It’s traditional!


barbie

Here’s a curious marketing omission for you: the Marvel Avengers merchandise is all lacking the one woman on the superhero team, the Black Widow. It’s a mystery. I’m wondering if maybe Scarlett Johansson has cooties or something.

Or maybe it’s something else. Maybe it’s because it is traditional to erase the feminine. Let’s take a look at some classical statuary.

There are, of course, nude statues of Greek and Roman women, usually standing in a three point pose – a bent knee, a curved hip, a tilted shoulder to accentuate the form. One has a hand over a breast to communicate modesty; her hoohah is smooth. In fact, all the hoohahs are smooth: there are but modest dents around the pelvic bones of the statues, but no openings or slight separations of the pelvic mounds to be found anywhere. The forms are all Barbie-doll blank down there, like female bodies just sprung out the head of Zeus, fully formed, sometimes clothed and vulvaless.

Meanwhile, the male statues rock out with their cocks out; dicks are everywhere. Penises of all sizes surround me: curled and flaccid, pert and alert, balls dropped and shrunken. I wandered around, looking closely at all of the female nude statues and fragments. There are no vulvas, no protruding labia, anywhere. There’s no suggestion that vaginas existed.

I’m a bit embarrassed to admit that I had never noticed before, but now that it’s mentioned, the absence is rather glaring. Most of the examples I can think of off the top of my head have a hand or a convenient fold of cloth draped in front of the crotch, as if there is something that must be hidden, but I know of a few obvious examples.

Venus_medici

Whoa. Weird. And doesn’t porn do this, too, demanding shaved pubes and labia hidden away?

I am suddenly rather creeped out because I’m not seeing something.

(By the way, no, I’m not advocating for naked, anatomically correct Black Widow merchandise. Modesty is fine, it’s just so strange to see it selectively applied.)

Comments

  1. drst says

    As I said on Twitter, girls don’t want boys, we want Black Widow merchandise and 5 seasons of “Agent Carter.”

    I think the rhetoric of the entire Republican party pretty well confirms the widespread terror and ignorance of the female body, especially genitalia. When you make something unspeakable and dangerous, nobody knows shit about it except that it has to be suppressed and controlled.

    (You should check out the history of the clitoris, which has been “discovered” about 90 billion separate times by male physicians. There’s also the fact that it was only a few years ago, 2009, that someone finally did scans of that part of female anatomy and discovered how large it is: http://blog.museumofsex.com/the-internal-clitoris/ NSFW link probably).

  2. serena says

    Recently I’ve been seeing a picture floating around the interwebs of what is claimed (with no citation or credit) to be a marble Renaissance era statue of Venus with one leg lifted exactly vertically and very detailed realistic vulvae/labia. Usually the caption will say something like “Venus, bussin’ that pu**y open since the Renaissance” but I suspect that it is a modern creation and can find no credit, origin, source or reference for the image. When I saw it originally, it struck me immediately that no classical or Renaissance statues apparently have such detailed ladybits, but could find no hard information to use to debunk it.
    Also, I don’t know how to embed images in comments here, but here is a random tumblr post containing the image and caption: http://rubyrockets06.tumblr.com/post/117067189157/pettymurphy-rainbow-unicorn-monkeyballs
    Perhaps someone with better art history knowledge than I can account for it? If it’s genuinely from a historical era, it’s a damned unique piece that I’m somewhat shocked [Little Middle-America] Me had never heard of.

  3. serena says

    Oh also, forgive me giving not much of a warning with that link – the link I posted in previous comment leads to a tumblr page containing an image of a very anatomically correct NSFW statue of a naked woman.

  4. rq says

    Speaking of superheroes, there was the recent case where some bedsheets (?) for the Big Hero 6 TV show? movie? were the Big Hero 4 bedsheets… because they didn’t include the two non-male members of the 6. And a mother wrote to the company, and the company replied with the old ‘girls are gross, haha’ joke. It’s all here.
    But no, girls and women aren’t being erased, they’re just not interested. See? They’re not buying the merchandise!!! [/s]

  5. numerobis says

    serena: That picture is painful looking — how does she stretch her leg up like that?!?

  6. kevinalexander says

    Serena@3
    That statue doesn’t look at all classical which style the Renaissance sculptors tried to copy. It’s not just the pose or the pudenda, the breasts look modern as well.

  7. drken says

    The Mary Sue has been covering the lack of Marvel merchandise for it’s female characters for a while. A while back, they had an article (that I can’t find right now) from an anonymous source within Disney’s (who owns Marvel) marketing wing which reported that Disney won’t market Black Widow, Gamora, etc. so as not to compete with the “Disney Princess” franchise. It was a bit tin-foily, but since Disney has no problem selling Cinderella and Meridia stuff, it would explain why Scarlet Witch and Black Widow seem to be getting the short end of the marketing stick.

  8. serena says

    @ numerobis – Very carefully? (rimshot)

    Also after further digging (I can’t believe I just scrolled through roughly 10 thousand notes/likes/reblogs) I finally find someone explaining and linking to the original (indeed modern) artist: http://www.jyoung-studio.com/main-page.htm
    So… if I had looked harder I wouldn’t have mentioned any of this at all; my apologies for taking up time and space when it wasn’t necessary.

  9. zenlike says

    Thing is, the Black Widow character IS already a cop out.

    We have a couple of guys whose superpowers are respectively ‘being a huge indestructible ragemonster’, ‘owning a superadvanced robosuite’, ‘having superstrength and an indesctructible shield’ and ‘being a fucking God’, and then we have ONE woman who has as a superpower… euhm… ‘she is a woman’ (yeah, she can fight and kick some ass, but they all can).

    She already IS the ‘token woman’. But even that is too much apparently, so at the end of the day, she is not really part of the team.

  10. anteprepro says

    zenlike: Sadly, she is not just the token woman with no actual superpower, but she is also one of the second string members of the team (along with Hawkeye). There are the four white guys who are the main heroes, and then she is ultimately the white female sidekick. Black leather eye candy, Scrappy Doo with ninja skills. But hopefully that will change, since even though she still plays second fiddle, she was given a bigger role and much more badassery in The Winter Soldier. But according to Marvel she will not be getting a film of her own anytime in the next decade. So, yeah.

    (In fairness, lacking a superpower makes her even more interesting and badass. If that is explored correctly, which I can’t say it has been. She is essentially Batman, who is also Badass Normal, without even having his access to Plot Convenience Wealth-Based Super Toys. That should be emphasized more, because it is ignored and yet it makes her really fucking impressive.)

  11. slithey tove (twas brillig (stevem)) says

    What? No mention of camel toe euphemism? How long has that been a thing?
    .
    and speaking of superheroes, there is the controv about comicbook depictions of female superheroes. How they are basically drawn as nudes washed with bodypaint as a “costume”, and the weird non-physical poses they’re drawn in; with butts or boobs prominently displayed.
    .
    and action figures: no mention of anatomically deficient Ken dolls? And rumors that naked Arny in the upcoming Terminator movie will be portrayed just like Barbie’s Ken.

  12. serena says

    Yeaaah, thanks! Now that I found the source, I’m enrapt! It is indeed no wonder it was so difficult to find, as yes it possesses none of the characteristics which I searched it for; I ended up having to tell google to search “venus statue pu**y” to find that tumblr post -.-
    Curse you, tumblr and internet in general when art is uncredited and passed off as something else! *shakes fist at random cloud*

  13. leerudolph says

    I have long been familiar with the (purported) fact that John Ruskin was horrified, and indeed rendered impotent, on his wedding night when he discovered that his wife—in contrast to the classical statuary he so admired—had pubic hair. It has (to my shame) never occurred to me that what very likely horrified him at least as much was discovering that his wife had a vulva, with labia and all!

