Some #Gamergate Links Hand-Selected for the Curious

A lucky few folks have heard the word GamerGate, but have no idea what it is. If they’re anything like B, they’re getting curious, and would like some links about it. They may even have a feminist friend who’s made their eyebrows rise to their hairline with stories about the shit GamerGaters get up to, like driving women from their homes with death and rape threats.

But, y’know, they may also have heard rumors that it’s actually about ethics in video game journalism.

Image shows Dr. Evil doing air quotes. Caption says "#Gamergate is about 'Ethics in journalism'"

I collected several select links at B’s request. Then I figured B probably wasn’t the only person in the universe who wants said select links. So I offer them to the internets at large, plus some explanatory verbiage, knowing I risk having a bunch of angry GamerGaters appear in my social media. They can howl their lungs out, if they like: that only gives me ammunition.

Right. So, let me let other folks introduce you to the raging bunch of misogynist shitstains who hide behind ethics figleafs in order to viciously attack women.

It’s utterly clear that GamerGate started as a harassment campaign against women in gaming, and all the bullshit about “ethics in video game journalism” is just a smokescreen. Their own fucking IRC logs prove it. Observe:

Do you still think that #GamerGate is a spontaneous movement against game industry corruption? Zoe Quinn has some screenshots to show you.

Zoe Quinn’s screenshots of 4chan’s dirty tricks were just the appetizer. Here’s the first course of the dinner, directly from the IRC log.

Spamming, Doxxing and Sockpuppeting: 4Channers’ dirty tricks, straight from their IRC log.

Let us pause and sum up the story so far with a meme.

Image is a screen shot from Jaws with the shark getting ready to rip a dude's legs off. Caption says, "Actually it's about ethics in videogames journalism. Great white sharks oppose eating boats. I already reported that other shark to the Coast Guard. You probably bit yourself in half."
That’s GamerGate in a nutshell, for those who don’t want to wade through all the linkage.

So, at this point, you’re probably wondering who Zoe Quinn is. She’s the independent game developer whose ex-boyfriend decided to destroy for the crime of sleeping with other men. She might have cheated on him, but I’m not really willing to grant that, considering he complained about her sleeping with other people when they were broken up. I don’t think he understands relationships or boundaries or that it’s okay for women who once dated him to sleep with other people after they’ve discovered he’s a fetid shitcanoe of a boyfriend. Anyway, his manifesto unleashed a howling mob of various assholes who can’t stand the idea that women play video games, and would like some video games to reflect interests outside of the narrow confines of the shoot-kill-fuck-everything storylines beloved of said assholes. They attacked Zoe with vigor, because she had the audacity to create a game called Depression Quest. Because she once slept with a video games reviewer, they decided they could pretend this was all about ethics in games journalism, even though said reviewer never reviewed her game. The whole saga is unfolded in many posts at We Hunted the Mammoth. There are a lot, so you’ll want to be sure to click “Older Posts” down there at the bottom.

It was not enough for GamerGaters to merely attack one woman. Oh, no. They have gone after game developer Brianna Wu, driving her from her home with vicious death and rape threats, for… stuff, I have no idea what. And no, she hasn’t slept with any game reviewers, so no, this isn’t, in fact, about ethics in video games journalism. It’s pretty much about the fact that she retweeted a meme that made fun of them:

Image is a composite of several memes, all with a child in a red shirt grabbing its head and shouting. Captions read: 1. "Gamergate is not about oppressing women." 2. This is about corruption (tweets 500 things attacking women)." 3. "Says 'Go start your own game studio' to woman who owns a game studio." 4. "Lectures women on how to respond to the problems he causes." 5. "Fighting an apocalyptic future where women are 8% of programmers and not 3%." 6. "Bases entire identity in games. Feels like a badass."

The horror. The cruelty. So forth. Yes, I’m sure that threatening a woman and her family with grisly sexual assault and death is a completely reasonable response to such a terrible attack. I mean, the fragile male ego must be defended at all costs. It is so precious. /snark.

Anyway. Brianna is a badass and won’t back down. Definitely read her piece.

Let us now observe the disparate treatment dished out to men who criticize GamerGaters and women who say something quite tentative, mild, and sad.

Chris Kluwe, who is a former Vikings player and one of my favorite people in the universe even though I have no interest in football, ripped GamerGaters a new one. I mean, it is an epic rant, and I bow to a superior ranting power and hope that, after reading his book, I can unlock that achievement. GamerGaters might have mumbled a few things, but they barely responded.

