New IGN Contest: No Girls Allowed

[Cowabungaa]

I would be interested in hearing IGNs logic behind there choice.

Same here, ofcourse there can be a good reason for a certain sex only competition. For example, you've got the Stilleto Race (a running contest on stilleto heels, the prize is free shopping or something) here in Holland, wich is girls-only. You won't hear anyone complaining about that. But it seems that IGN isn't exactly clear about their reasons for this.

 

[IrrelevantTangent]

I think I understand now why some people say, 'You can't spell 'ignorance' without IGN.' I predict there's going to be some kind of protest over this; there's no way people are going to stand for this.

 

[Radelaide]

This is good, except everyones gonna start screaming "BAWW Equal Rights!"

Just to clear that up, it's their contest, and they have no obligation to make it multi-gender. I'm sure after all the complaints, they'll cave and give the women some contest of their own. The prize sucks anyways though, it should be something manly, like a week splitting wood or working in a chewing tobacco factory.

Of course they are. I can imagine a whole bunch of feminist groups getting rather vexed about this then being asked what they hope to achieve by the noise they're making, they shrug and say something about "girls being just as good as boys." Honestly, I'm all for equal rights, but I have a feeling this competition would appeal more to a male demographic to a female one.

 

[Chipperz]

This is good, except everyones gonna start screaming "BAWW Equal Rights!"

Just to clear that up, it's their contest, and they have no obligation to make it multi-gender. I'm sure after all the complaints, they'll cave and give the women some contest of their own. The prize sucks anyways though, it should be something manly, like a week splitting wood or working in a chewing tobacco factory.

Of course they are. I can imagine a whole bunch of feminist groups getting rather vexed about this then being asked what they hope to achieve by the noise they're making, they shrug and say something about "girls being just as good as boys." Honestly, I'm all for equal rights, but I have a feeling this competition would appeal more to a male demographic to a female one.

Are these the same feminist groups that keep going on about how anything that men like is childish and infantile? They probably won't care...

 

[Radelaide]

This is good, except everyones gonna start screaming "BAWW Equal Rights!"

Just to clear that up, it's their contest, and they have no obligation to make it multi-gender. I'm sure after all the complaints, they'll cave and give the women some contest of their own. The prize sucks anyways though, it should be something manly, like a week splitting wood or working in a chewing tobacco factory.

Of course they are. I can imagine a whole bunch of feminist groups getting rather vexed about this then being asked what they hope to achieve by the noise they're making, they shrug and say something about "girls being just as good as boys." Honestly, I'm all for equal rights, but I have a feeling this competition would appeal more to a male demographic to a female one.

Are these the same feminist groups that keep going on about how anything that men like is childish and infantile? They probably won't care...

Yeah, but since it's excluding the wimmins, they're all like "OMG YOU FILTHY MEN!! WHY WOULD YOU EXCLUDE WOMEN!?!?!?!"

I dunno, sometimes I'm ashamed to be a wimmins

 

[Domitella]

Are these the same feminist groups that keep going on about how anything that men like is childish and infantile? They probably won't care...

which feminist groups would those be? I can't say I 've ever heard anyone 'going on' about that, let alone actual groups.

Well, actually I don't have a problem with this. There are plenty of women-only contests and such out there sponsored by cosmetic companies and the like. I believe "I can't believe it's not butter" did a "win a dream weekend with Fabio" contest years ago for example.

that's a bit different, as that's a date-like prize and designed, presumably, to enhance the idea of his availability heterosexually (whether that be the case or not). SImilarly, cosmetic companies are trying to sell their producsts, which for the vast majority, only women buy. They therefore want women modelling them in the makeover or whatever.

I have actually never seen a competition which was only for women, except for these date-like ones, or for makeovers which were set up for women, so they'd have trouble catering to a man, should he win. There are similar competitions, incidentally, where men get to spend time with a female star, or have a fashion makeover, so they aren't exclusively a female preserve.

However, Comic Con has no particular gender appeal, and there's simply no reason for the competition to be single-sex. The only reason I can think that could effect it would be if a woman would somehow be in danger because of her sex (unlikely in this case) or if she was to be accompanied by men, that the lawyers might have panicked about possible allegations of sexual assault or something. That's crazy, but it's really the only thing I can think of.

Honestly, I'm all for equal rights, but I have a feeling this competition would appeal more to a male demographic to a female one.

