Why areMarvel's Superheroines Less Popular than DC's?

[Atlanta96]

We talking about the same Harley that aided the Joker in killing Lois and destroying Metropolis in the first place? What exactly is your criteria for heroic?

I said IN THAT GAME. Supergirl's heroism and competence in I2 was at least on par with the mass murderer.

[Frontier]

(Shrugs) I liked Injustice Supergirl...definitely more then Superman, at any rate .

[Confuzzled]

But they are under different departments. Each department has to make money. WB will not keep subsidizing DC if it keeps losing money. The same way that Disney will not keep subsidizing Marvel if they are losing money. An idea needs to show it can make money if it is to succeed.

It's not like most of the superhero blockbusters making money were big comic book hits. Most of the MCU titles and heck, even Suicide Squad fall into this category.

Once most of the current older readership die out, comics will most likely go digital anyway. Two heads of DC Comics talking about the death of the industry at Comic Con is a portent.

[keeen]

As stated by another user, it is not done quite as "obnoxiously". They have an agenda to push, while DC has comics to sell.

People like this talking about "agenda pushing" is ironic, to say the least.

People like the drug story with Roy

Lol, what?

[Electricmastro]

In retrospect, I think that many of Marvel's most published women have been too closely associated with teams (e.g. Storm, Invisible Woman, Scarlet Witch, Black Widow, Wasp, etc.) and haven't been built up in a way that they've headlined their own titles to a level of success on par with the success their team-related titles have built up. With DC's women, like Wonder Woman, Barbara Gordon, Supergirl, Catwoman, and Harley Quinn, I'd say they've been at the center of their own titles which have gained considerable success on par with the titles in which they team-up with other characters. I think it's that sort of individual distinction which can help characters be seen less as "Oh look, there's that character that was part of a popular team I'm familiar with!" and more as "Oh look, there's that popular character I'm familiar with!" and that perhaps being so closely associated with a team can make it harder to boost their own individual popularity, because teams inevitably divide that popularity between its members.

[RobinFan4880]

It is all about promoting the characters at the right time, both in comics and in other media. It is a game of playing to the zeitgeist. DC was just better, or luckier, when playing that game.

[Relugus]

DC promotes it's women as much more complete characters.

Marvel uses their women on teams to support their male leads, and as plot devices. They are either portrayed as out of control or as shallow Mary Sue's.

DC's women are allowed to have their own identity. It's notable how many DC heroines stand alone as characters; Wonder Woman, Supergirl, Batgirl, Catwoman, Harley Quinn, Zatanna, Huntress, Raven. Note that even the "gender swap" characters have their own narrative.

Marvel's women have no narratives of their own, they are all pretty much subordinate to teams and the men who lead those teams.

Storm, for all that people hold her up as am exemplar, always plays second fiddle to Wolverine and Cyclops. Look at how laughably small her role is in HoX and PoX.
Marvel writers don't care much for her.

Scarlet Witch is not even viewed as a character by most of Marvel's writers and the fandom, she is viewed by the fandom as nothing more than a plot device to facilitate other characters arcs, because that is how Marvel have used her.

She-Hulk was once a great example of Marvel getting a female character right, but Jason Aaron has now turned her into an immitation of the Hulk, removing what made Jennifer unique.

Whereas DCs women stand apart from Batman and Superman, Marvel's women must always play second fiddle to Spiderman and Wolverine.

DC women are dynamic and important. Marvel's women are, to put it brutally, treated as window dressing.

[Sutekh]

Marvel uses their women on teams to support their male leads, and as plot devices. They are either portrayed as out of control or as shallow Mary Sue's.

As a fan of both Marvel *and* DC, I'd love to disagree with the stuff you've said, but you've nailed some uncomfortable truths. Women of *real* power, like Jean Grey or Wanda Maximoff, tend to get saddled with 'wimmen be cray/can't handle power' plotlines where people in charge (men!) are arguing whether or not they have to be stripped of that power (or killed!) for the greater good. That's an ugly trope, IMO, and it seems that the more powerful a female character gets, the more likely she is to 'lose control' and have some dudes arguing about how she needs to be stripped of that power or taken down.

