She Has No head: Revisiting "No, It's Not Equal"

[Mbast1]

I don't think that actually has to much to do with people criticizing his use of on-panel (and often for humor) rape.

I know. It's a hard thing to decide on. I think his work is generally progressive (and brilliant, honestly a big fan of this work) but that doesn't mean there's nothing to criticize. I just have no interest in the "I hate him cause he won't write my superheroes" crowd. And that is SOME of the voices.

[Mbast1]

That's what I meant, it was around but nowhere easy to get as it is now.

It seems to have been a lot easier to get than people think.

Also Marston's stories are laced with all the stuff that an adult would recognize, but that a child would not.

I just don't know how you can know that.

but I doubt that children recognized it.

I don't think we can know. Adults seem to have always thought children didn't know.

[Jadis]

I picked up her last issue and it wasn't that bad. I go issue to issue with her really. I just have to remember that like Huntress, Zatanna, Power Girl, Wonder Girl and many, many others the character I originally liked is dead and buried under tons of bad writing. This new Carol Danvers may have the blonde hair and the name but that's about all she has in common with the character I used to read. It's like Supergirl, the nice girl who I read in the silver age has been replaced by a bitter, short tempered brat with an ugly costume. Or Mary Marvel when DC changed her from nice to dominatrix. Or Fire when they changed her from supermodel to assassin for Checkmate, or Ice when they zapped her origin. In my opinion in their quest to stamp their own ego-imprint on characters many comic book writers go out of their way to anger old fans like myself and love nothing more than taunting us about it.

I have mixed feelings, depending upon the character. Someone like Supergirl I see ups and downs with. The character kind of came over as bland to me some times in the past. Though on occasions when I did bother to pick up her book or get some classic Superman Family material with her in it, she was often bright easy reading for when I wanted something safe and known. Some of her old stories tend to read better over time for me, for whatever reason.

In recent years she tends to be more edgey and I can either like her or don't at all. When handled well it can give her more of her own personality. As opposed to feeling like what Superman might be if he were younger and female. But that said I'm glad the Red Lantern thing is just temporary cause it's too altered the fundamental essence of her being Supergirl. Maybe she will come out of this mellowed out some?

With Carol I think it's an ongoing mess. She was depicted as a toady in Civil War and as a careless drunk before that. I had hoped the character was starting to regain some footing with her Avengers tv series material and some of the better issues from the Reed run. But everything KSD from the writing to the art (1st volume especially) to the uniform to the name doesn't work for me. The "She lost her memories again" thing is a poor and uncreative road to travel again imo.

I would hope one could at least refrain from starting your own run with WWII Japanese soldiers surrendering to howling female commandos. And not follow it up with Carol living in the Statue of Liberty. Coming up with better material than that is asking fairly little of a professional writer imo.

I largely agree about people like Ice and Huntress. I can't really say about some others (like Fire and Wonder Girl) because I never cared about them, or followed them closely enough as the case may be, much in the first place.

[Pól Rua]

You'd be amazed how often I've heard that and how little credence I give to it. I think part of it is that I grew up on marvel where continuity and the shared universe were the hallmarks of that company.

Is that the continuity where Tony Stark was wounded in the Korean Conflict, Reed Richards and Ben Grimm were World War II veterans and Flash Thompson served in Vietnam? Or are you talking about the continuity where Julie Power appeared simultaneously as a pre-teen adolescent and a young adult?
Or do you just choose to ignore those stories?
The simple fact is that when you're dealing with a world which incorporates elements of 'real world' context and unaging characters over a period of three quarters of a century, you HAVE to do it. You're doing it already.

[Pól Rua]

I probably did, I'm just not seeing how the new one is so much better.

Because the first one looks like every single other character, and the second one doesn't. It demonstrates that women don't come in just one shape or size, or that that shape or size is the only one that's 'acceptible'. In addition, the first character is pretty much a blatantly derivative knock-off of an existing character that adds little or nothing to that character while the second is a distinct character BASED on that idea which actually has something to say.
In addition, the first character was designed by Rob Liefeld who is a terrible designer and artist, and the second by Ross Campbell who is an excellent designer and artist.

So yeah. There's that.

[the4thpip]

Is that the continuity where Tony Stark was wounded in the Korean Conflict, Reed Richards and Ben Grimm were World War II veterans and Flash Thompson served in Vietnam? Or are you talking about the continuity where Julie Power appeared simultaneously as a pre-teen adolescent and a young adult?
Or do you just choose to ignore those stories?
The simple fact is that when you're dealing with a world which incorporates elements of 'real world' context and unaging characters over a period of three quarters of a century, you HAVE to do it. You're doing it already.

And then there was Bruce Jones' run on Incredible Hulk which seems to be canon in small parts. How many times did they bring back Betty from the dead until it held?

[Mark]

Slightly back on topic, it is covers like these that really showcase the problem both with the way Carol's black suit was drawn and the fairness aspect between male and female superhero costumes.

Avengers 9.jpg

While Namor is showing more skin than Carol he's not featured fully on the cover and his swim trunks are not cut the same way. If Carol's suit had been drawn with the same cut with which it had originally had been drawn drawn there wouldn't have been much wrong with it.

[ed2962]

Slightly back on topic, it is covers like these that really showcase the problem both with the way Carol's black suit was drawn and the fairness aspect between male and female superhero costumes.

Avengers 9.jpg

While Namor is showing more skin than Carol he's not featured fully on the cover and his swim trunks are not cut the same way. If Carol's suit had been drawn with the same cut with which it had originally had been drawn drawn there wouldn't have been much wrong with it.