The publishers may well believe that it's the case that only men would want to apply, but that's not a reason for *restricting* it to men. If they really beleived no women would want to apply, then they wouldn't need the restriction, and just because you think all geeks are male, why does that mean you deliberately act against women?

It's also a mistake to treat it as some sort of payback: "there's lots of women-only competitions, therefore it's okay". This isn't about redressing some non-existent ballance, it's more about what on earth was going through the heads of the people drawing up the rules - all the women-only competitions sighted have obvious reasons why that was the case, as do similar men-only ones. This has none. I suspect a mistake, perhaps the rules copy/pasted from another place, but it would be nice to see something said on the matter by the company concerned - it may turn out they have a very good reason.

 

[DeathQuaker]

If the prize is appealing to members of both genders, both genders should be able to enter. Period.

Yes! No one's really been able to come up with a convincing reason why only males (and young males at that) should be open to the contest. I can see why "Woman's Day" magazine might have a contest open only to women and "Esquire" magazine have a contest open only to men, especially in either case depending on the specific prize offered, but this is just odd.

What I'm also confused by is the "who are at least between 18-24 years of age..." bit. So...does that mean if you're 25, you're out? Or that you simply have to be a legal adult?

The full official rules [http://microsites.ign.com/d9/rules.html] make it clear that contestants "must be males between the ages of 18 and 24."

So yes, if you're a 25 year old man, you're out of luck.

Given what they want this person to do (the winner must agree to do all this journalism correspondent work, maintain a blog, etc.) it seems interesting what they want is a pool of relatively inexperienced people (most of which will be in college and thus still honing writing skills), and they aren't asking for writing samples. Sure, plenty of young adult males are fine writers, but if I were holding a contest to give essentially give someone a writing job, I'd be more concerned about their journalism skills than their age or gender.

It also strikes me that what they really want to do is hire someone for a one-time-only contract job, but since they seem to think they need someone from a very specific demographic, they are framing it as a contest rather than an employment opportunity (because then they could be sued for both age and gender discrimination).

I suspect a mistake, perhaps the rules copy/pasted from another place, but it would be nice to see something said on the matter by the company concerned - it may turn out they have a very good reason.

I looked at one of their other contests--the Ultimate Game System Giveaway--and that contest has no such restrictions [http://fye.ign.com/rules.html]. And their rules look much more "typical" to contest rules--a ruleset much more likely copy-pasted than that of the District 9 contest, which otherwise has some very specific rules pertaining to that contest. If someone was careful about all the other restrictions of the District 9 contest rules, I doubt they would have "mistakenly" put up the details about the age and gender demographic they're looking for. Also, the rules on the front page and the official full description contest rules match in demographic requirements, which makes the likelihood of mistaken copy-paste even less.

 

[Spinwhiz]

I'm sure IGN isn't stupid enough to not have a good reason for this. They have a team of lawyers behind them that they most likely have to pass contests through.

 

[DeathQuaker]

I'm sure IGN isn't stupid enough to not have a good reason for this. They have a team of lawyers behind them that they most likely have to pass contests through.

That's why I suggested that they probably really wanted to hire someone on a private single-job contract (read how specific the rules are with what will be required of the contestant), but because they were seeking a member of a specific demographic, they spun it as a contest instead. You can restrict contests to certain types of individuals as long as they are legal adults; you can't restrict job applications that way.

(They're not stupid at all. They're just quite brilliant, ageist, sexist jerks. )

 

[SomeUnregPunk]

what is the big deal? Men got products they can only use like condoms and women can only use like tampons. Unless there is a man out there suing a tampon company for bias and a woman suing a condom company for bias, I really don't see this as a issue.

I'm pretty sure women have more use for Peter Jackson movies than men have for tampons.

tampons absorption capability makes it an quick substitute for cleaning grease and oil, er doctors/nurses will actually tell people with bloody noses to stuff a tampon up it b/c it doubles as both a cloth that absorbs the blood and provides pressure where you need it. with a movie director all you can do is talk/rant with/at him.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

However, if you tell me Neil Gaiman is a better writer than Alan Moore, I will cut you.

Gaiman isn't obsessed with superhero sex and can usually string a coherent sentence together. And if it's Sandman versus Watchmen, Morpheus pwns Manhattan.

*flicks out switchblade*

*dons kevlar*

You don't like Moore's most influential work but you're putting him above a man whose not only successfully took on Hollywood, won and got a few webbys? Oh, and has not just done it with Sandman, but raised AIDS awareness with The High Cost Of Living, broke the children's market with Coraline, teen market with Stardust and still finds time to write interesting female characters that aren't based on the lacklustre triumvariate of babe, mother, whore. (Or in Miller's case, whore)

Gaiman gets on your nerves for being clever? Damn, that's one hell of a put-down.
"I'm sorry Mr. Gaiman but people find your work too inviting, evocative and comforting".
He also manages to look pleased when people like his work as well, rather than the perpetual "But you're not supposed to like it." growl of Moore. Even when he was doing Skizz, he moaned on and on about how bad humanity was while everyone else lined his script droid drug trolley.

And what exactly is wrong with a guy who can realistically depict men and women as not only frail moths but also utter shits. Moore does shits and repressed shits all the time and it just gets old.

Personally I'd enjoy a walk through the sheer hell of Delirium's lair and the heart rending of Desire than ANOTHER fecking monologue of mock-Wolverine macho bullshit about how to be a man you've got to fuck and kill your way through everything.

If you're talking about a fight though, let's stay away from the award winners and touch on some of the lesser known stuff. Against the Superhero Sex of V, which was first done better in Tharg's Future Shocks back in his script droid days, I'll bring out Neverwhere which actually links into London far more than V's verbal vomit of vernacular.

Or for world ending, how about Good Omens which actually paints the end of the world as if realized by Agathur Christie and Richard Crompton, but it's still shocking stuff. Saying that Moore writes better because he writes grittier deletes the great work of Douglas Addams, Terry Pratchett, Ben Elton and others. Poirot was still a match for Marlowe as detectives, despite their different settings.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is Moore trying to be Gaiman by wrapping tales together, but then dropping all pretense of the subtlety these characters worked with to crowbar in unfunny jokes. Rupert Bear on the Island of Dr Moreau. How we laughed. And then they all fuck and die. Again. I'm not saying he's a nihlist, but even Nietzsche said positive things from time to time.

At least we agree on the atrocious bastardization of superheros spawned from the gonads of Miller though. Let's make Superheroes realistic. Let's destroy dreams to create nightmares and then sell them as the new dreams. There's no rule we cannot break apart from "just leave it the fuck alone."

(Not American, Not under 25, Still thinks that Jackson's best work was Bad Taste)

 

[capnjack]

The whole: "male-only" theme is just wrong in so many ways that it's just plain stupid. I thought we evolved enough to know that women are equal to men, and that they too can be complete nerds (not using it demeaningly here).

Male-only theme? Evolved enough? I thought we might have evolved enough to allow a private company to hold a contest for anyone they want. Why isn't anyone complaining that it's agist, and 50 year old male nerds are not allowed to partake in the sweepstakes?

That's just... bad. No matter how you spin it. We're past things as large as boys-only voting, for fuck's sake, why would we devolve to have a boys only contest?

Um, it's bad if you write an article the way Escapist did,

There are plenty of contests open only to women. Think of contests to win make-up for example. Sometimes, it's just smarter to only open a contest up to your target audience. There are people who will enroll in any sort of contest because they like winning free things, not because they actually care about the contest.

There's nothing wrong with limiting it solely to the people who that content is directed towards.

By the way, everyone's forgetting that District 9's creators have just as much a role in this as IGN. Maybe the contest is only open to males in a certain age group, because they want to advertise to the people who are going to want to spend the cash in the box office.

But no, it couldn't be that simple. It obviously has to be a deragatory, sexist decision, right?

Ugh... I can't even find a good enough fail or facepalm picture to show my dissapointment on this.

I can't describe to you how deep the palm imprint on my face is, in part because of your comment.

Since they clearly haven't justified such a decision already, I call that this is just wrong.

Right. Guilty until proven innocent.

Please don't ever go into law or take part in a jury.

That's...stupid. Humanity fails again. God, it's getting so depressing anymore.

Almost as depressing as your English is getting "anymore".

There are a lot of good reasons for this, of course. Chicks don't like comic books. Chicks don't understand sci-fi. Asking a chick to "cover" a complex, multi-layered film like District 9 is unfair and obviously expecting way too much. And let's face it, this is an internet contest so it's not like many chicks are going to find out about it anyway.

