It All Starts With Comics, As Usual
Last Wednesday, in Action Comics #21, a little something happened between Lois and Clark. And to cut you off before you make any natural assumptions, Superman is actually dating Wonder Woman in the present continuity. Anyway, I’ll let the panels speak for themselves:
Posted in comics, feminism, internet, language, sex
Tagged Action Comics #21, Alton, Clark Kent, connotations, dating, definition, expectations, fault, feminism, friend zone, friendzone, gender, I value our friendship too much, interest, Jimmy Olsen, like-like, lois lane, love, misogynistic, misogyny, relationship, romantic feelings, sex, sobfest, solidarity, Superman, terminology, Tony S. Daniel, Twitter, ulterior motive
Mild spoilers abound.
There are a few directions I could have gone with in writing about the new Star Trek film that came out almost a month ago. The state of the plot and racism in casting have already been covered in the wittily titled Star Trek Into Dumbness and Whiteness, respectively. No, what I’m going to be writing about is a very specific scene I mentioned in our last E>. Here’s an image of the scene in question, in case you’d forgotten:
Before I carry on in highlighting the various opinions around the internet on this, allow me to provide some context. The woman is Carol Marcus, science officer, played by Alice Eve. She leads Captain James T. Kirk into a shuttle where she proceeds to talk to him about torpedoes. As she does so she asks him to turn around, and then begins stripping. He peeks. She looks at him [pictured above], and once again asks him to turn around. He does. Continue reading
Posted in feminism, film, internet, media, morality, sex, writing
Tagged Alice Eve, apology, Benedict Cumberbatch, Carol Marcus, Conan, Damon Lindelof, Devin Faraci, director, feminism, film, gratuitous, James T. Kirk, JJ Abrams, Kirk, man card, misogyny, scene, sexy, shirtless, shower scene, Star Trek, Star Trek into Darkness, strip, titillation, turn around, Twitter, underwear, unnecessary, writer
Way back in the February of 2011 the following trailer was released for the video game Dead Island:
It was so impressive that last I heard, Lionsgate was going to make a Dead Island film based on the trailer. Not the game, the trailer for the game. A feature-length film based on the trailer for a video game. Think on that for a bit.
What it does is speak volumes for the game’s publisher, Deep Silver, and those it hired to advertise the game. There was an emphasis placed on the feelings of terror and loss and the need to protect one’s family; it sought to set itself apart from other zombie games [of which there are so many]. Unfortunately the game turned out to be your fairly standard run-of-the-mill zombie hack and slash, but that’s not the point here.
The point is that this trend was actually continued in the promotion of the game’s sequel, Dead Island: Riptide, the trailer of which can be viewed here. The tone is once again consistent with that of the first, highlighting the terrors of a vacation gone horribly, horribly wrong. Which is great. And which is why the following seems so shockingly out of place.
The image you see above is a promo image for the European “Zombie Bait Edition” of the game, the crowning glory of which is the statuette at the centre. This was, earlier this week, described as being “Dead Island’s grotesque take on an iconic Roman marble torso sculpture.” This was met with understandable outrage and disgust from the internet, which prompted those at Deep Silver to scramble wildly and release the following apology:
“We deeply apologize for any offense caused by the Dead Island Riptide “Zombie Bait Edition”, the collector’s edition announced for Europe and Australia. Like many gaming companies, Deep Silver has many offices in different countries, which is why sometimes different versions of Collector’s Editions come into being for North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia.
For the limited run of the Zombie Bait Edition for Europe and Australia, a decision was made to include a gruesome statue of a zombie torso, which was cut up like many of our fans had done to the undead enemies in the original Dead Island.
We sincerely regret this choice. We are collecting feedback continuously from the Dead Island community, as well as the international gaming community at large, for ongoing internal meetings with Deep Silver’s entire international team today. For now, we want to reiterate to the community, fans and industry how deeply sorry we are, and that we are committed to making sure this will never happen again.”
So no harm now foul, right? Dead Silver took back their horrible statuette and we can chalk another victory up for the internet! But why exactly were people upset? An article on Rock, Paper, Shotgun which I linked to but will link to again said this about it:
This is beyond disgusting. It’s as if someone were attempting to demonstrate the most misogynist idea that could possibly be conceived, in an attempt to satirise the ghastly trend. A text book example of the most extreme ends of misogynist fantasy, a woman reduced to nothing but her tits, her wounds hideously depicted in gore, jutting bones, and of course barely a mark covering her globular breasts.
