changes as much as others do.

Although, in the case of the goddesses and the Amazons, Dr. Marston created his world as a subversion of the classic myths. His whole idea was "What if the Amazons WEREN'T the bloodthirsty man-haters that the myths make them out to be? What if they were really an enlightened society who could've brought the world together under a banner of peace and equality thousands of years ago, if only the men in charge hadn't feared giving up their power so much?"

Marston didn't spend much time (if any) exploring the personalities of the goddesses, but it would also make sense to continue this subversion by saying that the goddesses were also misrepresented in the myths. The myths were written by men. In Marston's world, those men would have a vested interest in portraying these women with "strange ideas" as bad people to be rejected.

This is another reason why Azzarello's run was so hated by many long-time WW fans. For him to undo one of the central tenets of Marston's vision comes across as yet another middle finger. "Nope! The myths were right! The Amazons really WERE just as horrible as the Ancient Greeks say! Deal with it!"

Except that the Greek Gods and the Amazons are works of fiction so their portrayal in the myths is literally how they really were. You can't misrepresent a fictional character that you yourself conceived.

Marston, love or hate him, took some liberties with mythology to create the WW mythos. That's fine, everyone does it. But it is what it is, Marston didn't have an accurate representation of mythology in mind when he wrote those stories.

Also, I don't see how it's "feminist" to take myths where pretty much everyone was an awful person, make the women good, and keep the men evil. If the message of feminism is that the sexes are equal, what do you call that?

[Vanguard-01]

This is how I feel about it. I don't like the almost utopian existence apart from "man's world".

Well, only Marston really portrayed the Amazon's society as truly "utopian."

Perez, for example, did a much better job of portraying the Amazons as a "good" society, but not a perfect one. Yes, their way has merit, but it's not without flaws. Those flaws were expanded upon by some subsequent writers quite nicely. Gail Simone, for example, introduced The Circle: a cadre of five Amazons who thought that Diana would somehow destroy Amazon society and tried to murder her when she was still a baby. They were portrayed as women acting out of a twisted sense of loyalty to Hippolyta and their people as a whole. Jimenez opened the Amazons up to a radical change in their society when they actually opened Paradise Island up to the outside world and allowed people to come and study their ways and even immigrate if they wished. Yes, men were included in that.

The point is you don't have to turn the Amazons into monsters to show that they and their ways are flawed and imperfect.

Its not really an argument. Zeus was pretty terrible in the Myths.
Ares was incompetent and in no way had a chance at beating all the other Gods. He wasn't strong enough or smart enough.

Well, with regard to Ares, most of the surviving Greek myths come from Athenian sources and the Athenians were known for being non-fans of Ares. I'm sure if any Spartan myths survived into today, they would've portrayed Ares as much stronger and more competent.

Plus, one can't discard the fact that Ares changed in Roman times into a much more competent and intelligent war god. So Ares can work as a Big Bad, as far as I'm concerned.

Except that the Greek Gods and the Amazons are works of fiction so their portrayal in the myths is literally how they really were. You can't misrepresent a fictional character that you yourself conceived.

Ancient cultures are well-known to have deliberately misrepresented other people in order to make themselves seem better than them. Egyptian pharaohs were infamous for re-writing historical accounts to downplay and/or ignore their failings.

In a world where the Amazons are NOT fictional, but a race of people the Greeks actually encountered, you can absolutely say that the Greeks could've changed their records of the encounter in order to make themselves look superior to them.

Also, I don't see how it's "feminist" to take myths where pretty much everyone was an awful person, make the women good, and keep the men evil. If the message of feminism is that the sexes are equal, what do you call that?

Oh, it isn't. That's why later writers changed Marston's idea that the Amazons were pretty much flawless and righteous in all things. As I said, Perez, Jimenez, and Simone did a great job showing that the Amazons were far from perfect. Heck, Perez had Heracles eventually change his ways and come to the Amazons to apologize to them for the things he did to them back in the day. Perez didn't really portray Heracles as evil. He portrayed him as a product of his time, and as a man who eventually saw the error of his ways and sought to make up for them.

Believe me, I'm no Marston purist. I like his ideas, but I have no problem with changing them somewhat. I just think Azz didn't do the best job at it, and this movie also looks like it's making some changes that may or may not work. Time will tell, obviously.

[Troian]

Zeus was a misogynist but the goddess Diana was named after and one of her partons was a misandrist.

[Powertool]

This is another reason why Azzarello's run was so hated by many long-time WW fans. For him to undo one of the central tenets of Marston's vision comes across as yet another middle finger. "Nope! The myths were right! The Amazons really WERE just as horrible as the Ancient Greeks say! Deal with it!"

Meh, I still find Azzarello's more myth-complying Amazons infinitely more sympathetic than Marston's. The former at least didn't leave the rest of the women of the world (with very few exceptions) to rot under androcratic familial and societal structures for 3,000 years to live like spoiled celebrities on a tropical island, keeping all for themselves the secrets of Amazon training which can turn any normal person into a superhuman entity almost overnight. And I may be wrong, but I think that when B.A. was documenting himself on Marston's original run, this awful d*** move, even admitting that the author hadn't really thought it through, wasn't lost to him.

The post-Crisis Amazons were performing a lot better in the likability field -- until Amazons Attack, at least. That was a hit they never really recovered from. So point to Azzarello's Amazons yet again.

[Confuzzled]

Zeus was a misogynist but the goddess Diana was named after and one of her partons was a misandrist.

And Athena cursed Medusa just because Medusa was raped in Athena's temple! Despite Medusa being an Athena devotee. Why no #JusticeforMedusa?

They were crazypants across the pantheon irrespective of gender. So like Vanguard I don't mind Zeus "borrowing" some of the goddesses's roles. The trailer has made it clear that the Amazons however are fierce, independent women capable of running a stable society and raising a child by themselves. And Diana identifies herself as "Daughter of Hippolyta" and I have faith that there won't be a change even if/when she comes to know of her paternal parentage.

[Vanguard-01]

Meh, I still find Azzarello's more myth-complying Amazons infinitely more sympathetic than Marston's.

Honestly, neither Marston's nor Azzarello's Amazons are in any way sympathetic. Marston never stated why the Amazons left Man's World, to my knowledge. Neither did Azz. That's another thing people didn't like about his run: if he had at least explained WHY the Amazons hate men so much, their views may seem more sympathetic.

Perez, on the other hand, spelled it out in no uncertain terms. The Amazons were actually enslaved, raped, and abused by men, so their aversion to remaining within Man's World makes perfect sense, as does any lingering hostility they may have toward men.

The former at least didn't leave the rest of the women of the world (with very few exceptions) to rot under androcratic familial and societal structures for 3,000 years to live like spoiled celebrities on a tropical island, keeping all for themselves the secrets of Amazon training which can turn any normal person into a superhuman entity almost overnight. And I may be wrong, but I think that when B.A. was documenting himself on Marston's original run, this awful d*** move, even admitting that the author hadn't really thought it through, wasn't lost to him.

Can't argue with any of this.

The post-Crisis Amazons were performing a lot better in the likability field -- until Amazons Attack, at least. That was a hit they never really recovered from. So point to Azzarello's Amazons yet again.

Not really a point for Azz's Amazons, since his Amazons were made to look like EXACTLY the kind of people who would murder unarmed men and children in the streets of a city.

Meanwhile, Amazons Attack only happened in complete defiance of everything that had been established about the Amazons prior to that event, and the only reason DC Editorial allowed it is because they didn't give a crap about Wonder Woman or her world. I defy you to tell me that if a writer proposed an event in which Batman's supporting cast started slaughtering innocent people in complete defiance of all their previous characterization that it would've been allowed to go down. Or if it was allowed, the writer would've been forced to provide Batman's cast with a "Get Out of Jail Free" card in which it was revealed to be totally not their fault.

[Confuzzled]

Meh, I still find Azzarello's more myth-complying Amazons infinitely more sympathetic than Marston's. The former at least didn't leave the rest of the women of the world (with very few exceptions) to rot under androcratic familial and societal structures for 3,000 years to live like spoiled celebrities on a tropical island, keeping all for themselves the secrets of Amazon training which can turn any normal person into a superhuman entity almost overnight.

Eh, the Amazons were a minuscule decimal point of the world population so despite their gifts there is no feasible way they could have taken all the women of the world under their wing or opened a training centre for them without being attacked by many other forces. They were like Furiosa from Mad Max who had enough of the exploitative system and just wanted an effective escape for herself and the few women who directly asked for her help.

[Lightning Rider]

Its not really an argument. Zeus was pretty terrible in the Myths.
Ares was incompetent and in no way had a chance at beating all the other Gods. He wasn't strong enough or smart enough.

I think its more of a problem if you are familiar with Greco Roman Mythology. I agree with Vanguard-01 for the most part. It causes me seriously cognitive dissonance when looking at supposed spoilers painting Zeus as a swell guy and Ares as a competent Big Bad.

JL/U used Hades...which really is probably better in the sense that Hades was actually not nearly as bad as Zeus or Poseidon.

The consequences of that reality are the argument, I'm not disputing he was terrible in the myths. I've read a lot of books on Greek Mythology, I don't mind that the world of DC puts their own spin on it. Myths are malleable enough.

[Powertool]

That's another thing people didn't like about his run: if he had at least explained WHY the Amazons hate men so much, their views may seem more sympathetic.

The whole of Azzarello's run on the character is centered on a very precise concept: progression.

Zeus cutting ties with his previous form so that he can progress to a new one, free from the burden coming from his actions along tens of thousands of years of life.

Hera progressing from the "jealous wife" archetype into a full-fledged person whose actions do not depend on her only defining trait.

Diana progressing towards full acceptance of all her roles and all her heritage, confident in the fact that, at the core, she's still the same person.

The Amazons coming to accept that it's time to go against a world view and behaviours crystallised millennia ago and progressing towards a new stage in their history.

Progression always holds the central stage. The theme of moving towards new horizons features front and center from issue 1 to issue 35 in a perfect continuum. It's a way to write superhero comic books that is actually not so easy to find nowadays, especially for characters with decades of continuity behind them, and that's why it irked so many people, who were probably expecting 12 issues dealing with Diana's New52 origin and other 12 dealing with some elements of that story that had resurfaced (like Rucka is currently doing, imho producing the most boring WW story in decades). Introducing a character by presenting him or her while he's struggling with change is much more bold and effective than starting from "the comfort zone" of a static, recognisable status quo, but unfortunately not universally praised as a practice. Which is a shame, since I never felt I had gotten as close to the core of the Wonder Woman character as I did while reading the pages masterfully crafted by Azzarello and Chiang.

They were like Furiosa from Mad Max who had enough of the exploitative system and just wanted an effective escape for herself and the few women who directly asked for her help.

That part of the movie sees its natural conclusion by delivering a message that is as powerful in its simplicity as it's unambiguous: there's no escape. At the end of the day, I tend to think that Marston's greatest sin was that he at his core a man of his times and therefore wasn't impervious to seeing seclusion (someone would say "segregation") as something that didn't work against positive change and in fact could even help it.