requiem2adream: (Glee: Britana - Sex is not dating)
[personal profile] requiem2adream posting in [community profile] scans_daily
I have a question about Huntress and Arsenal's one night stand so of course I turn to the lovely ladies and gents of scans_daily to hopefully find the answer.

The first I heard of it was in BoP: Dinah, Babs and Helena are meeting in a park to discuss whether or not they can work together as a team and the subject of Helena's one night stands with Dick and Roy comes up and Helena has the brilliant line 'Archers... they pull a mighty bow but they're quick to let fly'. Which of course pisses Dinah off royally and nearly ends the team before it even begins.

I went back and read the Outsiders issues where Helena takes Roy's place on the team while he recovers from being shot, thinking that would be where I could find the Huntress/Arsenal stuff (I'm a massive Huntress fan and I've been trying to track down and read pretty much everything she's been in because yes I am obsessive) but apart from the kiss at the end




there's not really any interaction between the two and certainly no sexy times going on between the pair.

So folks my question is this: is this the first time it's ever referenced or is does the Helena/Roy stuff happen in different issues to the ones I've been reading? 

Date: 2011-01-16 08:27 pm (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
The implication I get from this is that they've only just had their sex-but-not-a-thing during this time period.

Date: 2011-01-16 08:53 pm (UTC)
harpers_child: pogo the monkey from Umbrella Academy holds a cup of coffee (UA: pogo coffee)
From: [personal profile] harpers_child
i've always found roy's whole "i grab every chance to sleep with amazing women" thing to be very much my own sentiments. although given the way he's staring at nightwing's ass maybe he should drop the women part of that line. no need to limit yourself to just the women, roy.

Date: 2011-01-16 10:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ajremix.livejournal.com
I actually had to re-read Roy's last line because it first sounded like a muttered self-flagellation from a guy knowing he can't get what he wants.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:20 am (UTC)
julian: Picture of Julian Street. (Default)
From: [personal profile] julian
I've had them as "ongoing thing that happens mostly in our minds" for awhile now. There's some Outsiders stuff (5-6 years back, now?) where they have one of those "Fights as substitute for sex" things that's quite somethin'.

Date: 2011-01-17 07:26 pm (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
Roy and Helena, or Roy and Dick? ;)

Date: 2011-01-19 12:16 am (UTC)
julian: Picture of Julian Street. (Default)
From: [personal profile] julian
Roy and Dick. (Roy and Helena happened kind of on-camera, so, ya know.)

Date: 2011-01-16 09:18 pm (UTC)
From: [personal profile] thelazyreader
Funnily enough this may be one of the most natural one-night-stands in superhero comics, because Huntress and Arsenal are like opposite-gender versions of each other in the 'will sleep with anyone who's hot' aspect.

Date: 2011-01-16 09:49 pm (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
What reason did they give for her sleeping with Dick that was any more plausible than "because they're hot"? They have nothing in common, don't actually seem to like each other much and Dick is not the sort for one night stands (Bruce Jones to one side)

Date: 2011-01-16 10:01 pm (UTC)
nezchan: Navis at breakfast (Default)
From: [personal profile] nezchan
"Because he's hot" regarding Dick is a much better reason than "because he's hot" with anyone else. That's a fact!

Date: 2011-01-16 10:12 pm (UTC)
icon_uk: (Robin Don Newton)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
Well, yes, but that's the DCU equivalent of "Skies are blue" and "The grass is green".. sorry, Freudian slap... SLIP!!

Date: 2011-01-16 10:05 pm (UTC)
greenmask: (Default)
From: [personal profile] greenmask
He IS very gymnastic.

Date: 2011-01-16 10:47 pm (UTC)
rordulum: (Default)
From: [personal profile] rordulum
The only thing I ever liked about this was Gail Simone crapping on it in BoP, by having Helena say Roy was no good in bed.

But then, I've never liked Roy Harper... even before he started hitting people with dead cats.

Date: 2011-01-16 11:14 pm (UTC)
shadowpsykie: Information (Default)
From: [personal profile] shadowpsykie
Bizzaro Roy, it was in a recent supergirl comic :)

Date: 2011-01-16 11:31 pm (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
I hate to say it, but a dead cat featured there too

Date: 2011-01-16 11:50 pm (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
Here, a little something to make you feel more upbeat!

Date: 2011-01-17 03:00 am (UTC)
mad: Never fear! Misfit is here! (Misfit happy)
From: [personal profile] mad
Okay, that is the cutest.

Date: 2011-01-16 11:57 pm (UTC)
rordulum: (Default)
From: [personal profile] rordulum
Yep, I was talking about the Rise of Arsenal one. Non-Bizarro Roy, still a cat corpse wielding druggie.

The only good part of that whole story was Dick channeling his inner Batman and kicking Roy in the face, whilst calmly declaring, "I'm your friend." Still unintentionally hilarious, but not headshakingly so.

Bizarro-Roy with a quiver full of dead cats was intentionally hilarious, which is much better.

Date: 2011-01-17 09:48 am (UTC)
zyriex: Best Spiders Ever (Default)
From: [personal profile] zyriex
Okay, now I need to know the story behind that. What exactly was going on, aside from bizzaro antics?

Date: 2011-01-17 11:55 pm (UTC)
rordulum: (Default)
From: [personal profile] rordulum
In the Supergirl issue, I think it was just a selection of Bizarro heroes appearing on a splash page, and Bizarro-Roy did indeed have a quiver that was filled, not with arrows, but with dead cats. I don't even remember if I've read the whole issue.

As for the Rise of Arsenal stuff, what happened? Bad things happened. Right the way through. Bad writing, bad art, bad characterization.

Date: 2011-01-17 01:09 am (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
The only thing I ever liked about this was Gail Simone crapping on it in BoP, by having Helena say Roy was no good in bed.

Personally, I found that just about as crass as if Roy had said Helena sucked in bed. I guess I just feel that way because I have a crazy policy of not talking smack about the guys I bone.

But really, if we must accept that they hooked up then I'd like them both to get a good time out of it, at the very least.

Date: 2011-01-17 01:50 am (UTC)
big_daddy_d: (Speedy/Roy Harper)
From: [personal profile] big_daddy_d
Personally, I found that just about as crass as if Roy had said Helena sucked in bed. I guess I just feel that way because I have a crazy policy of not talking smack about the guys I bone.

