Marvel's Female Heroes And The Galbrush Paradox

[MarvelMaster616]

I wasn't sure where on CBR I should bring this issue up. If there's another thread that discusses this sort of thing, I apologize to the mods and feel free to merge this thread with that one. But for now, I'm just going to create a new thread so this sort of topic can be fleshed out.

The past few years have been pretty astonishing for Marvel's female heroes. Some forget that it wasn't that long ago when both Marvel and DC had an incredible lack of female solo titles. I think even Axel Alonso has brought it up before and he rightly pointed out that it was an issue. Women make up half the population, after all. Why shouldn't Marvel and DC try to cater to them? Why shouldn't they craft female heroes to appeal to a broader audience?

The success of the Wonder Woman movie showed that there is an audience for that sort of thing. Even before that, though, characters like X-23, Storm, Captain marvel, Kamala Khan, She-Hulk, Black Cat, Mockingbird, and Spider-Gwen have really helped Marvel expand its slate of female heroes. Overall, I think it's good for the industry. There should be a healthy mix, of sorts, for male and female heroes. It's in the interest of the industry as a whole to create a diverse range of heroes.

However, in recent times, mostly in the past couple years or so, I've noticed a few issues with female heroes that I think are worth discussing. It has to do with the unique challenges associated with developing female heroes. While this might not be a politically correct thing to say, developing compelling female heroes is different compared to male heroes. The standards are different. In some cases, there are double standards. There are some things you can do with a male character that wouldn't be very controversial, but if you did them with a female character, then it would probably spark an outcry.

Here are a few recent examples:

Last year when Fox was promoting X-men Apocalypse, it had to apologize for a billboard that showed Apocalypse choking Mystique. Even though this did happen in the movie, Fox still had to apologize because many found it to be in poor taste. If Apocalypse had been doing that to a male character, like Charles Xavier, then I don't think it would've been as big an issue. Again, I know that's not a politically correct statement, but I think it's a valid point.

We see it play out in the comics as well. Characters like Peter Parker and Tony Stark can go around, hooking up with all sorts of beautiful women without raising an eyebrow. If a female character does that, though, it takes on a different tone. Those characters are more likely to become villainous vixens like Emma Frost or Black Cat, which still draw the ire of a certain crowd.

That tone gets even more obscure when you look at how male characters are allowed to struggle and suffer. Wolverine and Cyclops can beat the crap out of each other in stories like Schism, but then share a beer later on in an issue of Wolverine and the X-men. However, Hank Pym can still NEVER live down how he struck Janet and can never do anything to redeem himself in the eyes of her or his friends.. Sure, women do clash at times, as Emma Frost and Jean Grey did. But it never escalated to the kind of violence and vitriol that we see with male characters.

In addition, female characters aren't allowed to really fail to the same extent as male characters. I've been seeing this a lot more lately with characters like Kamala Khan, Captain Marvel, Mockingbird, America Chavez, and even Rey from Star Wars. They still fight, but they rarely struggle or fail much. They're rarely allowed to undergo a lot of upheaval and for good reason. If they do that for male characters, then that's just character development. If they do that to female characters, though, it's sexist and generates an outcry.

There's actually a name for this phenomenon. It's called the Galbrush Paradox and it was coined during the GameGate fiasco a couple years ago. I recently wrote about it on my publishing blog because I'm trying to become a published author. And I've found that developing female characters is a lot harder than male characters. I find myself being a lot more careful with how I handle female characters because I don't want to get all these negative labels thrown at me or my work.

Now I don't deny that the writers at Marvel are much more talented and much more successful than I'll ever be. However, I've noticed that even they're struggling with this issue. Characters like Captain Marvel, America Chavez, and Kamala Khan don't really get to struggle, evolve, or overcome the same challenges as male characters. I can understand why Marvel is extra careful. Captain Marvel has a movie coming out in two years and the public is a lot more sensitive to the treatment of female characters these days. Just look at the outcry over what Joss Whedon did with Black Widow in Avengers: Age of Ultron.

I honestly worry that Marvel, and other comic companies, will let their female characters stagnate out of fear. They don't want to get labeled as sexist or being insensitive to minorities. I get that, but I think it's not good for the characters in the long run. When I look at a character like X-23, I don't think she could've been introduced today. I think there would be protests and outcries from fans and critics alike, claiming X-23 is just a male Wolverine and is somehow an affront to female characters everywhere.

That's just my opinion though. I wanted to open this thread up to a larger discussion. Do you share my concerns? Do you think Marvel is being too careful with its female characters? Do you think the Galbrush Paradox is even real? I think it's worth discussing.

[SpiderClops]

Female character when in leadership position/in-charge needs to have short hair???

[Crimz]

Most of the things you mention seem to usually happen in their solo books. In team books they seem to face the same adversities and are treated the same as the male heroes on the team.

Can't really blame the creators though, the added pressure make the solo's successful would lead most to play things safe.

[MarvelMaster616]

Most of the things you mention seem to usually happen in their solo books. In team books they seem to face the same adversities and are treated the same as the male heroes on the team.

Can't really blame the creators though, the added pressure make the solo's successful would lead most to play things safe.

That's kind of my point, though. The fact that Marvel has to keep playing it so safe is problem because it stifles creativity and innovation. In any industry, if you're too afraid to step outside the box, things tend to stagnate. Think back to the 80s when Frank Miller dared to tell a darker Batman story. That was a risk, but it paid off. It took the comics in a new direction. If they had played it safe, we never would've gotten groundbreaking stories like the Dark Knight Returns.

I also don't think we would've gotten stories like the Phoenix Saga or Civil War, stories that involved killing major characters and creating huge upheavals in the greatest world of superheroes. Right now, I don't see Marvel or DC taking those kinds of chances with their female heroes and I think that's going to be detrimental to them in the long run.

[Redjack]

1) speaking as a multiply published author, there's no difference, whatsoever in developing a male character vs a female. ZERO difference. Write human beings, make half of them female, repeat. The end. Anyone who tells you anything else is lying or doesn't know what they're talking about.

2) As for the rest, Gamergate was a trash fire from all sides and is best left on the dustbin of history. It has nothing whatsoever to do with comics, comic book fandom or the creation of comics or any other media. Zero. It's worthless.

3) The issue with the poster and the double standard on women's sexuality are not the same. not even part of the same thing. The problem people had with the X-Men billboard was it lacked context. COMIC BOOK fans and many fans of the films might not have a problem with such an image as they will place such things in their proper battle context. Movies aren't made for comic book fans. not even thesis films which are based on comic books are bing made for or in this case advertised to comic book fans. they are made for and pointed at the wider, general audience.

The issue was not one of "equality" but that this image used violence against women as part of its ADVERTISING SCHEME as an ENTICEMENT. It was a poor choice. The backlash was predictable and the company lost money when it had to replace all these billboards (which they did).

4) The sexuality of women in comics is an ugly issue not because of the creators (although there are several who should be in therapy rather than working their gender issues out in super-hero world) but because of the responses of fans who call women who have multiple partners "sluts." These emotionally stunted males (I won't call them men because actual men know better) can't stand the notion of a woman who is in charge of her sexuality and seek to shame any woman they perceive as being so. This is a problem in our society at large and something women have to deal with pretty much daily even BEFORE reaching the age where sex is an issue.

Mockingbird's most recent solo run and "core" audience reaction to it is a prime example of this. And there are plenty of examples in recent years where your question of "stunted female character growth" is simply proven false. This is both in solo titles and in group titles. There's no factual basis to support your fears. THOR is female right now for god's sake.

Your entire thesis and all your conclusions are flawed at very best and completely false in nearly every case. The paradigm you're creating doesn't exist so there's really no way to discuss your concerns except to tell you you've got it wrong.

Either you're just not seeing what's there because your viewpoint is a little off when it comes to this stuff or you're trying to stir up some gamer gate-esque nonsense over here in comic book world. Either way, you need to take another, better look at your subject matter. your question indicates you don't know what you're talking about yet.

[Captain M]

In a time where existence of female representation AT ALL makes many many people mad, I don't even think we should be worrying about this just yet. Because let's be honest this huge straight male demographic will hate whatever you do with female characters in any type of media. But I do agree with some of what you say.

[JKtheMac]

This whole idea is a mental trap. It is functionally the same as saying "I find it too difficult to write women, so I won't try and do it." or "The sexes will never understand each other." These arguments are as old as feminism and were rightly and thoroughly debunked way before this newer version of it ever cropped up. Zero issue, not even worth debating but to say it is nonsense.

[MarvelMaster616]

1) speaking as a multiply published author, there's no difference, whatsoever in developing a male character vs a female. ZERO difference. Write human beings, make half of them female, repeat. The end. Anyone who tells you anything else is lying or doesn't know what they're talking about.