  14. John Horstman says

    What, you didn’t know that males are biologically programmed to think feeeeemales are gross and need to be incentivized to get anywhere near their genitals with promises of domestic labor and childbearing?

  15. busterggi says

    Check out the centerfold in The Banana Issue of the National Lampoon. Trust me, it’ll mess up your head.

  16. Pteryxx says

    drken #8, probably this Mary Sue article: Invisible Women

    While working at Marvel post-acquisition, I saw a deck circulated by Disney’s Brand Marketing team. I’m prohibited from sharing the slides, but the takeaway is that, unlike the actual demos, the desired demographics had no females in it whatsoever. I asked my supervisor why that was. Ever the pragmatist, he said, “That’s not why Disney bought us. They already have the girls’ market on lockdown.”

    I’d entered the comics industry because I was a comics fan. It hurt to see so plainly that to Disney, people like me didn’t matter. My demographic was already giving them money anyway, with Disney Princess purchases. Even now, there’s no incentive to make more Marvel merch for women, because we already buy Brave and Frozen products.

  17. says

    If it’s genuinely from a historical era, it’s a damned unique piece that I’m somewhat shocked [Little Middle-America] Me had never heard of.

    That’s from an artist named J Young
    http://www.jyoung-studio.com/main-page.htm
    For future reference if you want to try to identify art, you can often get successful results by taking the image, then searching tineye.com or google reverse image search for “images like” then back-tracking the links.

    If you want to see some really amazingly shocking ancient art, the pan statue from pompeii is a very disturbing masterpiece. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotic_art_in_Pompeii_and_Herculaneum ) I once watched a really interesting documentary on the invention of “pornography” (Victorians, natch!) and they argued that the idea that there were certain images too mind-searing to be viewed by the uneducated masses (and women, natch!) could be traced back to the discovery that the Pompeii was not filled with the elegant wisdom of the ancients, but was more like a love-shack for the wealthy. That, they argue, struck a bit close to home for the victorians, who had raised hypocrisy to an art-form, and resulted in a “secret museum” being created, that contained erotic works of antiquity that only The Boys’ Club could look at. Natch!

  18. slithey tove (twas brillig (stevem)) says

    re @16:
    I remember the publicity, in the late 60’s, that Playboy was going to finally show pubic hair, in the pictures of on their “bunnies”. Their was much pearl clutching, that pubic hair showing was violating the final taboo for “respectable” nudey magazine [singular word intentional] readership.

    to digress: I remember once giggling about the faux halloween costume: of wearing only 2 black socks and two black handgloves ( rest of body nude, girls only, nudge nudge), to go as: the playing card, FIVE of spades. (thinkaboutit, yuck yuck yuck, viz u al ize it, snick snick]

  19. says

    Zenlike @ #10

    She already IS the ‘token woman’. But even that is too much apparently, so at the end of the day, she is not really part of the team.

    Actually, she is what the Marvel Universe considers a “peak human.” Hawkeye is also that, as well as a “Special Athlete”.

    Netflix’s newest Marvel TV Show Daredevil also features a “peak human” … Daredevil. This is a way to balance out the superhero universe and so that we puny humans have characters more like us that we an connect with. Daredevil is NOT a superhero in the classic “super strong, super fast” sense. That’s one reason why the show is so good, and why his character works SO well as a TV show. He’s very complex, and very human.

    Here is a list: http://marvel.wikia.com/Strength_Scale

    Peak Human: able to lift double one’s own body weight up to the 800lb level
    (Note: The weight of 800 lbs is the greatest amount of weight a human can lift, within the Marvel Universe, without being considered superhuman.)

    Black Widow can lift up to 500 lbs., while Daredevil can “only” lift up to 450. In the Marvel Universe, Black Widow can kill Daredevil in a fight. She’s technically stronger, and a better fighter (as Black Widow is “an expertly trained intelligence agent” while Daredevil is a self-trained boxer with a few heightened senses).

    Hawkeye ALSO doesn’t have any merchandise, but that sort of makes sense. He is, in my opinion, a secondary character. Black Widow is NOT what I’d consider a secondary character. Her character was SUPER FUCKING IMPORTANT in Captain America: The Winter Soldier, which is a big reason why I love that movie so much.

    Here is an old school list that was featured in some comics way back which is neat (but note the lack of female “Super-Heavyweights”):

    https://forums.marvelheroes.com/discussion/comment/2189000#Comment_2189000

  20. anteprepro says

    Pteryxx:

    s. Ever the pragmatist, he said, “That’s not why Disney bought us. They already have the girls’ market on lockdown.”
    I’d entered the comics industry because I was a comics fan. It hurt to see so plainly that to Disney, people like me didn’t matter. My demographic was already giving them money anyway, with Disney Princess purchases. Even now, there’s no incentive to make more Marvel merch for women, because we already buy Brave and Frozen products

    “Hey, you know this new soda we just put out? And how we’ve been advertising for Men, how it is Super X-Treme, and it will help them get women and double the size of their genitals? Well, you see, women also happen to like soda too. And the men we are marketing to like this would buy it even without basically telling women that the soda is exclusively for men. I think we should try to change our ad strategy and market more towards, ya know, everyone”

    “Bah, fuck that. We already have plenty of women buying our bottled water and juice products.”

    Seriously, the mind fucking boggles.

  21. drst says

    I’ll fight anyone who says Black Widow wasn’t crucial to the win in “Avengers.” She saved Hawkeye, brought Bruce into the team and along with Selvig was responsible for turning the device off and closing the portal. She outwitted the freaking GOD OF MISCHIEF while he played every dude around him like a fiddle.

    If she was a guy, there’d be legions of people talking about how valuable it was that the “everyman” without superpowers was so crucial to the story and played such an important part.

  22. Dunc says

    In fairness, lacking a superpower makes her even more interesting and badass.

    Yeah, I’d argue that BW is actually the most badass of the Avengers. If any of the others lost their powers (or Tony didn’t have his suit) she’d kick their asses from here to eternity. She can stand shoulder-to-shoulder with a freakin’ god. She needs her own damn movie, like, yesterday.

    The lack of merchandise for female characters has been a long running problem. Back in my serious Farscape fandom days, I waited years for a decent Aeryn Sun figure, entirely in vain. Yeah, you can have the limited edition Scorpius / Harvey in a Hawaiian shirt that only appeared in one episode, but the second most central character of the entire series? Nope, sorry!

  23. says

    slithey tove @ 14

    Artwork in comic books is much, much better than in the past, and so are the depictions of women (mostly). Especially with modern comics like Ms. Marvel (which is great and you should check it out) and Spider Gwen which one of my guy friends SUPER LOVES and he’s a big comic book guy who gets paid to write about the subject.

    Here are some cool official Spider Gwen Variant covers:

    http://www.comicbookresources.com/article/marvel-releases-first-three-spider-gwen-inspired-variant-covers

    But then… this happened (copied from article linked above):

    The release of these covers come at the end of a week that saw discuss and debate spark online after Frank Cho posted a sketch of Spider-Gwen on his website, parodying Milo Manara’s controversial “Spider-Woman” variant cover. Cho’s sketch — not an official release commissioned by Marvel — inspired criticism online for being an inappropriate depiction of a character with a strong young female fanbase, including a pointed response from “Spider-Gwen” series artist Robbi Rodriguez on Twitter: “Here’s my take on the frank cho sketch cover. Your drawing dirty pics of one of my kids. Be lucky your never around me. #spidergwen.” Subsequently, Rodriguez wrote on Facebook, “If you, as pro, want this medium and industry to be taken seriously, like we have a chance to now, then start fucking acting like it and change with the times. The definition of body image has changed in of all entertainment in the last decade. And it’s not a matter of changing the style of your work — it’s a matter of thinking about your work outside of your bubble.”

