([identity profile] wrote in [community profile] scans_daily2009-08-14 12:59 pm

Amazing Spider-man 603,

Wow, Is Marvel trying hard to make us not miss or like Mj because this is the most ugliest Mj I ever scene. I hope this is a zombie variant because it sure does look like one. I guess this too suffer from inconsistent art, well Michelle looks like Eliza Maza here.
Type your cut contents here.

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 07:09 pm (UTC)(link)
And once again, Michelle is reduced to the level of a plot-device cipher.

REALLY, Waid? REALLY? Peter says some incredibly insensitive things to her, and she's so spitting-nails angry that she's kicking him out, and all he has to do is SMOOCH on her, and she's ready GIVE HER PUSSY UP TO HIM ON THE KITCHEN FLOOR?


The misogyny inherent in this portrayal makes me want to take a SHOWER.

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 07:11 pm (UTC)(link)

And honestly, this happens IN COMICS a WHOLE lot. I'VE seen this trope OF the STOP ARGUMENT kiss a lot IN movies AND comics IT'S SORT of a big thing.

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 07:17 pm (UTC)(link)
You didn't even read my post, did you?

I don't CARE that it's Chameleon. It's STILL an inherently misogynistic portrayal of MICHELLE.

And anyone who CLAIMS to be a "liberal" (as I believe you've done) who DEFENDS misogynistic tropes on the grounds that they're used a lot in mainstream media should be ASHAMED of themselves. Yes, the "Oh, she was a bitch before, but she just needs a smack to shut her up" trope IS used in a lot of mainstream media, but so are any number of OTHER racist, sexist and homophobic tropes. I guess it's okay to reduce blacks to token characters who all talk in ghetto slang, then, because so many stories have done it before. THIS IS MEDIA THEORY 101.

And your parodying of my CAPS is neither funny nor effective, because it shows you're not interested in hearing my points as much as you are in trying to score points off of me.

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 07:29 pm (UTC)(link)
Come to think of it, doesn't it seem to be an extra helping of creepy that they present a dehumanized female as plot device and little more, in the same scene where they're discussing a refrigerator?

Or am I reading too much into this?

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-14 19:35 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-15 04:36 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-15 05:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-15 05:49 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 11:11 pm (UTC)(link)
You know, I have quite grown to respect you.

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-14 23:16 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 07:20 pm (UTC)(link)

No seriously, that (and the cover, and the general silliness) is pretty much what I was talking about. I don't really give a toss about BND, it's the fact that she's only in the scene so Chameleon can screw up Peter's life by having sex with her with absurd ease. But we all know getting supremely pissed at someone, then going to the extent of chaining the refrigerator closed is code for "I WANT YOU IN ME NOW YOU BIG STUD".

She's not a character here, she's a vagina with legs.

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 07:24 pm (UTC)(link)
THANK YOU. I was wondering if I was taking Crazy Pills for a moment.

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-14 19:27 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 08:34 pm (UTC)(link)
This. This, this, this. Right now, I don't care that this is post BND. I care about the fact that Michelle has no personality except to be a convenient plot device, and right now, convenience means her being totally willing to spread her legs for no goddamn reason at all for the roommate she was ready to throw out not ten seconds earlier. How is that not creepy?

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 08:54 pm (UTC)(link)

Wanky apologia

[identity profile] 2009-08-15 04:42 am (UTC)(link)
I'm guessing it's meant to subtextually tell us that Michelle really liked Peter, but she's bitchy to men she likes, and she thought that Peter understood and liked her and stuff when they slept together (and if they didn't actually have sex, then that could've coded itself in her head to "OMG he doesn't just want me for sex!") and then Peter called her the wrong name and didn't even REMEMBER sleeping with her and she was really hurt and angry hence superbitchiness + passive aggressive traps. Now, Peter seems to really actually want her when he's not drunk, so she can forgive his idiocy of the morning after as just drunk mistakes.

Unfortunately, this puts Michelle among the horde of women who unaccountably are over the top attracted to Peter who he dumps on. Because we all know whats going to happen when Peter comes back and Michelle insists they are in a RELATIONSHIP now.

Oh, my mistake ...

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 07:12 pm (UTC)(link)
... Just rechecked the cover. Apparently, it's Van Lente who's responsible for this shit, which is a shame, because I thought better of him than this.

Re: Oh, my mistake ...

[identity profile] 2009-08-15 01:54 am (UTC)(link)
The odd thing is that Mark Waid wrote first issue of this arc and recently a single writer has had been writing each arc on ASM (even if with an insane number of artists involved).

I don't know, but this arcs smells a lot to pure corporate mandate to me where the writers have to work with whatever "genius" idea is thrown at them by the higher ups.

Re: Oh, my mistake ...

[identity profile] 2009-08-15 02:16 am (UTC)(link)
That trick never works!

(Anonymous) 2009-08-14 07:35 pm (UTC)(link)
Apart from the whole "Rape equals love" trope that's going on here (and technically, you could argue that the Chameleon is "raping" Michelle in this scene since she is under the belief he's actually Peter reciprocating her new found love), Michelle pretty falls under the "Tsundere" category to a tee. Just get a load of the description for it at TV tropes:

Just further proof that "Vin Gonzales with boobs" is a walking plot device moreso than a character.


(Anonymous) 2009-08-14 08:12 pm (UTC)(link)
BTW, I hope this isn't going to lead to some "Who's the daddy?" subplot, with Michelle getting pregnant and Peter not knowing whether or not he's the father of Michelle's baby before it revealed it's the Chameleon's.


(Anonymous) 2009-08-15 10:05 pm (UTC)(link)
attacked later by michelle's age-sped-up-genetically twins by the chameleon anyone?

Cause right now BND is ALL about the new, am I right guys?

[identity profile] (from 2009-08-14 08:00 pm (UTC)(link)
The thing that I see excusing the misogyny that you see is also the reason that I hate this. A sitcom-level resolution seems appropriate when you've had Peter and Michelle acting as though they're characters in a sitcom or a bad romantic comedy. We've had the improbable meeting, the "comic" first date disaster-first date here being a euphemism for drunk sex, of course-, we've had the conflict that could have been resolved in ten seconds by either of them not acting like idiots, so why not have a stock ending like that. It would even make sense if there'd been a history of sexual/romantic tension between them, but I've come to accept that the Spider-Man story in my head is better than the one Marvel publishes.

But I really hate mistaken identity plots in sitcoms and this seems very much like a setup to one. Fake Peter thinks a picture of Gwen is MJ, won't it be funny when he meets MJ and says something to that effect? Real Peter wants to get back together with MJ, but fake Peter is starting an ongoing sexual relationship with Michelle, can't you just picture the wacky hijinks that'll happen when real Peter has any contact with either of them?

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 08:36 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, great. Now aside from being creeped out, I'm vicariously embarrassed.

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 08:08 pm (UTC)(link)
What did he say that was insensitive? I am not caught up. I do know that arguments do, in reality, turn out this way. I've had break up fights turn into living room sex, I imagine it is pretty normal.

(Anonymous) 2009-08-14 08:21 pm (UTC)(link)
Peter, having taken too much "liquid courage" in order to talk to Mary Jane at his Aunt's wedding, accidentally wound having sex with his equally drunk roommate, Michelle. Thanks to an alcohol-induced blackout, he had no memory of the night before (and even initially thought Michelle was MJ at first when he woke up to see a naked woman sleeping next to him). When Peter expressed surprise and confusion, Michelle realized he didn't remember their drunken tryst, and she kicked him out of the apartment. And if you think that sounds bad, it is.


(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-14 20:46 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] 2009-08-14 08:39 pm (UTC)(link)
Here you go (

[identity profile] 2009-08-15 02:23 am (UTC)(link)
Not to mention the fact that she's being raped!

I mean, HURR HURR SHE THINKS SHE'S HAVING SEX WITH SOMEONE ELSE, HOW HILARIOUS. Not that I except the writers to ever touch on this. No, I'm certain this plot will all be able how the Chameleon is screwing up Peter's life.

Okay, maybe it'll be used to give Peter something to angst over. Yet another person he failed to protect or something like that. But I doubt we'll even get that.

[identity profile] 2009-08-15 02:24 am (UTC)(link)
"Misogyny"? Seriously? It's a pretty standard slap/kiss thing (at least on her end).
kingrockwell: he's a sexy (Peter Parker)

[personal profile] kingrockwell 2009-08-15 03:35 am (UTC)(link)
I though kind of the same thing, though all I know of Michelle is from the posts about the last few issues, so I don't know how sudden this is. I've been going back and forth about what it is I don't like about this scene, and I'm settling on being mad at Peter. What Chameleon did there doesn't stem from being a "smooth operator" or necessarily perceptive, he's just not blind enough to miss it, while Peter's a jerkface who's acting like Michelle has cooties or something.

The only thing that's really misogynistic is that they'd make Michelle dumb enough to go for Peter, because modern Peter really isn't worth it at all.

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-15 05:09 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-15 05:30 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] 2009-08-15 05:39 am (UTC)(link)
"Misogyny"? Seriously? It's a pretty standard slap/kiss thing (at least on her end).

a) The slap/kiss thing IS a misogynist trope, and b) this is more than "slap" then "kiss," because it's "date raped while blackout drunk, and told him to get the fuck out of the apartment he was living in rent-free," then "let him fuck her on the kitchen floor just because he kissed her." That's a COMPLETELY misogynistic portrayal, because once again, it emphasizes that Michelle's bitchy front was just a cover for the fact that she was yearning for Peter's cock to set her straight.

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-15 07:47 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-15 08:47 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] - 2009-08-15 16:51 (UTC) - Expand