2) As for the rest, Gamergate was a trashier from all sides and is best left on the dustbin of history. It has nothing whatsoever to do with comics, comic book fandom or the creation of comics or another media. Zero. It's worthless.

3) The issue with the poster and the double standard on women's sexuality are not the same. not even part of the same thing. The problem people had with the XMen billboard was it lacked context. COMIC BOOK fans and many fans of the films might not have a problem with such an image as they will place such things in their proper battle context. Movies aren't made for comic book fans. not even thesis films which are based on comic books are bing made for or in this case advertised to comic book fans. they are made for and pointed at the wider, general audience.

The issue was not one of "equality" but that this image used violence against women as part of its ADVERTISING SCHEME as an ENTICEMENT. It was a poor choice. The backlash was predictable and the company lost money when it had to replace all this billboards (which they did).

3) The sexuality of women in comics is an ugly issue not because of the creators (although there are several who should be in therapy rather than working their gender issues out in super-hero world) but because of the responses of fans who call women who have multiple partners "sluts." The emotionally stunted males (I won't call them men because actual men know better) can't stand the notion of a woman who is in charge of her sexuality and seek to shame any woman they perceive as being so. This is a problem in our society at large and something women have to deal with pretty much daily even BEFORE reaching the age where sex is an issue.

Mockingbird's most recent solo run and "core" audience reaction to it is a prime example of this. And there are plenty of examples in recent years where your question of "stunted female character growth" is simply proven false. This is both in solo titles and in group titles. There's no factual basis to support your fears. THOR is female right now for god's sake.

Your entire thesis and all your conclusions are flawed at very best and completely false in nearly every case. The paradigm you're creating doesn't exist so there's really no way to discuss your concerns except to tell you you've got it wrong.

Either you're just not seeing what's there because your viewpoint is a little off when it comes to this stuff or you're trying to stir up some gamer gate-esque nonsense over here in comic book world. Either way, you need to take another, better look at your subject matter. your question indicates you don't know what you're talking about yet.

Thanks for your insight. It's always good to hear from someone else who's trying to get into the publishing industry. I doubt my experience is the same as anyone who has ever attempted it so please don't get the impression that I'm trying to generalize here.

Just out of curiosity, what kind of stories do you write? Have you ever had a hard time developing a certain character? I ask because I think some examples would be helpful to make your point because I do disagree. I think it's too much of a stretch to say that there's ZERO difference between writing male and female characters. I think reasonable people can argue about the extent of that difference. It may be much smaller than I'm making it out to be, but I don't think it's zero.

Maybe the X-men: Apocalypse example wasn't the best one I could've used. I agree with you that it did lack context. It was easy for some people to construe that image as something inherently sexist. So maybe another example will help make my point.

Here's a quick thought experiment, one that some others have actually pointed out before. Go back and watch Iron Man 2. Specifically, watch the scene where Black Widow beats up all of Justin Hammer's thugs. Now, imagine the genders were reversed. Make all the men women and all the women men. Does the scene have the same impact? I think not. That's why I don't think it's right to say that there's zero difference.

Like it or not, there are double standards. Your characterization about sexualized female characters seems to assume that only straight white males make that criticism. That's not accurate. There are female fans out there and they make those criticisms as well. To lump all the vitriol into a single demographic is, in my opinion, misguided. It also skews the context of my point.

Female characters like Mockingbird, Captain Marvel, and Kamala Khan have their share of issues that are unrelated to my point. However, I think the fact they're held to a more rigid standard is detrimental to them in the long run. The fact that they can't go through the same growth and struggle that male heroes go through without scrutiny is an issue. And I think it has more to do with how we, the fans, react to them than the capacity for creativity at Marvel.

[Redjack]

Thanks for your insight. It's always good to hear from someone else who's trying to get into the publishing industry.

I'm not "trying to get in." I make a living writing fiction. I'm speaking from experience and observation, not theory.

Your "thought experiment" is ludicrous. I'm not saying that to be insulting (though you may find it so).

Write human beings. Make half of them female. Repeat. The end. Anyone who tells you otherwise has no idea what they're talking about or is lying.

[Baseman]

1) speaking as a multiply published author, there's no difference, whatsoever in developing a male character vs a female. ZERO difference. Write human beings, make half of them female, repeat. The end. Anyone who tells you anything else is lying or doesn't know what they're talking about.

