DC Comics Cancels "Batgirl" Joker Variant at Artist's Request

[SolarRadical]

You don't get it. That's ok. Not everyone does.

please explain it to me than, why people want to censor this specific piece of art then.

[SolarRadical]

This whole controversy has just gotten sillier. Batgirl Vol 4 covers and variants.]

I believe this whole thing is a perfect example of selective outrage.

[thecrimson]

I personally don't find the cover at all offensive. I don't see sexual violence in that image. I see the Joker (a narcissistic psychopath who is well-known for being effectively asexual) tormenting a heroine who he has harmed in the past and provoking an extreme emotional reaction in her.

Now, that said? DC made the decision to change Batgirl's tone recently. The book is now being marketed toward a younger, more optimistic market. Some posters on this very forum have already stated that they've been allowing their children to read this new Batgirl book. Now, yes, those posters always have the option of not buying this variant for their kids. BUT? At the end of the day, putting such a visceral and mature subject matter on the cover of a book intended to be read by younger readers is just not a responsible decision. This variant would have been appropriate in the beginning of Batgirl's New 52 run, when the book was dark and visceral and marketed more to adults.

Just think of some kid coming to his/her LCS to pick up the latest Batgirl issue and spotting this variant. In my LCS, they don't really try to set aside variant covers. They just stack everything on the shelves. If there's a variant, you just look through the new issues until you find it. Now, maybe some LCS's are different, but a lot of them probably aren't. Any way you slice it, kids WILL get to see this cover on a book that is supposedly marketed toward them. That's just irresponsible.

Batgirl is not intended to be a mature book, at this time. Associating it with mature themes just doesn't work now. DC wants to celebrate Joker's anniversary with variant covers? No problem. But the Batgirl variant should be something a little funnier and lighter because the book itself is funnier and lighter.

I will also add my voice to the people who say that it is LONG past time that DC just move away from The Killing Joke and constantly bringing it back up to torment Babs. You don't have to ignore this piece of her history, but if bringing it up doesn't somehow serve the story, then it just doesn't need to be mentioned. Enough is enough.

I'd like to point out, once again, that the Batgirl comic is not being marketed towards kids. Some people are letting kids read it, but that's not the same thing. The audience is young adults. And the book has touched on mature themes within its pages.

[Agent Scarlet]

the part of my post the mentions who the threats were against was something that Cameron said on twitter. I just realized I failed to mention that in the original post. Dc did, however, say that they didn't approve of the threats/harassment being thrown about due to the cover.

DC Entertainment:

We publish comic books about the greatest heroes in the world, and the most evil villains imaginable. The Joker variant covers for June are in recognition of the 75th anniversary of the Joker.
Regardless if fans like Rafael Albuquerque’s homage to Alan Moore’s THE KILLING JOKE graphic novel from 25 years ago, or find it inconsistent with the current tonality of the Batgirl books - threats of violence and harassment are wrong and have no place in comics or society.

We stand by our creative talent, and per Rafael’s request, DC Comics will not publish the Batgirl variant. – DC Entertainment

http://www.comicbookresources.com/ar...rtists-request

Exactly, DC did not say what side was throwing the threats. Thank you for validating my point.

[numberthirty]

I will also add my voice to the people who say that it is LONG past time that DC just move away from The Killing Joke and constantly bringing it back up to torment Babs. You don't have to ignore this piece of her history, but if bringing it up doesn't somehow serve the story, then it just doesn't need to be mentioned. Enough is enough.

While it might not be "Enough is enough", this is a perfectly logical issue for readers to take up with a company. Add to that everything that is happening along with that discussion, and there is a very obvious reason for DC not to use the cover in question.

[mikelmcknight72]

This is further proof that, in my opinion, George Orwell's 1984 should be required high school reading. Political correctness (doublespeak in 1984) is the antithesis of freedom of speech, as is punishing people for speech you don't like. People no longer seem to know how to agree to disagree and then be friendly (or at least civil) to those with whom they disagree.

