espanolbot: (Default)
[personal profile] espanolbot posting in [community profile] scans_daily
Warning for nudity, sexism, racism and a horrible instant of "slut shaming".

From the second Nightwing Annual from 2007, here's Dick and Babara's first meeting following the events of the Killing Joke.

Shouldn't the kissing panel me more "Mfffffhhhhh" than "shh"?

Jennifer Walters at the receiving end of one of the worst "slut shamings" in Marvel comicbooks.

Context: the Leader is arguing that gamma radiation poisoning makes people not responsible for their actions, which is the logic used to excuse Dr Banner for the Hulk's frequent rampages, so legally his megalomaniac tendencies aren't his fault either. As more evidence of this, he has his lawyer bring up a full list of the people Jennifer slept with as She-Hulk versus ones as herself to be entered as evidence of how gamma radiation effects her judgement, or something.

Legal explanation or not, it still seems to be as about as liable in court as that time in Veronica Mars where a defence lawyer uses Mars' confidential medical records to damage her statement.

Wonder Woman had the patience of a saint in the old days...

Come to think of it, so must have Sue...

And Kathy Kane...

The Beast appears to be either a master of sarcasm, or he's trying to spare Jean's feelings.

Oh, Billy, no! Bad idea! Bad idea! No stop!

*facepalm* Editors, you're not helping!

Up Next, depending on if it's in the public domain, I'll be analysing this,

It's a terrible comic both in ways that should be obvious, and ways that aren't.

If it's not in the public domain, I'll be doing a special on Jack Chick instead.

Date: 2011-12-08 02:22 am (UTC)
nyadnar17: (Default)
From: [personal profile] nyadnar17
I am still not sure what all constitutes slut shaming so please help me out here. If everything else about that situation was kept the same, but Jen had not acted ashamed of her list of conquest, would this still be a case of slut shaming?

Date: 2011-12-08 02:32 am (UTC)
venatosapiens: griffin vulture (Default)
From: [personal profile] venatosapiens
Attempted, perhaps?

Date: 2011-12-08 02:37 am (UTC)
shadowpsykie: Information (Default)
From: [personal profile] shadowpsykie
except the purpose isn't to shame her but to prove that as she hulk she acted in a way jennifer walters would not have. though of course the attorney on a personal level i think was using it to make a dig at her

Date: 2011-12-08 02:36 am (UTC)
shadowpsykie: Information (Default)
From: [personal profile] shadowpsykie
If everything else about that situation was kept the same, but Jen had not acted ashamed of her list of conquest, would this still be a case of slut shaming?

I think so.

Date: 2011-12-08 02:49 am (UTC)
freezer: (Objection!)
From: [personal profile] freezer
You'd think a lawyer would be better able to answer such a question. Sure, "I don't recall" or "I don't know" won't look very good for purposes of answering the question, but she wouldn't be handing the defense buckets of ammo by going over the entire list.

Date: 2011-12-08 08:13 am (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
That would also be lying under oath (since she DOES remember) and the lawyer is more than likely already aware of the entire list but wants Jen to admit it openly.

Date: 2011-12-08 07:25 pm (UTC)
freezer: (Default)
From: [personal profile] freezer
"I don't know" is one of those things where everybody knows that's not the truth, but unless you can prove it (you have explicit proof of said knowledge or that he should have known and only didn't because he didn't want to), it gets a pass.

It's like asking a porn star how many scenes she's shot. You might have an itemized list, but is it really plausible that she'd know them all?

And again, a lawyer like Jen should've known not to broach the subject at all.

Date: 2011-12-08 09:54 pm (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
I suspect the lawyer asking the questions, probably would be quite prepared to subpoena everyone on the list she'd have drawn up before preparing this line of questioning.

Date: 2011-12-08 11:35 pm (UTC)
freezer: (Objection!)
From: [personal profile] freezer
And, in the real world, be shot down almost immediately for going beyond the scope of the charges.

Hell, Jen could've just pleaded the fifth and avoided the whole shooting match.

Date: 2011-12-09 02:26 am (UTC)
shadowpsykie: Information (Default)
From: [personal profile] shadowpsykie
Hell, Jen could've just pleaded the fifth and avoided the whole shooting match.

Track This

yeah she could have... but it would not have looked good for her either.

ugh.... lawyers... trust me... i work for them...

Date: 2011-12-08 01:22 pm (UTC)
dr_archeville: Doctor Arkeville (Default)
From: [personal profile] dr_archeville
Would there be any way for any lawyer to bring up the "Walters acts a lot more uninhibited when she's She-Hulk" without it being slut shaming? Because I thought that was a mildly clever defense: everyone (from what I can tell) who's been empowered by Gamma rays has expressed some altered mental states.

Date: 2011-12-08 07:30 pm (UTC)
freezer: (Objection!)
From: [personal profile] freezer
She-Hulk is (was?) a notorious party girl. That sort of thing would've been fair game. She was only able to bring up Jen's sex life because Jen brought it up first (and as I said earlier; she should ahve been able to handle that MUCH better than she did.)

And this whole defense angle brings up the old (erronious) trope that "Not Guilty, by Reason Of Insanity" is a free pass. The Leader potentially set himself up for a longer sentence than if he'd been convinced conventually, because if you're judged insane, you're shipped off to facility of the State's/Feds' chosing, until you're judged no longer a danger to yourself and others. If The Leader is claiming "Gamma rays made me do it," he's pretty much telling the courts "Lock me up until I'm no longer green and massive-skulled." Which the courts would gladly do.

Date: 2011-12-10 03:23 pm (UTC)
benicio127: (Lois love)
From: [personal profile] benicio127
Yes - by not resorting to compiling a list of who she has had sex with because it's irrelevant and Jen's own lawyer (if she had one?) should have objected. To show that she's different when affected by the gamma-rays the defence could have asked questions about violent behaviour, does she swear more often, does she threaten people, etc. What does a list of sexual partners show? That she gets horny when she's She-Hulk? Who cares? If the defence is attempting to show that Jen is a *bad* person while She-Hulk, this is a terrible and slut-shaming way of going about doing it.

It has no relevance because it doesn't show *harm* to anyone. Who is She-Hulk harming by getting her rocks off with a bunch of different people? Since there is absolutely no discussion of HIV or STD infection and knowingly passing it to a partner without informing that partner (which is a crime), then this line of questioning is completely irrelevant and bullshit.


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.

October 2017

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18192021

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags