How "Fascist" is WONDER WOMAN?

[jancy]

I think you're reading way too much into the Marston writings. Marston was against tyranny and fascism, and so was Wonder Woman. Sure, he preached that freedom should be conditional to submission to a loving authority. But there's nothing fascist about that. Its actually a good thing. Because the alternative is to have people just free to assert their destructive egos. That is what creates a world of war, violence, intolerance, etc.

[slvn]

I think you're reading way too much into the Marston writings. Marston was against tyranny and fascism, and so was Wonder Woman. Sure, he preached that freedom should be conditional to submission to a loving authority. But there's nothing fascist about that. Its actually a good thing. Because the alternative is to have people just free to assert their destructive egos. That is what creates a world of war, violence, intolerance, etc.

That's the idea, and it's a good one. The problem, in my opinion, is that people aren't always good at knowing which authorities are "loving" and which are not. Marston was well-intentioned and smart and, I agree, not an actual fascist, but like most social theories, his had a potential dark side. If, as he proposed, children were taught to erotically enjoy submission to authority, they might enjoy submitting to Nazis or Fascists who managed to wear a benevolent face--even though that's not what Marston had in mind.

[americanwonder]

Well, if we tossed out all ideas that have a potential dark side when used inappropriately, we wouldn't be left with many ideas. ;)

[jancy]

That's the idea, and it's a good one. The problem, in my opinion, is that people aren't always good at knowing which authorities are "loving" and which are not. Marston was well-intentioned and smart and, I agree, not an actual fascist, but like most social theories, his had a potential dark side. If, as he proposed, children were taught to erotically enjoy submission to authority, they might enjoy submitting to Nazis or Fascists who managed to wear a benevolent face--even though that's not what Marston had in mind.

I'm not sure about the darkside of his theories existing. but he wasn't dictating what the loving authorities were. Its up to you to decide and figure out. Marston was simply bringing up the concept of submisssion to loving authority.

You can't go through life refusing to have the "submit to loving authority" attitude just because you're worried about the authority in question not being truly loving. Because people who hold onto that reluctance behave with the opposite, which is asserting ego. Which equates to evil/bad, anyway. And in the end, what have you/they accomplished with that fear? Might as well adopt the "submit to loving authority" attitude.

[SteveGus]

I'm not sure about the darkside of his theories existing. but he wasn't dictating what the loving authorities were. Its up to you to decide and figure out. Marston was simply bringing up the concept of submisssion to loving authority.

Marston's plans, like most other plans to remake the human species, probably wouldn't have worked all too well in practice. It still doesn't mean that he was a 'fascist' or spreading some kind of hate-your-neighborism; his intentions were basically good.

[jancy]

Marston's plans, like most other plans to remake the human species, probably wouldn't have worked all too well in practice. It still doesn't mean that he was a 'fascist' or spreading some kind of hate-your-neighborism; his intentions were basically good.

But don't forget that Marston was simply putting out ideas. He wasn't dictating how we should interpret them. Its up to us.

Like what is considered a "loving authority". The the idea remains: We should be submissive to a loving authority rather than asserting our destructive egos.

[slvn]

Marston's plans, like most other plans to remake the human species, probably wouldn't have worked all too well in practice. It still doesn't mean that he was a 'fascist' or spreading some kind of hate-your-neighborism; his intentions were basically good.

I agree with that. I think that teaching people to enjoy being bound has the potential to make things too easy for fascists or other malevolent authoritarians--but clearly, that wasn't his intention.

And I even see his point about why people need to enjoy being bound (though I mean that more metaphorically than he might have). I just think that if you're going to teach that, you also have to teach a very healthy dose of critical thinking.

[CarolStrick]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism As far as WW is concerned, I always got the impression that her "loving submission" speeches could be translated as gentle "obey your Mama" lectures, directed toward the kiddie readers.

[jancy]

I agree with that. I think that teaching people to enjoy being bound has the potential to make things too easy for fascists or other malevolent authoritarians--but clearly, that wasn't his intention.
And I even see his point about why people need to enjoy being bound (though I mean that more metaphorically than he might have). I just think that if you're going to teach that, you also have to teach a very healthy dose of critical thinking.

The bit about enjoying being bound comes from his theory that the way to reform people to quell their assertive egos is through experiencing eroticism. Its the FEELING that trains your emotions that creates the change, not the actual "being bound" bit.
And don't forget that Marston advocated strength as well. Both strength & loving submission. But the right type of strength & loving submission. This concept was even demonstrated in Wonder Woman #28, where a prisoner named Irene experiences a surge of strength and dominance, yet she uses it to fight for the cause of loving submission (ie. saving Wonder Woman).

As far as WW is concerned, I always got the impression that her "loving submission" speeches could be translated as gentle "obey your Mama" lectures, directed toward the kiddie readers...

...and if you don't obey Mama, you'll get spanked in the booty! Hahaha!

[slvn]

The bit about enjoying being bound comes from his theory that the way to reform people to quell their assertive egos is through experiencing eroticism. Its the FEELING that trains your emotions that creates the change, not the actual "being bound" bit.

Sure--I realize that he's not ONLY talking about literally being bound, as in actual ropes and chains (although I do think he sees literal bondage play as a way of making that feeling of being bound fun and erotically exciting).

