stubbleupdate: (Every night I have the same dream)stubbleupdate ([personal profile] stubbleupdate) wrote in [community profile] scans_daily,
@ 2011-10-09 10:05 pm UTC
  • Previous Entry
  • Add to Memories
  • Tell someone about this!
  • Next Entry
Entry tags:char: ultra/pearl penalosa, creator: luna brothers, publisher: image comics, title: ultra
I'm now three posts in to a short series on the Luna Bros book Ultra. The first one was all on the covers, the second was about Ultra's date with a lovely gentleman and this one is about the aftermath.

I think that I'm sticking to my idea that Ultra is a positive female character, stuck in a book that has no time for anything like that. My warning is that this post will contain examples of other characters "slut-shaming" and calling women "whores." Like I said at the start, it's a problematic book.


Before Ultra gets in to her office we see her agent. I originally wasn't going to post the first page, but it cranks up the tension for the coming swerve. It also shows Pearl's agent as somebody that actually seems to be interested in her own welfare, as well as the bottom line.



What did we tell you? That guy is a dick.
There's a tiny bit of expressive work on the Agent's eyes as he's showing Pearl the magazine.


Panel 1 - Nobody romps, except in tabloid news
Panel 2 - I hope that this guy's publicist is meant to look like Pagus, Jesus' brother, because he definitely does.
And yes, the agent is being a bit of a dick at the end, but he sorts himself out pretty quickly.
He offers PEarl the day off, but she turns it down and gets to work. In the locker room she lashes out at a green and blonde girl who says that now that Pearl's secret is out, she can stop being fake.

I'll post some more of the public's reaction to the scoop at some point later in the week.

That article in full...

Yes, a superhero analyst says that Pearl "Whored up" And this is Pearl's outfit that shows "coppious amounts of cleavage"



"I did what any other reasonable guy would do."

I realise that I'm complaining about a fictional account that is meant to come across as completely dickish and a distortion of the truth. However, I get hella pissed about the real newspapers that do nonsense like this, so this just pushed one of my angry buttons. If you read any of my stuff on LJ you'll see that I wrote on a hyperlinktastic post about one such example.

This is one of the more obvious times when the character (the magazine is a character too) is clearly portrayed as a baddie in their attitudes towards women. The issue with Ultra is that there's a lot of times when it's not-baddies that are using derogatory words to describe women.

I'd expand on my feelings about tabloids and their horrid attitudes towards women, but it's been a long day and I can't do any more brain... stuff...


(Read 73 comments) - (Post a new comment)
(Flat) (Top-level comments only)

mrstatham: (pic#927958)


[personal profile] mrstatham
2011-10-10 07:23 am UTC (link)
I think it's astonishing that journalists are allowed to treat celebrities like cattle. In a lot of instances, the pictures and videos are obtained by illicit means, such as the pictures of SJ that I mentioned. And again, what gives the press the right? It might be stupid and silly of someone to have nude pictures on their phone, but it's their choice and the like, and plenty of average people do the same thing. I just think it's especially unfair when it happens to those who don't seem to chase the spotlight and are acting or performing because that's their job and it's what they want to do, unlike those that are full-time 'celebrities' and clearly do things to get the spotlight, like Paris Hilton.

(Reply to this)  (Thread from start)  (Parent)  (Thread


proteus_lives: (Ron Swanson)


[personal profile] proteus_lives
2011-10-10 07:54 am UTC (link)
It is unfair but it's impossible to stop.

Nine times out ten those kind of celeb pics get put on the news/gossip sites then immediately get taken down but that's expected. They just need the headline and people's google-fu does the rest. And the penalties don't out weigh the profit margins for these people.

It is their choice and it happens to regular folk all the time, there entire sections of the 'net devoted to people posting their nudies and tapes or pics/tapes of their exes.

There is no right but it is one of the consequences of the 24/7/365 news-cycle we now live in.

(Reply to this)  (Thread from start)  (Parent


meatwhichdreams: (me icon)


[personal profile] meatwhichdreams
2011-10-11 04:18 am UTC (link)
I am very much in agreement with you, although I just wanted to point out - Paris Hilton's sex tape was leaked by her boyfriend without her permission, as was Kim Kardashian's. That is not to say that both women do not use their fame to garner MORE fame through sexual stunts. But that doesn't change the fact that both were betrayed by people they trusted - and had their reputations irrevocably changed because of that betrayal. They might seek out the spotlight happily but they didn't ask for that particular spotlight, you know?

(Reply to this)  (Thread from start)  (Parent)  (Thread


mrstatham: (pic#927958)


[personal profile] mrstatham
2011-10-11 06:55 am UTC (link)
In the case of Hilton, hasn't she actually had two leaked? I think I may have been thinking of that and perhaps thought it a little too much of a coincidence, but I'll happily admit I might be jumping to conclusions. Neither tape really hurt her 'career', though..

(Reply to this)  (Thread from start)  (Parent



(Read 73 comments) - (Post a new comment)
(Flat) (Top-level comments only)