On the other hand, Felicia Day, who is one of the shining stars in the nerd entertainment firmament (Buffy and The Guild, people, nuff said), posted a heartstring-tugging piece talking about how GamerGate has made her afraid of the gamers she used to eagerly approach and schmooze with. She also mentioned that she’s been afraid to say anything for fear of getting doxxed by these assholes. Their response? She was doxxed within an hour. Deliberately. After she’d mentioned she has stalkers who might kill her if they could find her. Some ethics in video games journalism activism, eh?

Chris had a few choice things to say about that. More men like him, please. Fewer GamerGate shitstains.

Anitia Sarkeesian, who has been relentlessly harassed ever since she started her Tropes Versus Women in Video Games series, has had the harassment reach a crescendo with GamerGate assholes. She ended up having to cancel a talk at the University of Utah due to a very specific threat to massacre her and the students. She’s the kind of badass who wouldn’t cancel a talk even for that, but Utah is a bright-red state that loves its guns sooooo much it will allow people to run around with them concealed on campus, and even a very specific, credible threat to shoot up lots of people won’t make them disarm people going to a talk. Oh, but you can’t carry a backpack in, because that will help. GamerGaters love to claim this threat didn’t come from one of them. Sorry, dudes, but it came from one of your dudebros, a fellow hater, and you don’t get to disown him just because he didn’t use the right hashtag in his email. When you unleash torrents of harassment, you give murderous fuckwads cover to unleash their inner Elliot Roger. You own him.

Arthur Chu has particular insight into the minds of these assclowns, having been a reclusive gamer type himself once, and having met Felicia Day in the days before GamerGaters came along to make her leery of weird fans. I hope that many GamerGaters read his words, and that they eventually sink in, and make them realize they’re being horrible human beings and stop. They should be more like Arthur Chu, who is a gamer and a decent person, too.

Finally, our own Tauriq Moosa has written several excellent pieces on GamerGate. I recommend them all.

On Gamergate: Loose thoughts.

Gamergate: Two faced bullies, suicide and general hatred.

An actual journalist gives gamergate a parental talking to.

#Gamergate is giving a voice to voiceless? Your voice is better elsewhere.

But she’s wrong though…

And, finally, the definitive takedown of the idea these ignorant gits even know what ethics are, much less are all about ethics:

#Gamergate and the failure of ethics.

That’s not all the excellent stuff I’ve read about GamerGate, but it’s a start. For those who may have become addicted to reading about this inanity in the course of following these links, search GamerGate and Ophelia Benson, Amanda Marcotte, and PZ Myers, for a start.

And remember, it’s all about ethics in video game journalism or something. Even when they’re launching propaganda campaigns on Tumblr, in which they are advised to hide their misogyny and homophobia and avoid using sexist slurs because people are starting to catch on that people comfortable using that language and attacking women for basically being unapologetically female in their vicinity aren’t, actually, about ethics at all.

Image shows an adorable white kitten tumbled on its back on a red velvet background. Caption says, "I are cute kitten and I support #gamergate. I totally r not part of a cynical 8chan plot 2 take over tumblr with cute cat pics."

Thank you, Dave Futrelle.

“This isn’t their problem, guys. It’s ours.”

Comic-Con, mecca for geeks, reflects geek culture – and that includes the harassment (h/t). This isn’t the only event that’s put geeks harassing women who are also geeks in the spotlight recently, but it’s one of the biggest. It’s also seen a cosplayer brutally attacked.

Sexual harassment and misogyny are huge problems in fandom, as evinced by the above. So now seems like a good time to share this bit I’ve been meaning to highlight from Andy Khouri’s Fake Geek Guys: A Message to Men About Sexual Harassment.

This isn’t their problem, guys. It’s ours. We have to solve it.

Sexual harassment isn’t an occupational hazard. It’s not a glitch in the complex matrix of modern life. It’s not something that just “happens.” It’s something men do. It’s a choice men make. It’s a problem men enable. It’s sometimes a crime men commit. And it is not in the power nor the responsibility of women to wage war on this crime.

It’s on us.