On the other hand, DC doesn't really have a lot of female heroes operating at those levels of power. Folk with world-affecting levels of power, like the Specter, Dr. Fate, Dr. Manhattan, etc. tend to be dudes. Zatanna is a close parallel to the Scarlet Witch, in some respects, and *literally* changes the world by speaking, but not nearly at the same level as Wanda did when she said 'No more mutants.' There are a few women that I'd hold up as on par, like Tomorrow Woman, or Circe, but they are either villains, or barely ever used. DC seems more comfortable with lower powered female characters, no matter how horribly Marvel (mis)uses their very powerful female characters. When DC *does* have powerful women, they tend to be women with the exact same powerset as their powerful men, such as Supergirl, Jessica Cruz, Bombshell, Mary Marvel or Miss Martian, which is kind of derivative, IMO, where Marvel seems to have more some powerful women like Storm or Monica Rambeau or Sersi who aren't 'the girl Quasar' or 'the lady Thor.'

Both companies could do better, I think.

[Agent Z]

As a fan of both Marvel *and* DC, I'd love to disagree with the stuff you've said, but you've nailed some uncomfortable truths. Women of *real* power, like Jean Grey or Wanda Maximoff, tend to get saddled with 'wimmen be cray/can't handle power' plotlines where people in charge (men!) are arguing whether or not they have to be stripped of that power (or killed!) for the greater good. That's an ugly trope, IMO, and it seems that the more powerful a female character gets, the more likely she is to 'lose control' and have some dudes arguing about how she needs to be stripped of that power or taken down.

On the other hand, DC doesn't really have a lot of female heroes operating at those levels of power. Folk with world-affecting levels of power, like the Specter, Dr. Fate, Dr. Manhattan, etc. tend to be dudes. Zatanna is a close parallel to the Scarlet Witch, in some respects, and *literally* changes the world by speaking, but not nearly at the same level as Wanda did when she said 'No more mutants.' There are a few women that I'd hold up as on par, like Tomorrow Woman, or Circe, but they are either villains, or barely ever used. DC seems more comfortable with lower powered female characters, no matter how horribly Marvel (mis)uses their very powerful female characters. When DC *does* have powerful women, they tend to be women with the exact same powerset as their powerful men, such as Supergirl, Jessica Cruz, Bombshell, Mary Marvel or Miss Martian, which is kind of derivative, IMO, where Marvel seems to have more some powerful women like Storm or Monica Rambeau or Sersi who aren't 'the girl Quasar' or 'the lady Thor.'

Both companies could do better, I think.

I'm sure Zatanna fans are quite grateful we won't get the DC equivalent of "no more mutants" with her. The only use for reality warpers in comics is as villains or plot devices.

The idea DC isn't comfortable with powerful women is absurd given they've had ongoing or limited series for Wonder Woman, Raven, Starfire, Enchantress, Amethyst, Mera, Terra, Naomi, Supergirl etc.

Marvel relies on high powered derivatives as much as DC does. Actually moreso. Carol Danvers, Storm (who is basically Thor without super strength), She-hulk, Scarlet Witch and as of recent Betsy Braddock as the new Captain Britain.

That leaves only Sue (who has also had her "women be crazy" moments and is only just now getting something to do besides nannying the FF), Monica who has never had a solo series and whose history of having her codenames taken from her is practically a running gag, Sersi who has never had a solo series and Jean Grey (do I need to explain this one?).

[Killerbee911]

DC promotes it's women as much more complete characters.

Marvel uses their women on teams to support their male leads, and as plot devices. They are either portrayed as out of control or as shallow Mary Sue's.

DC's women are allowed to have their own identity. It's notable how many DC heroines stand alone as characters; Wonder Woman, Supergirl, Batgirl, Catwoman, Harley Quinn, Zatanna, Huntress, Raven. Note that even the "gender swap" characters have their own narrative.

Marvel's women have no narratives of their own, they are all pretty much subordinate to teams and the men who lead those teams.

