Marvel, Komen, and Pinkwashing

Today I found an article on The Mary Sue about Marvel's new push to spread awareness about breast cancer. Specifically, male breast cancer. From what I gather, the covers of eight October releases will have special pink covers, and all the October releases will have an ad trying to break the stigma of male breast cancer.

Now, normally I'd sigh and accuse Marvel of being a dick because they're only focusing on the disease as it pertains to their male readers when they definitely have female readers as well, but this is a special case. People tend to forget that men can get breast cancer too - not just fat guys with "man boobs," the guy I knew who had it was fairly skinny - and there's this huge femiphobic stigma around it, where guys feel ashamed of having a disease almost exclusively associated with women. So in this case I'll give Marvel and Komen some credit. Besides, at this point we all know about breast cancer.

But not a lot.

You see, I'm always wary of drenching products in pink to promote breast cancer awareness, often selling them with the promise that proceeds will go towards breast cancer research - or pinkwashing as it's commonly called. At best it's a marketing scheme used to promote some products over others - if you have to pick between two products, you'll likely go with the one promising to promote cancer research, even though the actual amount donated is usually pretty scant and typically capped at a certain amount. Even products like the Marvel comic books that aren't being used to raise money are still exploiting a devastating disease to generate profits - and I'm sure some people will be lead to assume the comic books will help support cancer research; if you look at the above cover, next to Captain America, it says "Benefiting Susan G. Komen for the Cure." At worst, the product in question actually contains chemicals linked to cancer development. Obviously comic books won't give you cancer, and probably aren't terrible for the environment (maybe?), but this is still a pretty obvious push to give Marvel brownie points and give them a competitive edge over DC Comics, at least for this month. I for one am kind of disappointed that Susanna Polo didn't touch on this in her article.

And y'all don't get me started on Susan G. Komen, who withdrew funding for Planned Parenthood for stupid political reasons. I don't care if they took it back, it was still a dick move.

So all in all, I have mixed feelings about this whole thing. I'm glad someone's drawing attention to male breast cancer and trying to remove the stigma, especially for such a young audience, but there are some aspects of this campaign leave a bad taste in my mouth. I'll definitely bring this up in future panel discussions.

Final thought, at least it's Marvel, leaving DC's Wonder Woman virtually untouched.

Finally getting into Wonder Woman

I've wanted to get into Wonder Woman comics for a while, but it's always daunting trying to dive into a series that's been around for decades. I never knew where to start, and asking for help can be a bit of a gamble. But Barnes and Noble made it easy >_>

I stopped at B&N last night after work, having some time to kill and wanting to get Jessica Valenti's new book. Still not in stock, of course. One of the greatest feminist writers of our time releases a new book and B&N can't bother to . . . ugh. I rolled my eyes and decided to check out the graphic novels, though I wasn't sure if I wanted to actually buy one since I just started my new job and I won't see a cent from this company for another two and a half weeks. But when I saw that DC Comics graphic novels were on sale, I couldn't resist. Good time to check out the 'ol Second Wave feminist icon, yes? But there was a grand total of two Wonder Woman volumes in the section. Lots of Batman, lots of Superman, lots of Green Lantern, two Wonder Woman. And one Batgirl book, which I grabbed to take advantage of the "buy 2 get 1" deal. I saw a couple Catwoman volumes scattered in the Batman section too but I was less interested in those. Probably would have settled for one of them had there not been a new Batgirl release - Barbara Gordon has defied the "women in refrigerators" trope and has gotten out of the wheelchair, stronger than ever! Yay!

Wait, what's that? You've never heard of "woman in refrigerators"? Here, watch this video, I'll wait

I love her.

Anyway, it's not that I hate dude superheroes or that I don't want to read any of their comics, but since graphic novels are so expensive I want to prioritize ones about women. It did frustrate me that there was such a small selection, but no one else seemed bothered by it. The checkout girl, unfazed, assured me that this one Batman series had a lot of Catwoman in it. Small consolation. When I brought it up on Facebook my friends were indifferent, not seeing the problem and shrugging it off. "Nothing to see here," one said. Not that the small selection was a shock, but I still think it's a problem. Why is everyone so goddamn complacent?

Again, nerds are willing to acknowledge a gender issue in their media, but with a very casual "yeah, that's how it is" attitude. People aren't willing to challenge it or call for any sort of change.

Look, they finally put pants on her! And straps! I always wondered how she was able to fight in a friggin tube top. The enormous boobs don't seem necessary though.

Anyway, I started reading the first volume of Wonder Woman: Odyssey last night, and it's awesome! I know I still have to finish Battle Royale, which I've been muddling through all summer (I like it, it's just  very long and I'm a slow reader with ADHD), but I want to find time to read these as well because I'm really into them so far! Then again, I should savor them, because I cannot get in the habit of buying these on a regular basis. Yes, I could just buy individual comic books, but since I want to collect these I want to get something durable.

But maybe next time I should go to Comicopia or New England Comics, they'll (hopefully) have a better selection than a bookstore.

Mary Sue's Internalized Misogyny

Mary Sue: a (female) character who is over-idealized, lacking any real flaws or depth, and usually exists for the purposes of the author's wish fulfillement. Typical characteristics involve having a horribly tragic past, having a lot of guys after her, unprecedented skills or powers, being the "chosen one," and not being like the other girls.

I first heard of Mary Sues when I was a teenager, dabbling in the roleplay forum on Gaia Online (don't judge, I was young and Gaia didn't suck balls yet). There was some post defining the Mary Sue character, with a plea to, you know, not use her in a roleplay. And that makes sense; I mean, you can use her all you want in, say, a romance RP, but an action/adventure RP can't really get anywhere when every female character is a special friggin' snowflake who always has whatever character traits are necessary for the situation.

Now, the hatred of Mary Sue characters seems especially aimed at female characters in fiction (Bella Swan in Twilight) and fan-fiction who embody those traits. At first I felt like it made sense to hate, or at least be very annoyed by, those types of characters. It seemed like the feminist thing to do, hate poorly developed female characters who are too perfect, and to express annoyance at how idealized these women are. Seemingly flawless women, be them in fiction or in print advertisements, aren't really helpful to the cause. But then I started to realize that these "annoying" wish fulfillment characters bear a striking resemblance to male superheroes and fantasy/sci-fi characters. Then I found an essay last night that confirmed that suspicion:

So, there’s this girl. She’s tragically orphaned and richer than anyone on the planet. Every guy she meets falls in love with her, but in between torrid romances she rejects them all because she dedicated to what is Pure and Good. She has genius level intellect, Olympic-athelete level athletic ability and incredible good looks. She is consumed by terrible angst, but this only makes guys want her more. She has no superhuman abilities, yet she is more competent than her superhuman friends and defeats superhumans with ease. She has unshakably loyal friends and allies, despite the fact she treats them pretty badly.  They fear and respect her, and defer to her orders. Everyone is obsessed with her, even her enemies are attracted to her. She can plan ahead for anything and she’s generally right with any conclusion she makes. People who defy her are inevitably wrong.
 God, what a Mary Sue.
I just described Batman.

I knew it!

The essay goes on to justify these self-insert, wish-fulfillment power fantasies because men have gotten away with them for decades. Who has rolled their eyes at Spider-Man for being "too perfect"? Well, some guys I guess, but most people don't criticize a guy's fantasy of going from a dorky every-man to a powerful hero who saves the day and wins the affection of whatever girl he wants.

So what IS wrong with young women writing these fantasies? That's what fan fiction is, it's fantasy! Sometimes you're putting yourself in the story, something young people have done for decades but didn't have a platform to share those self-inserts until maybe ten years ago. I should know, I did it all the time, be it in person (those make-believe games us kids used to play) or by using various toys. I'm sure most people my age did it too. Other times you're fantasizing about two (usually male) characters getting together. So they're not well written or interesting, honestly a lot of fan fiction isn't. And it's not like the presence of a Mary Sue is the only thing to make a fan fiction bad.

The critique of Mary Sues especially in works of fiction is another example of the heightened scrutiny women in fiction are often subject to. People are more likely to hate on female characters for being bitchy, slutty, weak, annoying, too perfect or too flawed. Male characters do sometimes get flack for being jerks, but it does seem like the outright hatred is mostly directed at female characters. You're more likely to hear "ugh, I HATE her!" than "ugh, I HATE him!"

Although maybe it doesn't help that female characters, especially in anime or comic books, are written to be weak, annoying, and/or crazy.

Another problem with this critique is that it can stifle creativity. Authors are afraid to create another Mary Sue, and there's a huge chance that the character will be called a Mary Sue for whatever reason. It discourages authors from writing about female characters, which is getting in the way of there being female characters. Perhaps there aren't many female superheroes for this very reason.

What the essay doesn't touch on are the "special snowflake," "not like the other girls," girl-hating Mary Sues out there. These I do have a problem with, because they illustrate the internalized misogyny in their authors. It's generally not a good thing when a girl, real or fictional, claims to not be like the "other girls" - "other girls" being those stupid bimbo cheerleaders, those "skanks" who wear makeup and mini skirts, those "anorexic" girls who are thinner than the protagonist, the catty popular girls, the girls who are physically or emotionally frail, or whatever girl the protagonist's love interest has a crush on. These characters exist in young adult novels and movies as well to be sure, and these sort of characters who are special and different and hate the "normal" girls are harmful because the reinforce the idea that women are, by default, shallow, emotional, catty, stupid, and a range of other negative traits. I know young women who refuse to befriend other girls, or they do but they don't hang out with only girls, they tend to hang out with their guy friends or mixed gender groups, because girls are considered a pain in the ass. Girls are conditioned since middle school to hate members of their own gender. The special snowflake Mary Sue demonstrates this attitude in fan fiction, and her prevalence encourages the problem.

The way female characters are written in fiction and fan fiction can demonstrate deeply internalized misogyny of authors, and the way the nerd community is so quick to hate female characters and label them Mary Sues only shows sexism internalized misogyny in fandoms and the fan fiction community.

On Con-Harassment

I was beyond thrilled to see this on Tumblr this morning! I can't quite tell what convention this was at, but I love whoever thought of this and I wish more conventions would post material like this.

Cosplayers deal with enough harassment going to a convention. I mean, unless you're staying in the official hotel or driving and parking in an adjoining garage, harassment is pretty likely for female cosplayers especially as they make their way to the convention center. I've definitely had to handle comments; I thought of taking a cab just so I could get to the Anime Boston in peace. But then I found a T pass at Shaws that was good for the whole weekend of the convention and I couldn't pass it up - no pun intended. So I took the green line, and only endured people staring at me on the train. The catcalls occurred going to the train stop. And at the convention hotel. Not sure if the guy was an attendee, but he kept hassling me to do a plie for him (seeing the tutu of my costume, and ignoring that I was clearly not in a good mood), and after he couldn't take "no" for an answer, I turned around and yelled "GO FUCK YOURSELF!" What really bothered me was that the people around me admonished me for not being nice. "That's not con-talk!" one person told me. Yeah, I was the bad guy.

About a year ago, someone started a thread on the Anime Boston forums called Female Cosplayer Safety. While it was good to hear tips on how women should handle sketchy situations, I wasn't pleased  at the victim blaming attitude in the thread. It was all about how if you don't want unwanted sexual advances or attention, you should go out of your way to avoid it. And the thread received a lot of support, with people echoing the sentiment that if you wear a revealing outfit, you're just asking for harassment. Funny thing is, I haven't seen the same effort being invested in educating guys about how not to be creepers. I'm sure if I tried, I would be called out on being a misandrist feminazi bitch insinuating that all male nerds are sketchy.

I'm not saying that women shouldn't know how to protect themselves, but I have a problem when people are putting a lot of energy into threads like the one above and aren't even bothering to educate guys on appropriate convention behavior. While I don't think all nerds are socially inept, I do think a lot of them are - while a lucky few of us have social cliques and thriving social lives, we do in general have a tendency to keep to ourselves more than normal people, and that often results in not always knowing how to act around people, especially people you don't know, especially people you don't know and are attracted to. This in itself has sparked panels such as Creepers 2.0 and my friend's panel on how to talk to the opposite sex at ConnectiCon.

Unfortunately, while a lot of people know this is a problem and go about solving it by putting the onus on women to prevent it - which is a problem in our culture in general, not just nerd culture - more people don't think it's a problem. They acknowledge that there have been some isolated incidents, but most con-goers know better, so it's that big a deal. I don't know how to explain to them that yes, it's still a systematic problem because there are cultural norms in place to perpetuate the issue. People still think that women wearing skimpy cosplays are "asking for it;" that female cosplayers exist mostly for the male attendees to gawk at, photograph, and try to pick up; and as I've said before, that conventions have an "anything goes" environment that doesn't have a lot of clear limits on what is and is not acceptable. Walk around a convention and you'll have people running up to and glomping total strangers, something that's mostly only frowned upon because you might damage the costume.

I hope more conventions take action to educate attendees about unacceptable behaviors such as sexual harassment, and I hope more people understand that the power of common sense is not quite enough to make the problem go away.

The Comic Book Dichotomy

It's no secret that comic book superheroes aren't exactly drawn to realistic human proportions. They go beyond looking fit and healthy - the women are super skinny with giant breasts and the men look 'roided up beyond all belief. Take a look at this picture, which is what Captain America's Chris Evans would look like if they jacked him up to his character's comic book body:

Yeah, little odd looking if you ask me. And it definitely strikes a chord with me, a new fan of the comic series (though I'll be wading into it at a fairly slow pace until I manage to get a job). I love the stories but not a fan of how the hero looks.

When I talk about how women in comics, video games, and anime are depicted, men often chime in that comic book guys don't look all that realistic either. I usually reply by reminding them that while women in these genres are drawn to appeal to the male fantasy of sex, the men are drawn to appeal to the male fantasy of power. They're both drawn with the male consumer in mind. Not that I'm complaining about the casting of Chris Evans in Captain America, he's one of the sexist men alive in my opinion, but I don't know how many women are attracted to his original comic book counterpart. Women tend to be attracted to more average or even feminine looking male characters like Link from the Legend of Zelda games. If women had their way, Steve Rogers would be drawn to look more like Chris Evans.

If you still don't believe me, head on over the The Escapist and watch Movie Bob's take on the issue. I'll wait. Don't be put off by the intro, he'll get to this quickly enough.

In respect to comics specifically, I've noticed that a lot of superheroes, at least mainstream ones, were somehow transformed into these muscly manly men. They started out as scrawny little boys and, either through science, aliens, or some life altering experience, were changed into powerful men. This seems to appeal to the average male reader, serving as a sort of inspiration or metamorphism fantasy.

All that said, I do want to take on the issue of hypermasculinity in comic books, because while it's not as bad as, say, every woman sporting a D cup and a plunging neckline, it is worth discussing. To me, the issue isn't about how men or women are depicted, the problem is the dichotomy between the two. The men are impossibly strong, the women tend to be impossibly sexual. There's hardy any overlap in mainstream comics. No feminine men, no androgynous women, the gender roles are hardly being blurred in the realm of comic books. Even heroes who are made fun of for being "lame" still have six packs and enormous biceps, even women who are mocked for being strong instead of weak still have huge boobs. Even Black Widow, who has somehow earned the Avengers the most feminist film released this year, is shown on the movie posters as being weirdly contorted, showing off her sexual assets rather than any physical strength. She may be a great spy and she may kick ass, but she's still an example that women usually have to rely mostly on something other than brute physical strength (magic, sex appeal, archer skills, intelligence, etc.) to succeed as a hero, while that's usually a male hero's best asset.

I leave you with this: put more muscle and less boobage on Wonder Woman or Black Widow, and you still have a kickass superhero. Put skimpy costumes, less muscle, and more feminine features on Superman or Captain America, and you probably have a joke.

Geeks Gone Wild! The Rise of Raunch Culture at Conventions

Ariel Levy's Female Chauvinist Pigs, one of my favorites in what can only be called the mini women's studies library in my bedroom, is all about women's participation in raunch culture. The concept is summed up well in the beginning of the book: "If Male Chauvinist Pigs were men who regard women as pieces of meat, we would outdo them and become Female Chauvinist Pigs: women who make sex objects of other women and of themselves" (Levy 4). The book touches on topics such as Girls Gone Wild, cardio strip teases and pole dancing classes, and women going to strip clubs. When I had to read the book again for a class, it reminded me a lot of the raunchy atmosphere that often takes over Anime Boston at night.

I say Anime Boston because at the time, that was the only big convention I'd been to at the time. ConnectiCon has some pretty raunchy stuff as part of their nightlife as well, as do many other large cons all over the country. At your typical convention, at a certain point in the evening, the atmosphere changed to one that is electrifyingly sexual. Pretty much all the programming requires an ID; cosplay burlesques and strip teases are an emerging trend; hentail panels dominate the anime convention, even the evening's main event(s) will be of an R-rated nature; the winner of this year's Anime Boston Masquerade was a sexy and titillating skit on why Japanese android girls were better than American robots (I shit you not); and booth babes and scantily clad female cosplayers are part of the scenery at any nerd convention.

My discomfort came not from the fact that there was programming of an adult nature, but that the vast majority of it was sexual, and not exactly in a progressive sort of way. Most of the hentai clips featured young women being raped, sometimes by much older men, or showing lesbians and women masturbating. While men are not absent from the sexy entertainment, women's bodies are usually the main attraction.

So now I read Female Chauvinist Pigs, this time actively applying the concepts in the book to convention culture.

When I asked female viewers and readers what they got out of raunch culture, I heard similar things about empowering miniskirts and feminist strippers, and so on, but I also heard something else. They wanted to be "one of the guys"; they hoped to be experienced "like a man."  Going to strip clubs or talking about porn stars was a way of showing themselves and the men around them that they weren't "prissy little women" or "girly-girls." (Levy 4)

This, again, resonated with me, as it reminds me how femiphobic nerd culture can be. We don't want those ditsy, cheerleader/sorority girl types flitting around at our conventions - it's bad enough having to put up with their giggling and inane chatter in our every day lives. Any indication of being "one of those girls" is quickly shut down with an unamused "no, stop it" or outright shunning. Don't admit to liking Ke$ha or watching Lifetime shows and expect to be taken seriously as a nerd. Going to Hentai Dubbing with your friends, however, shows that you can hang like one of the guys.

A little later on, as Levy discusses spring break and Girls Gone Wild, she begins to explain that "The heat is turned up a little in Miami, but a baseline expectation that women will be constantly exploding in little blasts of exhibitionism runs throughout our culture. Girls Gone Wild is not extraordinary, it's emblematic" (Levy 17). At conventions, guys may not go specifically for the sexual scenery, but it's certainly taken for granted as part of the experience. They go knowing there will be booth babes, skimpy cosplays, and evening events where girls will go wild.

In a later chapter, Levy profiles the Female Chauvinist Pig as someone who "gets it." She has a sense of humor, and is totally cool with "cartoonish stereotypes of female sexuality," as well as the stereotypical male response to it. And in a subculture that is still mostly run by men and for men, where men are the target demographic and dominant group, girls who "get it" are going to be much more appreciated and accepted over girls who are uncomfortable when it comes to sex and raunchiness, or "humorless" feminists trying to spoil the fun. In nerd culture, you either have to be "for the boys" - wearing skimpy costumes and, if possible, gyrating on stage at a main event - or one "of the boys" - hooting and hollering right along with them, or at least laughing and rolling your eyes playfully as they do so.

These are the women Levy calls "loophole women." They're often the mitiating presence as well, making the objectification of women's bodies less creepy. Sort of like Robin Quivers on Howard Stern (I am grateful for Mr. Stern bringing Spencer Horsman back to America's Got Talent, but that doesn't make him any less of a misogynist douche blanket). They're there to reassure everyone else that it's not that bad - it can't be sexist if women are okay with it, right? That's an issue I run into a lot when talking about these issues in nerd culture, or even in normal society. There's this idea that as long as some women are okay with something, no woman is allowed to raise concerns about it.

I also want to bring up the issue of accepting and fulfilling the cartoonish stereotypes Levy is talking about. Fact is, nerd culture revolves around cartoons - animated movies and TV shows, comic books, and live action movies based on those cartoons. People dress as cartoon characters, which may have been drawn with revealing outfits and outrageous proportions (I know my favorite cosplay, Germaine from Neurotically Yours, is one such example), and thus are going to act as those characters to a degree. There's a sort of "anything goes" atmosphere that encompasses that costumed play and occasional fanservice - the rules of normal society are, for at least a few days inside the convention hall, suspended, and you can get away with behaving in a manner that you could never get away with on a typical day. Some people are inevitably going to take it too far, and that is probably one reason why sexual harassment is still prevalent at conventions, if not the biggest reason.

Similar to the the topic of cartoonish stereotypes is the issue of "uncle Tomming," or "conforming to someone else's - someone more powerful's - distorted notion of what you represent. In doing so, you may be getting ahead in some way . . . but you are also reifying the system that traps you" (Levy 106). Not that Levy was trying to imply that being a woman today is anything like being a slave in antebellum America, but there are parallels. Women in nerd culture who partake in "Tomming" may dress and act the way they believe they're expected to, as women and as nerds. They may take on the "sexy nerd girl" stereotype in order to gain favor with the group she's in or at the convention she's attending. She may very well succeed, but in doing so she's only supporting the expectation that that's what geek girls are like, giving merit to those who fetishize female cosplayers and girl geeks in general.

Ginny McQueen can definitely attribute a lot of her success to her appearance and her willingness to wear revealing cosplays and photograph naked. That's mostly what she's known for. She is a skilled seamstress and people know that, but I doubt she'd be half as famous if she wasn't showing "the goods" regularly. Yet then it's assumed that her main purpose is that of a sex object and hardly anything more, which is probably why she was solicited to strip at a convention. People are taken aback by the idea that while she may objectify herself on her own terms, she's insulted that people only value her for her appearance rather than her contributions to the cosplay community.

I'm not against sex or sexy costumes, I don't think that stuff needs to be censored at conventions. A few hentai panels are fine, a little naughtiness in big events can add spice to the experience. We all know these conventions aren't just for kids, and the Cosplay Burlesque troupe was founded as a way to make conventions more adult oriented. But since when do mature adults need to be surrounded by boobies, lesbian lapdances and tentacle rape scenes to have fun? To me, things like Anime Boston's jazz lounge have the right idea, give the grownups something to do that's fun and mature that isn't necessarily sexual (too bad the drinks are horrendously overpriced at that thing). I just have a problem with conventions who think the only way to entertain their adult attendees is to make everything, well, "adult." Especially when that adult programming is overwhelmingly done at women's expense.

As far as burlesques in general go, I'm not certain I know how to feel about them. Where is the line between a positive, genuine expression of real female sexuality and a raunchy display of commercial sexuality for the horny masses? Can they truly ever be one in the same?

What I Mean by Nerd Culture

When I blog and give presentations about nerd culture, I don't merely mean what it means to be a nerd. I also try to steer clear of just talking about nerd media (video games, movies, comics, etc.). The media is important, it's what brings us together. We gather to watch it, to rant and rave about it, and to bond over those common interests. These gatherings, in person and online, in small groups and at huge conventions, are nerd culture.

Nerd culture is present at conventions, anime clubs, live gaming, chat rooms and forums, LARPing and tabletop RPG tournaments, even groups of friends that bond over nerdy interests. Nerd culture exists in comic book stores, and at midnight showings and video game releases. Those who create media are part of this culture, although I often regard the media as a separate entity; the media and culture have a complex, reflexive relationship.

Nerds like to insist that media doesn't effect them. Video games don't make people violent or sexist or anything bad like that - anyone influenced by media is an idiot, and we are smarter than that. I'm not saying that watching a sexist video game will magically make people sexist, but sexist media does perpetuate sexist cultural norms the same way that violent video games fan the flames of violent tendencies. Video games and movies that cater mostly to male interests reinforces the idea that nerd culture is still a boys' club, one where women are allowed to visit but cannot become full-fledged, voting members, and who must either be "of the boys" or "for the boys." Booth babes and maid cafes also serve to reinforce the "boys' club" environment at conventions, subtly informing female attendees that they still come second, even if it's by a few seconds (yeah, Olympic track is on).

Analysis of nerd culture and media is often based not only on how men and women are represented and depicted, but whether these tropes and power dynamics can be discussed. It's not just a matter of whether Princess Zelda is a "strong female character" or "damsel in distress," but how people perceive her character - usually a bitch for "friendzoning" Link after all his hard work. It's not just a matter of whether women are being sexualized in video games, but whether people can talk about that sexualization without being told to shut up. It's not just a matter of under-representation of women in the media, but whether people even notice - let alone talk about - that under-representation.

My interest in gender and nerd culture didn't merely arise because I saw problems that needed addressing - they arose because I felt like I couldn't address them. Whenever I tried to talk about them, no one seemed to share my concerns. In fact, they dismissed them, insisting that nerds are "above" sexism, that we're too smart to fall prey to the social ills of mainstream society. I felt very much alone, maybe I was crazy in thinking the way I did. I came to learn, from blogs here and there and from talking to some people one on one, that others did share those concerns. This is why my panels are discussions, not just presentations. It gives people a place to speak freely when they may otherwise be silenced and dismissed, and for others to take comfort in knowing that they're not alone.

Ginny McQueen, Cosplay Strip Teases, and the Fetishization of Female Cosplayers

Today I came across a story on Jezebel about a cosplayer who was solicited to strip at an anime convention in Las Vegas. I've never been a real fan of the growing cosplay burlesque/strip tease trend, but this took it way too far.

Ginny McQueen in one of her many amazing costumes

Ginny McQueen is certainly known for her work with cosplay. She's won numerous awards, she works for cosplay.com - she's very good at what she does. She's also attractive, slender, and often flaunts it with sexy, tight-fitting costumes. Still, to send her an e-mail asking her to strip at a convention is going a bit far. Especially when you know that there are cosplay burlesque troupes that already exist - they're the ones who usually perform at conventions, not ordinary cosplayers who happen to be sexy. And you'd think there would be plenty of actual strippers, nerdy or not, in Las Vegas who would be up for that gig. But just because someone wears sexy costumes doesn't mean she's willing to strip.

The deal looked a bit sketchy to me, really. I'm sure Animegacon is a real thing, I'm sure they do have burlesques and raves, but to send her a contract via e-mail (not even in a PDF or anything, no real legal language, just what they're offering and what they want her to do, with a spot for her signature) is a tad weird. You'd think they'd proposition her first and then send a contract if she was willing. Sketchy or not, it was certainly presumptuous. Only after they send her the "contract" did they want to meet with her and discuss it further.

(not Ginny McQueen, is actually burlesque)

I don't really have much to say about the cosplay burlesque/strip tease events. Nothing I can say other than personal issues with it. I went to one once, hoping for a great show, and I ended up leaving feeling sick to my stomach. Yeah yeah I know, there were guys in the show too (though I'm not sure they were really the main attraction - I wonder how many guys put on a Magic Mike kind of show and how many do it just for laughs), I'm sure there are guys in all the shows, hence why I can't call them sexist, from what I hear they're technically equal opportunity sexualizers. And I can't really blame a Las Vegas convention for wanting to bring in a little, uh, local flavor. In general I'm not big on the huge raunch culture at conventions, it was part of what prompted my interest in gender and nerd culture after reading Female Chauvinist Pigs by Ariel Levy, although I understand that book is controversial even within feminism. More importantly I'm not a fan of female cosplayers being sexualized and fetishized.

There are whole websites and photo galleries dedicated to cosplay girls. Not so much for male cosplayers although I don't doubt there are some out there. Still a bit of a novelty, many conventions result in "The Girls of [X Con]" webpages and articles (even on feminist leaning websites for women); we're fascinated and titillated by the idea of girls in pretty and sexy costumes at conventions. I've known men who have expressed appreciation for all the cosplayers at conventions, commenting that cosplay girls are hot. Female cosplayers, especially those in sexually appealing costumes, are unfortunately likely to experience sexual harassment at conventions. Women are sometimes advised to dress modestly or don't cosplay at all if they don't want people to stalk, grope, or catcall them. While part of this problem stems from the "anything goes" atmosphere of nerd conventions, it seems as though women who wear sexy costumes are assumed to be sexually available and slutty - "asking" to be harassed, "asking" to be followed around, "asking" to be upskirted and touched inappropriately. That's what they're there for, right?

In the case of Ms. McQueen, it looks like women who wear revealing costumes are either assumed to be strippers - or willing to strip - or they're simply perceived as sex objects, only valued for how they present themselves at conventions. As if her willingness to show off her body is more important than her ability to make amazing costumes by hand. I don't blame the woman, it might have been an amazing deal, but the assumption would no doubt insult many women in nerd culture.

Self-objectification in regards to cosplay and the fetishization of female cosplayers are two separate - yet complexly interrelated - issues in nerd culture. Putting cosplay girls on a pedestal might seem like a good thing for women, something we should all appreciate and enjoy, but it does the exact opposite - it makes it even harder for nerdy women to achieve truly equal footing with their male counterparts at conventions.

Commentary on the "Fake Geek Girl" Issue

I was first introduced to this phenomenon this past spring, shortly before making my first presentation Anime Boston, through an article on The Mary Sue. It really resonated with me, having been vaguely aware of it in my own surroundings but never really putting a name to the problem.

For example, if I was going to a comic book store to check out a new series, or find a new series to check out, I'd know I was running the risk of being pegged as a poser, or a bimbo just getting into comics/manga/whatever for attention. This makes entering a new fandom a daunting task. Look clueless, and people will get the wrong idea about your intentions. I finally faced that fear to pick up my first Captain America comic.

Now, I get that there are female posers in nerd culture. There are male posers as well but no one seems to care about their existence nearly as much as "fake geek girl." There are no doubt some women doing it for attention, girls who wear Marvel t-shirts because it's cute and trendy, or some women just attending conventions for the "wrong reasons;" hell sometimes they'll even admit to it. I'd say that they're ruining everything and this is why we can't have nice things and all that other angry grumbling, but I think these young women aren't nearly as common as people seem to think.

A lot of people slapped with the "fake geek girl" tag are probably just newcomers. Why are they new? Why are they getting into it? Who the hell cares? As long as they're trying something new, why is it a big deal why? And when someone is new to a series, franchise, fandom, etc. they're not going to know much right away. One episode at a time. One comic at a time. One game at a time, one level at a time, people get into these things gradually, although their interest and enthusiasm may develop faster than their knowledge. Enthusiasm is a big part of what makes someone a geek. Yes, having a vast store of knowledge is part of being a geek too, but that can only come with experience. How is someone expected to gain that experience and knowledge of all things nerdy if she (or he) is constantly encountering elitist gatekeepers telling her to get off their lawn? It's intimidating as hell.

Sure enough, the article on The Mary Sue concluded with:

But who are you to say that a stranger, someone you’re never likely to meet, is not genuinely interested in the thing they appear to be interested in? Who are you? I just… what? I’m rendered incoherent. Here at the Mary Sue, when an actress goes on a talk show anddescribes her personal affection and involvement and enjoyment and FANDOM for geek properties, we take it at face value. Why? Because we don’t actually have a reason not to. Because the alternative breeds a closed community of paranoid, elitist jerks who lash out at anyone new.
The proper response to someone who says they like comics and has only read Scott Pilgrim is to recommend some more comics for them. The proper response to someone who appears to be faking enthusiasm is to ignore them and not project their actions on an entire gender or community. The proper response to someone who appears to want to be a part of your community is to welcome them in. End of story.

My problem with the "fake geek girl" witch hunt is that it's largely femiphobic. Society, not just nerd culture, often associates femininity with being stupid and frivolous, only doing things in relation to others. This fuels the assumption that women only claim to like comics for attention. Maybe they assume a girl is only claiming to like Zelda games because her boyfriend or crush likes them. We're still getting used to the idea that women could possibly be legitimately interested in nerdy things without some ulterior motive.

The debate about whether "fake geek girl" are a legitimate threat sprung up again recently when this garbage sprung up on CNN, prompting this cartoon on The Escapist:

This cartoon did an excellent job of pointing out how ridiculously women are treated at conventions, by reminding us that you wouldn't even think of talking to a guy that way.

The new article added a new problem to the discussion: women who wore sexy costumes just to look good, without really knowing anything about the characters. Again, while I'm sure some women do this, I think a lot of women do cosplay as characters they know little about, but that doesn't necessarily make them posers. A girl who does that could have just been introduced to the character and wanted to dress as her, liking what she's seen but not exactly being an expert. 

I can't blame people for not liking actual posers, especially at conventions. You see, conventions are getting crowded, and many conventions can't move to bigger venues to accommodate growing interest. Going to a convention, you deal with long lines at registration, long lines getting autographs, long lines getting into panels and events, even long lines at the food court and hotel elevators. The dealer's room is packed, even the hallways can be packed. It's only natural to convince yourself that the people getting in your way, taking what you feel is rightfully yours, don't deserve it. They're not nerdy enough to take up space, to get into the panel you were turned away fro, to get the good seat at the masquerade, to meet your favorite artist before you do. Who hasn't fallen into this way of thinking at some point? It's frustrating, but still oddly comforting to think this way, because then you can believe that if you could somehow kick out these posers, there'd be a lot more nerdy resources for "true believers" like yourself.

Thing is, conventions are also expensive. They take a lot of dedication, especially if you cosplay. You need to pay to get there, pay to get in, pay for food, and often pay for a hotel as well. Cosplaying costs money, and time if you make it yourself (no judgement against those who can't, Lord know I can't sew for beans). So if someone is at a convention, especially in costume, they deserve to be there.

Not saying that's the right way of thinking, just a very common way. Still, it's not right to assume that anyone is "fake" until you get to know them. Not quiz them on obscure trivia, not gauge whether they've watched "enough" anime or read "enough" comics, or if they've been a nerd "long enough," but whether they legitimately like what they're into. Maybe it's time to just put an end to the stupid, paranoid witch hunt. Posers exist, and one of two things will happen to each poser: 1) he or she will get bored if it all, because they're not actually into it, and move on to some other interest; or 2) he or she will develop a legitimate interest and become a real geek. Either way, posers don't last.

An Analysis of Bioshock

I love Bioshock! I love it I love it I love it! I think I've played it eight times since finishing it in April, and God help me if it's been more than that because I very well may need help. I love it. Did I mention that? The story, the music, the old fashioned advertisements, the horror elements, the grenade launcher . . .

But not because it's feminist.

It's not anti-feminist either. It's not overtly misogynistic, although Anita Sarkeesian may disagree with me on that. We'll see what she thinks when she launches her Tropes vs. Women in Video Games series (which I seriously can't wait for). At least I hope she mentions Bioshock in on of her videos. Still, having played it so many times in so few months, I feel the need to discuss some gender-related themes in the games.

Just a disclaimer: I'm only going to talk about the first game, and finish with my reactions to Bioshock Infinite's promotional materials. I haven't played the second game yet so I don't feel comfortable talking about it.

So there's the fact that the game takes place in 1960 and that inevitably affect the gender dynamic of the game. It can't be too much of a surprise that the hero/playable character is a man, and villains are men. All the villains are men. Pretty much all the tough opponents are men. Women do play a role and it's important to mention what roles they play.

The main moral decision of the game, is whether to harvest or rescue a Little Sister. They carry ADAM, which can be exchanged for plasmids and gene tonics that re-write your genetic code and give you special abilities. You can harvest the little one and get a lot of ADAM, but she'll die in the process - or you can rescue her, giving you less ADAM and turning her back into a normal little girl, and every now and then you're rewarded with special plasmids, extra ADAM, and ammo or health packs. Atlas, your guide through most of the game, tells you they're not little girl anymore, they've been turned into monsters, and you should harvest them because you need all the ADAM you can get to stay alive. Maybe that's true in the higher levels, I always rescue the little ones and I often finish the game on medium with plenty of ADAM to spare. Then again I'm not much for using plasmids for combat.

What's interesting about this is the choice of the game's creator to use little girls. Doctor Tenenbaum, the woman who created the Little Sisters and then came to regret her choice (I'll talk about her later), wonders this out loud in one of her audio diaries. My theory is because they're the most vulnerable and innocent things the creators could possibly use to play on the gamer's sympathy. Would people feel as torn about harvesting or rescuing if it were little boys? Older girls? Adults? Would it be the same if they were children of both genders?

Would the escort mission be the same with a little boy?

Yes, there's an escort mission. And despite my experience I still suck at it. You have to turn yourself into a Big Daddy - a man in a big, SCUBA looking suit who's job is to protect Little Sisters from being harvested as they gather ADAM (you have to kill them to get to the Little Sisters, and Jesus balls those can be hard battles if you're ill equipped) - so a little girl will open these doors for you and you can get to the final boss. But because she's no longer imbued with ADAM she's vulnerable you have to protect her. And I do everything I can - hack the security cameras and bots, set up security mines, use heat seeking grenades, spray the splicers with antipersonnel rounds before the even get close, but eventually we get into a spot where I don't have time to properly set up security and she always dies. But then I have time to set things up before I get a new one. I'd point out the disposability of young girls, but Tenenbaum does mention that to lose even one is a sin. In general I despise escort missions, usually because the character being escorted is a frail female character. So the presence of just that in Bioshock makes me deduct points. Or would if I was keeping score . . . yeah, I'm watching Olympic gymnastics right now.

It's also important to point out the Little Sister - Big Daddy dynamic. She's little, innocent, and even though ADAM makes her indestructible, she'll still cry out creepily adorable things like "scabby on my knee! scabby on my knee!" when hurt. He is big, powerful, armed to the max and can kill anyone to protect the little girl. You can hypnotize him to make him think you're a Little Sister to protect you (the male hero), but I never do that, and it certainly doesn't help when he's mad at me for accidentally shocking him with my static discharge.

The Little Sister - Big Daddy pairing is perhaps the most iconic image of the game. She has such a bond with him. A Little Sister will become upset and weep when her Big Daddy is killed, so much so that it makes me question whether killing a Big Daddy is a moral decision or an act of violent imperialism.

The rest of the female characters are scientists, or victims, or in one case both. It's interesting to see two female scientists in the year 1960, even in what was supposed to be a Utopian society. Dr. Tenenbaum, the only really prominent woman in the game, is a scientist who discovered ADAM, and was manipulated into exploiting little girls in order to manufacture it for the masses. She eventually realized her mistake and became their protector, urging the hero of the game to rescue them. She has a safe house for the children in Olympus Heights. She is a maternal type, trying to do what she feels is right. Unfortunately, she has been forced to use her intelligence for evil more than once in her life, having been an experimental scientist in the Nazi concentration camp when she was young. In the audio diaries, she seems to be the most sane and most human character in the game with her complex inner struggles.

And a total badass at one point. Sort of a mama grizzly when it comes to protecting the Little Sisters.

Then again, Dr. Julie Langford is also fairly sane. And mothering, but with plants instead of people. Her research holds the key to saving the trees in Arcadia when Andrew Ryan poisons the air to kill them, but Andrew Ryan kills her to prevent her from actually developing the antidote. You actually watch her die as her office is turned into a gas chamber. She is a genius woman of science, but she's also a victim, like so many other women in Bioshock. In he audio diaries, she expresses annoyance at the "spliced up morons" around her.

Then there's Jasmine, the stripper. She was paid to produce a fertilized egg for Dr. Tenenbaum, which would be removed once she and Andrew Ryan had sex. She needed the money. But naturally Ryan found out and killed her. You find her corpse on the bed with a knife wound in her stomach.

Another woman is Dianne McClintock, who is attacked during a New Years Eve party, and Dr. Steinman fixes her up. Or at least, he's supposed to make her look pretty . . . I recall being made to believe he screws her up big time. He's deranged and wants to "experiment" with beauty rather than adhere to traditional standards. He wants to be the Picasso of plastic surgery. Before you kick his butt you see his other victims of science, all women of course.

Interestingly, aside from the nameless female enemies you face, the female characters of the game all seem pretty rational. It's the men that are either crazy or have been driven mad with power. It's the men that created most of the underwater city of Rapture, but it's also the men who destroyed it with war. The men are the villains, the bosses, the ones you must kill. They're the evil ones.

So there's sexism against men and women in Bioshock. The women seem to be the mature, rational ones - the mothers of Rapture. But they're almost all victims of the men - stabbed, gassed, butchered in failed plastic surgery experiments, harvested (maybe), or just plain manipulated into doing one thing or another for the benefit of men. The men are powerful, but it's clear they can't handle it. They try to build and create, and end up destroying and creating the horrific dystopian city of Rapture the hero stumbles upon in the beginning of the game.

Now there's a new game coming out, Bioshock Infinite. And this is their promotional poster:

Seriously, 2K games? . . . Seriously? Big strong man protecting a small, worried looking woman? I guess it's not that much better than a Big Daddy and Little Sister. And when you get up close and personal with this woman, you notice something a tad . . . unnecessary:

Seriously?!? Why are her tits so damn big? I highly doubt they'll have any purpose, nor will the low cut corsette, or her tiny physique. I'm sure she'll be a strong character, but the promotional material makes her look like a sexualized damsel in distress. Sure doesn't make me want to play the game.

Gender Swapping: Feminizing Male Characters

It seems to be a trend at conventions: women who cosplay as male characters will feminize/sexualize their cosplays in order to be the female versions of those characters. The practice of gender swapping, or dressing as a female version of a male character or male version of a female character (less common), has becoming a growing phenomenon at convention. I don't have an issue with gender swapping in general, but these outfits go far beyond cutting the costume to fit a woman's body; they will typically involve miniskirts, stilettos, cropped tops, corsettes and waist cinchers, tube tops, cleavage, fishnets, pastels and shades of pink not seen on the original character, and in general often a lot less clothing.

That's not to say that any one costume that includes these things is inherently wrong. There's nothing wrong with wanting to be a female version of anything or wanting to wear pink, there's nothing wrong with showing skin, and there's nothing wrong with taking some creative license with how a character looks. To be sure, these costumes are usually either handmade or involve piecing together normal fashions, while the concept of "female X" or "sexy Y" may not be creative the effort that goes into those costumes . Where I see a problem is the trend; the fact that to many people - even female nerds - "female" still means sexy and/or pinkified.

Then again, perhaps many female nerds see cosplay as the rare occasion they can be feminine or sexy. Such things are often discouraged in nerd culture. The "ideal" female nerd is a bit of a tomboy, the jeans and a t-shirt type with little to no makeup. While the guys may appreciate an attractive young lady in their clique or club, and that young lady will certainly be appreciated for her looks, she may not be appreciated for much else. Pretty girls are seldom taken seriously as full members of a group, unless they're someone's girlfriend or potential girlfriend. A girl who shows up to anime club in makeup and a pretty outfit is likely to have her "nerd cred" taken into question, as well as her intentions for joining the club. This may be why so many girls love cosplay. It's dressup, a chance to be sexy, or powerful, or pretty, something they cannot get away with otherwise. A chance to be both pretty and nerdy.

Drawing female versions of male characters can get even worse. I found these on Tumblr over the last few days, and while the art is good, I'm a bit horrified at how skimpy the outfits are. Hulk naked kinda makes sense, though for a girl, you'd think a torn cropped top or bra wouldn't hurt. Drawing her like a little girl isn't much better. Why the huge breasts? Why is one Iron Woman not wearing an iron suit? The suit's kind of important, don't you think? At least some of them have muscle . . .

Most troubling is the fact that the most common way to degrade a male character is to make him a woman. There are videos on the internet poking fun at superheros or video game characters acting like women. At ConnectiCon's Super Art Fight, guys would attack each other's drawings of superheros by drawing lipstick and high heels on them. In nerd culture, as in mainstream culture to be sure, femininity is still associated with weakness and being "less than" one's more masculine counterparts.

Again, this isn't to criticize individual behavior. What kind of feminist would I be if I condemned women for their choices? But those choices add up to a trend I find troubling and in need of addressing. In general I find the topic of self-objectification in cosplay an interesting and complex issue. I'll discuss that another time.