Why We Need Wonder Woman

[americanwonder]

And which book is this?

Hi Carabas, if you mean which comic is that WW pic and story in, then it's in "Jusctice League: The New Frontier Special #1."
http://www.dccomics.com/comics/justi...tier-special-1

eta: I see Becca's super speed is faster than mine. ;)

[dcwomenkickingass]

From DC Women Kicking Ass and CBR's own Josie Campbell, she sums up everything I've been trying to say since the changes to Diana's origin and the Amazons.

Well done, Josie!

http://dcwomenkickingass.tumblr.com/...501234842/gpjc

Thanks for posting this here. I thought Josie did a terrific job.

I loved WW in New Frontier so i'll probably like this! Thanks for the info!

Is this Gloria the bunny that revealed how Heff would have sex with the bunnies and all that? I remember reading about it.

That would be Gloria Steinem, leader of second wave feminism, founder of Ms. Magazine, responsible for getting Wonder Woman back her powers.

[BeccaBlast]

That would be Gloria Steinem, leader of second wave feminism, founder of Ms. Magazine, responsible for getting Wonder Woman back her powers.

The other reason the joke ending of that story worked so well -- Ms. Steinem pointed out how de-powering your strongest female character in the name of liberating her was actually self-defeating. Would that the lesson had stuck.

Nice to see you here, Sue -- a welcome presence, and a fantastic blog!

[Tiberious]

Thank you Gael for posting this. It actually made my eyes water up a bit. THIS is the Wonder Woman I miss. I agree with the writer 100%.

Hopefully someday Wonder Woman will be able to save herself...

[dcwomenkickingass]

The other reason the joke ending of that story worked so well -- Ms. Steinem pointed out how de-powering your strongest female character in the name of liberating her was actually self-defeating. Would that the lesson had stuck.

Nice to see you here, Sue -- a welcome presence, and a fantastic blog!

Thanks Becca!

[Fate's Faith]

Ah, so instead of a white knight its now a woman in star-spangled panties.

[BeccaBlast]

Ah, so instead of a white knight its now a woman in star-spangled panties.

What -- you afraid you'll be unnecessary?

[kelly_warrior_princess]

The other reason the joke ending of that story worked so well -- Ms. Steinem pointed out how de-powering your strongest female character in the name of liberating her was actually self-defeating. Would that the lesson had stuck.

What Ms. Steinem did was assumed that the depowering had anything to do with liberation. Thats kind of like saying depowering Superman in 1 year later was about an uprise of the proliteriate. The reason DC depowered WW (if you are talking about the white pant suit era) was to try something new with a character that was underselling after its wartime escapist popularity. I don't think liberation had anything to do with DC's choice to do something different.

An i don't think its really fair to build up a conspiracy of sexism, every time someone does something different with Wonder Woman: Which seems to happen a lot.

[BeccaBlast]

What Ms. Steinem did was assumed that the depowering had anything to do with liberation. Thats kind of like saying depowering Superman in 1 year later was about an uprise of the proliteriate. The reason DC depowered WW (if you are talking about the white pant suit era) was to try something new with a character that was underselling after its wartime escapist popularity. I don't think liberation had anything to do with DC's choice to do something different.

An i don't think its really fair to build up a conspiracy of sexism, every time someone does something different with Wonder Woman: Which seems to happen a lot.

Well, let's see -- Denny O'Neil, who wrote the stories and said later it was a bad idea, said it was done to make the character a modern, liberated woman. Many characters got changed at that time to make them modern and increase sales (duh!). So, if Steinem and O'Neil agree on what happened and why -- the person with an unsubstantiated theory; well, it isn't me.

[kelly_warrior_princess]

Well, let's see -- Denny O'Neil, who wrote the stories and said later it was a bad idea, said it was done to make the character a modern, liberated woman.

Where did O'Niel say this exactly? I've seen a lot of people saying that he said that, but no place where he was actually quoted saying it. Closest i can find is a tertiary source of quesitonable veracity that says "This reminds me of writer Denny O’Neil’s 1968 attempt to recast Wonder Woman as a more meaningful role model by taking away all her super abilities and presenting her as the wholly human, self-possessed, liberated woman."