This such a bad opinion that I can't help but comment on it, DC women have narratives of their own okay put them in a book with their male counterpart which them disappear and this is after solo years of character work. No DC female character will get priority over in a story over a their male gender flip and vast majority are that. DC women are real characters until are put in situation with their male counterpart which tend to be important stories. You want to see Wonder Woman disappear put in her a meaningful story with Superman and Batman. You want see Batgirl,Huntress and Catwoman disappear put them in a event book with Batman. What is the point of "strong complete character" if they are useless around a more popular male character in important stories. I am not trying to bash DC woman either DC has the same problem described by poster in a different form but hey at least DC has historically support female solo books right?

The Marvel problem described was exaggerated. Storm plays second fiddle to Wolverine and Cyclops but Cyclops and Wolverine haved play second fiddle Storm, Jean Grey, Emma, Kitty as well. Cyclops and Wolverine are back from dead so yeah they are going to get some focus. But who was leading in during those years when Xavier, Cyclops, and Wolverine were dead that is right Storm and then Kitty. Think about that is like the Justice League killing Batman and Superman leaving it in hands of Wonder Woman and Mera for 5 years. When has DC show faith in female characters to carry a line like that? You mention Storm in Hox and Pox but you fail to mention that Moria was the person with most page time in that series. Window dressing? Psylocke is leading Excalibur, Kitty and Emma leading the Marauders, I am pretty sure Moonstar or Magik is co leading New Mutants, Kwannon is the focus of Fallen Angels, Moria is getting a solo in Wave 2. Remember when I said DC females vast majority where a gender flip well Marvel has joined that trend with Valkyrie, X-23, Ms Marvel, Ghost Spider, Shuri, Ironheart, Wasp, Gwenpool which has had very degrees of success. Marvel has also Moon Girl, Black Cat, Squirrel Girl and Aero out.

Both of the companies are flawed in how they have handle females. DC gets better marks for solo projects with females, Marvel gets better marks for using Women in high profile stuff and women in leadership. Both need to do better. So to answer question why is DC heroines more popular than Marvel because DC was better at flip and spinning off female version of popular concept, Something Marvel has done as well with characters like Ghost Spider ,X23 and Valkyrie now.

[Agent Z]

This such a bad opinion that I can't help but comment on it, DC women have narratives of their own okay put them in a book with their male counterpart which them disappear and this is after solo years of character work. No DC female character will get priority over in a story over a their male gender flip and vast majority are that. DC women are real characters until are put in situation with their male counterpart which tend to be important stories. You want to see Wonder Woman disappear put in her a meaningful story with Superman and Batman. You want see Batgirl,Huntress and Catwoman disappear put them in a event book with Batman. What is the point of "strong complete character" if they are useless around a more popular male character in important stories. I am not trying to bash DC woman either DC has the same problem described by poster in a different form but hey at least DC has historically support female solo books right?

The Marvel problem described was exaggerated. Storm plays second fiddle to Wolverine and Cyclops but Cyclops and Wolverine haved play second fiddle Storm, Jean Grey, Emma, Kitty as well. Cyclops and Wolverine are back from dead so yeah they are going to get some focus. But who was leading in during those years when Xavier, Cyclops, and Wolverine were dead that is right Storm and then Kitty. Think about that is like the Justice League killing Batman and Superman leaving it in hands of Wonder Woman and Mera for 5 years. When has DC show faith in female characters to carry a line like that? You mention Storm in Hox and Pox but you fail to mention that Moria was the person with most page time in that series. Window dressing? Psylocke is leading Excalibur, Kitty and Emma leading the Marauders, I am pretty sure Moonstar or Magik is co leading New Mutants, Kwannon is the focus of Fallen Angels, Moria is getting a solo in Wave 2. Remember when I said DC females vast majority where a gender flip well Marvel has joined that trend with Valkyrie, X-23, Ms Marvel, Ghost Spider, Shuri, Ironheart, Wasp, Gwenpool which has had very degrees of success. Marvel has also Moon Girl, Black Cat, Squirrel Girl and Aero out.

Both of the companies are flawed in how they have handle females. DC gets better marks for solo projects with females, Marvel gets better marks for using Women in high profile stuff and women in leadership. Both need to do better. So to answer question why is DC heroines more popular than Marvel because DC was better at flip and spinning off female version of popular concept, Something Marvel has done as well with characters like Ghost Spider ,X23 and Valkyrie now.

