How to use this Page

Ok, whose pitbull has been messing around with my chickens?

So that’s why there are never any people swimming in the water at the Hamptons! And property values there, falling. Little wonder..

It’s the Hell Hound of Gozer!

Poking around a little bit, some people seem to think it’s viral marketing for the Cartoon Network site “Cryptids Are Real,” which is promotion for their upcoming show “The Secret Saturdays,” created by cartoonist Jay Stephens!

Here’s the website: http://www.cryptidsarereal.com/

Secret Saturdays is a project involving comic dude Jay Stephens. There was a preview of Secret Saturdays in one DC’s CN comics (Action Pack, I think)… it might still be one the stands now. The design looks like it owes a lot to the HB cartoons of the 60’s with a lot of Alex Toth-influenced designs. I picked it up for my kids and it made me think: “This is what would happen if those monsters on Scooby-Doo were real. There’d be a team like this going after them!”

P.S. - I’m not working for them. Although I probably should.

This is copied straight from gawker, and makes a little more sense to me then weird viral marketing:
As someone who has experience dealing with skeletal remains of both humans and animals (I’m in the forensic field, not a serial killer), as well as a fairly good knowledge of the decomp process, I agree with Snowden. It’s a dog.

The dentition is also a giveaway — it’s got what looks like typical canid teeth, with a large canine tooth, probably 4 premolars (I can’t tell from the photo, but it looks like one may have fallen out), and 2 molars on the lower jaw. The large first molar is called a “carnassial” tooth, something shared by all carnivores. The skull shape is clearly canid — it’s not a bear (size, shape, and teeth are all wrong) and it’s not a cat (too big and the snout is too elongated).

[After this post, Snowden, another commentator with some background and this cat-skiingthek12, had this follow-up conversation]

skiingtheK12 at 06:29 PM on 07/29/08 Reply by Email
@arguablythemostfamous: See my earlier post re: the carnassial tooth in the back. And that big-ass tooth in the front of the mandible? It’s a perfectly normal canine.

Also, it’s not a beak…it just looks beak-like from the angle and the fact that the tissue is gone from the snout.

@Snowden: Also, maybe I’m being optimistic, but I’m not sure that’s something tied on the paw. It looks like it could be a remnant of the “slipped” skin that still has a bit of fur attached to it (note: “skin slippage” is a part of the decomposition process wherein the outer layer slips off — in this case, taking fur with it). I think I see a little bit of fur on the tail and the side of the skull where the ears were.

Snowden at 06:42 PM on 07/29/08
@skiingtheK12: I see what you’re talking about, but would the paws just naturally settle right together like that? The fact that it’s washed up on the beach still strikes me as odd, though a more innocent explanation would definitely be nice. Can you take a guess at how long it’s been dead from the photo?

Damn, there’s never a Weekly World News around when you really need it!!

Nothing mysterious about this. It’s a turtle with no shell. Now you know why they those have shells, they are ******* ugly without ‘em.

Dammit, Fluffy! You come home RIGHT NOW!

Something tells me that photo’s not quite cute enough to be an ad for a new Cartoon Network kids show, you weirdos.

It looks like it’s flipping us off.

Ozymandias’s plan failed. I guess he’ll go larger next time.

I think it’s flippin us all off……edible?

Now I’m hungry for one of those roasting ducks in the window of the Golden Dragon restaurant downstairs…..

That’s it. Lunch break!

Oops, turns out it can’t be a turtle. Popular consencus elsewhere is that it’s a dog. Experts say it’s more likely a raccoon. It was carted off by some unknown people so no way to actually know.

It looks like some mammal with its snout and ears rotted off. I’m all for bigfoot creatures and chuppacabras, but I think it’s just some poor dead beast missing some body parts some hungry lobster chewed off before it washed up on the beach.

It’s a Gila-Monkey.

sad……..

but marketing for what??

Um, that looks nice and all, but wasn’t that a Far Side cartoon?

(That said, I could see someone independently coming up with that too.)

So… what sort of exoskeleton would a squid wear?
hmmm… WE3.2 air sea land…

So… what sort of exoskeleton would a squid wear?

I’m pretty sure Gary Larson made this comic decades ago.
But sequels and remakes are all the rage these days. I hear Drilon ret-conned the story so it turns out that the squid was never married and the cat still has all 9 of its lives left.

It was a very sweet story.

“Some have been caught sneaking from their tanks at night into other exhibits, gobbling up fish, then sneaking back to their tanks, damp trails along walls and floors giving them away.”

I’ve seen hidden video of this. The octopus is one of my favorite animals. I also once saw footage of one reach into a divers pocket, pull out a lens-cap, and then swim off with it. You could almost hear the best say, “It’s mine, suck’a!”

That Mr. Potato Head looks like Paul Giamatti.

