3 posts tagged “wonder woman”
Over here, Melissa wrote about the Wonder Woman on the cover of Playboy flap:
First of all, there's the "why are you mad? Have you never read a WW comic?" folks. Which, for one thing, is a very stupid question. Of COURSE the people who are mad read Wonder Woman. They wouldn't CARE otherwise.
Over here, Rachel Edidin wrote a piece decrying the use of Wonder Woman on the Playboy cover! And she informs us that she’s going to write a “multi-part series on the cultural significance of Wonder Woman and how it relates to the politics of porn over at Inside Out.” Two of the articles are already up! (here & here) My heavens! Rachel Edidin sure seems to CARE about Wonder Woman!
Oh, and what’s that you say, Rachel?
For the last week, I’ve been struggling to articulate my feelings about the cover of the February 2008 Playboy (Link probably NSFW). I know that I am very, very upset; I know that I feel deeply violated and profoundly hurt. I am angry - appalled - and disgusted.
It’s taken me longer to figure out why.
It’s not the nudity. It has nothing to do with comics, or with the general sexualization of female superheroes - the Valerie Perrine Supergirl cover doesn’t push any of those buttons. And while I have the utmost respect for Lynda Carter, and the comparison between her and Fallon seems tenuous at best, that’s not it, either.
It’s because it’s Wonder Woman.
And I don’t even follow her comic.
You don’t? Oh, but you watched the old TV series, right?
I have never watched Lynda Carter on TV. Never saw the show - only the few stills I’ve stumbled past online, usually on the way to something else.
Oh, well, then ... umm ... Hey, Melissa, you wanna retract that “stupid” comment?
Over here, Ragnell wrote concerning the Wonder Woman on the cover of Playboy controversy this:
A heroic and strong symbol is considered the same thing as a sex symbol, not because strength and heroism is sexy but because her appearance is sexy. It's related to what's going on in comics, I think, where the heroines are considered to be sexy first and heroic second -- because the guys writing the comics are like the person who wrote the Playboy article. They can't see beyond the sexy. They don't realize that there's a heroic aspect to the appeal of the character.
Really? The guys writing Wonder Woman aren’t aware that part of Wonder Woman’s appeal is her heroic aspect? Does anyone buy that? Does anyone really think that the guys who wrote Wonder Woman, including at least one homosexual, don’t realize that one of the things that makes Wonder Woman appealing is her heroic aspect?
If you’re bothered by the Playboy cover than you are, and I’m not going to try to talk you out if, and if you aren’t bothered, you aren’t, and I’m not going to try to talk anyone into changing sides anymore than I’d try to convince someone to switch sides on flag burning. You either think Wonder Woman is a symbol that should only be treated in certain ways or you don’t.
But honestly, does anyone in even their wildest imaginings believe that the guys who worked on Wonder Woman don’t realize that elements of Wonder Woman’s appeal include her strength, integrity, will, and bravery? Greg Rucka didn’t know that? George Perez? Phil Jimenez? If they didn’t know that, they spent an awful lot of time on the topic for no apparent reason.
What makes Ragnell’s post about men writing Wonder Woman so very odd is that she also wrote this:
Far be it for me to denigrate another member of the online comics community, but there are some things that just look strange and should be pointed out. I freely and fully admit that I've reacted to other fan complaints by asking incredulously if the other fan has actually read the work in question (or if they indeed know how to), and I don't see it as a question that off-limits when you find your interpretation of a work (and the tropes of the genre) to be remarkably different from another fan's reading.
However...But really. From whence comes your indignation, internet? Have you never read a Wonder Woman comic? Ever?
If you ask that question (even rhetorically) and the first post you link is by someone who has written the comic book in question, you look stupid.Just for future reference.
And it doesn't help that Greg Rucka shoots down your main point in the comments of that first link.
So wait ... was Greg Rucka able to see beyond the sexy or not? And who looks stupid?
I don't know if this would be considered a more or less positive portrayal of Wonder Woman than the Playboy cover, but at the very least, her entrance is impressive ... and a wee bit frightening if you have testicles.
So to change the tone of the Wonder Woman fuss, have a little fun with this performance.
Oh, and speaking of "performance," if there are any drag queens reading my blog (and how could there not be), let this be a lesson to you. Moving your lips is not a performance. (Although, not moving them might be if you have puppet on your lap.)
