Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 60 of 60
  1. #46
    The Mad Artist RMAN63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Bermuda Triangle
    Posts
    3,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Outside_85 View Post
    In #2 they also said:
    "Aye, what hangs between the shanks befouls my nose."

    So unless Hermes' junk reaches below his knees, I am reading it as the smell coming from Zola, the divine musk left by Zeus.

    Hermes was injured and resting in a regular room, since I doubt it's an Amazon custom to have beds in laundry rooms, which I doubt they have. That said, the Amazons are obviously well aware that their gods are someone you revere for what they are and what they do, but they are not people they trust.
    Well.. he's got wings on his ankles, maybe he's healthy in the endowement department and it IS indeed hanging between the shanks. Maybe he's so white because he never leaves the house. ahem. LOL

  2. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by americanwonder View Post
    Nope. Atlantis was attacked and retaliated. It's a much better explanation, easy to follow their train of thought, than what we got in Amazons Attack -

    "We're here to save our Princess!"

    "Mom, I'm standing right here."

    "Ignore her. ATTACK EVERYTHING THAT MOVES!"

    "Mom, you're not the Queen anymore, remember?"

    "Ignore that, too. SHOCK AND AWE! SHOCK AND AWE!"

    "Mom, we're only in awe at the stupidity of it all."

    With Azzarello, do we have any explanation for why they trade the boy babies? Do we know why the Amazons aren't smart enought o pick up drunk sailors for a night rather than resort to their seductive murder habits? Sorry, but it's a rather shallow and pathetic gimmick in my book at this point, because it wasn't needed for the story and Azzarello has done NOTHING with it (thus far?).

    In just these three pages, Johns, imo, gives Atlantis more depth without reducing them to hyper-simplistic generic sailor horror stories for boys.

    SERIOUSLY?

    Those three pages show nothing more than the same old cliche of an alien culture judging humanity as unadvanced and its greatest danger being itself. It's been shown in comics and sci-fi so much it's formulaic, and Johns did nothing there but re-hash it while showing the Atlanteans helping some people they, from the words written, think of as lesser than. This has been shown with everyone from the Vulcans to the Atlanteans in Marvel to Kryptonians to Martians and so forth. Not to mention it totally glosses over the former history and complex nuances of Atlanteans. Lest we forget this is the society that left Aquaman on a reef as a baby simply because he had blonde hair? That ostracized Garth cause he had purple eyes?

    Typical Johns, who really is a great writer for super-heroes, but really does little to advance them. Classic and predictable tropes like this while playing it safe is what he does, and this 3 page does not really show any complexity or depth to the Atlanteans. It just shows them being altruistic and heroic (while following their king) which is maybe more likeable, but complex? Where? Cause they've realized humanity has issues? No duh, really?

    The technology aside, Azzarello showed a realistic version of how an all-female society would keep themselves going for centuries without "sugar-coating" it by "magicking" it away so that the clean, neat, fairy-tale history of the Amazons could be kept intact. He also showed that in such a society, some women may hate or not favor men, just like some, not all, but some lesbians dont care for men, or some black people dont care for whites, or some men actually hate women. this is factual and honest, and to dismiss it as some "sailor's nightmare" is intellectually dishonest and only serves the altruistic way you want to still see them as.

    To answer these same old questions:

    "With Azzarello, do we have any explanation for why they trade the boy babies?"

    Because despite it not being very nice, it's practical to trade children that do not fit the make-up and rules of a society for weapons from a god than to keep them or just kill them outright. It's not nice, it's not sensitive, but it's practical and lets face it, it's better than outright killing them. And a way better complex explanation than having the amazons be able to only birth girls through magic.

    "Do we know why the Amazons aren't smart enought o pick up drunk sailors for a night rather than resort to their seductive murder habits? Sorry, but it's a rather shallow and pathetic gimmick in my book at this point, because it wasn't needed for the story and Azzarello has done NOTHING with it (thus far?). "

    Again, practicality. Why should they be "smart enough" to do that just to coincide with the more humane way some may want to see them portrayed? Its far more expedient and practical to just raid a ship together and get a boatload of sailors to sleep with you en masse and then kill them than to split up, go home with a dude, have sex with him and then try to leave. He may not want you to leave, he may try to follow you, he or the others they've slept with may try to find you. And maybe that secret society that's cut off from man's world wont be so secret and cut off anymore. Again, it's not nice but it makes perfect practical sense.

