http://rzerox21xx.insanejournal.com/ ([identity profile] rzerox21xx.insanejournal.com) 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] fredneil.livejournal.com (from insanejournal.com) 2009-08-15 08:47 am (UTC)(link)
Actually, you're ignoring your own previous posts.

You give a nod of the head to the idea that Peter was raped by Michelle, but then you only interpret the scene in terms of Michelle being raped by Peter. If you see the scene in terms of rape, then Peter was no less sexually violated and humiliated, so is it reasonable to expect sensitive and respectful treatment from him toward the person who did the violating and humiliating? If apologies are necessary, when did she apologize for her part?

[identity profile] box_in_the_box.insanejournal.com 2009-08-15 08:55 am (UTC)(link)
From the standpoint of morality, you're absolutely right, but from the standpoint of internal character logic, you're missing the fact that Michelle herself a) obviously doesn't think that she did any wrong to Peter, and b) obviously thinks that Peter did an incredible wrong to her, and yet, in spite of being so angry over her own violation that she's ready to kick him out, he doesn't even need to APOLOGIZE to her in order for her to spread her legs for him. From her own perspective, this is tantamount to the ugly old trope about the woman who's raped, but decides that she liked it after all. It's misogynistic because she considers herself horribly wronged, and yet, she requires absolutely no repentance, or even respectful treatment, from Peter in order to give up her pussy on the kitchen floor. As another poster said, she's reduced to a vagina with legs, whose "strong bitch" exterior is nothing more than a front for her total lack of self-respect.

[identity profile] fredneil.livejournal.com (from insanejournal.com) 2009-08-15 04:51 pm (UTC)(link)
Her not thinking that she did any wrong to Peter doesn't mean anything. My best friend was abused by her husband for years, and I wouldn't be surprised if he still doesn't think he did anything wrong to her.

You're making assumptions about what the wrong Peter did to her was, and I don't see those assumptions as being justified by the text. (though I'm not about to buy these issues for more detail.) Yes, it could be the sex itself. It could also be "I can't believe I fell for another jerk. Hey, wait, he does care about me," which would be stupid on her part, but not unlikely. Or it could be, "Damn, that's insulting, when I sleep with a guy, he always wants more. Oh, wait, he does want more." Neither possibility speaks well of her, but from what I've seen Peter doesn't come off well, either. If he can be a jerk, why shouldn't Michelle be an idiot?

I understand her initial anger, but at some point, she should have taken responsibility for her own actions and realized that if Peter was so drunk that he can't remember the night, she shouldn't treat him as though he had been sober all along. The impression I got about why she was upset was less about the sex itself and more that Peter was acting as though the sex was unimportant to him, which would be valid if he had been sober, less so if he literally can't remember it. We have no idea how or why they ended up in bed together, but as the more sober one, she should have been the one to stop it. Granted, she probably wasn't in any condition to be that rational, but she should still say to herself "wait a minute, he was more drunk than I was." So now we get into another way of looking at her actions. Maybe her anger at Peter is displaced anger at herself.