A comment I had in repsonse to Wimmin.

Discuss your thoughts on the articles written by J.R. Fettinger from the www.spideykicksbutt.com website.

Moderators: PartyHardy, BD, MadGoblin

Post Reply
User avatar
Antiyonder
Webslinger
Webslinger
Posts: 158
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:13 pm

A comment I had in repsonse to Wimmin.

Post by Antiyonder » Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:07 pm

First, here's a quick link to the article:
http://www.spideykicksbutt.com/DeepThoughts/Wimmin.html

I agree with the points made in the article, but I also have an explanation on why women are sometimes refrigerator bait.

It's called payback. See a lot of these male writers have likely had been spurned by the opposite sex, so rather than getting therapy, they use their stories to portray them in a questionable manner. Same reason why the love interests are usually killed off, or why some heroes and their loved ones are divorced. At least I've always thought so.

Sitcoms are similar in that Women are portrayed smart.

Any comments?
Antiyonder: No relation to The Anti-Beyonder from the non existing Amalgam Comics Miniseries "Secret Crisis Of The Infinity Hour #1-12"


Animaniacs "Turkey Jerky"

Miles Standish "Be gone pests, and give me the bird."
Yakko "We'd love to, really, but the Fox Censors won't allow it."

User avatar
MadGoblin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 6:42 pm
Contact:

Re: A comment I had in repsonse to Wimmin.

Post by MadGoblin » Sun Jan 21, 2007 11:08 am

Antiyonder wrote:First, here's a quick link to the article:
http://www.spideykicksbutt.com/DeepThoughts/Wimmin.html

I agree with the points made in the article, but I also have an explanation on why women are sometimes refrigerator bait.

It's called payback. See a lot of these male writers have likely had been spurned by the opposite sex, so rather than getting therapy, they use their stories to portray them in a questionable manner. Same reason why the love interests are usually killed off, or why some heroes and their loved ones are divorced. At least I've always thought so.

Sitcoms are similar in that Women are portrayed smart.

Any comments?
Well, we've all been spurned by the opposite sex, more than once. It's a stretch to say that it translates into feelings of brutality. And plenty of male figures get beaten and brutalized as well (Spidey himself was beaten to death during "The Other").

I always have to tread carefully when talking about this subject, because being a red blood heterosexual male, I am prone to a certain degree of chauvinism and misogny myself. And I must confess a certain amount of affection for the female form, even when I know it's exaggerated, maybe even particularly when it is.

I believe that some of what you say is true. Superheroes are for the most part adolescent male power fantasies - at least that's certainly how they started - because that was, and in many cases still is, the audience. And frankly, those fantasies don't completely disappear when one grows older, they just take on slightly different forms. One of those is the freedom from responsibility - and a committed relationship involves a lot of responsibility, which is turn has to be dealt with by a writer.

For example, Peter Parker doesn't have to tell Aunt May where he's going or what he's doing because he's a grown man who is no longer answerable to his "mother." He doesn't have to give J. Jonah Jameson an itinerary of where he's been because what Pete does when he's not taking pictures for the Bugle is none of Jonah's business (obviously this is all pre-Civil War). But, he DOES usually have to tell Mary Jane what he's doing and where he's going. She's his wife - and this creates a responsibility that conflicts with his super heroing, even more than his responsibility to May. He is accountable to her in ways that he is accountable to no one else. And when he does something really stupid and insensitive, for example, like running off to Paris to meet with the young, attractive daughter of his dead ex-girlfriend and telling MJ that she can't come , that makes him look exactly that - stupid and insensitive. It's akin to what Marv Wolfman once said when he spoke in favor of a perpetually teen-age Peter Parker - that he can screw up if he's a kid and be forgiven - but if he screws up as an adult he comes across as pathetic. I don't necessarily agree (which of us doesn't screw up - even into adulthood?) , but I suspect that Wolfman speaks for a lot of writers. For Peter to act as the primary driver of the series' events, and do all of the funky things that a character in his position has to do - like running off to the Savage Land or Outer Space or whatever at a moment's notice, often involves taking actions that would often make him appear irresponsible if he were a real, married person, which is not how Marvel is anxious to see him portrayed.

Plus, it's easy to keep recycling the "dating" subplot, which writers do. The problem is - we weren't supposed to keep reading the comics past our teens - to where we noticed that these things get monotonously recycled. Comics are supposed to be read by new audiences every few years so that stories CAN be recycled. At least that's the impression I get sometimes.

But yes, I do think that some writers don't have healthy relationships with women, don't understand them (but then - who does), may love them, but not like them very much, and that does come out in the storytelling at times. So, I think that it is a combination of a lot of things.

But to say that women always portray their sex any better is erroneous. A lot of women write soap operas, yet those heroines are often sleeping around, getting captured and tied up and having to be rescued by the strong, sexy male hero, or generally behaving like dingbats - all for the entertainment of a largely female audience.

But what do I know? In the words of one of the critics of this particular article of mine who intended to fire off a response to me, "even the smart ones can be really stupid sometimes."

User avatar
MadGoblin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 6:42 pm
Contact:

Post by MadGoblin » Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:12 am

In Part 2 of an interview over at Comic Book Resources with Peter David - he has the following to say about the death of Betty Banner, which adds a little real life color to the question:
If I had known that I would be off the "Hulk" in an issue or two, I never would have killed her off. Never.

It came across like a hit and run. What it really came down to was this: Bobbie Chase and I were discussing future directions for the series, and Bobby said that, as far as I were concerned, Betty was untouchable because she was my wife's favorite character. She then said, "Not to be indelicate, but your wife has filed for divorce." And I said, "Yeah…." She said, "Does that still hold with Betty?"

And I said, "No, let's kill the bitch." Okay, not exactly that. I said, "Fine, she's toast."

The intention was that Betty was Bruce's emotional core and anchor to reality. The notion of how Bruce would deal with the world when his anchor to the world was gone seemed to have gargantuan potential. It was a story that never would have been done by me if my marriage hadn't fallen apart, because I wouldn't have never dreamed of killing her off. But with my wife leaving me, the halo of safety was gone.

So we killed off Betty.
The full interview is at the following link:

http://www.comicbookresources.com/news/ ... gi?id=9407

User avatar
MadGoblin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 6:42 pm
Contact:

Post by MadGoblin » Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:13 am

MadGoblin wrote:In Part 2 of an interview over at Comic Book Resources with Peter David - he has the following to say about the death of Betty Banner, which adds a little real life color to the question:
If I had known that I would be off the "Hulk" in an issue or two, I never would have killed her off. Never.

It came across like a hit and run. What it really came down to was this: Bobbie Chase and I were discussing future directions for the series, and Bobby said that, as far as I were concerned, Betty was untouchable because she was my wife's favorite character. She then said, "Not to be indelicate, but your wife has filed for divorce." And I said, "Yeah…." She said, "Does that still hold with Betty?"

And I said, "No, let's kill the bitch." Okay, not exactly that. I said, "Fine, she's toast."

The intention was that Betty was Bruce's emotional core and anchor to reality. The notion of how Bruce would deal with the world when his anchor to the world was gone seemed to have gargantuan potential. It was a story that never would have been done by me if my marriage hadn't fallen apart, because I wouldn't have never dreamed of killing her off. But with my wife leaving me, the halo of safety was gone.

So we killed off Betty.
The full interview is at the following link:

http://www.comicbookresources.com/news/ ... gi?id=9407
If I didn't know any better, I'd say he made a liar out of me.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Masked Guy and 2 guests