I feel the same way. I feel like, whoever you sleep with, even if it's a one night stand, respect them..unless they were dicks to you. As for Roy and Helena, this is one of those scene where I thought nothing of it. There's no kind of love thing or shipping going, it didn't make Roy seem like "the man" nor do I think it was an attempt at such a thing because well..it's Roy, he inherited plenty of Ollie's traits and I'm saying that as the Roy Harper and Team Green fan that I am. All that and due to their character portrayals in the past, eh, this was one of those hook ups that just made a little sense to me actually.

P.S. Can anyone post the BoP scene in question?

Date: 2011-01-17 03:43 am (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Word. And not only that... so Helena slept with Roy. What is the Big Fucking Deal. The amount of men Helena has slept with canonically is far fewer than the majority of my IRL girlfriends' "lists."


Date: 2011-01-17 03:17 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
I'm confused as to how Helena got the bike of the DCU label when she really hasn't been linked with all that many men.

I have no idea, either, and I actually wish there were more female characters who engaged in casual sex.

Mostly I just want to see the setup. Something really interesting could have been done with Helena helping out Roy after he got shot since, you know, she knows exactly what he's going through. But no. We get a crappy handwavey kind of aside that it happened and that's it.

But how would you have envisioned it happening? I mean, I personally am not all that keen on the artist portrayal rather than the actual story portrayal. (crotch shot as she walks away)

Date: 2011-01-17 03:29 pm (UTC)
jaybee3: Nguyen Lil Cass (Default)
From: [personal profile] jaybee3
"Poor story telling IMO that suggests Huntress/Arsenal was just added in to get that exchange between the boys."

I've always thought that was the WHOLE POINT of this storyline. Which is why I personally dislike it so much. Winick having Huntress act OOC (at this point in her characterization) was basically just so Dick and Roy could josh about it. Not about her. At all. He could have inserted basically any other super-heroine - that's how little she means to the story. And THAT is insulting (and it's from this scene that she get the rep amongst DC writers and some readers as the kind of girl who'll sleep with anything) which is even MORE insulting.

All so Judd Winick could write a joke.

Date: 2011-01-17 07:17 pm (UTC)
strannik01: (Default)
From: [personal profile] strannik01
Oh I don't think it's a big deal and yeah, I'm confused as to how Helena got the bike of the DCU label when she really hasn't been linked with all that many men.

Same reason as why Oliver Queen is considered a ladies' man, in spite of the fact that, until his first death, he was largely loyal to Dinah. Some writer took a bit of information about the character without understanding the context, and other writers picked up on it.

Also, fans are often an immature, puerile lot.

Date: 2011-01-17 02:30 pm (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
I don't think there is any real commentaty on Helena here, Dick comments on Roy's proclivities, not Helena's.

Date: 2011-01-17 02:49 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Heh)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
No, but there has been fan commentary on it.

Date: 2011-01-17 03:33 pm (UTC)
jaybee3: Chibi Robin (robin)
From: [personal profile] jaybee3
Yes it's Huntress who has suffered from this story (which is ALL about the boys) not Roy. Readers and writers seem to have no problems with man-whores (look how they write Ollie after his return-including Winick with Joanna Pierce - after how he had been through).

Date: 2011-01-17 06:16 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
She suffered because people in fandom went around calling the character a slut based on their own judgments and perceptions and ideas that women should only have sex in these acceptable sets of boxes.

Date: 2011-01-17 06:21 pm (UTC)
jaybee3: Nguyen Lil Cass (Default)
From: [personal profile] jaybee3
I agree and it's not fair. I still can't defend THIS story though becuase I believe it does Huntress a disservice. She's basically used a sexual prop for a joke between Roy and Dick. She has no interaction with Roy prior to this and none afterwards. Any other super-heroine could have been inserted and the dialogue could have remained the same. Compare with it with the Josh storyline in BoP, which even though I didn't like it (more so I didn't like Josh and the way he treated Helena) was a story about HER. Some readers however will bunch the two together (and judging by the TV Tropes entry already have).

Date: 2011-01-17 08:12 pm (UTC)
From: [personal profile] arysteia
Thing is, I don't find this scene offensive. By pure coincidence I just read it for the first time at the weekend, and I thought, 'That's it? That's what all the fuss was about? No, must be more somewhere else.' While I take your point about it being about the boys and not Helena, that's the case every time a character visits another character's book. They help advance the star's plot/characterisation, not their own. But the actual scene is okay, for me. She and Roy are clearly on good enough terms that she'll help him out when he needs it, he's genuinely grateful, they kiss goodbye in what seems like genuine affection, and Dick then makes fun of Roy, not Helena. I call shame, and a lot of it, on readers for taking it, running with it, and being dicks about it, not the characters or the writers.

Date: 2011-01-17 09:24 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
This was exactly my reaction as well. I can sort-of see people's annoyance because Helena just popped up randomly so Roy could drop this revelation... But I can't really understand why it attracts such visceral hatred. The hook-up seems casual enough not to really affect the status quo of Helena's character. And I don't see that it's much worse than a reference to Roy and Helena playing Scrabble, singing songs, or skipping rope together.

I think that in order to get really annoyed by this scene one would have to accept that there's something uniquely awful about a woman engaging in casual sex. And I just don't.

Date: 2011-01-17 10:42 pm (UTC)
From: [personal profile] arysteia
I think that in order to get really annoyed by this scene one would have to accept that there's something uniquely awful about a woman engaging in casual sex. And I just don't.

This is what I find truly ironic. That the people most outraged on Helena's behalf appear actually to be the ones judging her behaviour.

Date: 2011-01-17 07:31 pm (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
People so the same with Dick, when his bedding average in very low indeed.

Liu (retconned in in the past 5 years)
Kory
Babs
Helena (one night stand)
Tarantula (don't even get me started on that one)
Cheyenne (Very briefly)

and I think that's it, in 70 years, well 42 years if you want to count from confirmation that he was 18....

Date: 2011-01-17 06:25 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
Yes. Some people say that Dick and Roy are "joking" about both bedding Helena, but I don't see that at all.

The only thing I see is faint eye-rolling disapproval on Dick's part. I definitely don't see how it's intended to make Roy look like the man.

