‘Comics need to get better at not being so … comic-y’...

Originally posted by -Pr-
I'm not saying Marvel doesn't try to push female characters. I just think DC does more, and that, even if you wanted to say Marvel did as much, Fraction's comment is still way off.

From my point of view, Marvel pays way more attention to how the female characters are developed and fit in the universe. Even if few got solos, that doesn't change that plenty got page time and major roles.

DC has female solo books... but outside of them gives little attention, and gives them very small role in the premier Justice League teams.

And I will say this applies mostly post-52. Pre-52, you had more female solo books, even outside the main names. You had Power Girl leading one of the JSA teams for awhile, and both JSA teams having a lot of female characters. The JLA was co-lead by a female character (Donna Troy), and was normally even split or even female-majority (one story arc had the team consist of 4 female heroes + DickBatman).

They were much better before.

Well New 52 was different, and DC seems to be rectifying it I think.

New 52 was the time to do it, though. "We're trying to attract new readers!" while being less open to women, well, it sends a message.

It is also striking how a lot more female characters didn't get carried over in the changeover than male characters (GL survived mostly intact... except Soranik and Iolande and Jade are all gone, and the first two don't really have any backstory reasons to vanish. Batfamily ditto. The two least-altered areas of the universe managed to lose 5 notable female characters and no notable males).

Basically if you were following a major female character pre-reboot, you were much less likely to be able to pick up their new version after, and if you were a female reader looking to start out and tried picking up the headline books, you won't find a lot of heroines.

And DC's attempts to rectify? Consider of precisely two books, about a year after they'd announced that they'd try. It's not exactly a stunning effort.

As far as Wonder Woman goes, sure, she's been shifted, but I don't see how they've necessarily put off female readers.

There's been heavy complaints about all this, and the number of women readers went down with the new 52.

To put it bluntly, even if you didn't see it as such, female readers certainly did.

(Seriously, I do not know precisely how many times I saw people post "**** this company," their words not mine, in response to DC's handling of female characters. A lot, certainly)

Golgo13
Yeah, before the relaunch, Marvel only had one solo female book and that was X-23. They don't sell very well. DC has team books like Birds of Prey and have pushed females in team books as well like JLA and JSA.

Having only X-23 was a short-lived aberration for them, I'll note.

Notably, they had a female-solo book recently last for over 120 issues on minor sales (MC2 Spider-Girl). They tried making a 616 Spider-girl book with Anya, it just didn't work well. They also made a non-616 *Shoujo manga* type book, Spider-Man loves Mary Jane, with MJ as the lead, which was really popular with female readers. The current Carol Danvers push is the second they've tried with her in recent years, they did one post-House of M that lasted for a 3+ year solo series. They had She-Hulk's recent book. They had the shorter minis Her-alds and Patsy Walker and some other girl-centric ones.

Marvel make a lot of tries. A lot don't work, but they try.

And yea, pre-reboot, DC did push females in both of those, like I noted uppost pre-reboot DC was doing quite well in the area.

I was including pre 52 comics, so maybe that's where the disconnect happened.

You've seen more than me, so maybe you know better, but I'd have to wonder if these people were actual fans of the character, and not those "using Diana to further a sexist agenda" people. I have no idea if it's being written well though, so if it's bad, fair enough.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I was including pre 52 comics, so maybe that's where the disconnect happened.

You've seen more than me, so maybe you know better, but I'd have to wonder if these people were actual fans of the character, and not those "using Diana to further a sexist agenda" people. I have no idea if it's being written well though, so if it's bad, fair enough.

Oh yea, this was on multiple general comic discussion areas, blogs, etc. (you may have noticed that this is not the most female-friendly of forums, so you won't really get a good perspective from here). A lot of them even like NuDiana in in terms of personality and such, just dislike the rapazons, how her backstory gets continually more male-centric, etc..

And, as I noted, this includes stuff like comparing info to note the drop in female readers (That one was on the blog DCWomenKickingAss, I believe).

I mean, the example comic I posted to illustrate that it was wider backlash is Shortpacked, a big webcomic with a male writer.

These are pretty widely recognized problems that I see independently complained about in different areas.

(Mind you, there were still some problems and stuff to complain about before. I.e. Cassandra Cain. Steph's death in Wargames. Etc.. It's just it tended to be a lot more... specific, less general trend-y stuff. Well, baring the normal minor complaints about the outfits and the ass-boob poses, but that doesn't get the same level of flak)

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
(did Lady Ghost rider have an ongoing for a while? I forget).

She did and it was a good book not sure why the **** Marvel cancelled it.

Originally posted by Q99
Oh yea, this was on multiple general comic discussion areas, blogs, etc. (you may have noticed that this is not the most female-friendly of forums, so you won't really get a good perspective from here). A lot of them even like NuDiana in in terms of personality and such, just dislike the rapazons, how her backstory gets continually more male-centric, etc..

And, as I noted, this includes stuff like comparing info to note the drop in female readers (That one was on the blog DCWomenKickingAss, I believe).

I mean, the example comic I posted to illustrate that it was wider backlash is Shortpacked, a big webcomic with a male writer.

These are pretty widely recognized problems that I see independently complained about in different areas.

This particular forum is female friendly enough, imo.

It's the vs forum's faux sexism that's an issue. Stupid kids.

So is the new comic bad? Or just a huge departure?

Didn't read the article, but I generally agree with the opposite of whatever Fraction says or does.

Originally posted by Cogito
Didn't read the article, but I generally agree with the opposite of whatever Fraction says or does.

👆

Originally posted by Q99
Yes, literally twice as much as the low point after the 90s bubble.

Not doing as well as the bubble, but that was a stupid bubble and far less stable than now.

Yup.

Originally posted by Q99
They weren't doing that badly either, '10 outperformed anything in the '95-05 period, often by a lot (and notably, was in a recession), and movies don't affect sales much at all. Like, we wish they did, but the effect is really minimal.

10 and 11 did just fine, but they've been steadily cutting good books. No one can argue with a straight face that they're putting out as many quality titles as they did 6-7 years ago. Beginning of the 00s was a pretty strong period as far as quality goes, and the X-Men/Avengers titles did not just pull in sales but were actually readable.

Originally posted by -Pr-
This particular forum is female friendly enough, imo.

It's the vs forum's faux sexism that's an issue. Stupid kids.

Still, it's right next to a very unfriendly one (and the 'faux' is pretty iffy, it's more 'people pretend to be faux to get away with it' when you get to that concentration) and there's a lot of crossover between the two.

So by extension, not a lot of female perspective here.

So is the new comic bad? Or just a huge departure?

It's... aggh, actually a bit hard to describe properly.

It's a book that, were it not for some problematic bits, I would call 'great'.

And the problematic bits range from really horrible (the Amazon rapist thing is not only offense, but it makes no sense- How do you grow up into your 20s, alongside Amazon friends, and have the way your culture reproduces never come up? NuDiana somehow has a moral compass that points in the exact opposite direction of her homeland, and not knowing it!), to merely a bit annoying/only a problem because of the pattern (Having Ares train her instead of, say, Athena, and having Zeus be her dad, is only really a problem because it all adds up to her great abilities and such having nothing to do with any other female characters).

You could make, like, 5 changes, most of them small (because only the Ares training is actually plot-important), and I'd probably be a major fan, or worst case not a reader but not a detractor.

And considering how poorly the biggest problem fits into the plot, I kinda wonder if it's someone in editorial who wanted it in, because it doesn't really jive with the surrounding quality, which makes it all the worse from the attracting-female readers perspective, because they take one of the traditional female draws, put on a good writer, then they make a couple bonehead calls, easily caught and fixed ones, and turned it into an example people use when talking about why women shouldn't read DC and should go marvel or indy instead.

Curryman

10 and 11 did just fine, but they've been steadily cutting good books. No one can argue with a straight face that they're putting out as many quality titles as they did 6-7 years ago.

Hm, I'd have to go back and see what the good ones were 6-7 years ago... but I think with the expanding non-big 2 market and total number of books, that might not be as one-sided as you think.

Comichron does sales charts, and it used to be a top 300. Now it's a top 400, and the 400th spot often sells as much as the 300th spot did 6-7 years ago.

The big two might have slightly less (they did put out an unusually high number of books 6-7 years ago), but the others have filled in the gap and then some, IMO at least.

That includes quality while I'm at it. IDW has both upped number and quality on their Transformers books, both Robots in Disguise and More Than Meets the Eye are much stronger than their already not-bad prior book. Archie Comics got Ian Flynn, who's a great writer, who went from 1 Sonic book, to 2 Sonic Books plus Megaman. And even though they're 'kids' books, you have stuff like 3-laws robots trying to figure out how to stop terrorists when they aren't allowed to harm human beings, and such. Antarctic Press has their long-running comic Gold Digger hit a sweet spot, Red 5 has Atomic Robo. Image has Saga.

There's a pretty good number of good books out there.

Originally posted by Q99
Still, it's right next to a very unfriendly one (and the 'faux' is pretty iffy, it's more 'people pretend to be faux to get away with it' when you get to that concentration) and there's a lot of crossover between the two.

So by extension, not a lot of female perspective here.

It's... aggh, actually a bit hard to describe properly.

It's a book that, were it not for some problematic bits, I would call 'great'.

And the problematic bits range from really horrible (the Amazon rapist thing is not only offense, but it makes no sense- How do you grow up into your 20s, alongside Amazon friends, and have the way your culture reproduces never come up? NuDiana somehow has a moral compass that points in the exact opposite direction of her homeland, and not knowing it!), to merely a bit annoying/only a problem because of the pattern (Having Ares train her instead of, say, Athena, and having Zeus be her dad, is only really a problem because it all adds up to her great abilities and such having nothing to do with any other female characters).

You could make, like, 5 changes, most of them small (because only the Ares training is actually plot-important), and I'd probably be a major fan, or worst case not a reader but not a detractor.

And considering how poorly the biggest problem fits into the plot, I kinda wonder if it's someone in editorial who wanted it in, because it doesn't really jive with the surrounding quality, which makes it all the worse from the attracting-female readers perspective, because they take one of the traditional female draws, put on a good writer, then they make a couple bonehead calls, easily caught and fixed ones, and turned it into an example people use when talking about why women shouldn't read DC and should go marvel or indy instead.

If I honestly thought those guys were being genuinely sexist, they'd have been banned by now, tbh. I've even gone in to threads where I thought it was out of hand.

I'm trying to keep my replies as short as possible so as not to have it turn in to a wall of text, so i'll try to keep this short.

Do you really think that having more men in the title discourages women from reading? That's an actual question; I'm not being rhetorical.

The "rapeazons" thing is consistent with the mythology, but I can see why people aren't happy with it, given that it's a huge departure. Plus, there's the Diana thing.

Honestly, I'm just trying to work out whether people are leaving the book because it's full of changes they hate (and I can certainly empathise with that; lord knows comic companies have ruined some of my favourite characters lately), or if they think the book is worse purely because there are more men in it. Or if it's a combination of both that's apparently turning off women.

Originally posted by -Pr-
If I honestly thought those guys were being genuinely sexist, they'd have been banned by now, tbh. I've even gone in to threads where I thought it was out of hand.

From my point of view? It's a really really sexist place. If you 'joke' in a sexist manner constantly, then there's a sexist atmosphere. The only female posters are ones with very thick skins who don't mind being insulted a lot, and/or who don't tell people they're female.

It's why I don't go to vs nearly as much as I used to, it just really didn't let up.

Do you really think that having more men in the title discourages women from reading? That's an actual question; I'm not being rhetorical.

It's not more men that's necessarily a problem, but less women, and also role.

If you have 7 women in a team of 30, and they get screen time and important roles... yea, they're a minority, but you've got enough to have diversity, give female readers a choice of characters to associate and such. It's not optimal but it's not a problem.

But if you only have one (Justice League), or if you have a few but they get a short-end of the stick (JLI- female characters don't get major roles, three out of four female characters are majorly wounded and taken out of the picture, and the remaining one, the only new character and one of the few new female characters in Nu52 period, is a flirt without much development), then it is a turn off. It doesn't have much appeal if there's not many characters you identify with or if they're side characters. There's lack of draw there.

And female readers do like it when there's more. It's realistic. It'll be closer to our own experiences, where there's not just one or a few girls at the fringe. There'll be a wider variety of girl personality types just like in real life. It makes it feel less like a world written by men for men and more like a world for everyone.

I'll also mention a related thing- you know the 'Bad Girl' books of the 90s, Lady Death, Vampirella and so on? Women in skimpy outfits killing things with lots of blood and fanservice? Those did great with female readers, you may be surprised. Why? Well, they were about female characters with lots of agency, they were the driving forces in their worlds, who did what they wanted and were very much power-fantasies. Wonder Woman's often been a power fantasy. Pre-Reboot Starfire power fantasy. But the current books have made several of the female characters more about the men (Starfire has been more focused on being a sex fantasy for the male characters, what with her memory issues and such), and there's really not a lot of available power fantasy for female readers in DC.

52 Wonder Woman still fits the role of power fantasy, it's just she's got a lot surrounding her to, I dunno, 'reassure' male readers that 'sure, she's a female power fantasy, but she gets the power from males'? That's one interpretation one can read in the book at least.

I'd say it's still one of the most attractive books to females in the DC line at the moment, you still have a powerful woman running around and fighting gods and monsters and such, it's just got parts that push away too, and if even your premier female books are pushing away a segment of female readers, that's bad.

The "rapeazons" thing is consistent with the mythology, but I can see why people aren't happy with it, given that it's a huge departure. Plus, there's the Diana thing.

A thing to remember is the myth amazons were created by the greeks to illustrate how horrible it'd be if women fought.

Myths often had morals, and it's pretty understandable why most modern versions reworked this one.

It's not that it's a departure so much as the result is one with a horrible moral about women. Rather than being empowering, it's literally an old story about how empowering women is bad. In Wonder Woman.

Honestly, I'm just trying to work out whether people are leaving the book because it's full of changes they hate (and I can certainly empathise with that; lord knows comic companies have ruined some of my favourite characters lately), or if they think the book is worse purely because there are more men in it. Or if it's a combination of both that's apparently turning off women.

The big thing is really the rapeazon thing which is a major turn-off, the rest just makes a not-good pattern that really is only a problem because of how wide-spread it is.

It's not so much more men, it's that women are being pushed out of major roles and replaced with men, and it's becoming a more male-centric story as a result. It's targeted towards men, not women, and it shows.

Who cares what Matt ****ing Fraction says?

Seriously, this dude is nuts.