What is so wrong with Mary Jane?

Filed under: uncategorized — duras January 20, 2007 @ 6:47 am

And yet, strangely enough, some people don’t seem to think so.

I try to avoid looking at Comic Boards these days, because the discussions there now, to be quite honest, are almost unbearable. But for now, , about the question of if Mary Jane Watson-Parker will or won’t be killed off. Let me make it clear that I am against it, and look down in disappointment upon Joe Quesada, the one who really doesn’t like her, for reasons I cannot even begin to figure out.

Until a few years ago, I probably would have thought it unlikely that any so-called Marvel fan would actually be easy with getting rid of even the most minor lady with historically noteworthy status who’s been around since the mid-80s or mid-90s, in contrast to DC, where some readers, if not all, seem to have no problem with destroying the minor ones, if any. But, as I discovered, while they may be a minority, there do seem to be some aimless bums out there who’ve developed a disliking out of nowhere for Mary Jane, because she’s supposedly annoying and they actually seem to agree with Quesada’s erroneous notion that being married makes it impossible to identify with Peter Parker.

Well first off, it appears that these lemmings who think that MJ is grating are basing their judgement upon the material produced circa 1998-2000, in which Howard Mackie really dropped the ball. You’d have to figure that none of them have any interest in the original issues where Mary first made that famous official debut of hers with the “tiger” statement, at the end of ASM #42 in 1966 (I think she may have actually first appeared several issues earlier, towards the end of Steve Ditko’s run, when Prof. Spencer Smythe was presenting his spider-hunting robot to J. Jonah Jameson, but wasn’t seen in actual view just then. Stan Lee must’ve wanted to keep her actual debut a surprise when John Romita became the new artist, and what a pleasant surprise it was). Or, maybe they seem to think that because she emotes, even anguish, that something’s wrong with her. Or maybe they’re using whenever she gets angry, even if it’s sensibly written, as their excuse! I have no idea. All I know is that why they’d even bother to read Spider-Man is beyond me.

And then these same people might tell you that they expect reality in comic books! Well, getting angry or being cynical is also part of reality, so I don’t know where they’d ever get off by claiming that.

But what’s really funny is that these same people who seem to be easy with the idea of getting rid of MJ, or want her to be, aren’t offering up any clear ideas of what is to be done afterwards. Can’t say they’ve ever really asked if some girlfriends or even a new wife, for that matter, could or should be intro’d. So there you have it, once again, we’re back at square one, and I still can’t understand the no-MJ crowd.

And to address that no-MJ crowd again now, two years ago, I had an argument with a columnist who discriminated against Jean Loring, ex-wife of Ray Palmer, the Silver Age Atom, and putting aside for a moment that he said some things about Jean that were untrue, the biggest flaw in his own approach was that he seemed to forget that Jean is a fictional character. And he seemed totally clueless to the fact that, if there was anything wrong with her, it’s not her fault, because she’s an entirely fictional character. Au contraire, it’s the writer’s fault. So, as I asked him, “is it that hard to ask for a repair job?”

Yeah, if anyone finds something wrong with her, or any other character, how come I don’t hear anyone asking to fix the characters, rather than killing them off, or worse, villifying them? And how come they seem to actually ask for a damaging blow to be dealt more to the female cast than the male cast? Rick Jones, certainly when Roy Thomas was writing him, had some really grating dialect at times, but after awhile, that was all fixed, and I certainly don’t hear anyone calling for his demise now. In fact, unless I’m too out of the loop, I notice how nobody seems to be asking for Gambit, who in all due honesty, you could probably make a much more legitimate case for a character to bump off, to be sent to the grave. The one time I can think of when someone really called for getting rid of a male character was that famous (notorious?) time in 1980 when a letter writer to Uncanny X-Men who didn’t like Wolverine made the call to “ditch the little runt!” Since then, there doesn’t seem to be much opposition to the male cast of characters whom readers either do or don’t like.

Hmm, have I found something to go on then? That some audience members are too biased in favor of the male cast to give a damn whenever the female cast has been marked for death? What a good question.

But until that can be answered, I think there needs to be case made that we can’t think of every single female character, major or minor, as irrepairable, and think of death/villification as the only answer to everything. If readers really do want to make things better, then they’d be advised to knock off the call for, or even show of tolerance thereof, for whenever a company even sounds remotely like they want to destroy certain female cast members, because they’re minor and that supposedly makes everything legit, or because they dislike that these ladies have won over the audience, like the Black Cat did in the mid-80s, yet Marvel, some time after Felicia Hardy’s reformation, chose to make her an annoyance, and in that case to influence the audience to ask for her to be shown the door. A move that, sadly, may have worked, but fortunately, since then, there were some repairs made.

