Legion World Forums LEGION CLUBHOUSE The Legion of Super-Heroes Long Live the Legion! LSH 44 spoilers

Mad Max Queers live on in space!

Did anyone notice the blond-mohawk wearing boy-Ikonn on p.3? The one who saw the coil of vine disappear on p.4? With his bare chest and little fur collar and bald boyfriend (notice the arm around shoulder in two panels, certainly taking contact beyhond bromance), he's pretty obviously the boytoy who was killed early on in the 2nd Mad Max movie.

But at the same time, isn't the tough-girl-who-kicks-ass kind of a new cliché these days? Can't we have both, like we see in the real world?

I've always thought Shooter answered those questions in that way because he was answering them at the request of the organized fandom for publication in a Legion fanzine...not because he is some Legion sex-life obsessed fanatic. Jim Shooter isn't obsessed with the Legion, that would be us.


IMO...it's the fans that are usually more interested in those questions, not the creators.


For proof he was probably responding to questions or speculation...check out this description:


"Not as plain as you paint her" seems to indicate that he was responding to questions, and we just aren't seeing what those questions were. Before judging him as a some kind of Legion sex-life obsesses crazed maniac, wouldn't it be prudent to find out what sort of questions he was being asked?


I'd say it went something like this:

Questioner: Hey Jim..we just brought you back into comics with our organized fandom after your career was basically over. Not to obligate you or imply that you owe us somehting...but would you mind answering a few questions for us?

Shooter: Sure I'll answer some questions for you guys, as honestly as I possibly can. What do you want to know?


Quesioner:

We want to know the stuff that will never be printed in the comics.

Who is involved with who and why?
Is so and so gay?
Are so and so doing something on the side?
How does BB react to being married to 2 women?
What do you feel makes these characters human, what are their flaws, what are their strenghts?
This is the way we see it: LL is like this.
Etc.

I don't see it as him just casting the female Legionaires in a negative light...he is pointing out their positives and their negatives. The men as well as the women.


If you look he's calling Ultraboy and Timberwolf neurotic fruitcakes...he says Starboy is as dumb as a stump. Calls Wildfire dull. Calls Mon-El insecure. About the only character that didn't get negative aspects of his character pointed out...was Superboy, and if you notice, he doesn't answer any questions about Superboy's sexuality either.

Was that because he didn't have an opinion on it? Or because that would have definitely gotten him fired.

Almost certainly he had an opinion on it...questioning Superman's sex life with Lois is the original comic book sex question.


I've met some that want to be treated that way...and I've met some that don't. I don't think there is a genral way women like to be treated.


Look...I have all sorts of issues with Shooter's descriptions..and I don't agree with 90% of them, in particular the one about Mon-El being some kind of insecure dullard. And I don't particularly like his take on Duo Damsel either.

But I do think he was giving those responses to fans who were asking questions of that nature.


That was a lame scene and I'm not quite sure what the purpose of it was. Maybe the entire purpose of it was to create controversy. In an otherwise totally homogenized title.

Maybe he did want Cosmic Boy to be sexist...so he wouldn't be considered bland, as he was then and still is, and maybe that was one of the few things he could get away with doing under Boltinoff's editorialship...


I don't either but I am going to offer counterpoints to criticisms I don't agree with. Shooter has produced a fair share of complete crap in his career...but usually the crap he produces is when he's going totally corporate and focused on merchandising revenue.

I personally think the guy was way ahead of his time at infusing characters with very realistic personality flaws or quirks, regardless of the tendency for cheesy dialogue...I think he still is ahead of the curve on it.

If anything...I think Shooter's writing is a little too realistic, just as his answers are a little too honest. But that doesn't mean he's a bad writer, because it takes talent to do that.

I don't see the personal bashing as much as the "I don't like Shooter's Legion and here's why." Two different things. John Byrne seems to get more ire than anyone around here (possibly Rob Liefeld), but I've let my dislike of such posts be known to the authors and I wish people wouldn't indulge in such behavior.

Please link us to anything you feel is more of a personal attack than one of taste.

PG was nice enough to come back and right the wrong. Thanks PG! I've read the post and you bring up a valid point of view, but could have done without the personal attacks.

As for the other incident alluded to...without going into detail...a few posts deemed "personal attacks" were removed. And the person who was involved who seemed to have an ax to grind due to an incident on another board was removed from Moderating only*...not banned or anything else as the situation didn't warrant it.

*Only because we (the Administrators) felt a Moderator shouldn't conduct in such flaming behavior.

wow i so don't care what characters he created! none of that gives him a pass to be sexist and homopobic, what!! i don't care if he founded america, that doesn't mean we can't criticize him. also, creating a bob from planet whatever and slapping a uniform on them? ALSO does not make them a good writer. because that's pretty much what characters are, they're bill from where ever with the power of whatever. holy crap, who cares what he made?! that does not give him carte blanche to just write whatever.

you know what makes a good writer? writing something well. and to me, writing something sexist or racist or homophobic or intolerant automatically means you're not a good writer. you are automatically bad at your job and full of fail. you can cover topics like that, you can depict characters that are like that, but how you structure your story and the context and treatment of such characters and happenings, THAT is what determines whether they are a good writer or not.

if neil gaiman writes a rape scene, i'm not horrified, he usually makes me think and handles it in a way that MAKES SENSE and treats it with the gravity it deserves. shooter writes a rape scene for cheap drama. something so traumatic and scarring shouldn't be treated in a trivial way by a writer (and yes the WRITER is treating it in a trivial way, not just the characters). if the writer actually thinks something his characters are doing is MESSED UP then a good writer gives something to the audience to help convey that.

let's say a character mugs another character. to show that the writer doesn't support what the character just did, they might show how their action effects the character they robbed, they might have another character be a mouth piece for them, etc etc. none of that here. shooter uses rape as a cheap way to add an antagonist. he's not trying to make the reader think about how messed up rape is or how it affects ayla, if anything he sets up a discourse that trivializes the act of rape even more.

man this... seriously this is getting really horrifying. I don't understand why people aren't more freaked out by how shooter's been writing! like... he is the definition of homophobia and sexism. no i don't think he runs around spewing hate but you don't have to be that in order to be sexist and homophobic!

i think the greatest example of his sexist writing is the fact that given Norima's reaction to jo? his writing is so sexist that it's fully plausible to many readers that her reaction to Jo of crazy-love might not mean anything and just be a throw away line. we also don't know if PROJECTRA has gone nuts or possessed or if she's just "projectra" because shooter writes women behaving nonsensically!

if he wasn't sexist and homophobic, i would be able to stomach his subpar writing. i would. as i've said before, i've got a really thick skin for ridiculously bad writing. you an't tell me that his dialogue isn't weird and choppy and nonsensical (gim making bizarre comments to shrinking violet about her education). m'rissey runs around doing things that Querl should have caught him on, that lyle would have been able to do, introducing multitudes of new characters for no reason, reconciling lyle's relationship with his family whom he shouldn't forgive?!

what makes these issues utterly incomprehensible is that he writes the boys FAIRLY WELL. so well in fact that it makes the female's reactions to any stimulus EVEN MORE confusing. if EVERYONE was being insane i'd go "oh he's just a bad writer and that's just how he writes" but he is so sexist that i CANNOT UNDERSTAND HIS CHARACTERIZATION. i DO NOT know what he is trying to tell us about ANY female character except that they ALL LOVE SEX. that is ALL i've been able to get out of him. that's it. i can tell you that cham is adorable and fun, that garth is trying his best to lead the team and getting stressed out about it, i can tell you that querl is snarky and well meaning and always five steps ahead. i can tell you that lyle is smart and brave and quick thinking, i can tell you that jo is brave, sort of dumb and hormonal, with something dark in his past. i can tell you that jan has a soft spot for animals and likes naked time.

i cannot tell you anything about the girls. NOTHING except ayla "doesn't like to sleep alone", but apparently NONE OF THE GIRLS DO. their agendas seem utterly wrapped up in sex, sex with MEN, and codependent or submission sex with men!! tell me ANYTHING about ayla! or saturn girl! or triad? is saturn girl a good leader?!! I DON'T KNOW. i CANNOT TELL.

perhaps the only responsibility any writer has is "CONVEY MESSAGE". he fails at this and therefore: is a bad writer. one of the vehicles by which he reaches his "bad writer"-ship is sexism. actually, if he WASN'T sexist, he might sort of be good!