This is all tongue and cheek, right? You're not actually stupid, are you?

Because you sound serious, and that's far more offensive than IGN's sweepstakes. And it's very presumptious and stereotyped as well. I hope I'm just not picking up on a subtle, satirical jab at IGN.

If you are not kidding, then you should be embarassed of this article, in my opinion.

 

[Kogarian]

Almost as depressing as your English is getting "anymore".

Good job, CapnJack. You rebuttled my argument that it was sexist by pointing out a grammar error. I'm sorry we can't be as cool as you. Because we all know you're so smart by quoting half a page and having a sly remark for everything.

Nice rejoinder. I applaud you.

 

[ZeroMachine]

The whole: "male-only" theme is just wrong in so many ways that it's just plain stupid. I thought we evolved enough to know that women are equal to men, and that they too can be complete nerds (not using it demeaningly here).

Male-only theme? Evolved enough? I thought we might have evolved enough to allow a private company to hold a contest for anyone they want. Why isn't anyone complaining that it's agist, and 50 year old male nerds are not allowed to partake in the sweepstakes?

That's just... bad. No matter how you spin it. We're past things as large as boys-only voting, for fuck's sake, why would we devolve to have a boys only contest?

Um, it's bad if you write an article the way Escapist did,

There are plenty of contests open only to women. Think of contests to win make-up for example. Sometimes, it's just smarter to only open a contest up to your target audience. There are people who will enroll in any sort of contest because they like winning free things, not because they actually care about the contest.

There's nothing wrong with limiting it solely to the people who that content is directed towards.

By the way, everyone's forgetting that District 9's creators have just as much a role in this as IGN. Maybe the contest is only open to males in a certain age group, because they want to advertise to the people who are going to want to spend the cash in the box office.

But no, it couldn't be that simple. It obviously has to be a deragatory, sexist decision, right?

Ugh... I can't even find a good enough fail or facepalm picture to show my dissapointment on this.

I can't describe to you how deep the palm imprint on my face is, in part because of your comment.

Since they clearly haven't justified such a decision already, I call that this is just wrong.

Right. Guilty until proven innocent.

Please don't ever go into law or take part in a jury.

That's...stupid. Humanity fails again. God, it's getting so depressing anymore.

Almost as depressing as your English is getting "anymore".

There are a lot of good reasons for this, of course. Chicks don't like comic books. Chicks don't understand sci-fi. Asking a chick to "cover" a complex, multi-layered film like District 9 is unfair and obviously expecting way too much. And let's face it, this is an internet contest so it's not like many chicks are going to find out about it anyway.

This is all tongue and cheek, right? You're not actually stupid, are you?

Because you sound serious, and that's far more offensive than IGN's sweepstakes. And it's very presumptious and stereotyped as well. I hope I'm just not picking up on a subtle, satirical jab at IGN.

If you are not kidding, then you should be embarassed of this article, in my opinion.

Well, someone's in a "go-against-the-crowd" mood today, hm?

The contest is sexist and wrong. There are no two ways about it. They are denying a group access to this contest for no reason other than gender. Saying that males are the "target audience" is also sexist and wrong. Why couldn't a girl enjoy this movie? Your argument on that is null and void.

And the comment you quoted Malygris on is obviously a jab at IGN. I'm hoping that you were taking a jab at Malygris for that, or it would just make you seem more like an idiot. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, though, and say you just sound more like an ass.

It is sexist, it is wrong, and considering it's a contest being held by a high-profile movie being worked on by a high-profile director/producer on a high-profile website... well, that's just bad PR all around.

And I can't, for the life of me, see why you would think otherwise.

EDIT: Oh, and if you think that District 9 looks like it would only appeal to boys, think again. The only other one of my friends that knew about it before I told them was one of my best friends... a girl. A girly girl. And she's psyched about the movie and thinks it looks awesome.

 

[Sparrow]

*Quoted to poke*

I sent a message to IGN, inquiring why this was the case. I got a quite nice and civil reply:

Hi Lewis,

The eligibility requirements for this contest were determined by Columbia TriStar Marketing, the marketing team behind the District 9 film, and were passed on as a directive to IGN as Sponsor of this particular Sweepstakes running on the IGN.com site. 

While IGN supports gamers of all ages, genders, shapes and sizes,  these guidelines were created  to foster a buzz for the film among a very narrow target group that the film's promoters felt would be extremely passionate about the film's subject matter. 

