The Big Picture: Favorite Ms. Take - Part 1

 Pages PREV 1 2 3
 

double post sorry

derp what is an edit button

Zachary Amaranth:

Frozen Donkey Wheel2:

Oh, dear god. I was not complaining about the comic episode because of what his fucking show is called. I was complaining because I just don't think they're very interesting. That whole bit about the show's title was not meant to be taken literally, I was just proving a point. I can't believe I have to clarify something so blindingly obvious, but there it is. Are we done now? Please?

If it was blindingly obvious, you wouldn't have said the contrary.

Sorry, dude. I'm guessing we're done, but only because you know you've fucked up and are backtracking.

*sigh* No. No we aren't.

Frozen Donkey Wheel2:
OK, couple of things about this video:

1. Goddamnit, Bob, your show is called "The Big Picture". TALK ABOUT BIG PICTURE STUFF. I mean, a comics episode is fine every now and then, but come on! The only reason it's been so long since you did a comics episode is that you spent the whole month of October talking about bad sci-fi movies, which is BASICALLY THE SAME GODDAMN THING. Please, just...Talk about things that actually matter more often. You're good at it.

2. I swear if I hear that motherfucking "COMICS ARE WEIRD" bit ONE MORE TIME I WILL probably just press the mute button like I did in this video. Seriously though, please stop. It's really annoying.

There. See the bold text? Think about that. Obviously if I'm fine with a comics-based episode being on the show at all, that means that I don't have a problem with the concept of him doing comics-based episodes. That also means that, since I don't mind him taking the occaissional episode to talk about comic book continuity, I don't expect him to take the title of his show completely literally all the time. (That's the blindingly obvious part I was talking about before)
That quote is my original, unaltered post, so no back-tracking or fucking up was involved. I have been saying the same thing right from the start of this stupid little debate, and the proof is right there.

NOW we're done.

"...and that's the big picture"
Except it's not when you include a cliffhanger! It's only half the picture, Bob!
:P

Seriously though, that's a bit beyond just "weird" it actually pretty damn fucked up (no pun intended).

Awe, just as it was getting interesting :(

The Random One:

Towels:
stuff about rape

You're making a tempest on a teapot. I mean, your point is valid, but your entire problem with it esteems from a single fact you didn't take into account when you read the article: it was meant to be read only by people who had read the original comic.

My comments are not really about the original story. They were about Strictland's argument. If her argument is so private, then why did Bob reference it? In fact Bob's observations hinge strongly on Strictland's assertions. I think its reasonable to question her argument, based on its own merits.

I mean, she just makes accusations, write a paragraph or 2 of flimsy evidence, and then says (based on what the evidence she just presented) Mind-fraking Rape is so obvious a child could see it. Well.. Um... No. Its not that obvious. Evidentally the effects of Strictland's assertion were quite dramatic on the comic industry too, but I guess Bob's going to get to that.

Sorry, I know I went a bit of a tanget, but It just felt like Strictland's assertion was being accepted as fact, so I felt a long legal defense was in order. After all, I don't want to be accused of empowering rapists X.X Really, I just want to understand the feminine empowerment trend better and maybe even help its cause by discussion.

So... let me get this straight. (I will call our lovely superhero 'Ms. Take')

Ms. Take wakes up, confesses that she is pregnant but doesn't know the father or remember having sex.

She has her baby very early, which grows and develops sooner then Breaking Dawn child.

Turns out the baby is actually her rapist, which is now her son too.

The story is revealed that he tricked/mind controlled her to become in love with him, thus used her as a portal by making himself reborn through his victim.

Spite that she learns everything now, she stays in love with him and rides off into the sunset like a happy ever after, thus the other superheros just shrug saying it was weird?

image

Aisaku:
She's been retooled up the wazoo, given her own series, made field leader of the New Avengers, and still neither writers nor readers care enough to take her from second string status. I don't think it's that much of a problem with the character itself just that superhero comic readers do not see female characters as focal characters.

