Hell Hath No Fury

I'm not Superman's biggest fan (having always preferred Batman) but i check it out every now and again, just to see whats going on with him. I had it on my pull list for the Jim Lee run and then discontinued it. Ever since Busiek took over this title, I HAD to put it back on my pull list. This is some good stuff and I would highly recommend it.

I like Ed Brubaker, I just wish his year-long arc would have had more closure. It felt like the first part of a film trilogy. Hopefully, I don't have to wait three years for the second part.

I'll also touch on a couple of things you said up there. First off, regardless of whether or not Quesada was being disingenuine (is that even a word?) is irrelevant. If the man says he is unaware of it, I'll accept it until proof can be shown otherwise. I have hard time believing there are twenty-somethings that have never seen Star Wars, but they exist.

The real issue is women getting pissed over how fictional women are portrayed. I hate to say it, but most of the stuff they seem to get pissed about is close to the same thing I see on the cover of Cosmopolitan every month (minus the slimy tentacles). That magazine is a woman's magazine, aimed at the twenty-something female who wants to bind her man into a commitment and learn the secrets of simultaneous orgasms. Not once, though, have I seen a single blog about how unfair or sexist THAT rag is. So I say equality is a good thing. While trying to wake people up to the evils of sexism in comics, lets do the same to the other publications. THAT would be equal.

On a final note: Um, the talking to yourself thing was little awkward and creepy. :D

I have to admit the Mary Jane statue kind of creeps me out. I'm used to girls being drawn/sculpted bone-thin, but the way she's bending makes it look like she's going to snap in half. And the look on her face is just creepy.

The Mary Jane statue has ruined my life. Once I saw it, I figured that that's what women are supposed to look like. Now I must go on unfullfilled in my love life because I can't find any women that thin with boobs that big who can bend at that angle and wash my super hero clothes. If only I was able to accept the fact that it's just a statue based on a cartoon, perhaps I could once again find happiness. Alas, it appears I shall die alone now. Thanks, Adam Hughes. Thanks, Sideshow Collectibles.

What fake controversies.

Seriously.

The statue is such a non-issue. Don't buy it. End of discussion. I'm for equality, like equal pay for equal work, equal opportunity, and no discrimination based on gender - but people do laundry, both men and women, and sex sells. People need to deal.

And it may color me as a pervert, I care not, but that cover makes me want to buy that issue of Heroes for Hire. Women in peril imagery works especially well for me when the women are strong, fight back, and succeed - you know that these three are going to win in the end, and the pseudo-erotic imagery (tentacle porn doesn't bother me, but the Brood are just NASTY) is a selling point without a doubt. We can mock that it targets adolescent boys, but the truth is this kind of stuff works very well with adult men.

Civil War is tasteless and offensive. That cover is harmless.

Just curious, how come Dynamite comics aren't ever on the release list? There are some great titles resonating from there!

When Cosmo changed in the 70s, it was a different time. Helen Gurley Brown was trying to salvage a declining readership and wanted to find ways to empower women. At the time, showing that women could express their sexuality in risque and provocative ways was a novel approach. This had previously been under the aegis of men's publications. But her goal was not to simply use sex to sell magazines, although that was a part of it. It was to show women that they could be single while having love, money, sex and power.

Is there a fine line between that and, say, Maxim? Perhaps. But I can still distinguish between the two. However, today's Cosmo has indeed degenerated into something less than it was when HGB made her changes.

Should comics use sex to sell? Well, they can be that cheap if they want. I like my comics to be about action. and my porn to be about *action* if you know what I mean and I think you do...

Does the HFH cover objectify women? You betcha. Let's not front. But I am more offended by the manga style. Makes my stomach churn.

I dunno, I like my comics to be like most of the rest of my entertainment media -

to have a good mix of at least a few of the following: drama, suspense, action, humor, sex, horror, tragedy, triumph.

For me, the sex thing is not a requirement. If it is there, OK. But the cover to this comic has it backwards for me. It's all sex first and, oh, hey, there may be some action.

I don't see anything on the cover that I haven't seen on hundreds of other comic book covers.

Anyway, this is one of those cases where a woman is drawing it. If she has no problem I don't see why anyone else should. Like Merin says: fake controversy.

I guess the biggest problem is some people have nothing else better to do than stir some stuff up because there are no nipples being shown on TV right now.

Just because a woman draws it does not mean it has to be OK for everyone. Motivation is more important than gender in this case.

"The Slumber Party Massacre" exploits women even though it was directed by a woman. (Go! Go! Driller Killer!) In fact, it's source material, "Sleepless Nights", was written by a woman. But it was intended as a parody of sexed-up slashers. It ended up as just another gore-fest (although a memorable one).

The artist of this cover may be a woman. But from what i see, her goal is not to empower women or make them sympathetic or help them in any way. Just to make a buck off some T&A. So she would be no "better" than a man creating the exact same cover.