It’s very prevalent in a lot of zombie imagery you can find nowadays, and it’s certainly present in this picture of a zombified Snow White on the left. Her body is mutilated [appropriately so, for a zombie] but her breasts remain completely untouched. There’s this sense of the grotesque from the image as a whole, but her chest remains an object of potential titillation.
I don’t think I have to say too much about how grossly sexist this is, and how prevalent it is in the society we live in. What I am going to say is thank God that on some level we can make enough of a public outcry to stop stuff like this before it happens. The bottom line is this: if we as a community [on the internet or otherwise] care enough about something, we really can do something about it. Even if it’s just stopping the production and sales of a tasteless statue.
———
A rebuttal to essentially everything I’ve written can be read in an article by Daav Valentaten on Venture Beat entitled “The Dead Island: Riptide reaction was an equality fail.” I present it as a counterpoint to my own post.
Posted in advertisement, advertising, bizarreness, feminism, internet, video games, zombies
Tagged breasts, collectors edition, Community, Daav Valantaten, Dead Island, Dead Island: Riptide, Deep Silver, disgust, disgusting, feminism, internet, Lionsgate, misogyny, sexism, Snow White, statuette, trailer, Venture Beat, video games, zombie, Zombie Bait Edition
Even if you haven’t recognized it for what it is, chances are, you’ve seen elements of it. The resurgence of beards, comments on period piece clips like “Why don’t we wear hats anymore?” or “Dang- they knew how to dress back then.” Or perhaps you’ve stumbled across The Art of Manliness or are (like me) a faithful apostle of Ron Swanson.
Now whether you’re aware of it or not, there is a growing culture based around this general perspective of “manliness” that supposedly existed from 5,000 BC to 1974 AD. The resurgence in the popularity of the beard, the wave of internet memes centered around being “classy,” our love affair with period pieces- all of this compounded has created the beginnings of a whole new subculture.
Don’t believe me? Just take a look at some of our favorite TV characters.
Don “F***-You, Liver!” Draper
Jack “Even Ayn Rand Thinks I’m Egotistical” Donaghy
Rick “Bad Decisions” Grimes
Walter “Tied with Draper for Making People Love Fedoras” White
Barney “Legen- wait for it… -DARY!” Stinson
Cullen “I Will Punch You For No Particular Reason” Bohannon
Comedy, Drama, Action/Horror, Westerns- this is a pretty broad range, and we’ve got the same strong, dour antihero type in all of them. Men who remind us of our fathers and grandfathers. Tough as nails bastards who came to this country with only a dollar in their pockets- who took a break from their honest 8 to 8 jobs of hitting metal with other pieces of metal to kill Nazis and look dapper doing it.
So what’s this culture all about? As with any group, we can talk about the superfluous or cosmetic elements- in the case of the “manly” group, handshake etiquette, strait-razor whetting, and driving stick- but to really understand ’em, we’re going to need to look at the underlying values in play here.
Independence:
What do all the men shown above have in common? A degree of independence. They’re DIY guys. Men who aren’t reliant on the help or charity of others- in short, dudes who can take care of themselves in most any situation, from car repair to providing for the family to killing the undead. And on that note…
Initiative:
These are all men who don’t allow themselves to be victims. They’re proactive moment-seizing leaders who don’t wait idly by for someone to step up. Good or bad, they’re leading the way- and speaking of bad…
Stoic:
These are guys who tend to lend credence to the stereotype of the unspeaking, unfeeling male. At best, the strong, silent type- at worse, the uncommunicative lout. One way or another, they don’t let the situation get the better of them. That’d be undignified, and if there’s one thing that they’re about, it’s…
Dignity/Pride:
It’s in the way they dress, the way they speak, the way they expected to be treated. A kind of code that prohibits some things and makes others compulsory. You can’t hold your head high, then what’s the point in having one?
Moral Ambiguity:
These men are all, to varying degrees, antiheroes. Guys with their own agendas and a certain degree of moral ambiguity that keeps you on your toes. There’s a level of egotism, self-centeredness, and disregard for others that makes them pretty good at what they do, but what they do not all that good- certainly they don’t fit the traditional mold of the selfless, self-sacrificial hero.
Wealth:
And while it’s not true for all of them, money tends to be a major element of their stories. A drive to be successful, prosperous, and (again) independent. It’s the age-old dream of being your own boss.
So what does all of this boil down to?
Power.
