G. Willow Wilson Responds to The New Yorker's "A-Force" "Porn Star" Criticism

[Starleafgirl]

Rock on, G. Willow Wilson.

[ktralfam]

One thing I don't understand is why someone who obviously doesn't read comics bothers to write a diatribe about this comic book cover... It's like me writing an article for CBR on what nonsense James Joyce's Ulysses is after reading 10 pages of the book...

I think you should read 10 pages of Finnegan's Wake before you call Ulysses nonsensical.

[JohnNorthey]

What would've been more interesting is to have asked a group of 10 year old girls what they thought of it rather than just the boys. But also to have done it in a far more academic setting - ie: with proper statistical controls if you want to make a general statement that 'they all look like porn stars' but of course journalism has become more sensational and chasing clicks than doing any reach research. I'd bet the original author has a 10 year old son and just asked a group of his friends what they thought.

[Hariel0079]

Da fuq yo saying son????????? It was a woman the one who wrote the original article.

The person who wrote the op-ed and whom G. Willow Wilson is addressing is a woman...

Just shows in this day and age how many people don't carefully read articles and their automatic response is to "blame the men".

There ARE men that actually say the same as the women is saying.

[solletaire]

I think you should read 10 pages of Finnegan's Wake before you call Ulysses nonsensical.

I think you might have missed my sarcasm there

[Penance]

There ARE men that actually say the same as the women is saying.

So????????? this is about that woman in this particular case your comment is still out of place.

[solletaire]

There ARE men that actually say the same as the women is saying.

That is beyond the scope of this discussion, though...

[KOSLOX]

I'd bet the original author has a 10 year old son and just asked a group of his friends what they thought.

She ha two sons, asked them a few questions about the characters on the cover then decided, "Yep, I've got a clickbait article for the New Yorker." She didn't really even dive into what the book was about, so it seems she just looked at a cover and then wrote.

[Mathieu B]

Wow! I love her response. Very spot on.

[notable]

That New Yorker article is flat-out embarrassing. Lazy, poorly researched, poorly conceived, poorly written -- as a former newspaper editor, I finished it wondering who assigned that piece and how it ever made it online. Whoever upthread mentioned clickbait had it exactly right. This is like the New Yorker's version of BuzzFeed, but even more useless because it's passing itself off as intellectually stimulating. At least BuzzFeed and its ilk have the decency to admit that they're internet junk food. This piece is Cheez-Its masquerading as a wheel of brie.

I have a 9-year-old niece and a 5-year-old nephew. Maybe I'll have them look over the next issue of the New Yorker and give me their opinions. Clearly children are now legitimate cultural critics. I'll then include a section about how one time I went to a library and I looked at some old magazines and I got bored, and I'll casually namedrop my blog, and then suddenly I'll have an article worth printing in what is supposed to be one of our nation's leading publications. Blech.

[Rene Narciso]

I think I will be the only one here that agrees somewhat with Jill Lepore and her kids. Yes, this cover is pretty tame and respectful for superhero comic book standards, and in this way it's a step forward.

But the key here is "superhero comic book standards". After 30 years reading comics, I'm very used to it, and a cover like this doesn't make me look twice. It's actually a quite good and female-empowering cover and all that.

But get someone not used to superhero comics. Heh. Out of the mouth of babes, like they say in the Bible. We are so used to it that we forget, but someone ignorant of comics will not be so jaded to sexy, gorgeous women in super-tight clothes and sexy poses. Yep, the characters look and dress like porn stars. Particularly Dazzler and the other one kneeling.

[solletaire]

I think I will be the only one here that agrees somewhat with Jill Lepore and her kids. Yes, this cover is pretty tame and respectful for superhero comic book standards, and in this way it's a step forward.

But the key here is "superhero comic book standards". After 30 years reading comics, I'm very used to it, and a cover like this doesn't make me look twice. It's actually a quite good and female-empowering cover and all that.

But get someone not used to superhero comics. Heh. Out of the mouth of babes, like they say in the Bible. We are so used to it that we forget, but someone ignorant of comics will not be so jaded to sexy, gorgeous women in super-tight clothes and sexy poses. Yep, the characters look and dress like porn stars. Particularly Dazzler and the other one kneeling.

Although I would acknowledge your point... I also want to point out that by the same standard these same people who are not familiar with comics would feel the same way when looking at the male superheroes: Muscle bound, gorgeous men in poses exuding superiority, arrogance, and aggressiveness...

[t hedge coke]

Props to G Willow Wilson, being sound as always. And, props to Leia Calderon, too.

I'm just going to assume everything the New Yorker runs any more is researched by ten year olds with porn on the brain.

"Look at those women standing there. Standing. Like pornstars. On their feet, even! And most of them in clothes that cover their entire bodies! Why are there even this many girls in one room together?"

[Rene Narciso]

Although I would acknowledge your point... I also want to point out that by the same standard these same people who are not familiar with comics would feel the same way when looking at the male superheroes: Muscle bound, gorgeous men in poses exuding power, arrogance, and aggressiveness...

Sure.

Both heroes and heroines have become more flashy and exaggerated in the 1990s, and comics never returned to the more understated style from before, despite attempts.

It's just that we fans are so used to it.

[notajediyet]

I think I will be the only one here that agrees somewhat with Jill Lepore and her kids. Yes, this cover is pretty tame and respectful for superhero comic book standards, and in this way it's a step forward.

But the key here is "superhero comic book standards". After 30 years reading comics, I'm very used to it, and a cover like this doesn't make me look twice. It's actually a quite good and female-empowering cover and all that.

But get someone not used to superhero comics. Heh. Out of the mouth of babes, like they say in the Bible. We are so used to it that we forget, but someone ignorant of comics will not be so jaded to sexy, gorgeous women in super-tight clothes and sexy poses. Yep, the characters look and dress like porn stars. Particularly Dazzler and the other one kneeling.

You broke me out of lurk mode; congrats.

What would you have them wear? Superheroes don't wear sensible shoes and cotton blends. They wear tight fitting spandex, have unrealistic bodies, and somehow manage to fight in said outfits. Yeah, comics have a bad record with dressing their heroines in bathing suits. We got a way to go to get past the Hawkeye initiative. But comics, like fashion, is about unreal clothes on unreal bodies.

Good gravy, next you'll want Superman to fight crime in a T-shirt and jeans!