But lets say for a moment that the above quote is actualy what he said, to me it looks like people are using the word liberated, in the same way we do these days for the word "feminist" when refering to a female character. How often do we hear someone saying such and such a character is feminist: yet when questioned on what they mean, they say things akin to "well she's a well developed character." A well developed character is not feminist, its just a well developed character. There's nothing feminist about a well developed character, its completely non-partisan.

So pretending for a moment that the above quote is accurate, which is unlikely as it appears to be someone giving an opinion on someone elses view, liberated seems to be used in a similiar fashion to "feminist" when used to describe a female character.

As for it being a bad idea, it wasn't DC's first & it most certainly wasn't DC's last: Trials of Shazam anyone? 99% of the reboot anyone?

Many characters got changed at that time to make them modern and increase sales (duh!). So, if Steinem and O'Neil agree on what happened and why -- the person with an unsubstantiated theory; well, it isn't me.

Can you cite a source for that assumption, because i'd like to see it first hand. I'd like to read it myself, since i'm not necessarily labouring under the same bias you may be. I'm not trying to be rude & i know it sounds rude (especially the word bias), but really all it means is that its entirely possibly to read information & put more focus on one part then another part that disagrees with your own point of view (its sometimes called "belief bias" or "observational bias"). As an academic i'd like to read it myself, so i may judge the information in its entirety first hand, if it exists at all.

An again i want to apologies in advance if it sounds like i'm taking a shot at you... Especially with that "if it exists at all" part. However when it comes to gender politics & comics as individual entities on the internet it can become quite an echo chamber of unsubstantiated rumor. Remember what happened with the "all female DC characters to wear pants" policy that people got offended when DC didn't follow through on there promise... Even though they never promised any such thing, people just echo chambered a silly joke, until they believed it was real.

[americanwonder]

Where did O'Niel say this...

iirc - I think it's in the History Channel special they did a few years back on the history of comics (good show, btw)*. I don't think he meant any harm by the change, just a creative shake-up to try something different, but he does seem to agree (again, iirc) in looking back, that Steinem had a point in arguing against the depowering of the most famous super gal.

* I think it's this show:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373763/

[kelly_warrior_princess]

iirc - I think it's in the History Channel special they did a few years back on the history of comics (good show, btw)*. I don't think he meant any harm by the change, just a creative shake-up to try something different, but he does seem to agree (again, iirc) in looking back, that Steinem had a point in arguing against the depowering of the most famous super gal.

* I think it's this show:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373763/

Just reserved a copy from the library.

As for Stienem having a point, i'm sure she did: Its the same point every overzealous fan has when there favourite character is changed in a way they don't agree with: HOW DARE THEY DO THAT! The fact that its Stienem doesn't lend any credence to the justification she used for why she was pissed... In truth its the same reason i'm pissed about Captain Marvel & Billy Batson apparently having been dropped on there heads repeatedly until they suffered some sort of internal cerebral trauma that caused an extreme personality shift... Becuase i don't like it. But its DC's character, they can screw them up any way they like.

None of this gives her feminist justification any actual credeance though. An lets be honest the further WW can distance her slef from the feminist thing, the more likely she'll be to actually attract an actual fanbase & the less likely writers will be terrified to actual use her without fear of the digital equiviliant of angry mobs showing up & lynching them in the court of public opinion.

[direction9]

I read, and the main message is something really far from the changes to Diana's origin and Amazons.
The only reference to that is:
"So forgive us Wonder Woman fans if we seem obsessive.

the proper response is to stop reading at this point, and to answer: no.

[Augie Pires]

Where did O'Niel say this exactly? I've seen a lot of people saying that he said that, but no place where he was actually quoted saying it.

I think if you have the Wonder Woman Animated film, he says something along those lines in the DVD extras section. There's this history of WW piece and he's in it. I haven't watched it recently, so I don't have the exact quote, but he does say that or something along those lines.

[Augie Pires]

Double post...