Bitter Much?
“[I]f you support DC Comics, then personally, I really can’t consider you a feminist.” — Valerie D’Orazio, January 16 (link no longer available) (via Ragnell)
Yet… “If you really want these comics [starring and/or created by women] to be successful — and, in turn, convince Hollywood to make more movies starring these superheroines — then make more of an effort to support these comics. Talk them up on your blogs, and support them with your wallets. No, I’m not saying support the ones you think are “crap.” But go support Wonder Woman.” — Valerie D’Orazio, January 9 (link no longer available)
So, if we’re supposed to support comics about and by women … yet we’re not feminists if we support DC … I guess that leaves Marvel. Which has a new series coming out, Cloak and Dagger, starring a woman and written by a woman … Valerie D’Orazio. How convenient!
Update: Gail Simone discussed sexism at Marvel in August 2006 (link no longer available). So does that make D’Orazio not a feminist because she still supports the company? Or does it just point out how stupid these kinds of litmus tests are?
Update 2: Valerie responds (link no longer available) by ignoring the contradictions in her posts and playing victim once again. It seems I made her afraid! — her emphasis — to express her opinions for over a year. Why does she care what I think? (Unless, maybe, I have a point?)
Her post is, however, also a great summation of my comments on working at DC. I’m not sure what she thinks it proves, other than we both had bad experiences with some of their staff. And that, once again, my headlines get me in trouble because some people ignore the entire post following and only pay attention to the title.
(Oh, and can someone explain to me why anyone would consider receiving review copies a conflict of interest?)
3:29 pm
It’s even weirder in its full context of Marvel rules, DC drools (How feminist was the cover of this week’s Spider-Man that didn’t feature the president-elect?)
So what if you work for DC Comics, in a freelance or staff position? Is Jann Jones a feminist? Gail Simone? Nicola Scott? G. Willow Wilson? Karen Berger? Shelly Bond? Chynna Clugston…?
What was up with that whole chauvinist Minx imprint experiment…?
3:30 pm
Well, I kind of understand her perspective: she thinks that if someone tells you of terrible behavior on the part of a company, and you decry the behavior but keep supporting the company, then your fidelity to your principles may be in question.
The flaw in her position is that it assumes that the terrible behavior is unarguably terrible and we’re sure of the reason. In her particular case, I’m sure she was treated horribly, but I’m not sure it was because she was a woman; I think lots of it can be explained by corporate blindness and the usual way a business doesn’t mind grinding employees through the cogs.
3:32 pm
So if my sub list is 95% Image books, does that mean I get to stand in the hallway while the big girls shout at each other or something?
3:34 pm
I think it’s unfair to imply that her criticisms of DC are motivated by a desire to promote her own book at Marvel.
Given her unpleasant experience at DC, I’d say that seems much more likely the genesis of her dispute with them.
3:36 pm
So far, I’ve had a far better experience at DC than I’ve ever had at Tokyopop and have seen nothing even remotely sexist in my interaction with them. They’re a big company, and like you said, they have the same kind of corporate blindness that most publicly traded companies do. But they’re also realistic and tell you how it is, no fudging around the truth. Money comes first, but they still play by the rules.
But . . . I think a lot of a creator’s individual experience relies heavily on their interaction with their editor. My experience at TP improved significantly when I finally switched editors, and I’m enjoying working with DC because my editor there doesn’t make promises he can’t keep but still strives to make sure I’m getting what I need. Who’d know what I’d be saying had I a different editor. You can’t deny that some editors DO treat women different. Perhaps not in a sexist way but in an um . . . relationship way.
As for content: Both DC and Marvel have blatantly sexist content. But the majority of their demographic is 30-something-year old men and teen boys. They’re writing their fantasies, and a man’s fantasies aren’t always the reality. But neither are a woman’s fantasies always reality, either. Just look at romance novels: NO self-respecting man would act like the men in those books, but it’s how some women apparently WISH their men acted. Now nobody’s going around calling romance novels sexist, are they?
Fervently wishing right now that they’d given Minx more of a chance, though. :( I think there was still a lot of potential. Who knows when there will be decent girl superheroes written for girl teens now?
Just sayin’ . . . There needs to be a new batgirl series. Something fun and lighthearted but still dealing with serious issues. :) I’d devour that series like downing a pan of rice crispies treats. XD
3:37 pm
I’d say that for Valerie, it’s certainly a fortunate turn of events, at any rate. Especially for someone who probably thought she’d be blackballed in the industry for whistle-blowing.
I think she deserves the break, and I haven’t exactly seen her beating the “buy my book” drum, but I wouldn’t blame her if she did. If I ever write a book, I’ll promote it anywhere and everywhere I can.:)
3:39 pm
It seems to me that Valerie has taken Marvel to task before:
http://occasionalsuperheroine.blogspot.com/search/label/Tigra
And I seem to also remember the thing about the Mary Jane statue and the Heroes For Hire cover. I would imagine her Marvel series was already in the works when these issues came to the fore.
I think everyone is drinking too much hyperbolic kool-aid.
3:41 pm
“As for content: Both DC and Marvel have blatantly sexist content. But the majority of their demographic is 30-something-year old men and teen boys. They’re writing their fantasies, and a man’s fantasies aren’t always the reality.”
Um…I’m a 30-something year old man.
Why is it always assumed that we like the objectification of women in our comics? I’m not going to claim I’m an angelic, perfect reader. But I get as sick about the gender gap in comics as anyone. I think there are execs who THINK we like it, and keep putting it in there regardless of the truth.
(Caveat: I did like Empowered. Like I said, not perfect. But I found the book funny and charming, although there certainly was an emphasis on T&A in there. The charm outweighed my objections.)
3:43 pm
Valerie is a good person, Johanna is a good person, and one feminist telling another feminist how they should behave, even with good intentions, is guaranteed to end badly.
What about a retreat to neutral corners? I’m sure this is at least halfway a misunderstanding.
Just sayin’.
Gail
3:45 pm
Hey Ray,
Thanks for pointing that out. I was trying to point out that sexism exists on BOTH sides but that nobody makes a fuss when it’s sexism against men . . . not that it makes either acceptable. Personally, I don’t get why so many women read romance novels either, but I can understand why content such as this exists (because many people do still buy in to the hyper-glorified stereotypes, wishing for something they’ll never have) and that complaining about it isn’t going to change it, especially when it’s under a company that has perpetuated a certain image for the life of its business.
I don’t think the fantasy sexism will end, but I do think that if DC or Marvel can put out successful series with very different feminine images directed at an audience who wishes fare of a different sort and do an amazing job of it, then the money would speak for itself, and we’d see change. But labeling either company sexist won’t make them stop producing such content because it’s what’s currently selling. Their current model was working, has been working, and will continue to work, and considering the way the economy is going right now, I very much doubt they’ll be taking any major risks in changing their image or the diversity of their content any time soon.
3:46 pm
So I’m trying to figure out her point here…she thinks it’s wrong for feminists to call her out on not being the “right” kind of feminist, but then feels it’s justified to tell other women whether or not they’re feminist by her criteria? I feel I’m missing something really key here.
Also, I happen to think she should feel free to openly support comics by her friends if she likes them and all that, but I fail to see how professional critics receiving comps for impartial review is a conflict of interest. Again, that’s just me speaking crazy talk.
Finally, comparing people potentially disagreeing with her on their own blogs — you know, their places to soapbox much the way she keeps emphasizing repeatedly that her blog is HER safe place and should be respected as such — to being like the daily grind of mental and sexual harassment is one outstanding feat of self-victimization. It would be great if she would just openly admit she’s unable to support DC in almost any form anymore and can’t bring herself to say anything positive about them, outside of Zuda, but right now, she’s fooling no one but herself on appearing non-biased. I don’t quite get why she limits her revenge tactics to just sniping at DC and their evil dark money-grubbing conspiracies, but it’s starting to come off fairly desperate and the insider knowledge condescension is tiring. She’s in a position to do great good for the industry, and it just feels like she’s wasting it in favor of being Queen of the Internet Whom None Dare Contradict.
Fighting for womens’ rights in the industry, fighting for good comics, fighting to break the silence around certain practices…I think those are great goals. But I read her stuff nowadays and find it somehow dishonest, which undermines a lot of her arguments. I hope she finds a way through to some personal peace and clarity, otherwise it’s going to eat her up inside and derail all her good intentions. The road to hell and all that.
3:49 pm
How is reviewing review copies a conflict of interest? Film critics don’t pay to see films, theater critics don’t pay to see plays, comic book and book critics don’t pay for the comics they review.
That’s a bit different than reviewing the work of your friends and boyfriend without noting that the work you’re reviewing was created by one of your friends or boyfriend, isn’t it?
3:51 pm
Gail Simone, you write for DC comics. If one can’t read DC comics and be a feminist by D’Orazio’s logic, can one write for them and collect a check from them? Isn’t she implying that you aren’t a feminist? How exactly does that not annoy you?
3:53 pm
How on earth is a critic recieving comp copies a conflict of interest? If it is, then the vast majority of critics in every part of the entertainment industry are irreversibly compromised.
But it blatantly ISN’T a conflict of interest in our gracious host’s case, as demonstrated by the amount of negative reviews posted here that end with the words “a complimentary copy for this review was provided by the publisher”.
On the other hand, the president and spokesperson for the most high profile feminist organisation in the comics industry using that platform to publicly persue a personal vendetta against her current employer’s biggest business rival? I’d call that a conflict of interest.
As for D’Orazio’s apparent belief that she AND SHE ALONE gets to decide who is and who isn’t a feminist (seemingly based on the sole criterea of whether or not an individual helps her postively promote her public profile); and her astonishing self-righteous indignation at other people saying what they think on their own blogs, while furiously defending her right to say whatever she likes on hers; and most irritatingly of all, her constant insistance that she’s done SO MUCH to further the cause of women in comics, but *in private*, and she can’t possibly tell you what those things actually are, what do you think she is, THE PRESIDENT AND SPOKESPERSON FOR THE MOST HIGH PROFILE FEMINIST ORGANISATION IN THE COMICS INDUSTRY or something?- gah, don’t get me started.
Forget Marvel and DC, I used to be an unquestioning supporter of The Friends Of Lulu, but that’s no longer the case, and won’t be ’till they get a new president.
3:55 pm
Anun, you said, “she should feel free to openly support comics by her friends if she likes them” which I totally agree with, so long as the person mentions the relationship in the post. I like to see recommendations like that, especially if they give reasons to try it beyond “it’s my friend’s work”.
3:56 pm
Reading the comments and follow-up posts just made my brain hurt while thinking: *rowr!*hiss!*catfight* Seems like everyone’s jumping to conclusions without actually reading entire posts.
Anyway, I thought this post was about whether reading DC comics made someone anti-feminist just because they’d had sexist business practices in the past, not a personal attach. Or to take the same visual sample that Valerie used but putting it in a different perspective: Is it the coffee of the company that’s sexist or the barista who pinched your butt who happened to work for the company? Should you no longer drink double soy latte from Latte Inc. because of a few stupid employees?
People have different responses to that.
However, Johanna, I can see where the title might be misleading. Perhaps retitling it to, “Is It Hypocrisy?”, because it seems this is more a question of who is hypocritical (DC, Valerie, or the consumers?) than bitterness.
3:58 pm
That’s a much better choice, Rivkah, but I’d rather not change it at this point, given how much discussion has gone on. I made the bad decision of the title, I’ll live with the lumps.
4:00 pm
I’m confused at the idea D’Orazio gets intimidated into not stating opinions due to this blog. I might be naive on politics in the comic “blogosphere”, but I’m not sure how criticism from this blog is damaging enough to be intimidating, especially as Occasional Superheroine itself has many viewers, gets refered to a lot, etc. The criticism itself might be intimidating but that goes with the territory of posting your opinions in public, surely.
She is a good writer. She’s got a good grasp of narrative, structure, pacing, rhetoric and all that good stuff that a writer needs to get their opinion across & convince people to agree with it. Sweeping generalisations are a different issue.
4:04 pm
Charles. She states on her blog:
“I’ve endured this woman’s complaints/backhanded compliments regarding Friends of Lulu for over a year in silence. I’ve had to read about her accusing me of “conflict of interest” while she reviews her stacks and stacks of comp copies. I was so impacted by her words that I was afraid — afraid! — to support the comics of my friends and loved ones for fear that “CWR” would call me out on it.”
I’ve always disliked the word “feminist”. It means nothing other than that you support women’s issues, but for every woman, there’s a different issue to support and a different side to take and rarely do we all see eye to eye.
And where are the masculinists, dangit?
4:05 pm
She’s got a good grasp of narrative, structure, pacing, rhetoric and all that good stuff that a writer needs to get their opinion across & convince people to agree with it
Um, no she doesn’t. Do you have any idea what her opinion regarding reading DC comics and feminism is? Did she convince you share it?
4:07 pm
Oops. Just read your comment through another time, Charles, and I just realized you were criticizing that exact statement, not asking where it was.
I couldn’t agree more. Comics blogs may help people find more readers but I’ve never seen an incident where they killed a title. Usually seems that if anybody actually gangs up against a title, they end up helping sales, not hurting them.
4:09 pm
Johanna, I figured that was your stance and I agree. It goes along with the dishonest note I get from her entries at times. I think she’d be happier if she had a thicker skin and was just more upfront about why she likes or dislikes something.
4:11 pm
ha ha ha! You’re right, Rivkah, that’s the best check to a critic’s ego online.
Charles, I learned on Usenet that if you’re afraid of posting an opinion, you only need to pick one of these:
1. Reconsider how sure you are of that opinion. If you don’t want to say it in public for fear of how people will respond, is that your brain acting in self-defense? (Like they say in ethics courses, if you don’t want to see it in the newspaper, don’t make that choice.)
2. Post with enough evidence, examples, or support to avoid criticism. This is the one I try for, most of the time.
And ultimately, what’s worse? Being responded to, or being ignored?
5:12 am
“Gail Simone, you write for DC comics. If one can’t read DC comics and be a feminist by D’Orazio’s logic, can one write for them and collect a check from them? Isn’t she implying that you aren’t a feminist? How exactly does that not annoy you?”
Well, because, for one thing, it isn’t true. I don’t trot out my feminist credentials every time I receive explicit or implied criticism, but I believe them to be quite extensive in both my private and professional life. If years of volunteer work at crisis centers doesn’t count in the feminist resume, then I think we need to reconsider how such things are totted up.
When Valerie came forward with her story, I expressed support both publicly and privately, regardless of the fact that DC was the engine feeding my family, then and now. The abuse I have taken online for expressing distaste or anger for gender nonsense in comics, including for publishers I work for and otherwise admire, is considerable.
It is also unimportant. My mantra has been for years, “I can always go back to doing hair.” And I stand by that. If I had to apologize for who I worked for to that extent, I would go back to my previous career. I have quit books over ethics in the past and expect to do so again. But my DC experience has been ridiculously positive in general, and I could say the same for nearly every publisher I’ve worked for. It’s just a fact.
As for Valerie’s comment, well…
I, myself, have said a multitude of things that were either ill-considered, said in heat and regretted later, or just purely uninformed, often enough to have some sympathy for the occasional off-the-cuff snark said in haste. Some things bug me, this particular untrue charge doesn’t even register.
Even if it were aimed straight AT me (and who knows, it wouldn’t be the first time someone’s taken that shot at me), I don’t think it would change my opinion here, much. Here we have two powerful female voices, both of whom have excellent credentials as commentators and feminists. My hope and belief is that this spat between two admirable people will be brief, as many of my own little temporary scraps have been (I once spent an afternoon exchanging sippy little posts with Martin Pasko, for Pete’s sake, a writer I not only admire tremendously, but one of the most generous and kind guys I’ve met in the industry). Bullshit slides downhill, and all the linens are clean again eventually.
Even my best friends have said things I strenuously disagree with at some point. Isn’t that the case with everyone?
Hope that made some sense.
Gail
6:13 am
Speaking as one member of Johanna’s stable of reviewers, I’ve never felt compelled to write a positive review because I was given a comp copy. I hope my track record points that out.
That being said, I’m not naivete enough to believe the books sent to Johanna are a completely random selection of the company’s current catalog. I wrote a very positive review of Tail of the Moon volume 9 and since then we’ve been sent comp copies of the subsequent volumes. As Johanna said earlier, that’s just good business. A thoughtful company will study a reviewer’s taste and send what they think will appeal to him/her.
The only obligation I feel when I’m given a comp copy is to review the book. I’m trying very hard, and currently failing, to stay on top of my review stack. By whether a review is negative or positive will only be determined by my reading experience of the book. I only agree to review a book, I don’t agree to how the review will turn out.
Whether she meant it or not, I found Valerie’s statement a question of my integrity, not just as a reviewer, but as person. I also felt she questioned the integrity all reviewers and critics. Needless to say, I was offended by the remark and would appreciate a retraction.
6:59 am
“Valerie is a good person, Johanna is a good person, and one feminist telling another feminist how they should behave, even with good intentions, is guaranteed to end badly.”
Hear, hear. I personally admire a number of the people involved in this thread (Val, Johanna, Gail, Rich, Daniel) and enjoy their writing, so it’s disheartening when it gets ugly and personal. Dust-ups like this can focus discussion on issues that need attention, but it gets derailed if we instead focus on the personalities involved. You’re all intelligent, interesting people. Let’s have a discussion.