    Which was really gross. Check out the link for specific links to the pic that I am not even going to share here.

    It was a slap in the face. It wasn’t official. It was a real-life troll by a well-known artist.

    But Robbi Rodriguez’s response was perfection. He is a well-respected artist with a huge success on his hands with Spider Gwen. I’ll be picking up the trade as soon as it comes out (I’d love to collect individual comics, but I’m too broke for that; generally I get trades used, but this one I am buying new).

  24. Jackie the social justice WIZZARD!!! says

    I find it sad that women who do not alter their bodies by removing the hair that naturally grows on our bodies with razors, chemical depilatories (that burn) or just ripping it out by the roots with hot wax, are considered masculine or ugly.

    Everybody should do what makes them happy with their bodies. But the double standards are maddening. If my pube or pit hair shows when I go swimming it is a scandal. I’m supposed to be mortified for my body to be seen with hair on it. Men’s body hair is not seen as dirty or gross. It’s not remarkable to see men’s body hair just as it isn’t remarkable to see their torsos. You can find fat, hairy, topless guys on the lake and at the pools all summer. You won’t find one fat, hairy, topless woman.

    When was the last time you saw a woman proudly display her stretch marks? Do you know how many women have scars from childbirth? Just as childbirth is supposed to wreck our vaginas, it is supposed to ruin our looks. Scars are permanent. Lose skin does not usually go away without surgery. The act of becoming a mom is something we teach every little girl she should want to do, then we tell her it ruins her as a sexual being forever. We shame the female body for everything, but we really love to shame women for the after effects of birth.

    I can openly carry a gun. I cannot openly carry my own body. My tits are seen as more threatening and offensive than a firearm. If I walk topless past a school with a rifle over my shoulder, I’m getting arrested for the tits. Our culture spends so much energy erasing women’s bodily autonomy and forcing women to submit to male control. Forced birth, street harassment, body policing, internet terrorism etc. are all symptoms of patriarchy and rape culture. What appears to be many small problems are really one big one.

  25. Jackie the social justice WIZZARD!!! says

    Speaking of Daredevil:

    D’onofrio is killing it as King Pin. He’s why I watch the show. Him and the political undertones.

  26. Saad: Openly Feminist Gamer says

    Jackie, #27

    Great post. I concur with everything there.

    If I walk topless past a school with a rifle over my shoulder, I’m getting arrested for the tits.

    I never thought of it like that. What a fucked up society. And these people have the nerve to yell MISANDRY when this shit is pointed out.

  27. Saad: Openly Feminist Gamer says

    Jackie, #29

    D’onofrio is killing it as King Pin. He’s why I watch the show. Him and the political undertones.

    Yes, same here. I love that kind of portrayal of villains. I hate Fisk one minute and my heart breaks for him the next. Brilliant stuff.

  28. anteprepro says

    Jackie: No problem, well deserved :)

    Regarding Marilove’s post at 26: You probably all have an idea what the picture looks like if you saw the Spiderwoman cover that was much talked about. It is a straight up blatant copy of that. Which is bad enough, because it is intentionally repeating sexist poses for the sake of trolling people who call out sexism. But the added element to the pic, for those that don’t want to follow the link: They have Spiderman staring at her ass, saying “woohoo, deja vu”. The fucking depths assholes will go to.

    And they wonder why people are in an uproar about the sexism in the spheres of various nerdy hobbies. Well, because of shit like that. Shit like that is exactly why people are talking about misogyny now. Juvenile trolling, intentional provocation, all in the face of consistent diminishment and objectification.

  29. drken says

    @ Pteryxx #19:

    Yep, that’s the one.

    @ zenlike # 10:

    Black Widow seems to be turning into the new “Aquaman”, now that they’ve cast Khal Drogo to give him a badass reboot. Basically, somebody who you can call useless so you can pretend to know more about superheroes than you actually do.

  30. jehk says

    What bothers me is the assumption that men (or boys as the case may be) cannot identify with women characters just because they are women.

    I (a male) liked a number of female characters from my childhood entertainment. I recall Terra and Celes from the Final Fantasy 3/6 video game. They were cool and had interesting character arcs that had nothing to do with them being women.

  31. says

    I think Black Widow’s character would work best as TV Show, and not a movie, because her back story is so complex and so much a part of her. There is a reason why Daredevil is so good. And let’s be honest, as good as a lot of the Marvel movies have been, TV is where it’s AT right now, if you want to *really* tell a story and take risks while doing it.

  32. Gregory Greenwood says

    Jackie the social justice WIZZARD!!! @ 27;

    I agree 100% with your entire post, but I particularly want to point out this;

    I can openly carry a gun. I cannot openly carry my own body. My tits are seen as more threatening and offensive than a firearm. If I walk topless past a school with a rifle over my shoulder, I’m getting arrested for the tits.

    We live in a society so utterly (though hopefully not yet irrevocably) poisoned by patriarchy and rape culture that a woman’s body, and still more any truly free expression of a woman’s sexuality on her own terms (rather than in a form and fashion amenable to the patriachy), is seen as more dangerous than a firearm, and more offensive than the most heinously dehumansing forms of bigotry. Our society harbours an unbelieveably toxic attitude toward women that polices their body morphology one second (damning women who can’t live up to some all but unobtainable physical ideal), only to shame them for the fact that they are female bodied at all the next (if a woman does approximate that extreme ideal of beauty, she is all too often treated as simultaneously a subhuman sex object existing only for the pleasure of men and some kind of morally corrupting succubus whose sexual appeal is a threat to civilisation).

    It is the ultimate expression of the snare our society so loves to place women in – damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

  33. Menyambal says

    The problem also goes into the future. The plaque on the Voyager spacecraft, the one with the line drawings of humans, shows the guy’s unit clearly enough to guess at function, except that on the corresponding area of the female figure, there isn’t even a vertical line.

    I once heard an older man tell about finding pubic hair on his wife after never seeing it in Playboy. And then they started showing women who had no pubic hair, which seemed odd. Is it back?

    I liked the Black Widow in what I have seen of the movie. She seemed smarter, less prone to emotion, less ego-driven, more capable, a better fighter, and more believable than all the guys. Cap was a steroid freak, Hulk was a rage monster, Thor was a god, and Iron Man a rich guy with gadgets (he may have built them, but he never really seemed to have thought them through). They are all extremely manly, in stereotypical ways. Black Widow was clever and capable, almost manipulative with the guys, and may have come across as too stereotypically female – tricking men, needing nothing but her body – for some of the dudebros in the studios. The idea that she shouldn’t be part of the merch is so wrong that there must be some reason – some wrong-ass reason – other than customer demand.

  34. says

    There’s one positive thing to come out of the Cho troll and the fury it generated. I hadn’t kept up with comics recently, and so had no idea that Spider Gwen was a thing until that picture circulated on the ‘net. Now she has at least one more die-hard fan.

    Also, Black Widow is fantastic. Her Universe has some great BW merch, if you are interested in that kind of thing.

  35. Menyambal says

    If you follow the links to Frank Cho’s site, and read his response to the criticism of his drawing, you will lose even more respect for him. It is the standard trick of calling people overwrought and overly sensitive.

    Looking back at the Black Widow role in the movie, I wonder if someone wrote her as a powerful female, and the boys in the studio didn’t realize just how great she was going to be. And now they are over-reacting.

