Page 52 of 73 FirstFirst ... 24248495051525354555662 ... LastLast
Results 766 to 780 of 1088
  1. #766
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Right behind you
    Posts
    6,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    THIS is actually true. Ive never seen so many peeps reading a comic that not only do they not like, but have the gall to be offended by.
    Which makes it even more incridible they wish to spend their time complaining over a book they arent reading.

  2. #767
    Dr. Poison's Lab Asst. Power Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Green Bay, WI
    Posts
    2,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    THIS is actually true. Ive never seen so many peeps reading a comic that not only do they not like, but have the gall to be offended by.

    While I appreciate you supporting my reply, I don't think any of us are in any position to decide what does or doesn't offend someone else.
    Check out Hall of Justice Forums at: http://hallofjustice1.proboards.com

  3. #768
    Dr. Poison's Lab Asst. Power Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Green Bay, WI
    Posts
    2,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Outside_85 View Post
    Which makes it even more incridible they wish to spend their time complaining over a book they arent reading.

    I've seen you complain about books that you're not reading(i.e. Justice League) but in any case, I think it's only natural that people complain that something they used to like has changed. They want to be able to enjoy that something again and complain as a way of venting.
    Check out Hall of Justice Forums at: http://hallofjustice1.proboards.com

  4. #769

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Power Guy View Post
    While I appreciate you supporting my reply, I don't think any of us are in any position to decide what does or doesn't offend someone else.
    Nothing in my post says anything about being in a position to decide what does or doesn't offend anyone. It does say state people having the gall to be offended by something they continue to read.

    ie, they can be offended by whatever they like, but why continue to read it?

    Don't try to be snarky because I agreed with you. you appreciated nothing.

  5. #770
    U dont need my user title brettc1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Beyond the Dune Sea.
    Posts
    11,513

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    1) doesnt matter, because the main premise of what Marston and his wife, or wives kept from the original concept of the amazons was the exclusion and supposed inferiority of men. He simply took the myth and recreated everything around it to not only fit what would be more socially acceptable, (ie. making them immortal so the need to procreate would not be a question, thus not having to deal with the ways they had to perpetuate) but to fit a feminist agenda that did not promote women and men as equals, but one that excluded men and in some ways viewed them as inferior. An island that men could not set foot on, the condescending premise of an ambassador come to teach "man's world" how to be better, and so forth. He just took the concept and made it "nicer" and imbued it with heavy deus ex machina so some inconvenient questions wouldn't have to be answered, but kept the "no men" policy and the implied view of men's inferiority for his agenda.
    Now, if this was his thing so be it...but a, he could've just created his own thing instead of taking from a myth but keeping its dislike and exclusion of men, and it couldve still been a powerful example. and b, he could've used it to promote equality of the sexes instead of an island that excluded and eschewed men. In any case, that's partially what I always found hypocritical about the amazons, and too fairy tale ish through the ages after Marston...that they needed to keep re inventing all of these
    "Magical" reasons of how they existed without men....even Perez's thing about them being the reincarnated souls of women murdered by MEN. Really??!?[/QUOTE]

    Yes he did.

    There is no point trying to sugar-coat it. Marston absolutely beleived that the world would be better off if men were calling the shots. That is not hard to understand considering that even as he was writing Wonder Woman the Japanese Imperial Army was commiting mass-rape and murder during the occupation of Hong Kong, in a follow up to their same actions in Nanking some years earlier. Similar atrocities were happening in Europe, and would continue to happen, including the Russian occupation of Berlin.

    The truth is there is a sad history of male violence against women. These days at least it is somewhat balance by the vastly greater suicide rates among men, if that is any kind of equality. Personally I am a big advocate for increased awareness about mens issues in our society, but at the same time I have a daughter and womens issues dont just go away.

    I understand what Marston did for the time, but he can and has been judged, and it's easy to use myths you did not create one way and get rid of the nasty bits that do not fit your agenda and then outright re do the gods for that purpose as well. fine. But For now, in this modern day and age, I appreciate what's being done now, that shows the dark side of these myths again and some actual and logical realism to how an all female society would perpetuate without any deus ex machina to support it.
    Personally I have never been a big fan of the idea that Stan Lee should have shown Thor and the Asgardians as killers and rapists. Still don't.

