Why some people thought Falcon was a statutory rapist:

[sadoeuphemist]

Okay, so this all starts off when Zola abducts Cap to an alien dimension where he's been doing his freaky genetics experiments. Time moves faster there so that Cap can spend like a decade adventuring without having to worry about regular Marvel continuity. Anyway, Cap escapes!



But in actuality!



















I always thought it was weird that people making the claim were accused of not having read the run, or ignoring context. If all you saw was the scene itself of Jet and Falcon sleeping together, the obvious conclusion is that she's 23+. The only reason anyone would think Jet was still a teenager is because they've read the rest of Remender's run.

This is of course less damning than it looks, JRJr basically draws one-year-olds as identical to twelve-year-olds. Here's Ian and Jet twelve years after their first appearance:

That's like a twelve-year-old boy there. But what is Jet's age supposed to be? Would JRJr continue to draw a fourteen-year-old as a baby kewpie doll? A fifteen-year-old? Sixteen? Seventeen?

I believe that Remender always intended Jet to be in her 20's after the timeskip. But just reading the text I'd be inclined to think that Jet is lying to Falcon about her age. On it's own it's kind of suspicious to offhandedly mention 'oh btw I'm 23' right before getting drunk and having sex with a dude.

Comments

[grumman]

So the argument is that despite her being drawn like Jennifer Garner and the comic explicitly stating she is an adult, she must be a thirteen year old because of her publication history? Do these people also believe that every time a comic has a "To be continued...!" that the characters just sit around drinking cocoa for a month before getting back to their fight?

[sadoeuphemist]

No, it's got nothing to do with publication history at all. All the dates given are "in-universe."

[scelestus]

Easy answer? People like to bitch, and fake outrage is in vogue.

[stubbleupdate]

This outrage is fake because...?

[mrstatham]

Because the outrage was screaming that Falcon was a statutory rapist, when the real offence is bad writing having to establish a character's age to justify a sexual encounter, plus bad art from a previous where we can't tell the difference between a toddler and a child of about eleven because of how the artist depicts them.

That's why the outrage was fake.

[stubbleupdate]

Fake would mean that the outrage was not genuine, or was not actually felt.

What you have described is genuine, misinformed outrage.

So, I'll ask again "what makes this outrage fake?" and what makes the poster above qualified to divine sincerity in the hearts of others?

[stubbleupdate]

Even though we've all read the tumblr post that you stole this from, it would be good if you were to link to it.

[sadoeuphemist]

Ah yes, here is the post I got 90% of the images from: http://moneystcroix.tumblr.com/post/90703508863/re-rick-remender-alleged-statutory-rape-and-jet

The only exception is the blurb stating Jet and Ian were both infants, which she didn't have, so I got it from here instead: http://weinersoldier.tumblr.com/post/90617385753/from-captain-america-4-convenient-photoset-for

[wizardru]

Listen, I'm still pissed at Rick Remender for his work on The Atom and I'd be hard pressed to find anything he's ever written that I could claim to like...but this doesn't really seem to be a fight worth having. There are several things at play here and ironically the more problematic elements appear to be ignored. That the original complainant has made it her mission to get Remender fired and runs a blog that may be focused on that task makes me a little more cautious when following the accusation.

JRjr simply doesn't have a great range in terms of characters. As well noted everywhere, he only has a few body types and Children simply don't work well in his repertoire.

We first see Ian as a baby, while Jet is shown as a child. What age? It's not clear. When we see Ian a year later...A YEAR LATER....he is shown as a fully clothed mini-person. He's not only out of diapers, he can clearly walk on his own and appears, for all intents and purposes, to be four or five years old (as you can see up there next to bearded Steve).

Of course, with things like the sliding time scale and editorial fiat about character ages, this seems a weird thing to dig one's heels in about. How old Kitty Pryde, now? She's been aged, de-aged and re-aged as the writers saw fit. How about half of the cast of Runaways? The Power Pack? Franklin and Valeria Richards? I'm not trying to belittle the issue, I'm just pointing out that comic book characters ages move around a lot and the nature of comics makes this whole thing kind of hard to follow. Adjusting characters ages, even in a case where the character has only been around for a few years, is part and parcel of the never-ending stories of mainstream comics.

I'm primarily confused on the story, though (since, as mentioned, I don't enjoy Remender and don't follow this title, which has a history of being problematic since issue #1). Why is Falcon having drinks with a scantily-clad woman in his apartment, if he isn't actually intending any sort of relationship with her? The implication that they both got really drunk and had sex unintentionally (at least on Falcon's part) is kind of a terrible trope that seems to be legitimizing a lot of bad behavior. I think Remender was trying to make Jet seem independent and in control of her sexuality, but instead this comes of to me as her being a prop: the focus isn't on her being independent in the panels I've seen: it's on Falcon "accidentally" having sex with a co-worker and the hilarity that ensues (presumably). That this is also a male fantasy of sorts? Well, draw your own conclusions.

This is all based on just a few scanned pages I've seen and some context I've read. I could be completely off-base about all of it. But rather than worry about it, I'll just go re-read some issues of Mighty Avengers, i.e. the GOOD Avengers book.

[crimsonmoonmist]

Now, I might be a particularly sheltered male to be honest,
but I really can't imagine how any man would consider waking up next to a person
he had no intentions of being intimate with as a good thing,
much less something to fantasize over.

[wizardru]

I wouldn't say its a universal fantasy, but the 'young, buxom and nubile woman throws herself at male' is common enough to be a trope, IMHO. I think this is one of those scenes that would play REALLY differently if the same dialogue were switched to different characters.

I'm also having a hard time accepting that the writer is trying to say that Falcon DIDN'T intend for this to happen. This isn't them at a party with forty other people, from what I'm seeing. This is Falcon and Jet engaging in flirtatious talk over wine on the couch with her dressed racily with shoes off and him in casual clothes. This looks like a date to me: how are we supposed to get that he had no idea or intention that this might escalate to something more serious? Sam's reaction in context seems kind of odd.

[carriemac]

He also holds and kisses her after waking up, so presumably if he hadn't wanted to be intimate in any way with her, he wouldn't have continued the physical aspect of their relationship the next morning when he was completely sober.

[deepspaceartist]

I'm not very surprised that there's no evidence backing up the 'Falcon comitted statutory rape' claims. Heck, considering Sam was drunk and Jet apparently wasn't (or was at least signifcantly less drunk considering her lack of hangover and enhanced physiology), if anyone's a rape victim in this encounter it's Sam. But Tumblr being how it is, you'll always find tons of people willing to jump on a hate train now matter how baseless it is.

[angelophile]

The fact that the original complaint was a misreading doesn't mean that the other issues with race and sex that have been brought up in discussing Rick Remander's work suddenly stop existing or are rendered invalid.

The fact that people simply accepted that the writer had included a scene of statutory rape in a mainstream comic should maybe be seen as an indicator of the way the comics industry, and Remender's writing in particular, are perceived.

[arbre_rieur]

"The fact that the original complaint was a misreading doesn't mean that the other issues with race and sex that have been brought up in discussing Rick Remander's work suddenly stop existing or are rendered invalid."

Who here says otherwise? Hasn't the discussion here been focused specifically on this one claim that Remender depicted the Falcon as a statutory rapist?

Besides, whatever offensive stuff Remender does in the past, that doesn't make spreading misinformation about a story he wrote, whether intentionally or otherwise, okay.

"The fact that people simply accepted that the writer had included a scene of statutory rape in a mainstream comic should maybe be seen as an indicator of the way the comics industry, and Remender's writing in particular, are perceived."

I wish I could believe it started off as a case of genuine misinterpretation. I'm too cynical for that. I *could* believe they thought Remender conveniently aged Jet up so she wouldn't be underage and that they found that skeevy, but that's not what they were saying. They were, no question about it, actually saying the Falcon was a literal statutory rapist in this story, despite the text, despite how she's drawn, and despite the common sense argument that Marvel/Disney would no way in hell allow one of the heroes of their recent blockbuster movie become a rapist. I can't believe that's anything other than some readers deliberately twisting the truth because they already have grievances with the writer.