Date: 2011-01-17 03:24 pm (UTC)
jaybee3: Nguyen Lil Cass (Default)
From: [personal profile] jaybee3
I thought that whole line stated what Gail thought about the story and the way Helena was treated in it (if you go back into the archives of S_D she has one comment where's it clear she's referring to this story in a negative way).

Date: 2011-01-17 03:21 pm (UTC)
jaybee3: Nguyen Lil Cass (Default)
From: [personal profile] jaybee3
It doesn't make sense because it WAS out of character - she cared for Charlies/Vic and Dick (in her own way). Prior to this, she wasn't the kind of character who had been shown to have sex with guys she didn't care about just to "do it". The fact that she never had scenes with Roy prior to this story or after, just proves that how bad this is. She was basically brought into this story has a warm female body for Roy and Dick to joke about. It's not even about HER. Yet it's because of this one scene that her characterization since has been judged (even Gail with the Josh thing).

Date: 2011-01-17 09:23 pm (UTC)
alienist: (Default)
From: [personal profile] alienist
I think that might say more about the people reading the scene than the scene itself.

Date: 2011-01-16 10:15 pm (UTC)
kirke_novak: (Marvel: Caiera)
From: [personal profile] kirke_novak
I have absolutely nothing of substance to add, except for: BRITTANA! \o/

Date: 2011-01-16 11:16 pm (UTC)
shadowpsykie: (ask the questions)
From: [personal profile] shadowpsykie
am i the only one who thinks Dick is a little jealous

maybe its just this community but his "Is there anyone you WONT sleep with" came out like either "Roy, YOU bitch, i thought i was the only one," or "Dammit Roy, why won't you LOVE ME!"

Date: 2011-01-16 11:19 pm (UTC)
joasakura: (Default)
From: [personal profile] joasakura
You're never the only one.

;D

Date: 2011-01-16 11:31 pm (UTC)
ext_79087: robin-thighs (robin thighs)
From: [identity profile] wasabi.livejournal.com
Certainly not. In my personal canon that was the main reason Dick swings off in a huff.

Date: 2011-01-17 02:21 am (UTC)
nezchan: Navis at breakfast (Default)
From: [personal profile] nezchan
In that case, the whole "men who have my dance card" thing is definitely a shot.

Date: 2011-01-17 12:11 am (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
Nope, you are definitely not alone there...

Date: 2011-01-17 01:11 am (UTC)
darrylayo: iPhone (iPhone)
From: [personal profile] darrylayo
Whoa dude, am I supposed to read that page "manga style?"

The reading order is all over the goddamn place.

Date: 2011-01-17 02:45 am (UTC)
sharky_chan: (kkbb: reality and fiction)
From: [personal profile] sharky_chan
All I can say is Helena's waist is really freaking me out in those panels. It's like the artist learned anatomy from Liefeld comics and forgot her internal organs. She'll probably need those at some point...

Date: 2011-01-17 03:03 am (UTC)
ravenous_raven: Silhouette of Fables' Medea in cat form, "Witch Cat" in a corner (Witch Cat)
From: [personal profile] ravenous_raven
Never just you. I kept on looking at it from the 2 angles pictured, thinking it was the shading or the color of the costume, but when a girl's waist looks like it has the same diameter of the bicep of the guy she's kissing, there are serious art issues.


At least it's an archer's bicep and not, say, Plastic Man. Yay for the small things?

Date: 2011-01-17 06:26 am (UTC)
sharky_chan: (supers: dom)
From: [personal profile] sharky_chan
Small mercies indeed x_X;;.

Date: 2011-01-17 03:16 am (UTC)
darrylayo: (Default)
From: [personal profile] darrylayo
Holy god, how did I miss that??

I think that in looking over the art, the blackness of the cape created a visual "mass" there and I completely missed that her waist is about the size of two forefingers.

That is really shameful.

Date: 2011-01-17 05:57 am (UTC)
zyriex: Best Spiders Ever (Default)
From: [personal profile] zyriex
Holy Crap, you're right. I think I'll go back to imagining that black space as actual flesh again. It makes me not want to hurl

Date: 2011-01-17 06:27 am (UTC)
sharky_chan: (black lagoon: balalaika)
From: [personal profile] sharky_chan
The cape definitely makes it more bearable, but unfortunately once you see it, you can't really unsee it _o_.

Date: 2011-01-19 12:35 am (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
Holy god, how did I miss that??

At a guess, that's what Helena said when she went looking for most of abdomen in the next scene.

Date: 2011-01-17 04:13 am (UTC)
aaron_bourque: default (Default)
From: [personal profile] aaron_bourque
This was before the threesome with Hal Jordan and Lady Blackhawk, right?

Date: 2011-01-17 04:50 am (UTC)
big_daddy_d: (Default)
From: [personal profile] big_daddy_d
Yep. Waaay before that. Like...4 or so years ago. Maybe 5, can't remember. I have the trade so i need to go back and check the date. Plus note that Roy still has two arms there. Well at least one of them isn't a robot arm.

Date: 2011-01-17 06:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] heckfiresinferno.blogspot.com
Huh...lemme guess, Winick wrote this, right?

Date: 2011-01-17 12:14 pm (UTC)
tsunamiwombat: (Default)
From: [personal profile] tsunamiwombat
No one seems to be able to characterize Helena correctly when it comes to romance and sex...

Also, ew, Soulpatch

Date: 2011-01-17 03:16 pm (UTC)
jaybee3: Chibi Robin (robin)
From: [personal profile] jaybee3
As I've said before - this one scene did more damage to Huntress's reputation (and is the primary source of the "She Gets Around" mention she's in under TV Tropes) since prior to this she was never presented as a casual sex with no feelings kind of person (she had a one-night stand with Dick yes but there were hardly "no feelings" there and Devin Grayson even seemed to be building up to something more when she had Dick when he visited her at New Year's).

Now, thanks to Winick, all of a sudden she'll go to bed with anyone - whether it be Roy or Josh the parking attendant who treated her like a piece of meat (though I think Gail was actually using that to move Helena away from this characterization). Prior to her "guest" appearance in Outsiders she had not only never seen to be the slightest bit interested in Roy - she had never had scenes with him, and after this (aside from the BoP mention which seemed like another Gail meta-comment on this Outsiders thing) she never mentions him again - and has had no scenes with him since.
Winick basically brought her onto the book just for this. So she could be used as a sexual sparring joke between Roy and Dick (who've both slept with her - ha, ha, right, Judd). It's not even about her.