That’s the cutest! I always knew they had feelings.

If someone stuffed *my* Mr. Potatohead with crab, I’d be very attached to it, too.

Luckily these aren’t armed yet with rocket launchers and flame throwers, but it’s only a matter of time…

We3 no home now.

Chihuahuas are scary enough without additives.

Where can one hide?

More like a platoon, not an army. First they use cute animals with an humanitarian angle, next they’re working on the assembly lines in Detroit!
hmmm… wonder if i can get my ipod implanted…

This is the dawn of the Reavers! Not the Firefly bullshits, but the mutant massacring kind!

I luv squirrels!!

I have watched the sneezing baby panda for the last 2 days and it still makes me laugh if i even think about it. You’ve quite literally made my holiday weekend with that one, Heidi.

Wasn’t that a Sherlock Holmes reference, the ‘Giant Rat of Sumatra’? Wrong end of the country, but still.

Now all we need are recipes.

Rodents of Unusual Size? I don’t think they exist.

PAD

I love this kind of stuff! If I could do it all over again, I think I’d be an explorer/zoologist/cryptozoologist.

Does anyone have / Two eighty pound rats? / I want to rid / My house of cats.
Shel Silverstein

I can’t wait for the manga-fied versions of this creature.

And there’s a man with sort of expression you get when you just realised that you’re holding a giant rat.

“habitat disturbance”. Yeah, sadly, that must be read as, ‘humans like to use desert areas as use for military target practice and large industrial companies’ toxic waste dumps, just because not enough humans can live in the desert or care about it.

Oh, no.

We’re behind on our Meerkats, so I don’t know exactly what happened. But my heart goes out to her.

This reminds me, I’m working on a book called The Legacy with Al and have some character studies up here: http://theuniversityofmyopia.com/10.21.07.php

What’s interesting about this cover is that it does not appear to be designed by Jordan Crane, as all previous Mome covers have been.

U Can Has MOME?

Just for the recored, I love the leather jacket, and would never complain about it. Every strong and well known personality should have their signature style. I he does write another Sandman story, I hope it’s as good as 1602 and The Eternals.

I wonder what the contract was for Gaiman when he wrote Endless Nights (the graphic novel from a few years back). I remember him saying something along the lines of “it was a favor for Karen Berger…”. Was it for those old 1987 terms?

I guess a new Sandman story would be cool. However, while I think Gaiman is getting better and better with every novel he writes, his comic output seems to be stagnating. Nothing like the original Sandman series.

Let’s all look askance at DC and give them withering sidelong glances (*) until they come back to the table with a piping hot new Gaiman-penned SANDMAN mini.

(*) No sidelong glaring, please. Let’s keep this relatively civil.

Wasn’t the back story of Dream being captured covered in the Sandman Mystery Theatre / Sandman one shot?

~

Coat

Not only does he wear the same one… even if Leather Jackets weren’t totally as bad (easily) as goatees, at this point, in terms of nerdy-guy-cliches-that-are-held-over-from-what-was-once-an-edgy-look,
it’s a not even a good leather jacket as leather jackets go. The hem alone is enough. Just look at it’s hem. bad hem. No stretchy hems, Neil. no, no, no.

“bad hem. No stretchy hems, Neil. no, no, no.”

So three seasons ago.

Three seasons? If only.

Yes, I know I’m a miserable fashion snob. Some faults we just have to embrace and live with.

I haven’t recovered from Gaiman’s jacket since SPX 1999. Seriously.

Heh. I went to Cleveland last year to catch a baseball game. Those bugs were everywhere. They hung out by building, mainly - I was amazed by how many people were sitting at outdoor cafes and restaurants while the bugs swarmed around them.

I read an interview with the home plate umpire where he said that they didn’t delay the game because “nobody requested it.” Which, to me, means that Torre only had to ask for a delay. I was going bananas trying to figure out why they couldn’t stop for 30 minutes to see if the bugs would disperse.

What a revoltin’ development.

Canadian Soldiers Invade. Yankees Lose.

This administration doesn’t know how to plan for a war. Now I’m a believer!

Find out where Tony K is gonna be back on radio and stopping “bugging” us with other stuff, Coale.

Mark, in all seriousness, please do more posts like this. A delay of game on account of infestation would have been hilarious…

If I had to make a bet, I’d say he goes back to 980, since the only reason he went to WAPO was loyalty to the Post. Now that it’s not Post radio, I doubt he goes back.

MLB.com has a good article on the game. Technically known as Hexagenia, mayflys require pollution free lakes to reproduce.
That said, it reminds me of my college days in eastern Iowa, when the campus would be overrun with boxelder bugs.
and to tie it all together, read The Iowa Baseball Confederacy, by Kinsella, who has been adapted into comics.

i don’t know where else to ask. so no Ultimate Fighter recaps for the new season?

I don’t watch the show, only listen to recaps of it. I have heard this Joe fella is the biggest wussy in the history of the show, even worse than Noah.

There’s nothing stranger than an Indians playoff game and last night was no exception. I found it amusing to watch all those overpaid Yankees players swatting and twitching like a bunch of junkies going through withdrawal, while the Indians players simply waved a couple of times then went on pitching or hitting. What primadonna crybabies.

Two down, one to go.

I’m a Clevelander and was in NY for the weekend and yes I did hear: “I bet Cleveland had a big box of these and just unleashed them on the Yankees.” I find more solace in the fact that these were indeed a plague from the Big Cooperstown in the sky sent to harass Joba and “Jetes.” Sorry NY fans — it’s been a looooooooooooooooooong time for us. We will come with bats, balls, and bugs.

I love those guys!

Yeah these are really great. I way way into Bigfoot/Loch Ness & UFOs as a kid (and to some degree still) myself.

I blame it all on "In Search Of…". I might have to do a Cryptozoology backpost now.

Cool stuff! Love the textures, and the different renditions of the character!

Cool. But in Italy, they call him Spiderman.

Mama mia!!

No, we call him “uomo ragno”.

i thought people called him l’arengne gypsy :p

That should be “signing”, not “singing”. Not even French people would want to hear me sing.

[…] Usagi Yojimbo creator Stan Sakai recently traveled to France for the Japan Expo in Paris, and offers a detailed report of his experiences there. (Link via Heidi MacDonald.) […]

[…] Fuentes: TheBeat y Comipress.com […]

LOL! on the Wonder Woman scissors. I had a worse idea, that the 2 big ‘holes’ would be her breasts. But i guess since it was from the 70’s…

Today’s WW scissors would have had the open the legs idea AND my breast idea!

Oddly enough, the Flash was nowhere to be found…

What’s a metaphor? So the horses can graze.

Penii. Funny word.

Oh, and technically speaking Heidi, the S’s you referred to generally write it as s’s. However, such de-capitalization raises a similar debate (not quite as hotly contested however) on message boards of an entire other section of the internet. Just, ya know, FYI…

As I understand it from reading elsewhere, Paniccia is no longer the editor on H4H, though he may have bought that cover while he still was.
The blame to be assigned for this cover, and there’s blame a-plenty, goes to whatever editor bought it, whatever editor approved it, and Joe Quesada.

Quesada has a daughter, too. Having a daughter or wife doesn’t seem to blunt this Manstream crap one little bit. In fact, men seem to hide behind their women, as surely as there is a man on that cover behind those women, using them as a shield when their product is called into question. “My wife likes it.” “I have a one-year-old daughter.” “My girlfriend doesn’t have a problem with it.” “I have a wife.”

I reckon we ought to start donating to the CBLDF now, because this cover is exactly the sort of thing a politician or judge looking for re-election needs for a nice, juicy, obscenity court case. This cover, by itself, will not pass an obscenity test.

My thoughts on the cover:
http://divalea.livejournal.com/454772.html

Way to go, Manstream.

Will anyone ask Joe Quesada or Paul Levitz about any of this?

Some may ask, but will they feel the need to answer, and why not? That’s why the blogiverse is ultimately a better answer to the call for comics journalism than any formal publication, print or online.

Hmm. Would admitting an error lead to the destruction of mainstream comics as we know it? Or would it correct it? And how did that cover even pass a censor!? Is there a censor even!? Should there be!? Too many questions without answers…

“In fact, men seem to hide behind their women, as surely as there is a man on that cover behind those women, using them as a shield when their product is called into question. “My wife likes it.” “I have a one-year-old daughter.” “My girlfriend doesn’t have a problem with it.” “I have a wife.”

Not sure what this means? Are saying that these woman don’t like the stuff? Are saying that the men are lying and saying that thier wives like it?
Are saying that because I have a daughter (and I do) That I can’t be into bondage? Yes there is a problem with the representation of woman this way in comics. Arguing with generalized statements does nothing to help.

Some may ask, but will they feel the need to answer, and why not? That’s why the blogiverse is ultimately a better answer to the call for comics journalism than any formal publication, print or online.

hahahahaha….

“And that’s why this totally unrelated topic supports my current agenda!”

Good stretch there, Guy.

Well played.

Oh, Heidi, why do you hate men so?

“Yes there is a problem with the representation of woman this way in comics. Arguing with generalized statements does nothing to help.”

I’m not a woman, and this topic doesn’t impact me on any kind of personal level, but I can’t see how arguing with generalized statements hurts. It’s tough to have year after year of these kind of drawings and then ask everyone to please narrow their comments to something so specific that it stifles criticism of the trend itself and those who continue the trend.

HEROES FOR HIRE has always been basically a T&A book, and it’s never done it any good. I genuinely have my doubts as to whether this stuff *does* boost sales to any appreciable degree. I think it’s just an article of faith with Marvel and DC. If you look at what actually sells in the direct market, it’s pretty tough to point to a book with high sales that you can attribute to tits. (Frank Cho on MIGHTY AVENGERS, for example, is selling roughly the same as Leinil Francis Yu on NEW AVENGERS. Which kind of suggests it’s the Avengers, not the tits.)

Dan:
What I mean is, when imagery like the above is called into question, there are men who will use the women/girls in their life as “proof” the imagery is not harmful, demeaning, or misogynist.

e.g., “My wife likes it.” “I have a daughter/wife/girlfriend, I can’t be a misogynist .” “My girlfriend doesn’t have a problem with it.”

Hope I’ve cleared that up.

I really really like the Elin Winkler quote you included. That pretty much sums it up for me.

Now, I get just as annoyed as the next person by over-eager bloggers who feel the need to criticize and complain about things all the time. I’m a pretty cynical and dour dude, but I still need my doctor recommended ray of sunshine from time to time. That being said, I honestly didn’t see why there was quite as much fuss over the MJ statue as there was. Sure it was disrespectful to the character, but then again so was Todd McFarlane’s entire run on Spiderman. Our ideal of Mary Jane may have been betrayed, but the product was not. It was obvious from the outset who the intended audience for that statue was, and what sort of function it was intended to fulfill.

This cover, in my opinion, is the exact opposite of that. It’s misleading, as Ms. Winkler so adeptly pointed out, and it’s insulting to fans who like to actually read the story contained within the covers. Heroes for Hire is not Lil’ Annie Fannie, and it’s insulting to a lot of us that Marvel (and DC) feel the need to constantly lie to us and mislead us into buying their books. Is it that these companies feel that their standard market of heterosexual males will only buy books that feature female leads (a “concerted effort” to bring aboard female readers) if they all have covers like this?

The continued output of crap like this is an insult and a betrayal to mildly-intelligent comic book readers everywhere. I demand less crap like this proliferating the shelves, and more comics that feature Picasso masturbating with roasted chickens (go read Nick Beretozzi’s “The Salon”).

It’s too bad they pick up some of the more lurid aspects of Japanese comics in these statues/toys and covers, instead of the elements that have broad appeal.

These are comic books about gorgeous people in skin-tight costumes wailing away on each other. Of course they’re for fetishists. The only complaint I see is that the guys aren’t really getting in on the fun, except maybe for Superman and Green Lantern.

Lea,
Sorry I wasn’t trying to call you out…and the way you newly phrased it I think delivers the point much stronger….could be just me you know…

I do agree with you though, its sad that there are mainstream superhero comics that I can’t read to my 2 yr old daughter or 6 yr old son because of the pictures…

I guess I don’t see why people think Marvel or DC should reply. Honestly and I mean this with all respect it seems like the readers/writers making a fuss on line. Blogs have a tendency to make things sound louder than they are. These products are aimed at a very niche crowd and that crowd buys them. They are not meant for everyone and just because some do not like them does not mean Marvel or DC should not make them and people not be able to buy them.

I agree that they should show more deversity in products and try and make products for a female readership just like they do for the fanboys. That is what people should be asking for and working on not freaking out over something that is not meant for them in the first place.

Again I mean this with all respect, I love this blog and read regularly. I just don’t understand why people think everything has to be for everyone. There are plenty of things not designed or meant for me, it does not mean I think they should not exist at all.

“Will anyone ask Joe Quesada or Paul Levitz about any of this? Will anyone remember?”

Heidi, I hope you ask (who better?), and I hope you get answers you can share.

maybe the next step in sales boosting is taking the E and the R off the title…

“Is there a censor even!? Should there be!? ”

No, but that doesn’t mean that editor shouldn’t take responsibility for the content of their comics. I remember when Frank Kane called out Karen Burger for alienating Christian readers (rather then female readers) with Preacher. His point was not that it should be censored, but rather thought through. His thought was that there are alot of potential Christian readers that would never go into a comic book store as long as they were pushing books like that to new customers. That’s alot of money passing stores by. The censorship card was pulled on him, in order to take away any credibly that he might have in his point of view.

“Sure it was disrespectful to the character, but then again so was Todd McFarlane’s entire run on Spiderman.”

I liked Todd’s run and felt that it had been a long time since MJ seemed that dynamic, but hey that’s just my tast.