If you think there’s something wrong with a female protagonist, don’t ask for her to be killed or worse yet, villified, and in ways that prove Mark Gruenwald right when he said, “Every character is somebody’s favorite. You shouldn’t kill them off lightly, or worse, ruin their old appearances in retrospect.” That’s what was done with Jean Loring, and if we just tolerate what was done with her, we’ll be tolerating if Betty Brant, who’s fairly minor by today’s standards, next. She may have been absent from the Spider-cast for several years now, and if we don’t think carefully, then yes, it’s possible that the editors could mandate tampering when bringing her back again. If you think there’s something wrong with any female protagonist, ask simply if they can be fixed. Ask, best of all, if writers with a real dedication can be found who can accomplish this task. But don’t ask for death. There has been too much of it running rampant in comics today anyway, regardless of if they’re reversed. The villifications are even worse.

And if you can ask for something more productive and positive, then that way, comics can be made much better, and a good step can be taken towards redeeming them from the disasters they’ve undergone today.

Can Tony Stark be redeemed?

Filed under: uncategorized — duras @ 5:10 am
the damage done to Shell-Head, most recently with the villification Tony’s undergone in Civil War, and asks how we can be made to care about him again. (Hat tip: Bobb.)

Belgium: a land full of comic books

Filed under: uncategorized — duras January 19, 2007 @ 1:53 am
, Belgium has a collosal output of comic books (the name for them in French is bande dessinée), and tons of people read them:
BRUSSELS – Almost two-thirds of the books bought in Belgium are comic books, according to a study published on Wednesday.

La Derniere Heure reported that Wallonia’s culture minister Fadila Laanan had commissioned a survey into the state of reading in the French-speaking community.

It found EUR 232 million was being spent on books in French, with 62 percent on ‘bande dessine’ tales about Tintin and other comic characters.

Publishing houses in Wallonia and Brussels raked in EUR 227 million in 2003 alone.

Wow! And according to :

“Youngsters started to draw comics wanting to become famous one day. That’s why there are so many comic artists here,” De Graeve says.

About 80 percent of comic books printed in Belgium are exported, so Belgians are used to the fact that many of their authors are recognised and respected internationally.

Of course, France is a major competitor in this field:

highlights the fact that France has become one of Belgium’s main competitors in the field of quality comics.

France is becoming more important in comics. You see more young artists being published there than in Belgium. But if you bear in mind that France is a big country and Belgium a small one, I think there is still relatively more creativity in Belgium,” De Graeve says.

I’ve got a few Asterix books at home, that’s the comic book from France I’ve been most attached to. But look at that, how in contrast to the United States, in Europe, children have much more of an interest in comic books/strips than across the Atlantic. My guess? Because, simply put, parents are encouraging them to read. If parents in the US were to do the same, and encourage reading, starting with anything that is available that’s suitable for children, then maybe a case could be made to make the flagship Marvel and DC comics kid/family friendly again!

Comic book dedication is one thing where Europe is way ahead of America on. That’s why, in the US, we have a lot of catching up to do.

If you understand French, you can visit , , and .

Nothing special about the new-New Avengers

Filed under: uncategorized — duras @ 1:29 am
The roster featured, as revealed by Brian Bendis himself, seems to feature , but simply put, the Master of the Mystic Arts belongs, if in any team book, in the Defenders. And with the way that Bendis has been writing him recently, I’d say that it’d be better to avoid it.

, but with the way things are going, I’m really not interested, and Spidey, as past history has shown, is better off working alone than in a team title.

The gym and I don’t workout

Filed under: uncategorized — duras January 18, 2007 @ 2:00 pm

Gyms love the beginning of the year; it’s when slacking members re-commit to exercising (for at least a couple of months). It’s also the time many people join the gym as one of their New Year’s resolutions. If I believed in New Year’s resolutions, I’d be one of those people. But with all the renewed energy clogging up the gym, I’d be waiting all day for a treadmill.

As a gay man living in a sunny city, it’s hard to escape the gym mindset. It’s practically our first religion. Most gay men have a membership and many claim to use it regularly. I say claim because the results from some guys’ workouts aren’t obvious to me, leading me to wonder what they actually do in the gym.

