The bigger issue with the cover is that its style doesn't mesh with the current Batgirl comic, which is the real reason they pulled it.
I've never seen the Batgirl comic series, so I really can't say. If that's the case, I guess it makes sense to withdraw the cover. Something can be amazing but too much out of place to be acceptable.
The bigger issue with the cover is that its style doesn't mesh with the current Batgirl comic, which is the real reason they pulled it.
I've never seen the Batgirl comic series, so I really can't say. If that's the case, I guess it makes sense to withdraw the cover. Something can be amazing but too much out of place to be acceptable.
Yeah the new comic is more a lighter style and more female friendly to attract more female consumers. So a cover highlighting that the titular character was raped and crippled probably not the smartest idea for those fans.
The bigger issue with the cover is that its style doesn't mesh with the current Batgirl comic, which is the real reason they pulled it.
I've never seen the Batgirl comic series, so I really can't say. If that's the case, I guess it makes sense to withdraw the cover. Something can be amazing but too much out of place to be acceptable.
Yeah the new comic is more a lighter style and more female friendly to attract more female consumers. So a cover highlighting that the titular character was raped and crippled probably not the smartest idea for those fans.
Batgirl taking a selfie is more this style than "Serious call back to a comic most of the people reading this new one never read."
Now everything is starting to make sense. I initially thought it was a little bit of an overreaction to oversensitivity, but I kind of understood why some were upset, just not enough to totally pull the cover. Now that the style of the series has been clarified, it totally makes sense as to why the cover in question is inappropriate.
I was struggling to wrap my head around this, thinking "Am I bad or insensitive for not getting this?"
While I agree that being insensitive is an issue, so is being oversensitive.
Would it make sense that Damien or any other Robin or Nightwing would be I'm the same emotional state?
Jason Todd, for example. If the Joker has him like that, would you expect tears in his eyes and a look of fear on his face?
After all, the Joker is in complete control, and enjoying every second of it, and nothing good can come of it for him, and he knows it, and there's nothing he can do about it.
Yes. And in fact, a few seconds of google show that it's been done, also as an alternate cover, also of the titular character's series, also crying, also after getting raped, also while being held at gunpoint by a grinning evil character.
So here's a few differences I noticed in these covers, and to me, they make a big difference.
First up with Nightwing, he has already been shot. The gun is pointed directly at him. And his expression, while not super defiant like the modified Batgirl cover posted earlier, is more resigned than anything. He is not whimpering. Batgirl, in her cover, is being cowed by the mere presence of the Joker and a gun. The gun is not held to her head, there is no immediate danger of death.
In a word, Batgirl lacks agency on her cover. Nightwing, while clearly injured and in a bad spot, has not been robbed of his potential actions. Though he's been shot already, and a bad guy is about to execute him, he is not panicking, he still has a chance to act, to try and make it out alive. He doesn't need to be rescued, she does.
I don't know, maybe I'm nitpicking, but I'm much more comfortable with the content of the Nightwing cover than the Batgirl one.
+2
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
It's the whole, 'she just a terrified damsel in distress' theme that absolutely doesn't work, an why the altered cover of her glaring at the Joker does. She's still in the same level of 'distress' but instead of being helpless, and crying, looks like she's at least going to keep on trying to do something superheroic, no matter how dire the situation.
Honestly the controversial cover is a much more effective and powerful piece of art than the Nightwing cover.
It's just completely inappropriate for the book it was placed on and references a story that has problematic themes in context of the overall comic industry.
Would it make sense that Damien or any other Robin or Nightwing would be I'm the same emotional state?
Jason Todd, for example. If the Joker has him like that, would you expect tears in his eyes and a look of fear on his face?
After all, the Joker is in complete control, and enjoying every second of it, and nothing good can come of it for him, and he knows it, and there's nothing he can do about it.
Yes. And in fact, a few seconds of google show that it's been done, also as an alternate cover, also of the titular character's series, also crying, also after getting raped, also while being held at gunpoint by a grinning evil character.
So here's a few differences I noticed in these covers, and to me, they make a big difference.
First up with Nightwing, he has already been shot. The gun is pointed directly at him. And his expression, while not super defiant like the modified Batgirl cover posted earlier, is more resigned than anything. He is not whimpering. Batgirl, in her cover, is being cowed by the mere presence of the Joker and a gun. The gun is not held to her head, there is no immediate danger of death.
In a word, Batgirl lacks agency on her cover. Nightwing, while clearly injured and in a bad spot, has not been robbed of his potential actions. Though he's been shot already, and a bad guy is about to execute him, he is not panicking, he still has a chance to act, to try and make it out alive. He doesn't need to be rescued, she does.
