Batgirl cover cancelled

[AmazingSaul]

I also don't like the assumption that boys need to be told rape is wrong. Rape involves a man forcing himself on someone. The act is sick and twisted. Not all young boys would do that. There are many decent boys out there. I don't like people assuming all boys will do it so we have to teach them not to... Those people also have issues.

 

Some do not believe that there are any decent boys out there. There are people out there that assume all boys will do it.

 

Saul, I totally agree with you, it should be (key words) known by instinct that rape/sexual assault is bad. No argument there, either. But... you should read what (what passes for) feminists nowadays can spout. I'll give an example:

 

As long as some men subjugate females with force, all men need not. The knowledge that some men do suffices to threaten all women. He can beat or kill the woman he claims to love. He can rape women. He can sexually molest his daughter(s). THE VAST MAJORITY OF MEN IN THE WORLD DO ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE.

 

 

 

-slym

 

Wow... That lady has a problem. I am assuming this is a new movement of some sorts. I don't keep up much with current times. Maybe these women just need to be shown some love? Or someone should try to talk and reason with them? I'm sure there's a happy solution to it all. Usually there is a medium everyone is happy with. What do the girls want? We should give them more money or whatever (that's what I do with my wife and she backs off right away from my comic purchases). ?

[Quicksilver Signs]

OK, so this thread is littered with Anita Sarkeesian fans who think it's their job to tell me what I think of a cover and pass its judgement to me. In this sad PC society where it's not ok to be offended or not share the same opinion, it's become clear to me that we've clearly handed the keys to the inmates of Arkham Asylum.

 

Clearly, the cover is a hommage to one of the best Batman arcs that details possibly the strongest story arc a female heroine can go through on a personal level. Comics have delt with society and acts as a reflecting mirror when it's left to do so. When not able to do so we get comics code authority and feminazis using pressure to get their way.

 

In any event, I don't view the cover offense....maybe risque....and guess what? What I think doesn't matter in terms of if this should hit the print stands or not. God Bless America. Oh wait, did mentioning God offend you? Get over it.

 

Now I have to deal with my seventh grade son in a public school is being told about rape and violence in his HEALTH class. See, this is mandated from the state, and I wasn't given an option for this. I guess they're trying to teach men, I mean boys...NOT to rape. Thanks, feminist movement. I say arm women with a gun, because everyone needs to be a hero and villains will still be out there.

 

Peace.

 

What's wrong with teaching boys about proper consent in sex ed class?

 

Back in my days my parents taught me what was right from wrong. We didn't have to worry about these things. So it appears it's a modern problem. I don't recall ever even talking much about sex in my early years. We would discuss comic books and toys. We would also discuss movies or which place we would go get a burger later. We didn't even have phones or anything fancy. I didn't start dating until highschool and the majority of boys I knew would maybe hold hands with a girl and at most make out. Sex was something people would do, but we didn't discuss it as it is discussed now.

 

You didn't answer the question. Are you saying it should be up to the parent to teach them this, and not be brought up in school at all? Not that I agree or disagree with that, I am just asking a question - no malice intended.

 

 

 

 

-slym

 

Maybe parents should be parents again. Why would they need to teach young boys raping is bad? I knew that was bad and did my peers. Someone with a sick mind would do it anyways.

 

I also don't like the assumption that boys need to be told rape is wrong. Rape involves a man forcing himself on someone. The act is sick and twisted. Not all young boys would do that. There are many decent boys out there. I don't like people assuming all boys will do it so we have to teach them not to... Those people also have issues.

 

I don't think forcible rape is an issue of right or wrong, 99% know it's wrong. But teaching consent is another thing, some people think having sex with a totally drunk girl is ok, even one passed out. There is a major problem with sexual assault on college university campuses. Doubled by the institutions trying to push it all under the rug in fear of bad PR

 

[AmazingSaul]

OK, so this thread is littered with Anita Sarkeesian fans who think it's their job to tell me what I think of a cover and pass its judgement to me. In this sad PC society where it's not ok to be offended or not share the same opinion, it's become clear to me that we've clearly handed the keys to the inmates of Arkham Asylum.

 

Clearly, the cover is a hommage to one of the best Batman arcs that details possibly the strongest story arc a female heroine can go through on a personal level. Comics have delt with society and acts as a reflecting mirror when it's left to do so. When not able to do so we get comics code authority and feminazis using pressure to get their way.

 

In any event, I don't view the cover offense....maybe risque....and guess what? What I think doesn't matter in terms of if this should hit the print stands or not. God Bless America. Oh wait, did mentioning God offend you? Get over it.

 

Now I have to deal with my seventh grade son in a public school is being told about rape and violence in his HEALTH class. See, this is mandated from the state, and I wasn't given an option for this. I guess they're trying to teach men, I mean boys...NOT to rape. Thanks, feminist movement. I say arm women with a gun, because everyone needs to be a hero and villains will still be out there.

 

Peace.

 

What's wrong with teaching boys about proper consent in sex ed class?

 

Back in my days my parents taught me what was right from wrong. We didn't have to worry about these things. So it appears it's a modern problem. I don't recall ever even talking much about sex in my early years. We would discuss comic books and toys. We would also discuss movies or which place we would go get a burger later. We didn't even have phones or anything fancy. I didn't start dating until highschool and the majority of boys I knew would maybe hold hands with a girl and at most make out. Sex was something people would do, but we didn't discuss it as it is discussed now.

 

You didn't answer the question. Are you saying it should be up to the parent to teach them this, and not be brought up in school at all? Not that I agree or disagree with that, I am just asking a question - no malice intended.

 

 

 

 

-slym

 

Maybe parents should be parents again. Why would they need to teach young boys raping is bad? I knew that was bad and did my peers. Someone with a sick mind would do it anyways.

 

I also don't like the assumption that boys need to be told rape is wrong. Rape involves a man forcing himself on someone. The act is sick and twisted. Not all young boys would do that. There are many decent boys out there. I don't like people assuming all boys will do it so we have to teach them not to... Those people also have issues.

 

I don't think forcible rape is an issue of right or wrong, 99% know it's wrong. But teaching consent is another thing, some people think having sex with a totally drunk girl is ok, even one passed out. There is a major problem with sexual assault on college university campuses. Doubled by the institutions trying to push it all under the rug in fear of bad PR

 

I wasn't aware there was a problem. Sorry I'm not educated in those things. I grew up in a small town. I apologize if I sound ignorant in certain aspects. I just felt that boys shouldn't be treated like criminals.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

http://time.com/3755285/batgirl-joker-cover-controversy-feminism/

 

From the above link:

The worst message to send creators is that if your female character doesn’t get a Good Feminist seal of approval — if she shows too much weakness or too much sexuality, if she has too many stereotypical female qualities or too many “male” ones, if she suffers a failure or a harrowing ordeal, if she is shown in an overly disturbing situation — your work may be attacked as anti-woman. That’s a prescription for bland characters and dull stories.

 

Since a lot of people won't click links I wanted to provide the above snippet that I thought was very insightful

 

Yes, because god knows there are no female characters left in comics that show weakness or too much sexuality.

 

To me, this looks so much more like, 'How dare you invade our boys club!"

 

I didn't get that at all.

The author rephrased the point several times. Here is another

when feminist criticism becomes an outrage machine that chills creative expression, it’s bad for feminism and bad for female representation. Making artists, writers, filmmakers, and even audiences walk on eggshells for fear of committing thoughtcrime against womanhood is no way to encourage quality art or enjoyable entertainment — not to mention the creation of good female characters.

 

[Prince Namor]

http://time.com/3755285/batgirl-joker-cover-controversy-feminism/

 

From the above link:

The worst message to send creators is that if your female character doesn’t get a Good Feminist seal of approval — if she shows too much weakness or too much sexuality, if she has too many stereotypical female qualities or too many “male” ones, if she suffers a failure or a harrowing ordeal, if she is shown in an overly disturbing situation — your work may be attacked as anti-woman. That’s a prescription for bland characters and dull stories.

 

Since a lot of people won't click links I wanted to provide the above snippet that I thought was very insightful

 

Yes, because god knows there are no female characters left in comics that show weakness or too much sexuality.

 

To me, this looks so much more like, 'How dare you invade our boys club!"

 

I didn't get that at all.

The author rephrased the point several times. Here is another

when feminist criticism becomes an outrage machine that chills creative expression, it’s bad for feminism and bad for female representation. Making artists, writers, filmmakers, and even audiences walk on eggshells for fear of committing thoughtcrime against womanhood is no way to encourage quality art or enjoyable entertainment — not to mention the creation of good female characters.

 

'Chills creative expression?'

 

There's no one in comics screaming because of a lack of or a restriction in creative expression.

 

Where are the people claiming they can't create what they want in comics?

 

[InvstmntComcSuply]

http://time.com/3755285/batgirl-joker-cover-controversy-feminism/

 

From the above link:

The worst message to send creators is that if your female character doesn’t get a Good Feminist seal of approval — if she shows too much weakness or too much sexuality, if she has too many stereotypical female qualities or too many “male” ones, if she suffers a failure or a harrowing ordeal, if she is shown in an overly disturbing situation — your work may be attacked as anti-woman. That’s a prescription for bland characters and dull stories.

 

Since a lot of people won't click links I wanted to provide the above snippet that I thought was very insightful

 

Yes, because god knows there are no female characters left in comics that show weakness or too much sexuality.

 

To me, this looks so much more like, 'How dare you invade our boys club!"

 

I didn't get that at all.

The author rephrased the point several times. Here is another

when feminist criticism becomes an outrage machine that chills creative expression, it’s bad for feminism and bad for female representation. Making artists, writers, filmmakers, and even audiences walk on eggshells for fear of committing thoughtcrime against womanhood is no way to encourage quality art or enjoyable entertainment — not to mention the creation of good female characters.

 

'Chills creative expression?'

 

There's no one in comics screaming because of a lack of or a restriction in creative expression.

 

Where are the people claiming they can't create what they want in comics?

 

That is not the argument.

You are missing the "when feminist criticism becomes an outrage machine that chills creative expression".

Which the author contends, happened with this cover.

[Prince Namor]

In the 60's and 70's it was so innocent....

 

 

 

[InvstmntComcSuply]

The better word would have been attacks, rather than chills.

[AmazingSaul]

In the 60's and 70's it was so innocent....

 

 

 

 

That Detective Batgirl story is one my favorites! ?

[Prince Namor]

http://time.com/3755285/batgirl-joker-cover-controversy-feminism/

 

From the above link:

The worst message to send creators is that if your female character doesn’t get a Good Feminist seal of approval — if she shows too much weakness or too much sexuality, if she has too many stereotypical female qualities or too many “male” ones, if she suffers a failure or a harrowing ordeal, if she is shown in an overly disturbing situation — your work may be attacked as anti-woman. That’s a prescription for bland characters and dull stories.

 

Since a lot of people won't click links I wanted to provide the above snippet that I thought was very insightful

 

Yes, because god knows there are no female characters left in comics that show weakness or too much sexuality.

 

To me, this looks so much more like, 'How dare you invade our boys club!"

 

I didn't get that at all.

The author rephrased the point several times. Here is another

when feminist criticism becomes an outrage machine that chills creative expression, it’s bad for feminism and bad for female representation. Making artists, writers, filmmakers, and even audiences walk on eggshells for fear of committing thoughtcrime against womanhood is no way to encourage quality art or enjoyable entertainment — not to mention the creation of good female characters.

 

'Chills creative expression?'

 

There's no one in comics screaming because of a lack of or a restriction in creative expression.

 

Where are the people claiming they can't create what they want in comics?

 

That is not the argument.

You are missing the "when feminist criticism becomes an outrage machine that chills creative expression".

Which the author contends, happened with this cover.

 

Yes, a lot of 'authors' out there, contending 'what happened', as opposed to what the artist and creators of the comic say.

 

And as opposed to what DC's reaction over the last couple of years has been to criticisms of sexism, violence towards women and misogyny (they haven't done a thing).

 

Some 'authors' have a hard time letting facts get in the way of a good story.

[Beastfeast]

...Wow.

 

The level of Good Ole' Boy in this thread is nuts.

 

If this stupid "controversy" can ignite this much fear and paranoia, I can only imagine what ya'll would do to actual, real life problems.

 

Some great take-aways from this:

 

"Do you sit to pee?" is so misogynistic it's hilarious that you can't see it. But I get it, "I'm part of the problem," right?

 

Thinking the good old days were somehow better shows how truly disconnected to the reality of others some of you are. Maybe it was FOR YOU. It wasn't for most women, people of color, trans, gay, or basically anyone other than white men.

 

This has now turned into a philosophical argument that won't change how any of us think and I'm bowing out.

 

I think we can all agree that the real tragedy is that we can't buy and flip this book for $$$ after all this hype.

 

 

 

[CBT]

...Wow.

The level of Good Ole' BoyPC loons in this thread is nuts.