ahhh god. ON TOP OF THIS. some of you actually think that pointing all these things out should get me BANNED or my posts DELETED? really. that's... so awesome. i'm so glad that the way you handle a female concerned about sexism in a book is to suggest their removal from your presence.

what horrifies me more is that some of you AGREE that he's being sexist or homophobic and yet this isn't an issue for you. that's... wow. i mean i really don't know what to say to that because the point is pretty much moot then whether he is or isn't, right? wow.

god!! i actually feel like i'm facing a moral dilemma with this book. i WANT querl/nura with such a FIERCE passion ever since nura died but this book keeps checking off the boxes of the "DANGER, YOU NEED TO NOT BUY THIS OR SUPPORT THIS PERSON" list.

on the other hand i LOVE manapul's art, this issue was even more upsetting because i didn't even get the benefit of it being the artist i'm reading it for. i don't know what to do!! do i support the book against my morals out of fear that it'll get cancelled and that i'll miss the character interactions that i DO want?! i feel so upset now! i wasn't even that upset after reading the issue but somehow all this made me more horrified. maybe it's the reflection and the accumulation that suddenly became more visible.

Thanks veryvery. I guess you just made BB's point.

You want to edit out all of your "Jim Shooter is sexist and homopobic" every other sentence or do I?

I get that it's your opinion, but it isn't shared by everyone, nor is it a fact because you say it is.

I'm sorry if that's all you see when reading the series, but perhaps you shouldn't read the book anymore if it upsets you so much.

i think i was explaining thoroughly why i feel this way about his writing. it's not like i'm jsut screaming it at the top of my lungs here. i also explained, yet again, that i think his characterization of the males in this series is good and fun and explained why i thought so as well with many examples so i don't think "that's all i see" when reading this series. if you feel the need to delete things, that's your prerogative but i really don't see anything i said as being... i'm not sure what you think i'm being.

it's fine with me if people think that a writer is bad or good, if people have different tastes, if they like it when element lad has a pink uniform and i like the black one. but on a subject like this, such as sexism and homophobia, i don't think treating it like a simple "difference of opinion" type thing is viable. for me, sexism and homophobia are important, moral issues, and i don't think me saying someone or something is sexist or homophobic and pointing out my reasoning is somehow horrible or a reason to have my post edited.

so i'm allowed to have a opinion as long as the opinion isn't "shooter is sexist and homophobic" and then i point out my reasoning for it? okay. well that's fine then, i'm very fine with not participating on this board any longer. i was happy to engage with several of you, many of you seem like nice people but i'll probably be much happier off the board given whats transpired over the course of my very short stay here.

Do what you have to, veryvery, but I don't think you were out of line at all, and I for one wish you'd stick around.

Looks like this issue could rival the Pro-Fem for controversy. I haven't read it yet, so will reserve judgment, but must say that the issues raised in this thread are very interesting, both pro and con.

Veryvery, I don't quite agree with you regarding the absence of character in Shooter's females, but you've made your points clearly. The rape/threat scene(s) do sound troubling, but it's the sort of thing I think I really have to read before commenting.

The moral question regarding which comics one chooses to support is a critical one, and highly personal. It's important for us to examine why writers write the scenes they do, how it affects us and how they might have done it differently, or better. This is how we move - or stumble - forward. I echo Matthew E's comment in that I hope you stick around, but accept that some of us will continue to disagree with you and, at some point, further discussion does not advance the issue.

Set, I found your comments on how rape in comics is used, and how you have reacted personally, to be very insightful. It's a big issue, and, as you say, it's not going away, in real life or in the popular media.

...er, going back to the "OKKK", my first impression after the initial confusion was that the three Ks instead of one meant it was from Lu. But the other explanation is just as good or better.

And as for the whole raging debate, everyone just remember that the subject in question is very charged and sensitive. To me, it's completely understandable that those scenes would offend people. And when people are offended on a deep, personal level, the reactions tend to reflect that. I myself have mixed reactions, but I respect how people could have very intense ones.

veryvery, I hope you'll reconsider. I've enjoyed your occasional presence in the "Roundtable" thread particularly. The moderators are within their powers to interject in heated situations, but I hope that discussion of such an obviously important issue can continue in some form.