I don't know, maybe I'm nitpicking, but I'm much more comfortable with the content of the Nightwing cover than the Batgirl one.
Well, I guess I disagree with your interpretations of both covers.
For Nightwing, he doesn't just look resigned, to me he looks defeated. You say he's not been robbed of potential actions and still has a chance to act. I don't see that at all. His face, his tears, his body position, there's nothing there to me that says "this is a guy who's still got a chance to make a move". To me it says "this is a guy who will die in this position". He definitely needs to be rescued in this picture, he is neither capable nor willing to get out of this by himself.
For Batgirl, I agree with what you see: she's terrified by the Joker, even as he casually keeps the gun hanging instead of pointing it at her head. But I disagree with your interpretation, that it makes her weaker, a damsel in distress as Gabriel said. I rather see it the other way around, that it makes the Joker that much more powerful and terrifying. This is a guy who can make Batman's protégé whimper in fear by being nonchalant. He doesn't need to use the threat of immediate brute force to scare you, by holding the gun to your head and threatening to shoot like some common street thug. His very presence is scary enough.
So comparing these two covers, I see Nightwing and Batgirl being equals and equally in bad spots, but the threat faced by Batgirl being orders of magnitude worse than the one faced by Nightwing.
Would it make sense that Damien or any other Robin or Nightwing would be I'm the same emotional state?
Jason Todd, for example. If the Joker has him like that, would you expect tears in his eyes and a look of fear on his face?
After all, the Joker is in complete control, and enjoying every second of it, and nothing good can come of it for him, and he knows it, and there's nothing he can do about it.
Yes. And in fact, a few seconds of google show that it's been done, also as an alternate cover, also of the titular character's series, also crying, also after getting raped, also while being held at gunpoint by a grinning evil character.
So here's a few differences I noticed in these covers, and to me, they make a big difference.
First up with Nightwing, he has already been shot. The gun is pointed directly at him. And his expression, while not super defiant like the modified Batgirl cover posted earlier, is more resigned than anything. He is not whimpering. Batgirl,in her cover, is being cowed by the mere presence of the Joker and a gun. The gun is not held to her head, there is no immediate danger of death.
And if the later is not the immediate danger what does that tell you about the former?
The subject/focus of the image isn't Batgirl. It wasn't intended to be. The art is part of a series of covers for all of DCs current publications celebrating the Joker on the 75th anniversary the characters introduction.
I get the idea of not publishing it in conjunction with the current more lighthearted Batgirl series. But the criticism of the art itself misses the mark.
0
Options
Lord Palingtonhe.him.hisHistory-loving pal!Registered Userregular
To help Le Goat move the thread along, I'm just going to say that our interpretations are different.
Also, when the server says your plate is hot, you really need to pay attention.
I'm just saying you don't eat there if you believe in such a thing as good food. You eat there because you want to put on your fancier than Denny's clothes.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
To help Le Goat move the thread along, I'm just going to say that our interpretations are different.
Also, when the server says your plate is hot, you really need to pay attention.
I was just talking today with somebody about how my hands have become weak. Time was I worked with hot things all day long so any waitresses comments about "Hot plate" were irrelevant to me. If they held it in their hands then I would be fine.
Still would not have ever considered touching a cast iron skillet with a bunch of sizzling meat on it.
I'm just saying you don't eat there if you believe in such a thing as good food. You eat there because you want to put on your fancier than Denny's clothes.
So what's that, like a shirt with some sort of sleeve on it?
I'm just saying you don't eat there if you believe in such a thing as good food. You eat there because you want to put on your fancier than Denny's clothes.
So what's that, like a shirt with some sort of sleeve on it?
Pretty sure it's the polo shirt that's missing the top button, and the second button won't stay buttoned. Possibly some minor staining in an inconspicuous location.
The title alone was funny enough for me. Also, I desperately was trying to find another topic so we could move on.
I don't believe the guy when he says that the waitress didn't warn him the plate was hot.
Every time you order fajitas at every restaurant they tell you the iron skillet is hot.
Every time. Every restaurant. I love fajitas. I have ordered them in many different places many times. Always received warning. Maybe he didn't hear it, maybe he wasn't paying attention. But his assertion that she didn't say it? Nope.
Fucking Australia inventing new god damn spiders. How is this bad news that goes right? IT ISN'T!
Warning: Dancing spider wants you to love him
It's bad news gone right because it's an adorable brightly colored spider that I'm 90% sure isn't completely deadly to humans.
It's an Australian spider.
Why would you even think that it would be anything but utterly deadly?
Clearly because I am apparently nigh-on illiterate and read it as Austrian. (Interesting note, when I search for "Deadly species of Austria" Google directs me to "Deadly species of Australia" for the majority of the articles returned, so I'm guessing I'm not alone in that mistake)
Run from the terrifying dancing death spider, foolish mortals.
Also, watch this video of the spider dancing. (Spoilered cause some people don't like adorable, brightly colored dancing spiders)
The title alone was funny enough for me. Also, I desperately was trying to find another topic so we could move on.
If you are communing with your deity with the result being getting sprayed in the face with hot oil, and then you proceed to file a frivolous lawsuit...let's just say I don't think fajita plates are the only hot thing you need to be concerned with.
Not always, some are brightly colored in order to fool predators into thinking that they're venomous. Also I couldn't help but laugh at the link on the side of that page; "NEWLY DISCOVERED SPECIES OF VAMPIRE CRAB MIGHT ALREADY LIVE IN YOUR HOME". Vampire crabs guys. Vampire. Crabs.
+1
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Not always, some are brightly colored in order to fool predators into thinking that they're venomous. Also I couldn't help but laugh at the link on the side of that page; "NEWLY DISCOVERED SPECIES OF VAMPIRE CRAB MIGHT ALREADY LIVE IN YOUR HOME". Vampire crabs guys. Vampire. Crabs.
They do bite the shit out of your crotch, so it might be true.
This is like those lawsuits where someone eats a piece of the burger wrapper on accident and sues. You don't have to pray right after you get your food, and you especially don't have to pray by bowing your head directly into fajitas. Did this guy never have fajitas before? Did the sizzling not tip him off?
Not to try and exonerate the hot plate guy, because it is 100% his dumbass fault.
But... what's the first thing you do when somebody tells you the plate is hot?
"OW!"
Everybody. Every time.
Granted, I haven't been to an Applebee's in over a decade (not because I avoid them, they're just not around), but those kinds of places serve fajitas in giant iron skillets, on top of a seared-burned wooden platter so they don't catch the table on fire, and the grease from the meat is still dancing up to a foot above them amidst a loud sizzling noise.
That covers sight, sound, and smell.
Even without saying the words "Look out, that's hot," that's literally every way they could possibly tell you the damn plate is hot without pressing it against you.
GNU Terry Pratchett
PSN: Wstfgl | GamerTag: An Evil Plan | Battle.net: FallenIdle#1970
Hit me up on BoardGameArena! User: Loaded D1
Posts
pleasepaypreacher.net
I've never seen the Batgirl comic series, so I really can't say. If that's the case, I guess it makes sense to withdraw the cover. Something can be amazing but too much out of place to be acceptable.
Yeah the new comic is more a lighter style and more female friendly to attract more female consumers. So a cover highlighting that the titular character was raped and crippled probably not the smartest idea for those fans.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/dc-relaunch-batgirl-comic-book-717782
Batgirl taking a selfie is more this style than "Serious call back to a comic most of the people reading this new one never read."
pleasepaypreacher.net
I was struggling to wrap my head around this, thinking "Am I bad or insensitive for not getting this?"
It's nothing about the quality or appropriateness of either one by itself, it's about the combination of the two that is an issue.
So here's a few differences I noticed in these covers, and to me, they make a big difference.
First up with Nightwing, he has already been shot. The gun is pointed directly at him. And his expression, while not super defiant like the modified Batgirl cover posted earlier, is more resigned than anything. He is not whimpering. Batgirl, in her cover, is being cowed by the mere presence of the Joker and a gun. The gun is not held to her head, there is no immediate danger of death.
In a word, Batgirl lacks agency on her cover. Nightwing, while clearly injured and in a bad spot, has not been robbed of his potential actions. Though he's been shot already, and a bad guy is about to execute him, he is not panicking, he still has a chance to act, to try and make it out alive. He doesn't need to be rescued, she does.
I don't know, maybe I'm nitpicking, but I'm much more comfortable with the content of the Nightwing cover than the Batgirl one.
It's just completely inappropriate for the book it was placed on and references a story that has problematic themes in context of the overall comic industry.
Well, I guess I disagree with your interpretations of both covers.
For Nightwing, he doesn't just look resigned, to me he looks defeated. You say he's not been robbed of potential actions and still has a chance to act. I don't see that at all. His face, his tears, his body position, there's nothing there to me that says "this is a guy who's still got a chance to make a move". To me it says "this is a guy who will die in this position". He definitely needs to be rescued in this picture, he is neither capable nor willing to get out of this by himself.