I’ve tried to be a regular gym attendee but I’ve never been comfortable there. My typical "routine" is fairly modest; a couple of reps on exercise machines, laps on the treadmill and a run around the track. So basically, I feel like a girl next to the ‘roided-out muscle heads who juggle free weights.

They should have a gym that only caters to badly out of shape men. That way, we can feel less self-conscious about our bodies and concentrate more on getting into shape. It’s working for women and the franchise. I need someone get to work on that.

Also, if you have the mixed curse of visiting a gym in an area frequented by gay men, the gym becomes an extension of the club. There’s nothing worse than having to remove my earbuds every 10 minutes to speak to some club associate who wants to catch up. I’m in the gym, honey!

Actually there is something worse; it’s called the locker room. This is the area where you change clothes and shower. However, if you’re like some men (you know who you are) you also use the locker room to cruise potential dates or cut out the pretense and handle business in the steam room.

I’m not a prude, but all of that extra action can be a bit distracting to those of us whose primary concern is getting our underwear on while sucking in our stomach. Besides, don’t we have clubs made exclusively for the purpose of having sex?

Sex in gym locker rooms is an old tradition but some are aiming to end it. Recently, six former maintenance men have sued Equinox Fitness Clubs, alleging they had to clean bathrooms and locker rooms that men used for sex.

, the suit states the workers were "exposed to in appropriate, lewd, embarrassing and humiliating sexual behavior and activities occurring in the showers, saunas, steam and [men’s] locker rooms" that they then had to clean up at Equinox clubs around Manhattan.

Sound like your gym? Equinox management is denying the claim, of course. But it wouldn’t be surprising if that was the case. I’ve known a handful of guys who’ve had gym memberships revoked for working out their private equipment. If the lawsuit against Equinox is successful (which I doubt), imagine the precedent that would set.

Not only would you have to worry about being cruised by members, but you’d probably have to pass through some extra security. As it is, many gyms use surveillance to keep an eye on the action in the locker room and showers. If I wanted that many people watching me naked, I’d go to a sex party.

As for now, these are reasons the gym and I don’t workout. Although I have to admit to the main reasons: excercising hurts and I’m lazy.

Lesbian economics

Filed under: uncategorized — duras @ 2:00 pm

recently wrote a on women’s wages compared to men’s. A lot of you probably remember the buttons from the late 70s and early 80s that said "$0.69" — the amount, at the time, that women earned for every dollar earned by a man in the same job.
 
Since then, we made progress. Slow, small progress, but progress, until sometime in the mid-1990s, when we hit $0.75.

However, according to Estrich, more recent trends are cause for concern:

According to U.S. Labor Department data, women with college degrees who are between 36 and 45 earned 74.7 cents on the dollar last year, down a penny from 10 years ago.

Women with high school educations are still making 75% of what their male peers make, which is obviously less than what most of us with college degrees earn, but the whole picture is ugly.

The fact that we’re losing ground really took me by surprise. I assumed that, since the 1970s and the "$0.69" buttons, we’d been slowly creeping towards equality. I didn’t think we were there yet, but I would have guessed that we were in the high 80s, not less than 75 percent.

What I really find distressing and hard to think about in all of this, though, is the implications for lesbian families. Are we going to be able to afford things like college tuition etc at the same rate as straight families? How could we?

Let’s do some simple math with two hypothetical couples: Mr. and Mrs. Straight each college educated. To keep the math simple, Mr. Straight makes $100,000 per year. He and Mrs Straight met in college, with the same major and similar grades. She earns Estrich’s average of 74.7 percent of what he earns, or $74,700, for a combined household income of $174,700. (I never said we were feeling sorry for the couples in this example.)

The second couple — Mrs. and Mrs. Lesbos — actually went to college with the Straights. They all hung out and studied together. Mrs. and Mrs. Lesbos each earn $74,700, for a combined household income of $149,400, which turns out to be only 85.5 percent of the Lesbos’ household income. (Still a nice income, but is the lesbian really worth 14.5 percent less than the heterosexual couple?)

Over time, this problem gets worse. If the Straights were to save that money every year for 10 years, even if they only earned 4 percent interest on it (a very conservative figure), at the end of the 10 years they would have $353,354 more than their lesbian friends. In 20 years at 5 percent interest, the heterosexual couple is up almost a million dollars: $945,525.

That’s a lot of tutors, summer camps, college education, special coaches or classes, unpaid internships funded by parents, etc.

