Diversity and Representation in Media

Only if you focus on the Superman movies. Their animation and live action have pretty good female characters.

Their track record for animation is spotty, but yeah, I could you could argue for some properties there. But when it comes to live action, nope. I actually thought during the first season of Arrow that they had finally figured out to write an interesting female (despite Laurel), but they didn't reach their third season without proving that they can't handle it after all.

Thea Queen and Sara Lance, after bumpy starts (justified in Thea's case - being a troubled teenager and all), turned out to be two fantastic characters. Nyssa Al-Ghul is a very cool part of the supporting cast of Arrow. Laurel also became a fan-favorite over seasons three and four after dealing with her issues and becoming more level-headed and responsible. Finally, Alex Danvers is made of pure win.

Are there many comic book animated shows with better female characters than Wonder Woman & Hawkgirl? Also, DC's most popular female character, right now, was created in an animated show. I think that Harley remains one of the most interesting takes on emotional abuse depicted on TV.

edited 26th Jul '16 6:46:16 AM by Julep

Yeah, i really don't see how their track record in animation is in anyway spotty. If there's DCU female character who has fans outside of comics, chances are they were introduced to her by DC animation.

Yeah, Sarah Lance was a fantastic character, as was Moira....BOTH were dead by season 3. Felicity started out a fantastic character until the something in the mind of the writers switched from "supporting character" to "love interest" which totally ruined her. Laurel had to much baggage by the end of season 2 to be salvaged, and she will always be the "lesser " canary, because they killed off the badass version they had in Sarah. And I actually liked bratty Teenager Thea better than what they did with her after she discovered her "true heritage", it was such a step back for her character.

Arrow had gold on their hand and they consequently squandered it because in the eyes of the writers the only female worth something is the one who moons over Oliver Queen.

I feel like it's a better question to just look at this one instance, rather than the years of DC animated works (in and outside of the DCAU) made by a variety of creators over a large period of time.

It's weird because no one wanted this. If we're talking /co/, it's a sloppy addition onto the story that both took time and resources away from where they could have gone (the actual animation and polish), if we're talking those who complained about Barbara's treatment in the original comic, it's somehow detracting from her character even more.

I don't complain that Barbara was used as a plot point in the original story. From a comics perspective most fans understood Batgirl as an established character already (one of the advantages of comic books as they are is that a lot of times you don't need to reestablish characters), and the fact that the story made her vulnerable isn't a knock against her character, it's the goddamned Joker. The uncomfortable sexual undertones on the whole comic could certainly have been toned down, but that'd be more an overall thing. If they wanted to establish Barbara as her own character before breaking her (which makes sense from a cinematic perspective), they could easily have done it, they just picked the worst way possible.

edited 26th Jul '16 7:00:56 AM by InAnOdderWay

At the very least, it isn't by any means spottier than anyone else. It's not like Avatar and The Legend of Korra represent average animated shows.

Yeah, Sarah Lance was a fantastic character, as was Moira....BOTH were dead by season 3. Felicity started out a fantastic character until the something in the mind of the writers switched from "supporting character" to "love interest" which totally ruined her. Laurel had to much baggage by the end of season 2 to be salvaged, and she will always be the "lesser " canary, because they killed off the badass version they had in Sarah. And I actually liked bratty Teenager Thea better than what they did with her after she discovered her "true heritage", it was such a step back for her character.

Sara isn't dead. This is a comic book show, obviously Death Is Cheap. And Sara wasn't a fantastic character when she was "Oliver's badass crush" (that pretty much entirely sums up her S2 character), she truly started shining in Legends of Tomorrow - a show which should really just have been about her, Cold and Heatwave.

Laurel's baggage is the reason why she became such a great character later on (she became a Team Mom to the other members whenever they started angsting a bit too much, which for Oliver was daily) - as for "Malcolm's daughter" Thea, she got over it pretty quickly and is now one of the few live comic book characters who seems to really enjoy doing superhero stuff - that's incredibly refreshing.

I agree that Felicity's writing deteriorated overtime, but for series with an Ensemble Cast such as these ones, wonky writing is pretty much mandatory - while Felicity became insufferable, Laurel became cool. All comic book shows are like this in one way or another, whether it is Arrow, The Flash, AOS, LOT, Gotham or Daredevil. The number of characters that consistently remain fan favorites without ever crossing the Felicity line is very, very low - I'd say Cisco, Mack and Claire (and Claire is very much in the supporting cast of her shows).

edited 26th Jul '16 7:13:21 AM by Julep

Animated shows actually do better with female representation than animated movies....granted, this is partly because a lot of animated shows are either important from Japan or inspired by Anime, and for some reason Anime feel way more comfortable with female protagonists.

If you look for sheer numbers, then Japanese influence is absolutely positive. When you look at the representation in detail, however, it is much less obvious. I am regularly turned off from watching promising anime series because the writing of female characters is often horrifying'.

For f*ck's sake, they did what to Barbara?!

>.<

You want to fix the Killing Joke, here's the key. Writers, pay attention, please. The Joker did not shoot Batgirl. He shot Barbara Gordon. He had no idea she was even Batgirl at the time, it was just a fortuitous coincidence that he happened to maim a superhero in the process of sticking it to Gordon.

It's one of the most naked, open, honest instances of fridging in comics. On every conceivable level, Barbara gets shot to cause pain in the men around her. From writer to characters, nobody involved actually gives one solitary shit about Barbara Gordon as a person. She's a Victim Lamp.

You want to fix Killing Joke, you work with that. That's your focus. I don't mean, "Flesh her out a bit more beforehand so the audience and characters can feel EVEN MORE Manpain when the Joker smashes the Victim Lamp." The way the film handles Barbara's development prior to the incident sounds atrocious, but even if it had been great, it would still have just been there to make her Fridging more tragic. It does nothing to address the Fridging; it's just there to heighten the Manpain.

No, the way to fix The Killing Joke has nothing to do with what comes before the Fridging and everything to do with what comes after. What makes this story so horrific for Barbara is that this is the end of her character in the story. This is her final scene. She's hospitalized and promptly f*cks off out of the story, and from that point forward it's all about Bruce, Gordon, and Joker.

This is her final note. She leaves the story on a moment of weakness, of disempowerment, of victimization. It's hard enough seeing supporting cast reduced to this, but she's a goddamn superhero.

Point is, while trying to give her more characterization earlier in the story is an admirable effort - but not in the way they did it, which has so many problems - what matters most is giving her more to do after. Instead of taking photos for his horror show to Gordon - one of the more literal examples of objectification, as Barbara Gordon's role for the rest of the story is played by still images of Barbara - why not have him just take Barbara?

Keeping Barbara in the story, having her as his hostage, and having him entirely unaware of the fact that she's Batgirl means that Barbara has every opportunity to flip the table. To make a move, make a stand, do something unexpected that blindsides the Joker and changes the tide of the conflict. It allows her to end the story on a moment of power rather than one of weakness.

On the other hand, while there's a lot of skeevy "representation" in anime, the sheer number of them and the fact that some of them are of higher quality than others, meaning anime fans don't have to deal with Girls Need Role Models as much as those who stick exclusively to Western media.

Adding the Batgirl prologue is a big zit on an otherwise great adaptation. And it's not because of how it shows Babs, it's not because of awkward rooftop anime sex (although trust me, none of these things help) but it's because the film itself is supposed to be a character study of an insane man, how he got there, and how Batman, the guy who wants to help him, may be as insane as the Joker is.

If you wanted to flesh it out, IMO, I would have paired it with another Joker character study as a prologue. Going Sane would be perfect for that.

edited 26th Jul '16 8:22:26 AM by Beatman1

True, true, and usually when you get bad female characters you also get bad male characters, those go hand in hand.

Sure, since Japan has from a western perspective an odd relationship with sex and sexualisation, the portrayal often is questionable - and sometimes the portrayal is actually quite good, but you have still to deal with stuff like odd camera angles so that you can see the underwear of the females at every opportunity. But with the sheer mass of them, you also get a number of good ones. I mean, take Sailor Moon...you could easily dismiss it as an early version of Twilight if not for the fact that the episodes were all designed to send positive messages to females (be yourself, don't fall for those who promise you quick success, those kind of things) and it also had stuff like for all intense and purposed transgendered characters in later seasons. Then there is stuff like Lady Oscar aso.

I am a Hiromu Arakawa enthusiast, and her female characters are always spot-on - then again, so are the male ones. Whether she is telling an epic Steampunk fantasy or the lives of farm school students, it always works.

It's just that when you start a new anime series, you don't really know what you will get when it comes to female characters. You can go from the well-rounded cast of Attack On Titan (sadly, didn't watch it for long, I got Erenjaegerphobia) to Facepalm-worthy content. Or those who cross the line so much you can enjoy them as a pure Guilty Pleasure once you turn your brains off (like No Game No Life).

About 80 percent in agreement about Arakawa (granted I haven't seen much more than Fullmetal Alchemist so far). Some of the gratuitous fanservice of Winry and Hawkeye made me roll my eyes, but their writing keeps them meaningfully involved in the plot. Goes hand-in-hand with being able to write good characters in general; I was pretty surprised the story was able to keep so many side characters distinct.

Whups, realized my initial Killing Joke post forgot the link to the movie's livetweet. Here it is.

edited 26th Jul '16 11:03:51 AM by Tuckerscreator

I'm fine with fanservice as long as it's equal-opportunity, and to my knowledge Hiromu Arakawa's kind of a Bara enthusiast, so those shots of Armstrong and Sieg are intended as Author Appeal.

Edward also tends to lose his shirt a lot, and damn if he isn't ripped for a tin...vertically challenged teenager.

I don't care about equal-opportunity fanservice, but what does matter to me is whether the fanservice detracts from the work or if the character doesn't exist beyond the fanservice.

Yeah, no. I'm pretty sure some Comic Con staffer who wasn't even supposed to be part of the panel completely hijacking and talking over the "Women in Film Production" panel and offering his so-called insights over the women filmmakers and producers who were actually there is a classic example of mansplaining.

edited 26th Jul '16 11:42:19 AM by higherbrainpattern

Re: Equal opportunity fanservice.

I would argue that there's a difference between Ed, Armstrong, and Roy's shirtlessness vs Winry and Hawkeye's. In the men's cases, it's played as empowerment. They end up shirtless in battle, displaying glorious muscles, bragging about their code and sealing their wounds WITH FIRE, etc. With the women, it's not so empowering; we see them shirtless in private, with embarrassment at someone seeing them, usually with someone they have romantic tension with. So in my view there's a clear difference of presentation.

Here's a video that I think explains pretty well that frequent differences between male and female sexualized depiction.

edited 26th Jul '16 11:40:47 AM by Tuckerscreator

So would that mean that someone like Erza Scarlett is a step in the right direction?

Some scenes, yes. But the scene she was tortured at the Tarturus arc seems to cross the line for most people (including me).

Ugh. Mention Fairy Tail distress me again for how frustrating that series was. It has good story and ideals, but poor or average execution. The fanservice stopped being funny and moved to annoying and even offensive. I mean, the World of Buxom is... appealing but not when the buxom is inserted into supposedly scary / emotional scenes.

edited 26th Jul '16 11:47:25 AM by shatterstar

Mashima: "The way her gigantic jugs jiggle expresses pure regret and sadness. You just dont get it, man. If you did, you'd be crying your eyes out."

Yep, for example, I wasn't bothered about the butt shot for Gamora at all since they also stripped Chris Pratt and sprayed it him with orange goo for no real reason. I don't mind fanservice as long as it is equal opportunity fanservice and the character itself is more than a sexy lamp.