Winick does that a lot. Reading back the Lost Days of Red Hood mini he sexed up Talia more than she had ever had been before (she has sex with nameless minion AND Jason in story where she's a supporting character) and the whole point of the story seemed to be getting to Jason and Talia having sex. Literally that was the climax (pardon the pun) of the entire mini-series and what it seemed all to be building up to. And just like this Outsiders story it was a story about the GUY where the woman in question is basically used as a prop and nothing more.

In case anyone missed I really, really, REALLY hate this story.

Date: 2011-01-17 06:18 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
Winick basically brought her onto the book just for this. So she could be used as a sexual sparring joke between Roy and Dick (who've both slept with her - ha, ha, right, Judd). It's not even about her.

Except that if anything, the exchange seems to be about Roy and his promiscuity. He's the one getting negative judgement from Dick, however mild it might be. Dinah and Helena's joking over Roy was in much, much poorer taste than anything Dick and Roy said - particularly considering Dinah's relationship with Roy.

prior to this she was never presented as a casual sex with no feelings kind of person

Not everyone agrees that that is such a terrible thing to be. I actually find Simone's portrayal of Helena's sexuality far more offensive. I'd take a happy slut any day over a woman who sleeps with Josh just because she has low self-esteem, then decides to "reform." Ugh. Then again, I've always hated the trope that women only sleep around because they have emotional issues.

Date: 2011-01-17 06:25 pm (UTC)
jaybee3: Nguyen Lil Cass (Default)
From: [personal profile] jaybee3
My problems with it seem to be that Huntress is basically a X Female insert. Any other super-heroine could have done the same. Which is a disservice to her.

No disagreements about the thing with Dinah or with..ugh...Josh. I gather that those both those situations were actually Gail commenting on Helena and the "rep" she got from this scene above. But it actually made it worse. Josh was a distasteful person and the fact that she slept with him after that made me question her sanity (whereas sleeping with Roy just makes me question her taste in men).

Date: 2011-01-17 06:36 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
My problems with it seem to be that Huntress is basically a X Female insert. Any other super-heroine could have done the same. Which is a disservice to her.

Well... Yes, it could have been any heroine. I don't agree that it's a disservice though, because I can't see anything inherently negative about her sleeping with Roy.

I'm afraid I just don't really understand why a casual hook-up means that her character is being trashed, or that she is less worthy of respect.

Date: 2011-01-17 07:26 pm (UTC)
thebigapricot: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thebigapricot
Of course there is nothing wrong with her sleeping with Roy if he were X male. The problem with the scene it is Winick chose to write a scene with Roy and Helena as the X Female. And the problem with that is 1) Helena was Simone's character at the time 2) Helena was being written as trying to fit in with a team that included Roy's defacto step-mother

Now whether Helena could or would isn't the question really. It's whether Winick gets to write something that Helena did that would/could have an effect on the main book she was appearing in. Which he did.

I'm not fond of the scene where the birds all talk about who slept with who. I understand the purpose of the scene, to show how the nascent team was still quite fragile, but the slut shaming just pisses me off.

The other thing about Winick's writing of her that I hate is when Helena says to Nightwing, "The rest of the team is okay. Except Grace. She's a total bitch."

Date: 2011-01-17 08:04 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
The other thing about Winick's writing of her that I hate is when Helena says to Nightwing, "The rest of the team is okay. Except Grace. She's a total bitch."

Ugh, seriously? Unimpressed.

I'm not fond of the scene where the birds all talk about who slept with who. I understand the purpose of the scene, to show how the nascent team was still quite fragile, but the slut shaming just pisses me off.

Which issue is this?

Date: 2011-01-19 12:08 am (UTC)
cuntfucius: (Default)
From: [personal profile] cuntfucius
Winick seems to love using the word bitch. 8|

Date: 2011-01-19 12:24 am (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Hmm, yeah, I've seen it in Powergirl at least once already, but he's not the only one. I fondly recall an "I'm Donna Troy, bitch!" LOL

P.S. Where have you been? :O :):):)

Date: 2011-01-19 12:33 am (UTC)
cuntfucius: (Roy/Donna)
From: [personal profile] cuntfucius
Lol let's not even get into how much Donna is using that word in Robinson's JLA (along with "cow", "witch" and any other gendered slur she can toss around. )

I ... had to take a long break from comic fandom because it was pissing me off, hahaha. WHENEVER I HAVE TROUBLE SLIPPING INTO THE MODE OF NOT TAKING THINGS SERIOUSLY I feel like it's time to step away for a while. :) I'm slowly making my return (and will get back on tumblr soon!). I still stalk you all ;)

Date: 2011-01-19 01:16 am (UTC)
benicio127: (Heh)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Lol let's not even get into how much Donna is using that word in Robinson's JLA (along with "cow", "witch" and any other gendered slur she can toss around. )

Oh, yeah, I read the issue with her and Jenny and was like whoa, what? LOL At least it's not Sarah Palin Donna? ....Poor Donna. :(

I still stalk you all ;)

:D:D:D

Date: 2011-01-19 02:27 pm (UTC)
thebigapricot: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thebigapricot
You're back! And just in time for Donna's big issue in JLA which I just posted about and, of course, thought of you!

Date: 2011-01-20 02:02 pm (UTC)
cuntfucius: (Default)
From: [personal profile] cuntfucius
♥ YOU WARM MY HEART. I'll be making a return to tumblr soon enough, I didn't know people actually noticed me missing haha

Date: 2011-01-19 12:34 am (UTC)
cuntfucius: (Default)
From: [personal profile] cuntfucius
Oh, and Bea and Tora have used the word in their exchanges four times now. COUNTING.

Date: 2011-01-19 01:23 am (UTC)
benicio127: (Heh)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Oh I forgot about that! Though, I remember at one point Tora said something like "I was worried you were going to die on me, you &$*#" to Bea, so I thought it was something like "you shit!" because it was only four symbols, not five.
Which I kind of feel is a bit more acceptable, I don't really like calling other women bitch or cunt. Jerk, jackass -- I totally use those liberally among friends. I have a friend who calls girls bitch in a friendly way, but I'm still not a fan. And then again, swear words in general coming from Bea would be like swear words coming from Donna. Just... weird and off.

