A Bias Towards Females in Comics?

I believe that there is an unrecognized bias towards females in comics and other popular media that goes unrecognized due to the fact that it comes not from what is on the page or screen, but rather by what is omitted. This occurred to me when I was re-reading one of my favorite comics of all time the other day, "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?" It is Alan Moore's take on how to end the Superman saga. In it Superman gives up his career as a hero and settles down into a life of domestic tranquility, focusing on his new roles as a husband and father. I then wondered what would happen if there was ever a similar tale entitled "Whatever Happened to the Amazon Princess?" and how such a story could play out. I instantly realized that it could never end with Diana retired from adventuring to become a wife and mother. Such a tale, especially if written by a male author, would be met with immediate vitriol for not being "empowering" to women.

This of course is a gross double standard. Even non-powered females who previously played roles as the male's love interest now must be portrayed as self-sufficient and possessing considerable physical prowess. "Grounded" made it very clear that Superman needs Lois as his rock and foundation, but she could get along just fine without him. In the New 52, Jor-El's wife Lara is not only his intellectual equal, but superior to him in combat, having served in the Kryptonian military's special forces. Popular culture in recent memory has begun to broadcast a clear message to female consumers: "It is not acceptable to be a traditional housewife and mother; anything less than equality with, nay, superiority over, your male counterparts is tantamount to a betrayal of your gender."

Men aren't exactly expected to be stay at home fathers either. The idea of a stay at home anything isn't explored much in comics, because in today's society most parents both work. So if Diana became a mother I would assume she would have an occupation, not because she is an empowered woman, but because most people have a job.

@ZEELLO said:

Anyway if this thread is regarding my comment in an earlier thread regarding a WW movie.. The issue which I tried to anticipate is not so much about WW deciding to settle down with Steve Trevor, but the fact you had her starting out an extremist feminist. It's the transition from one to the other that makes it so the film implies that feminists are ignorant. The problem is not saying to all women that you can be happy just being a mom supporting a family. The problem is saying you will not be happy until you just become a mom supporting a family, and if you try to fight it you're just wasting your time.

No it's not, and I actually agree with your analysis in the movie thread that my treatment for a Wonder Woman film would earn the scorn of feminist critics who peeled behind the action to discover the deeper message. At the same time, Nolan's Dark Knight was basically an apology for the Bush administration's handling of the War on Terror, yet despite the unpopular opinion it presented the film's artistic merits shielded it from commercial failure or fan backlash. A well done Wonder Woman movie could prove likewise. Feminism is an empty philosophy, and Wonder Woman is the perfect female icon with which to subvert it with a better message, albeit one presented in an action filled piece of cinema.

And to be clear, my Wonder Woman film would not end with her barefoot and pregnant, nor even laying down the Lasso of Truth (there needs to be sequels after all). I do not see har as going from one extreme to another, but merely moving away from one extreme as a necessary part of her personal growth and character development.

I think the Simpsons covered this, If I remember correctly, Marge joins some type of women's council and they are all successful, business types, and look down on her for being a stay at home mom and wife.

@The Stegman said:

I think the Simpsons covered this, If I remember correctly, Marge joins some type of women's council and they are all successful, business types, and look down on her for being a stay at home mom and wife.

To be fair, the Simpsons have done everything...

@RideASpaceCowboy:

I think this is hardly the case. First of all, Superman gets along just fine without Lois nowadays, but even before New 52 she was part of the humanizing aspect of his character--much like Ma and Pa Kent. And then, so what if Jor-El's wife is his superior? A woman can't be superior to a man? That is basically what you are saying when you say that.

As a woman, I hardly want to put men beneath me, but I do want to be treated as an equal. A lot of times this gets lost in the mix of overzealous feminist who want to produce a clamor over every self-perceived slight to them. However, what you're doing is just the opposite of this. You make it seem as if we should stop striving for equality. You forget that it was only this past century that we even begin to balance the scales that were for so long tipped in the favor of men; even now they aren't completely there.

The whole reason that story is unique by Superman is that men and Superman are historically portrayed as the warriors and the saviors. Women were confined to the household entirely, and made to raise children. It's out of the typical male gender role. For the same reason, it's not an equivalent to have Wonder Woman retire and become a housewife either, because historically women were limited to only being housewives for the longest time, especially in American history. It only recently just changed. It wouldn't be the same as having Superman retire to raise a family because it would be nothing out of the ordinary for what women have done for years.

It's thus triumphant for women that Wonder Woman is a fighter, and it would be seen as a slight against her character to do that; to put her back into the traditional role of women in society, and a regression of the progress women have otherwise made. There's nothing wrong with being a house wife, but the real key thing is that women weren't allowed to do anything else for literal thousands of years and if you make Wonder Woman that then it is a regression of character, not a progression.

wow, totally. what you are saying does happen, not saying it happens everywhere or with everything but yeah, I've noticed it.

heck, something like this always happens - when you want to push something forward you usually push down extremely the antithesis, like when people want to stop being shy or introverted, turn into completally different persons and act out and talk loud and stuff...

basically, if you get burned by ice you immediatally apply fire on it, but obviously that's bad. you need to be more moderate but it never happens like that, and in this case its a similar situation

@Target_X said:

@RideASpaceCowboy:

There's nothing wrong with being a house wife, but the real key thing is that women weren't allowed to do anything else for literal thousands of years and if you make Wonder Woman that then it is a regression of character, not a progression.

The idea that women have been relegated solely to the role of housewife for thousands of years is actually a historical myth (yes, I have better sources to support my claim than the preceding link, such as Nancy Pearcey's Total Truth, but unfortunately I can't link to book chapters as easily as recent internet articles), largely untrue in agrarian societies and more-or-less an accidental byproduct of industrialization.

@RideASpaceCowboy said:

@Target_X said:

@RideASpaceCowboy:

There's nothing wrong with being a house wife, but the real key thing is that women weren't allowed to do anything else for literal thousands of years and if you make Wonder Woman that then it is a regression of character, not a progression.

The idea that women have been relegated solely to the role of housewife for thousands of years is actually a historical myth (yes, I have better sources to support my claim than the preceding link, such as Nancy Pearcey's Total Truth, but unfortunately I can't link to book chapters as easily as recent internet articles), largely untrue in agrarian societies and more-or-less an accidental byproduct of industrialization.

The housewife is a term I use loosely because it was the one you fixated on. The fact of the matter is, women have not been treated on par with men in society. You can tout articles pointing out other instances all you want (which I won't even get started on other than to say--cracked.com and a book written from a theological standpoint, really?), but there are just as many that say otherwise. Such as the studies that show women are paid less than men in the work place, not allowed to go to war, not allowed to vote, own property, etc. Given, a lot of these things haven't happened in my lifetime, but women still struggle under the societal yoke that has been placed on them to live within certain expectations. Not saying men aren't either, but we're speaking of us at the moment.

Also, you focused in on one sliver of everything I spoke on and cast aside the original point of your own topic. The reason why it wouldn't be empowering to Diana is because that is not what she is. She was built as a symbol of feminism. She's a warrior. If they just retired her to live the life every other woman does than they take that away from us.

I wasn't going to say anything at first, but now I have to. What is wrong with Jor-El's wife being his equal in intelligence and his superior in fighting? I could only see a man as intelligent as Jor-El being with a woman as intelligent as him and anything less would be a slight against him. Also, he was never portrayed as a warrior before so why shouldn't at least one of the two be a warrior? It's apparent that Kryptonians have something that even America doesn't comprehend. It's okay for a woman to be better at something than a man. It's also okay for a woman to be a stay-at-home mother if that is what she wishes. I know lots of women who'd rather stay at home and raise their children, but it's impossible these days. Women have to go to work and still come home and do the work the husband refuses to do. Why not a stay-at-home father instead? I'm sure Clark still had a job and things he had to do. What would you say if instead of working to support his family, he decided to let his wife do it? The reason why it would be a slight against women for Diana to be a stay-at-home mother is because she is an Amazon. It's not because she's a woman. I can see plenty of female super heroes retiring and just being a housewife, but not Diana. She could never just settle for that. She was raised as a warrior. She was raised to be equal to a man in every way if not more powerful. I do not see her as Superman's female version. They are completely different, but I see her as a woman who will more than likely have to die in battle because she, like every Amazon, could never settle for anything but the taste of war.

@lykopis said:

@RideASpaceCowboy said:

@Target_X said:

@RideASpaceCowboy:

There's nothing wrong with being a house wife, but the real key thing is that women weren't allowed to do anything else for literal thousands of years and if you make Wonder Woman that then it is a regression of character, not a progression.

The idea that women have been relegated solely to the role of housewife for thousands of years is actually a historical myth (yes, I have better sources to support my claim than the preceding link, such as Nancy Pearcey's Total Truth, but unfortunately I can't link to book chapters as easily as recent internet articles), largely untrue in agrarian societies and more-or-less an accidental byproduct of industrialization.

You can't be serious. The point was women for hundreds of years were expected to stay home and raise children. Men weren't. Your link points to that women worked just as hard as men in the fields and helped out daddy at the tavern. Interesting. So, what were the son's doing? Serving the tables as well?

You did mention better sources. Please do. Total Truth is a Christian propagandist's attempt to assert the break-down of the religion due to sectarian governments. Chapter 12: How Women Started the Cultural War is particularly interesting, pushing forth the above comments but failing to address how society expected women to care for the family, while the husband went out and did man's work. I do believe history was grossly unfair to men -- making them miss out on the raising of their children -- being equal to their partners when it came to their domestic life. But it wasn't mandated into law -- it didn't result in women being ostracized and refused entry into colleges in which they could gain the knowledge and credentials to have a career.

I get the point now of your thread. No thanks.

Thank you so much for pointing out the flaws in Total Truth. My sentiments exactly.

As others have mentioned, I believe this is truly a case by case scenario; Superman settling down fits his character. Diana settling down does not. Say Janet Van Dyne/Wanda Maximoff settling down - fits character. Thor- does not. Not really a bias, you just picked two examples which fit your argument. What you're describing is equality and certainly not superiority.