What if he doesn't come back?

[A Guy's Name]

Well, this thread has turned from discussing what would a reader do if New-52 Superman doesn't return (which I have faith that he willl) to the hiring practices of DC when it come the gender/sex of the creators.
Hehehehe.
Now, if only this was a Monty Python sketch, we can also discuss the justification of having strange women living in ponds throwing swords at people being the basis of the system of government.

[Ascended]

I myself would rather have a higher quality of creator (and most especially editor!!!!!!) on the Super-books. And Im not too concerned about what they are. Male, female, white, brown, black, green, blue, gay, straight, trans, omnisexual....if a gay monkey with bad eyesight and a smoking problem will do a better job than the guys currently in the office, then I say hire him (or her!). If some person with no experience in the field will do a better job, hire them! As a consumer, product quality is what matters to me the most, the rest is secondary.

Affirmative action is a great thing (though there are compelling arguments that most American companies are beyond the need of it now, though that's debatable and other companies in other nations like Germany are woefully behind and still benefit from it), but not if it comes at the cost of product quality. Then you're just shooting yourself in the foot for a vague externality that isnt likely to impact your bottom line in any meaningful way. About the only exception to that rule in industries like this one is when the company takes that minority hire and makes a big deal over it, like Marvel did with the Ms. Marvel creators. That earns you a chunk of points and generates damn solid WoM advertising at a premium cost, but unless you're willing to market your creators like you do your product, it has very little impact in businesses where the employee is rarely seen and whose name isn't even known to the majority of consumers.

I am all about Corporate Social Responsibility, but no business should damage itself for it (that's government's job). So if DC can find better talent, great! I dont care what they look like as long as they do a better job. If all they're capable of is the same quality we have now there's no point in hiring them for Superman. Put them on a book that is doing worse so that title's quality rises.

[Ascended]

Well, this thread has turned from discussing what would a reader do if New-52 Superman doesn't return (which I have faith that he willl) to the hiring practices of DC when it come the gender/sex of the creators.
Hehehehe.
Now, if only this was a Monty Python sketch, we can also discuss the justification of having strange women living in ponds throwing swords at people being the basis of the system of government.

If this were a Monty Python sketch, we could also have Superman team up with a man who some men call....

TIM!!?

[Francisco]

More talented people and if they happen to be women... Awesome

[A Guy's Name]

If this were a Monty Python sketch, we could also have Superman team up with a man who some men call....

TIM!!?

*Unnecessary explosions in the distance*
I know you, Superman.
*Pyrotechnic fire*
And you seek the Holy Grrrrrrrraaaill!
*Boom! Boooowwhh! BOOOOOM!*

[victorsage]

I'm curious why it was necessary to add this clarification on your part. Did my suggestion that DC hire more women to work in its Superman office somehow imply that gender was more important to me than "good stories," as you say? I think that Superman stories should be produced by more women than work on them now because women can do the job just as well as the men who are currently hired. So, if more women are hired, DC not only gets the benefits of a more gender-balanced Superman office, but it also gets to hire women who are equally as capable as men. It's a win-win.

By saying it would be better to hire more women, you are implying that said women writers would improve the story. Simply because of their genitalia, since their womanhood is what you are pointing out as important. "Gender balance" doesn't matter. Actual talent level does.

[victorsage]

More talented people and if they happen to be women... Awesome

Pretty much agree. I know this is radical to say now a days, but I really don't care what's between a person's legs, or what race they are, or what their politics is, or who they want to sleep with. I just want people who are good at creating stories around DC's characters. That's all anyone should want.

[misslane]

Actually that's exactly what you are implying. If the women that are going to be hired will do the job just as good as the men who are currently working at the super office why should they hired them if they already have men doing just as good work as they would? The only reason to hire them is because they're women. I don't want them to hire more women perse. What Superman needs is more talented people who actually like the character and want to tell good stories with him. People who understands that he is the star and threat him as such.

I'm not saying I want anyone fired for no good reason. I'm just saying having more women creators in comics is a good goal just as it would be to have more women in politics or any field. I am not saying they should be hired BECAUSE they are women, but because they do a good job. Sometimes offices don't hire women because they have a backward mindset. Rumor has it women have been less involved in the Superman office specifically because the company wants to avoid new incidents with the harasser, Eddie Berganza. I would like women to have the same opportunity as men to work on Superman, and I think it would be nice to have a woman write the character; it's been awhile. No where did I say I was prioritizing gender over talent.

[misslane]

By saying it would be better to hire more women, you are implying that said women writers would improve the story. Simply because of their genitalia, since their womanhood is what you are pointing out as important. "Gender balance" doesn't matter. Actual talent level does.

It would be better to hire more women because I like to see more women in the industry that is predominantly men. Do you think it's more men because they want it more or are just better at it? Or do you think there have been barriers to women's involvement? You are misunderstanding and misrepresenting what I said. I want women who are talented to get the same opportunities as men who are talented to work on Superman. I never said I wanted women hired just because of their gender.