[grumman]

Okay, it's an indicator that some people hate Remender's writing. It is /not/ an indicator that that hatred is valid. You cannot point to a baseless attack as evidence in itself that the attack is not baseless.

[mrstatham]

"The fact that people simply accepted that the writer had included a scene of statutory rape in a mainstream comic should maybe be seen as an indicator of the way the comics industry, and Remender's writing in particular, are perceived."

Or, the more someone insists on spreading a piece of misinformation, then the more it's going to be perceived, which is pretty much the case here; A bunch of people have been kicking up a fuss about nothing but because it's Tumblr, there's plenty of people who'll believe every last word.

If they've got legitimate issues with his work? Use those. Don't try and peddle a scene as a rape when the characters involved are both specifically stated to be of age and the only indicators otherwise are the artwork of an artist who people acknowledge is not particularly in his prime anymore and clearly has difficulty depicting varying ages. Especially when you're doing something like calling for someone to lose their job.

[angelophile]

But the hashtag was being used on Twitter. "Because Tumblr" doesn't explain why it got traction.

[mrstatham]

It was still being spread on Tumblr. And so what? Misinformation and a petty campaign to get someone fired is still misinformation and a petty campaign regardless of where it's done.

If they want to genuinely critique Remender, go and do it using actual valid points.

[angelophile]

Which the originator of the tag has done in their explanation.

And as I said "The fact that the original complaint was a misreading doesn't mean that the other issues with race and sex that have been brought up in discussing Rick Remander's work suddenly stop existing or are rendered invalid."

[mrstatham]

An explanation that only followed once they were shown to be wrong about this issue, which is what they were specifically complaining about.

Again, I'm not saying their points are invalid, but it's disingenuous to change approaches like that was their point all along once they're proven wrong about the thing they were complaining about. Their 'point all along' was genuinely strong, but to me, they've lost face by complaining about a non-issue.

[marghammerman]

"The fact that people simply accepted that the writer had included a scene of statutory rape in a mainstream comic should maybe be seen as an indicator of the way the comics industry, and Remender's writing in particular, are perceived."

I was thinking the same thing. It was obviously wrong for so many people to ignore or twist the circumstances of this scene, and I would personally never make or repeat a serious accusation without carefully considering the evidence. However, I've been around long enough that when someone tells me there was a rape scene in a superhero comic, my initial reaction is probably gonna be less, "I don't believe it!" than "Oh crap, not again."

[lucean]

To be honest, from everything I've seen from the storyline so far, I would probably have been one of those people who thought Jet was in her teens. And while in the scene Jet does clarify that she is actually 23, I am not aware of that being brought up anywhere before and seems to be there to just to make things okay, which combined with the previous misconception just made it seem even sketchier to me. I agree with others that Remender probably intended her to be that age from the beginning, but both the art and the story failed to properly support this intention.

Now having said that, some of the reactions have been justified and well-reasoned, but they are also kind of being brushed aside with the other criticisms. Also things are not helped by the fact that Remender never seems to think why people might take his writing in such a context, but rather is almost accusatory for people's take on his writing and how they are obviously taking him out of context. The reaction to his writing of the Alex speech was the greatest example of that and I found really amusing as another writer had a twitter discussion with the fans about it and explained his reasoned thoughts on the matter and Remender swooped in and claimed that was what he meant, even though his initial writing was really difficult to interpret as such and his own explanations had never indicated it.

[beyondthefringe]

I felt like Jet's "voice" changed considerably in this issue. It seems like she suddenly became a lot more colloquial and casual in tone, as opposed to her previous standoffish, almost bombastic way of speaking.

[starwolf_oakley]

So, fans wanted Rick Remender fired because John Romita, Jr. can't draw little kids?

...Makes sense.