Thanks for listening, we hope this provides some clarification...

Sincerely,

Christine Henderson - Senior Manager, Customer Service

 

[capnjack]

Almost as depressing as your English is getting "anymore".

Good job, CapnJack. You rebuttled my argument that it was sexist by pointing out a grammar error. I'm sorry we can't be as cool as you. Because we all know you're so smart by quoting half a page and having a sly remark for everything.

Nice rejoinder. I applaud you.

A few things to say to you: 1) English isn't your first language, is it? If it isn't, I'm actually a little sorry. If it is, I'm way, way more sorry. 2) Maybe you weren't paying attention, but I wasn't trying to rebut your argument. I was pointing out the irony. 3) Not trying to have a sly remark for everything. Just sharing my honest opinion. Too harshly, perhaps, but it was a gut-reaction to how disgusted I was by the people up in arms about something before understanding the scope of the situation.

It's like people getting pissed off that a white guy kills black zombies in Resident Evil 5.

Worry about something important. It's shit like this that takes humanity a step back. Yeah, guys, go fight IGN to open their contests to women, because that's what equality is about.

*facepalm*

Well, someone's in a "go-against-the-crowd" mood today, hm?

Nope. The crowd is in a "go-against-reason" mood today. The stupidity of it blew my mind so hard, I was forced to respond. I'm aghast, really, because I can't believe the responses I'm reading.

The contest is sexist and wrong. There are no two ways about it. They are denying a group access to this contest for no reason other than gender. Saying that males are the "target audience" is also sexist and wrong. Why couldn't a girl enjoy this movie? Your argument on that is null and void.

Actually, they're only accepting a certain group of people based on their age range and gender. They're denying every other person, young or old, male or female.

How is defining a target audience sexist? What the fuck are you on? Every company chooses a target audience and attempts to attract them.

The supreme idiocy of this post... is unbelievable. Dude, who said a girl couldn't enjoy the movie? Do you understand what a target audience is? I never said that, so don't put words in my mouth, or in IGNs. Wait for an actual response before making a useless, moronic judgment.

And the comment you quoted Malygris on is obviously a jab at IGN. I'm hoping that you were taking a jab at Malygris for that, or it would just make you seem more like an idiot. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, though, and say you just sound more like an ass.

I'm not trying to be an ass. I am dead serious. I don't want to get in a flame war or be offensive. I am seriously shocked by the ridiculous attitude of the posters in this thread. Everyone is jumping the gun because of a fucking contest.

It is sexist, it is wrong, and considering it's a contest being held by a high-profile movie being worked on by a high-profile director/producer on a high-profile website... well, that's just bad PR all around.

Not really. They allow women to enroll for the contest. They hid it somewhere in the contest rules that women cannot actually win it. They didn't elaborate on that, because then it would bring more attention to it. As it stands, I doubt this is going to blow up in their faces.

And I can't, for the life of me, see why you would think otherwise.

Because you're not thinking clearly. I know nothing about this movie. It looks like it's targeted towards males in a certain age range. These males will be the majority of movie-goers for this movie. Plenty of other people in other demographics will watch the movie as well, OBVIOUSLY, but they're not important. The majority will be the age-range targeted by the contest, because a contest has a better chance of working as an advertisement to the target audience. They want to maximize their potential audience.

I could be wrong. I am being presumptuous as well. My point is that we don't know what the deal is, since IGN hasn't said anything. To assume that it's sexist only illustrates that you are small-minded.

You still haven't explained to me why this would be sexist, but a contest that offers make up only to females wouldn't be sexist as well. There are plenty of male drag queens, after all. You have also failed to explain why you think that it's sexist to exclude females, but not ageist to exclude people over 40. How is that ANY different?

I can't believe anyone would waste time being up in arms about something like this. Contests are not required to be open to all people of all age ranges. I doubt this is the first contest or the last aimed at just one sex and there is nothing wrong with that.

EDIT: Oh, and if you think that District 9 looks like it would only appeal to boys, think

again. The only other one of my friends that knew about it before I told them was one of my best friends... a girl. A girly girl. And she's psyched about the movie and thinks it looks awesome.

Thanks for that bit of uselessness. How you managed to miss the point so thoroughly is both amusing and terrifying to me.



EDIT: Oh, hey, read the post above mine. It was exactly as I suspected. Marketing for the contest decided this was the best demographic to pursue for the contest.