    Azzarello is not the type of writer that's going to spell it out for you, nor does he need to if one actually applies logic. Why leave them alive to possibly follow you or find you when you can just kill them once you're done? You do know ancient societies were very practical like this? And why should the Amazons be excluded simply because they are women?

    All societies, including fictional Atlantis and factual America, have done some very immoral and questionable things, especially in the name of religious beliefs, politics, or societal needs. Some o' y'all really kinda need to get over it.
    Last edited by jabu46; 03-31-2013 at 02:56 PM.

  3. #48
    U dont need my user title brettc1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Beyond the Dune Sea.
    Posts
    11,584

    Default

    Maybe the reality you spell out is exactly why some folks like the idea of a place where we can see human potential, rather than wallow in our own base instincts. Gene Roddenberry had the same vision in mind.

    But then there are folks who like the idea of the Federation in Star Trek as closet facists, I guess.
    Irene Adler: “I would have you right here on this desk until you begged for mercy twice.”
    Sherlock: “I’ve never begged for mercy in my life.”
    Irene: “Twice.”


  4. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brettc1 View Post
    Maybe the reality you spell out is exactly why some folks like the idea of a place where we can see human potential, rather than wallow in our own base instincts. Gene Roddenberry had the same vision in mind.

    But then there are folks who like the idea of the Federation in Star Trek as closet facists, I guess.
    Honestly, the federation WERE fascists in a sense, they were just nice about it because it would have been "politically incorrect" to show it on TV. Roddenberry himself had some serious issues. Many of those alien races saw them as such. This was explored a great deal on Deep Space Nine, which was the best, to me, out of the Star Trek series. Of course, Roddenberry hated it, mainly because it did not fit his unrealistic, politically acceptable version of a space exploring military going boldly where no man has gone before to poke their noses into other races cultures...which is exactly how colonialism happens.
    Last edited by jabu46; 03-31-2013 at 05:22 PM.

  5. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,034

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Outside_85 View Post
    In #2 they also said:
    "Aye, what hangs between the shanks befouls my nose."

    So unless Hermes' junk reaches below his knees, I am reading it as the smell coming from Zola, the divine musk left by Zeus.

    Hermes was injured and resting in a regular room, since I doubt it's an Amazon custom to have beds in laundry rooms, which I doubt they have. That said, the Amazons are obviously well aware that their gods are someone you revere for what they are and what they do, but they are not people they trust.
    After the Amazons talk about musk, Hermes says he should not have come. That placement wasn't random. Also, the Amazons say they want to take a blade and "separate the offence from the offender. Leave them to shrink and wither on the sand." What does Zola have (in plural) that can be cut off? Did Zeus drop seed on her legs and it's still there? Hermes is a god. Maybe his "eggs" hang low.

    Look at the picture of Hermes resting. There is laundry hanging. There are laundry baskets in the background. Also, he's resting on a simple bed; it could have easily been carried in. Sure, that could be Hippolyta's bedroom and she does her own laundry, but that seems unlikely.

    I don't even know why you are arguing with me since I was supporting your statement that males were forbidden. I was showing that not even a male god was welcomed.

  6. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    Those three pages show nothing more than the same old cliche ....
    I find your post rather hilarious mainly for this little bit right here - you do realize that 'man-hating Amazons, grrr' was a tired old cliche long before Azzarello was even born, right? This aspect of the story hardly took two brain cells worth of creativity to come up with because there are countless sources that have already done it time and time again - it's basic copy-paste writing by trope with no depth or advancement (so far?).

    He doesn't show "some women may hate or not favor men," he makes the WHOLE society very unoriginally one-note. And there's no background story or complexity to them - they behave this way just cause (so far?). So, no, this isn't "factual" and "honest" - imo, it's shallow sensationalistic spectacle desperate to pander for attention and lacking any real substance (so far?).