It’s about power. These guys represent everything we, as a generation, aren’t. Independent, wealthy, self-assured, proud. Does that sound like us? Not at all. We’re the casual dressed, globally conscious masses struggling to make it by, and taking whatever miserable, degrading soulless job we can find. We’re not strong like these glamorized images of our grandparents are (having conveniently erased the racism, bigotry, and misogyny).
But we want to be.
And so begins the perpetual motion machine of life-imitating-art and art-imitating-life. Epic Meal Time, Memes, Period Pieces- the list goes on.
So is this a good thing or a bad thing?
Well, there are good and bad elements to every culture (some more bad than good, and vice versa), but let’s list out the positives and negatives.
Positive:
Negatives:
So what’s the final verdict?
“Manly” culture doesn’t appear to be either helpful or harmful- at least, not yet. The underlying issue being power, it’s going to be faced with the task of walking the thin line between empowerment and megalomania. So long as self-control is kept in mind, they oughta be fine.
Be sure to look for next week’s installment: “Science” Culture.
Posted in Economy, feminism, money, politics, race, television, Youth, zombies
Tagged 30 Rock, action horror, antihero, ayn rand, Barney Stinson, beard, bigotry, Breaking Bad, classy, conservatism, conservative, Cullen Bohannon, Culture, dignity, Don Draper, Epic Meal Time, Fedora, feminism, Feminist, Hell on Wheels, How I Met Your Mother, independence, Jack Donaghy, Mad Men, man, Manly, masculinism, masculinist, misogyny, money, moral ambiguity, objectivism, objectivist, Parks and Rec, Parks and Recreation, power, racism, razor, respect, Rick Grimes, Ron Swanson, sexism, stoic, suits, The Art of Manliness, The Walking Dead, tough, tough as nails, Walter White, wealth, WWI, WWII
“Concerned Women for America.”
It sounds almost like a cartoonish satire of the kind of people who storm into PTA meetings demanding to know why their children have been
“exposed to filth” after discovering a copy of Catcher in the Rye, Slaughterhouse Five, or Harry Potter in their kids’ assigned reading list. The kind of people who warn about the corrosive and unwholesome messages hidden in rock songs, or who sit horrified in front of the TV as some sensationalist dead-inside “journalist” warns about the latest secret teenager trend that’s sure to kill them/get them pregnant.
And as much as it sounds like something that’s ripped out of Footloose, Concerned Women for America is very real.
And that is an absolute shame.
Let’s take a look at some of the bilge that these guys are producing.
What caught my eye was a recent article of theirs on Malala Yousafzai, a heroic Pakistani girl and women’s rights and peace activist. In this post, the authors launch a vicious attack on Islam as being an inherently barbarous and misogynistic religion with a murderous agenda for any who dare oppose it. As the article states
“Malala questioned the station of women under Islam’s oppressive thumb, and the Taliban tried to put her six feet under the ground.”
This, quite simply, is a lie.
Yes the Taliban tried to kill Malala, and yes, Malala questioned the station of women-but what the authors of the article neglect to mention is that Malala Yousafzai is a Muslim herself.
Apparently it’s not enough that this fifteen year old girl (and she is fifteen, not fourteen, as the CWA article wrongly states) has to deal with the threat of violence and murder- she now has to endure her activism being hijacked by the “Concerned Women for America” bent on turning her sacrifice into a smear campaign against her own religion, which they claim is both “false” and “hate-filled.”
But why stop there?
The “Concerned Women for America” are also turning their ignorant ire against the “Slut Walks,” which for those of you who may be unaware, are parades of women wearing clothes of different degrees of modesty or exposure to make the point that it doesn’t matter how you’re dressed- one’s wardrobe is never an “invitation to rape” as some sex-offenders have tried claiming.
Being the moral, upstanding people that they are, CWA has sent up a howl of protest against these walks, declaring:
“The latest desperate bid for attention by the publicity-starved feminists is to sponsor SlutWalks — events where scantily clad women take to the streets en masse to claim their “right” to dress and behave however they want or to go anywhere at any time without the risk of being sexually assaulted or deemed streetwalkers.”
“They propose somehow to make the point that even if what they wear, their drunken state, or their presence alone in a very vulnerable place might indicate their willingness to participate in a sexual free-for-all, women should not be subject to lewd propositions or be at risk of being raped.”
Now I could leave it right there- those two statements alone are enough to demonstrate without a shred of doubt just what vile, reprehensible misogynistic scum the CWA is made of, but just to hammer in a few more nails for safe measure, here are some of there other quotes.
Here’s a lovely little comment regarding the Russian punk-rock protest group “Pussy Riot,” recently sentenced to two years in prison for singing an anti-government song in a cathedral.
Their formal statements about the incident reveal their utter lack of morality, embrace of a “blame-everyone-but-us” ideology, and disdain for capitalism and individual responsibility. Like their U.S. counterparts, they want “human rights, civil and political freedoms” for themselves but not for Christian believers or anyone else with different beliefs… Christians around the world are facing intolerance of their beliefs and sometimes violence as well. In spite of the Constitution, religious liberty is under attack in the United States, with the federal government telling religious institutions that they must violate their beliefs and support homosexual “marriage,” homosexual adoptions, contraception, and abortion or face penalties.
Really? A handful of women sing a song in a church decrying the increasingly totalitarian state, get the ridiculous sentence of two years prison for doing so (the same action in the US would merit a fine, if that) and it’s you who are the persecuted ones.
Here’s another good one- outrage that a Macy’s employee was fired for confronting a transgender person for using the women’s dressing room.
Transgender? Give me a break! First of all, there is no such thing; it is a choice of behavior. And hope as we might, our desire to behave in a certain way does not legitimize a chosen behavior. It certainly does not entitle them to circumvent the rights of society and our moral tenets in order for them to “have their way.” Natalie Johnson, the employee in question, was quoted in an ABC interview, “I refuse to comply with this policy,” and “There are no transgenders in the world. A guy can dress up as a woman all he wants. That’s still not going to make you a woman.”
An easy call? Certainly not, but this self-righteous outrage is just plain stupid. What if the person in question had been born a hermaphrodite? How would he or she be treated then? Would that kind of ambiguity have justified the guy/gal being denied service? If that’s our logic, why not deny service to people in wheelchairs for not conforming to the societal norm? That logic just doesn’t hold up.
End of the day, “Concerned Women for America” is what cancer would look like if it were an social movement. Shame on this vile organization.
Posted in America, Christianity, feminism, Islam, lgbt, news, politics, Shame Day
Tagged activism, America, bigtory, Cathedral, Christian, Christianity, Concerned Women, Concerned Women Blog, Concerned Women for America, conservative, current-events, feminism, Feminist, gay, Hermpaphrodite, homophobia, Homosexual, human-rights, intolerance, Islam, Islamophobia, Macy's, Malala Yousafzai, misogyny, Muslim, Natalie Johnson, Pakisant, peace activist, politics, Pussy Riot, Putin, rape, religion, Russia, sex, Sexual Assault, shame day, slut walk, Taliban, terrorism, Traditional, Transgender, Transsexual, US, Values, women's issues, Xenophobia
 | Evan on The “One Size Fits All… |
 | Phi on The “One Size Fits All… |
| ‘Nimble Fingers’ Rac… on Lisa Nakamura Part 2: Navajo C… | |
 | abdessamed gtumsila on Colonial Williamsburg: A Cultu… |
 | T on Is “Art of Manliness… |
Culture War Reporters 
Let’s Talk About The Hijab
I could spend all day railing on the treatment of the Middle East/Arabs/Occupied Palestine/Muslims/etc. The way Arabs/Muslims are singled out for scrutiny and criticism. Casting Indian actors to play Arabs, since Arabs don’t match their own stereotype. The lack of appreciation for the key role the Middle East played in preserving and advancing science and philosophy.
You get the idea.
So rather than trying to tackle a single issue that could be (should be, and has been) covered by an entire academic book, I’m going to hit up super-specific issue.
The hijab. Continue reading →
Rate this:
3 Comments
Posted in America, Europe, feminism, Islam, media, race, religion
Tagged Aceh, afghanistan, Africa, America, Arab, Asia, bigotry, Christopher Titus, comments, congressman todd akin, Culture, Egypt, Europe, expression, feminism, Feminist, freedom of speech, Hijab, human-rights, indian actors, Indonesia, Iran, Islam, Islamophobia, Jordan, Kevin Hart, Lebanon, Malala Yousafzai, mennonite, Middle Eastern, middle-east, misogyny, missouri congressman, modesty, no shirt no shoes no service, north america, patriarchal, patriarchy., politics, racism, racist, rape, religion, saudi arabia, secular, social standards, stubbenville, Syria, Todd Akin, trial, western, westerner, women's issues, women's rights