[misslane]

I myself would rather have a higher quality of creator (and most especially editor!!!!!!) on the Super-books. And Im not too concerned about what they are. Male, female, white, brown, black, green, blue, gay, straight, trans, omnisexual....if a gay monkey with bad eyesight and a smoking problem will do a better job than the guys currently in the office, then I say hire him (or her!). If some person with no experience in the field will do a better job, hire them! As a consumer, product quality is what matters to me the most, the rest is secondary.

Affirmative action is a great thing (though there are compelling arguments that most American companies are beyond the need of it now, though that's debatable and other companies in other nations like Germany are woefully behind and still benefit from it), but not if it comes at the cost of product quality. Then you're just shooting yourself in the foot for a vague externality that isnt likely to impact your bottom line in any meaningful way. About the only exception to that rule in industries like this one is when the company takes that minority hire and makes a big deal over it, like Marvel did with the Ms. Marvel creators. That earns you a chunk of points and generates damn solid WoM advertising at a premium cost, but unless you're willing to market your creators like you do your product, it has very little impact in businesses where the employee is rarely seen and whose name isn't even known to the majority of consumers.

I am all about Corporate Social Responsibility, but no business should damage itself for it (that's government's job). So if DC can find better talent, great! I dont care what they look like as long as they do a better job. If all they're capable of is the same quality we have now there's no point in hiring them for Superman. Put them on a book that is doing worse so that title's quality rises.

Who's talking about affirmative action? Who knows why fewer women work on Superman or in comics? I have some guesses, and not all of them have to do with women's lack of interest or talent. I hope DC is open to talented women and is seeking them out. So what I want is for more women to have the opportunity to work on Superman, and to do so because they have the desire and talent to do so. Do you think someone saying that they'd like to see a female President of the United States in her lifetime is saying that they just want any woman regardless of qualifications or beliefs? Again, this is about opportunity. I hope that women are given the same opportunity as men and that there aren't attitudinal or institutional barriers to them working in comics and on Superman specifically. Are you (and others) seriously denying that there aren't factors beyond women's talent and interest that might be keeping them away from comics and Superman specifically?

[vasir12]

More talented people and if they happen to be women... Awesome

Dude, diversity in people's background is diversity in perspective. Different perspectives interacting lends itself to better stories in the think tank.

[Tayswift]

agree, let's hire the best talented suited to superman books independent of color or gender. So we got Scott Lobdell ohhhhhhhhh yeaaaaaaahh
I kind of don't fell for this anymore

[Dataweaver]

Pretty much agree. I know this is radical to say now a days, but I really don't care what's between a person's legs, or what race they are, or what their politics is, or who they want to sleep with. I just want people who are good at creating stories around DC's characters. That's all anyone should want.

I tend to agree, with the sole caveat that all too often, the writer lets these things become a drag on his or her writing, because s/he is more concerned with making a point than with telling good stories.

Don't get me wrong; a story can promote an agenda and still be a good story; but the story's quality should come first, and any activism should only be in there if it helps the story.

[Ascended]

Who's talking about affirmative action?

?????

You were.

"They should hire more women. It'll make the stories better." Talent and quality weren't mentioned. Just gender.

So you're including the likes of Ann Nocenti and Meriditch Finch. I'll pass.

Perhaps you assumed that a requirement of "talented" was obvious enough it didnt need to be mentioned?

Also, I didnt reply directly to you or your post. Just commenting on the discussion in general.

[misslane]

I tend to agree, with the sole caveat that all too often, the writer lets these things become a drag on his or her writing, because s/he is more concerned with making a point than with telling good stories.

Don't get me wrong; a story can promote an agenda and still be a good story; but the story's quality should come first, and any activism should only be in there if it helps the story.

Again, I don't think you guys realize how unbelievably sexist all of this stuff sounds. When I suggested that I'd like to see more women in comics, your first response isn't to agree but rather to offer numerous concerned caveats related to the talent and agendas of these prospective writers. Your kneejerk reaction to someone expressing a desire to see more gender parity in the Superman office is not that hiring more women means hiring more people who are as talented as men and can offer a unique perspective to Superman comics. No, instead, your first response is to generate a list of concerns and fears about the dangers of hiring more women. For example, it seems common concerns are that hiring more women means confronting the scary possibility that DC would be hiring a bunch of untalented hacks to meet a non-existent affirmative action requirement.

You know, sometimes when someone -- in this case that someone is me -- says that she would like to see more women involved in making Superman comics, she just means that more talented women with good ideas should be hired. They do exist, you know. It's funny, when guys here talk about hiring more innovative writers for Superman (i.e. getting rid of someone like Dan Jurgens in favor of someone like Max Landis) no one writes fearful posts about how these new hires could be untalented social justice warriors hired for the sole reason of increasing diversity. No, when it comes to hiring women, apparently what is between her legs matters a great deal. Because what is in between her legs means that just the idea of hiring her means that boogeymen like special treatment and agenda-driven writing is of the utmost concern.

In other words, the next time someone says that it would be nice to see more women involved in the creation of Superman comics, it would be nice if the first thing that's said isn't that it's important to hire talented people who can write things besides thinly disguised feminist propaganda. Maybe it's okay to just say that with so many talented female creators out there right now, it would be great if some of them could bring those talents to Superman. Hiring more women isn't something that should be the cause of concern. If hiring more women concerns you this much, women aren't the problem, you are.