Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   She-Ra co-creator J. Michael Straczynski on the current She-Ra redesign "controversy": What you're complaining about has nothing to do with the character we created   ( twitter.com) divider line
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

2014 clicks; posted to Geek » on 19 Jul 2018 at 4:11 PM (13 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



140 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-07-19 12:54:45 PM  
Original Tweet:

 
2018-07-19 01:06:56 PM  
Nicely written, especially this bit:
... male characters tend to be idealized in form and proportion; but female characters tend to be objectified. There is a profound difference between those two, and failing to perceive that distinction is pernicious. That's why you'll rarely see a male superhero without pants . . . By that I don't mean naked, I mean without leggings of some kind. But that's absolutely the rule for female characters (I say this as the guy who put Wonder Woman in pants during his run because seriously it's hard to fight otherwise). No leg hair for guy heroes.
 
2018-07-19 01:10:45 PM  
yeah yeah yeah.... Moar Babylon 5, please.
 
2018-07-19 01:13:43 PM  
Sign, this nonsense.

She's just wearing realistic armor. Look at SCA armored knight ladies, they wear flat metal chest gear just like the guys. Putting in "contours" would make the armor be vulnerable to arrow attacks.

Example:

images.fanpop.comView Full Size
 
2018-07-19 01:16:17 PM  
A historical example:

ncregister.comView Full Size
 
2018-07-19 01:55:17 PM  
That "baby ducks" blast was awesomely brutal.
 
2018-07-19 04:35:08 PM  

shortymac: A historical example:

[ncregister.com image 682x519]


Angua tho
 
2018-07-19 04:37:30 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size

We, Michael?
 
2018-07-19 04:40:58 PM  
Would totally pass on Princess Adora. Sharp knees, and all that.

/btw, the Masters of the Universe comic volumes 1-x and the 2 volume  "Eternity War" follow-up were amazing

I feel like it's what the reboot wouldve down if it were more Adult-Swim themed and got a proper time slot and support.
 
2018-07-19 04:41:31 PM  

draypresct: Nicely written, especially this bit:
... male characters tend to be idealized in form and proportion; but female characters tend to be objectified. There is a profound difference between those two, and failing to perceive that distinction is pernicious. That's why you'll rarely see a male superhero without pants . . . By that I don't mean naked, I mean without leggings of some kind. But that's absolutely the rule for female characters (I say this as the guy who put Wonder Woman in pants during his run because seriously it's hard to fight otherwise). No leg hair for guy heroes.


so...its always been okay to create body dysmorphia in young males then...because sexism is fine when directed at men.

Gonna have to call  bullshiat.
 
2018-07-19 04:42:39 PM  

shortymac: Sign, this nonsense.

She's just wearing realistic armor.


img.fark.netView Full Size


Armor should be lightweight, and distracting to enemies.
 
2018-07-19 04:43:15 PM  
My wife says if you go back to the original in the 1980s, She-ra and He-man both looked a lot like the new She-ra.
 
2018-07-19 04:43:37 PM  

Stratohead: draypresct: Nicely written, especially this bit:
... male characters tend to be idealized in form and proportion; but female characters tend to be objectified. There is a profound difference between those two, and failing to perceive that distinction is pernicious. That's why you'll rarely see a male superhero without pants . . . By that I don't mean naked, I mean without leggings of some kind. But that's absolutely the rule for female characters (I say this as the guy who put Wonder Woman in pants during his run because seriously it's hard to fight otherwise). No leg hair for guy heroes.

so...its always been okay to create body dysmorphia in young males then...because sexism is fine when directed at men.

Gonna have to call  bullshiat.


In his one of his tweets he totally mentions male body dysmorphia, it's part of a long tweet chain, he's just saying female characters are more likely to be especially objectified.
 
2018-07-19 04:43:37 PM  
B5 did She-Ra?!!?
 
2018-07-19 04:43:42 PM  
That's a really good read from Straczynski.