You are quite capable of phrasing your objection as, 'this scene is *completely* sexist, with Ayla being the one who gets threatened with rape for pages and pages, tearing up, etc. and being *very* capable of sending her attacker into the stratosphere, hands tied or not, and I think Shooter has a history of this sort of thing and here's why.'

Dragging speculation about what sort of person he is personally isn't helpful. Alan Davis draws teens who appear to be *very* young, sometimes in romantic situations. Would it help the discourse to say that this is some sort of sign that he's a pedophile and that there is 'something wrong' with people who like his work? Not at all. It's the opposite of helpful.

They say in law school that; If you don't have the facts, argue the law. If you don't have the law, argue the facts. If you don't have either, pound the table. You are 'pounding the table' by name-calling and appealing to emotion, *and you don't have to!* You have a valid case, and every right to an opinion, so all you are doing, IMO, by resorting to name-calling is putting people into defensive mode, as it's all too easy to see 'blatantly misogynistic and / or homophobic' to an attack on the person who liked that presentation as a misogynist or a homophobe. (Which do exist in our society, but I sure can't imagine an honest-to-gosh homophobe being comfortable for long on these boards!)

If you feel unable to remain in a situation where everyone doesn't agree with everything you say, I'm not confident that leaving a message board will make much of a difference, in the long-term.

You might even consider hanging around on this message board full of people as practice for the real-world, where you might find yourself working for a boss who actually *is* sexist or homophobic.

(I had one boss who would *freak* when I'd call myself his secretary. He'd constantly insist that I was some sort of Project Coordinator, but my duties consisted of running his paperwork around the office, booking his travel arrangements, screening his calls, and even sometimes fetching his lunch! He may well have been homophobic as well, but I pretty much ignored his jokes, so I have no idea, nor, really, do I care. His personal philosophy wasn't important to me, and I learned long ago that there are billions of people in this world, most of them don't believe as I do and *I can't change all of their minds*.)

As there is no other planet-of-people-who-think-like-I-do to live on, I have decided to take a breath and allow other people to live their lives, even if they believe stuff I don't.

Awful gracious, tolerant even, of me, I know, but I've chosen not to get an ulcer over what other people think, say and do. I give myself enough grief with the stuff that *I* think, say and do, which I actually have some say over!

Say all the strong things you want to say. But don't be surprised or distressed to find out that every other person on this message board is a real person with opinions and beliefs of our own, and we may not all agree with every little thing.

Differences are what makes the world worth living in. If I knew that *everything* I believed was the absolute end-all, be-all of existence, and there was nothing left to know, no reason at all to ever talk to anyone, I'd be pretty bored. Finding out that I am *wrong* can be exciting, because I'm physically done growing, and the only way for me to grow now is by learning new things.


Edit to add: is there some way to list our real name in our Profile? I kinda hate anonymous posting during discussions like this, as it lends the impression that I'm only saying things under the cover of anonymity, instead of saying stuff that will be associated with me, a real living breathing person.

-Ian Turner, real person, with every bit as much a right to an opinion as the real person he's responding to.

This echoes my feelings on this. The board has a standing rule against personal attacks.

veryvery, you and Insomnia Girl have made some valid points and you are certainly entitled to your opinion. The issue does seem to be a hot button one for both of you. However, if you cannot go back, look at your post and see where some of what you said would be considered a personal attack, then perhaps these boards are not for you. I am not saying that you should stop posting here. I think you have much to contribute.

Set (Ian) and Quis (Rob) are doing a better job than I am at arguing the point, so I'll try not to ruin their well throughout posts.

The Rules -

Extrapolating about an individual based on an ancient interview you read only part of and a work of fiction will not be tolerated. Plain and simple.

I didn't know this site had a rule against creator bashing. LOL that explains some of the responses to my Byrne bashing. I actually feel pretty bad about that now as I was coming here seeking to commiserate with other Byrne bashers.

Anyway, now that I know that you guys don't want us to do that I won't do it anymore. I still have a hard time figuring out why all Legion fans don't want to bash Byrne along with me. But I did tell myself when I came back here I would respect the spirit of the site...when in Rome...