EVERY Marvel character has been retooled up the wazoo. That's their whole problem, they can't put a nail down on any one of their heroes. Besides a few tidbits of their back stories and powers they're all pretty much carbon copies of each other, and that has to stop.

You don't even need to give Ms. Marvel her own series. I mean Martian Manhunter doesn't have his own comic and he's one of my favorite JL members.

I remember reading about that plot in one of the many Marvel themed articles Cracked.com put out. I wonder if that plot ever made it into a graphic novel...TO AMAZON!

I don't know all the details of this comic, but I'd like a stab at playing Devil's Advocate.

1) Stage one love. It is a quid pro quo kind of thing: male wants sex and offspring. In exchange, he offers dedication, loyalty, devotion and support.

Understand, this guy didn't hit Ms. Marvel in the head with a brick and schtupp her. He wooed her. He treated her like a princess in a fairy tail conjuring pleasures for her (arts, music, poetry). Why? Didn't he have the power to just hit her in the head with a brick? If he did (and I'd argue he did, with all his tech stuff) why didn't he?

Because he was engaged in stage one love. And we, in our modernity, may find that lacking, but it isn't unfeeling and rape. Many societies have depended upon it for sex, love, distibution of rights, privileges, property and responsibility. He did his best, through this wooeing to show her he was dedicated, etc. And she bought it.

2) She bought it under mind control. For the sake of argument, I'll liken this to giving candy and booze to a date. Those, no doubt, can effect her judgement. By tradition, not enough to invalidate consent. (As opposed to say, when Roman Polanski butt raped a 13 year old who had been drugged... and still managed to say, "stop.") Giving a girl drinks may deminish her capacity to consent, but to invalidate that consent for this reason is akin to invalidating rape as, if a man is horny, he too is operating under deminished capacity.

3) Ms Marvel did, in Avengers 200, appear to buy the seduction. He was devoted to her. He was, in stage 1, quid pro quo love. From what I've gotten from this issue, from this writer's vision, is that he would have continued to love and support her. And she dug it. What happens later is another writer's vision.

Or should we hang Cyrano DeBergerac too?

Trishbot:

I played a game with my fiance; could we name a single female heroine that has not 1) been killed, 2) depowered, 3) raped, 4) been shoe-horned into a marriage, or 5) gotten pregnant.

... We were only able to name ONE (love ya, Squirrel Girl). From Wonder Woman to She-Hulk to Ms. Marvel to Scarlet Witch to Jean Grey to Batgirl to Storm to Black Canary to Power Girl to practically every other female character...

I think most of the male heroes have been killed or depowered at this point too.

I... WHAT?!?!?! I dunno whether to be confused or offended... and now I gotta wait a whole week for part2. Damn...

I wouldn't call it rape. It's actually more like sex slavery.

Somewhere around Bob's episode on Black Heimdal in the Thor movie, I said to my computer screen: "Ok, Bob, so you are pro-affirmative action. I understand that. The idea disgusts me, because I see it as discriminating as the things it is supposed to counterweight, but at least I understand where you stand."

And this made watching Bob's more political episodes (which come in plenty lately) much easier. Bob does not try to give equal view. I can understand it. The point of author's column in newspaper (the equivalent of which this show is) is to give author's opinion on a question. Not to give a balanced opinion.

So, good to hear you, Bob. Still a running a good show. Still think you are way out of your depth on some things, but the show is good.

Could it be that Marvel just say "hey! just have this girl name Rogue kill her!~ easy! done!~" so... instead of redeeming ANY dignity, they decides to kill her instead!

The only Ms.Marvel I know is from the cartoon of the the 90's "X-Men" there, Ms. Marvel showed up in ONE episode, and never will I know ANYTHING of her origin till now...

You have to remember that Tony was a drunk at the time, Thor's a norse god unaccustomed to human behavior and etiquette and the Visions a robot. The only person who might have strongly objected would be Captain America, but he probably stuck his fingers in his hear and starting singing at the first mention of "sex".

SnakeoilSage:
You know it seems to be that with the right re-tooling, Ms. Marvel could really be Marvel's answer to Wonder Woman... or even Superman. I've never even read a comic with her in it and I know who she is and parts of her back story. She's got a unique look, mainstream powers, and her name is Ms. Marvel!