Not even in the most liberal and convoluted of political philosophies could that ever be considered sexist. Lesson for today: don't jump the gun.

I learned a lesson today, as well: sometimes the Escapist can be very tasteless.

 

[yeah_so_no]

I have seen plenty of women only contests, so I really don't think this is that big of a deal. A few segregations of the sexes is completely ok and there is no outright chauvinism involved in this at all, It's a contest for guys. Though I can't see a reason a women couldn't enter this I don't believe this is a cause for alarm. Women get their perks, Ladies nights at bars, When a band is filming a music video, and you really like the band, but they want 3 girls to every guy for the shoot, Women can get an assortment of jobs without harassment but say A guy wants to be a model or cut hair, he's assumed feminine and gay, but when a woman wants to be a cop (at least nowadays) no one questions here. This is just an IGN contest its not a big deal. There's also those law issues about men and womens different times spent incarcerated for the same crime. I am all for global equality, this to me does not show any inequality, its simply a contest that only guys can enter, its not like your right to vote is being taken away.

...you do know the "perk" of Ladies' Nights is that it's a way for bars to drum up business by using women to bring in men, right? Ladies' Nights exist because the cheaper price means more women will come that day, which means more men will come because they are hoping to pick up women. They could have Men's Nights, but a) women probably wouldn't come because we can meet men anywhere and b) straight men would stay away because it would be seen as a 'sausage fest'. Ladies' Nights are not about giving women perks, but bringing in more men.

As for the rest of what you said, good lord.

And as for this contest--is there any particular reason why they're saying it's only open for men? Because this is stupid. EDIT - OK, just saw the reason up above. WTF.

I hope this makes some of the feminist blogs, because seriously, WTF. It's like it's saying "Girls don't like things like this, only boys."

 

[mshcherbatskaya]

However, if you tell me Neil Gaiman is a better writer than Alan Moore, I will cut you.

Gaiman isn't obsessed with superhero sex and can usually string a coherent sentence together. And if it's Sandman versus Watchmen, Morpheus pwns Manhattan.

*flicks out switchblade*

*dons kevlar*

You don't like Moore's most influential work but you're putting him above a man whose not only successfully took on Hollywood, won and got a few webbys? Oh, and has not just done it with Sandman, but raised AIDS awareness with The High Cost Of Living, broke the children's market with Coraline, teen market with Stardust and still finds time to write interesting female characters that aren't based on the lacklustre triumvariate of babe, mother, whore. (Or in Miller's case, whore)

Since when does most influential = best? Watchmen was innovative within the context of the superhero genre, which I don't particularly care for (X-men was an exception for a while, but...well, lets not get into that), and the rather meta comic within a comic was, especially for it's time, impressive. But I will be the first to say that the ending of that story jumped the mutant psychic alien shark. And what does taking on Hollywood have to do with comic books? Raising AIDS awareness? I had no idea Gaiman was so noble. I thought he was jumping on the bandwagon to give his story a topical urgency and significance it otherwise lacked.

I tried to read Coraline but got bored and quit. Same with Stardust, the appeal of which utterly escapes me. I don't know what female Moore characters you are talking about, but Minna Murray and Sophie Bangs rock my socks. How can I fail to love a heroine whose battle cry is, "Someone get me my pen."

Gaiman gets on your nerves for being clever?

No, he doesn't get on my nerves for being clever, he gets on my nerves for being "clever." I trust you to understand the difference.

"I'm sorry Mr. Gaiman but people find your work too inviting, evocative and comforting.

'People' might, but I don't. No, wait, I will agree with you on "comforting." I think there is something very comforting about his work. That is not a compliment.

And yes, Moore is a moody, anti-social sod, from what I understand of him. Why being nice has any bearing on the quality of his work I don't know. I buy his comics from a store, not from him directly. He can growl as much as he likes as long as he keeps writing.

And what exactly is wrong with a guy who can realistically depict men and women as not only frail moths but also utter shits. Moore does shits and repressed shits all the time and it just gets old.

I personally never found Gaiman's characters particularly realistic or compelling. I guess I must just like shits. That's probably why I continue to post here. (Oops! Did I say that out loud? OH MY GOD, I HAVE NO INNER MONOLOGUE!) I kid, I kid, I'm joking of course.

...

Anyway...

Personally I'd enjoy a walk through the sheer hell of Delirium's lair and the heart rending of Desire than ANOTHER fecking monologue of mock-Wolverine macho bullshit about how to be a man you've got to fuck and kill your way through everything.

I've thought about this and I have no idea what you are talking about. What Moore comic is this, with the macho bullshit? That's a totally serious question. Though I would agree with the critique that he kind of wandered away from the actual story into a primer on hermetic Kaballah, I'd be quite happy climbing he Tree of Life with Promethea. But then I like tha shit anyway.

As far as Desire goes, the best Desire story I ever read was fanfic (by a talented writer who I've lost track of, unfortunately.)

If you're talking about a fight though, let's stay away from the award winners and touch on some of the lesser known stuff. Against the Superhero Sex of V, which was first done better in Tharg's Future Shocks back in his script droid days, I'll bring out Neverwhere which actually links into London far more than V's verbal vomit of vernacular.

Superhero Sex whut? Nevermind. And Neverwhere? Bought and read the first six issues or so, was unimpressed with the first, bored my the second, lost any optimism I had about it by the third, and why I struggled on trying to read it for three more issues I really don't know. I think it's because I had run out of The Invisibles trade paperbacks or something.

Or for world ending, how about Good Omens

See my comments above re: Coraline, Stardust, and Neverwhere.

which actually paints the end of the world as if realized by Agathur Christie and Richard Crompton, but it's still shocking stuff. Saying that Moore writes better because he writes grittier deletes the great work of Douglas Addams, Terry Pratchett, Ben Elton and others. Poirot was still a match for Marlowe as detectives, despite their different settings.

OK, I think we hit the point where we have to call off the discussion on the grounds of We Just Have Really Different Tastes. You are citing a bunch of authors who don't particularly interest me. Adams was good, but I quit about halfway through the third Hitchhiker books. I have (Ultrajoe will never forgive me for this) tried and failed at various times to read Terry Pratchett, and I have never seen the appeal of Agatha Christie at all but I love Raymond Chandler.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is Moore trying to be Gaiman by wrapping tales together, but then dropping all pretense of the subtlety these characters worked with to crowbar in unfunny jokes.

No, he's not trying to be Gaiman, he's having fun playing with the tropes of pulp fiction of a specific era. Of course it's not subtle. The source material was in no way subtle, and if he is doing a pastiche experiment, not with the stories but with the genre conventions themselves, subtlety would be 180 degrees in the wrong direction for what he was trying to do.

And then they all fuck and die. Again. I'm not saying he's a nihlist, but even Nietzsche said positive things from time to time.

What should he have done? A comforting ending of some sort? I'm rather surprised that, judging by our tastes displayed here, I apparently have a much darker worldview than you.

At least we agree on the atrocious bastardization of superheros spawned from the gonads of Miller though.

*gags at the thought of Frank Miller* Oh, and his art is so fugly it makes my eyes bleed.

Let's make Superheroes realistic. Let's destroy dreams to create nightmares and then sell them as the new dreams. There's no rule we cannot break apart from "just leave it the fuck alone."

Again, you have completely lost me on this rant in a "what the hell are you going on about?" way. But then again, look at the other stuff on my shelf: Grant Morrison, Warren Ellis, Garth Ennis, Brian Vaughn, and Brian Bendis.

So, having established that our tastes are such that I have to repect our differences, and knowing that, when it comes to maintaining an ongoing wrangle with you, I will never surpass the accomplishments of Cheeze_Pavilion and would only expose my own lack of stamina and bull-headedness in that arena, I bid you adieu. Also, ironically, given the origin point of this discussion, I am moving into my new apartment and need to go transport my archival boxes of comics and a couple bookshelves of trade paperbacks to my new place. Oh, and the equal quantity of manga. Though my consumption of that has slowed down a bit, now that all the titles I follow have caught up in translation, and so now I am stuck with the Japanese schedule of quarterly and half-yearly releases.

(Is American, Not under 35, doesn't give a rat's ass about Jackson but wouldn't mind going to the Comic-Con)[/quote]

P.S. Regarding the boy who bet that girls aren't interested in comics - if his profile is to be believed, I have been collecting comics longer than he has been alive.

P.P.S. Someone loaned me American Gods and I must say, I'm enjoying it so far. So there you go. If I can learn to enjoy Gaiman, maybe there is hope for you.