Over the course of a 40 year career, using the for the stock market between 1892 - 1997, 7 percent, Mrs. and Mrs. Lesbos will have $5,783,175 less than the Straights.

I know that they wouldn’t all be earning the same salary over all that time, but trying to figure out the math on that is more than I’m up to right now. And the easy math still makes the point. I suspect that the real world version would actually be more dramatic because Mr. Straight’s numbers would keep getting further apart from his wife’s and Mrs. and Mrs. Lesbos’.

Estrich makes two general suggestions for addressing the pay gap:

But there are two obvious answers to this — other than passive acceptance, that is. One is to look hard at the pay scales, and recognize that part of the reason certain specialties make less is not because they’re easier or less important, or even require less training, but because there are more women doing them. Another is to recruit more women to the high-paying ones.

On a societal level, sure. But easier said than done. On a "but what about my family" level — kinda empty.

What do you think we should do?

Liza Barry-Kessler’s blog can be found at www.lizawashere.com.

New Year’s wishes

Filed under: uncategorized — duras @ 2:00 pm

It’s that time of the year when we all look ahead with hope and optimism and make our resolutions and pledges for the coming year. Inevitably, we vow to lose weight, get that promotion at the office, be more caring partners, keep up the yard, take out the trash regularly, call our family more often and just all in all be better people.

Herer are share some of my wishes for the gay and lesbian community for 2007. Some of the things on my wish list are personal some are universal and some are light-hearted jabs at this thing we call the gay and lesbian community, that little enclave we’ve come together to create in hopes of making a better world than where most of us came from.

Whatever’s on your wish list, I wish you luck and happiness in working to achieve it this coming year.

I wish gay men and lesbians saw more of the things they have in common rather than the things that separate them.

I wish Hillary would do the right thing and refrain from mounting a presidential campaign.

I wish the Republicans would finally see that their real “base” is not the wacky right wing.

I wish I wasn’t still so enamored with the last man who broke my heart.

I wish men would quit breaking my heart.

I wish all closeted gay politicians, including Fla. Gov. Charlie Crist, would come out.

I wish there were half the gay bars and twice the gay book reading clubs.

I wish there wasn’t so much attitude in the gay community.

I wish gay men would hook up before 3 a.m.

I wish gay men would talk about something other than what body part they worked out at the gym today and what happened to the price of their real estate this month.

I wish the real estate market would rebound.

I wish I didn’t know by heart the measurement of every one of my body parts.

I wish I had bigger arms.

And a bigger chest.

I wish we still didn’t feel the need to bury ourselves in gay ghettos.

I wish my neighborhood would turn gay.

I wish we weren’t occupying a foreign country.

I wish the media would tell us how many Iraqi civilians are dying in Iraq as frequently as they tell us how many American soldiers die there.

I wish no one were dying in Iraq.

I wish that we won’t leave Iraq too early and let the situation deteriorate into a civil war.

I wish gay guys would stop wearing their collars turned up. It didn’t look good the first time around back in the ’80s.

I wish gay society wasn’t so youth-obsessed.

I wish I was about 10 years younger.

I wish gay men valued the size of each other’s hearts and intellects as much as we value the size of each other’s penises.

I wish the right guy would call me “Daddy.”

I wish guys wouldn’t start conversations online with the word, “stats?”

I wish I spent less time online.

I wish the men I wanted to have sex with were the same ones I wanted to date.

I wish I got asked out on dates.

I wish we’d find the cure for AIDS.

I wish gay men would stop barebacking and putting ourselves at risk.

I wish gay and lesbian relationships weren’t treated as second class. I wish we had the simple right to get married.

I wish gay and lesbian people understood why we need to continue our fight for marriage, even if it makes us unpopular with some voters.

I wish I had somebody to marry.

I wish you all the best in 2007.

Rainbows in the clouds

Filed under: uncategorized — duras @ 2:00 pm

I had a chance to see a personal hero of mine last night, and she inspired me like I knew she would. Maya Angelou, the Renaissance Woman — author, playwright, poet, actress, civil rights activist — read aloud her new poem  “A Pledge to Rescue Our Youth” at the 15th Annual “A King Celebration Concert” by the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra held at the Martin Luther King Jr. Chapel at Morehouse College.

The poem was meaningful, written specifically for young men and women of color, imploring them to “Come up from the gloom of national neglect, you have already been paid for./ Come out of the shadow of irrational prejudice, you owe no racial debt to history.”