You could make her the Superman of Marvel. Make her tough, and even if she isn't a natural leader like Captain America she can, thanks to so many heroes knowing her, be the rallying cry that unites them. I think it's a direction worth looking at.

That's actually what happened to her in recent years, she had her own series for a while and featured prominently in the Avengers. She led the Mighty Avengers during the post-civil war period and is a member of the New Avengers. She was one of the few likable "pro-reg" heroes. In Universe she's meant to be the most popular female superhero (in real life it would probably be an X-Woman, but hey thats hated and feared for you).

Wow, I Actually remember my brother owning a copy with a collection of comics (I think they were all avengers-related, or something?) that had this story in it. I was like 14 or so at the time and i remember thinking how fucked up it was back then, even though i didn't really fully understand it all at the time.

Looking back now, its crazy that they actually did that to one of their "Lead" Heroines or whatever you consider her. Side-kick?

Don't know if they'd ever do a story like this (with the obvious exception of actual birth) to someone like Spider-man or Hulk...although it might end up being hilarious.

EDIT: Actually on second thought im sure much, much weirder has happened to them.

Gorfias:
I don't know all the details of this comic, but I'd like a stab at playing Devil's Advocate.

1) Stage one love. It is a quid pro quo kind of thing: male wants sex and offspring. In exchange, he offers dedication, loyalty, devotion and support.

Understand, this guy didn't hit Ms. Marvel in the head with a brick and schtupp her. He wooed her. He treated her like a princess in a fairy tail conjuring pleasures for her (arts, music, poetry). Why? Didn't he have the power to just hit her in the head with a brick? If he did (and I'd argue he did, with all his tech stuff) why didn't he?

Because he was engaged in stage one love. And we, in our modernity, may find that lacking, but it isn't unfeeling and rape. Many societies have depended upon it for sex, love, distibution of rights, privileges, property and responsibility. He did his best, through this wooeing to show her he was dedicated, etc. And she bought it.

2) She bought it under mind control. For the sake of argument, I'll liken this to giving candy and booze to a date. Those, no doubt, can effect her judgement. By tradition, not enough to invalidate consent. (As opposed to say, when Roman Polanski butt raped a 13 year old who had been drugged... and still managed to say, "stop.") Giving a girl drinks may deminish her capacity to consent, but to invalidate that consent for this reason is akin to invalidating rape as, if a man is horny, he too is operating under deminished capacity.

3) Ms Marvel did, in Avengers 200, appear to buy the seduction. He was devoted to her. He was, in stage 1, quid pro quo love. From what I've gotten from this issue, from this writer's vision, is that he would have continued to love and support her. And she dug it. What happens later is another writer's vision.

Or should we hang Cyrano DeBergerac too?

It's pretty late at night/early in the morning where I am so excuse me if I've made a mistake, but I think I see a major flaw in your second argument. If you give drugs or alcohol to a date she has the right to turn it away. If a woman goes to a bar and gets drunk than people are more likely to place the blame on her. Clearly she knew what a bar was, and what could happen to her so to some the sympathy might drop. I'm not saying I agree, but I understand that train of thought. Ms. Marvel was kidnapped, she didn't go seeking this brain washing experience. This dude plucked her out of her own dimension against her will. If I get you drunk at a bar people will probably put some of the blame on you, but if I break into your house, knock you out, and drive you to my place to get you wasted I'd like to think you'd get a bit more sympathy.

Dak_N_Jaxter:
"Find out, next time..."
1 Week... 7 days....166 hours.... you son of a bitch.

Ninjas man....

I was not ready for ninjas

rancher of monsters:

Gorfias:
I don't know all the details of this comic, but I'd like a stab at playing Devil's Advocate.

2) She bought (his woo pitch) under mind control. For the sake of argument, I'll liken this to giving candy and booze to a date. Those, no doubt, can effect her judgement. By tradition, not enough to invalidate consent. (As opposed to say, when Roman Polanski butt raped a 13 year old who had been drugged... and still managed to say, "stop.") Giving a girl drinks may deminish her capacity to consent, but to invalidate that consent for this reason is akin to invalidating rape as, if a man is horny, he too is operating under deminished capacity.

If you give drugs or alcohol to a date she has the right to turn it away... Ms. Marvel was kidnapped, she didn't go seeking this brain washing experience....

Outstanding argument. There was an excellent episode of a show called "Picket Fences" where a shy guy on a date has a friend doing a Cyrano for him, BUT, he also spikes her wine with a little vodka to "help relax her". The shy guy is very sympathetic, but is charged with rape, more for the cyrano (if it wasn't really his words wooing her, he didn't deserve to get laid) but you've got me thinking: arguably he should have been found guilty for the vodka.

This is really, really sick.

I hope the writer was sent to a psychiatrist. He probably had the bodies of about 10 women in his basement or something.

:|

Gorfias:
if a man is horny, he too is operating under deminished capacity.

You do realise that's the same as saying 'She was wearing a short skirt so she was asking for it'

Just sayin...

Tbh I find anyone defending this pretty horrific.

You know what the sadest thing is? This story could have worked, if they'd played it to the hilt as a comsic horror story, ala The Great God Pan.

I hate cliffhangers.

I'd just like to point out that the reason a lot of babies in fantasy and sci-fi stories go through rapid aging is because the writers typically want said babies to be fully fleshed out characters, and babies don't really have personalities until they get older, and they hate waiting.

Hence: rapid aging. But yes, it is lazy and forced and kinda stupid.

Ms. take, oh bob you're so funny

Hmm.. first time I watched an episode of this. It's pretty good and informative, while also thankfully pointing out stuff I had actually thought of as I watched it. Particularly when I started thinking of Twilight right before he flashed a picture of the movie poster. :p

Seriously, this kinda stuff in comics is half of the reason I don't read comics anymore. That and.. well, the issues I have with this. :/

Looking forwards to part 2.

I thought you said you DIDN'T want to do a dark topic this week.

Wait.
I thought Captain Marvel was made by DC comics.

Oh wait ... this was about the other Captain Marvel.

Now I'm more intrigued about why there wasn't some sort of lawsuit over the name.

The Gentleman:
Actually, by contemporary definitions, that was technically not rape. Before you flame me, allow me to explain:

As many here are fairly aware, rape in and of itself is one of the newer violent crimes established in western traditions. As such, what defined rape was very limited to violent forcible penetration without consent. The stereotype rapist were pretty much the only ones targeted by this definition. Many jurisdictions even required a resistance by the victim in order to establish force. As such, intercourse by coercion or deception were legal in many jurisdictions up until the 1990s when many reexamined the laws and amended them to include such tactics.

Some examples:

In a 1985 case, one American woman in New York was randomly called up and told she had a fatal disease and the only way to cure it was to have sex with a doctor's "assistant" (the caller wasn't even a doctor). The appellate court rule it not rape.

A 1988 case in Pennsylvania had a 14-year-old girl who had been released from juvenile detention into the custody of the defendant, who threatened to send her back unless she had sex with him. The appellate court reversed a conviction for rape due to lack of force.

One 1990 case whereby a principal at a Montana high school threatened to withhold a diploma from a graduating female student unless she had sex with him (she complied) was ruled reprehensible, but not rape.

Sadly, had Ms. Marvel realized what had actually happened to her and filed charges, her son/lover would probably have not been found guilty, or, failing that, would have had his conviction overturned on appeal.

But by now everyone should know that last generation's romance is this generation's stalking.

Very good point. I'd forgotten just how much broader the definition of rape has got.

As an interesting side-note on that: in the Old Testament rape is further specified as a man forcing himself on a woman, while not in the confines of a town. The reasoning given is that any woman being raped in a populated area would be able to cry out and bring people to her aid. Therefore (by the magic of logic) any woman who is raped in a town must have consented.

Back on topic, I think we can all agree that - while not legally defined as rape by contemporary standards - it's a series of events that should have seemed "a bit wrong" even at the time! Then again, comics wouldn't be comics without the odd morally-dubious event.

DVS BSTrD:
Now THATs an Oedipus complex!

So did Freud just go and possess the comic writers for this one, because not even Oedipus Rex was this Freudian.

This right here is why Comics Are Weird is a much better series than TV Is Weird or Movies Are Weird. TV is occasionally strange and movies every once in a while make a peculiar decision...In fact, if that's what you want to change the names of those two series into, I'm sure Big Picture fans would support it.

I do think it's kind of odd that Bob followed the dark episode about animal killing with the much lighter episode about rape...but then again that's yet another example of how extremely weird comics have to get. Mind control? That is apparently commonplace in comics. When's the last movie or TV episode with mind control?

I actually know very little about Ms. Marvel and am looking forward to the next episode later today along with the Bob analysis that often comes with these episodes.

P.S. Bob, your analysis and opinions is the best part about any of your episodes. History lessons are okay, but are much better when you insert your analysis into it.

This is one of those instances where the actions of other men make me embarrassed to share the same gender with them. Granted, there's quite a bit of one-upmanship going on if you want to look at all the Ghosts of Sexists Past, but seriously. Using someone's vagina as the intradimensional equivalent of a Chinatown bus, complete with the protein stains? It's a concept that is so full of intrinsic batshittitude that I can't imagine anyone cranking off to it. And in this day and age, that's saying something.

But what really sells this as true fuckedupedness (I know, I should stop making up words at this point) is the reactions from the rest of the Marvel universe. Most simply shrugged their shoulders, said "It's Tuesday, whaddaya gonna do?" and called it a day. A startling number (re: more than one) chose to see this womb hijacking as the start of a serious and meaningful relationship. If sexual assault * exploitation = true romance, then we'd see a lot more celebrity marriages with shelf lives longer than a gallon of milk.

...How soon is Part 2 getting here again?

Oh my god. What the fuck, ew? I love Runaways. It's the only comic series by a large comic publisher that had ethnic, gender, and sexual minorities and the best character, in my opinion, had a BMI over 23. Best series ever...if you don't read the last arc and some of the side stuff. But a lot of the comics published by Marvel has been very female-unfriendly, whether it's gratuitous displays of T&A or just a poorly developed female character itself.

So, thanks to this article, I became very curious about Carol A. Strickland's "brutal takedown", googled it and found it. It was such a great read, that I found a way to contact her and link her to this very ranting about comic redonkulousness. She said, and I quote here,

"Thanks so much for pointing this out! It has indeed added to the niceness of my day. ("Hunger Games" ticket is in my pocket, so that will finish it off very well.)"

She then warned me to stay away from this week's Wonder Woman. Anyway, just thought you'd like to know that, mang. :D

And yeah, Ms. Marvel was one of those characters who seems like she -should- be a good character, but every writer in charge of her seems to be a master of total bullshit. So, that's never good...

Also the plot of Anne Rice's "The Witches of Mayfair" series of books.
(First book, "The Witching Hour" published in 1990)

Lasher, an immortal spirit made of intelligent airborne floating bacteria, eventually impregnates himself into the main character. Then he kidnaps her, rapes her, which forces her to birth a fast-growing female child which then Lasher will use to use to create a whole series of fast growing immortals called Taltos.

Another series of books in which a fast-growing baby grows up, has sex with mommy, and tries to have more babies.

Fast-growing babies are also present in the 1988 book Wetware(novel) by Rudy Rucker.
In that book, a glass-body robot (optical processing) named Berenice creates a race of "9 Day Boys" which grow to adulthood in 2 days (each day of their life is a decade to them), then are driven to impregnate women to fill the earth with the fast-growing "Meatbops" so as to wipe out the original genelines of humanity.

As to the contents of the episode. Yeah that's a little weird... I guess after the weird stuff I've seen, not much fazes me. This was actually rather tame compared to other things I've seen.

As to the episode itself. I don't understand why this is a two parter. The episode was about five minutes long, why split it into two?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here