Date: 2011-01-19 01:45 am (UTC)
bluefall: (phooey.)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
Well, considering everything else Winick has been doing with Tora...

Date: 2011-01-19 01:54 am (UTC)
benicio127: (Default)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Oh God, I know, that flashback to her past? Uggggggggggggggggggh how is it that the person who writes two of my favourite characters -- Jason Todd and Mia Dearden -- and writes my favourite version of Talia al Ghul can't be consistent on these other characterizations?! :( :(

(And Ooops I realised I accidentally wrote Bea up there when I meant Tora)

Date: 2011-01-17 07:34 pm (UTC)
strannik01: (Default)
From: [personal profile] strannik01
I'm afraid I just don't really understand why a casual hook-up means that her character is being trashed, or that she is less worthy of respect.

Because we as the society (and I am not just talking about Americans here) are still struggling with the cultural implications of sexual revolution. We want to treat men and women as equals, yet we still tend to judge behavior based through the prism of gender. When men engage in casual sex, it is a sign of their virility. When women engage in casual sex, they are being improperly permissive.

There are arguments to be made against casual sex, but this sort of double standard bugs me.

P.S. Another thing that occurs to me is that while it is possible to show a character having casual sex without compromising her dignity, as (jaybee3 said) too many writers fall into the trap of treating a woman as a prop, as if she has no thoughts, feelings or motivations of her own. I think Roy/Helena thing would be far more palatable to our merry community if both characters were treated with the same level of thoughtfulness and complexity.

Date: 2011-01-17 07:54 pm (UTC)
bluefall: (act feminine)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
I'm afraid I just don't really understand why a casual hook-up means that her character is being trashed, or that she is less worthy of respect.

Some women don't sleep with guys they're not pretty seriously into. That's not a judgement on women who do, in any way. It's simply a reality that that's a choice some people make. It was established, over several years of character work, as Helena's choice. To have her act in a way not in accordance with that is, yes, a disservice to her character, in exactly the same way that Clark Kent waking up tomorrow as a die-hard emo with Crow mascara would be a disservice to her character: failure to respect prior characterization is a fundamental failure of respect, period.

As for whether it was insulting beyond merely the fact that it meant Winick didn't care about who she was as a character? That has far less to do with objective fact and far more to do with how Winick saw it and how he expected his audience to see it. You can think penises are the most awesome things in the entire world, it doesn't make someone calling you a "dick" any less an insult.

Basically, Winick writes this scene as a sexually-based indictment of Helena. "Is there anyone you won't sleep with," Dick asks Roy, as though Helena were somehow sexually distasteful. "Casual sex with people you aren't in love with is bad," Dick tells Roy, as Helena says goodbye to someone she had casual sex with and doesn't even appear to like. There's no way he wasn't looking down his nose at Helena as he wrote this, and no way the dudebros that make up 80% of the comic-reading audience would interpret this as anything other than a massive validation of the natural dudebro inclination to slut-shame, with bonus offer of a tasty new target.

The fact that that's an effective insult is horrible, yes. It's a disgusting truth of kyriarchy. But it is a truth nevertheless, and that damage had to be answered.

(Not, mind, that I'm all that fond of how Gail chose to answer it.)

Date: 2011-01-17 07:55 pm (UTC)
bluefall: Wonder Girl facepalming (facepalm Cassie)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
"Clark Kent waking up tomorrow as a die-hard emo with Crow mascara would be a disservice to her character"

His character, even.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:14 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Some women don't sleep with guys they're not pretty seriously into. That's not a judgement on women who do, in any way. It's simply a reality that that's a choice some people make. It was established, over several years of character work, as Helena's choice.

I totally understand what you're saying in this wrt this scene and while I agree for the most part, sometimes women in reality themselves change. ie. I know a woman IRL who recently got divorced and was monogamous with her husband of 15-plus years, and has now been enjoying a newfound sexual freedom.
Here, in this scene, we don't see some kind of character development for Helena, but I don't know if I really like this idea of saying, "well this character has been written this way and that can never change" in regards to the character's sex life, especially if that character is a woman.
And even more so if that character is a woman and a heroic one because then it starts to go down the whole "good girls don't do that" route.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:23 pm (UTC)
bluefall: (bright knight)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
Well, sure, if Helena decided for whatever reason that she was going to change her relationship philosophy, that would be fine. But that should be something that happens from her perspective and respects her as a character, not something that happens off-panel without explanation in order to set up a different character's punchline.

It's true there are an awful lot of serial monogamist women in capes. Renee and Zinda are, offhand, the only two I can think of at DC who aren't, though I'm sure there are probably a few more. But most of the guys are too, after all. These are all pretty old characters with old sensibilities, and the new characters are all subject to the blanket "let's not delve too deeply into teenagers' sex lives" policy.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:37 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
It's true there are an awful lot of serial monogamist women in capes. Renee and Zinda are, offhand, the only two I can think of at DC who aren't, though I'm sure there are probably a few more.

Kate Kane, Kory, Grace Choi, Jess Jones (pre-Marriage) are a few I can think of. And Mia Dearden, she definitely wanted to have sex with Dodger, she brought condoms with her to visit him. (I don't know if they ever got to do anything since he cheated on her with Emma Watson.) And she hit on Connor a lot.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:56 pm (UTC)
bluefall: (act feminine)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
Grace! How the hell did I forget Grace! I guess just because she's been in a committed relationship for so long?

Though she and Mia do both have that whole "past history of sexual abuse" thing going. I appreciate that the writing for both of them (so far as I know at least, I'm not a big Arrow fan) has avoided ever drawing that "promiscuous because damaged" conclusion -- Grace has a healthy and varied sex life, and also she was abused once, and these things are unrelated as far as the narrative is concerned -- but the implication is still just sitting there waiting for someone to make it, and I worry that sooner or later someone will. I mean look what happened to Shulkie. These gross sexist cliches have real traction with some writers. :/

Date: 2011-01-17 09:02 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
I totally agree. Mia actually really seems to have some positive attitudes towards sex just based on the fact that she hits on her crushes the amount she does. It's really, really refreshing to see not even taking into account the fact that she's a sex abuse survivor and is living with HIV.