2) As for the rest, Gamergate was a trash fire from all sides and is best left on the dustbin of history. It has nothing whatsoever to do with comics, comic book fandom or the creation of comics or any other media. Zero. It's worthless.

3) The issue with the poster and the double standard on women's sexuality are not the same. not even part of the same thing. The problem people had with the X-Men billboard was it lacked context. COMIC BOOK fans and many fans of the films might not have a problem with such an image as they will place such things in their proper battle context. Movies aren't made for comic book fans. not even thesis films which are based on comic books are bing made for or in this case advertised to comic book fans. they are made for and pointed at the wider, general audience.

The issue was not one of "equality" but that this image used violence against women as part of its ADVERTISING SCHEME as an ENTICEMENT. It was a poor choice. The backlash was predictable and the company lost money when it had to replace all this billboards (which they did).

4) The sexuality of women in comics is an ugly issue not because of the creators (although there are several who should be in therapy rather than working their gender issues out in super-hero world) but because of the responses of fans who call women who have multiple partners "sluts." These emotionally stunted males (I won't call them men because actual men know better) can't stand the notion of a woman who is in charge of her sexuality and seek to shame any woman they perceive as being so. This is a problem in our society at large and something women have to deal with pretty much daily even BEFORE reaching the age where sex is an issue.

Mockingbird's most recent solo run and "core" audience reaction to it is a prime example of this. And there are plenty of examples in recent years where your question of "stunted female character growth" is simply proven false. This is both in solo titles and in group titles. There's no factual basis to support your fears. THOR is female right now for god's sake.

Your entire thesis and all your conclusions are flawed at very best and completely false in nearly every case. The paradigm you're creating doesn't exist so there's really no way to discuss your concerns except to tell you you've got it wrong.

Either you're just not seeing what's there because your viewpoint is a little off when it comes to this stuff or you're trying to stir up some gamer gate-esque nonsense over here in comic book world. Either way, you need to take another, better look at your subject matter. your question indicates you don't know what you're talking about yet.

How much context can you expect from a still image?

[Redjack]

How much context can you expect from a still image?

precisely the point. if you only have a set of stills to work with in your advertising campaign, it's probably a stupid idea to use the one where a man is choking a woman to death. clearly reality agreed.

[Captain M]

precisely the point. if you only have a set of stills to work with in your advertising campaign, it's probably a stupid idea to use the one where a man is choking a woman to death. clearly reality agreed.

Yeah well the OP is saying why would it be considered a stupid idea if it won't be considered stupid if it's a guy who is getting chocked.

I mean let's face it the studios obviously had no intention of any of the accusations. All they wanted was to make people worried about mystique and know the stakes since Mystique happens to be the most popular character for the casual viewers.

[Redjack]

Yeah well the OP is saying why would it be considered a stupid idea

yeah. i get that. it isn't complex. the answer is what I said.

[jackolover]

I have thought about women heroes recently and I came up with a question.

What female hero has a power set no male is able to duplicate, or, the male heroes couldn't replace if she went missing?

I know Sue Richards power set is unique, and may not be replaced by any male counterpart.

If you were going to replace the FF with all females who would they be? Kamala for Stretcho, Lunella for Reed, Firestar for the Torch, She-Hulk for Ben?

But the most impressive thing that has stuck in my conscience lately has been the super group the A-Force of female-only characters. This is a team that uses female values and decision making that makes for a unique approach compared to the macho blast-em' method of Captain Americas All Boys Avengers. The Wasp has been the only counterbalance to this all-male domination of super heroes, until that point a female group was formed around Sue and Jennifer. When the A-Force made its appearance in Secret Wars, it was like a world of Amazons. What it really needed was a great female villain, like Morgana Le Fey, or Madam Hydra to test the construction of attack of the A-Force. I have always really loved the female villains who really lost their temper, and had to be chastised and humiliated. Those were always the best encounters.

Some characters were rather deadpan, like X-23 and Carol Danvers who were all business, but the ones like Nico and Kamala added softer emotional moments you don't get with male heroes.

One Australian artist does a comic called the 4 Horsefems, and they are a mix of butch females and softer characters, fighting all sorts of threats like the Devil or Martians. It gives a great insight into the purely female dynamic, where a female group allows expression of their personality, whereas females in male groups tend to be more protective of their individuality and hide it. Not in female groups, as best shown when Carol Danvers fronted the Alpha Flight in Secret Wars - a group of female pilots in a flight group, (first seen in an earlier Captain Marvel time travel story in the regular universe).

[SpiderClops]