 

Yuuup!!!

 

 

"Do you sit to pee?" is so misogynistic it's hilarious that you can't see it. But I get it, "I'm part of the problem," right?

sitzpinkler is so absurd and unbelievably funny, as is jazz hands instead of clapping. Both are examples of when attempting to be PC disconnects one from reality.

You saying Good Ole' Boys is far more offensive than what you are selectively quoting (by leaving out, "should I be allowed to pee standing").

Only a PC loon could attempt to turn people objecting to trying to outlaw peeing standing up, into an attack on women.

What would ACTUALLY be Mysoginistic would be telling Women they have to stand to pee, which is equally as absurd as trying to force men to sit....

 

 

Thinking the good old days were somehow better shows how truly disconnected to the reality of others some of you are. Maybe it was FOR YOU. It wasn't for most women, people of color, trans, gay, or basically anyone other than white men.

and of course, the requisite straw man, set up something no one said, and knock it on over. You beat that scarecrow up, huzzah!

There is lots that was worse in the old days, and lots that was better, but none of that was being debated...

[Prince Namor]

I still don't get how a landlord demanding money from a renter for ruining his floor from peeing (in a standing position), is an example of anything other than a bizarre court case (that was ruled in the renter's favor).

 

There was no law passed saying men had to sit to pee, so no 'PC Police' were involved.

[Beastfeast]

...Wow.

The level of Good Ole' BoyPC loons in this thread is nuts.

 

Yuuup!!!

 

Oh, neat. You changed what I said. NOW I see your point!

 

 

 

sitzpinkler is so absurd and unbelievably funny, as is jazz hands instead of clapping. Both are examples of when attempting to be PC disconnects one from reality.

You saying Good Ole' Boys is far more offensive than what you are selectively quoting (by leaving out, "should I be allowed to pee standing").

Only a PC loon could attempt to turn people objecting to trying to outlaw peeing standing up, into an attack on women.

What would ACTUALLY be Mysoginistic would be telling Women they have to stand to pee, which is equally as absurd as trying to force men to sit....

 

I have no idea what you're even trying to say here about the pee. Yeah. What you said about peeing is dumb and irrelevant to the conversation.

 

Also, the "good ole boy" system, depending on where you live, represents nepotism, intolerance and deep corruption. I'm from the deep south and it's allll alive and well.

 

Also, that Jazz hands thing is so dumb. Those ARE the lunatics that no one should pay attention to and represent a very vocal minority of narcissists, the mentally ill, and pot stirrers.

 

Thinking the good old days were somehow better shows how truly disconnected to the reality of others some of you are. Maybe it was FOR YOU. It wasn't for most women, people of color, trans, gay, or basically anyone other than white men.

and of course, the requisite straw man, set up something no one said, and knock it on over. You beat that scarecrow up, huzzah!

There is lots that was worse in the old days, and lots that was better, but none of that was being debated...

 

Back in my days my parents taught me what was right from wrong...

 

No one said anything about the good old days? Hmmmm.

 

 

[CBT]

I still don't get how a landlord demanding money from a renter for ruining his floor from peeing (in a standing position), is an example of anything other than a bizarre court case (that was ruled in the renter's favor).

 

There was no law passed saying men had to sit to pee, so no 'PC Police' were involved.

 

Glad you looked it up, if you are going to quote the article you read, include the part about the red lights, what the judge actually ruled, in fact quote his ruling into the thread.

 

As with most case law, the case put forward is very specific, but the issue being addressed is much larger. That is to say in this case, men won the "right" to pee standing up, and those attempting to infringe that right lost.

 

I know you wont actually do it, so i will put the quotes you left out here for others....

 

Article title not quoted; "German court rules that men can urinate while standing"

 

Other washrooms mentioned, not quoted, "There is some debate in Germany about whether men should sit or stand to pee. Some toilets have red traffic-style signs forbidding the standing position..."

 

and the judges ruling, also not quoted, "Despite growing domestication of men in this matter, urinating while standing up is still common practice," he(Judge Stefan Hank) added."

 

I cited it as an extreme (and funny) example of PC-ness run amok. The debate didnt start with that court case, and it hasnt ended with the ruling, though it was a big blow against the PC crowd.

 

 

[Revol]

I will always associate this thread with the mind searing image of which positions CBT does or does not pee in.

 

 

There's a metaphor in there somewhere.