Again, I think he meant well and generally did well; I'm not really complaining about him. Every social theory is going to have a downside, right? I do think, though, that it's good to recognize the potential downside of something like this:



I get that the "good kind" of slavery Wonder Woman is talking about isn't really what most of us think of as slavery at all. But remember that the audeince for this and kids, and ask yourself: would you tell kids that if they "want to be slaves there's no harm in that?" This seems to suggest that it's OK to have someone else do your thinking for you; but I think you have to teach kids that they should respect and listen to others but ultimately learn to think for themselves.

Again, Marston didn't support actual, historical fascism at all--far from it--so the question for me is whether his ideas, or his way of teaching, would encourage people to yield to authoritarian rule. Do you know about Milgram's obedience experiment? It's described at http://www.integratedsociopsychology...xperiment.html . Inspired by the question of why people were willing to be Naxi prison guards and other tools of dictators, Milgram wanted to find out under what conditions people would obey an order to give an electric shock to other people. What I'm wondering about, I guess, is whether teaching people to take erotic pleasure is obedience would make them more likely to administer that shock. I'm just wondering; I don't know for sure.

[americanwonder]

I get that the "good kind" of slavery Wonder Woman is talking about isn't really what most of us think of as slavery at all. But remember that the audeince for this and kids, and ask yourself: would you tell kids that if they "want to be slaves there's no harm in that?" This seems to suggest that it's OK to have someone else do your thinking for you; but I think you have to teach kids that they should respect and listen to others but ultimately learn to think for themselves.

First, I think it's important to keep in mind that there's much more to Marston's WW than just "if they 'want to be slaves there's no harm in that.'" There's a lot going on - including WW breaking free of chains, literal and figurateive - so I think we can quickly end up with a distorted picture if we only focus on one picture.

Second, give kids (and Marston) a little more credit. Kids ask a TON of questions, especially when they don't understand something. Asking questions about when it's a good idea to submit can lead to learning and thinking for themselves, no?

Again, Marston didn't support actual, historical fascism at all--far from it--so the question for me is whether his ideas, or his way of teaching, would encourage people to yield to authoritarian rule.

Authoritarian is a much better word choice than Fascism - which the author seems to grasp in the comments section (iirc), though it does make me wonder how me never noticed that after spending so much time writing the article.

[slvn]

First, I think it's important to keep in mind that there's much more to Marston's WW than just "if they 'want to be slaves there's no harm in that.'" There's a lot going on - including WW breaking free of chains, literal and figurative - so I think we can quickly end up with a distorted picture if we only focus on one picture.

Oh, of course! I know I've cited that picture more than once, but I don't think there's any danger that we're going to focus only on that. I just think that if we're asking whether there's even a small part of Wonder Woman that might be conducive to authoritarianism, this is an interesting example to think about.

Here's another:



Isn't there something that seems just a little Orwellian about what Steve says? Is this love or is it brainwashing? I have not doubt Marston meant it to be love; I just think the lines get a little blurry when you're telling people that they have no choice but to love and be transformed like everyone else.

Second, give kids (and Marston) a little more credit. Kids ask a TON of questions, especially when they don't understand something. Asking questions about when it's a good idea to submit can lead to learning and thinking for themselves, no?

Sure. I'd be fine with having high school students read Mein Kampf, too, if they're studying it critically; taht could lead them to ask questions and think for themselves, too. (And no, I'm not equating Wonder Woman to Mein Kampf. Hitler's work, one would teach only to critique it; Marston's, you'd use mostly to inspire, but you would also welcome and encourage critical questions.) But if a student asked you whether you agree with Wonder Woman and Marston that there's nothing wrong with being a slave if that's what you want, would you agree? I wouldn't. Or at least, I would say that no matter what you want, you always remain responsible for your own choices, so it's not a good idea to let some "master" or "mistress," however good, do all of our thinking for us.

Authoritarian is a much better word choice than Fascism - which the author seems to grasp in the comments section (iirc), though it does make me wonder how me never noticed that after spending so much time writing the article.

Yep, agreed.

[kelly_warrior_princess]

Charles Reece advances an argument in two parts, here and here, , which indicts Marston's "loving authority" as just another 1984 brainwashing campaign.

hmmmmm, an interesting pair of articles. I hadn't thought about it like that.

Sure quite a bit of it is wrong (more in the second article then the first), but interesting all the same. Its nice to see someone else can see paradise island as a facist paradise. But me personally, i like to focus on the preboot, post-crisis stuff being hell on earth, rather then some sort of paradise & facism had nothing to do with that.

[Mr. Holmes]

So Wonder Woman is a communist now?

Stalin's USSR was just as facist as Germany. Communism was just Lennon's vision that died with him.

About the article, I was intrigued about the Ayn Rand comparisons, but no, I don't think WW is fascist. I actually have a lot of problems with the Marston stuff, but I wouldn't go that far.

[americanwonder]

... Isn't there something that seems just a little Orwellian about what Steve says? Is this love or is it brainwashing?

Orwellian brainwashing? lol WHAT?

Why is it that for interpretations of Azzarello's WW, you almost always seem to paint in the brightest shades of optimism, but for Marston's it's Orwellian brainwashing instead of something as simple as enthusiastic support?