[randomengine]

I don't understand why so many people are having trouble telling the difference between not liking something and being offended by it. It is an ocean of a difference.

[dragonmp93]

I'd like to point out, once again, that the Batgirl comic is not being marketed towards kids. Some people are letting kids read it, but that's not the same thing. The audience is young adults. And the book has touched on mature themes within its pages.

Yeah, 8 years old kids love to play GTA, but that doesnt mean that the game is marketed towards kids.

While it might not be "Enough is enough", this is a perfectly logical issue for readers to take up with a company. Add to that everything that is happening along with that discussion, and there is a very obvious reason for DC not to use the cover in question.

Said reason being a huge flame war............................................... ...............

[Cypher]

Those paintings are not part of the intellectual property of a company who is selling art for a profit.

Its not, but its the caving in of the company and the attitude behind it thats the same in result.

This is further proof that, in my opinion, George Orwell's 1984 should be required high school reading. Political correctness (doublespeak in 1984) is the antithesis of freedom of speech, as is punishing people for speech you don't like. People no longer seem to know how to agree to disagree and then be friendly (or at least civil) to those with whom they disagree.

Ditto, my friend.

[thecrimson]

This is further proof that, in my opinion, George Orwell's 1984 should be required high school reading. Political correctness (doublespeak in 1984) is the antithesis of freedom of speech, as is punishing people for speech you don't like. People no longer seem to know how to agree to disagree and then be friendly (or at least civil) to those with whom they disagree.

I'd like to think I've maintained some level of civility while posting here. Sometimes I may have been sarcastic, but that happens sometimes.

[Agent Scarlet]

I don't understand why so many people are having trouble telling the difference between not liking something and being offended by it. It is an ocean of a difference.

Where was the outrage over the 3 covers Char Aznable posted that reference the same story?

That's why. If they were so offended by the subject matter, there would have been outrage over those as well.

[teddyeatsyourface]

Exactly, DC did not say what side was throwing the threats. Thank you for validating my point.

Your point was that I forgot to mention Cameron Stewart in my post?

DC's disapproval of the actions stand regardless if I remember to correctly source another DC staff member's additional information regarding the situation. So I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with your replies?

[Coal Tiger]

please explain it to me than, why people want to censor this specific piece of art then.

Who's censoring it? The art exists, unchanged. The right to free expression doesn't mean the right to being published.

[Mad Love]

This whole thing was yet another example of thoughtless outrage.

The variant line was about celebrating Joker as a character for Joker's 75th anniversary. Since it's the version for the Batgirl title, it refers to the Killing Joke which which is their most iconic interaction. That's why the power dynamic favors the Joker over the hero which is in line with their history.

However, people confuse that as celebrating the actions of the villain. They don't want Batgirl shown negatively even though the cover is intentionally biased for the Joker. They make all sorts of claims in the name of feminism. They assert anti-DC sentiments, misogyny and sexism in the comic industry, etc. People write that it doesn't match the title. Cameron Stewart chimes in about how it doesn't reflect their work.

But, it's a variant cover! Variant covers have their own theme and subject. They're also optional and not the standard cover. Joker is one of the most psychotic, homicidal, deranged villains. Celebrating the character doesn't mean you're in favor or promoting any of his fictional actions. It's about celebrating the creation and concept of the character as a villain.

Nope, some people only saw poor little Batgirl and misogynistic, grimdark DC.

[Sans Simian]

But it's not wrong to depict Barbara being diminished because that's Joker's perspective and the most significant interaction they had. That's the point.

Have you considered that maybe people take issue with it because they're looking for images of misogyny rather than take other factors into account? Misogyny tinted glasses. How could he not realize what he was doing? The image is rather straight-forward. What he didn't realize is how offended people would be and how much his name would be dragged into the fray. It's peoples' interpretation that's the problem. Not the image.

Well said. I agree completely.