    In case you missed it, in the later part of the movie, when Loki is in the glass room and she is listening to his rant, he calls Black Widow a “quim”, which is a Britishism for lady parts. The TV version that I saw, left it in.

  36. Grewgills says

    Netflix has done great with Daredevil. I would like to see them pick up a few more Marvel franchises including Black Widow.

  37. anteprepro says

    Menyambal: I honestly think they want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to be able to just play it safe and have a movie about a bunch of powerful white guys being powerful and taking charge. But they also want to be able to point to Black Widow and say “see, a woman is there, doing productive things too! We are so progressive!”. But then they can go right back to ignoring exactly how much of the plot was contingent upon her actions, and ignore marketing her as any significant part of the team, because she is just a second tier member, not one of the big faces. See also: Nick Fury, fucking leader of SHIELD. I almost wonder if Winter Soldier was consciously an attempt to move more in the right direction by giving those two a much larger role. But it was still a movie starring and focusing on Captain America and his conflict with another white guy. Sooooo.

    In case you missed it, in the later part of the movie, when Loki is in the glass room and she is listening to his rant, he calls Black Widow a “quim”, which is a Britishism for lady parts. The TV version that I saw, left it in.

    I didn’t notice that in the movie. Then it was brought to my attention by Cracked.

    But I honestly can’t say how I feel about Joss Whedon’s stance on the line.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/the-most-offensive-line-the-avengers-and-why-it-was-brilliant-and-necessary

    “Mewling quim” was the offensive phrase in question, and it was used to subtle yet poignant effect. Loki (Tom Hiddleston) uses this insult to rattle Black Widow, aka Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson), the only woman Avenger in a group of super-powered men, while she is interrogating him……

    So what’s the problem? It’s two-fold. For one thing, there’s the meaning of the word “quim” as a synonym for an extremely offensive sexist insult (We’ll give you a hint: It starts with the letter C and rhymes with “runt”).

    Then there’s also the fact that Whedon flippantly joked that his greatest achievement was working the term “mewling quim” into “The Avengers.”…..

    And then article goes on and on about how Joss Whedon couldn’t POSSIBLY be sexist, etc. etc.

    He said that as part of what appeared to be a joke interview: http://whedonesque.com/comments/28797#more

    I still think it was a problematic line to use, and even more to joke about as his “greatest achievement”. Even moreso is the nuisance of his fans waving away the criticism, because Buffy. Or something.

  38. drst says

    Jackie – damn right. People freak out if they can see a woman’s bra strap in certain settings, for fuck’s sake.

  39. says

    marilove @37:

    I think Black Widow’s character would work best as TV Show, and not a movie, because her back story is so complex and so much a part of her. There is a reason why Daredevil is so good. And let’s be honest, as good as a lot of the Marvel movies have been, TV is where it’s AT right now, if you want to *really* tell a story and take risks while doing it.

    A backstory that includes (at least the comic book version) Natasha being alive during WWII (as detailed in an issue of Uncanny X-Men #260-something).
    I agree that she’d work best in an ongoing tv series.

    For those that don’t know-Daredevil has been renewed for Season 2.

    Hot Topic has a fashion collection for women inspired by the Avengers.

    Here are some Easter eggs for Marvel fans hidden in the DD show.

  40. slithey tove (twas brillig (stevem)) says

    re anteprepro@43:
    To add to your rant of “cake&eat”, I’ll add Fury himself as a token. For them to say they “are all so integrated, the very leader of the Avengers, Fury himself, is a POC”. While totally having him as a cameo, that pops in for a line, here and there. All the action in the movie is a set of the, usual, white male bro hood doing all the cool stuff.

  41. says

    Tony!

    Unfortunately, Scarlett Johansson may not want to move to TV. A lot of big stars have of course done TV series, and maybe for the right deal she’d do it, but she’s a legit movie star. So that might be one reason they wouldn’t create a TV series. And I’d rather her not be replaced by another actress. I really like Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow. But I’ve always liked her as an actress.

  42. says

    @8, drken:

    The Mary Sue has been covering the lack of Marvel merchandise for it’s female characters for a while. A while back, they had an article (that I can’t find right now) from an anonymous source within Disney’s (who owns Marvel) marketing wing which reported that Disney won’t market Black Widow, Gamora, etc. so as not to compete with the “Disney Princess” franchise.

    According to Coelasquid’s Tumblr — Coelasquid is the (female, if this matters) artist behind Manly Guys Doing Manly Things (look at that URL!) and Platinum Black, as well as working in animation — another, slightly different explanation was also made internally: Disney was worried that the Disney brand was becoming too associated with “girly” stuff thanks to all the princess fetishism, and their non-princess franchises were suffering from it, so when they bought Marvel they decided to make sure the marketing was targeted exclusively at boys.

    Either way, it’s appalling, and yet another reason (if another were necessary) to keep away from Disney stuff.

    @10, zenlike:

    We have a couple of guys whose superpowers are respectively ‘being a huge indestructible ragemonster’, ‘owning a superadvanced robosuite’, ‘having superstrength and an indesctructible shield’ and ‘being a fucking God’, and then we have ONE woman who has as a superpower… euhm… ‘she is a woman’ (yeah, she can fight and kick some ass, but they all can).

    As I know from following a couple of superhero fans on Tumblr (personally, I hate superhero crap; this Cracked article puts it into words in an excellent and very insightful way), Black Widow actually does have superpowers, they’re just not showy ones. She is biologically altered in some hand-wavy “comic writers are as clueless about science as Fox News commentators” way, which means she is the better part of (possibly over? I forget) a century old yet is still physically young and has a lot of lifespan left, plus the super-strength and agility, etc. etc. etc.

  43. says

    The TV show Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. is pretty diverse, and a lot of fun. Agent May is my favorite. And the actress who plays her is 51. It’s rare to see an “older” woman play such a kick-ass character.

  44. says

    Here is a break down of Black Widow. She is enhanced a bit. I wasn’t aware of that. (I”m a little new to Superheroes and comics).

    http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/39060/is-black-widow-genetically-engineered-or-enhanced-in-avengers

    Cool!

    And, related, and directed to Vicar mostly, you don’t have to like Superheros or the movies or the TV shows but that doesn’t make it “crap” and I am not going to “stay away from it”.

    I enjoy it. It’s great fun. I have been enjoying learning about how comics have changed over the years, and it’s especially fascinating how characters change over time. i find it really cool that there is this HUGE world that’s been around a long time. It’s so vast and varied, and something for everyone. Some writers and artists in the past weren’t that great, but that’s true of any medium.

    Also, the standards have risen recently, particularly over the last 5-8 years. Cho acting like a troll also made him look really terrible. The reaction to his “variant cover” was largely negative (and again, it wasn’t an official cover of any sort). He just came off really poorly.

    And comics and graphic novels are not ALL about superheroes. If you aren’t into superheroes, there is a vast world of other great stuff out there.

    For example, I really want to look into this series:

    https://imagecomics.com/content/view/image-expo-announcement-southern-cross-is-a-terrifying-marriage-of-horror-a

  45. says

    The Vicar @53:
    The version of Black Widow in the Avengers hasn’t had much of her backstory revealed, so we don’t know how much history she shares in common with her comic book counterpart (who doesn’t actually have super strength). IOW, there’s no evidence that she has super powers of any sort.

  46. says

    I believe they backed off on some of the strength of Captain America as well, so that he’s a bit more human, but don’t quote me on that.

    She may just be considered a very well trained “peak human”.

  47. says

    marilove @53:

    And, related, and directed to Vicar mostly, you don’t have to like Superheros or the movies or the TV shows but that doesn’t make it “crap” and I am not going to “stay away from it”.

