Two things, one, Wolverine's bones aren't unbreakable. Adamantium has been destroyed on numerous occasions and although his bones are laced with the stuff, they are far from MADE of it. Second thing, I take exception to the line, "Even if stories in the Ultimate universe did “count” like they do in the regular MU." What does that even mean? As a follower of the Ultimate MarvelU I really have to ask, what is trying to be expressed by those words. Since last I checked deaths and major battles have definitely "counted" in terms of continuity.
xsuit's forum posts
This show was truly a masterpiece. I can only describe its influence on me, my childhood, and the person I've grown to be as the reason so many of the newest animated series i.e. Batman the Brave and the Bold are ruined for me. Almost every 90s animated series at the time were just simply more than a distraction. They pushed the boundaries of perception itself. Though it was Spider-Man TAS that would take the , it was the bat mobile, bat wing, or even just the bat symbol I littered my notebooks with during class.
When the show ended it was like having a best friend move away. But, ever time Kevin Conroy's attached to a new bat project it just like that buddy coming back for a visit to share some of the greatest stories ever.
The Gauntlet, Grim Hunt, New Ways to Die...all mentioned already and are definitely great arcs. Only thing I haven't seen anyone mention has been Character Assassination which I thought was a fun arc a well as the pretty recent Revenge of the Spider Slayer arc and OMIT if you're really curious about the in between of OMD and BND. To be honest though there have also been a lot of mini arcs of high caliber as well like the reintroduction of Hammerhead, issues #. 575/576. Have fun.
I also happen to have written at length about many of Marvel's characters with the utmost enthusiasm and appreciation. This is a criticism, the basic message of what I've intended to express is that both Marvel and DC have some incredible female characters that they're simply not investing in nearly enough nor are they taking them as seriously as they should. "Batman and Robin" displayed closeups on backends and nipples on the chestplates of Batman and the boy wonder and it had every fanboy up in a tizzy, completely outraged along with the generally goofy nature of that whole tangential take on the Batman franchise. This is not very different. DC misused their own material and lent it off to someone who didn't have the nuances to portray it in a way that people enjoy. It's a similar sentiment when it comes to women leaning every which way to strike a pose, barely dressed, and tossing around innuendo more than the word "the".
I don't believe it applies in this instance since where that is concerned we're looking at two different mediums. I found a great deal of things to not appreciate about that movie, least of which being the costume change/addition. That being said one thing I can't fault it for would be having very few gratuitous shots of the female protagonist. At least I don't recall very many of them if any at all. Thinking back to film as a medium, I can't really recall too many movies from large properties that grossly objectified women. Of course my experience with that form are limited to a majority of the largest "hits."
I've also seen men in shorts and t-shirts in that sort of weather as a somewhat macho-infused opposition to the cold but none of them are going out to fight Skrulls or the Joker's henchmen. Yes, not everyone dresses for practicality or functionality 100% of the time and there is some leniency in the suspension of disbelief. But the efficiency of Batman wearing a cape as well as the disadvantages of it aren't offensive to as say Storm wearing a low-cut top with a thong and an o-face as her sole expression is. It's not a natural instinct of women to wear things that could cause discomfort, it's societal, it's a long-existing aesthetic but the situation you describe is entirely different.
I guess I just didn't come across the point as completely as I had hoped to. I by no means meant to imply that it was a majority of women with such feelings as far as attire goes but just that it wasn't uncommon to see groupings of like minded individuals in outfits that defy practicality. In many ways they could be easily have been identified as a minority that given factors of age, experience, circumstance, and etc. just have such a mentality but then I dare posit that the same could very well apply to heroines. Them being a minority as well in the super heroics department. Though that isn't to say I don't applaud a costume change, e.g. the Huntress' armor, or the refitting of many heroines with boots as opposed to the standard stiletto, and frown when a new art team will return them to the impractical all over again. It's just as I stated earlier, I just have a hard time trying to question why there's outcry about Ms. Marvel in heels when she can fly. It just seems like points about impracticality in discomfort become moot when faced with rationale like that coupled with the nigh invulnerability.
I've seen women wear things that absolutely blow my mind. I've even been privy to comedy routines that accurately express my inability to grasp the need or better yet desire for some of the fashion choices that have been made. From my limited perspective I can't imagine who a female is dressing for sometimes when she leaves for the "club scene" wearing practically nothing. I personally don't find it appealing and I imagine for those few depraved individuals out there that'd dare attempt to take advantage of them it's a look they can admire. That being said it really baffles me but I can't contribute that to anything else as it was and still is their choice and that's how I look at comics. Some artists I believe can go too far i.e. "Gotham City Sirens" but, I also don't see how it fits an overall picture of misogyny that some claim.
That's true, a woman's body language is significantly different in the way she relates to her environment. Men and women have different assets to flaunt however, the emphasis with most male characters is strength. You see male characters taking positions where they are standing up straight and looking authoritative with barrel-shaped chests, crossed arms, tensed shoulders and perhaps not every woman necessarily has to mirror that but there's a difference between a woman who looks confident and sexy vs a woman who's doing an outrageously salacious pose.
I agree to an extent only because with highly agile characters I've noticed a different standard. I recall back in Nightwing's stand alone series with his adventures in Bludhaven where the issues would be littered with shots of him going from rooftop to rooftop, swinging and zip lining solely with internal monologue his only companion. It was just him, skin tight suit, essentially just posing in the air. Did I have a problem with it? To be honest, just like when there's random "fan service" of the female variety, I don't take much note of it unless it's excessive. Even now I only recall it because he like Spider-man have had moments like that being characters specifically known for their agility. Moving forward though I don't know how else to say it but mean are built so differently. They don't really have hips which emphasis the rear and were artists to emphasis a male's genitalia the book would most certainly be met with an upgrade to "Adult Magazine" treatment if not criticized for being a danger to children[s health and mental well being. Such a double standard gets on my nerves but I've seen it all too often to believe society has evolved far enough to the point where major companies could easily get away with it. I guess though my only question to you in all this regard would be then is the issue more because of the poses or the costumes themselves?
I didn't have any problem with Marvel Divas (except for the goofy title), I actually love Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa. However, not long after Marvel released that they released "X-women" which was the Milo Manara comic that depicted Psylocke, Shadowcat, Storm, and Rachel Summers bound and gagged in cloth bikinis with o-faces in thongs and almost ridiculously suggestive porno-inspired poses on nearly every page - not a strong vote of confidence for female readers. Then before that there was the "Heroes for Hire" tentacle rape cover controversy as well as that statue released of MJ washing Spiderman's uniform with a thong on, a pearl necklace, and wayyyy lowcut jeans. Joe Quesada always defends these things too which I don't understand in the slightest but even as recently as a few months ago someone asked about sexism in comics for one of his "Cup of Joe" features and he told them just not to even buy them if they seemed sexist. I don't buy comics that offend me but I've had to let a few go that have and would be willing to buy them again if they reflected something positive and apparently there are many like-minded people of a similar opinion.
Marvel seems to think women will only read comics if it's similar to a "Sex and the City" premise (like with Marvel Divas) or about fashion (like with Models Inc.) or of some Notebook-caliber love story. Meanwhile, many girls watch shows like Buffy or True Blood or read books like Hunger Game that feature about the same amount of action, adventure, and romance that most superhero franchises do. I like Marvel's effort but they try to appeal to women in the most stereotypical way possible and still permit quite a bit that will offend them. That's why I take umbrage with them, I love the characters, I love the mythology but if you read any of their books not only are the examples I mentioned above within them but women don't even really get all that much feature. The X-men lately is all about Wolverine and Scott yet when Uncanny sold the most comics was when Storm was in charge.
And clearly, given this was all prompted by DC titles Marvel isn't the only one. In essence, I don't want to "attack" either one of them, I'm a customer and potentially a customer who would shell out more money for a better product.
I have not read "X-Women," I cannot begin to dissect something I have no experience in whatsoever. I have read some of "Girl Comics," I have read stories about strong Marvel females i.e. Pepper Potts, Daisy Johnson, Maria Hill, and have expressed my appreciation for those characters both on Marvel boards and standard forums alike and have unfortunately found that I was one of such a small minority that seems to be doing so. I can't being to tackle Storm's role in the X-men since there were pre-Schism already roughly five running x-books not to mention Wolverine's one-shots and etc. But from the "House of M" saga and on I've been keeping mostly in the loop and have found Storm to be fairly absent. I've seen her in the Black Panther books but not so much in the X-men proper. Now I've seen strong females stand up like X-23, Dani Moonstar, Rogue, and even Emma Frost as of late but haven't seen nearly as much publicity. I'm not afraid to admit I wasn't into comics when the "epic" battle that brought Storm to leading the team debuted but I did read the fight and must say I don't see how that one accomplishment seems to dwarf to the point of blocking out completely the development of all these other strong females in the mutant community. I buy books based on story foremost and art secondary. In my opinion, storytelling has only continued to improve from the 80s to now. That being said, also in my opinion, there are more prominent heroines than there were back then. I guess what I mean to say then is that perhaps there more to the drop in sales than the team leader.
Joe Quesada gets a lot of flak for many of his decisions. I know that even though it's years later, people are still flaming him for OMD/BND. I personally defend it when I get the chance to because I got back into "Amazing Spider-Man" as a regular reader because of it. The stories that came about from that event blew my mind with their unique nature and intricacy. Moving back to Marvel and sexualized merchandise, well I can see why the easiest answer for him would be to say to just not buy it. Busts and statues and splash pages depicting things of that nature seem to sell even if the books that contain them don't. And when at conventions there's the free publicity of cosplayers dawning those same impractical costumes or version modified to be even more scandalous, I imagine it's an odd pulse to try to read. I don't understand why it's such a difficult task separating that excess from what you're there for. From my experience with the Teen Titans (v3) pre-New 52, when Wonder Girl lead the team, I lost interest. But it wasn't the dynamic change more than it was the writing. That is to say that then don't solid stories rectify such situations of poor product?
I must say I disagree. To quantify what I mean by that, well it sounds mostly as if you're taking shots across Marvel's bow for one. I came to this article because the titled caught my attention but all I've received was generally attacks at Marvel.
Its been said often and in uproar about costume choices of heroines but aside from a few cases I can't say they're really that surprising. As one of the commentators mentioned earlier about model-esque women flaunting their sexuality. It's true. I've personally witness on numerous occasion, while in college, women who wore clothes that lacked any sort of practicality given their surroundings. I.e. stiletto heels and short skirts in the middle of December in Buffalo, NY. Being New York, you can imagine there was indeed iced pavement and snow on the ground. I honestly thought to myself how ridiculous it was but because such was a common event, there was little left to explore. Jumping back to the original point, women can and have sexualized themselves just as much as men do. Now in the context of nigh-invulnerable characters, choices of attire become moot. Supergirl can rock a skirt or in the new 52 what is essentially a one piece bathing suit. Bullets don't phase her. In the cases with assassin's, sex appeal can easily be attributed to being as dangerous/distracting as any other ploy to garner a loss of focus of one's adversary.
Moving to the illicit poses, therein I give leeway only to the fact that it's simply not a two way street. Reality is clear in that department. Men just don't move like women do. There's almost a art to the way a woman can move and I'm not idolizing, it's clearly visible if you just stop and look around for a moment. be it in part to difference in centers of gravity or etc. there just tends to be a gracefulness/fluid quality that is generally lost in male movement. Drawing this back to costume design then it's clear that of course designs between male and female counterparts would be sharply contrasted.
Returning back to costume choices. Can it really be said that it's not a male dominated industry. Attacking Marvel seems a little premature as I recall a large debacle at the mention of their "Marvel Diva" miniseries. People were up in arms over the cover of the issue. Just the cover. The issue was at least a month from release. I remember this clearly since around the same time, DC was releasing it's own female team series, "Gotham Citty Sirens." Alot of boards were going crazy over the former but it seemed that latter was largely being overlooked. As one who has read them both I can say that I'm amazed that they seemed to so quietly disappear from people's minds. Marvel Divas didn't see well. I personally enjoyed it immensely. It was not oversexualized and simply followed the lives of four heroines as they lived. The art was great. The writing engaging. So many people couldn't get past the cover to be bothered however. Though with DC's counterpart I genuinely felt a little like dirt after reading some of the issues. The gratuitous shots of stiletto acrobatics and low angle shots of them just talking to a set of panels where the three protagonists' home is set ablaze and SPOILERS: Posion Ivy uses the fluids from a giant cactus to doze the flames effectively covering all three ladies and in a white-ish substance END SPOILERS. Really made me question how I wasn't seeing flat out riots at how poorly these well-known, at least by my perspective, were being so mistreated. I've never seen Maria Hill, Pepper Potts, or Daisy Johnson, Marvel Heroines with respectable fighting attire, given such treatment but then again books featuring them don't seem to do as well as any other books anyway.
Clearly I've rambled enough. I don't wholeheartedly disagree with this article but I cannot sit here after all I've read (comic book-wise and other) and sit blindly by as if there's no counterargument. Thanks for taking the time to read this if you have.