How do we fight this war? We stop enabling. We check ourselves and, when necessary, wreck ourselves. Do you know a guy who’s hate-following women on Twitter just to troll them? You check him. Do you know a guy who’s writing disgusting screeds to women journalists because they don’t like the same things he likes? You check him. Do you know a professional whose discourse with women in his field is loaded with gender-specific language and condescension that could enable further abuse? You check him. Are your Twitter followers identifying you as a sympathetic ear for their sexist views? You check yourself. Is your website’s message board a cesspool of ignorance and hate? You check it like you actually give a damn. Do you know a guy who’s sending rape threats to women for any reason? Oh, you report that guy.

The more good people who speak out, the less chance creeps and assholes have to engage in bad behavior. No, it’s not fun. No, it’s not comfortable. Yes, it’s hard calling people out on this shit. But if we don’t, when we could have, we’re enabling that behavior. If you can do so safely, and without making the situation worse for the victim, check the creep.

Image shows a cat smacking a hand. Caption says, "Sexual harassment cat says no means no."While you’re at it, read this post from April 2013 by Meredith Placko.

At DragonCon last year, I witnessed a guy take photos of a girl’s backside at a group photo shoot. So many people were so involved with their own stuff, they failed to notice. But I sat there and watched as several people looked on at this guy and they said nothing. I broke off from my shoot and stood in front of the guy taking the lewd photos and confronted him. He took off before I could get any information about him. The girl had no idea she was even being photographed.

It’s easier to look the other way. Standing up and saying something means you have to get involved, you have to put effort into your actions. You may even come across as the bad guy. But standing up means you may save someone’s day.

And finish off with this post from Sushi Killer, which contains photos much better than my photoshopped jobs, horror stories, and bits like this:

One photographer mentioned that when he is working with a cosplayer and sees someone trying to take a picture of her butt or up her skirt, he jumps in front of their camera, blocking the shot with his own crotch. This draws attention to the pervert and can shame them, while also protecting the cosplayer.

I’d very much like to see more people at conventions intervene when creeps start creeping. I’d like to see this become the norm, until assholes get the message that their assholery isn’t welcome. Let’s make Comic-Con, all cons, and the geek world in general safe for geeks and unsafe for predators.

Image shows two dogs and a baby in costumes. Caption says, "Our costumes are cool, not consent."

Original image courtesy Pets Adviser.

Nonsense Handily Diagrammed in a Variety of Languages

This is one of those things that every skeptic should have handy at all times. Happily, there are t-shirts (use the drop-down for a variety of styles, including women’s. Yay different styles and colors!).

Anyway, here’s the diagram:

Shamelessly filched from the Reason Stick.

Shamelessly filched from the Reason Stick.


 Visit the link, and you’ll find one in Croatian, one in Italian, one in Spanish, and another that includes conspiracy theories. I bloody love this thing! I’ve gone ahead and ordered one on a snazzy shirt. I’ll post a picture of me strutting round in it when I get it. Should I wear it to one of the local fundie churches and bring my Skeptic’s Annotated Bible? Or would that be too obvious?

Skepticism 101: What’s the Harm? Plus, Resources

So what’s the harm? What’s the harm, if people believe silly stuff?

Skepticism 101 panel

I have an answer to that: What’s the Harm. Go there, and you’ll see what the harm is. Even the most harmless woo can be quite harmful.

The thing about believing in “harmless” woo is that it leaves you open to harmful stuff. You’ve shut your critical faculties down, you’ve learnt not to question certain things. That leaves a crack in the door through which some snake-oil salesperson can insert a foot.

You could end up thinking some little bit of natural medicine is harmless, even helpful, until it delays a critical treatment, or you take a supplement that wasn’t so natural and pure after all.

Ghosts are just a bit o’ fun – until strange things happen that scare you, and rather than searching for a mundane explanation, you call a ghosthunter or exorcist, who then parts you from cash best spent elsewhere at best, and feeds your fears until you end up doing something dangerous at worst.

And on. And on, and endlessly on.

What’s the harm? It blinds you. You can’t see the spectacular beauties of this world as they truly are. You can’t see the rough edges and the dangers, nor the non-woo things that can sand down those edges and protect you from those dangers.

You donate to homeopathic “healers” instead of Doctors Without Borders, and thus fund useless medical care for desperately needy people instead of funding the real medicine they so desperately need.

What’s the harm? It saddens me we even have to ask that question.

So, seeing as woo is harmful, and needing a good skeptical toolkit to protect you from it, where do you turn?

Here are some of my favorite skeptical resources. Feel free to add your own.

James Randi Educational Foundation.


Respectful Insolence.

Science-Based Medicine.

The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science.


And finally, courtesy of Caeli “Starspider” Kane, moar pitchoors!

Jen McCreight et moi

Valerie Tarico and Meg Winston

Jen McCreight

Meg Winston

Skepticism 101: How May Skepticism Be of Service? Plus Pictures!

Pictures or it didn’t happen, right? At last we have photographic evidence of the awesomeness that was the Skepticism 101 panel at GeekGirlCon, courtesy of the woman who brought Nerf guns to work and, in general, ensures I do not stab myself in the heart with my pen at work. A round of applause for my good friend Caeli Kane, otherwise known as Starspider, ladies and gentlemen. And another for her snazzy new DSLR, if you’d be so kind.

Skepticism 101 panel, from near to far: Valerie Tarico, Meg Winston, a sliver of Jen McCreight's noggin, Amy Davis Roth, moi, and our delightful moderator Case.

That’s some serious Seattle star power right there.

So we’ve had a chat about what is skepticism, and talked about popular pseudoscience. Let us continue ever onwards, and I answer a rather personal question put to each panelist: how has skepticism helped you?

Well, that’s easy. Skepticism has kept me from spending my limited fundage on useless nonsense, for one. I’ve learned how to evaluate claims and sort out what’s plausible from what’s not. There was a time, and it wasn’t that long ago, that I might have actually plucked a homeopathic (heh, I nearly typed “homeopathetic” just there) remedy from a store shelf, because it promises fast, safe relief from various miserable ailments. Now I know I don’t have to spend money on this stuff. If I want a nice placebo effect to help with a cold, all I have to do is put a bit of onion in water, shake, dilute, shake, dilute, repeat until not a single molecule of onion remains, and voila! I’ve got a homemade homeopathic remedy that will work every bit as well as the real thing, and won’t cost me one thin dime.

My arm might hurt after all that shaking, o’ course. But at least all the lovely exercise will have taken my mind off my symptoms.

Jen McCreight et moi

Skepticism, and becoming familiar with how science works, has given me the ability to sort truth from hype fairly well. It’s given me patience. For instance, a few years ago, I’d have been super-excited about those supposed superluminal neutrinos, and annoyed with science when it turned out there were more mundane explanations instead. I’ve learned this is just how science works: scientists discover something odd, say “That’s possibly interesting,” share their results, media goes utterly insane claiming ZOMG teh laws of fizzicks, dey r rong! while other scientists figure out that, no, there’s some perfectly ordinary explanations for those results and the theory of relativity has got nothing to worry about.

Exhibit B: artistic krakens.

Now, I ignore the hysterics and follow the real science with unalloyed pleasure. Especially when the scientists get snarky.

Skepticism has helped me let go of gods, and adjust happily to a life without them, which turns out to be brilliant, far more fun, and much more interesting than being a believer ever was.

Moi pontificating.

And, most importantly, skepticism has made me a far better fantasy author.

I know, strange thing to say, right? You don’t usually think of fantasy and skepticism in the same sentence, but it’s true. Back in ye olden days when I swallowed anything fantastic that came along, I was rubbish. Skepticism and science have given me the tools to question certain assumptions, and look for better answers, and find inspiration in this universe of ours, which is far more fantastic than anything my poor imagination could dream up. It’s given me much more interesting characters and story worlds worthy of them. It’s given me stories I could never have told before.

Skepticism has given me the people who can help me realize tell those stories.

Those are precious gifts. This is a glorious universe. And, as if those things weren’t enough, skeptics are fun to hang round with. I see nothing but win here.

So, you skeptics, gather round. Tell me what skepticism has done for you.

So Sorry to Disappoint

My first foray into the realm of public humiliation was a great big flop on the humiliation front, but happily completely successful in the not-dribbling-on-myself front.

I should begin by saying I love the concept of GeekGirlCon. I love a sea of women with a few islands of men getting together to celebrate all things geek. I wish I’d known about it sooner, that it hadn’t happened the weekend a certain popular phone launched and thus closed the vacation calendar, and that I hadn’t already promised I’d attend Frankenstein. I only got to attend the panel I was on, and then we had to skedaddle rather than dawdle. Next year, I sincerely hope, will be different. And I think I shall assemble a costume.

As it was, my poor long-suffering coworker and dear friend and I rousted ourselves out of bed at an obscene hour (we are nocturnal) and raced down to the Con, arriving at ten-thirty. Plenty of time, we thought. We found parking. We went in search of the Con. We discovered that Seattle Center is utterly enormous when you think you know where you’re going but really don’t and nobody at the main entrance has any idea such a thing as GeekGirlCon is taking place.

Then we got to the registration booth and were told they were sold out. The woman handling all that should’ve had a camera handy, because the panicked expression on my face must have been exquisite.

She got us passes the very instant I blurted out, “But I’m one of the speakers!” Thanks to her, we were able to slip into the room with a comfortable two minutes to spare. I slipped into my seat. I stared out at the sea of faces. There were a lot of faces. We were a last-minute deal, and who the hell wants to talk about skepticism when they could be geeking out? The answer is many.

Paul Case, President of the Seattle Skeptics, moderated for us. I’ve known Case for a long time, and he’s brilliant at this kind of stuff. He warmed the audience nicely, had topics ready, kept things moving, and in general did the kind of job that prevents panels from becoming boring disasters. Not that this one would have – not with four brilliant women: Jen McCreight, Surly Amy, Meg Winston, and Valerie Tarico. We could’ve managed by just yammering free-form. But Case added structure, and came up with the idea of prizes, and I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised the audience actually seemed to like us, considering the synergy between an experienced organizer and clever panelists.

Alas, being a panelist, I didn’t take notes. Hopefully, folks who were there will do a proper write-up and point me to it. All I can do is babble a bit about how awesome the audience was (teh awesome!), the genius of my co-panelists (total genius), and hope like hell that my friend isn’t lying to me when she said I didn’t suck. In fact, she said I had charisma.


Then she said I had stage presence.


Then she said it’s because I’m open and approachable and people want to talk to me.


And I’m left thinking that, although she has a reputation as a forthright and honest person, she may have been sparing my feelings just a bit. Then again, she said all of us were brilliant and engaging and very interesting indeed, so maybe she was dazzled by the glory reflecting off the other panelists. Because, you see, I’m not exaggerating: these are incredible women, and outstanding skeptics, and sharing a panel discussion with one of them is right up there amongst the best moments of my life.

The upshot is that I very much hope we all do this again, and soon. Because the fact that so many women lined up during Q & A to ask us good, hard-to-answer questions about dealing with non-skeptical friends and relations, about how skepticism affects us, about what we can do for kids with frightenly religious or woo-smitten parents, shows me how necessary this is.

I’m going to do up a small series here, dealing with some of the questions Case asked, and what I can remember of the audience’s questions. I’ll link to the other skeptical women on the panel if they do their own write-ups. And if you were there and wrote something, or come across someone who did, please feel free to link in comments.

You’re even going to get a video of me doing crystal magic. How awesome will that be, eh?

Our Vulcan President

Ladies and gentlemen, the evidence that Barak Obama is, in fact, a Vulcan, despite his penchant for flashing beaming grins.

Exhibit A, which is evident in his every speech and appearance, and thus needs no link: his preternatural calm.

Exhibit B: His ability to flash a Vulcan salute.

And Exhibit C: His response to inane questions about public plans driving private plans out of business:

I believe it was David Jackson, from USA Today, who suggested to the president this afternoon that a public health care option would “drive private insurance out of business.” I thoroughly enjoyed the Obama’s response.

“Why would it drive private insurance out of business? If private insurers say that the marketplace provides the best quality health care; if they tell us that they’re offering a good deal, then why is it that the government — which they say can’t run anything — suddenly is going to drive them out of business? That’s not logical…”

Pure Spock, that is. And you know something? It’s fantastic to have a Vulcan in charge, especially after the last eight years of Tweedledum and Tweedlevil.

Others have compared Obama’s remarks to Spock, but none of them created a clip. This means that instead of filching one, I had to create my own:

Live long and prosper, Mr. Sp – er, President.

(Tip o’ the shot glass to and the unwitting fools at, who respectively supplied sound and image.)

Look, You Snide Son of a Bitch…

…I’m sorry if the only comics your mommy let you read were Richie Rich and Archie, but before you go hating on comic book fans, you might want to get to know a few. You know, like your fucking president.

What a dumbfuck:

The New Yorker‘s Anthony Lane, in his review of “Watchmen,” casually dismisses comic-book fans as “leering nineteen-year-olds” who fear “meeting a woman who requests intelligent conversation.” Adam Serwer offers a welcome response.