To tell the truth, Dr. Angelou could read a set of Mapquest directions and I’d get chill bumps. Her voice itself is so commanding. But the woman uses it for good. And while the night belonged to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and his wife, Coretta Scott King, who died a year ago, I knew she also spoke for me, a lesbian.

Dr. Angelou spoke about the “rainbow in the clouds,” a lyric from an African-American slave song. If you put something shiny and beautiful in a dark place, than hope will always be alive, she said.

Well, we all know the rainbow is our symbol, although some fundamental Christians want to “take it back.” So I decided in my mind that, yes, our rainbow symbol and we as queer people must continue to provide hope for others by shining, even during dark moments in our lives and history.

Dr. Angelou is famous for her quotes as well, and many notable ones include speaking on behalf of gays.

“I will not sit in a group of black friends and hear racial pejoratives against whites. I will not hear ‘honky.’ I will not hear ‘Jap.’ I will not hear ‘kike.’ I will not hear ‘greaser.’ I will not hear ‘dago.’ I will not hear it. As soon as I hear it, I say, ‘Excuse me, I have to leave. Sorry. Or if it’s in my home, I say, ‘You have to leave. I can’t have that. That is poison, and I know it is poison, and you’re smearing it on me. I will not have it,” she said in an interview with the .

She went on to say in the interview that people must have the courage to stand up to people who belittle others they perceive as different.

“Sooner or later, you’ll be able to say out loud, ‘Just a minute. I defend that person. I will not have gay bashing, lesbian bashing. Not in my company. I will not do it.’"

When Mrs. King died, the mainstream media hardly mentioned in news articles and obituaries her dedication to gay rights and to ending HIV/AIDS in addition to all the other human rights issues for which she worked. Her fight for human rights were a part of her own legacy as well as keeping the torch alive of her husband’s enduring legacy.

But Dr. Angelou made sure this aspect of her beloved friend’s life was noted. Speaking during Mrs. King’s funeral, standing in anti-gay Bishop Eddie Long’s megachurch where members of the infamous “God Hates Fags” Westboro Baptist Church were camped out front taunting those attending the funeral, Dr. Angelou let it be known Mrs. King cared for us, too.

“Born of flesh and destined to become iron. Born a corn flower and destined to become a steel magnolia. She loved her church fervently. She loved and adored her husband and her children. She cherished her race,” Dr. Angelou said at the funeral.

“She cherished women. She cared for the conditions of human beings, of Native Americans and Latin — Latino and Asian Americans. She cared for gay and straight people.”

As we honor Dr. and Mrs. King this weekend, let’s enjoy the parties and, for some of us, the day off. But let’s also be dedicated to being rainbows in the clouds.

(The concert will be broadcast nationwide Monday, Jan. 15, on NPR stations, including Atlanta affiliates WABE 90.1 FM and WCLK 91.9 FM.)

A dangerous message

Filed under: uncategorized — duras @ 2:00 pm

The Washington Post’s John Kelly kicked off with a surprising sentence.

In the new Punisher series, S.H.I.E.L.D hires the wrong agent

Filed under: uncategorized — duras @ 9:44 am
There appears to be something wrong with what’s in the script for the new Punisher War Journal series. :
Agent Sitwell recruits G.W. Bridge, who’s praying at a mosque, back to SHIELD to bring in Frank Castle.

It’s bad enough that Civil War was written as an attack on US government policy, but now, they have to take S.H.I.E.L.D, Nick Fury’s respectable law enforcement agency in the fictional world and tarnish that too, by making it seem as though they’re willing to hire potential jihadists? Good grief.

And while Bridge may resign from SHIELD later on:

Bridge quits as he knows that while on the SHIELD payroll, he won’t be able to cross the moral line that he needs to in order to bring The Punisher down.

It sounds to me as though this is more of an attempt to dodge any criticism. Sorry, but, that doesn’t explain why they ever bothered to hire this character in the first place, or why, if he’s willing to resort to plain deadly force to attack Frank Castle, that they’re letting Bridge run around loose either.

That aside, Captain America is certainly tarnished here, when in , he’s hiring thugs:

Captain America is talking with Diamondback to accept a few villains on his side. Punisher isn’t having any of this, and being the Punisher, blows away Goldbug and the Plunderer right in front of Cap.

He even blew away Stiltman in the first. Do I get the feeling that this offing of some of the supercrooks may not last so long? I don’t know, but for now, I’m disgusted that Cap’s being depicted as badly as he is, hiring criminals to back his own movement in Civil War.

<<< Previous Page - Next Page >>>