    That comment rubbed me the wrong way too, though I don’t know if Vicar was engaging in the same shaming that other critics of comics do.

    I enjoy it. It’s great fun. I have been enjoying learning about how comics have changed over the years, and it’s especially fascinating how characters change over time. i find it really cool that there is this HUGE world that’s been around a long time. It’s so vast and varied, and something for everyone. Some writers and artists in the past weren’t that great, but that’s true of any medium.

    All of this ^^^ is part of what makes you cool :)

    And comics and graphic novels are not ALL about superheroes. If you aren’t into superheroes, there is a vast world of other great stuff out there.

    This cannot be stressed enough. Marvel and DC dominate the industry (obviously), and the majority of their output is superhero comics. They *do* produce comics that are not in the superhero genre (DC’s Vertigo imprint for instance). As your link points out, IMAGE comics produces a wide variety of comics from all manner of genres. In fact, IMAGE produces very little superhero content. Then there’s Dark Horse Comics, which does much the same. There’s BOOM! Studios which also doesn’t produce many superhero comics. There are many comic book publishers out there that produce little to no superhero comics.

    ____
    Speaking of BOOM! Studios and non-superhero comics, this upcoming comic book by Mark Waid and JG Jones looks quite interesting:

    Strange Fruit #1 (of 4)
    Publisher: BOOM! Studios
    Authors: J.G. Jones and Mark Waid
    Artist: J.G. Jones
    Format: 32 pages, full color
    Price: $3.99
    On sale: July 2015
    Synopsis: It’s 1927 in the town of Chatterlee, Mississippi, drowned by heavy rains. The Mississippi River is rising, threatening to break open not only the levees, but also the racial and social divisions of this former plantation town. A fiery messenger from the skies heralds the appearance of a being, one that will rip open the tensions in Chatterlee. Savior, or threat? It depends on where you stand. All the while, the waters are still rapidly rising…
    Two of the industry’s most respected and prolific creators come together for the first time in a deeply personal passion project. J.G. Jones (Wanted, Y: The Last Man) and Mark Waid (Kingdom Come, Irredeemable) take on a powerful, beautifully painted story set during the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927. Strange Fruit is a challenging, provocative examination of the heroic myth confronting the themes of racism, cultural legacy, and human nature through a literary lens, drawing from Southern folklore and tradition.

    Here is an interview with the Waid and Jones about the series.

  48. says

    Thanks, Tony! :)

    I do think some people are WAY too quick to brush of “superhero stuff” as crap, without really thinking about it. I mean, it’s totally okay to not like something, but that doesn’t automatically make it crap.

    Some writers and artists in the past weren’t that great, but that’s true of any medium.

    And I should probably add that there are still artists and writers out there who aren’t that great but, again, that’s true of any medium.

    I’m reading some older Black Panther stuff and oh my gosh! So much politics. Blatant. It’s great. Black Panther is a REALLY great character that was written very well. He has a deep, interesting, very political background and story. It’s wonderful. There is a lot of humor but also a lot of darkness in the Black Panther stuff I’ve been reading and I’m really glad I did my research and sought out some older trades.

    http://marvel.wikia.com/T%27Challa_%28Earth-616%29

  49. jehk says

    Many of my favorite story lines in comics are about the characters as humans. Their super powers being secondary. I’m thinking of X-Men in particular. Tribalism and othering is pretty central to that whole series.

  50. Grewgills says

    @Tony #57
    There are also quite a few excellent non super graphic novels. Maus and Persepolis are both amazing stories.

  51. says

    @#57, Tony! The Queer Shoop

    That comment rubbed me the wrong way too, though I don’t know if Vicar was engaging in the same shaming that other critics of comics do.

    It’s pretty simple, and since you apparently don’t want to read the article I linked to, let me give you the short version:

    The universe of a superhero narrative is inevitably built around far-right-wing, essentially fascist ideas.

    Remember that article PZ linked to the other day, the one about Theodore Beale, which so many people said was so spot-on? It included this section:

    The fascist narrative comes, in effect, in two parts. The first involves a nostalgic belief in a past golden age – a historical moment in which things were good. In the fascist narrative, this golden age was ended because of an act of disingenuous betrayal – what’s called the “stab in the back myth.” (The most famous form, and the one that gave the myth its name, being the idea that German Jews had betrayed the German army, leading to the nation’s defeat in World War I.) Since then, the present and sorry state of affairs has been maintained by the backstabbers, generally through conspiratorial means.

    The second part is a vision of what should happen, which centers on a heroic figure who speaks the truth of the conspiracy and leads a populist restoration of the old order. The usual root of this figure is (a bad misreading of) Nietzsche’s idea of the ubermensch – a figure of such strength that morality does not really apply to him. He’s at once a fiercely individualistic figure – a man unencumbered by the degenerate culture in which he lives – and a collectivist figure who is to be followed passionately and absolutely.

    It isn’t even tricky to see how this fits in with the Avengers universe: we have WWII-era Captain America (and Black Widow, technically) who were heroes back when we were The Good Guys Fighting The Nazis (who were of course evil incarnate). Then there was a period of decline while the heroes were gone — which of course includes, although the movies kind of try to pretend that they aren’t saying this by trying to make Captain America be less of an ass than he would be in real life, the Civil Rights movement, the Equal Rights movement, Gay Liberation, etc. etc. etc. Now the heroes are back, and have joined up with a bunch of other people who are “great”, which includes a guy who is super-rich (initially, at least, through inheritance, not hard work) and an honest-to-god god. They are so inherently, obviously good that they are essentially above the law — they don’t need authorization to do anything, they can cause vast collateral damage without facing consequences, and they have a flying base provided by the government which geeks online have calculated would be so expensive to build that even the U.S. military budget would be insufficient. (It’s also worth pointing out that although the movies deliberately try to distract you or pretend otherwise, the Avengers actually do a worse job of dealing with things like alien invasion than the actual military would — they can’t handle the large number of enemies, and the only reason the military wasn’t on hand to deal with it is that the Avengers deliberately did not tell the military that the aliens were coming in time to react.)

    Superhero universes inevitably end up portraying things like “due process” and “democracy” as being wastes of time. Why should we waste all that time and effort giving people a fair trial, when Superman (or whoever) says they’re guilty and Superman is a Good Guy? (Or maybe Batman just goes in and beats the crap out of them directly, so they don’t even have to be punished! Bam!) Defense lawyers are always evil enablers of obvious criminals (except, of course, Daredevil, who miraculously only deals with innocent, worthy people and never has to go through with a defense because justice demands that even a criminal should have representation; if he ends up helping a criminal, it’s because the criminal deviously concealed his own evilness so well that not even Daredevil could penetrate the disguise until it was Too Late). Elected governments exist only to put obstacles in the way of good guys, and regulations are — like in the original Ghostbusters movie, although that was not strictly speaking a superhero universe — unnecessary and costly. All officials are either stupid or corrupt, and only the superheroes can “fix” things.

    (As a digression in an already-lengthy comment: Superman and Thor are particularly egregious. Both of them have both incredible powers and access to superhumanly advanced science. They could put an end to poverty — thus mostly eliminating the root causes of an awful lot of human misery — if they would stop focussing on trivial, petty stuff. Nevertheless, they both claim to want to help humanity in general. In terms of the concept of “sins of omission”, the two of them are the most ethically dodgy characters in superhero fiction.)

    I don’t know that it’s healthy for us, as a culture, to be wallowing in this stuff, and I’m reasonably certain it’s not good for kids to be raised on it — in the sense that we are awash in rape culture in the way that casual acceptance of violence against women is so often just assumed, superhero media is “fascist culture”.

    And yes, I am aware of non-superhero comic books. That’s why I keep saying “superhero” instead of “comic book”.

  52. says

    I thought you weren’t that familiar with this topic, Vicar? And yet, so many words!

    This is a fictional world. Of course the military isn’t involved. That would make everything too neat and wouldn’t make for a very good story about super strong and supernatural characters interacting with each other. So they write the military out.

    Also, the new Daredevil on Netflix is great mainly because the main plot point is addressing the aftermath of all the shit that went down with Thor and Iron Man and The Hulk in New York’s Hell’s Kitchen. The Superheroes fucked up Hell’s Kitchen, and Daredevil the show directly addresses that.

    They could put an end to poverty — thus mostly eliminating the root causes of an awful lot of human misery — if they would stop focusing on trivial, petty stuff.

    Yeah… they could… and then that would be the end of it all. There WOULD be no story. Not really, anyway. This could be said about a lot of other movies and books… It’s fiction!

    I think Tony was perhaps a little too charitable; I DO think you’re shaming in the typical way, and brushing it off in the typical way. It’s a fictional story about fictional characters in a fictional world that only *resembles* our world. It’s quite clear to me that you hold a lot of opinions about something you know very little about. Sigh.

    THE NEXT BIT CONTAINS SPOILERS!

    Defense lawyers are always evil enablers of obvious criminals (except, of course, Daredevil, who miraculously only deals with innocent, worthy people and never has to go through with a defense because justice demands that even a criminal should have representation; if he ends up helping a criminal, it’s because the criminal deviously concealed his own evilness so well that not even Daredevil could penetrate the disguise until it was Too Late)

    Uuuuuh, did you even watch Daredevil??? I’m guessing that’s a big NO, because the *second* episode in the TV series completely contradicts your “point”!

    Daredevil actually does represent a murderer, but he KNOWS he is a murderer. That’s the entire point of the entire episode. He is trying to learn more about what is going on. He also knows that there is no evidence to put this guy in prison, either. It was a REALLY powerful episode, and he actually *directly has to deal* with the fact that he, a defense lawyer, is defending client he knows is guilty. He gives a really powerful, complex closing argument, in fact, and it’s clear he’s saying “We know he killed this guy, but we can’t prove it’s not self-defense, either.” It was a very timely speech, very well done, and very powerful when you take the larger context of the episode into account as well.

    A summary:
    http://collider.com/daredevil-recap-season-1-episode-3-rabbit-in-a-snowstorm-charlie-cox-netflix/

    Wow. You really don’t know anything about the show you just gave us your opinion on.

    I get the distinct impression that you’ve seen exactly 20 minutes of superhero movies/tv shows and now have some great, big opinions based on almost nothing.

  53. Callinectes says

    They won’t be able to keep this up when Captain Marvel comes out. From what I know so far, Captain Marvel ticks all the right boxes, but it’s still stupidly late into Phase Three of the MCU for a Marvel superhero film to have a female superhero lead.

  54. anteprepro says

    Wow, Vicar. Wow. That is a tremendous amount of straining to essentially be self-righteous in your dismissal and contempt of superhero stories. It completely abuses the entire spirit of that essay on Vox Day to frame superhero stories as fascist in the same way that Vox Day’s politics are. Jesus fuck.
    Also: There is no implication of WWII being a golden age, or there being a decline from that period, that I am aware of.
    Yes, massive flying ship thing would be super duper expensive. Somewhat of a plot hole or something.
    Marvel universe Thor is not an actual god. Neither Thor nor Superman are powerful to end poverty.

    The criticisms regarding negative portrayals of government, and in glorifying the vigilante, are good criticisms. But the shit ain’t fascist, and you going that fucking far to justify your personal viewing preferences is just fucking ridiculous.

  55. says

    The Vicar @62:
    You know, I already figured all that out all by my lonesome several years ago. I understand the problematic elements in superhero fiction. At the same time, I can also enjoy superhero fiction in the hopes that it will become better over time.

    ****

    marilove @63:

    I think Tony was perhaps a little too charitable; I DO think you’re shaming in the typical way, and brushing it off in the typical way. It’s a fictional story about fictional characters in a fictional world that only *resembles* our world. It’s quite clear to me that you hold a lot of opinions about something you know very little about. Sigh.

    You’re right. I was being charitable and I shouldn’t have been.
    Also, I noticed that The Vicar responded to me, but not you…interesting.

  56. says

    anteprepro @67:

    Marvel universe Thor is not an actual god

    Thor in the Marvel Cinematic Universe may not be a god, but he definitely is in the comics. Doesn’t change your point though-he still doesn’t have the power to end poverty.

  57. anteprepro says

    Tony!: True facts. Honestly, now I am wondering which actual gods would have the power to end poverty anyway? Obviously monotheistic omni-powerful gods, but I can’t imagine how, say, Poseidon, or Isis could end poverty. I might just not be creative enough.

  58. says

    Also, I noticed that The Vicar responded to me, but not you…interesting.

    I noticed that, too.

    And I noticed his weird synopsis of Daredevil, as if he actually watched it, when he clearly hasn’t.

    Note: I have been obsessing over this stuff for like two months now. I know my shit in some areas, but not in others. That said, the universes are not perfect, but the medium as a whole has gone through a LOT of changes over the years. And, like I said, that’s kind of what I love about it.

    No entertainment is perfect. I’m sure, The Vicar, you watch or read and otherwise consume media that has its own set of problems.

    I think connecting the superhero universes to fascism is really incorrect, and ignores a lot of really interesting and subversive stories and timelines (which is why I keep emphasizing Black Panther).

    For example (SPOILERS AHEAD!!), after Age of Ultron, the next Marvel movie, is Captain America: Civil War

    The plot will involve pitting Iron Man and Captain America against each other. There is a desire to regulate the superheroes. Iron Man is for regulation. Captain America is *not*.

  59. says

    Anteprepro @ 33:

    I didn’t notice that in the movie. Then it was brought to my attention by Cracked.

    But I honestly can’t say how I feel about Joss Whedon’s stance on the line.

    I certainly noticed it in the movie, and was shocked and impressed that it managed to bypass any censoring. If you listen to the commentary, Whedon notes that yes, it was a very bad thing to say, yet it fit Loki’s attitude towards humans, human women in particular (of course), and made his surprise turn into shock when he found that the Black Widow was playing him the whole time. In short form, it was Loki playing the lowest and deepest punch he could, and it bounced back on him.

  60. says

    In short form, it was Loki playing the lowest and deepest punch he could, and it bounced back on him.

    YES, this. Loki’s arrogance is his biggest fault. Black Widow completely out-witted Loki. He was made to look like a petulant child, because really, for all his charisma, that’s all he is.

  61. auraboy says

    Marcus Ranum @ 20 – that programme on the history of pornography was one of the very first I worked on for my school work experience. From my recollection it was estimated something like 50-60% of recovered art had already been destroyed and much of it is, still, to this day, held in private collections and not seen much. It’s always worth remembering that the art we see has undergone many cultural censorship purges and rarely represents the full picture of a cultural time and place. You may recall the Roman depictions of oral sex used as humorous protections in their toilets, as oral sex was guaranteed to bring laughter and protect against ill fortune. There was also some evidence that male and female genital hair removal was very popular amongst certain classes of many cultures in the research that programme undertook – but I realise that is a separate and more sensitive issue that I can’t recall in enough depth to argue the merits of.

  62. says

    chigau @71:

    What does ‘end poverty’ even mean?

    That’s a good question. Given the multifaceted nature of poverty, I have no idea how a fictional character like Superman or Thor would end poverty. Would they force all world governments to provide for their citizens? How would they do this? How would they ensure 7+ billion people have access to clean water, proper sanitation, and adequate shelter, clothing, and health care?

  63. says

    garydargan @61

    Another pertinent question: Why is the Black Widow not black?

    Because she seduces men and then destroys them; it’s sexism all the way down.

    chigau @71

    What does ‘end poverty’ even mean?

    Depends on who’s saying it, but ate a minimum it means ensuring that everyone has adequate potable water, food, shelter, and clothing, as well as access to health care and education. I don’t really see how Superman could accomplish this; it’s amazing how many problems can’t be solved by the ability to juggle freight cars. Batman could make great strides at reducing poverty in Gotham, and his failure to do so is definitely a point against him, but Supes is actually pretty useless for most purposes; punching bad guys and fighting wildfires are the only things that occur to me, and he already does those.

    anteprepro @70
    Let’s see; Athena could probably give some good advice, but political leaders would have to listen to her. Isis was supposed to be the friend of slaves and the downtrodden, but it’s not clear what she’s supposed to have actually done for them; I imagine she’d be big into unions and the like, and as a fertility deity she could help with crop yields and pre- and post-natal care for mothers and babies and probably clean water, but, while those would all help, none are enough; also, I don’t know that she could do it everywhere at once. Any other fertility gods will have the same deal going, and most of the rest wouldn’t be able to do squat, except on a purely local level through direct personal intervention; e.g. Lugh the Long-Handed going around teaching people various technical skills would help, but only when and where he went.

  64. says

    auraboy@#76 – that was a good series; I really enjoyed it. It stopped just short of screaming in horror at what a bunch of hypocrites the victorians were. What has always seemed to me is that the American upper class values (the ones paid lip service to) are basically the victorian ones; at the same time the working class was much more similar to the British working class under the emire. So Americans sort of continued the ridiculous hypocrisy of the victorians, because of christianity as well as left-over longing for aristocracy. Typically, Americans don’t want an aristocracy (unless it’s The Kardashians) but our ruling class has a strong hankering to be aristocrats. That’s how we got this weird culture built on “fame” – popular recognition instead of breeding. Anyhow, I digress.

    Jackie @#27 absolutely skewers American hypocrisy in other important areas. I read things like that and see the truth in them and all I can think is that our society is lies, lies, lies all the way down.

  65. says

    Supes is actually pretty useless for most purposes; punching bad guys and fighting wildfires are the only things that occur to me, and he already does those.

    His problem is that he chooses to support The Establishment and defend the status quo. He could, you know, use X-ray vision to bust crooked cops and politicians, prevent the US and its allies from engaging in wars of aggression, etc. Basically, Supes has the potential to be Locke’s Leviathan. Instead he aligns with the oligarchy. Well, what do you expect from an alien aristocrat? And, I don’t think he’s very smart, given the decisions he seems to make.

    Now, that would be a fun comic series to do: what if a super-powered, intelligent alien indestructible life-form found its way to Earth and was a socialist? Ruthlessly egalitarian superman could defeat fascism and the power-hungry simply by interposing his indestructibleness in their path, then he could begin a project of Social Justice. It’s SJW-Superman!

    I hate the fact that most comic book supers align themselves with totalitarianism on one side or the other. Sure, Loki’s a totalitarian, but Thor ain’t exactly an SJW either.

  66. says

    @77, Tony! The Queer Shoop

    That’s a good question. Given the multifaceted nature of poverty, I have no idea how a fictional character like Superman or Thor would end poverty. Would they force all world governments to provide for their citizens? How would they do this? How would they ensure 7+ billion people have access to clean water, proper sanitation, and adequate shelter, clothing, and health care?

    Yes they’d probably act as the world army at the highest level. This would have the added effect of freeing up the armies of the nations from fighting each other, because that would become pointless.

    The logistics would be interested to think through. I wonder if anyone has tried to figure that kind of thing out. Probably lots of people, with their marxist and libertarian ideas of economy, and probably a few boring market economy people too. Superpowers would help because they are kind of like perpetual motion free energy systems :P

  67. says

    I ran into this problem when I was trying to write a superhero series when I was 14 or whatever. The logic of these kinds of powers leads to stories that don’t look anything like the superhero stories that we are familiar with.

  68. says

    brianpansky@#82
    I wonder if anyone has tried to figure that kind of thing out.

    Isaiah Berlin tried; I think his conclusions were that you can’t force freedom on people (“negative liberty”) because it’s a contradiction in terms. So SJW-Superman would not be able to aggressively achieve equality through super-redistribution. Although, I think Berlin stopped short of acknowledging that, while you can’t force freedom on people, you can smack down those who are trying to reduce others’ freedoms. The beauty of an SJW-Superman is that they could create a world that was a better place for equality to flourish simply by smacking down those who are causing inequality. That would apply to violence, as well. In internationalist terms, it’s always difficult to say “who is the aggressor?” in many wars (because everyone says it’s the other guy who made them do it!) but the beauty of having a single being in the position to make that decision, and act upon it, would mean that “so what? whoever I say is ‘aggressor’ gets their attempt at aggression smacked down!” That would have a fairly interesting level-setting ability: much like the tired parent who says “I don’t care which of you kids started it, but I know which of you swung their fist first so you’re the one that’s in the most trouble.” Same idea: “I don’t know how to make equal opportunity for everyone, but I can damn sure stop Wall Street execs from enjoying their multi-million-dollar bonuses simply by crushing their fancy cars, flattening their houses, and transferring their money to the treasury. Then I can go to Congress and put my fancy red boot of social justice on congressional pants-seats until they pass legislation using that money for education, social services, medicare, etc.”

    I guess what I’m saying is that if you keep pounding the nails that stick up farther than the rest, pretty soon you’ll have a more level playing field. You can’t pull people up, but you can beat on anyone who’s holding them down, and that’d make a huge huge difference.

  69. johnhodges says

    Black Widow does not have to be of African ancestry to use that name, because there is a poisonous spider of that name, and so the name implies (as intended) that she is a dangerous woman.

  70. Anri says

    I seem to recall a large-format one-shot comic recently in which Supes made an effort to feed the world for a day.

    Candidly, I can’t be arsed to look for it, as I haven’t the fainest glimmer of what it was called… or if dreamed the whole thing.

  71. says

    Anri @87:
    You’re probably thinking of Superman: Peace on Earth:

    After helping to start the Christmas season in Metropolis; Superman finds a starving young woman that leads to him look up the topic of world hunger. Wanting to help, Superman proposes to the United Nations to help to end world hunger through the gesture of spending a day delivering as much food as he can to settlements that need it anywhere on the planet, an idea met with significant controversy but ultimately given the go-ahead. With tankers filled with food, Superman flies to starving and impoverished locations all over the Earth, and is met with varying levels of gratitude, praise, fear and frenzy. Eventually, Superman arrives in a country whose militarized government warns against his help. In response to his persistence, they fire a chemical-weapon missile at where he is, with civilians below. He attempts to save the people by sending the cloud of poison into space, but the tanker is damaged and the food is poisoned. In the end, Superman makes a statement to the press, quoting the old phrase Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man how to fish and he eats for a lifetime. His message to the world is for everyone to share their knowledge to anyone in need. He asks for the world to inspire others in hopes for true peace to live on.
    The story in Peace on Earth was conceived based on the Superman stories from the 1940s, specifically, the World War II-era stories where Superman would go out and fix the world’s problems. In explaining the reason why he fails, Alex Ross said that the lesson Superman learns in Peace on Earth is that he leads by example, instead of becoming the brawn that humanity doesn’t and shouldn’t have. The artwork gave Superman another nod to which he has been alluded: a stand-in for Jesus Christ.

