![1465079566628[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/5XmnOaG.jpg "1465079566628[1].jpg")
>/co/ will defend this
>>83495919
I'd feel different about this if it were DC or all 5 of those guys were actual heroes and not just people with superpowers who beat up other people with superpowers
Even if you want to argue about the last panel, I'm not sure why the others had to be changed. Why would it be easier to get skin cancer instead of spider bites, and how would she make that happen as a grade school kid? And I liked the Oscorp bit.
But really, I don't get the fuss. Comics have a long history of being socially progressive, and often in rather hamfisted ways. It isn't a new thing. I'd rather have that than more reboots and grimdark nonsense.
>>83495919
So did she try to grow a dick or what?
>>83496007
You'll be fine.
>>83496286
I don't have a problem with socially progressive comics, but the strip in OP is straight up retarded and factually wrong. Marvel has plenty of female heros
>>83495919
Of course. /co/ is die hard marvel cucks.
>>83495919
Oh no /co/ certainly won't. That issue was fucking shit and actually tried to get the audience to sympathize with a remorseless fucking murder who was feeling angsty. I almost feel like Bendis could have written a better issue (at least the Bendis speak would have distracted from the awful plot).
>>83495919
What's the problem with it?
>>83495919
You should post the next ones, where it says that women are horribly oppressed because men find tampons icky.
>>83495919
>As soon as I get paid as much as your father.
But you do.
>>83496286
>Comics have a long history of being socially progressive, and often in rather hamfisted ways.
That's actually my problem. Comics have always been a predominate liberal medium, it's one that has always been open to diversity, so why do these current writer and article authors just so clumsily feel the need to insert this weird kinda of narrative that's all just white guys swinging their cocks around.
>>83496501
This. I'm so sick of /co/'s hate-boner for DC and blatant Marvel bias. For once I'd like to have a DC thread without Marvel shills shitting it up. The only "flaw" that DC's ever had was making comics for patricians and true fans instead of braindead "general audiences" and casuals.
>>83495919
What bothers me the most about this is that not only is her lifestyle choices a cocktail for cancer that apparently by her teenage years she hasn't realized that X-ray radiation doesn't grant superpowers, even in the context of the Marvel Universe.
>>83495919
>As soon as I get paid as much as your father
Well Mrs. Morse, maybe you should work as hard as he does.
>>83495919
>Women heroes are inferior to men
>Taking shortcuts won't work, not because it's the wrong way to go about things, but because muh patriarchy
This has to be satire.
This is such a damaging message for young girls.
>Don't try to better yourself! Become a professional victim like Mockingbird! Even if you're wealthy, able-bodied, white, educated, American, and managed to secure a position in your dream field, you're still owed sympathy and handouts by society, so long as you have a vagina! Remember ladies, you can't amount to anything on your own, so make sure you demand handicaps be put in place to tip the scale in your favor whenever possible!
>>83497240
To have a relatable universe, and to be able to do any kind of social commentary, you have to take some liberties and tell that story as if the in-universe society reflects the real world, and starts from some kind of similar place. Can you really imagine how comics would look if every golden age diversity lesson had turned comics into some kind of permanent social utopia?
Besides, she's talking about her in-universe childhood heroes. These guys could have stood out to her for some kind of personal reasons, or they could have been more famous or recognizable in-universe. The comic history is being used to tell a story about society, not about comics history.
I'm playing devil's advocate here, but I really don't see how or why we would pretend that comics trying to be progressive would mean that they should have only done it once and then we should pretend that the issue had been fixed and never deal with it again.
>>83497107
It's been illegal to discriminate pay based on gender for 50 years. If the pay imbalance was so noticeable there would be a bunch of lawsuits over it
But there aren't any. I know because it would get screamed to high heaven if one was ever brought up
>>83499080
It's the leftist ideology
Nobody has agency except straight cis white males. Everyone else is discriminated against and therefore, why bother trying when the MAN is just going to keep you down anyway?
Look to the government to help you, poor disenfranchised minority (still not sure why being a woman counts as a minority but whatever)
>>83495919
>As soon as i get payed as much as your father
Maybe she should work harder
>>83499080
But that's not the message. The message was that she felt like this at one point, as many people do, but went on to do it anyway.
>>83499785
We're going off on a big tangent at this point, but honestly, that's just silly. That's both anecdotal and inductive. There's plenty of empirical, measurable data on the subject. You're just assuming that because you haven't heard about it, or people don't often get caught doing it, that it can't and doesn't happen.
Even accepting your reasoning, you're not thinking about the difficulty in actually acting on those issues. The individual people harmed by those incidents typically don't have the knowledge that it's going on, without knowing what other people make. Even when they can find that out, they have to do so when the decision by the company - not the paycheck or the job - is within the statue of limitations, so they not only have to know and prove a pay difference, but prove that the company decision on that different pay had been made within that time. Data shows issues big picture, but it's extremely difficult to catch and act on that on an individual basis.
