As to freebies, movie critics see their films for free, restaurant critics don’t. It can be an issue though.

Yeah, but it isn’t as if the writer and artist have the chance to fix the critic’s copy of the book up much nicer than the copies everyone else is getting. The comp copies I’ve received physically can often be treated rather roughly.

You’re really stretching to make the support thing out to be drilled down to very specific items. Once the message board posting saying DC is tops was readily dismissed, we got to the free trade coffee premise…which doesn’t even work. That establishment still gets a profit off of the sale. You’d buy your free trade some place you didn’t mind getting your dime.

Not supporting a company isn’t a small focus thing. I had a debate with a member of WashTech (a technical support union) where she tried to justify shopping at Wal-Mart (the most egregious violator of a working person’s labor rights) by saying it was the only way she could afford to buy her family steaks. My response? If you can’t afford to buy steaks from a decent company, you don’t need to be eating steak.

Johanna: I’m glad to contribute to your income stream by bumping the comment thread. ;)

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.

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.

And if this was a war of words between guys, somebody would say now, and heck, it might just as well be me (for I like to be the cause for another spit-take):

“Take it out, so we can measure it and move on” :-)

“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.

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.

And Rivkah’s the most recent one I saw who referred to kitties, although I trust she meant better than some others. :)

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)

Because the prospect of college was just $80,000 too expensive. Especially for a freakin’ art degree. I mean . . . who makes that kind of money in ART? Unless you’re dead, of course. -_-;

BTW: I appreciate you clarifying your views. It wasn’t the language I found offensive so much as the content. I believe in speaking frankly about personal issues (heck, I do it all the time), but it was told in a style I am not personally comfortable with, preferring instead the quick, straightforward facts, not the roundabout. However, as a form of catharsis, I can understand. I wish that she would put a warning on the front of her posts, however, stating that there’s some graphic content that some may find objectionable within. Some of the language is enough to get more than a few people banned at work.

I’m perfectly comfortable with my sexuality (and have had my own somewhat gruesome tales to tell, though I never stretched them out over multiple posts or centered a metaphorical theme around them), but I at least always put them behind a cut and warn my readers beforehand that there’s mature content. On the internet, you never know who’s reading, so I try to assume at least a PG-13 rating for the casual browser.

It’s a common courtesy I think most people appreciate.

Thanks! Even if it that was sarcasm. :D

Or course, I skipped college, so fat load of good that did. ;)

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.

Yes, yes, it must be the headline, I know, I’m working on that skill!

For a much healthier discussion about feminism (which I feel was the actual, overlooked point of this post), I just posted an entry plus feedback from readers here: http://lilrivkah.livejournal.com/265587.html

“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?”

I thought that she’s not a bloggist/journalist in the first place and instead her blog’s one of the many that aren’t journalism. Likewise, Bloggus Caesari and I Can Has Cheezburger? and Media Notes are really blogs. After all, they’re really websites with new entries appearing in sequence as they are written and uploaded – web logs, or blogs for short. Since all three of them are blogs, does that make all three of them really journalism too?