The Privilege We Don't Talk About

These days, everyone likes to talk about race, gender, sexuality, and sometimes religion, if it's the right religion. Entire worldviews and ideologies exist around these factors, and people build their entire identities around the circumstances of their birth. Circumstances that are built entirely on chance and often do play a part in the way your life plays out, but these very self-same people generally tend to ignore the elephant in the room.

The very well-off, well dressed, upper-class elephant.

The elephant with multiple degrees, a trust fund, and paid speaking positions.

The elephant that makes daily stops at Starbucks to micro-blog on their Macbook Air about injustice.

Maybe it's just the reformed Marxist in me, but nothing irritates me more than seeing someone who genuinely, in their heart of hearts, feels that they're a victim of the world lecturing someone in a rougher place than they are. I can't help but feel that regardless of race, gender, whatever factor, that someone who has just stepped off the stage of the Sydney Opera House from a lecture where they earned enough to buy one or two reliable used cars shouldn't be lecturing someone in rural Appalachia regarding their place of power in the socioeconomic structure of systems.

So let's talk about Roxanne Gay. Who, according to her twitter feed 24 hours ago, will be lecturing at Missouri State University. Who, according to her twitter feed 15 hours ago, complained about a $400 suitcase that can charge her iPhone and weigh itself, just doesn't work. For comparison, last time I flew anywhere, my company paid for it, and I had just my carry-on in a $20 bag I bought from Target. But I don't want to weigh myself, who debated going to the doctor last week for a stomach ache that I thought might be my appendix (it wasn't - don't eat gluten-free pizza) against someone who has had her own TED talk. I want to talk about perspective.

Fight.. the.. system? 

Screencap for convenience. Link for veracity. The person behind the counter at McDonalds is making, in about six months, what you make for a speaking appearance, I'd wager. If not less. This person who asked you "boy or girl" might have a boy or girl of their own, who they're worried they won't be able to feed, and are just hoping the glint in your eye doesn't mean you're about to ask for the manager. This person that you're explaining how damaging enforcing the gender binary to doesn't even have an ounce of power or privilege that you have, where you can go on a national speaking stage and explain your ideas to modest crowds of people. She can't even take the words that you've spoken to her, verbatim, to her manager and have him pass it up the chain. because it won't matter. "Girl or boy" isn't something that the counter employees at McDonalds have any influence at all over. At best, all you've done is waste her time. At worst, you've impacted her productivity and inconvenienced the people behind you in line, and that's not going to cost you anything. 

Fortunately, there's a little bit of a silver lining to this story. After publicly and proudly tweeting (again, on a public platform), she was quite handily told how completely out of touch and lacking perspective she was, and did her best at apologizing. Of course, between the initial tweet and the 'apology' were quite vitriolic statements thrown at people who were being everything from supportive but critical to straight-up assholes, but progress is progress.

But this is the crux of what bothers me about identity ideologies: They're mainly made up of people who make a living out of them. I'm not paid to write these posts; I write them because these are things that I enjoy or things that I feel. I don't have a trust fund; I have a real life job somewhere that I don't mention that takes up entirely too many hours of my week to pay my bills so that I can keep myself distracted with video games or action figures, and I'm thankful that I have a job. Some people don't.

And some people have a job they hate, that pays them sweet fuck-all, and still have to deal with people who have no sense of perspective or empathy for someone that's struggling because they don't look like them or think like them. 

The Salt Mines of Valhalla

I lost my old picture again

It's Thorsday, and you know what that means!

I've written previously about the female Thor situation, in less than complimentary terms. I've outlined valid reasons for not liking this change that extend much further than certain sources who'd have you believe those complaints are simply 'hur durr woman bad bring back manly man.' Today, I'd bring you an example of just how effective it is to make a change like that, and what happens when you release one, just one, issue that doesn't fall into line with what the people who laud you for your poor decision.

Behold, The Mary Sue (archived for your protection): Crusaders of truly the highest calibre, and an honourable website to boot. They obviously genuinely care about the stories and not the naughty bits of the characters in the story.

Tying in with the Secret Wars event, series writer Jason Aaron returns with Thor #1 – a story meant to continue the threads of new!Thor’s heroic journey, but one that fails to be remotely as empowering as her solo series.

