I only ever had a passing love for Wonder Woman never was a huge fan. I hate how the feminists have appropriated her as some sort of icon when Wonder Woman was originally created because the guy was writing about a woman who was a SUBMISSIVE to him. Her creation is heavily tied into a Dom/Sub relationship and what do feminists hate? EXACTLY! So the fact that she’s a feminist icon NOW fucking pisses me off because SHE WAS LITERALLY NEVER EVER MEANT TO BE THAT! But of course feminists ruin the fuck out of everything. Not surprised.
You know literally nothing about Wonder Woman. -laughs-
William Marston, Wonder Woman’s creator, WAS a feminist. In a 1943 issue of “The American Scholar”, Marston wrote: “Not even girls want to be girls so long as our feminine archetype lacks force, strength, and power… Women’s strong qualities have become despised because of their weakness. The obvious remedy is to create a feminine character with all the strength of Superman plus all the allure of a good and beautiful woman.” (Sounds like feminism to me.)
And yes, he was into Sub/Dom stuff, but not the way you’d think. He one said "Give them an alluring woman stronger than themselves to submit to, and they’ll be proud to become her willing slaves!"
He alleged that women were innately “less susceptible than men to the negative traits of aggression and acquisitiveness, and could come to control the comparatively unruly male sex by alluring them.” This controversial‘girls run the world’ prediction was very much ahead of his time. In a 1937 interview with The New York Times he claimed –
“The next one hundred years will see the beginning of an American matriarchy–a nation of Amazons in the psychological rather than physical sense,” adding that, “women would take over the rule of the country, politically and economically.”
So yeah. Wonder Woman’s creator was a guy who was really into strong dominating women and believed in a future Matriarchy.
Now, obviously, Wonder Woman has changed a lot since these early days. She’s not always consistently written (no super hero is), but her status as a Feminist Icon is fairly indisputable.
OMG when I saw this ask I laughed my ass off. Wonder Woman as the sub? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL *wipes tear*
Don’t you DARE fucking imply imply you know jack shit about anything when I got sources to GOD I hate you bitches. And Fandomsandfeminism NEEDS to stop stalking me!
I wasn’t stalking you. You posted this in the feminism tag, which I track. Just for the record. I track the feminism tag.
And why are you screaming misogynistic slurs? Seriously. There’s no need to start insulting people because they don’t instantly agree with you.
Now, let me just quote some of the source you provided. Let’s really look at it.
“Wonder Woman was essentially a female Superman. The Amazonian princess who left her home, the Amazon kingdom of Paradise Island, after rescuing and falling in love with a downed American airman named Steve Trevor in order to help fight against the evil megalomaniacal Axis forces. She was super strong, fast, intelligent, impervious to harm, and she could fly in her invisible airplane. She also wielded weapons. On her wrists, she wore manacles that could deflect bullets (Olive Byrne always wore manacles). She had a golden tiara that she could throw like a boomerang with deadly accuracy, and she also had a magical lasso that forced all who were caught in it to obey her (This later evolved to become the lasso of truth, no doubt related to Marston’s early research). She was, as Marston described, a strong, smart, generous, loving, affectionate, and alluring superheroine who would later become a feminist icon. However, Wonder Woman was far from a perfect feminist icon in her original form (Wright 21).”
Sounds pretty feminist.
But why does this article think that Wonder Woman wasn’t a perfect feminist icon?
“The Wonder Woman comics penned by Marston were packed with bondage, spankings, enslavement, and punishment of both men and women.”
Because there was bondage in it? Because Wonder Woman lost her powers temporarily if she was tied up? I’m not seeing how Dom/Sub themes inherently makes something anti-feminist. True, it is an odd origin, and there is much debate in current feminism about how to read dom/sub relationships. But I disagree this inherently makes her anti-feminist, especially considering the other themes in the work.
“The simple fact that Diana Prince, this omnipotent force for good, was no more powerful in her daily life than most other woman underscored how underpowered women were”
I inherently disagree with this reading. The fact that Diana appears to be a normal everyday “powerless” woman only to secretly be a superhero reads very differently to me. I think it underscores how powerful women were underestimated, and that women shouldn’t underestimate themselves just because of how others view them.
The article then goes on to say that yes, even the somewhat dubious “looses her powers because she gets tied up” thing was dropped decades ago. Just as feminism has changed since the 1950s, so has Wonder Woman.
The assertion that Wonder Woman was NEVER meant to be a feminist icon is demonstrably false (The man talked about wanting America to become a Matriarchy for god’s sake), and even her flaws as a feminist icon are based on a debatable reading of the early canon.
Anti-feminist blogs annoy me to no end. There is literally no positive purpose to them. They’re not about change, or even meaningful dialogue, but wallow in a static state of negativity.
And also, pro-tip you mangy reactionary douchebag: if you expect a claim to hold up under scrutiny, better have a rock-solid claim with more than one obviously biased source to support it.
Please go crawl back into whatever cesspit you emerged from and look at your life, look at your choices.