7:04 am
re conflicts of interest – I can see comp copies being a conflict if they’re undeclared and this blog gives a suspiciously high number of favourable reviews, but it does declare them and it’s often critical.
7:05 am
That’s an interesting perspective, that we spend too much time talking about books we like. I hadn’t considered that. My thoughts were that
1) there’s too much negativity out there elsewhere
2) the site title suggests recommendations
3) smacking down books few have heard of seems like being unnecessarily mean
4) I’d rather devote time (of which I never have as much as I like) to praising instead of panning
But I’ll keep in mind that some will be suspicious of that approach.
PS KC’s response to being suspiciously postive was “he obviously hasn’t read the early years of the site.” :) Seriously, when offered review copies, I do only accept those that I think I might enjoy. There’s no point in wasting anyone’s money for stuff I expect to dislike, just to get something free. And I’ll repeat my advice on how to get lots of comps: do reviews for over a decade, working constantly to improve, with a wide range of coverage and trying for a professional approach.
7:13 am
Clearly it’s in Johanna’s best interests to generate as many hits to her site as possible to ensure her comp copies and income stream remains intact. Now if those hits begin to drop then a little controversy, such as attacking others for ‘conflict of interest’, wouldn’t go astray now would it? Jeez, Johanna might be smarter than people think, she’s got a lot of people sucked in here.
Keep generating those hits, I’m sure she’s sitting back chuckling away and getting ready to show DC and Marvel a healthy lot of site traffic, none of which has anything to do her ‘reviews’.
7:15 am
Just FYI, webcomic topics get more hits than DC/Marvel coverage (which I rarely do), and manga gets more than either. What drives hits up most, though, is an active comment thread, because people keep coming back to see what new things have been said. So if you really want to disrupt my “income stream” (ha!), the best way to do it is by not participating.
7:17 am
Keep generating those hits, I’m sure she’s sitting back chuckling away and getting ready to show DC and Marvel a healthy lot of site traffic, none of which has anything to do her ‘reviews’.
Actually, Mr. Best — and far be it from me to defend such a scary, aggressive and dominant personality as Ms. Draper-Carlson is — your logic does not hold water, since you did not take into account the actual numbers of what reviews are being posted here on the site. It’s relatively easy to do, they are on the left hand side below the comment box.
Superhero Reviews: 149
Manga Reviews: 332
Indy Comics Reviews: 59
In other words, if you DO want to argue the finer point of this site being in the pocket of somebody, you should probably not use DC or Marvel as an example, since the numbers do not support such a theory.
In order to support it, the site would have to be a lot more fangirl-ish with regard to the “mainstream”.
Even Webcomics Reviews have a higher number than Superhero Reviews: 152
Now, a smart argument would have used THOSE numbers and claimed that ComicsWorthReading is in the pocket of the manga publishers in the US.
I personally think Ms. Draper-Carlson is in the pockets of Archie Comics (109)… but perhaps that is just an unhealthy fetish of hers. We all have some of those.
7:20 am
I’d re-title the entry “Hypocrite Much?”
Valerie made her name writing “Goodbye To Comics”, yet now she is head of Lulu (an organization promoting the involvement of women in comics), and also writing for Marvel.
I stopped reading her blog ages ago because of the constant bashing of DC. DC puts out some fine comics, as well as some turds. It was obvious the constant bashing was her way of getting revenge on people who had offended her in the past. That’s dishonest.
As to her fear of stating her opinions lest someone not find her likable, that is the way of people who want everyone to like them. Most people outgrow that phase when they enter adulthood.
7:21 am
To be fair, she didn’t think she was going to be working for Marvel or running Friends of Lulu when she wrote Goodbye to Comics.
7:23 am
Ouch. I’d never read “Goodbye to Comics” before and out of curiosity looked it up.
Now I really, really, really wished I hadn’t. Gross. There is such a thing as TMI. I only made it halfway through and never got to the actual point (if there ever is a point because it rambles so much).
I also fail to see how DC was the fault of her physical or mental misery. It sounds very much like she’s blaming everything on everybody else without taking any responsibility for her share of the blame as well. But blame is a two-way street.