>>83495919
Wait, isn't she around Spidey's age?
>>83495919
>/co/ will endlessly bitch about this
FTFYF
>>83500482
I thought she was Clints age
>>83500457
If it could be empirically proven someone would launch a lawsuit at the companies doing it and the current political climate would lead to every news outlet in America writing a story about it.
But it can't be so that doesn't happen.
Don't worry, I'm certain the new Ministry of Equal Pay will send inquisition teams of women to businesses demanding they justify the pay grade of all the women they employ under penalty of fines and bad press.
>>83500482
That might actually be the most confusing part. If anything, I'd think she was slightly older, so I wouldn't really get how Spiderman had been a childhood influence.
But that kind of goes back to how you have to take liberties with the in-universe history and relatability.
>>83500457
Not the person you're replying to.
>That's both anecdotal and inductive.
I actually did some research on this for a paper for college and wasn't able to find a single reference to any pay discrimination court case in the US that wasn't decades old. If you have any sources to prove otherwise please show us.
Also, a perspective that usually isn't tackled: there's decent data showing us that a pay gap may exist due to womens choice for careers that pay less or job positions that demand less workload. I'm pretty convinced that, if a pay gap exists, it's due to behavioral differences between the genders rather than institutionalized sexism.
>>83500751
Complaints have to start through the EEOC, which introduces some issues because they're slow and the statute of limitations doesn't stop. It's also their imperative to reach a settlement - the fact that there aren't many issues that reach the point of being lawsuits doesn't mean that violations don't occur. Even if you could start by filing suit, most are settled instead of ever going to court. If you want one example: http://www.tampabay.com/news/tampa-woman-wins-lawsuit-against-citicorp-for-pay-discrimination/1225359
A lot of the data on the subject makes a point out of the caveat that it's based on men and women working in the same positions. The idea of different careers and fields is something that certainly gets considered.
>>83499822
>It's the leftist ideology
>Nobody has agency except straight cis white males
So... Taken to its logical extreme, the attitudes today's progressives are actually going to foster in the next generation will leave straight white men believing that they're all powerful and everyone else feeling utterly helpless at their hands?
>>83500457
>But that's not the message. The message was that she felt like this at one point, as many people do, but went on to do it anyway.
>"Surprise! Things are still terrible if you're a woman." says the wealthy super-spy, studying hard in her underwater getaway house
I could understand if the message was "I was told I wouldn't be as tough as Captain America, but I worked hard and now look at me" or "I used to think only men could be superheroes, but there's lots of important ladies out there too and now I'm one of em" or something like that, but she's literally saying "I tried taking a bunch of short cuts and none of them worked, clearly it's the patriachy's fault, even though I've since accomplished my dream, life is terrible if you don't have a penis".
It just makes her come off as a miserable shit who's blind to her own accomplishments and privileges, content to revel in being a victim rather than leading by example and becoming the strong, independent female hero she wants to see in the world.
So basically, they turned Mockingbird into your garden-variety gender studies major.
>>83501488
Basically.
We're raising our little girls to be professional victims who demand society bend to favor them rather than independent humans who will work hard to get where they want to be.
We're telling girls that the way to see more women in STEM fields is to become a Gender Studies Major who tries to change the STEM field, rather than telling them to just pursue a career in a STEM field and work hard.
We're cultivating experts on why starving to death sucks rather than experts on farming and sustaining food supplies.
Things will even out once large chunks of this generation amount to exactly nothing and people realize how asinine this approach is.
>>83499325
>you have to take some liberties and tell that story as if the in-universe society reflects the real world, and starts from some kind of similar place.
See, there's taking liberties and then there's blatantly disregarding decades of canon in which this comic does, and there are better ways to go about this then to attack the issue with the erroneous subtly of a GI Joe PSA. Like you could maybe try using metaphoric allusion to reflect the issues of the world *cough*liketheydidwithXmeninthe70's*cough*. My biggest problem is just how obnoxious the current way is. It's like I bet any kind of money that if Wyatt Wingfoot was introduced today as opposed to the 60's, instead of being the charming, all American, Native American he is, he'd always been wearing traditional Native American garb, he be antagonistic to every white MAN he see, and he'd probably offhandily go muh land every other issue. It just so heavy handed these days.
>The comic history is being used to tell a story about society,
What story? That everything sucks for women and men get everything because "DUDE BALLS LMAO" fuck off with that story, because it's bullshit.
>but I really don't see how or why we would pretend that comics trying to be progressive would mean that they should have only done it once and then we should pretend that the issue had been fixed and never deal with it again.
but they haven't done it once, they've been doing it consistently since the 50's.
So why exactly does she hate Janet?