I'm currently watching Babylon 5 for the first time on Amazon Prime, just started Season 3. last night  I'm utterly fascinated by this show, especially the parallels to current events.  It's often downright frightening how close they are.

/will leave the thread now to avoid any spoilers
 
2018-07-19 04:45:55 PM  
just...what is wrong with people these days?
 
2018-07-19 04:46:07 PM  

shortymac: Stratohead: draypresct: Nicely written, especially this bit:
... male characters tend to be idealized in form and proportion; but female characters tend to be objectified. There is a profound difference between those two, and failing to perceive that distinction is pernicious. That's why you'll rarely see a male superhero without pants . . . By that I don't mean naked, I mean without leggings of some kind. But that's absolutely the rule for female characters (I say this as the guy who put Wonder Woman in pants during his run because seriously it's hard to fight otherwise). No leg hair for guy heroes.

so...its always been okay to create body dysmorphia in young males then...because sexism is fine when directed at men.

Gonna have to call  bullshiat.

In his one of his tweets he totally mentions male body dysmorphia, it's part of a long tweet chain, he's just saying female characters are more likely to be especially objectified.


Don't let his actual words get in the way of some perfectly good troll bait
 
2018-07-19 04:49:31 PM  

KingBiefWhistle: shortymac: Stratohead: draypresct: Nicely written, especially this bit:
... male characters tend to be idealized in form and proportion; but female characters tend to be objectified. There is a profound difference between those two, and failing to perceive that distinction is pernicious. That's why you'll rarely see a male superhero without pants . . . By that I don't mean naked, I mean without leggings of some kind. But that's absolutely the rule for female characters (I say this as the guy who put Wonder Woman in pants during his run because seriously it's hard to fight otherwise). No leg hair for guy heroes.

so...its always been okay to create body dysmorphia in young males then...because sexism is fine when directed at men.

Gonna have to call  bullshiat.

In his one of his tweets he totally mentions male body dysmorphia, it's part of a long tweet chain, he's just saying female characters are more likely to be especially objectified.

Don't let his actual words get in the way of some perfectly good troll bait


KingBiefWhistle: shortymac: Stratohead: draypresct: Nicely written, especially this bit:
... male characters tend to be idealized in form and proportion; but female characters tend to be objectified. There is a profound difference between those two, and failing to perceive that distinction is pernicious. That's why you'll rarely see a male superhero without pants . . . By that I don't mean naked, I mean without leggings of some kind. But that's absolutely the rule for female characters (I say this as the guy who put Wonder Woman in pants during his run because seriously it's hard to fight otherwise). No leg hair for guy heroes.

so...its always been okay to create body dysmorphia in young males then...because sexism is fine when directed at men.

Gonna have to call  bullshiat.

In his one of his tweets he totally mentions male body dysmorphia, it's part of a long tweet chain, he's just saying female characters are more likely to be especially objectified.

Don't let his actual words get in the way of some perfectly good troll bait


it's an 8 part tweet and not ONCE does he mention Dysmorphia at all.
its not troll bait, its taking difference to part of his statement with the implications of what he is saying.
 
2018-07-19 04:51:19 PM  

Gratch: That's a really good read from Straczynski.

I'm currently watching Babylon 5 for the first time on Amazon Prime, just started Season 3. last night  I'm utterly fascinated by this show, especially the parallels to current events.  It's often downright frightening how close they are.

/will leave the thread now to avoid any spoilers


I'm watching it for the first time as well, it's farking eerie.
 
2018-07-19 04:51:43 PM  

natazha: My wife says if you go back to the original in the 1980s, She-ra and He-man both looked a lot like the new She-ra.


and your wife would be wrong.
 
2018-07-19 04:52:29 PM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: shortymac: Sign, this nonsense.

She's just wearing realistic armor.

[img.fark.net image 426x640]

Armor should be lightweight, and distracting to enemies.


Good lord.

Is that just "Ye Olde Generic Fantasy Babe", or is it cosplay of an actual movie/game/anime/TV character?  Asking for a friend...
 
2018-07-19 04:53:13 PM  

KingBiefWhistle: shortymac: Stratohead: draypresct: Nicely written, especially this bit:
... male characters tend to be idealized in form and proportion; but female characters tend to be objectified. There is a profound difference between those two, and failing to perceive that distinction is pernicious. That's why you'll rarely see a male superhero without pants . . . By that I don't mean naked, I mean without leggings of some kind. But that's absolutely the rule for female characters (I say this as the guy who put Wonder Woman in pants during his run because seriously it's hard to fight otherwise). No leg hair for guy heroes.

so...its always been okay to create body dysmorphia in young males then...because sexism is fine when directed at men.

Gonna have to call  bullshiat.

In his one of his tweets he totally mentions male body dysmorphia, it's part of a long tweet chain, he's just saying female characters are more likely to be especially objectified.

Don't let his actual words get in the way of some perfectly good troll bait


This entire "controversy" is troll bait.
 
2018-07-19 04:55:11 PM  
Nerd culture needs to be shoved back into the hall lockers
 
2018-07-19 05:02:21 PM  

Gratch: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: shortymac: Sign, this nonsense.

She's just wearing realistic armor.

[img.fark.net image 426x640]

Armor should be lightweight, and distracting to enemies.

Good lord.

Is that just "Ye Olde Generic Fantasy Babe", or is it cosplay of an actual movie/game/anime/TV character?  Asking for a friend...


Witchblade
 
2018-07-19 05:03:30 PM  

Jeebus Saves: KingBiefWhistle: shortymac: Stratohead: draypresct: Nicely written, especially this bit:
... male characters tend to be idealized in form and proportion; but female characters tend to be objectified. There is a profound difference between those two, and failing to perceive that distinction is pernicious. That's why you'll rarely see a male superhero without pants . . . By that I don't mean naked, I mean without leggings of some kind. But that's absolutely the rule for female characters (I say this as the guy who put Wonder Woman in pants during his run because seriously it's hard to fight otherwise). No leg hair for guy heroes.

so...its always been okay to create body dysmorphia in young males then...because sexism is fine when directed at men.

Gonna have to call  bullshiat.

In his one of his tweets he totally mentions male body dysmorphia, it's part of a long tweet chain, he's just saying female characters are more likely to be especially objectified.

Don't let his actual words get in the way of some perfectly good troll bait

This entire "controversy" is troll bait.


You're not wrong
 
2018-07-19 05:04:11 PM  

Gratch: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: shortymac: Sign, this nonsense.

She's just wearing realistic armor.

[img.fark.net image 426x640]

Armor should be lightweight, and distracting to enemies.

Good lord.

Is that just "Ye Olde Generic Fantasy Babe", or is it cosplay of an actual movie/game/anime/TV character?  Asking for a friend...


Not 100% clear but I think that's witchblade.
 
2018-07-19 05:06:25 PM  
Do some people really not understand that when a few people "complain" about this sort of stuff on the Internet, they're actually just trolling???
 
2018-07-19 05:06:32 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-07-19 05:06:49 PM  

brizzle365: just...what is wrong with people these days?


Same thing that's always been wrong with us. Now we just all get a louder voice.

Also, capitalism has gone monster-time, and makes it even worse by encouraging fringe and extreme viewpoints in exchange for views that our oligarchs can monetize.
 
2018-07-19 05:06:53 PM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: shortymac: Sign, this nonsense.

She's just wearing realistic armor.

[img.fark.net image 426x640]

Armor should be lightweight, and distracting to enemies.


Reporting from the Battle of the Bunk.......millions dead....calling in for re-inforcements....the carnage.....
 
2018-07-19 05:07:43 PM  

Jeebus Saves: KingBiefWhistle: shortymac: Stratohead: draypresct: Nicely written, especially this bit:
... male characters tend to be idealized in form and proportion; but female characters tend to be objectified. There is a profound difference between those two, and failing to perceive that distinction is pernicious. That's why you'll rarely see a male superhero without pants . . . By that I don't mean naked, I mean without leggings of some kind. But that's absolutely the rule for female characters (I say this as the guy who put Wonder Woman in pants during his run because seriously it's hard to fight otherwise). No leg hair for guy heroes.

so...its always been okay to create body dysmorphia in young males then...because sexism is fine when directed at men.

Gonna have to call  bullshiat.

In his one of his tweets he totally mentions male body dysmorphia, it's part of a long tweet chain, he's just saying female characters are more likely to be especially objectified.

Don't let his actual words get in the way of some perfectly good troll bait

This entire "controversy" is troll bait.


Well, it got attention to She-ra, which ordinarily would have slid like an old man's prune turd into the toilet bowl
 
2018-07-19 05:10:39 PM  

Luse: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: shortymac: Sign, this nonsense.

She's just wearing realistic armor.

[img.fark.net image 426x640]

Armor should be lightweight, and distracting to enemies.

Reporting from the Battle of the Bunk.......millions dead....calling in for re-inforcements....the carnage.....


Worry not warrior, I shall send you the finest and freshest of swimming fighters directly to your position. I might suggest keeping your eyes and mouth shut, cover your nose and ears...the landing squad is till not up to snuff with targeting and such...
 
2018-07-19 05:10:39 PM  
I don't think much of the new character design, but the original wasn't exactly award-winning either. American animated shows sucked badly in the character design department.
 
2018-07-19 05:13:21 PM  

Thong_of_Zardoz: Do some people really not understand that when a few people "complain" about this sort of stuff on the Internet, they're actually just trolling???


I don't think they are trolling, but I also don't think these complaints represent a significant group of people either. Cherry pick some basic complaints, then you (as a "journalist") are writing about the new hot-button controversy in the internet!
 
2018-07-19 05:18:02 PM  

Gratch: That's a really good read from Straczynski.

I'm currently watching Babylon 5 for the first time on Amazon Prime, just started Season 3. last night  I'm utterly fascinated by this show, especially the parallels to current events.  It's often downright frightening how close they are.

/will leave the thread now to avoid any spoilers


As we all say, quite frequently these days:
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-07-19 05:20:19 PM  

Stratohead: it's an 8 part tweet and not ONCE does he mention Dysmorphia at all.
its not troll bait, its taking difference to part of his statement with the implications of what he is saying.


Sorry, but there's a lot more inferring going on from you than there is implying from JMS.
 
2018-07-19 05:20:39 PM  
I don't know about all this idealized stuff, but the new art is embarrassingly bad overall. It shouldn't be such a step down from 80s cartoons.
 
2018-07-19 05:26:29 PM  
Is the controversy that She-Ra should be at least as sexy as Rarity from My Little Pony?

Can we just drown these people?
 
2018-07-19 05:29:06 PM  

Omnidirectional Punching: I don't know about all this idealized stuff, but the new art is embarrassingly bad overall. It shouldn't be such a step down from 80s cartoons.


It seems to be aimed at somewhat younger children in general, which accounts for both the simplicity of the character designs and the fact that everyone is drawn a bit closer to prepubescent in proportion than pubescent regardless of the character's ostensible age.

Which, to be clear, is perfectly fine.  Honestly the 5-10 age bracket is probably a lot more appropriate for the kind of story the MotU shows were about than the 12-15 year olds the original show seemed to be marketed toward.

// I think the reason some people who were kids in the '80s and early '90s found this jarring is that almost every show that was ostensibly about children had actors or animation or voice acting or all of those at once that mostly consisted of people in their damned 30s, 20s at the lowest.  Power Rangers was five "teens" with attitude, where attitude == the two extra decades that had passed since they were actually teenagers, the "High School Musical" starred entirely people too old to even remember high school, etc.  My guess is that real child actors were a pain in the ass legally in some way if you weren't going to make them into a full-on permanent act on a family sitcom or whatever.
 