[mrstatham]

Pretty much. It's a forced way of doing it, but when a character says she's 23 ON THE FREAKING PAGE, that establishes that the male character sleeping with said character IS NOT A STATUTORY RAPIST. But of course, rather than construct a more thoughtful response to Remender's work - which IS problematic at times - hey, deliberately misread something and start a witch-hunt, and THEN have the nerve to be surprised when readers and creators alike get aggravated over the bullshit being peddled.

[sadoeuphemist]

No but my point is that if Remender hadn't come out and stated his intentions, my reading of that scene would have been that she was lying about her age, so I don't think it's a deliberate misreading at all. 23 seems implausibly old, and for her to drop a mention of it right before having sex seems suspicious.

[deepspaceartist]

23 isn't really implauibly old for how this artist draws children and teens. Look at 12 year old Ian in the last scan of the OP, then look at Jet in the first scan. Is first scan Jet being 11 really that implausible?

[sadoeuphemist]

Sure, by the drawings she could be any age at all. But my point is that by reading through the story, particularly with the recap page that describes the kids as both infants, the reader is more likely to be thinking of her in her teens. So when she says she's at least 23, the initial reaction is, wait, that can't be right.

[flint_marko]

I'm not a fan of a lot of what Remender's done, but regardless what the recap said Jet was clearly not an infant like Ian was.

[arilou_skiff]

What HAS Remender does? Curious.

[flint_marko]

Havok's whole "don't call me a mutant" thing, for starters.

[sadoeuphemist]

Tbf, the portrayal of age is so bad in this comic that she could have been an infant. One-year-olds are still infants I think, and look how they portrayed Ian at one year old.

[mrstatham]

The art is just terrible in Dimension Z for depicting those ages, though, which is part of the only reason I believe Jet saying she's 23 is Remender feeling he has to establish that; Again, I can personally not tell the difference between Jet in her first appearance, Jet one year later, and Ian 'one year later' (since when did a one year old have hair that long?) and 'eleven years later' - they all look the freaking same despite the gap of about twelve years or so.

So I can see your point and I can see the possibility of Jet lying about her age, given the recent issue focusing on her plus her attitude toward Steve about her father and the like, but I really do think it's Remender just ham-fistedly justifying a scene. I also keep forgetting the legal drinking age in America is twenty one, which is arguably why '23' seemed like a weirdly arbitrary number to me.

[bj_l]

When recap pages have been known to mispell names, leave characters out, give completely different summaries of events and even give completely different names the use of infants plural is obviously a mistake and they should in no way be used when trying to argue something that occurred 'in universe' or for context.

[angelophile]

What I really take from this is that I really really wish the trope of "female character gets introduced as a child, then ages up off-screen/magically to be of an age to express sexual interest in the central character" would die out and quickly.

Layla Miller, Amy Pond, this...

[philippos42]

Oh, good lord, the "Layla Madrox" arc. Wait, I can't rant about PAD here. Ugh.

[northstarfan]

Nah, rant away. Just don't post his work.

[northstarfan]

Or "female character formerly treated as underage is suddenly revealed to have leaped forward to the age of consent (even ahead of her peers) so that she's legally fuckable by the older male love interest". That one can go too.

[philippos42]

I assume we're talking about angelophile's icon now?

[northstarfan]

Ha! Honestly, I hadn't noticed. It wasn't meant as a swipe at anyone, but yeah, I admit, though I vastly prefer Pryde/Wisdom over Pryde/Rasputin, there is a bit of meta-blech there for the above reasons. It's mitigated by the fact that Kitty didn't have any peers her own age in Excalibur to measure her progress against and Ellis did write her as a very capable young adult, but given that her last stated age in the book was 15 and kids in comics typically age at a snail's pace, it took a little effort to squint past. It didn't ruin anything for me (in that instance, at least), but it was something I still took note of. The fact that Ellis described the Dreamnails arc as "Kitty Pryde gets f***ed" (asterisks and all) in a Wizard interview at the time didn't mean I had a lot of faith in the writer's intentions going in either.

And then Claremont came back along after and tried to regress her to a literal 16-year-old virgin, which was even more creepy.