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

[Cipher]

Except it would never be Bruce, Dick, or Jason. That's the point.

Word.

They also don't have a history of vaguely sexual (or at least sexualized) assault with the character. Men also don't have a history of being placed into victim roles by the medium in a way that's only recently been widely acknowledged.

So you're saying that nothing bad can be depicted happening to a woman on a comicbook cover now? Even when it references canon being used in the book last issue? That sounds awfully boring.

I'm saying it's a bad call when you're trying to promote a character as a superhero and when your company and medium have had a history of handling women characters poorly, yeah.

Maybe in a few years when female superheroes aren't subject to this kind of rhetoric quite as much, these things will feel a little more innocent. But ... context, context, context.

And just her fighting back a bit would have changed the whole thing. So it's not even that "bad" things can't happen -- it's just that this fell into a wholly victimizing mode in a time when that's a little too close to the norm.

[Goddess]

Good. The cover depicts a superhero who is not shown as someone trying to fight back against her captor, but as a victim. If she was shown struggling, looking angry or desperate, it would have made a huge difference.

Most sensible comment and thus I agree. While I'm no fan of the censorship, I don't like that she isn't fighting back. The art is beautiful yet tasteless in that sense. Would make more sense if it were Harley in her place (with her Stockholm Syndrome and whatnot) but not Gordon.

Regardless, I don't read Batgirl.

[Claude]

If the point of all the variant covers is to show the Joker terrorizing various heroes, there's ways to do that without directly invoking Killing Joke. Why not show Batgirl fighting the Joker? What about Batgirl infected with Joker venom?

This. If the point of the variant covers is to show the Joker terrorizing various heroes, then the variant covers would show the Joker terrorizing various heroes.

They don't.


It's looking more and more like there are certain segments of Comics Fandom that are genuinely angry that they can't get as many terrorised women on the covers of comics as they'd like. It's Dark, you see, and Dark Is Awesome.

[Dr. Cheesesteak]

huh interesting. so what is DC claiming then? if there were threats, then i'd like them to clarify that statement a little more.

it was almost certainly supporters threatening non-supporters, or vice versa.

[DevilsGambit]

I got a death threat AND a dox threat over a certain other social media controversy that for the sanity of all involved here I shall not name.

There are always people like that out there. You can't let them have control. And yet, like a slippery slope, that's what's happening. Like no one in Hollywood will touch North Korea anymore after the whole fiasco with The Interview, or the Spider-Woman cover likely putting an end to the classic Jessica Drew costume, and now this. It's getting more numerous, and it's getting worse.

Its getting worse only because these companies won't stop caving. 1% of the population will call something let say "sexist." Then 5% will defend it and say it isn't. That other 94% of the population or reader base just flat out don't care. They just want politics out of entertainment. Yet companies cave for fear that the minority of people will call them "sexist" or whatever the controversy entails. Even though no one actually thinks that. They've given power to the thin skinned and the spineless.

[thecrimson]

Just to be clear, if anyone is sending death threats, it's wrong.

You'd be surprised at how many people don't understand that.

[Claude]

So you're saying that nothing bad can be depicted happening to a woman on a comicbook cover now? Even when it references canon being used in the book last issue? That sounds awfully boring.

There's more to comics than bad things happening to women on the cover.


Or, y'know, should be.

[Rakzo]

Word.

They also don't have a history of vaguely sexual (or at least sexualized) assault with the character. Men also don't have a history of being placed into victim roles by the medium in a way that's only recently been widely acknowledged.

Wasn't Dick Grayson raped twice?

[cygnadu]

extremely disappointing that albuquerque caved into the ridiculous criticisms that people levied at the cover. some creators these days are too absorbed with social media and appeasing the "fans" on the internet.

[Luke Cage]

That's actually exactly the message this cover sends, and why so many people took umbridge with it.

^Re: above: Really glad to hear that. Hopefully he saw value in the negative reactions to this cover an chose to pull it based on solidarity with some of the complaints. Again, I don't think anyone (hopefully) imagined that he meant to cause harm with this cover; but as far as contributions to an overall scene, intentions are irrelevant.

No it doesn't. The Joker has tormented male characters for decades, and no one says a word.

[Teek]

This is all setting a really bad precedent. I don't like the idea of artists being bullied into asking for their work removed, as I'm sure that's the reason he caved and requested it. He was probably getting a bunch of hate messages.

Technically speaking, the Mimi Yoon PowerPuff Girls cover getting canceled set the bad precedent. (If not an earlier fake outrage) This is just a continuation of the practice. The days of "If you don't like it, you don't have to buy it" are apparently over. Welcome to the new era of "I don't like it, so nobody should have it."

I mean, this isn't even a case of "I can't buy this issue of Batgirl without seeing this cover I don't like." The people complaining would literally have to go out of their way to be offended.


You know what. Maybe all these perpetually offended people should come up with some kind of guideline. A code of sorts, deciding what can and can't be printed. I think that would be a great thing for the industry.

[nepenthes]

Also better remove those three letters. Mods will remove your comment.

Thank you, this is correct. 'SJW' is not a term we want thrown around here.

[sneakyflute]

I'm looking forward to Joker's sensitivity training seminar.

[Baseman]

I pretty much agree with what people are saying here.This sets a bad precedent.If a special interest group can have a cover banned because they find said art offensive then whats stopping another from doing the same?
Have a problem with Catwoman being Bi? Just get enough people to complain about it on social media and send death threats to the artist/writer. Because 's apparently how we solve problems theses days.

Note: Not saying that everyone who had a problem with the cover send the deaths threats Just trying to show a point here.

[Luke Cage]

Wasn't Dick Grayson raped twice?

Hey, stop bringing facts into the debate.