When Fangirls Attack
Geez, you make one little comment about fabulous comics snark and suddenly there's a massive influx of folk fromWhen Fangirls Attack. Hi, all! Glad I checked my stats, because that's one fantastic blog-o-links.
Thesis? What thesis? I'm busy dorking around on the internets.
ETA: See? Such an awesome blog that I'm already editing to comment on some of the links!
While discussing feminist concerns over the lack of Marvel creators with internal genitalia Toy Soldier tells us that: "Thirdly, there is a failure to acknowledge whether women generally have an interest in reading and creating comic books. If we want to have an honest discussion, then we have to address that rather valid question. For now, the answer appears to be no."
Just as I begin to think this is one fanboy who doesn't meet many women who aren't inflatable, I click to my next tab (NB: No pleasure, no rapture, no exqusite sin greater than tabbed browsing... with apologies to Kevin Smith) and find that Rosario Dawson has co-created a new title for Image. It's called O.C.T. – Occult Crimes Task Force, and while the cover art seems to lack stretchy synthetic fabrics, the premise seems a melange of known successes -- Dawson compares it to a supernatural "Law & Order" here, and her description calls up elements of Hellblazer and Buffy, to name a couple. In short, nothing too "girly" for fanboys. And hey, she even "stars" in it.
Starts to make me wonder if it's not that women aren't interested in the "materials" covered by the DC and Marvel (lycra and spandex?) but rather that they're more interested in owning their titles. Creator-ownership at the Big Two (sn't that quaint?) is a rare and precious thing, and what with a long history of men taking credit for the work of women I know where I'd be drawn as well. Sure makes more sense than implying that women aren't interested in making or reading "mainstream" comics. Women's lib has meant a lot of different things over time, but one of my favorite iterations is the ability to enjoy it when two-dimensional folk kick the snot out of the monster of the week without being thought "un-ladylike."
And speaking of ass kicking, I'll be in my bunk. Holy shit, that's hot.
Thesis? What thesis? I'm busy dorking around on the internets.
ETA: See? Such an awesome blog that I'm already editing to comment on some of the links!
While discussing feminist concerns over the lack of Marvel creators with internal genitalia Toy Soldier tells us that: "Thirdly, there is a failure to acknowledge whether women generally have an interest in reading and creating comic books. If we want to have an honest discussion, then we have to address that rather valid question. For now, the answer appears to be no."
Just as I begin to think this is one fanboy who doesn't meet many women who aren't inflatable, I click to my next tab (NB: No pleasure, no rapture, no exqusite sin greater than tabbed browsing... with apologies to Kevin Smith) and find that Rosario Dawson has co-created a new title for Image. It's called O.C.T. – Occult Crimes Task Force, and while the cover art seems to lack stretchy synthetic fabrics, the premise seems a melange of known successes -- Dawson compares it to a supernatural "Law & Order" here, and her description calls up elements of Hellblazer and Buffy, to name a couple. In short, nothing too "girly" for fanboys. And hey, she even "stars" in it.
Starts to make me wonder if it's not that women aren't interested in the "materials" covered by the DC and Marvel (lycra and spandex?) but rather that they're more interested in owning their titles. Creator-ownership at the Big Two (sn't that quaint?) is a rare and precious thing, and what with a long history of men taking credit for the work of women I know where I'd be drawn as well. Sure makes more sense than implying that women aren't interested in making or reading "mainstream" comics. Women's lib has meant a lot of different things over time, but one of my favorite iterations is the ability to enjoy it when two-dimensional folk kick the snot out of the monster of the week without being thought "un-ladylike."
And speaking of ass kicking, I'll be in my bunk. Holy shit, that's hot.
posted by Turtle at 8:32 AM
6 Comments:
rogue is drooley. me likey her long time.
and, hey, this does mean you have your sex drive back, right? lol
That's between me, myself, and apparently the whole of the interwebs.
And yes. Rogue is drooley.
Here from When Fangirls Attack ...
You are the first person I've read to bring up the creator-owned issue. Most arguments have centered on the definition of talent, and whether or not the current "standard" is gendered.
So thank you, for bringing ownership of one's work into it, as I probably wouldn't have seen it so quickly on my own.
Thanks, StoryJ! I'm new to the intricacies of comics publishing, and have found issues surrounding creator-ownership to be some of the most fascinating in the whole of the intellectual property/creative freedom debate spectrum. I think there's research to be done as to gendered views on its importance, as I'd bet they are far more subtle than simply "I don't want to end up like some 19th century inventor's wife," but perhaps in that subtlety there might be understanding as to how both personal and collective history has shaped our choices and expectations.
(Erm, this is where I give the disclaimer that I'm a sociologist. Though perhaps that caveat is redundant to my statement.)
I think the ownership issue may not be in and of itself gendered. It just made something click in my thoughts when you pointed out that it's rare for "the big two" to grant ownership, just as it's rare for a female talent to get onto the more visible titles - if she gets jobs from the companies at all. Given the degree of unwelcome, and the emotional (if not financial) benefits to owning what one makes, and the hope for recognition and accomplishment within the structure of one's chosed art isn't something taken lightly.
The personal benefit:work and effort ratio just made far more sense than what was swirrling around in my thoughts yesterday.
Post a Comment
<< Home