Because obviously, stories are only meant to empower characters, not to test them, not to challenge them, or not to *gasp* tell stories about them? 

So let’s just address the most pressing concern of that recap: Jason Aaron decided to follow up the empowering story of Jane Foster becoming Thor and finding her place in both Asgardian and human society with a story that features her being murdered – repeatedly.

No, I think you missed something, TMS. The Jane Foster that because Thor isn't in this story. It doesn't feature her being murdered. You said not a paragraph earlier that it was multiple reality versions of her. 

At no point in this issue do we learn anything about any of these women as characters, about their lived experiences or their perspectives on these brutal crimes. Our empathy is never encouraged by the narrative to align with them.

I remember in Edge of Spider-Verse where all the Spidermen of multiple realities were being brutally slaughtered -- on-panel, mind you -- by a multiversal fox-hunting party of ancient immortals. I'm so glad we got to learn about the hopes, the dreams, the very essence of those Spider-men. No? Oh, and all the Spider-women: Mayday Parker, Ultimate's Jessica Drew, Gwen Stacy, Silk, and (inexplicably, as she's not even a proper Spiderverse character) 616 Spider-woman all suffered losses on their side of the gender divide too, right? No? Oh..

Instead, the focus surrounds the Ultimate-Thor, Thorlief (a coconut for anyone who can crack the naming conventions going on here), and his determination to solve this crime for pretty self-involved/white knight reasoning.

I've been told only misogynists use the term white-knight. You're not a misogynist, TMS, are you?

At this stage of cultural saturation they’re just normalized, and so audiences have grown numbs to the shock of gratuitous female mutilation and excessive male violence dressed up as redemptive justice.

Yeah, it's a good thing men are never blown up, shot, stabbed, mutilated, or otherwise brutally murdered in comics.

Aaron’s use of this particular trope in such an unimaginative and predictable fashion is precisely what makes it so damaging: stripping Jane Foster of her legacy as a brave and meaningful character

...who is letting cancer kill her because she thinks Asgardian science is too magicky.

Imagine if it was Jane Foster having to investigate a series of her own murders? Not only would that reassert her agency, but it would also offer opportunities for a more interesting detective-victim connection because, hey, they’re all the same person.

That actually would be a better story. Too bad she's off doing something *awesome* like fighting in the Secret War thingie that's going on. We could have had her in a b-list miniseries instead of Ultimate Thor, who no one's cared about since like 2004.

There were other ways to tell this story without taking feminism out into the woods and cracking it over the head with a shovel.

Readers, I was torn between "[EXISTENTIAL SIGH]" and "Actually, it's about ethics in shovel-wielding" here, so have both.

Not only does [Storm] suffer verbal abuse from an older Thor (‘drunken and grizzled detective who doesn’t play by the rules!’) who argues she should be facially branded to remind everyone she’s a mutant, but also has to put up with Thorlief hitting on her while at work?

Hey, at least he's not selling her to rub his hammer because it'll grow like the Thor of myth and legend would. Progress!

She’s also dressed in a shoe-string swimming costume outfit with a headdress that looks like a Thanksgiving turkey at Coachella, it’s all very bad.

Which managed to a) still cover more than her most popular recent outfit and b) look like an homage to old-school Jack Kirby Thor comics. Also, you dropped this - she's wearing practically the same headgear as everyone else.

I think she looks kind of awesome. Also, really no love for Mjolnir-wielding Storm? Really? 

Just imagine discovering and loving an empowering, resilient determined hero like Jane Foster as Thor, only to then see her be brutally murdered and replaced with (for all intents and purposes to new readers) the ‘original’ Thor again. While the Jane Foster that readers have followed in Thor is alive in Secret Wars (following the events of the main series), how on earth are people that only want to read her adventures supposed to know that?

She hasn't been replaced. This isn't even the same book. She's off fighting in the Secret Wars (which is a *main* titles, and this is a mini-series. And they could probably find out by looking at the cover. Which, given that comic shops usually sort titles by publisher and title name alphabetically, would probably be at most 2 slots over on the shelf.

We’ve got our safe spaces, Marvel; but why is the rest of your world still so dangerous?

SAFE SPACES FOR EVERYBODY!!

But seriously, though. This is an even clearer example of why you never apologize than when I discussed Shut Up Wesley Wheaton. You can create the most perfect example of something that they'll rally behind, but make one single issue that isn't in lockstep and you'll be dragged under like a pack of hungry wolves are at your heels. Make something, write something, film something, code something... but stop trying to please people that will turn on you the moment they smell blood. 

An Open Letter regarding #ChangeTheCover

As of the time this is published, indeed as of the time that I write this, I already know it's too late. The artist of the cover to Batgirl #41, under pressure from a mob of neo-Puritanical zealots, has requested that DC not use his artwork for Batgirl #41. I no longer have a dog in this fight, but I refuse to give up completely.

To Mr. Rafael Albuquerque: your cover was fantastic. It upset some people, and that's okay. It was supposed to. It was art, and art is often upsetting. And pleasing. And evocative, scary, titillating. And inspiring. And when it comes to Batgirl, it was inspiring.

Not because, as some complete numpties have suggested, because I as the reader was supposed to identify with the Joker and feel a sense of power over Batgirl. That's, pardon me, fucking ridiculous. How the hell do you seriously suggest that someone identifies with Joker? There's not just something wrong with Joker, there's very nearly nothing right with Joker. Another few mis-wired neurons, and the man would probably not be able to sit up straight or feed himself. Anyone who thinks that the audience is supposed to identify with Joker has something seriously wrong with themselves. And I welcome any accusations of ableism that statement brings.

No, Mr. Rafael Albuquerque, it inspired me because I knew by the end of the story, Barbara would overcome the fear shown in her eyes, and being the character I identify with in the book (that's right, neo-Puritanical zealots, a cis-het-white-dude can identify with a formerly disabled woman) that inspires me. I've had some really dark, really low points in my life, and it was around then that I picked up Birds of Prey for the first time. I'd had no idea what had happened to Barbara Gordon since the tragic events of The Killing Joke, but what I saw was amazing, and I fell in love with the character ever since. A lesser person would have allowed themselves to be relegated to the background, but not Barbara Gordon. She became even more indispensable to the DCU than ever. Seeing her on that cover, I knew she'd overcome her greatest fear: Joker and a gun. Because that's what Barbara Fucking Gordon does.

It's a human character that has one great, paralyzing fear. No pun intended.

I am shamed that you may have received threats and harassment over your commissioned artwork by the comics fans (the official word is you didn't, but I was watching the hashtag. I know what I saw), but I also feel that you're apologizing to the wrong people. I really don't believe it's the actual fans of Batgirl that are giving you grief over this. You had nothing to apologize for.

To Cameron Stewart: You didn't so much throw Rafael under the bus as you drove said bus yourself. And then backed up over him.And then drove for 17 blocks with him stuck to the undercarriage of the bus. Nice job.

Which leads me to DC: You've capitulated to the formless cacophony of people that not only weren't going to buy your product in the first place, but would likely have found something “problematic” with whatever you put out, even if it were a relaunch of Archie Comics where Betty and Veronica realize they don't need Archie, form a relationship with each other, then set out to smash the Patriarchal culture that Jughead reinforces.

I had empathy for you, though, up until now. It hasn't been easy, I know, watching Marvel drag itself out of the financial collapse, dust itself off, and become an entertainment powerhouse whilst simultaneously playing a long game at easing into diversity in a natural way. And you were catching up. It wasn't as fluid or as smooth as Marvel's changes, but it was there. When they stumbled with Thora (a blatantly unlikeable character that's only been positively received among those whose ideology is being blatantly pandered to). But following up Gail Simone's powerhouse writing with cheap-webcomic art and a writer that openly referred to the title as “sjw”? I'm not sorry anymore that it's resulted in accusations of transphobia and reinforcing rape culture.

By editorial mandate, you have undone years of hard work on a character that is very personal to me, and that's a bed I'm content to let you lie in. I was prepared to sit out Cameron Stewart's run and check back in when a new creative team took the lead, but since buckling to #changethecover, I no longer have faith in the creative direction that could possibly be taken. Any risk in storytelling will, going forward, be measured against the possible social media backlash by people that feel no connection to the character or her stories and wouldn't have purchased the final product anyway.

DC, my trust is broken. I'll go back and read through Birds of Prey again. I'll read Gail Simone's run on Batgirl again. I'll go back and read Batgirl: Year One, and even the Cassie Cain and Stephanie Brown stories where Barbara is mentoring them. I'll even go rewatch that painful Birds of Prey TV series for Dina Meyer's excellent Babs, but I'm scared to come back to you now, as it's clear you're not writing for the fans. I'll leave you to your drunk party girl Batgirl and smiley selfie covers. I hear there's a great writer doing some good stuff over at Dynamite with Red Sonja in the meantime.

As for the rest of you: In response to "just how wrong Barbara's tears are", compare that cover to this video. This is probably the most messed up thing I've seen in Batcanon. (Spoilers for Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker)

In conclusion:  The Joker is a messed-up individual. He does things to hurt people to get at other people. Barbara is not alone in this. Tim Drake and Jason Todd were both victimized to hurt Batman.

Morales vs Thor: A Study in Contrast

Pardon me while I plug in my waffle iron once again. This really should be the last time that have to bring up female Thor.

In fixing my poor education on the subject of Peter Parker, I've recently read through the last half of his Ultimate Spider-Man run, into the second volume that culminates in the death of Peter Parker and the rebirth of the character of Spider-Man as Miles Morales. It's something that echoes and contrasts nicely the difference in the handling between Miles Morales and the mystery female Thor.

The main contrast between these two situations is the respect in which the handover from seasoned hero to rookie newcomer is handled. In Spider-Man's case, there was an epic six-issue final battle in which Normon Osborn, as a hulked-out Green Goblin, escapes SHIELD custody, springing some of Spidey's biggest and baddest adversaries in the process and begins a hunt that ends at Aunt May's house. Spidey, Human Torch, and Iceman face off against Goblin, Vulture, Electro, Sandman, and Kraven. Parker is particularly heroic, having just survived being shot through the torso taking a bullet that was meant for Captain America, as he webs himself shut and drags himself to the battle, before crushing Goblin with a truck. Aunt May even gets a shining moment of awesome as she shoots Electro down with her own revolver. And in the end, Parker is given a magnificently noble send-off, in which a young boy is standing in the crowd watching as the life slips away from him, and he finally makes peace with being unable to save his Uncle Ben. A young boy named Miles Morales.

Morales's uncle is the Ultimate universe version of The Prowler, a professional burglar (that bears an uncomfortable resemblance to Deadpool) who does a job on Oscorp labs only to unwittingly provide a ride to an enhanced spider that ends up biting his nephew. The first 10 or so issues, as far as I've read, of Morales has him treating Peter Parker's legacy with awe and reverence, and rightly so. He's a young kid, younger even than Parker was, coming from a different background and a different life experience. His Uncle Ben moment comes when, after discovering his powers, he gets to the scene of the final battle too late, and blames himself for Parker dying. His appearances are initially met with hostility, then slow acceptance, particularly with Jessica Drew, Parker's female clone and Spider-Woman of the Marvel Ultimate universe. Morales has a natural and believable amount of self-doubt for someone of his age. A palpable sense of “Who am I to take Spider-Man's place?”

Pictured: The Absorbing Strawman

Pictured: Character Assassination
on a female villain.

The new Thor... does not take this approach.
Contrasting between
Morales and Thor, one subject is treated with a great deal of respect, where the other is not. Where Parker got a hero's death, and a supporting cast that transfers into the new character's life to both keep him grounded and teach him how to be Spider-Man, Thor gets none of these benefits. Where Morales is both well-established and likeable, the new Thor is flippant (in her own mind) and arrogant (in addressing other characters). Morales's book shows minority characters interacting naturally with one another as well as established characters while Thor's book turns a pair of established villains into a strawman anti-feminist critic and a pushover girl-power cheerleader. We get to know Morales as a human being and as a budding hero, where Thor just plops a stranger in front of us and says “We're not going to tell you who this is, but you're going to like her whether you like it or not!”

And finally, Parker is treated with respect. Given a hero's death and a lasting legacy. Thor is turned into a drunken layabout with a deified case of depression. Ultimate Spider-Man is how you go about replacing a hero. Thor is how you go about disrespecting your own property and alienating fans for clickbait attention.