Sorry about that, because I have bashed him pretty heavily, not really personally...but definitely certain aspects of his creative intellect.

veryvery, I personally don't have a problem with you haveing a strong opinion on the subject, in fact it was probably the fact that your opinion on it was so strong that lead to me replying to you. I tend to have strong opinions on certain subjects myself. But as general rule, if you have a strong vocal opinion on things you are likely to encounter those with an equally strong opinion on the opposite side, in just about any topic, and there will be those that are going to want to challenge your points.

That's what I was doing...I wasn't attempting to attack you and I hope it didn't come off that way, I just strongly disagree with some of the conclusions you drew.

Wait?

I thought Byrne was a legal exception to the rule?

I realized somwething not long ago... not only am I a fan of the LSH, I'm a fan of LSH fans.


I hope that Superboy, Ricardo, veryvery, Insomniac Girl, Phantom Girl and everyone else continues to post and have their strong opinions, because I for one enjoy reading them. I'm on here quite a lot, and believe me this forum is all the more interesting when you all are here too.

I agree with a lot of what I read and disagree with a lot as well... but I sure never tire of reading all of your intelligent well-thought-out comments.

I hate that LSH fandom is already so splintered, so it's my personal hope that the fans who post here, at least, can get along (despite being fans of different LSH eras/versions).

Your fan,

MLLASH

Just to clarify things (and hopefully not muddy them for you). You are able to say here things like "I didn't like (insert creator's name) use of XYZ.", "I think So-and-so's art this issue was terrible.", "I've never liked John Doe's writing style.", or "I think this was a bad story because of ..." However saying things like "Joe Schmoo is a hack!", "Arty Artist should just stop drawing.", or "Ed Editor kicks puppy dogs." gets into personal attacks.

Sometimes it can be a fine line between criticism and a personal attack. The board asks that you err on the side of being respectful.

Stay tuned for Legion of 3 Worlds...

That's exactly my point and the reason I argued over Adriana's remarks a few weeks ago. Her reasoning was absolutely fine, agreed or not, BUT she crosses the line when she extrapolates (IMO) fiction for the artists.
Just because Shooter writes girls in a way she doesn't like doesn't mean he believes girls are like that. I have never seen an interview in which he states something like that.
I, for one, love her participation here and it is always a joy to see a girl in this typically male environment.

I didn't like the art. Previous artists on this title have managed to differentiate the characters ages- here IK looks as old as UB. It's a cartoony art, and might have it's place with a less diverse cast...

The story wrapped up a number of plots and moved the LSH into a better position for protecting the universe. Shooter provide us with a simple story, with a simple solution- sometimes that's all we get with a four colour, 22 page comic.

The pirates were B movie villains- one note characterizations. M'Rissey provided most of the detail, and that couched in legal speak and speed jargon. Since I expect to see more of him then the pirates, I'm okay with that trade off.

I don't know if this was answered or buried under all the debate...

M'Rissey sold the marketing rights. The rings might still be too expensive to produce, so the marketing rights don't mean jack right now. He simply sold an empty bag of goods.

No, that's Rob Liefield you're thinking of.

I'd feel wierd dissing a creator *too* badly, because some of them read this site (such as Barry Kitson and Francis Manapul). I felt about two centimeters tall when I expressed an opinion that FJM's artwork wasn't as polished as the first two issues and look more rushed, and he responded to me...

From the sounds of his 'retirement' announcement, Waid definitely read *some* messageboards, since he said bitterly that his leaving the Legion would no doubt be 'to the joy of Legion fans everywhere.' I didn't care for where he was going with the Legion stories, but it was a bit sobering to hear him so bitter about the experience of working on the Legion.

I think the last thing we would want is for creative sorts to avoid working on the Legion because we're such horrible dicks to them...

It might be even more of a caveat emptor if the UP doesn't allow people to make use of all the features, like unrestricted flight or jamming the public service.

I didn't mind the artwork. First reading, it seemed a bit messy, but on the second read it looked much better. He did do a good Vi. My problem was his storytelling - i think he could have done things differently - but from what I know about him -which is not that much - I think he will get better with time in his ability to tell a story.

I like M'Rissey. And I can't wait to see what Shooter will do with him. Is his name a play or words for something?