What helps is that it's Alex Ross and he's generally able to keep things tasteful even when he's drawing someone in a skimpy costume. There's a Red Sonja cover he did with the chain mail bikini, but Red doesn't look like a Penthouse model, she's looking down at the viewer and she's fierce and bad ass.

[Wedge Antilles]

I think for the most part comics now are less "sex-charged" than the 90s. Exceptions exist of course, but generally less now.

[Mark]

What helps is that it's Alex Ross and he's generally able to keep things tasteful even when he's drawing someone in a skimpy costume. There's a Red Sonja cover he did with the chain mail bikini, but Red doesn't look like a Penthouse model, she's looking down at the viewer and she's fierce and bad ass.

But if Namor's suit had the same cut style as Carol's don't you think that marvel would have gotten letters?

[t hedge coke]

But if Namor's suit had the same cut style as Carol's don't you think that marvel would have gotten letters?

Oh, they would have. Heck, even his normal trunks get upset letters on occasion. Especially if he's treated in a mildly sexualized fashion, such as 1234 or the Watson Namor series.

It's a weird gauge, with some of fandom. There were fans super angry and hurt by the JLA comic, New Maps of Hell, because there's jokes in it, between Lois and Clark, re an intern being cute and how Clark should be waiting at home later wearing biking shorts and bearing hot coffee. Those same fans, I have little doubt, had no trouble with a Superman comic from around the same time, where Lois surprises her husband at home wearing negligee on-panel. But the idea of Superman showing off in tight pants for his wife just in dialogue was enough to set them off.

[ed2962]

But if Namor's suit had the same cut style as Carol's don't you think that marvel would have gotten letters?

Oh, sure! If say Michael Turner or Ed Benes did page after page accentuating Namor's pouch, male fans would definitely have issues with it.

[TroubleWithTrebles]

"In addition, the first character is pretty much a blatantly derivative knock-off of an existing character that adds little or nothing to that character while the second is a distinct character BASED on that idea which actually has something to say."

We should all be careful when making sweeping declaratives. Even down under, potentially, glass houses and rocks can ruin any point.

At least in the example Mr. Rua used above, it was a case of a paid professional's work being ripped off by another paid professional.

Unfortunately, in the case where paid professional work is ripped off by non professional hobbyists who don't have the writing chops, the creativity or the work ethic to make Manthing out of Swamp Thing, said-hobbyists merely cannibalize a character or plot, then regurgitate, then shamelessly and gormlessly claim that their efforts are "new" because of a few paltry differences. Like the difference between an image that is visually appealing or simply sexist and sexploitative (because that is the easy way out like plagiarism).

Despite non pro protests to the contrary, there is a spacious divide, a yawning canyon, between self publishing and self aggrandizing vanity press supported by nothing but emperor's new clothes support provided by other vanity press posturing poseurs, who are not to be conflated with true auteurs such as Drew Hayes, or the highly successful playwright who wrote and co-created The Deep.

Other folks, whom claim their work is in the same boat as successful auteurs, but are not, & their work can be argued as half baked rip offs, are not held in the same regard at all, despite being touted by their emperor's new clothes pals. If someone supports said rip offs, their veracity RE comments about rip offs becomes questionable. This of course is modulated by the opinions of the audience, and whether they think something is a rip off or not, like whether they think that a current Elektra costume iteration is sexist or not.

For this thread, we can cite TANK GIRL, one of the greatest [kinda indie but actually corporate] feminist comics ever, also one of the most beloved by PFLAG and LGBTQ comics ever, and one of the comics that flipped off sexploitatation in the most unabashed manner. Tank Girl is also possibly one of the most pertinent comics characters to this thread. And the aforementioned three aspects of the comic which could not be achieved without the counterbalanceed character of Booga, the anthropomorphosed kangaroo, as the social commentary in the Neal Adams Green Lantern/Green Arrow run was not possible without the second banana of Ollie Queen.

So would the audience consider "Killeroo" ["created" more than several years after Tank Girl and Booga were sold worldwide] to be a new character or a rip off? Are its so called differences truly different or merely the detritus of taking the easier way out with the character instead of doing the harder work of character development in an original way, and calling a difference/disparity in quality a "difference between the characters"?

Tank Girl and Booga:



And then the "newer" Killeroo:



Because discussing the difference between a rip off and an evolution of a character type is like debating whether a thong suit with cameltoe is reasonable because "it frees up the woman's movement for combat", or just titillation.

Since sexuality and sexualized material often falls under the pervue (pun intended) of semiotics, the precepts of the great Semiotician Umberto Eco could be condensed here, for the comments about fanboys and rip offs both, as "Context of the commentator belies the comment, as the cultural reason for making the comment to the audience will be recognized by the audience, which will then tailor their reaction to the comment (of the self presumed pundit) accordingly".

Gay or straight, male or female, anglo or not, fan-sans-credits or published pro.

And yes, an unpaid podcaster still constitutes being a fan-sans-credits and not the status of "pro".

[Brian Cronin]

A. A debate about whether Marvel used to care about continuity in the past but now doesn't is non-starter, as Pol and others have explained. However, more importantly...

B. A debate about continuity period is off-topic for this thread, plus, of course, the attempt to...

C. Turn that debate about continuity into some odd "men are being picked on" debate is also a non-starter. So don't, you know, try to start it.

[TroubleWithTrebles]

Okay, have to ask: leaving panel to panel layout aside, if we go simply on splash pages and covers, WHAT is the appeal of the controlled linework of Benes, what is the appeal for the static images? The faces seem blank. There seems to be no soul in it even compared to figures in less corporate work.

The merits of his work seem to have no reliance on boobies or pudendums; he could easily do a reprise of a male focused pseudo metaphysical character like Dr. Fate and avoid all the derisive mentions of his name here, in this context.