BTW, a woman sleeping with somebody else who works in comics doesn’t mean they’re sexist unless one or the other party is doing it for personal gain. But why can’t two people be attracted to each other? Survey says that the majority of married couples in the US met at the workplace. With women becoming more common in the comics industry, there are bound to be more relationships as well. Women don’t need to be sheltered from such relationships. They just need to be taught how to handle them and to learn how to maintain a professional relationship outside of the romantic (or how to stand up for themselves and request a change in who they’re working with). But this applies to any industry . . . and it applies to men as well, because the confusion comes as much from their ends as ours. Not every man is a raging rapist, neither is everybody of either gender completely innocent.
So instead of getting defensive and yelling “sexist” and “anti-feminist!”, maybe the industry should be focusing on forward-thinking education instead. MOST people are in the dark about how to handle these kinds of romantic/professional situations. I don’t think it’s a fault of the comics industry nor confined to DC in particular.
If I missed the point of her post entirely, enlighten me. I skimmed the majority of it because her style is so stream-of-conscious-rambling I developed a headache instead, and I’m still not entirely sure what her point was.
7:26 am
Alan – Hypocrite? Really? Because she wrote Goodbye to Comics? Dishonest? Because she criticizes DC?
Unfair. If she does have a bias against DC comics, well, Goodbye kinda lays that right out for ya, doesn’t it?
Or, is it possible that she has more to say about DC than Marvel because she reads more DC books?
Maybe we can keep the personal attacks on Valerie out of the discussion for a change.
This is an actual person we’re talking about here, who may very well read these comments. And correct me if I’m wrong, but you don’t know her, do you?
And Rivkah? Your post is disappointing. Just…you did miss the point, that much I agree with.
7:27 am
caleb, one can buy DC comcis without going on message boards and saying “DC Comics are tops. What they are doing for women is wonderful”.
That she encouraged people to buy Wonder Woman, is evidence enough that your interpretation was incorrect.
7:29 am
Kristina. I would like it if you informed me what the point was. I’m merely stating the overall impression of someone who’s never heard of this person before and doesn’t have the time to nitpick through the details of a hundred-page collection of posts. I guess I get irritated with bloggists/journalists who sacrifice the clarity of their immediate point for the sake of sensationalist writing. Yellow journalism is the correct term, I believe? Because I put my brain through that wringer for an hour and still didn’t come out with any coherent thread or thought other than one gruesome instance that gets drawn out through a number or excruciatingly long journal entries.
And I made a perfect score on the reading portion of my SATs, so it’s not like I suffer in reading comprehension. Perhaps just patience. But if I truly wanted somebody’s life story, I’d buy a book. The internet was never intended for patient people.
7:31 am
caleb, one can buy DC comcis without going on message boards and saying “DC Comics are tops. What they are doing for women is wonderful”.
That she encouraged people to buy Wonder Woman, is evidence enough that your interpretation was incorrect
Heh. Okay. Personally, I don’t think “good” writing should require all that much evidence and interpretation, particularly by a third party arguing on behalf of the writer to the readers, to clear up a point.
So you’re saying she’s saying it’s okay to go to the coffee shop and buy the cappuccino, but not talk up the fact that you buy that cappuccino from that coffee shop?
Sorry, but that doesn’t make very much sense to me. Besides, I’m sure DC would rather have readers’ money then their vocal support on message boards.
7:32 am
Interesting. Personally, I’m beginning to wonder why my pointing out a contradiction in her posts got labeled a catfight, while a guy practically calling for her to be ousted from Friends of Lulu because of this contradiction got his point taken more seriously.
Yes, yes, it must be the headline, I know, I’m working on that skill!
7:35 am
Rivkah. I think the point of the story was just to relate the author’s experiences. The intentions behind it, I couldn’t say.
Possibly she felt others might identify with some of what happened, and it might alleviate shame or stigma in some small way.
Unlike clever commentary like “gross” “TMI” and “scrubs brain with soap”.
Hell, maybe it was just cathartic for her. That’s fine, too.
I hardly think it rates as “yellow journalism” to recount the events of one’s own life. If you found it too graphic, well, I just can’t imagine why, honestly. I’d have to go back and re-read it line by line to be absolutely certain, but if I recall correctly, the most graphic language used was the word “vagina”. If that’s offensive to you, well, that’s another issue altogether, isn’t it?
Look, it wasn’t your cup of tea, I get that. I just feel like the harsh, and yes, juvenile, tone of your post was uncalled for.
Oh, and congrats on your reading score.
7:37 am
Because you’re both girls, Johanna. Everybody knows that. *tilts head ditzily while fluttering eyelashes coyly* (if somebody didn’t just get the sarcasm there, I WILL punch you.)
I have to say, however . . . that in spite of the territorial hissing of everybody defending their favorites, I’ve been seriously entertained. I really, really try not to read “he said, she said” posts, but it was just like a whirlwind sucking me in. I couldn’t seem to escape. I’m certain there’s some bizarre psychology behind all this.
7:39 am
a guy practically calling for her to be ousted from Friends of Lulu
Who was that? Also, I haven’t seen anything about this on any other blogs or news sites (yet)- who’s calling it a “catfight?”.
(I’m in the middle of a run of nights at work at the moment, and doing most of my surfing here- where blogger, livejournal and wordpress are all blocked, so my web-browsing is sorely limited; which may be why I’ve missed any repercussions. I entirely understand if you don’t want to add feul to the sensationalist fire and thus choose not to tell me where to look, of course)
7:42 am
http://everydayislikewednesday.blogspot.com/2009/01/ladies-and-gentleman-president-of.html
And Rivkah’s the most recent one I saw who referred to kitties, although I trust she meant better than some others. :)
7:44 am
Yeah Johanna, but that guy whose article you linked to? He doesn’t know what he’s talking about, so no one cares.
Honestly, I don’t personally care who leads Friends of Lulu, I just think it’s weird that their president pretty much regularly does the exact opposite of what the group’s supposed to be about.
Like, writing off one of the industry leaders (if by “industry” we mean “direct market”) and all people who read them as anti-woman doesn’t seem to advance the cause of Friends of Lulu.
And since her role is to speak on behalf of women in comics, she bears paying attention to, especially when she’d advocating for/against things on the basis of how pro-/anti-women they are. If she were just an ex DC editor or a future Marvel writer or just a person with a web connection, she’d be easier to ignore…and certainly not worth engaging.
But when the President of Freinds of Lulu measures feminism by what comics publisher you read, when she comes out and says you, reader, are no feminist until you quit reading this company’s product…well, that sure boggles MY mind. (Ditto the president of Friends of Lulu getting into these “Johanna said what?! That woman is awful! When Fangirls Attack said what? That organization is awful!! types of things.)
She can call me names and it doens’t much matter, because I’m a male and therefore not someone she supposedly speaks for.
7:49 am
Kristina Hubert said to me:
“And correct me if I’m wrong, but you don’t know her, do you?”
There is a major logical fallacy in your statement, Kristina, in that you suggest I can’t comment on Valerie because I don’t know her. Under such logic, only her friends who have met her (and perhaps a couple enemies) would be allowed to comment about her. This would rule out just about everybody else on the internet, and thus nullifying the purpose of the internet, communication with people from around the world.
7:51 am
There is a major logical fallacy in your statement, Kristina, in that you suggest I can’t comment on Valerie because I don’t know her. Under such logic, only her friends who have met her (and perhaps a couple enemies) would be allowed to comment about her. This would rule out just about everybody else on the internet, and thus nullifying the purpose of the internet, communication with people from around the world.
There’s a difference between commenting on something she said, and attacking her. Some of the things you said? I would have taken personally.
I don’t claim that I’ve never made a personal attack on anyone online, but I try very hard not to say anything I wouldn’t say to someone’s face. It’s easy to forget that actual people, with feelings, read these words. That was my point.
7:54 am
caleb. One can buy fair trade coffee from a coffee shop while also condemning that coffee shop’s policies on its other coffees.
7:56 am
caleb. One can buy fair trade coffee from a coffee shop while also condemning that coffee shop’s policies on its other coffees.
Sure they can. Perhaps that’s what she meant. That certainly makes more sense than Valerie D’Orazio saying something stupid out of emotion to a commenter on her blog and then, rather than clarifying or correcting it, making a post about what a big meanie Johanna Draper Carlson is, and then hoping someone like you will find a way to make the mistake sound less stupid and defend the stupid thing she accidentally said.
3:57 pm
Nobody wins an argument on the internet. The entire internet loses. Rise above. It’s not easy, but it’s better than needing to medicate for blood pressure.
This is a bit tangental, but aren’t we long past the time when Marvel and D.C. were the the mainstream comics industry? Forbes and Washington Post did best G.N. lists for 2017, and most of them were not superheroes. Other stuff has definitely reached the plane of popular culture.
I really hope so.