Interesting Wonder Woman article

http://geekmom.com/2013/06/the-cliffs-of-insanity-wonder-woman/

I agree with stuff about Her and Superman. In fact I agree with most of the stuff she said.

I especially liked her comments about the New 52 run. It's been a great series in its own right, but the changes it's made to Wonder Woman have been bad almost across the board. I read the monthly series because it's entertaining, but it's not really Wonder Woman.

While I do agree that some of the changes to Wondy's backstory are unnecessarily grim, I do disagree with the general tone of the article. Just because a feminist iconic character is in a relationship with a more well known character doesn't necessarily diminish her as a character. If Wondy is still presented to be stong and independant while dating Supes, there's nothing wrong with that. If she is written to come over to Clark's apartment to clean his kitchen in a short skirt, there's a problem.

To make the arguement that Wondy and Supes are too similar is a very shallow arguement. Sure they both have black hair and are as strong, so what? Diana was raised as a princess in a magical island surrounded by only other women and trained to be a mythical greek warrior. Superman was raised on a farm in Kansas by a middle-class couple and went to journalism school. Ya think the two characters would have slightly different personalities and experiences being raised in such different environments? Maybe they would have different ways of dealing with situations? Maybe these differences could make for interesting stories? Of course not, they both have black hair and are super strong, they must be twins!!!

Of course Clark would be the one teaching Diana about being a normal person. Clark has spent his enitire life pretending he isn't a god-like being while Diana was raised among mythical beings and greek gods and she had not adopted a secret identity when she arrived in the outside world. To call that scene sexist is reaching pretty far when it had perfectly explainible plot reasons.

If the new book is written with equal respect for both characters in a mutual relationship, there is no problem.

Your point here is well taken, but it does raise the question: why don't we ever see a reversal in these roles. Sure, Clark has something to teach Diana, and it's natural for that to happen. But it's also natural that Diana would have a lot to teach Clark, but we never see those interactions.

If I'm reading the article correctly, it seems that the objection isn't just that they are together, but that the overall tone in the comics has been that Superman is really the star of the show, and Wonder Woman is only important insofar as she helps to define his new direction.

this

Diana does have a lot to teach Clark and Soule should incorporate that into the book. Like I said they both have completely different life experiences and a lot to learn from each other. Diana does have the wisdom of Athena, who is the goddess of wisdom, so she should be quite intelligent and be able to teach Supes a thing or two. Not least of which Diana can start to school Clark on some advanced fighting styles since in new52 Superman's fighting style is 'punch bad guy'.

I generally like Geoff Johns as a writer, but his work writing their relationship has been poor. When Soule writes this book, I hope that he does present them as equals. I object to the idea that some people have that the very premise of the book is a detriment to Wonder Woman, which it isn't. It can be written just like Superman/Batman where both characters share the limelight.

wonder woman needs to be treated right if she is supposed to be part of the trinity,and her villans need the right treatment outside her title too,she needs to stablish herself.