    Note: The several "so far"'s should make it obvious that I recognize the story isn't over, and yes, I do leave the door open for further details to emerge as the story crawls along, and yes, I'm open to changing my opinions should any details give me good reason.
    Last edited by americanwonder; 04-01-2013 at 12:30 AM.
    "... Act, that each tomorrow find us farther than today."
    - Longfellow

  7. #52
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Right behind you
    Posts
    6,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pad View Post
    After the Amazons talk about musk, Hermes says he should not have come. That placement wasn't random.
    He also said he was dying in #1 and that Diana should leave him behind and focus on Zola.


    Quote Originally Posted by pad View Post
    Also, the Amazons say they want to take a blade and "separate the offence from the offender. Leave them to shrink and wither on the sand."
    What does Zola have (in plural) that can be cut off?
    The kid in her womb, and as you write it it's singular; one offence and one offender.


    Quote Originally Posted by pad View Post
    Look at the picture of Hermes resting. There is laundry hanging. There are laundry baskets in the background. Also, he's resting on a simple bed; it could have easily been carried in. Sure, that could be Hippolyta's bedroom and she does her own laundry, but that seems unlikely.
    If I am not totally off the blink, in the old days, drying your clothes in the same room you slept in wasn't uncommon because of the body heat you generated along with any fireplaces or stoves that also happened to be in the room. Also I believe the clothes happen to be Hermes' shirt's.
    But I highly doubt that was either Diana's or Hippolyta's quarters.

    Quote Originally Posted by pad View Post
    I don't even know why you are arguing with me since I was supporting your statement that males were forbidden. I was showing that not even a male god was welcomed.
    My apologies, but it didn't register to me in that way :S

    That said, I think there is a difference between how the Amazons see male humans and male gods. Male humans are not welcome and not tolerated (I think) at all. Male gods on the other hand might still not be a welcome sight, but they are tolerated. Now it is ofc entirely possible it's only different because the gods are the Amazons gods and fulfil important functions in their spiritual lives. And the Amazons know that their gods happen to be petty and vindictive. Hermes for instance is a psychopomp that leads the dead from one place to another, so making an enemy of him might leave you stranded for eternity in a place you don't want to be left in. Finally there is that small thing about the gods being powerful enough on their own to make the Amazons reconsider any aggression towards them normally.

  8. #53

    Default

    [I][QUOTE=americanwonder;16844871]I find your post rather hilarious mainly for this little bit right here - you do realize that 'man-hating Amazons, grrr' was a tired old cliche long before Azzarello was even born, right? This aspect of the story hardly took two brain cells worth of creativity to come up with because there are countless sources that have already done it time and time again - it's basic copy-paste writing by trope with no depth or advancement (so far?).

    He doesn't show "some women may hate or not favor men,"
    he makes the WHOLE society very unoriginally one-note. And there's no background story or complexity to them - they behave this way just cause (so far?). So, no, this isn't "factual" and "honest" - imo, it's shallow sensationalistic spectacle desperate to pander for attention and lacking any real substance (so far?).[/
    I]

    Sorry, but What youre saying is an intellectually dishonest and mean-spirited opinion based off of your own biases that support how you want to see the amazons more favorably portrayed. It does nothing to approach the actual practical, more realistic, and more honest showing of how an all female society would perpetuate itself. You are also overlooking instances where the "man-hating" aspect of the amazons across the board has been shown to not be true.

    How is it entirely a man hating society if the queen had an affair and begat the child of a male god? How is it a totally a man hating society when some amazons in that infamous sex raid story were shown to be upset when their male children were taken away? Or did you miss the amazon who just gave birth covering her eyes and crying?

    Also two things, even if what Azz has done is a cliche, it doesn't NOT make that 3 page showing you spoke of a cliche. Its just a more "favorable" cliche cause its nicer, and the typical condescending one where an alien culture comes to help humanity and judges us. Happens in every other sci-fi flick. Maybe Atlantis will take us over "for our own good" next.

    Also, if Azz's showing is a cliche, its far more realistic and logical than the sugar coated nice nice version that existed before. If youre gonna have an all female society that existed for centuries have the "balls" so to speak to show the complex and possibly ugly truths of how that society would be possible. Dont create a society of women that exclude men that are "nice" about it and then explain away any and all need for men for perpetuation usage through "divine purpose" and "magic." It was always a too neat and safe route all for the purpose of Marston and his wishes to show what he felt was the superiority of women over "man's world". I understand why it was shown that way for lil' kids back then but now its just too much of a fairy tale for modern day readers. Even Harry Potter has more grit that that. Personally, I can at least respect this way more because the Amazons are shown having made some hard yet ugly (and hopefully by some, regrettable) choices to keep their one gender society and norms going, and not just because Hera or Aphrodite or some goddess decreed their perpetuation through magic and divinity.

  9. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    Sorry, but What youre saying is an intellectually dishonest and mean-spirited opinion based off of your own biases that support how you want to see the amazons more favorably portrayed. It does nothing to approach the actual practical, more realistic, and more honest showing of how an all female society would perpetuate itself.
    lol - Show me the historical FACTS regarding all female societies, then lecture me about how "realistic" it is. What's that? There are NO real historical facts on this subject? So, that would mean there's a #### ton of speculation (we'll call it writer's artist liscence) going on here, right? You like the story, so that makes you "intellectually honest" or somesuch? But you don't have a biased opinion on this yourself, right? Please.

    eta - There simply isn't a whole lot of "logic" and "realism" to the Amazons ignoring the techonological advancements they encounter when they go out into the world. Where's your "intellectual honesty" there? Or are you picking and choosing when to apply it (eg, are gods having a drink in a NY bar logical and realistic)?

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    You are also overlooking instances where the "man-hating" aspect of the amazons across the board has been shown to not be true.

    How is it entirely a man hating society if the queen had an affair and begat the child of a male god? How is it a totally a man hating society when some amazons in that infamous sex raid story were shown to be upset when their male children were taken away? Or did you miss the amazon who just gave birth covering her eyes and crying?
    You're assuming again. I'm cheeky in my hyperbole, but no, I did not overlook or forget those moments. But, those moments have no depth because there's no follow-up. Azzarello's 'love story' for Hippolyta is just stupid, imo - very shallow, gimmicky writing he borrowed (and didn't write particularly well). One single mother is shown crying for one panel - and then did what? No depth, no follow-up - and thus, no complexity.

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    Also two things, even if what Azz has done is a cliche, it doesn't NOT make that 3 page showing you spoke of a cliche. Its just a more "favorable" cliche cause its nicer, and the typical condescending one where an alien culture comes to help humanity and judges us. Happens in every other sci-fi flick. Maybe Atlantis will take us over "for our own good" next.
    "Well, Johns' cliche is bigger" - that's your arguement? "Oh look, Amazons are being mean to the poor picked on men" happens in countless sources. Very generic unoriginality. Is it "favorable" because it's condescending to the readers who want to judge "alien" cultures rather than take a good look and dare to question our own?

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    Also, if Azz's showing is a cliche, its far more realistic and logical than the sugar coated nice nice version that existed before. If youre gonna have an all female society that existed for centuries have the "balls" so to speak to show the complex and possibly ugly truths of how that society would be possible. Dont create a society of women that exclude men that are "nice" about it and then explain away any and all need for men for perpetuation usage through "divine purpose" and "magic." It was always a too neat and safe route all for the purpose of Marston and his wishes to show what he felt was the superiority of women over "man's world". I understand why it was shown that way for lil' kids back then but now its just too much of a fairy tale for modern day readers. Even Harry Potter has more grit that that. Personally, I can at least respect this way more because the Amazons are shown having made some hard yet ugly (and hopefully by some, regrettable) choices to keep their one gender society and norms going, and not just because Hera or Aphrodite or some goddess decreed their perpetuation through magic and divinity.
    "Grit" does not equal "realism." There are no "balls" here because Azzarello has done nothing of depth or complexity with it. It's unoriginal shallow gimmicks THUS FAR. "Balls" would be daring to look at REAL issues, not simplistic fictional distortions built for spectacle and lacking substance.
    Last edited by americanwonder; 04-01-2013 at 01:16 AM.
    "... Act, that each tomorrow find us farther than today."
    - Longfellow

  10. #55
    CBR Mod/WW Section Mom Gaelforce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Southern New Jersey
    Posts
    3,369

    Default

    I will add that wanting the baby you just birthed (motherly instinct) is not the same as liking/loving men.

    Also note - Hippolyta was shown fighting Zeus for far more panels than having sex with Zeus. Getting past that it was terribly written (Zeus really truly loved Hippolyta? She wasn't just another conquest? Yet he hasn't been back since then while he's been sowing his oats elsewhere (see Zola)), all it shows is that the Amazons have the potential to come around. Hippolyta took a year (the seasons change in those panels) and that was with a god actively pursuing her (because he was in love with her. Right.)

    I'm still holding out hope that Hephaestus was either misled, lying or just not telling the whole story.

  11. #56

    Default

    lol - Show me the historical FACTS regarding all female societies, then lecture me about how "realistic" it is. What's that? There are NO real historical facts on this subject? So, that would mean there's a #### ton of speculation (we'll call it writer's artist liscence) going on here, right? You like the story, so that makes you "intellectually honest" or somesuch? But you don't have a biased opinion on this yourself, right? Please.[/I][/B]




    Sigh...you're arguing the wrong point, and that is where im pointing out possible intellectual dishonesty, but you may just be mistaken about the argument made. No one is saying that an all female society actually exists or existed or real historical facts of it exist. The point is that IF A PEOPLE CREATED AN ALL FEMALE SOCIETY, THIS WOULD BE A MORE REALISTIC WAY IT WOULD HAPPEN. Unless you honestly think that through magic, children are made from clay (lol) and an all female society without men perpetuates itself through (snicker) divine purpose?? It's silly, especially by today's standards, and a neatly packaged, safe and cowardly way to create a one gender society without having to deal with the actual complexity and issues of eschewing males altogether. If YOU needed to make a baby or perpetuate your bloodline today you would need male sperm. FACT. Go to a sperm bank, sleep with a friend, something. Azz simply showed the sacrifices and ugly choices that needed to be made in a warrior society, and the consequences thereof, of creating such a society. Whether its a cliche or not (I've rarely read about this "man-hating female stereotype" in fiction spoken of) It's the difference in the WAY that this fictional society is shown in having to perpetuate itself, that is more complex and realistic, NOT the society being realistic itself. Wrong argument.

    I know these are comics, but a lot of fans today (and before) need some level of realism, some level of logic, something that makes concrete sense!, that they can relate to even when reading about the fantastic. It's why Batman is so huge, and Marvel comics has always sold more than DC. WW before had hardly NO sense of realism, which made her campy. From her birth, to the heavy handed and various "spiritual" and magical ways her superior all female society existed without males, to her coming to "man's world" to show how our poor two gender society how to exist. It was all too much of a neatly packaged fairy tale to take seriously. Again, it may be a cliche', but Azz took away the rose tinted glasses and gave something that is far more likely and logical, though ugly, than women perpetuating themselves through the divine. Did you seriously not know that a lot of fans, including female ones, found WW to be campy and a joke for these reasons and others? Do you honestly think she's seen as cool these days as the X-women over at Marvel are, or even Black Widow?



    eta - There simply isn't a whole lot of "logic" and "realism" to the Amazons ignoring the techonological advancements they encounter when they go out into the world. Where's your "intellectual honesty" there? Or are you picking and choosing when to apply it (eg, are gods having a drink in a NY bar logical and realistic)?

    You do know some people, and even some societies, do not favor or trust technology, right? Hell, I have a friend who still refuses to get a cellphone. So no, its not impossible for a centuries old warrior society to not want to deal with modern technology, especially if they are a hidden society. And when did they go out into the world? Raiding ships is them actually going out into the world? If you dont like that they are not shown as technologically advanced as they were before, fine, I get that, but lets not pretend that all people everywhere are going to go "oh! technology!" when they run across it. Look at the Amish.

    As for the gods having a drink in an NY bar, they are shown to be just as flawed and wanton of things as people. And this has been shown in fiction for a long time, and even in religion. Why wouldnt Ares in modern times drink at a bar the same way Tony Stark or Hal Jordan would? Is he supposed to be wearing an outdated Toga and armor drinking from a pool of wine in Greece?The gods reflect the times just like people do. Its another matter of taking something fantastical and placing it in a realistic, modern setting.



    You're assuming again. I'm cheeky in my hyperbole, but no, I did not overlook or forget those moments. But, those moments have no depth because there's no follow-up. Azzarello's 'love story' for Hippolyta is just stupid, imo - very shallow, gimmicky writing he borrowed (and didn't write particularly well). One single mother is shown crying for one panel - and then did what? No depth, no follow-up - and thus, no complexity.



    No follow up, sure, I agree, but they are instances that arguably show that the Amazons are not all "man-haters." The queen making it with a male god and the woman being upset that her child was being taken away. It being shallow and gimmicky and not written well is your opinion, nothing more. Stick with the facts. A lot of stuff has not been followed up yet, including the Amazons side of the sex raids. YOU GUYS are just assuming they are all "man haters" based off of a few instances where no one was showed thinking this en masse, that and the sex raids which were more likely done for practical and logical purposes to perpetuate and protect themselves from being followed rather than outright hatred.

    Also, lets not pretend that the Amazons have never been shown not favoring or liking men before this. The very basis of their society is built off of excluding men. Your "tolerance" argument only goes so far when this is the basis of your society. Azz just took it to the far end and more extreme conclusion, but the Amazons have been shown before not trusting or liking men. Being "nice" about intolerance is still intolerance.




    "Well, Johns' cliche is bigger" - that's your arguement? "Oh look, Amazons are being mean to the poor picked on men" happens in countless sources. Very generic unoriginality. Is it "favorable" because it's condescending to the readers who want to judge "alien" cultures rather than take a good look and dare to question our own?



    My argument is multi-faceted as your paragraphed answers are obviously showing. And what's with the "poor-picked on men" line? I dont think anywhere in this book are men seen as poor and picked on, and again, an intellectually dishonest statement when considering there are HUNDREDS more stories of men picking on EVERYBODY, so I doubt its as countless as you think in comparison. In any case, fine, BOTH are cliche, but the cliche with the Amazons started before Azz. They've never been fond of men and excluded them. Nowhere in this book are they shown "picking" on men. They reacted to one coming on their island and are now known to raid ships of them to get their seed so they can perpetuate. This is a necessity, not picking on anyone. When Azz actually shows Amazons going out to beat up and kill men simply for pleasure, then i'll agree men are being "picked on"

    As for your example with the Atlanteans, again, its still a cliche. Another culture coming in and making us take a good look at our own has happened in "countless sources", including the Amazons who sent their daughter over to teach our "poor two gender society" how to act. Martian Manhunter did the same thing, as have the Atlanteans before. Hell, The Avengers JUST dealt with alien gods doing the same thing over in their book. All those 3 pages showed were some Atlanteans helping Aquaman with some of the damage they helped cause and, yet again, realizing that humanity is its "own worst enemy." That's your example of depth and complexity? Sorry, I've read that trope FAR more times in modern fiction, comics, and sci-fi than I have about man-hating amazons. You want complex Atlanteans? Read PAD's Aquaman and his Atlantis Chronicles.



    "Grit" does not equal "realism." There are no "balls" here because Azzarello has done nothing of depth or complexity with it. It's unoriginal shallow gimmicks THUS FAR. "Balls" would be daring to look at REAL issues, not simplistic fictional distortions built for spectacle and lacking substance.[/QUOTE]

    Grit equals realism far more than using the "out" of "magic" and "divine purpose" to avoid having to deal with a complex and possibly disturbing issue. You mean to tell me those weren't "gimmicks" before? If youre going to create an all female society that eschews men, than show, in a realistic sense, how that's accomplished and own it. That's where the "balls" come in. The amazons before needed so much magic and divine intervention to explain their existence in a nice and neatly packaged way that it sorely lacked any grounding or logic. As ugly and maybe cliche to you as this current way is, its at least owning what the Amazons have always been and not "half-stepping" with it so they can maintain their facade of "tolerance" and morality by explaining away how a one gender society perpetuates itself through "magic".
    Last edited by jabu46; 04-01-2013 at 09:34 AM.

  12. #57

    Default

    Gaelforce: I will add that wanting the baby you just birthed (motherly instinct) is not the same as liking/loving men.
    [/B[/I]
    ]



    The way you and others talk about them hating men, I'd figure the hatred would supersede any motherly instinct. And let's be clear, the Amazons have never loved men, even before Azzarello. I love the hypocrisy of maintaining an all female society where men cannot set foot on the island for whatever reason, and the actual instances where the Amazons have been shown judging and not caring for "man's world" before, but now because of this all of a sudden there's concern that they are not shown liking or loving men. In any case, ny point before was that that one panel did show that some of the Amazons did not want to give their baby away, male or not, but probably did to keep the rule of their society intact.




    Also note - Hippolyta was shown fighting Zeus for far more panels than having sex with Zeus. Getting past that it was terribly written (Zeus really truly loved Hippolyta? She wasn't just another conquest? Yet he hasn't been back since then while he's been sowing his oats elsewhere (see Zola)), all it shows is that the Amazons have the potential to come around. Hippolyta took a year (the seasons change in those panels) and that was with a god actively pursuing her (because he was in love with her. R
    ight.)




    Who said Zeus was in love with her?? Look, Zeus is a "playa", as he's been depicted in mythology, the book is not going to any lengths to show him otherwise. So yeah, maybe she was just another conquest. Maybe his plan was to birth Diana for specific reasons not divulged yet. And the battle they had was romantic foreplay. The Queen of a warrior society and the king of the gods use combat in various ways, and in this case Zeus had to prove his mettle by winning her through something they both respect; war. Its barbaric and not quite romantic in a modern way, but it's how some old societies like that functioned. Look at Game of Thrones for a reference. The panels obviously showed them being attracted to each other, and Hippolyta spoke of him in a way where she found him attractive and was in awe of him. She was fighting him, but it was all leading to them having sex. Just like some women today keep a man they like off until he's proven his worth through various means.

    Youre speculating on Hippolyta taking a year to come around, since she was shown to be attracted to him before the battle started. This was shown and worded plainly in the book.There is no real reason to believe she outright hated men before that.




    I'm still holding out hope that Hephaestus was either misled, lying or just not telling the whole story.[/QUOTE]



    I dont think he was telling the whole story, but him lying and none of it being true would be a cop-out and I dont think Azzarello does that. He needs to own this and so do the Amazons.
    Last edited by jabu46; 04-01-2013 at 10:01 AM.

  13. #58

    Default

    I never expected Azz to turn the Amazons into rapists and murderers. It's interesting because before the New 52 they were victims of rape and murder (by Hercules and his men) and now they are rapists and murderers.
    Last edited by Lee-Sensei; 04-01-2013 at 01:06 PM.

  14. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    Sigh...you're arguing the wrong point, and that is where im pointing out possible intellectual dishonesty, but you may just be mistaken about the argument made. No one is saying that an all female society actually exists or existed or real historical facts of it exist. The point is that IF A PEOPLE CREATED AN ALL FEMALE SOCIETY, THIS WOULD BE A MORE REALISTIC WAY IT WOULD HAPPEN. ...
    I am intellectually dishonest for seeing that your claim of "REALISTIC" does NOT have a historical precedent to build on?

    What I find silly is ignoring historical facts in claims of what is "realistic." I find it silly to accept a story of gods literally chillin' in a NY bar while claiming to want realism. Diana fights zombie centaurs, literally goes to Hades to visit the god with candels on is head (lol), gets magical swords that magically appear fromm her bracelets (snicker), but suddenly the story must be grounded in "realism" when it comes to immortal Amazons and their secret sex raids? How is that not picking and choosing what you claim needs to be "realistic"?

    But since you love "realism" so much - riddle me this: Countless sailors have been having drunken anonymous sex in countless ports across the globe for centuries, right? So, are you more likely to want to follow a lady home after a drunken one night stand, or that you, and others, would go looking when a shipload of people you care about doesn't return? Which is more likely to create enemies looking for you?

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    (I've rarely read about this "man-hating female stereotype" in fiction spoken of)
    How often, in how many sources, are the Amazons depicted as man-hating females? It was old long before this millenium. Which is one reason I liked WW's version of the Amazons being more unique rather than a tired old generic sterotype that Azzarello is borrowing to fit in.

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    Look at the Amish.
    Ah, yes, that great warrior nation known as the Amish. And your friend not wanting a cell phone is another poor example as that is a personal lifestyle choice, not a matter of national security. The Amazons, a warrior nation hell-bent on their independence, not caring about the technology of their enemies is "realistic"? Does that really sound like the logical choice to you? For that matter, an island that no one has found 'til now is "realistic" and "logical"?

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    Stick with the facts.
    You mean like when I point out that your "realism" is lacking in historical facts? And I make no claim that my opinion is anything other than my opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    YOU GUYS are just assuming they are all "man haters" based off of a few instances where no one was showed thinking this en masse, ...
    You make it sound like we reach this "assumption" based on nothing when Azzarello has spent far more page time on this aspect of the Amazons. He hasn't shown the Amazons speaking "en masse" but he also hasn't shown anyone other than Diana (who feels completely foreign to her own society) really speaking out against it. This is my point - it's very lopsided and done so on purpose for sensationalize shock. But it lacks any actual depth. It's like showing Rush Limbaugh for 98% of the time and thinking that's a good showing of how Americans think.

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    Also, lets not pretend that the Amazons have never been shown not favoring or liking men before this.
    I never said the Amazons have never been shown as not favoring men. I've never even said I think the Amazons can't have flaws.

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    And what's with the "poor-picked on men" line? I dont think anywhere in this book are men seen as poor and picked on, ...
    Murdering men is not picking on them? I doubt they would agree with you if they were alive to have a chance to disagree. And no, it is not a "necessity" to murder as there are other options available.

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    and again, an intellectually dishonest statement when considering there are HUNDREDS more stories of men picking on EVERYBODY, so I doubt its as countless as you think in comparison.
    Here's an exercise in facts for your intellectual honesty - go to any refugee camp on the planet and ask them if it was a group of armed men or armed women that attacked them. Perhaps there is a reason there are more stories of men picking on everybody? Then come back and lecture me on the intellectual honesty of Azzarello's portrayal of the Amazons and how it fits so well with current and historical facts.

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    All those 3 pages showed were some Atlanteans helping Aquaman with some of the damage they helped cause and, yet again, realizing that humanity is its "own worst enemy."
    Exactly the point of this thread - Atlanteans helping with some of the damage they helped cause. It's called follow-up. And it contrasts to the prior issues of generic Atlanteans attacking in a rather generic war. I'm not saying it's great literature; I'm not saying it's never been done before in fiction. Yet, it's still done so with more complexity, mainly due to the follow-up, than Azzarello has given the Amazons to date.

    Again, I've never said I think Azzarello will never follow-up on this. I'm stating my opinion of the story as we have it. Tools, materials, and some labor may build a roof someday, but until then, the potential for a roof is not going to keep the rain off of my head.
    "... Act, that each tomorrow find us farther than today."
    - Longfellow

  15. #60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee-Sensei View Post
    I never expected Azz to turn the Amazons into rapists and murderers. It's interesting because before the New 52 they were victims of rape and murder (by Hercules and his men).
    To be fair, I don't think we can say they rape the men - it's seduction.
    "... Act, that each tomorrow find us farther than today."
    - Longfellow

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •