Mark Millar: Sexist and Racist?

[Matt H.O.W.L.]

It's their right to be offended, yes. I disagree with that position though.

EDIT: I read that kinda fast, but I wanted to add that it still is a bit different of a situation. The writer of the article is offended with the material that's actually written in the book: the portrayals of the characters. In your situation, the pedophiliac homosexual relationship actually isn't there.

I guess it depends on the "it" Julian referred to in his post, but he ended the statement with "even if he doesn't intend it?" That's why I agree with Zack's position here. Carpenter's not a right-wing fascist because Michael Meyers killed dope-smoking, horny teens. He didn't intend it to be that, so it's not.

[El Dave]

I guess it depends on the "it" Julian referred to in his post, but he ended the statement with "even if he doesn't intend it?" That's why I agree with Zack's position here. Carpenter's not a right-wing fascist because Michael Meyers killed dope-smoking, horny teens. He didn't intend it to be that, so it's not.

Not to you, anyway. To someone else, it may mean exactly that. Art is too subjective to simply say that something is or isn't there.

Is Batman homosexual? HELL YEAH! 

[Kenney]

"I’m not against cheesecake or sexual content in comics, but when that content is strictly for boys and the women are just bizarre centerfolds with fangs and big hair … well, it starts to smell like a guy’s locker room"

All i got from this toilet paper of a rant is that since she isn't a fanboy i'm not allowed to be one either. What's wrong with the smell of a guys locker room from time to time.

I've seen variations of this theme of an argument over the years. I used to listen to a pretty good podcast called I Read Comics done by Lene Taylor. She was an engaging host, and had an interesting take on this hobby we all love. Yet, one thing she did routinely drove me nuts. She constantly called to task the over sexualization and depiction of women in comics. Fair enough. But then, 5 seconds later would go on and on about how hot some guys were in a comic that featured gay male couples. Both of those points were fair, but when you put them side by side, it made both hard to swallow.

So yeah, a lot of times, it seems like these arguments come down to "I'm not being catered to enough". That's a bit of an oversimplification, but I think that is a big part of the root of these arguments. 

[Matt H.O.W.L.]

Not to you, anyway. To someone else, it may mean exactly that. Art is too subjective to simply say that something is or isn't there.

Is Batman homosexual? HELL YEAH! 

My problem is when the subjectivity leads to people making assumptions about and attaching attributes to the creator. I mean, did you know Bob Kane was a "degenerate"? Me neither. 

[MikeFarley]

I don't even like Millar and I have to second this emoticon.

 

[Mike Murphy]

It's their right to be offended, yes. I disagree with that position though.

EDIT: I read that kinda fast, but I wanted to add that it still is a bit different of a situation. The writer of the article is offended with the material that's actually written in the book: the portrayals of the characters. In your situation, the pedophiliac homosexual relationship actually isn't there.

I dunno...







Seriously though, about the topic in question- she's smart enough to realize she can get some quick press for herself by spouting baseless, bullshit claims while hiding behind "I'm offended, wah." So, good on her.

You don't have the right to NOT be offended. That's just a prettied-up way of saying censorship. I can find just as many examples in Millar's work that stand as counterpoints to every single one of her claims.

[Ryan 'gobo' C.]

You don't have the right to NOT be offended. That's just a prettied-up way of saying censorship. I can find just as many examples in Millar's work that stand as counterpoints to every single one of her claims.

Bingo.

[Lukeh]

pfffft. Lesbo.

[El Dave]

My problem is when the subjectivity leads to people making assumptions about and attaching attributes to the creator. I mean, did you know Bob Kane was a "degenerate"? Me neither. 

That's kind of the point of subjectivity.
I think he's a degenerate. Hell, I think most of YOU are degenerates.  

[deadcowaroma]

Bingo.

"that's a bingo! how fun!"

Sorry....everytime I see that word now I think Christoph Waltz. 

[uncommoner]

I have several problems with her essay.  When she says, "whether Mark Millar deserves the success is questionable," I think, who is she to decide??  If people like his work, why shouldn't he be monetarily compensated?  He obviously works at his success.  
When she says, "no woman in a Millar-penned story is in control of her destiny," I think, well...duh Millar is in control of her destiny as the writer.
When she says, "Millar assumes that his readers can identify because they must be downtrodden fanboys too," I think that her objective is to be just as sexist as what she denotes Millar to be.  
And the zing-er at the end, when she says, "it would be brilliant if the content matched the potential" in regards to the comics industry, I think, how sad that she cannot appreciate and enjoy almost all of the comic books on the stands.  There is so much "brilliant" material out there that does not in any way victimize women or any race.  Anyway, as many other posters have already voiced, she doesn't have to read his material if she feels offended by it.  Just like I don't have to read any more of her writing.  Thankfully, as a person, not just as a singled out "woman," I have that choice.    

If I may, I would like to point you to another view point in regards to the female comic book fan.  Kat Rocha wrote a column on the Comic Related website called the F-word.  Her first column can be found here: [url]http://comicrelated.com/news/2805/the-f-word-returns/url]  Her argument is coherent and intelligent; the point that she makes is much more developed than I could write.    

Not all female comic book fans are angry feminists, just as not all male comic book fans are "downtrodden fanboys."  It's the blanket statements that make me all hot and bothered.  

[Jordan]

in both Wanted and Kickass, Millar's female characters are strong.  Hit Girl is definitly the strongest superhero and the only reason Kickass survives the story and in Wanted Fox trains whats his face (i forget his name... not a big fan of Wanted) and makes him into the killer his is.  if she's crazy sexualized, it's by HER choosing as a person.  Nobody forced her to be like that; nobody can force Fox to do anything she doesn't want to.  and isn't she black?  

you may not like her morals, which is fine, but you can't deny that Hit Girl and Fox are strong individuals.  

[zack kruse]

Not to you, anyway. To someone else, it may mean exactly that. Art is too subjective to simply say that something is or isn't there.

It's a bit different when you start slandering the artist and their fans because you've got some cuckoo idea stuck in your head that there is no good reason to believe.

The appreciation of art may be subjective, but I suspect that you would be pretty upset that if, after looking at some of your photos, I made the swift determination that you were a sexist and racist because there was a dreadful lack of female and/or minority subjects in your work. Then, to make matters worse, I started going out of my way to tell others that you were a bigot and implying that anyone who enjoyed your work probably harbored some of these feelings of at least sexism, if not racism as well.

That is not the same as a making a personal judgement about your art based my tastes.

[deadcowaroma]

It's a bit different when you start slandering the artist and their fans because you've got some cuckoo idea stuck in your head that there is no good reason to believe.

The appreciation of art may be subjective, but I suspect that you would be pretty upset that if, after looking at some of your photos, I made the swift determination that you were a sexist and racist because there was a dreadful lack of female and/or minority subjects in your work. Then, to make matters worse, I started going out of my way to tell others that you were a bigot and implying that anyone who enjoyed your work probably harbored some of these feelings of at least sexism, if not racism as well.

That is not the same as a making a personal judgement about your art based my tastes.

I thought the criticism though was not that there is a lack of female/non-white characters but that those characters are often portrayed in a negative light. If El Dave was doing something similar, he'd probably deserve some criticism.

[zack kruse]

I thought the criticism though was not that there is a lack of female/non-white characters but that those characters are often portrayed in a negative light. If El Dave was doing something similar, he'd probably deserve some criticism.

I was just offering an example. Not drawing a direct parallel.

[Spooky]

You know, I came into this forum with the intention of being a comic book fan, not a female comic book fan, but just a person in the world who loves to read comics.  It is because of women like the author of this essay that I decided not to correct other members when they said "man" or "dude" in connection with me.  I didn't want to make a big deal out of being a female; it just simply isn't necessary.  My point of disclosing this "little secret" is simply the fact that this woman's view is why I felt that way.

[steve bryant]

By Erin Polgreen:

...Millar is the writers’ equivalent of Rob Liefield in the 90s...

If I'm ever blessed with the opportunity to meet Ms. Polgreen, I will propose marriage to her on bended knee immediately.

[thefreakytiki]

If I'm ever blessed with the opportunity to meet Ms. Polgreen, I will propose marriage to her on bended knee immediately.

I actually heard someone refer to him as a modern day Stan Lee because of how he sells the sizzle.  I kinda agree with that a bit more.  YMMV. 


the Tiki

[steve bryant]

I actually heard someone refer to him as a modern day Stan Lee because of how he sells the sizzle.  I kinda agree with that a bit more.  YMMV. 

Self-promotion aside, I just haven't enjoyed anything written by Millar.

[JimN]

I think Julian is saying something different though. I think he's saying that if someone finds a portrayal offensive, it's still offensive, whether the writer intended it or not.

Is it offensive or she is offended? I think there's a difference. I may be offended by puppies but does that mean puppies are inherently offensive? OTOH, there may be people who think puppies truly are offensive (sick bastards!). In other words, it's a gray area... who determines what's offensive? That tends to involve cultural mores, individual tastes and beliefs, etc. If a person finds the portrayal of a particular character offensive, that's their reaction  to the portrayal but it's much harder to determine if the portrayal itself is offensive.

I have a knack for making the simple complex.

Jim