Date: 2011-01-19 12:11 am (UTC)
cuntfucius: (Default)
From: [personal profile] cuntfucius
So basically we have girls who are queer, girls who have been abused, and aliens as the only girls who can be promiscuous in comics and it be "understandable" because of their "backgrounds" or some weird implications that I'm totally looking way too deeply into.

Which I know I am, hahaha. BUT STILL. You see less hetero-identified girls with "good" backgrounds doing this.

Ah, I fondly remember the slut shaming even Donna Troy went through...

Date: 2011-01-19 12:21 am (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Yep! Exactly. And you have to be a type to have casual sex, you know! And because Helena is Catholic, she can't fit into this group? (Except that one of my best friends is Catholic and very happily has enjoyed lots of sex with different people! So take that stereotypes!)

Date: 2011-01-19 12:30 am (UTC)
cuntfucius: (ReneeKate)
From: [personal profile] cuntfucius
Yeah, either way I think people need to tread carefully when deciding on whether or not Helena would be the "type" of person to have casual sex, or if it's "in character" for her to do so. Especially because sexual choices are so very personal, sometimes you can be mostly monogamous and deep-connection-based your entire life, but have a tiny period where you want to try out some casual stuff to see if it's for you. I mean, I'm NOT a Winick fan at all by any means (rather the opposite), but I think in general, though he's using Helena as an annoying proxy for an exchange, he's also kind of shining a poor light on Roy here. Which was only aggravated by Gail's sniping of his "talents" in bed later on, or lack thereof. Winick's got a bad case of misogyny and liberal-proclaimed-male-feminist syndrome, so I can't give him too much of a benefit of the doubt here, buuuut I remember REALLY cringing at Gail thinking she was "sticking up" for Helena but, in fact, making Helena not seem in charge of her own bodily autonomy, taking away a bunch of her agency by attributing the sex she had to low self esteem and to a troubled period for her.

Roy gets a lot of slack for this, too. It's character memes spread around in fandom and by writers, ideas getting taken and run with and it just gets embarrassing to read because people repeat these "truths" without really trying to dissect the numbers and reality behind them. Donna Troy immediately, by glorious Kyle fangirls and boys, got branded as a slut the moment she touched Roy Harper. So did Helena. And even Kendra got bad reception for that reason. Donna also was suddenly a "slut" for ... being nice to Jason? All because she had touched Roy Harper before, which obviously WOW HOW LOW CAN YOU GO, GIRL?

So because of the treatment of a fave of mine, my eyes were VERY open and peeled to how Helena was treated after this. And it was not good. I honestly am baffled that Helena gets treated as the go-to casual sex girl in the DCU by so many fans, when her number isn't even "high." It's even more disturbing that people act as if it would be a bad thing if it was so.

Date: 2011-01-19 12:40 am (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Yeah, either way I think people need to tread carefully when deciding on whether or not Helena would be the "type" of person to have casual sex, or if it's "in character" for her to do so. Especially because sexual choices are so very personal, sometimes you can be mostly monogamous and deep-connection-based your entire life, but have a tiny period where you want to try out some casual stuff to see if it's for you.

Exactly and this is what I was trying to say elsewhere, but you've outdone me as usual. ;)

Donna Troy immediately, by glorious Kyle fangirls and boys, got branded as a slut the moment she touched Roy Harper. So did Helena. And even Kendra got bad reception for that reason. Donna also was suddenly a "slut" for ... being nice to Jason? All because she had touched Roy Harper before, which obviously WOW HOW LOW CAN YOU GO, GIRL?

Ugh, so gross. Not only that but branded a slut because the fans also don't like the male character (ie. Jason or Roy) so she gets shat on by proxy.

Date: 2011-01-19 12:54 am (UTC)
cuntfucius: (Default)
From: [personal profile] cuntfucius
Yeah, and I think this is the problem of people being so absolutist about sex. If you involve it in a story, people immediately are on guard about its "purpose" in a story. Sometimes, people think immediately it is sleazy if there's no love involved...in particular, the readership I think is a bit behind on progressive ideals, since it's a mostly (direct market wise) shrinking one, I think? Because of this, individual character assessment on their sexuality can't ...be done in a realistic manner, usually, since most characters aren't really shown talking about it, or their preferences, or whatever. Comic relationships -- romance and sexuality, are written like...terribly, lol, often, in a way where you often get contradictory and backwards ideals projected on to characters.

It is because Roy has been more brazen and honest about his sexual desires than most that he's seen as sleazy, I guess. And then it becomes a caricature of sleaziness: He frequents strip clubs (and strip clubs are dirty, and strippers are dirty, so let's make STD jokes about Roy!), he ranked girls in bed in Rise of Arsenal during a sadistic fight...and yet, his impotence also gets made fun of. It's just like...Roy has been retconned and retroactively made into being pinned with character essentialism, where he was "doomed" to always be troubled and come from a broken lifestyle, so let's include being sexual in that "brokenness."

And, yes, any girl who touches a man THAT sleazy has to be sleazy herself, right? It's just all really backwards ideas, in general, and the sad thing is I see them projected by lolfeministbloggerslol in comic fandom just as much.

Date: 2011-01-19 01:42 am (UTC)
benicio127: (Heh)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Absolutely and I'm nodding my head to everything you've said here. And I really am getting the sense of just how conservative the majority of comic fans are. I mean you see more progress in TV and movies. And you know, I can recall someone mentioning there were letters sent in when comics showed Dick and Kory in a sexual relationship because they were a) 18/19 ish (even though Kory is an alien and who knows how old she really is?) and b) not married etc. etc. etc.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:24 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
You took the words out of my mouth (off my keyboard?)

Whether or not a woman ever could/would enjoy casual sex or not is not something germane to most comic book conversations. Pretty much the only way to introduce that possibility is to write her as having casual sex at some point. And actually, it kind of bugs me that we even need to establish a "type" of female character who would do that - particularly when most male characters are assumed by default of being capable of casual sex in at least some situations.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:50 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
And actually, it kind of bugs me that we even need to establish a "type" of female character who would do that - particularly when most male characters are assumed by default of being capable of casual sex in at least some situations.

Ohmygod Yes. But by comic book logic, it seems that the fandom equation is, for example: Cheshire having casual sex is OK; Stephanie Brown is not. (

Date: 2011-01-17 09:12 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
I'm beginning to see a parallel between this issue and the good old "I don't have a problem with X being gay, except that up until now he/she has always been portrayed as straight - making him/her gay is not being true to the character."

While this sounds reasonable on the surface, it ignores the fact that the default orientation for characters has always been straight - just like the default sexuality for "good" female characters has always been committed and monogamous. You need to actively declare a character gay; there is no need to declare them straight, unless you state otherwise that's just assumed. The burden is on the writer to declare that a heroine might enjoy casual sex - because otherwise it's conventionally assumed that she doesn't.

And if a writer does make that declaration, people will be unhappy with it because she's never been written as that "type" before.

Date: 2011-01-17 09:26 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Well, I think that's extremely reasonable thinking and is why the whole idea of parents enforcing heteronormativity to their children is a bad idea -- the assumption that their child will be the default straight.
And we have no idea unless a person tells us about their sex life and since that's such a personal topic, the automatic assumption is that good person = chaste person.

And don't even get me started on how disgusting it is to be OK with a Talia who pines away for a man who loves another woman over her (in fact that man loves many women!) and be chaste for him, yet when she has agency and makes her own choices of who she's having sex with, that that is the truly bad move.

Date: 2011-01-17 09:45 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
Well, I think that's extremely reasonable thinking and is why the whole idea of parents enforcing heteronormativity to their children is a bad idea -- the assumption that their child will be the default straight.

Um yeah, that's the point I was trying to make, but maybe it got a bit lost. I meant that considering everyone straight by default is a product of heteronormative thinking, and actually not at all a reasonable assumption to make.

But a similar assumption of chastity operates in the way we see (and the way writers write) heroines. Casual sex apparently needs an established history of "sluttiness" in order to be in character - which is weird because I'm fairly sure that Helena never explicitly said "btw guys, I only have sex with men I love and am in a committed relationship with."

Date: 2011-01-17 11:45 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Outlaw's amazing rack)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
But a similar assumption of chastity operates in the way we see (and the way writers write) heroines. Casual sex apparently needs an established history of "sluttiness" in order to be in character - which is weird because I'm fairly sure that Helena never explicitly said "btw guys, I only have sex with men I love and am in a committed relationship with."

I have nothing to add except thank you for this very awesome point!!!

Date: 2011-01-17 09:33 pm (UTC)
bluefall: (act feminine)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
Well, again, it depends how it's presented. Is it her story, in which she is a protagonist with agency, or is it an off-panel swerve in service of a male character?

I wouldn't be too thrilled with a Superman comic that abruptly had "Batman's ex-boyfriend" show up to make Clark look all super-accepting and liberal either.

Date: 2011-01-17 09:55 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
I wouldn't be too thrilled with a Superman comic that abruptly had "Batman's ex-boyfriend" show up to make Clark look all super-accepting and liberal either.

Is it bad that I might be at least a little bit thrilled by that?

Joking aside, yes, I do get why fans aren't happy with this happening while Helena's essentially a bit-part character. That's pretty much the only aspect I do get, but yeah, I get it.

Date: 2011-01-17 10:30 pm (UTC)
bluefall: Babs, looking grumpy and unimpressed (Babs is a grump)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
Yeah that might actually be worth it just to see the fanboy's heads explode, I gotta admit. XD

No but yeah, that's basically my point. The other thing is that Winick has a longstanding habit of ignoring prior characterization, so even if I didn't have an issue with him developing Helena's character in such a glancing, bit-part manner, I don't actually believe he's developing her here at all, just grabbing a convenient blank slate for his Roy/Dick whim. And pretty much just carelessly slapping a target across her chest for all the dudebro contempt the fanbase can muster while he's at it. He doesn't care about her here, not who she was before or where she'll go after. That's not an okay attitude to have when you're writing about someone else's character, period; that as volatile a subject as female sexuality is at issue is just icing on the failcake.

Then of course Gail came and tried to solve that problem by, um, validating that slut-shamey default dudebro read and throwing in some no-no-yes to boot. I'm willing to bet that a lot of the read you see from fans on this scene now, as opposed to when it was published, involves some back-propagated slut-shaming from that. -.-

dudebro, dudebro, dudebro, let me say it a few more times it hasn't yet entirely lost all meaning

Date: 2011-01-17 10:45 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
And pretty much just carelessly slapping a target across her chest for all the dudebro contempt the fanbase can muster while he's at it. He doesn't care about her here, not who she was before or where she'll go after. That's not an okay attitude to have when you're writing about someone else's character, period; that as volatile a subject as female sexuality is at issue is just icing on the failcake.

Hmm. I'll admit that maybe I hadn't fully considered the perspective of fans who, while not being inclined to slut-shame themselves, dislike this scene because it exposed Helena to a lot of nasty remarks from dudebros.

Female sexuality is a really contentious issue. I don't think it should be, but it is. I guess I can see why you'd be unhappy with Winick for not anticipating/not caring about the fallout for Helena. I suppose it would have been different if he'd been her main writer at the time, and prepared to go the distance and defend her decisions.

It's really unfortunate that her actual main writer's attempts to "fix" this were far more offensive.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:19 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
Basically, Winick writes this scene as a sexually-based indictment of Helena. "Is there anyone you won't sleep with," Dick asks Roy, as though Helena were somehow sexually distasteful. "Casual sex with people you aren't in love with is bad," Dick tells Roy, as Helena says goodbye to someone she had casual sex with and doesn't even appear to like.

Does this bit happen somewhere else in the comic, or is it something you're inferring from the page above? Because Helena and Roy seem to like and respect each other there - he thanks her, said he knew he could count on her, they kiss, she leaves.

I agree that Dick seems vaguely slut-shamey here, but towards Roy, not Helena. I thought the "is there anyone you won't sleep with?" comment has more to do with - as Roy himself points out - the fact that Helena and Dick had a history. Dick is chiding him, albeit mildly, for breaking a code of friendship.

There's no way he wasn't looking down his nose at Helena as he wrote this, and no way the dudebros that make up 80% of the comic-reading audience would interpret this as anything other than a massive validation of the natural dudebro inclination to slut-shame, with bonus offer of a tasty new target.

I think there's two ways you could take this scene: 1, that Winick really was looking down his nose at Helena and knew exactly how the fanboys would react; and 2. That Winick, perhaps naively, assumed that the average reader had more egalitarian views on gender and sexuality than they actually do.

I can easily imagine an identical scenario with the genders reversed (not in comics - perhaps in Sex and the City or something like that) that wouldn't be taken as insulting to anyone. The fact is that this type of thing isn't always an effective insult any more, not everywhere. Perhaps Winick just misjudged his audience?

I think most of the seediness on this page comes from the art, not the writing. The scene would read completely differently if the kiss between Roy and Helena was subtler, and the panel didn't centre on Helena's waist and hips.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:26 pm (UTC)
bluefall: Wonder Woman looking badass (Warrior)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
Does this bit happen somewhere else in the comic, or is it something you're inferring from the page above?

Elsewhere in the comic. Helena's pretty contentious with the whole team the whole time she's there, but she has some extra-pointed insults for Roy IIRC.

I dunno. You could be right, but Winick's treatment of women elsewhere has pretty much robbed him of any remote shred of the benefit of the doubt with me.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:32 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
I dunno. You could be right, but Winick's treatment of women elsewhere has pretty much robbed him of any remote shred of the benefit of the doubt with me.

I haven't really read much of Winick's writing apart from his Jason-centric stuff. I know some people took issue with Talia's portrayal in Lost Days, and I definitely don't think we were intended to look down on her there - she was obviously written to be a sympathetic character imo.

I guess I'm also giving Winick the benefit of the doubt because he is heavily pro-LGBTQ, and that doesn't normally go hand-in-hand with misogyny.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:41 pm (UTC)
bluefall: (into the sun)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
he is heavily pro-LGBTQ, and that doesn't normally go hand-in-hand with misogyny.

You would be surprised. -_-

As for Winick, I'd recommend you read his run on Green Arrow/Black Canary to see a few examples, but I don't actually loathe you with a deep, abiding visceral hatred, so I can't in good conscience inflict that on you. On the whole, Winick's liberalism reminds me of a kid who discovers his mom's makeup and does himself up like Ronald McDonald, then goes and finds her and says "hey look now I'm just like you." He sort of gets the message and he wants to play, and those are both good things, but he has a habit of still wildly missing the actual point.

Date: 2011-01-17 08:44 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
...I am impressed by the striking visuals of that analogy.

He sort of gets the message and he wants to play, and those are both good things, but he has a habit of still wildly missing the actual point.

I know exactly what you mean.

Date: 2011-01-19 12:10 am (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
Some women don't sleep with guys they're not pretty seriously into. That's not a judgement on women who do, in any way. It's simply a reality that that's a choice some people make. It was established, over several years of character work, as Helena's choice.

Ummm, how does that tie into her sleeping with Nightwing, who she hardly knew, and with no intention of taking the relationship further?

Date: 2011-01-19 12:17 am (UTC)
bluefall: (Scary Bat God)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
She didn't sleep with Nightwing, she slept with Batman's Son. It was an attempt to make a physical connection with the Batclan as a concept, and she did indeed already have a very serious emotional thing about the Batclan concept. That was kind of the whole point of that mini, her trying to find a way into the family after spending ages upon ages circling desperately around the edges.

Beyond that, it's my understanding that Grayson actually did intend for Helena to continue to pursue Dick and for them to take that relationship further, but was ultimately overruled by Dixon's Babs/Dick before it could get off the ground.

Date: 2011-01-19 12:27 am (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
That still speaks an approach to sexual relationships that a a bit far from "Some women don't sleep with guys they're not pretty seriously into" if a convenient body which happens to be an emotional proxy will suffice.

I've never been a huge fan of the Dick/Babs relationship, but if the alternative would have been Dick/Helena (And Devin Grayson written Dick/Helena) I think I'm grateful.

Date: 2011-01-19 02:27 am (UTC)
bluefall: (bright knight)
From: [personal profile] bluefall
Well, I admit that "Some women don't sleep with guys they're not pretty seriously into" was imprecise -- I was kind of conflating two arguments there. It's true that New York Huntress was sexually conventional in the same vein as her Helena Wayne predecessor, but by the time we get to Birds!Huntress we've added the more fraught Dick/Helena as well as the more conventional Helena/Vic. So at that point it's more accurate to say that Helena was someone who only had emotionally-motivated sex, rather than casual sex. Either way, though, the carefree purely sexual vibe with which her Roy fling is portrayed here is inconsistent with her history to that point.

I admit I don't really get Dick/Helena. I mean, Grayson's theory, as voiced by Babs in Nightwing/Huntress, is that Helena reminds Dick of Bruce. And you know what, that's fine with me. I read Bruce and Dick as solely father and son, any kind of serious shipping of them squicks me right the fuck out, but it's a true fact that many people are romantically drawn to people who resemble their parents. I don't have an issue with that justification for Dick's romantic choices. It's just, you know. That would be Babs (at least if Dick were actually attracted to Babs now and not the memory of Babs ten years ago). Helena's almost nothing like Bruce.

Date: 2011-01-17 09:31 pm (UTC)
alienist: (Default)
From: [personal profile] alienist
I haven't read the scene in context, but I agree with that last bit so hard. Casual sex does not degrade a character, and that arc in BoP? Complete with slut-shaming from Barbara and Helena? Ugh.

Mod note!

Date: 2011-01-18 04:26 pm (UTC)
greenmask: (grr)
From: [personal profile] greenmask
While it's acceptable to point out inconsistencies with characterization, in some cases there is a danger of tipping into "slut shaming", which is completely unacceptable on this community.

It's reasonable to criticize writers not showing the journey between one attitude towards casual sex and another, but comments about a character being "sexed up" because they're shown having sex with two characters definitely tips towards slut shaming, and we've had correspondence from a number of members who feel the same.

It is simply not okay to shame based on when a woman is shown enjoying more sex than a commenter feels is "appropriate".

Please consider this if commenting further.

Date: 2011-01-18 12:17 am (UTC)
jeyl: (Default)
From: [personal profile] jeyl
So the moral here is that monogamy is bad?

Profile

scans_daily: (Default)
Scans Daily
Founded by girl geeks and members of the slash fandom, [community profile] scans_daily strives to provide an atmosphere which is LGBTQ-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist, woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free.

Bottom line: If slash, feminism or anti-oppressive practice makes you react negatively, [community profile] scans_daily is probably not for you.

Please read the community ethos and rules before posting or commenting.

April 2014

S M T W T F S
   1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23242526
27282930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags