Is it difficult or time consuming?

I saw Marina and the Diamonds on Craig Ferguson’s show several months back. That was my first exposure to them. And, honestly, I really didn’t fall in love: I thought the 80s throwback style was just a little over the top for me. So when I started hearing her name thrown around more often, I kind of dismissed it. I thought I knew that I wasn’t impressed and that I didn’t want to hear any more. I had nothing against her. Just… not all that curious. But, then all these people who love the same music I love said that they loved Marina. So, I finally got my mitts on some of her music yesterday, and I basically have been listening to it ever since.

And… I’ve been looking up interviews with her and watching music videos and videos of live performances and looking at pictures of her. I’m, in a word, obsessed.



( We've got obsessions. )

Day three is supposed to be on my least favorite character. And this was a tough one. A little while ago, it probably would’ve been Xander. Because of his mansplaining in Into the Woods and slut shaming in… well, too many episodes to count, really. But. I’ve sort of had a Come to Jesus moment with Xander (in this scenario, Xander is not Jesus. I don’t know who is—but it isn’t Xander). I’m still not crazy about him, but my seething hatred has dissipated.

Willow was another contender—mainly for her baby talk. Snuggly wuggly? Smoochies? Ugh. I can’t stand baby talk. Not to mention the “Baby” talk with Tara—them calling each other “Baby” and “Sweetie” all the time. Gag me. But that hardly seems like grounds to award her the Least Favorite Character title.

I realize that everyone is going to think that I’m a total freak and that no one in the entire world feels the way I do about this character, but whatever. I’m a lone wolf. A renegade. I follow the beat of my own drum and all that.

So, without further ado, the Least Favorite Character title goes to…
( Can't fight the seether )

A friend of mine posted about this website on her Tumblr, and I thought some of y’all on my flist might find it interesting, so I thought I’d pass it along. Women in Refrigerators Syndrome describes the use of the death or injury of a female comic book character as a plot device in a story starring a male comic book character.

It reminded me of the post on Man Pain™ that gabrielleabelle posted/linked to not that long ago (that I can’t for the life of me find)—and all the sacrificing of female characters that occurs on both AtS and BtVS.

The Women in Refrigerators site lists a bunch of female comic book characters and how they were offed/maimed/depowered. A companion page , titled Men Defrosting, takes a similar look at male characters—but points out how male victims of violence are more frequently restored to their former status than their female counterparts.

I don’t have a whole lot of commentary to add—perhaps because I’m only on season 2 of AtS—and because the the WiR content pretty much speaks for itself. But I wanted to point out that the WiR site has responses from comic book fans and industry people. And a few of them are really interesting. Especially this response from fan Jeff Mace. He makes lots of valid points throughout—but what strikes me is that despite how he clearly understands exactly what this discussion is about, he still manages to COMPLETELY MISS THE POINT.

In wrapping up his argument, he says:

"When tragedy befalls a comic heroine, it might be due to the lineage of the medium in which she exists, it might be due to cultural universals that have been with us throughout human history, and, yes, it just might be the work of a untalented, incompetent, and/or misogynistic hack.

"It also might be part and parcel of an important story, a story that deserves to be told. Or it could simply be a product of the symbiotic, cyclical relationship between the storyteller and the audience: male characters written by male creators for male fans, some of whom will become male creators and write stories about male characters for... you get the idea."

  I just don’t even know what to say about this. It’s more impressive as a summary if you go and read his full argument, where he shows a thorough grasp of the debate—then ends it with this, which reads like, “Yeah, ladies are getting cut into pieces and shoved into refrigerators. But that might just be because men have always oppressed women.”

Wha huh, now? Isn’t that the point of this whole project? To show that oppression has indeed permeated the comic medium/superhero genre, and it manifests in a particularly violent fashion? And the fact that he seems to think that the point of the project was to prove that comic book creators are misogynistic hacks? I don’t even know.

Another troubling thing Mace says is:

"I remember an imaginary ‘interview’ PAD wrote (in one of his CBG columns) with a comics pro from ‘the future.’ In that pro's time, violence in comics had been partially supplanted by depictions of healthy, consensual sex. Therein, I suppose, lies a possible cure for the WiR malaise: Close the refrigerator door and turn down the sheets! ;)"

Maybe I don’t understand exactly what he’s saying here, but it sounds like he’s suggesting that pro’s idea of “evolution”--that the way to avoid a grisly death, for a female character, is to “turn down the sheets”?

Yeah. That doesn’t sit well with me. The concept makes sense to me—replacing violence with sex—but to argue that this is somehow a sign of progress in attitudes toward women—shifting anger expressed through mutilation of female bodies—to the portrayal of them as willing sex objects? Not loving it.

But to end on a more positive note, this response from Rob Harris is short and sweet and does an excellent job of setting up useful male disempowerment/harm vs. female disempowerment/harm parallels.

Also: Check out WiR’s righteous logo.

Tell me that isn’t awesome. You can’t. Because it IS awesome. The logo will not be denied.

ETA: Look! I think I figured out my link problem! Either that or I just royally screwed up this entry.