    2) difference between Superman and Marstons ideal of WW and the amazons is that Superman did not exclude one gender for another. There were women on krypton, but men were not allowed to be on paradise island. Superman came to help people, not on a mission to promote peace in "mans world"...there is a difference in the propaganda, though both characters are and should be ideals of human traits, and remain so.
    If you look closely at the Christopher Reeves Superman movie and even the more recent Man of Steel you will see some very blatant selling of Superman as an inspirational savior figure, leading a struggling child race by example.


    In the end, what you're saying is fine and good, but it shows a character who is somewhat of a relic for various reasons and outdated in this day and time, even in its feminist agenda, which has evolved as well. WW needed some modernizing and yeah, some visceralness and logic, less fairy tale magic, less preachy propaganda and "symbolism", to be taken seriously.
    I find that a lot of the time people take things seriously if they simply reaffirm their thinking and dont challenge them. Good example might be the use of torture on 24. People take the show seriously because it seems reality based, even though professional interrogators say that the use of torture to gather intelligence as shown on the show is completely unrealistic, if only in the reliability of the information harvested. In that respect it is about as realistic as the car chases on The Dukes of Hazard.

    Personally I dont see our society generally as being more evolved that Marson's era - in fact there is a creeping undercurrent of cynicism, hopelessness, and escape into materialism that indicated exactly the opposite.

    Which is probably why Harry Potter did so well. Plenty of whimsy and fairty tales there, and J. K. Rowling is taken very seriously indeed
    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.”


  6. #771
    Dr. Poison's Lab Asst. Power Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Green Bay, WI
    Posts
    2,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    Nothing in my post says anything about being in a position to decide what does or doesn't offend anyone. It does say state people having the gall to be offended by something they continue to read.

    ie, they can be offended by whatever they like, but why continue to read it?

    Don't try to be snarky because I agreed with you. you appreciated nothing.

    I wasn't being snarky at all. I was being sincere. I'm not the type of person to sugar-coat at all.
    Check out Hall of Justice Forums at: http://hallofjustice1.proboards.com

  7. #772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Power Guy View Post
    In Justice League #13 and 14, Cheetah was able to pierce Superman's skin with her teeth and turn him into a man-cheetah under her control. She was also fast enough to catch the Flash and slice up his leg.

    I have to say I don't really get where you're coming from. First you complain that the likes of Cheetah and Giganta are dis-interesting and not really credible threats to Wonder Woman but then, when someone like Johns shows the Cheetah to be capable of such powerful feats as I mentioned, you label that as something "gimmicky". It's almost like you don't want to like these villains simply because Azzarello doesn't like them unless you care to explain this matter further?
    Many years ago at Marvel, Spider-man beat Fire-Lord. A cosmic being and a herald of Galactus. Beaten by Spide-man. Fans were outraged, not because they didnt like ol' webhead, but him beating Fire-Lord didnt make any sense.

    Now, unless Cheetah can run around the world 3 times while I sneeze, or break the sound barrier, there is no way she should be able to cut the Flash unless he is seriously dozing. And from what youre saying, she's also as strong and fast as Superman and WW. Personally, I dont remember the Cheetah ever being so formidable that she can take down the whole JLA, but maybe Johns seriously upgraded her. Which he does do to some characters and I often find it gimmicky. Her being able to turn others into a were-cheetah I find gimmicky and a bit cheesy, but thats just me. Anyway, I dont read the book cause I dont like his JLA, so I'll leave that open. Ive also looked up info online and dont see anything showing her powers to be on that level, but please, if you know of one, provide the bio. Im seriously curious.

    But in any case, Ive just never found her to be all that interesting. I dont think the typical were-people have ever been appealing to me.

    And it has nothing to do with Azz, though I understand why he chooses not to focus on her "super-villains" and more on the mythology she came out of, but I wouldnt mind seeing Circe, Dr. Psycho, and the Swan if done well, even by Azz. I just wouldnt want to see it as the typical super-hero/villain fight, but something within the same tone and interesting.

  8. #773
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    6,176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    who says Paradise island was unreachable?
    If it hasn't been "reached" enough to be brought into the historical record in thousands of years, I'd say that it has been functionally "unreachable." Also, in Demon Knights, Cain (the father of all vampires, who strikes fear into even Lucifer's heart) can only find Themyscira because he has an Amazon guide. Also, in the JL 2 text piece, Steve Trevor was brought to the island in an aura of golden light, and afterwards the U.S. government couldn't find it, even though they knew Steve's coordinates. Putting all of that together, it seems pretty clearly the island is unreachable by non-Amazons (other than some gods and the like) using normal means.

    Why they would be so unreachable is a good question, but, since they don't seem (as far as we know) to have powerful tech or magic of their own, I'd say it might be because some deity or supernatural power took an interest in them.

    And why should they not "worry so much" about being tracked or found if they want to remain isolated and hidden? Do you realize how many tales would be told over time by men about women coming out of the sea to have sex with them,
    Not many, if they made the decision to stop raiding. Why should they have to travel around en masse boarding ships like pirates? They could show up in towns, two or three together, meet men and tell them they're from some country on the other side of the world, and just have ordinary one-night stands. Not many men would try to trace their one-night stands back to a foreign country--and if they did, they'd be looking for the wrong country, based on the false information that the Amazons gave them.

    Plus, I think youre applying youre own sense of moral thinking to this, mainly because its something you and I dont have to worry about and its to us, for the age we live in, an unthinkable thing to do.
    No, I want to worry about it. I want Hippolyta to make the argument that what they were doing was no worse than what men in their day would do, like taking concubines and treating their women like slaves, and that it would be a sexist double-standard to blame powerful women for not behaving better than powerful men at the same tie and place. And I want that argument to carry some weight. We should be listening and saying to ourselves, "yeah, there are heroes of Western civilization who did things that were as bad as what the Amazons did and we didn't bat an eyelash about it. But somehow it still looks worse to use when women are doing it. Sexism is really deeply engrained in our culture; let's recognize it so we can get rid of it."

    But when Wonder Woman asks her why they couldn't have found more humane ways, I want Hippolyta to have something to say--like, "we had doubts, but we followed the path laid out for us by the goddesses who saved us from abuse at the hands of men." And then ideally I want Hippolyta to say that they had already begun to change, and I want them to be open to changing more under Wonder Woman's influence.

    If Wonder Woman has already been an agent of change in her own culture, I think she'll be well-positioned as an agent of change when she finds misogyny in man's world.

    And why wouldnt they trade the boys for weapons from the GOD of weapons that they may need to defend themselves with if their society decreed no males were allowed? Why does it have to be because of the gods, so the Amazons will look a little more morally clean? Seriously, they don't "seem" like they would do that to you? LOL...Hitler didnt seem to some like he would cause the holocaust, but he did. Things, and people, are not that simple.
    Well, actually, Hitler did "seem" like an anti-Semite and a trouble maker well before he caused the Holocaust. And he didn't raise a daughter of exemplary character, or another (Exoristos) who tries to the do the right thing and misses the sense of moral purpose she had at home. And he didn't dedicate much of his life to protecting the world from true monsters and murderers, as Batwoman says the Amazons did. Anyway, I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with the Amazons binding their sons to terms as apprentices to Heph in exchange for weapons, but the custom of abandoning them at birth (against the will of a mother, as shown in issue 7) and never seeing them again seems harsh enough to warrant some explanation.

    [quote]Have you read Thor lately? Thor in his youth pillaged with other vikings, got into fights with other culture's gods for no reason, and took what he needed. He didnt rape women, but he didnt always show them a high deal of respect either. He's grown now, as i hope and suspect Hippolyta and the others have, but him and the asgardians were no saints. Read the current Thor book by Jason Aaron.[/B]

    I haven't read Thor lately, no, but I thought you were saying that Thor currently has the values of the Vikings from long ago, and that's what I doubted--and you seem to be confirming that I was correct. Again, I have no problem with the idea that the Amazons would have done brutal things when they were in a defensive position and when those were the norms of their time. They seem to have held on to those customs for a long time, though, and I'd like to know the material or cultural conditions that led to that conservatism. I would imagine religion had something to do with it, as it often does it real life, and if religio had something to do with it in Azz's universe, than chances are there were actual gods who had something to do with it.
    Last edited by slvn; 06-28-2013 at 01:13 PM.

  9. #774
    Dr. Poison's Lab Asst. Power Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Green Bay, WI
    Posts
    2,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    Many years ago at Marvel, Spider-man beat Fire-Lord. A cosmic being and a herald of Galactus. Beaten by Spide-man. Fans were outraged, not because they didnt like ol' webhead, but him beating Fire-Lord didnt make any sense.

    Now, unless Cheetah can run around the world 3 times while I sneeze, or break the sound barrier, there is no way she should be able to cut the Flash unless he is seriously dozing. And from what youre saying, she's also as strong and fast as Superman and WW. Personally, I dont remember the Cheetah ever being so formidable that she can take down the whole JLA, but maybe Johns seriously upgraded her. Which he does do to some characters and I often find it gimmicky. Her being able to turn others into a were-cheetah I find gimmicky and a bit cheesy, but thats just me. Anyway, I dont read the book cause I dont like his JLA, so I'll leave that open. Ive also looked up info online and dont see anything showing her powers to be on that level, but please, if you know of one, provide the bio. Im seriously curious.

    But in any case, Ive just never found her to be all that interesting. I dont think the typical were-people have ever been appealing to me.

    And it has nothing to do with Azz, though I understand why he chooses not to focus on her "super-villains" and more on the mythology she came out of, but I wouldnt mind seeing Circe, Dr. Psycho, and the Swan if done well, even by Azz. I just wouldnt want to see it as the typical super-hero/villain fight, but something within the same tone and interesting.

    Honestly, I don't know of any real good bios for any characters that are current and accurate. I'm only going on what I read about the Cheetah recently. She is powered by a cheetah-goddess of some sort so that could explain why her abilities are more than you had thought they were previously. I would also understand if you were basing at least part of your opinion on the Cheetah off of the Priscilla Rich or Debbie Domain versions of the characters as neither one of them had any powers. They were just insane ladies in cat-suits(not counting Alex Ross' Justice version of Priscilla).

    When Azz took over the book, I was looking forward to his take on the Cheetah, Dr. Poison, Dr. Psycho, and The Mask to name a few but I don't think we'll see any of them in his run.
    Check out Hall of Justice Forums at: http://hallofjustice1.proboards.com

  10. #775
    CBR Mod/WW Section Mom Gaelforce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Southern New Jersey
    Posts
    3,357

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Power Guy View Post
    Honestly, I don't know of any real good bios for any characters that are current and accurate. I'm only going on what I read about the Cheetah recently. She is powered by a cheetah-goddess of some sort so that could explain why her abilities are more than you had thought they were previously. I would also understand if you were basing at least part of your opinion on the Cheetah off of the Priscilla Rich or Debbie Domain versions of the characters as neither one of them had any powers. They were just insane ladies in cat-suits(not counting Alex Ross' Justice version of Priscilla).

    When Azz took over the book, I was looking forward to his take on the Cheetah, Dr. Poison, Dr. Psycho, and The Mask to name a few but I don't think we'll see any of them in his run.
    fwiw, pre-52 there was a male version of the Cheetah for a short time and he went toe-to-toe with Superman.

    Perez's reboot of the character was supposed to put her in Diana/Clark's weight class.

    Sadly, editorial didn't get the message and Catwoman took out Cheetah in her book, and Batman one-punched her during Heinberg's run.

  11. #776
    Senior Member chastmastr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3,916

    Default

    You know, I was going to post a bunch of long-winded responses to the discussions of basic right and wrong, the nature of evil, how far survival could morally excuse behavior that would ordinarily be considered evil, and so on--as well as commenting about a level of snarkiness ("privilege," etc.) in replies to my responses--but I've decided that it isn't worth the effort to do that. Things are getting needlessly heated and rude, and other people have already responded to some of the actual issues quite well, so I'm going to go off and enjoy some tea and cereal instead.

    Have a nice day. :)

  12. #777
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Right behind you
    Posts
    6,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Power Guy View Post
    I've seen you complain about books that you're not reading(i.e. Justice League) but in any case, I think it's only natural that people complain that something they used to like has changed. They want to be able to enjoy that something again and complain as a way of venting.
    As far as I remember, it's been quite a few months since I entered a JL-tread to complain about it.

  13. #778
    Dr. Poison's Lab Asst. Power Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Green Bay, WI
    Posts
    2,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaelforce View Post
    fwiw, pre-52 there was a male version of the Cheetah for a short time and he went toe-to-toe with Superman.

    Perez's reboot of the character was supposed to put her in Diana/Clark's weight class.

    Sadly, editorial didn't get the message and Catwoman took out Cheetah in her book, and Batman one-punched her during Heinberg's run.

    You make some good points. As far as Batman taking out the Cheetah in Heinberg's run, Wonder Woman had softened her up quite a bit before Bats threw that punch so I don't see that portrayal as Cheetah being any weaker than Diana.
    Check out Hall of Justice Forums at: http://hallofjustice1.proboards.com

  14. #779

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jabu46 View Post
    1) doesnt matter, because the main premise of what Marston and his wife, or wives kept from the original concept of the amazons was the exclusion and supposed inferiority of men. He simply took the myth and recreated everything around it to not only fit what would be more socially acceptable, (ie. making them immortal so the need to procreate would not be a question, thus not having to deal with the ways they had to perpetuate) but to fit a feminist agenda that did not promote women and men as equals, but one that excluded men and in some ways viewed them as inferior. An island that men could not set foot on, the condescending premise of an ambassador come to teach "man's world" how to be better, and so forth. He just took the concept and made it "nicer" and imbued it with heavy deus ex machina so some inconvenient questions wouldn't have to be answered, but kept the "no men" policy and the implied view of men's inferiority for his agenda.
    What is it about a mythological society that is not dependent on males scary and abhorrent for men? How do you promote equality in the 1940s and in comics when women were not considered equal much less real citizens of the US? Marston decided to create a society that was essentially different to make a point that women could survive, thrive and prosper independent of men. So what if he viewed men as inferior although he probably did not (if anything he saw men as morally inferior)- he viewed men as more violent and controlling then inferior - and if you think about it for a moment men are that more violent and controlling. Why should the Amazon a strictly women only society allow men to set foot on their island when men only see women as inferior - what would the point be?

    The world of the 1940s was male dominated in every way and the comics reflected that and continue to reflect the domination of men. Why should Marston make his society open to men when society was not open to women.


    Now, if this was his thing so be it...but a, he could've just created his own thing instead of taking from a myth but keeping its dislike and exclusion of men, and it couldve still been a powerful example. and b, he could've used it to promote equality of the sexes instead of an island that excluded and eschewed men. In any case, that's partially what I always found hypocritical about the amazons, and too fairy tale ish through the ages after Marston...that they needed to keep re inventing all of these
    "Magical" reasons of how they existed without men....even Perez's thing about them being the reincarnated souls of women murdered by MEN. Really??!?
    How do you again promote equality when comics were dominated by men? Women characters were almost not seen in comics and were barely heroes -- how do you create this equality when comics like society did not promote or encourage equality of any sort?

    I understand what Marston did for the time, but he can and has been judged, and it's easy to use myths you did not create one way and get rid of the nasty bits that do not fit your agenda and then outright re do the gods for that purpose as well. fine. But For now, in this modern day and age, I appreciate what's being done now, that shows the dark side of these myths again and some actual and logical realism to how an all female society would perpetuate without any deus ex machina to support it.
    Logical realism in comic and fantasy? These are stories and fantasies - how logical is it for someone to fly or be an alien? How real is it that glasses can be a disguise? How real is it that being a god on earth, Superman chooses to be an average American most of the time. Superman by himself is a deus ex machina. Why does WW have to conform to what is "real" in a fantasy setting?


    2) difference between Superman and Marstons ideal of WW and the amazons is that Superman did not exclude one gender for another. There were women on krypton, but men were not allowed to be on paradise island. Superman came to help people, not on a mission to promote peace in "mans world"...there is a difference in the propaganda, though both characters are and should be ideals of human traits, and remain so.
    Comics in general already excluded women from being heroes so it did not have to exclude them as it already did it. As for women on Krypton - sure I imagine there were but there is almost no mention of women on the influence of Krypton society and even the stories of Superman is about his father (Jor-El) and not his mother. Where do you actually see women in comics during the 1940s that is a positive rather than the typical stereotyped women that needs to be saved by the strong male hero.

    So Superman purpose is to help people with his good old fashion American boy scout way; why can't Diana purpose be to promote peace to man's world - man's world is full of violence and war after all.

    In the end, what you're saying is fine and good, but it shows a character who is somewhat of a relic for various reasons and outdated in this day and time, even in its feminist agenda, which has evolved as well. WW needed some modernizing and yeah, some visceralness and logic, less fairy tale magic, less preachy propaganda and "symbolism", to be taken seriously.
    The world is full of realism when we read fantasy it is supposed to be fantasy. Wonder Woman at the moment is more horror than fantasy. For 70 years WW has existed and was taken seriously. Why is that when WW comic mythology has been almost totally reconstructed to be dominated by males that it is now "to be taken more 'seriously'?" And what do you mean by more taken more seriously?
    Last edited by magisensei; 06-28-2013 at 08:30 AM.

  15. #780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brettc1 View Post
    Now, if this was his thing so be it...but a, he could've just created his own thing instead of taking from a myth but keeping its dislike and exclusion of men, and it couldve still been a powerful example. and b, he could've used it to promote equality of the sexes instead of an island that excluded and eschewed men. In any case, that's partially what I always found hypocritical about the amazons, and too fairy tale ish through the ages after Marston...that they needed to keep re inventing all of these
    "Magical" reasons of how they existed without men....even Perez's thing about them being the reincarnated souls of women murdered by MEN. Really??!?
    Yes he did.

    There is no point trying to sugar-coat it. Marston absolutely beleived that the world would be better off if men were calling the shots. That is not hard to understand considering that even as he was writing Wonder Woman the Japanese Imperial Army was commiting mass-rape and murder during the occupation of Hong Kong, in a follow up to their same actions in Nanking some years earlier. Similar atrocities were happening in Europe, and would continue to happen, including the Russian occupation of Berlin.

    The truth is there is a sad history of male violence against women. These days at least it is somewhat balance by the vastly greater suicide rates among men, if that is any kind of equality. Personally I am a big advocate for increased awareness about mens issues in our society, but at the same time I have a daughter and womens issues dont just go away.


    Are you seriously celebrating the suicide rates among men?

    The truth is there is a sad history of whites taking aggression, and advantage of institutional racism against minorities, especially blacks in this country through slavery, segregation, and even today with institutional racism. No point in trying to sugarcoat it. Statistics show that still, even under a biracial president, white men with a criminal record have more chances to get a job than a black man without one. Same holds true for women. Blacks are victims of stop and frisk, prejudice at work, and segregation by heavy gentrification and financial disadvantage. Its even said affirmative action benefits white women more than it does minorities, whom are lower on the social scale. Would the world, or even just this country, be better off if whites weren't calling the shots? would it be better off if blacks, their historical and in ways present day victims, were?

    Marston had a right to his beliefs, but he also can be challenged on them, and its quite arguable that the answer to the social ills of women were for them to seperate themselves from the male gender and subjugate, or create a cultured view where they are inferior. Most people today usually are uncomfortable with concepts, fictional or factual, that excludes anyone based on race, gender, or sexual preference from it. The Amazons, since Marston and onward, have done that. It was just prettied up to make it look nicer, but it's there. And that's where the hypocrisy lies. If youre going to exclude a gender, dont pretty it up, especially today, to make it more palatable.


    And that's the other thing Im stating: I enjoy what Azz has done because he removed the "prettying it up" by way of magic and divine will, which has changed and gotten convoluted and silly over the years, to something visceral, realistic, and practical albeit ugly. For me, it makes the amazons more real, not just because of the flaw, but because of the realistic moral sacrifice they had to make to keep their society with its "no male" policy and culture going, and protected. I just also think its more dramatic in its contrast of WW being who she is and what she thinks, and makes for more modern, mature storytelling.

    If you look closely at the Christopher Reeves Superman movie and even the more recent Man of Steel you will see some very blatant selling of Superman as an inspirational savior figure, leading a struggling child race by example.

    what struggling child race? And so, what's your point? you do know many people found that to be belittling and condescending, right? You do realize that is why many fans find characters like Superman and even WW cheesy and uncomfortable to a large extent? Because many do not want to be told, through blatant propaganda of a fictional "savior figure" how they should think and act. This is even doubly more condescending to minorities when its coming from an alien that looks every bit a white dude and a white woman from a hidden island in greece sporting the american flag. Personally, i just look past that and enjoy the story and action, cause I really dont need or appreciate the lecture.


    Personally I dont see our society generally as being more evolved that Marson's era - in fact there is a creeping undercurrent of cynicism, hopelessness, and escape into materialism that indicated exactly the opposite.

    That has nothing to do with what Marston was trying to put forward in his feminist agenda, especially since in his fiction he was excluding one gender for another instead of figthing for equality. But yeah, of course you dont see anything having evolved...in an era where a woman can run for president, a black female first lady is highly influential, and a biracial president with a muslim name exists for two terms, rights to vote for women and minorities and so forth, and there is actually an ongoing conversation and action being taken for gays to be able to legally marry, we haven't evolved at all. Im not saying we're anywhere near perfect, but to say were generally not more evolved than Marston's era is hyperbole.



    Which is probably why Harry Potter did so well. Plenty of whimsy and fairty tales there, and J. K. Rowling is taken very seriously indeed [/QUOTE]

    Harry Potter was taken seriously not only cause it was done extremely well, but because J.K., being a brit, did not infantilize her fiction like most americans do. I never said magic could not exist in stories, but Harry Potter was FAR from a fairy tale. And unlike Marston's mythos, magic was not used to hide ugly truths. There was some dark and ugly stuff in there, so much so that some more religious people in this country complained about it. Also, J.K. did not exclude or imply superiority of anyone based on gender, unlike the amazons. Huge differences.

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
  •