Page 20 of 54 FirstFirst ... 1016171819202122232430 ... LastLast
Results 286 to 300 of 797
  1. #286
    Astonishing Member Nite-Wing's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by themasething View Post
    So... Just curious, where is the outrage for this cover? It's the same style of situation (Wonder Woman held hostage in a pose that could be seen as sexually suggestive) with another female superhero.

    Attachment 19397
    but you see Wonder Woman isn't being held suggestively or crying so she isn't a victim
    She's just dancing with the devil in the pale moonlight

  2. #287
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teek View Post
    Seriously. Open question. Anybody with the answer, please answer.

    What problem could any singular individual have with this cover that could not be resolved by not buying it? I'm legitimately asking because while there are certain things that shouldn't be left open to the free market in the interest of public safety, I cannot for the life of me see how this is one of them.

    Please. Somebody tell me why "just don't buy it" was not a good enough option.
    None. How many people actually requested DC pull it, though? Or was it more just a widespread reaction of, "Hey, this cover is in bad taste. I'd really respect DC more if they chose not to run things like this."

    And, I mean, I would. It doesn't mean I need one image banned, but it'd certainly be cool if DC were aware enough to stop sending those kinds of messages before they got to solicits or print.

    I think people are (probably) reading into a rhetoric of "WE MUST BAN TOGETHER TO BAN COMICS COVERS," whereas the reality is more along the lines of, "Hey, DC, this is kind of icky; I wish you would think about not doing these kinds of things again."

    And if the artist and/or publisher see value in those complaints, what's the problem?
    Last edited by Cipher; 03-16-2015 at 08:17 PM.

  3. #288
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Claude View Post
    So that's "no", then. No covers of them crying and terrorised.

    Were you referring, incidentally, to that Kubert cover of Batman leaping to try and rescue a Jason who has his back to the reader? Not any of the - many, I'm sure - covers of a cowering Red Hood?
    That was the one posted, but I've seen MANY of them. You have Google, go nuts. And I like how you think that ignoring the point that murder is worse than creepiness makes your argument valid, when you've put forth no evidence for your view at any point. Arguments without evidence are meaningless.

  4. #289
    Astonishing Member Double 0's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scymiral View Post
    Isn't possible Albuquerque read the criticisms and thought they might have a point? I don't think you can assume Abuquerque "caved" in any way. If anything, it sounds like Abuquerque just didn't want to be associated with the people "defending" his cover. And who can blame him?
    I know I wouldn't.
    "Race is a social construct, they say. And I remind them that money is a social construct, too. Social constructs have power." — DeRay Mckesson

  5. #290
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,858

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teek View Post
    Seriously. Open question. Anybody with the answer, please answer.

    What problem could any singular individual have with this cover that could not be resolved by not buying it? I'm legitimately asking because while there are certain things that shouldn't be left open to the free market in the interest of public safety, I cannot for the life of me see how this is one of them.

    Please. Somebody tell me why "just don't buy it" was not a good enough option.
    If it is what it looks like, it is the artist's call.

    I have no problem with that.

  6. #291

    Default

    There are still a lot of people who hate the constant imagery and jokes about Jason Todd's death in both the exterior and interior DC book. The same thing with Damian's death scene. The whole trying show people who are outraged out Batgirl are hypocrites by insinuating they didn't care about Jason and/or Damian is a faulty argument because a lot of people DO care about Damian and Jason and do not like when their death scenes are glorified or otherwise taken lightly. It's a shame that Kubert variant flew so far under radar because I know a good chunk of the batman/Jason todd fandom (both men & women) would be pissed that it made it through the cracks.

    I think some of the reasons why so many people noticed the Batgirl variant is because

    a) She has just been through a major overall and has a bunch of new fans and critical acclaim for her book

    b) Women have been some of main the victims of brutality, fridging, and other nastiness in comics over the past few decades (or since forever), so people are quicker to see mistreatment of female characters than male.

    c) Her fanbase is mainly made up of women, so of course it won't go unnoticed especially when you take into account point b)

    Attempting to make others feel bad or show them lacking character because there was a vocal outrage to the Batgirl variant from a few days ago and not the Jason Todd one from December is a BS move, imo. People can be upset with the Batgirl variant even if they didn't know about the Jason Todd Variant. They can be upset that both crimes against the characters are still being used as publicity stunts.

    The shaming is a straw man argument at best.

  7. #292
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    6,865

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by themasething View Post
    So... Just curious, where is the outrage for this cover? It's the same style of situation (Wonder Woman held hostage in a pose that could be seen as sexually suggestive) with another female superhero.

    Attachment 19397
    Shhh, don't get another cover pulled.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
    Maybe this wouldn't have felt as salient (or not have been enough to derail published solicits) without threats against those who complained entering the scene, but I could believe it either way.
    I never based any of my comments on the presumption that DC pulled the cover due to threats that came from those who were against the cover, and people who did so are having that used against them, so, why so quick to start acting like all of the threats were one sided?

  8. #293
    Astonishing Member Coal Tiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by themasething View Post
    So... Just curious, where is the outrage for this cover? It's the same style of situation (Wonder Woman held hostage in a pose that could be seen as sexually suggestive) with another female superhero.

    Attachment 19397
    You really don't understand why people were upset about the Batgirl cover, do you? No one is upset about women being terrorized by the Joker. The Batgirl cover directly references a story in which Barbara Gordon was shot, paralyzed and sexually assaulted by the Joker (he's wearing the same outfit from the Killing Joke). The issue isn't women being attacked or anything, it's that this is still how DC is trying to define Batgirl. At the end of the day, all anyone at DC can do when Batgirl and Joker are in the same sentence is say "hey, remember that story where Joker paralyzed her, stripped her naked and took pictures? ...and by the way, we want girls reading this book!"

  9. #294
    BANNED dragonmp93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    13,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scymiral View Post
    Huh. I actually learned something from this thread. For a while there, it wasn't looking good :P Thanks!
    You are kidding, right ?.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scymiral View Post
    Isn't possible Albuquerque read the criticisms and thought they might have a point? I don't think you can assume Abuquerque "caved" in any way. If anything, it sounds like Abuquerque just didn't want to be associated with the people "defending" his cover. And who can blame him?
    Or he was just sick of listening to the people who didnt like it................................................ ............

    Quote Originally Posted by Teek View Post
    Seriously. Open question. Anybody with the answer, please answer.

    What problem could any singular individual have with this cover that could not be resolved by not buying it? I'm legitimately asking because while there are certain things that shouldn't be left open to the free market in the interest of public safety, I cannot for the life of me see how this is one of them.

    Please. Somebody tell me why "just don't buy it" was not a good enough option.
    Well, said person would still have the knowledge of the existance of that cover............................................. .......

  10. #295

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by themasething View Post
    So... Just curious, where is the outrage for this cover? It's the same style of situation (Wonder Woman held hostage in a pose that could be seen as sexually suggestive) with another female superhero.

    Attachment 19397
    That's not even remotely the same situation and you know it. Please come back with something better.

  11. #296
    Goddess_In_Real_Life Goddess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    New JerZ. You KNOW something! Tell me what you know!
    Posts
    724

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by themasething View Post
    So... Just curious, where is the outrage for this cover? It's the same style of situation (Wonder Woman held hostage in a pose that could be seen as sexually suggestive) with another female superhero.

    Attachment 19397
    Comparing apples and oranges: don't give people a reason to nag. Wonder Woman is not held suggestively or painted as a victim. That's the difference. Gordon is painted as a victim in that cover.
    Author of X-Forums.

    Follow Goddess on Instagram.

  12. #297
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
    The point is more that there might be people who want to red the books, or are at the very least interested in seeing a better field for female superheroes, and might not be reading because of things like this.

    DC would be the first to tell you they're not interested in only playing to existing audiences.

    And everyone who's part of this conversation here (and I'd guess at large, if you're savvy enough to be concerned over cover previews) knows what The Killing Joke is.


    I don't know that I've ever read it as, like ... intercourse (I feel really disgusting going this far into it), but sexual assault, definitely, just in the fact that she was stripped nude and posed. Sexual no matter how you slice it.
    Being naked isn't sexual, IMHO. He just wanted her injuries to be obvious to Gordon. It was about him, which IS problematic, but the story has since been redefined from Barbara's perspective and that's the canon this refers to. Note that she's in costume, as opposed to the yellow dress. When the Killing Joke happened she wasn't a superhero anymore. It's obviously meant to be symbolic of her trauma and fear, but that's part of who she is. To disrespect that seems like victim-shaming.

    And anyway, nobody is either reading or not reading a comic because of a themed variant month. They're just buying or not buying the variants. It's not relevant to the general public, because they simply don't care and won't be exposed to it. On top of that, unless they know the context of the image it doesn't have any connotations besides "creepy looking."

  13. #298
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cranger View Post
    I never based any of my comments on the presumption that DC pulled the cover due to threats that came from those who were against the cover, and people who did so are having that used against them, so, why so quick to start acting like all of the threats were one sided?
    The last word we've had from anyone involved in the decision specifies they were.

    But in that case I wasn't using the threats to argue against you or anyone else; just noting that they may have been a wrinkle in a decision Albequerque was already leaning toward here. That was the thrust of that post. I wasn't singling anyone out or even really trying to argue there.
    Last edited by Cipher; 03-16-2015 at 08:23 PM.

  14. #299
    Retired Admin (1998-2020) Matt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 1997
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,079

    Default

    Reminder #2 from me:
    Keep your discussions civil and devoid of insults towards persons or groups of people, otherwise you will be removed from the discussion on a more permanent basis.
    Discuss the topic, not those involved in the conversation. There is a world of difference between the two.
    "Let me guess. My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie!"
    @Matt_of_Geek
    Now writing at The Atomic Junk Shop

    CBR Community Standards and Rules

  15. #300
    ♥♥عابث سولاناس♥♥ Park Slope Pixie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,027

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by macattack View Post
    This is asinine. Death threats to the artist over the cover? That's far more messed up than anything on the cover entails!

    So the Joker can't hold any women at gunpoint ever again? Where does it stop?

    Also, Cameron Stewart subtly throws the artist under the bus on Twitter.

    https://twitter.com/cameronMstewart/...39515227078657
    https://twitter.com/cameronMstewart/...39735788711936
    https://twitter.com/cameronMstewart/...40016245075968
    https://twitter.com/cameronMstewart/...40395980607488
    Which is a bit bullshit because editorial tells Albuquerque or whoever exactly what they want on their covers. Albuquerque was just doing his job.

    At any rate, i'm still outraged that they used a transgendered character with a beautifully unique aesthetic as little more than a one-note joke to be efficiently "handled" by their one-size-fits all cipher headliner.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •