perpetual_motion | I hate that I have to repeat this on occasion

I DO NOT REQUIRE VAGINAS TO ENJOY COMIC BOOKS.

I don't care if those vaginas are on characters or on writers or on artists. Vaginas do not need to be involved for me to enjoy comic books.

There's been a minor run of angry people who are taking issue with Gail Simone being the only female writer on the big relaunch. The fact that DC tried to get more female writers/artists and were turned down? WHO CARES?! THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH VAGINAS IN THE ROOM.

I love Simone's work. I also love Tomasi's, Bedard's, Snyder's, Cornell's, Giffen's, Johns's, Azzarello's, Jurgen's, and a shit ton of others. I don't love their work because they have penises. I love their work because it's entertaining, well-written, and enjoyable. Fuck, I thought Sean McKeever was a chick until just recently. I have no basis for thinking this, by the way; I just thought the person writing a kick ass Nomad and Black Widow was probably a chick. Which is not a fair assumption to make. But I made it.

It comes down to this: If you flip this argument from "we need more vaginas in the room" to "we need more penises in the room," you'd call that sexism, right? Because it FUCKING IS.

Yes, it's too bad DC couldn't pull in some more talented writers and artists who happened to be female, but you know what? I FAIL TO GIVE A FUCK. BECAUSE A VAGINA IS NOT MANDATORY FOR ME TO ENJOY COMICS.

And really, can't we all just get along and agree that Judd Winick is a hack and will ruin Catwoman? Not because he has a penis but because he's a fucking hack?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I'm not sure how to respond to this...

It's not, IMHO, a 'vaginas' issue. It's that DC as a company it touting how 'diverse' it is without actually reflecting that. 99% of it's creators are guys, that does not reflect 'diversity.'

To me, it's a vagina issue because the people I've read making the biggest noise on the matter aren't asking for particular creators who they trust would do good work, but just female creators in general. I'm not all right with that. If you want to argue that certain female creators should have been properly hounded by DC to join in, I can get behind that. But to say that ANY female creator would do devalues the work of not just the female talent DC now has, but all the talent in general. Because what's being said there is, "I don't care if it's good. I won't read it unless there's a woman attached to it."

And I can't help but wonder, if the numbers were flipped, if the people who are angry at DC, would be angry at them if it was 99% female creators and 1% male, or if that would be okay in some weird way.

Amusingly, I'm a guy arguing that there's too many penises.

^_~

I am not in any way saying that a book HAS to be written by a women to be good. God knows there are hack writers of both genders.

But the lack of women in DC's line up of writers and artists seems to say unpleasant things about how DC chooses to do business. I may be wrong in thinking this, but it certainly doesn't look good....

If they'd managed to get another female writer/artist on, would that have been enough? Would four? Five? I seriously think this is something that some people think requires a 50/50 ratio, and I think that's ridiculous. I want good comics by talented people. I'm getting that with DC's current line up for the most part. Would I rather see Winick tossed out for someone with a better grasp of storytelling and character development? In a second. If that person is female, fine. If that person is male, fine. As long as someone with better skills than Winick is in charge of a book, I'm happy.

And I don't like the fact that DC made an attempt is somehow not enough for people. They tried. The writers/artists they asked weren't interested/didn't have time/whatever. But DC's attempt is being blown over because they, apparently, didn't try hard enough. So, they don't meet the minimum requirements as decided by other people, and their attempts are blown off because people they should have done more. It's a complete lose-lose for them, and I don't think that's fair.

I don't require a specific percentage, but less than one percent ain't exactly impressive.

I also have to question how hard DC worked to recruit people. There are plenty of former DC writers who weren't included in the reboot, for instance.

I don't think fans would be harping on this so much if Dc hadn't claimed their new books were so 'diverse.' Having most of the staff being middle aged white guys looks pretty dumb under a 'diverse' company.

Why assume the worst? Yes, we don't know how hard DC worked to recruit people, but why immediately assume they didn't work that hard? And I always took their "diversity" line to mean character-wise, not necessarily in the male to female ratio on books.

I hate that I have to repeat this on occasion

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject