Which...really mitigates the issue very little, if at all, IMO, particularly in the light of the Twitter convo, re: making explicit text out of Byrne's "obvious subtext". Because, unfortunately, even the best case scenario of applying sexual abuse as a root of JM/Aurora's behavior when there's already so much explicit childhood trauma comes off as ****-shaming, while the worst case scenario -- and the first one that leapt to mind because I've have, sad to say, seen it postulated before -- of JM's attitude toward Walter when she comes back to herself being an indication of sexual abuse is so horribly sexist and misogynist that it's the main reason I've been going back over the Byrne run trying to dig up that best-case scenario, because even if I elect to not support the book, I don't want to hate it. Not going to go into detail here, but @betterthanlegos and @twbasketcase do an excellent long-form evisceration of the worst-case over at Tumblr. (Trigger warnings for discussions of non-consensual sex/rape.)Originally Posted by Phil
And, you know, I'm with the majority in thinking that Byrne's AF run was the best the team has ever been and still their strongest overall showing to date, and Lord knows I'm always going to give the man his due for some of the subversive writing he managed to get away with (*points to icon*), but that doesn't mean that there wasn't stuff in there that shouldn't have been amended or just plain ignored as a product of its time. Jeanne-Marie actually given agency in her choice about working with Alpha Flight, as opposed to having her body completely and unwillingly hijacked by Aurora? Good thing. Jean-Paul and Raymonde explicitly given a father-son relationship as opposed to the subtext of them being being January-December lovers? Well, I have complicated feelings on that front, but I generally count it as a positive. So the appeal to authority doesn't do a lot to make me view the current team choosing to go for for the physical/mental/sexual abuse trifecta 30 years post-Byrne in a favorable light either. Frankly? The fact that they decided to switch out the nuns, who at least had a strong presence in JM's history (though I'd have argued that the art in Lobdell's run held more of an implication of sexual misconduct than the text in Bynre's, but then...you know...90's superhero art), for a random figure implies that keeping true to the book's history was secondary, while the molestation reveal was what was considered the important -- doesn't matter who did it, so long as JM was molested.
As for the assertion that heroes need to be brought low in order to rise, I agree with that in principle. Stories where nothing bad ever happened to the cast would be boring. But to look at the differences in how male heroes are brought low and female heroes are brought low and imply that the treatment is equivalent is ridiculous and dodges the issue. I've seen this sidestep soooo many times by male writers trying to justify their mistreatment of female characters as necessary that it's just not funny. Bring me a dozen male heroes in mainstream comics -- we'll even count Image and Dark Horse for these purposes -- who are driven to revenge themselves upon [insert stock type here] because they were raped/sexually molested. How often is the defeated hero put on display with his strategically torn uniform only just covering the tip of his [censored]? When are we going to see the story where Hank Pym or Tony Stark's relationship issues are revealed to be the result of an auntie/schoolmarm with wandering hands? Bringing sexual abuse in as part of the low cycle/angsty backstory of a heroine is overdone (and that's not even getting into how many villainess' have it as their reason for going bad), usually lazy writing, and very rarely handled well, and, honestly, the trope is so threadbare by this point that, handled well or not, it's simply needs to be given a rest.
I've already canceled my pre-order for Alpha Flight #3. I'm going to give it a shelf read, but given that half of this writing team already has a very problematic story concerning lack of consent under his belt and seemed to miss the point of fan concerns by arguing semantics over substance in that case, my faith is riding pretty low. I am just really, really tired of being reminded that being female means that I'm part of the industry's afterthought audience.
Reply With Quote