I’m not going to argue with Lane over the quality of a film I haven’t seen, but I really find it hard to understand why comic book fans are the subject of such persistent abuse. You’d think we clubbed baby seals for a living or perhaps sold sub-prime mortgages. The unbridled contempt for people who like comic books reaches something close to the feelings people have for parking cops and tax collectors.

Comic book nerds can count Barack Obama, Rachel Maddow and Patrick Leahy among us…. Whatever Lane’s opinions of Watchmen’s source material, comic books are the closest thing Americans have to folktales, and their content is about as close as a reflection of American cultural identity, for good or for ill, as we have. You’d think that for that reason alone, the material and its consumers would be worth at least a minimum of respect.


As it happens, right around the time Adam was posting his defense of comic-book readers everywhere, Matt Yglesias (comic-book reader) referenced a remark by Ana Marie Cox (another comic-book reader) about Watchmen and contemporary politics, which Matt then expanded on to make a point about Cold War policy towards Russia.

It’s almost as if comic books have something compelling to offer to those who aren’t socially-awkward teenagers.

Which you would’ve known if you’d ever bothered to read one, you lackwit.

Observe what Watchmen has to teach us. In a post entitled “What Obama Could Learn from Watchmen,” Yglesias relays the following:

Ana Marie Cox does a webchat for The Washington Post:

Singapore: Obama likes comics; can he learn anything from Watchmen?

Ana Marie Cox: We can all learn something from the Watchmen. Personally, I hope he repeals the law against costumed vigilantes soon.

More seriously (tho not totally so), I think Cheney and Bush modeled their presidency on Ozymandias.

Watchmen was written during the Thatcher and Reagan years, when it seemed the whole world was going batshit insane (subsequent myths notwithstanding). Nonfiction books on politics don’t achieve the level of discourse this comic does. It’s one of those things that shows us how our world really works by holding a mirror up to it and watching while we recoil in horror, and then edge closer in fascination. We’re in 1984 territory here. And yes, if you’ve never read it and you’re wondering, Ozymandias is an excellent analogue for Bush. Both of them did horrific things with a relentless sense that they were right and good. Both of them seemed incapable of introspection. And both of them suckered people in by appearing heroic at the outset – although in Bush’s case, it took a nation too shell-shocked by 9/11 to think so.

Social commentary? Relevance? Meta-themes? Oh, it’s got it, in spades.

So look, you pissant little wretch of a reviewer, before you uncap your pen again and make an absolute ass of yourself by hating on those who have better reading comprehension skills than you, try actually reading some comics. Hang out in the comic store on New Comic Wednesday. Chat up the people who’re coming in for their fix… shit, no, on second thought, don’t. It’s always sad when someone who thinks they’re all that and a box of pet rocks gets taken off at the knees by those with superior intellect. Wise yourself up first. Read Watchmen, read these, and then maybe you’ll understand that the Comics Code Authority stopped castrating comics a long fucking time ago.

But I’m not holding out much hope for you. Someone who apparently didn’t both to watch Watchmen before reviewing it is probably far beyond rescue.

Comic Book Secrets Revealed! Terrible News!

OMG, they’re killing Batman! However will I cope?

Apparently, in the comic books, Batman is…


Bruce Wayne — who by night is Batman — gets murdered by a man claiming to be the father he thought was dead.

In a highly controversial new comic book storyline, Bruce, who first appeared in 1939, is killed by Simon Hurt — the leader of the shady Black Glove organization.

Now, my first response to this was, “Oh, for fuck’s sake. It’s been DONE.”

The Stranger, my wonderful hometown newspaper, expressed my sentiments much better:

Oh my God. This is terrible. How could they kill Batman. Oh my God. There has never been anything like this in comic book history. They’ve raped my childhood. I must buy multiple copies of that issue because it is sure to be a collector’s item. Etc. Etc.

Nailed it.

I love comics, and I usually love the DC universe, but for fuck’s sake, this is beyond lame. It just screams desperate execs trying to figure out a way to get gullible fans to freak out and buy more issues. The problem is, I don’t think there’s enough gullible fans left after that “Death of Superman” debacle. Seemed like everybody jumped on the “kill a major character” bandwagon after that, and it’s lost its novelty. Yet here they are, trying to make a tired old idea seem fresh and new, trying to hit people with a trainload of emotion rather than engaging them with truly creative and useful ideas…



I know where this is coming from. They’ve been talking to Andrew Breitbart, haven’t they?