2018-07-19 05:29:16 PM  

Thong_of_Zardoz: Do some people really not understand that when a few people "complain" about this sort of stuff on the Internet, they're actually just trolling???


I have to say I'm instantly suspicious of anyone who's immediate reaction to other people being shiatty on the Internet is, "OMG, they're just trolling" because it heavily implies that they themselves troll people online and they just assume that everyone else expressing a shiatty opinion is just like them. Hate to break it to you, but there really are a significant number of people out there who do and say absurdly shiatty things because they wholeheartedly believe and support them, and are not just "doing it for the lulz".

Your behavior online is an extension of who you are as a person. If you're a flaming asshole online, you're an asshole offline, no matter what you try to tell yourself. The shiat you do online is not some separate reality, and we really need to understand that as a society if we're going to last much longer.
 
2018-07-19 05:33:02 PM  

Surool: Thong_of_Zardoz: Do some people really not understand that when a few people "complain" about this sort of stuff on the Internet, they're actually just trolling???

I don't think they are trolling, but I also don't think these complaints represent a significant group of people either. Cherry pick some basic complaints, then you (as a "journalist") are writing about the new hot-button controversy in the internet!


It's got to be one of the greatest returns on Internet Outrage. A insignificantly small number of people complain, and we've already had three threads on Fark where the Enlightened Ones proudly and (most importantly) publicly loudly decry all of the "Incels". And I can only imagine the number of comments that sites like Jezebel will generate.

It's almost as if it's manufactured outrage for the sole purpose of generating page-clicks, and not in any way, shape, or form a reflection of anything but an minuscule, insignificant, inconsequential part of society.
 
2018-07-19 05:33:16 PM  

Jim_Callahan: Omnidirectional Punching: I don't know about all this idealized stuff, but the new art is embarrassingly bad overall. It shouldn't be such a step down from 80s cartoons.

It seems to be aimed at somewhat younger children in general, which accounts for both the simplicity of the character designs and the fact that everyone is drawn a bit closer to prepubescent in proportion than pubescent regardless of the character's ostensible age.

Which, to be clear, is perfectly fine.  Honestly the 5-10 age bracket is probably a lot more appropriate for the kind of story the MotU shows were about than the 12-15 year olds the original show seemed to be marketed toward.

// I think the reason some people who were kids in the '80s and early '90s found this jarring is that almost every show that was ostensibly about children had actors or animation or voice acting or all of those at once that mostly consisted of people in their damned 30s, 20s at the lowest.  Power Rangers was five "teens" with attitude, where attitude == the two extra decades that had passed since they were actually teenagers, the "High School Musical" starred entirely people too old to even remember high school, etc.  My guess is that real child actors were a pain in the ass legally in some way if you weren't going to make them into a full-on permanent act on a family sitcom or whatever.


Good child actors are more difficult to find and child labor laws make some of the standard practices of TV & movie making (long hours, multiple days in a row of filming without time off, dangerous environments, etc) pretty much impossible.
 
2018-07-19 05:36:33 PM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: shortymac: Sign, this nonsense.

She's just wearing realistic armor.

[img.fark.net image 426x640]

Armor should be lightweight, and distracting to enemies.


Sweet Jesus
 
2018-07-19 05:44:53 PM  

Thong_of_Zardoz: Surool: Thong_of_Zardoz: Do some people really not understand that when a few people "complain" about this sort of stuff on the Internet, they're actually just trolling???

I don't think they are trolling, but I also don't think these complaints represent a significant group of people either. Cherry pick some basic complaints, then you (as a "journalist") are writing about the new hot-button controversy in the internet!

It's got to be one of the greatest returns on Internet Outrage. A insignificantly small number of people complain, and we've already had three threads on Fark where the Enlightened Ones proudly and (most importantly) publicly loudly decry all of the "Incels". And I can only imagine the number of comments that sites like Jezebel will generate.

It's almost as if it's manufactured outrage for the sole purpose of generating page-clicks, and not in any way, shape, or form a reflection of anything but an minuscule, insignificant, inconsequential part of society.


You should know
 
2018-07-19 05:46:31 PM  

Flaumig: Thong_of_Zardoz: Do some people really not understand that when a few people "complain" about this sort of stuff on the Internet, they're actually just trolling???

I have to say I'm instantly suspicious of anyone who's immediate reaction to other people being shiatty on the Internet is, "OMG, they're just trolling" because it heavily implies that they themselves troll people online and they just assume that everyone else expressing a shiatty opinion is just like them. Hate to break it to you, but there really are a significant number of people out there who do and say absurdly shiatty things because they wholeheartedly believe and support them, and are not just "doing it for the lulz".

Your behavior online is an extension of who you are as a person. If you're a flaming asshole online, you're an asshole offline, no matter what you try to tell yourself. The shiat you do online is not some separate reality, and we really need to understand that as a society if we're going to last much longer.


No, this is merely what you want to believe because it conforms to your world view.
 
2018-07-19 05:48:21 PM  

Theaetetus: [img.fark.net image 300x173]


It was bound to happen sooner or later.
 
2018-07-19 05:48:50 PM  

Gratch: That's a really good read from Straczynski.

I'm currently watching Babylon 5 for the first time on Amazon Prime, just started Season 3. last night  I'm utterly fascinated by this show, especially the parallels to current events.  It's often downright frightening how close they are.

/will leave the thread now to avoid any spoilers


He also wrote a graphic Spiderman novel a couple of decades ago that sparked the interest in a spiderman movie.
cdn.waterstones.comView Full Size
 
2018-07-19 06:01:10 PM  

optikeye: Gratch: That's a really good read from Straczynski.

I'm currently watching Babylon 5 for the first time on Amazon Prime, just started Season 3. last night  I'm utterly fascinated by this show, especially the parallels to current events.  It's often downright frightening how close they are.

/will leave the thread now to avoid any spoilers

He also wrote a graphic Spiderman novel a couple of decades ago that sparked the interest in a spiderman movie.
[cdn.waterstones.com image 263x400]


Spider-Man was already filming, and maybe even done, by the time JMS took over Spider-Man.

His first issue was out in June of 2001. Spider-Man filmed from January 2001 to June 2001, and they had a teaser or poster out in time to have to have to edit the World Trade Center out of it and the film.

If anything, JMS's run benefited from the movie.
 
2018-07-19 06:05:23 PM  
Meh....

Classic He-man was an unrealistic portrayal of a man.  She-ra was equally unrealistic.  As I child I understood this and even appreciated it.  I wanted to pretend I could be like He-man... Nevermind that it would require magic.  While there are some bodybuilders who look similar to He-man, they don't get to that level without drugs.

Still, I wanted the toy that was unrealistic and badass.

I'm a middle-aged office worker.  I still works rather play video games as He-man than as myself.  Likewise, every professional athlete we watch on TV is equally unrealistic.... Minus the magic from the He-man universe.

I'd rather dream about achieving something 99.999% of us never will.  Because it is fun.... Not because I don't know it isn't realistic.

I think a lot of people are upset with the idea of making a super hero less so, and not three sexual appeal.  If you made a Superman cartoon where he was 5'8" and overweight, a lot of guys would flip out about it too.
 
2018-07-19 06:05:53 PM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: shortymac: Sign, this nonsense.

She's just wearing realistic armor.

[img.fark.net image 426x640]

Armor should be lightweight, and distracting to enemies.


Personally I always took the "barely there' armor as an indication the character was so badass they didn't need protection. Like Conan the Barbarian.
 
Displayed 50 of 140 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report