For Batgirl, I agree with what you see: she's terrified by the Joker, even as he casually keeps the gun hanging instead of pointing it at her head. But I disagree with your interpretation, that it makes her weaker, a damsel in distress as Gabriel said. I rather see it the other way around, that it makes the Joker that much more powerful and terrifying. This is a guy who can make Batman's protégé whimper in fear by being nonchalant. He doesn't need to use the threat of immediate brute force to scare you, by holding the gun to your head and threatening to shoot like some common street thug. His very presence is scary enough.
So comparing these two covers, I see Nightwing and Batgirl being equals and equally in bad spots, but the threat faced by Batgirl being orders of magnitude worse than the one faced by Nightwing.
...So am I the only one now thinking that combining Family Circus with H R Geiger would be fucking awesome?
"They say you mostly come out at night, but it's already half past 10."
The title alone was funny enough for me. Also, I desperately was trying to find another topic so we could move on.
And if the later is not the immediate danger what does that tell you about the former?
The subject/focus of the image isn't Batgirl. It wasn't intended to be. The art is part of a series of covers for all of DCs current publications celebrating the Joker on the 75th anniversary the characters introduction.
I get the idea of not publishing it in conjunction with the current more lighthearted Batgirl series. But the criticism of the art itself misses the mark.
Also, when the server says your plate is hot, you really need to pay attention.
pleasepaypreacher.net
"God, please let this food be better than last time."
pleasepaypreacher.net
I was just talking today with somebody about how my hands have become weak. Time was I worked with hot things all day long so any waitresses comments about "Hot plate" were irrelevant to me. If they held it in their hands then I would be fine.
Still would not have ever considered touching a cast iron skillet with a bunch of sizzling meat on it.
So what's that, like a shirt with some sort of sleeve on it?
Fucking Australia inventing new god damn spiders. How is this bad news that goes right? IT ISN'T!
pleasepaypreacher.net
I don't believe the guy when he says that the waitress didn't warn him the plate was hot.
Every time you order fajitas at every restaurant they tell you the iron skillet is hot.
Every time. Every restaurant. I love fajitas. I have ordered them in many different places many times. Always received warning. Maybe he didn't hear it, maybe he wasn't paying attention. But his assertion that she didn't say it? Nope.
It's an Australian spider.
Why would you even think that it would be anything but utterly deadly?
but its soooo adoooooooorable! just a wittle itsy bitsy cutie pie wit widdle wiggly arms.
Clearly because I am apparently nigh-on illiterate and read it as Austrian. (Interesting note, when I search for "Deadly species of Austria" Google directs me to "Deadly species of Australia" for the majority of the articles returned, so I'm guessing I'm not alone in that mistake)
Run from the terrifying dancing death spider, foolish mortals.
Also, watch this video of the spider dancing. (Spoilered cause some people don't like adorable, brightly colored dancing spiders)
pleasepaypreacher.net
ITS SO CUTE.
If you are communing with your deity with the result being getting sprayed in the face with hot oil, and then you proceed to file a frivolous lawsuit...let's just say I don't think fajita plates are the only hot thing you need to be concerned with.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Not always, some are brightly colored in order to fool predators into thinking that they're venomous. Also I couldn't help but laugh at the link on the side of that page; "NEWLY DISCOVERED SPECIES OF VAMPIRE CRAB MIGHT ALREADY LIVE IN YOUR HOME". Vampire crabs guys. Vampire. Crabs.
They do bite the shit out of your crotch, so it might be true.
.... stop looking at me like that.
This is like those lawsuits where someone eats a piece of the burger wrapper on accident and sues. You don't have to pray right after you get your food, and you especially don't have to pray by bowing your head directly into fajitas. Did this guy never have fajitas before? Did the sizzling not tip him off?
But... what's the first thing you do when somebody tells you the plate is hot?
"OW!"
Everybody. Every time.
Granted, I haven't been to an Applebee's in over a decade (not because I avoid them, they're just not around), but those kinds of places serve fajitas in giant iron skillets, on top of a seared-burned wooden platter so they don't catch the table on fire, and the grease from the meat is still dancing up to a foot above them amidst a loud sizzling noise.
That covers sight, sound, and smell.
Even without saying the words "Look out, that's hot," that's literally every way they could possibly tell you the damn plate is hot without pressing it against you.
PSN: Wstfgl | GamerTag: An Evil Plan | Battle.net: FallenIdle#1970
Hit me up on BoardGameArena! User: Loaded D1
Ya, but usually with your finger, not your face....
and his lap. He knocked it off the table and onto his lap after some of the grease spat onto his face while he was bowing over it.
MWO: Adamski
Even if I'm not eating fajitas. Especially if I'm not eating fajitas. You can never be too safe.