  72. says

    Superman arrives in a country whose militarized government warns against his help. In response to his persistence, they fire a chemical-weapon missile at where he is, with civilians below. He attempts to save the people by sending the cloud of poison into space, but the tanker is damaged and the food is poisoned. In the end, Superman makes a statement to the press, quoting the old phrase Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man how to fish and he eats for a lifetime. His message to the world is for everyone to share their knowledge to anyone in need.

    See what I mean? Superman aligns with oligarchy whenever he can, instead of confronting it. Why didn’t Superman do a little “regime change” on the leaders who ordered the chemical strike? This is my beef with Superman: he’s super-powered by philosophically naive. Apparently he has the X-ray vision but can’t read Thomas Paine, or Plato, or Hume. Instead of lecturing everyone about “share their knowledge” why didn’t he point out that a government that uses chemical weapons on its citizens has lost its legitimacy and the people are entitled to replace it with a new mandate? Then, he could have a) gotten another tanker-load of food b) deposited the leaders in the tribunal at The Hague alongside Dick Cheney, George Bush, and Henry Kissinger, and then wound up with a lecture like:
    “ive a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man how to fish and he eats for a lifetime. But if that man lives under a tyrant who takes his fish and abuses him, you first get rid of the fucking tyrant.”

  73. microraptor says

    @Marcus Ranum- because a lot of comic book readers are conservatives and Marvel and DC would never try taking such a blatant political stance in a novel unless it was an alternate timeline where the superheroes go extremist and attempt to take over the world for its own good. That’s also why they never take on corrupt corporations that manipulate markets (unless they’re building weapons for supervillains) or war criminals (unless they’re from fictional East European countries).

  74. microraptor says

    Oh, and someone sited Black Panther and Wakanda. Well, Black Panther was an interesting character… and then someone made the horrible decision of allowing Reginald Hudlin to have creative control. At that point, Panther immediately turned into a total Mary Sue who was just better than everyone else, shoved Storm from X-Men into a relationship with him (where she mostly gushed about how awesome he was), and changed Wakanda from an African developed nation into a nation that was technologically superior to everyone else (except possibly Latveria, depending on who was writing Fantastic Four that month) that has developed the cure for cancer and likes to sneer about how they’re not going to share it with anyone else.

    Of course, that last part is moot after a Phoenix Force powered Namor flooded the country.

  75. says

    I mean, Superman could just fry all those nasty dictators and free their people. Look at how well that worked out the last dozen times the west did that. Wouldn’t it be really cool if he could just destroy Daesh?
    And all those starving children in Africa! He could bring the ice cream!
    Basically, why can’t Superman just be a great big White Saviour?
    Why would anybody think that such a white saviour superhero would be any less problematic than an extrajudicial power fantasy super hero?
    Besides, what’s the superpower to end centuries of systemic discrimination and injustice?

  76. zenlike says

    drken

    @ zenlike # 10:
    Basically, somebody who you can call useless so you can pretend to know more about superheroes than you actually do.

    I never called her useless, but thanks for playing. I’m also explicitely referring to the Marvel Movie universe, and not the comic books (that was the topic under discussion, right?) , and in the movies it is never explained that she is supposed o be some ‘better class’ of human. She is just someone who is quite intelligent and can kick some ass.

    But thank you for your condecending comic-book snobbery though.

  77. says

    zenlike: And I explained that her character and others are considered “‘peak human” and aren’t (necessarily) supposed to have superpowers. Hawkeye is another example. “Peak human” characters are important in the comic book superhero world. From my reading, it appears that Black Widow was also once peak human in the comic books, but eventually got extra super powers. The comic book world is so fast and there are often different universes, though, that I could be wrong. I have too many tabs open…lol.

    But the concept of “peak human” is a thing in the comic book world, and in the movies, and it’s important.

    Even Tony Stark doesn’t have superpowers until he puts on his suit.

  78. anym says

    #77, Tony! The Queer Shoop

    chigau @71:

    What does ‘end poverty’ even mean?

    That’s a good question. Given the multifaceted nature of poverty, I have no idea how a fictional character like Superman or Thor would end poverty.

    Obligatory SMBC: http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2305

  79. zenlike says

    marilove,

    Yes I understand, since I don’t read the comics I didn’t know about the concept of peak humans and I do think it is an enriching concept for the universe they try to create. However, in the movies (certainly the latest crop build around the Avengers), as far as I know, the concept is not explained, and there is nothing to indicate that Black Widow is anything else than an exception human being, but still a ‘normal’ human being nevertheless.

    Yes there are, and always have been, superheroes without ‘innate’ superhuman powers, but who get similar powers through different (technological) means, like indeed Iran Man. Tony Stark isn’t a superhero, Tony Stark in his Iron Man costume is.

    I also concur with many above that the superheroes without actual special powers can be more interesting characters because of this. I don’t really think it worked in the Avengers movie, which is understandable, because the format didn’t really have a place or time for deep character development.

  80. paul says

    In the past, the rationalization for this sort of omission has been that little boys don’t want to play with a girl action figure, and little girls don’t want to play with superheros.

    If that was ever true, no one can pretend that it applies to the most recent incarnation of The Avengers. Everyone associated with these movies knows that a substantial portion of the customer base is postpubescent fanboys who will gladly pay top dollar for any representation of Scarlett Johansson in a black leather catsuit.

    (Which, BTW, is one of the less ridiculous superhero outfits out there. If you are going to be jumping off of or onto moving vehicles, you will want a second skin to protect you from road rash, and cuffs, shirtails, collars, or a cape would just be a hazard. Motorcyclists used to wear something similar for good reason.)

  81. paul says

    Marilove @22

    Black Widow is NOT what I’d consider a secondary character. Her character was SUPER FUCKING IMPORTANT in Captain America: The Winter Soldier, which is a big reason why I love that movie so much.

    The movie was good. I was hoping they would do a lot with the difference in skill sets. Caps is a boy scout, while BW is a spy/assassin/secret agent–he doesn’t know how to be deceptive or dishonest, while it is a prerequisite for her job. They did some of that, I guess. I expect to be disappointed with the Black Widow movie, which seems to keep getting pushed back. They already missed a perfect opportunity in the story arc–at the end of Winter Soldier, she says that all of her identities have been blown and she has to start building new ones. What better hook for an origin story? We could have seen present-day Natalia revisiting her past, tying up loose ends, and flashing back to how young Natalia became Black Widow.

  82. Rowan vet-tech says

    Wow. It’s like the perfect comparison between a *real* apology and a not-pology. “I was only joking!”

  83. Saad: Openly Feminist Gamer says

    carbonfox, #101

    Wow, that took me by surprise. Fucking disgraceful.

  84. lucy1965 says

    Salon left out Renner’s soupçon of ableism:

    After the interviewer added whatever movie it was Black Widow would just be the sidekick, flirting away, Evans joked, “She’ll just flirt with everybody.” Then, Renner quipped, “She has a prosthetic leg anyway.”

    My interest in paying $20 to sit through this is approaching zero from beneath, I tell you what.

  85. lucy1965 says

    Maybe I’ll wait for the DVD and just watch the scenes with them in it?

    While promoting the film in London, Scarlett Johansson and Mark Ruffalo sat down with Cosmopolitan UK, and instead of the usual back and forth (and potential awkward questions about costumes and pregnancy), the interviewer took a bit of a different route.

    Cosmo UK turned the tables on the actors, asking Ruffalo the usually sexist [questions] Johansson [is] often presented with during press tours. Johansson, in turn, got the intellectual and thoughtful questions about her character… the ones often reserved for her male co-stars.

    Video here.