No one ever claimed DC would ever prioritize a female character over a male one, they were praising DC for giving their female characters more solo material. Both Marvel and DC are guilty of male characters overshadowing female ones for the most part with few exceptions (Cassie Sandsmark in Young Justice the comic, Storm in X-Men which pretty much only lasted as long as Claremont was writing). You're arguing against a point no one was making.

[mathew101281]

DC in general seems to be more individualistic then Marvel who seems to be more team centered. The Justice league always felt more like a group of individuals that got together while the Avengers always felt more like a team. In the DCU heroes tend to have their own cities, while at Marvel heroes tend to congregate at certain places. Their is a lot more sharing of rogues at Marvel then at DC.

I think it’s a result of how each universe was created. Marvel was essentially created by a small group of people in a relatively short period of time. DC on the other hand could be thought of as a bunch of free standing characters that were patched together after the fact.

[kjn]

I think there was a thread over in the Marvel forum that touched upon these questions. I think Relugus has some good points, but I don't think Marvel is inherently more misogynistic than DC (or vice versa). Rather, their respective success in creating female characters is an emergent quality of the way they have approached character creation in general.

Note that I pretty much also ignore Wonder Woman here, since her creation was an extreme outlier.

Anyway, DC's focus when creating heroes has usually been making rather bland main characters. This does not mean boring, but they didn't have that much personality, and were thus good targets for the reader's wish fulfillment fantasies. Both Batman and Superman (especially once you consider the Clark Kent identity) fall very much into that mold. The way that DC then crafted interesting drama around them was to surround them with interesting and colourful characters. The role of Catwoman, Lois Lane, and Poison Ivy was not only to be colourful characters, but to challenge the bland hero in various ways.

Marvel constructed its heroes differently. Spiderman has a lot more personality than DC's early superheroes, and thus less need of the interesting side characters. And in the team books there were several male characters who could bounce off each other, while the women easily could be relegated to the role of the leader's or hero's girlfriend. Gwen Stacy, Sue Storm, and Jean Grey all suffer from that narrative dynamic.

[Frontier]

Marvel constructed its heroes differently. Spiderman has a lot more personality than DC's early superheroes, and thus less need of the interesting side characters. And in the team books there were several male characters who could bounce off each other, while the women easily could be relegated to the role of the leader's or hero's girlfriend. Gwen Stacy, Sue Storm, and Jean Grey all suffer from that narrative dynamic.

I don't know if Spider-Man quite works for that comparison if only because his supporting cast is often as colorful and vivacious as he is.

[Restingvoice]

DC in general seems to be more individualistic then Marvel who seems to be more team centered. The Justice league always felt more like a group of individuals that got together while the Avengers always felt more like a team. In the DCU heroes tend to have their own cities, while at Marvel heroes tend to congregate at certain places. Their is a lot more sharing of rogues at Marvel then at DC.

I think it’s a result of how each universe was created. Marvel was essentially created by a small group of people in a relatively short period of time. DC on the other hand could be thought of as a bunch of free standing characters that were patched together after the fact.

Ha. That reminds me of a joke a Marvel fan once made about New York City. There's Avengers, Fantastic Four, and Spider-Man covering the sky and the whole city, and then there's Daredevil micromanaging Hell's Kitchen XD
Not even counting when the X-Men decide to leave the mansion and hang around.
and Morlocks in the sewers.

About the thread, yeah, the popular ones from Marvel like Storm are part of a team, not an individual, and they didn't get a focused series and especially live-action until the 90s and 2000s. Spider-Man and The Amazing Friends, she counts as the Friends.

Spider-Woman got a cartoon in the... the 60s? The 70s? but somehow doesn't get as much recognition as Lynda Carter Wonder Woman... probably because it's a cartoon...

There are Kamala and Carol but they're recent, once they allow Carol to be a feminist icon, and Kamala follows as a character whose ethnicity and culture is interwoven nicely with her hero journey that she instantly becomes iconic, not a token.