So, as for the comic. I have to admit, the only way I’m offended by it, is in that it’s stupid, and not appropriate for a place where parents send their kids to. Anyone who has seen my fine art paintings knows that there are plenty of naked women in it, but I would never put that sort of thing up front for kids to see. I should also add in my own defense that most of my patrons are women, and tell me that I still show women in a strong and beautiful light. So I ask; (and this is outside the realm of what kids see) can women be shown in a positive way, without their close on, not hiding their secualality, or am I just kidding myself. I ask this as a lover of womanly beauty, but also with the utmost respect for the female mind.

Okay because I’m a moron I had two versions of this post up and have deleted one, but some comments that were made to it, so I have preserved them here:

On 05/22/07 at 7:49 pm e MICHAEL wrote:

Keepin it Real Heidi!!!

I’m not shocked it was by a female. All the Japanese are crazy in their ideas as their morals and traditions are radically different than what we have in the U.S.

And I respect Elin a lot, even moreso now. You go Elin!!

Finally, yes, Daughters of the Dragon and Heroes for Hire was infinitely better in the first few issues. Though, I have to say, I really don’t remember anything actually INSIDE the comic that was that icky.

On 05/22/07 at 9:13 pm e Shannon Chenoweth wrote:

You know, I really love Marvel Comics so incredibly much, but this makes me ashamed to be a fan of not just Marvel, but of comics in general with images like this out there. There really is no excuse for this. As Heidi has already stated, these women are heroes. HEROES! And yet, they are being treated like sex objects. This is unacceptable in my mind. Big boobs and sex poses are one thing, but putting these heroes in a pornographic and abusive situation like this is just sickening.

I really hope Marvel pulls this cover before it hits the comic shop shelves or at least makes changes to it.

On 05/22/07 at 10:38 pm e Josh wrote:

I guess I don’t see why people think Marvel or DC should reply. Honestly and I mean this with all respect it seems like the readers/writers making a fuss on line. Blogs have a tendency to make things sound louder than they are. These products are aimed at a very niche crowd and that crowd buys them. They are not meant for everyone and just because some do not like them does not mean Marvel or DC should not make them and people not be able to buy them.

I agree that they should show more deversity in products and try and make products for a female readership just like they do for the fanboys. That is what people should be asking for and working on not freaking out over something that is not meant for them in the first place.

Again I mean this with all respect. I love this blog and I think it is really wonderfully done. I just don’t understand why people think everything has to be for everyone. If DC launches a line of comics aimed at girls I don’t care. It is not for me, but I don’t want it to stop. I just hope people buy and the industry stays healthy.

In no way am I endorsing the fetishing of superheroes in comics. But the bondage aspects do get played out by the male heroes, too (adding Batman to Franklin’s note on Green Lantern and Supes):
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/1563899140.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Lea wrote: “This cover, by itself, will not pass an obscenity test.”

Are you serious? It doesn’t even meet any the definition of pornography, much less obscenity, given that no “naughty bits” or acts of heavy breathing are involved. Hyperbole does not help your case.

Shannon Chenoweth wrote: “Big boobs and sex poses are one thing, but putting these heroes in a pornographic and abusive situation like this is just sickening.”

Again, just because you don’t like it doesn’t make it pornographic. And I think we need to define abusive. Half the point of superheroes is that they get abused, captured, beaten up, etc. Showing the hero in jeopardy is part of the game. So, we might as well drop that as an issue and get to the real point: It’s the sexuality, not the jeopardy that’s the point.

And, of course, if you Google “Comic Book Bondage Cover of the Day,” you’ll find it’s nothing new and this is not even an extreme example.

Watch out, Franklin, you’re hittin’ that bingo card!

Can we please put the whole “men in comics are objectified too!” thing to rest? It is NOT germane to the present argument. Do superhero objectifications make you UNCOMFORTABLE? If not, they are not the same.

>>Will anyone ask Joe Quesada or Paul Levitz about any of this? Will anyone remember?

I know Newsarama’s not exactly where one goes for hard-hittin’ journalism, but I’ve occasionally been surprised at some of the hardball questions they’ve pitched at Quesada for the “Joe Fridays” feature.

Will they have the stones to put this one to him? I’m actually gonna guess they will. Can Quesada deflect the question with his Reagan-esque talent for winning over the masses? I bet he will.

I think Franklin did point out, correctly, that “It’s the sexuality, not the jeopardy that’s the point.”

I’m sure that H4H pamphlet is not going to be see where children are likely to find it — only in comics-specialty stores patronized almost entirely by 18-45-year-old males, and most of them are involuntarily celibate so they won’t have kids to bring those things home to.

So it’s not about warping children, or oppressing women, it’s about material that makes women uncomfortable. But does material need special justification for existence because it makes some people, even a lot of people, uncomfortable? As was pointed out in the comments, The Preacher makes a lot of Christians uncomfortable. Persepolis makes a lot of Muslims uncomfortable. No doubt comics like Shirtlifter make homophobes uncomfortable. I’m not sure “uncomfortableness” is a standard we really ought to impose.

The world would unquestionably be improved by having a comics market that contained a great deal more material women can enjoy. The question then becomes, does complaining about fanboy-service products like that H4H cover or the “comiquettes” bring us closer to that goal? Or does it just scratch an itch?

“it’s the Avengers, not the tits.”

Could become a new Marvel battle cry…

More like “eyes up here!” (Props properly go to Scott Kurtz for that one)

No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the public.

Morally bankrupt, perhaps, but not broke.

“As was pointed out in the comments, The Preacher makes a lot of Christians uncomfortable. Persepolis makes a lot of Muslims uncomfortable. No doubt comics like Shirtlifter make homophobes uncomfortable. I’m not sure “uncomfortableness” is a standard we really ought to impose.”

Yeah, I think you missed the point of that, which was many main stream comics companies chose to (quite unwittingly, but that’s no excuse) alienate potential readers by going with fanboy-service and shock value, rather then make the effort to present quality comics. I have no objection to themes that may make “Christians uncomfortable” as long as it’s done in a intelligent manner. I’m a Catholic (sort of) and I was very sad when the Swamp Thing meets Jesus issue got scrubbed. Sure, they put it our a couple of years later, but by then it no longer had momentum. It’s no wonder the majority of America still won’t except our work as a valid medium. Furthermore, “stores patronized almost entirely by 18-45-year-old males” are going the way of the laserdisc. If you can’t bring in and Kraft service the young readers, comics truly have no future.

Heidi, I don’t see where I’m playing bingo. Clearly, while male characters are sometimes sexually “objectified”, too, it is nowhere near as common as it is with female characters, which was my point in saying “the guys aren’t really getting in on the fun, except maybe for Superman and Green Lantern.” Now, do those covers make ME uncomfortable? Not in the slightest, but that has more to do with me than the depictions themselves. After all, one of my favorite movies is “Secretary.”

But to get this back on track, I’m not at all certain that the assumption that it is sexually explicit/demeaning depictions of superheroines that’s turning off potential female readers. Certainly abundant fan service isn’t keeping teenage and pre-teen girls from reading manga. (Again, this is not “bingo”; I’m not telling women to just go read manga. I think what turns them off is the superhero part of the equation. Now, obviously, most women reading this now are going to be exceptions, and the idea is going to feel as strange to you as getting upset over festishized superhero BDSM does to me. But I can count on one hand the number of women I’ve known personally in 35 years who read superhero comics (as opposed to manga and the occasional Vertigo title). That goes all the way back to the pre-bad girl 1980s, when I knew one girl who read “New Teen Titans.” Compare that to the many girls and young women I know who read something like “Bondage Fairies” or “Tarot: Witch of the Black Rose,” and it’s some pretty compelling, if anecdotal and maybe even weird, evidence.

OK, that last one has lots of typos. It is far too late/early to be typing anything.

I think Franklin did point out, correctly, that “It’s the sexuality, not the jeopardy that’s the point.”

no no no no

When the two are put together, it’s always the sexuality and the the sexuality with the jeopardy that’s the point.

It’s bad enough that women are objectified as much as they are, but the extent to which that objectification tends to go hand in hand with physical violence is downright terrifying.

I think you hit the nail on the head when you refer the editorial staff at the comics companies as living in a biosphere. Currently there’s a real dichotomy between what readers want and what editors THINK we want, and it’s causing some spectacular blunders on their part.

Keep the pressure up, Heidi!

Heidi, did you ever know that you’re my hero?

My feeble-by-comparison ComicMix column on all of this is out today. This article is, naturally, one of my links.

Franklin: Girls like superheroes. Women go to see Spider-Man.

Franklin. Women do like superheroes. Naruto, for example, is really just superheroics under another name. And there is a massive female fanbase. Similar titles include Full Metal Alchemist (the creator is a big fan of the superhero-inspired Star Wars).

I guess with you, I’d question what your end goal is (and I guess others)? Them making a statement regarding the cover (either company mind you)? Making a more concerted effort to not do things like this? etc. I’m not bashing you or questiong your (or anyone else’s) opinions, I’m just trying to figure out what you’d like to see accomplished. Again, I’m right there with you, I think it is off and should not have been published.

In addition, there are many other “calls” that each companies make that no one seems to make the companies respond to or try to change, yet we let those go without a peep. granted, this one is a touch more visual and “morally wrong” so I’m just curious.

Jimmy/Justin’s version of DOD and HFH was an exact example of how a book can be sexy without showing a touch of skin. These were two, attractive, sexy characters that had brains to match their bodies and they were more willing to use the prior before the latter. Read their stories, they accomplished that. Now, I’m not sure what the book, specifically the cover, is trying to convey.

It bothers me that it did go through, what has been indicated, many levels without someone even remotely questioning the cover. Yet, the press is what they get, even if the cover gets bounced, they are getting press.

I don’t know if anyone short of Tony Isabella loves Misty Knight as a character more than I do and yes Daughters of the Dragon was done as an homage to Blaxploitation (the inspiration for these characters) –big fro and all as a personal preference because I find them attractive. But you’ll notice that in reading DOD both Misty and Colleen, while sexualized, were smarter and more capable than anyone else they encountered in that book. That was always the hard and fast rule when Jimmy and I wrote the book.

They reflected the genre and time period in a fun and stylized manner, they were aware of their sexuality, they even used it to their advantage in much the same way as the movies that inspired them do, but that wasn’t the extent of their worth as characters. At least not in my opinion. Do I like the cover? No, but my dislike of it is due to the representation of the Characters I adore.

[…] Update:  Heidi MacDonald over at the Beat gets a little more in depth. […]

[…] Via Journalista e BEAT. […]

[…] Via Journalista e BEAT. […]

“I’m sure that H4H pamphlet is not going to be see where children are likely to find it — only in comics-specialty stores patronized almost entirely by 18-45-year-old males, and most of them are involuntarily celibate so they won’t have kids to bring those things home to.”

Good lord … I’m sure that isn’t the case.

Can anyone think of another hobby where the fans are hated as much?

Mickie says, above, “When the two are put together, it’s always the sexuality and the the sexuality with the jeopardy that’s the point.”
True that, and it’s been that way forever. Whether it’s Mina Harker being menaced by a vampire, or Pauline escaping another Peril, the two have always gone together in cheap literature.
This cover image, though, crosses over into new territory. This is like a painting commissioned by a tits and slime fetishist.
At what point do we start looking at the people who make this stuff, and the people who buy it, and tap our heads in horrified disbelief at how sleazy it is? Me, I passed that point a while back. Sadly, I haven’t bought a new Marvel comic in about twenty years, so I can’t boycott them.

Why would anyone bother to ask Paul Levitz? I don’t think he had anything to do with this cover.

It’s a dumb cover, but I can’t say that I understand the rancor. I’d think that representing superheroines by tracing porn stars/adult models or almost anything drawn by Mark Beachum would be worse. (But I do understand the point that there being other wrongs doesn’t excuse this one — I’m just saying that it surprises me those things don’t spark more complaints.)

Anyway, I’ll vote with my wallet, and not purchase this issue.

Scott, you must not be paying much attention if you think “those things” are going unnoticed.

Franklin: I LOVE comics, heck, Spider-man is one of my most favorite characters! So, pardon me if I find that some female heroes are being portrayed in a negative matter rather than a positive one like they should be. It’s one thing to show some skin, or bigger boobs, but this cover image is just crying out “wrong!”

[…] Over at The Beat, Heidi MacDonald clubs the issue baby-seal-style here, here, here, and here. Although it all seems like a variation of “I don’t think this should be allowed to exist.”  Hey, nobody listened to me when I objected to the existence of boy bands and the horrible teenage squealing they produced. Fulminating over the objectification or inferred servitude of a fictional character is just as silly. LINK […]

Ask Quesada? They ran the hank Pym crawling out of Jan’s vagina sequence while he was EIC. Do you think he’ll say no to anything?!

Really, what’s wrong with having a tiny man crawl out of your vagina as long as you’re married to him?

[…] CLE “Misty Knight.” [Note: Knight was one of the first substantial black women characters in mainstream comics. A few days after the panel, Eaton writes in her blog that she was horrified to see the latest cover of the comics series starring Misty Knight, which shows Knight and her friends drawn in a ridiculous porn style and being molested by tentacles. See PW Beat for more.] […]

>>Will anyone ask Joe Quesada or Paul Levitz about any of this?

[…] Hasta aquí trata Newsarama el tema acerca de las insinuaciones en los productos de Marvel, aunque hay que tomar en cuenta que no querrán molestar mucho a sus clientes. En cambio es interesante ver la reacción que tuvo a estar portada Elin Winkler, quién se dedica a publicar comics para adultos: Ahora, como todos sabemos, yo publico comics pornográficos. […] No me avergüenzo de los comics para adultos que mi compañía publica. Esto es porque trato de ser un editor responsable que creo que debe haber comics para adultos con sexo consentido, mujeres disfrutando y no siendo tratadas como meros objetos […] Veo la portada de Heroes for Hire y me doy cuenta de que 1) esto pertenece en la portada de un comic para adultos, como Milk y 2) es una portada que ni siquiera yo pondría en Milk, porque las mujeres se encuentran todas obviamente en una posición de abuso. Esa fue mi reacción inicial. […]

[…] I didn’t think I had anything to add to the discussion on the infamous Heroes For Hire #13 cover. (Some of those links possibly NSFW.) Something stuck in my mind, though. Typolad suggested that “you would never, ever see Marvel or DC make a cover like this with a male protagonist. Yes, a male hero may be shown in peril, but his face will be defiant. He won’t be shown as submissive.” Lea Hernandez’ remix of the cover alters the expressions to do just that. […]

I’m surprised that anyone that knew their alphabet during the ‘bad girls’ craze is too terribly shocked and appalled by this.

Really, this conversation is a bit boring because every point and counter is predictable to the point where it would make efficient satire. Every argument just looks like an ad hominem rerun from the last time this happened, and you can see it repeated again next week when it happens again. The reason Marvel doesn’t need to answer the critics is because the outrage doesn’t feel genuine, it is finite, and you can’t possibly make it last another week without just losing more faith in the human race, let alone one of the hobbies you love.

I think the reason you’d never see this kind of cover with a male protagonist is because the mainstream companies understand that both their female readers and the mostly heterosexual (and probably slightly homophobic) male readers would recoil in horror. Whereas I feel sufficiently conditioned by comics and most other artistic mediums that this cover just makes me roll my eyes.

But hey, Marvel’s still got one ace up their sleeve. You’ve only seen the cover!
What if the actual content inside of the issue is a direct contraposition to a cover they knew was sexist, and they’ve been baiting you all the entire time? Frankly, if that isn’t true, (and yes, I’m sure it isn’t.) they should scrap the inside story and art and make it happen just to be ambitious. It’ll read like the S.C.U.M. Manifesto but with even more violence against men, a rousing tribute to fervid, determined sisterhood and an honest look at gender identity. If the last page doesn’t end with more synchronous menstruation than the 4th week of Lilith Fair, than yes, I’ll join you in burning Joe Quesada in effigy and we can go back to a Marvel thats run by business men in suits rather than genuinely creative types.

Either way, I think you’re just pretending to care. You’re either going through the motions because you think you should be offended, or you should seek out some genuine hentai and the vast majority of pornographic comics, try to get skin a bit thicker so as not to bleed to death in a rain storm.

Yes, and they should do more things for a select audience.
They should do more comics for the segregationists.

” Do I like the cover? No, but my dislike of it is due to the representation of the Characters I adore.”

See, I agree with what Justin Gray said here.
To me it would be more of a situation because of misinterpretation.
This SCREAMS male (and to a smaller range of females) fanservice. It doesn’t offend me personally, but it makes me roll my eyes. There will always be fanservice of one kind or another, and I don’t think the issue is an imbalance of male to female fanservice art.
I think it’s just depicting them in a wrong light. Sort of misleading, as if they’re trying (and I think they are) targeting an audience of people who enjoy this kind of thing. Is the cover the same as the content? Buy it and find out. I don’t like the fact that some readers are being mislead, and that characters aren’t being interpretted right.

It’s not an issue of degrading women. It’s not an issue of fan service. It’s just misinterpretation of characters and content.

On another note, I see that people continue to say women prefer manga.
As a woman, I disagree. I love gritty stories with manly characters. I don’t enjoy boys with big eyes and flowing white hair. I want my men mean with some chest hair to boast. Hairless manga seals aren’t my kinda thing. ;P

And with the issue of female fanservice: I’ve never seen Peter Parker or Superman in a provocative situation a woman might enjoy. Where is my half naked wet man being touched tenderly by tentacles? In the cover you see, what? AN ARM? Oo la la!
It’s time for the man to be full frontal, if ya catch my drift.

I see NOTHING wrong with that cover.It’s cute & kinda hot.I think you have too much time on your hands to complain about something like this completely harmless cover.You must go completly insane of stuff like gagfactor.com or bukkake porn!

I will buy that issue for the cover & the cover alone.Sex sells,get over it.

Keepin it Real Heidi!!!

I’m not shocked it was by a female. All the Japanese are crazy in their ideas as their morals and traditions are radically different than what we have in the U.S.

And I respect Elin a lot, even moreso now. You go Elin!!

Finally, yes, Daughters of the Dragon and Heroes for Hire was infinitely better in the first few issues. Though, I have to say, I really don’t remember anything actually INSIDE the comic that was that icky.

You know, I really love Marvel Comics so incredibly much, but this makes me ashamed to be a fan of not just Marvel, but of comics in general with images like this out there. There really is no excuse for this. As Heidi has already stated, these women are heroes. HEROES! And yet, they are being treated like sex objects. This is unacceptable in my mind. Big boobs and sex poses are one thing, but putting these heroes in a pornographic and abusive situation like this is just sickening.

I really hope Marvel pulls this cover before it hits the comic shop shelves or at least makes changes to it.