Report: Only 30 Percent of Marvel/DC Characters Female

[Lupine]

Again, you keep touting scientific facts. I think you're the one that doesn't understand how it works. You see because again you're saying that biological reasons are the reason said person is acting this way or going into this field and I'm pointing out to you that said scientific data is being gathered in the real world where people are already products not just of their genetics or instincts but also products of their societies, upbringings,traditions, etc.

To put it another way, if you're doing a study like this, you shouldn't do it with a single test group and say "good enough". Your sample size can't be limited and more than that it needs to have representatives from more than a single society, country, race, etc. If you want to say that this is nature and not nurture then you need to cover your bases on the nurture end of things instead of having a go at it on the small scale and then touting it as the new gospel truth.

And to repeat myself once more, even after that is done, you can't take those findings and then try to apply them to the micro level indiscriminately. Also I can't see anyone being particularly irrational except for your insistence that feminist must be. I get the feeling that you don't know a lot of feminist and thus for you they are these fairytale-others built in your mind from pieces of media.

Also I say this while not exactly disagreeing with you that men and women have different mentalities and instincts and that these very well can lead to different job choices, but the problem is that you see this as totally because of biological reasons and can't be bothered to consider things not happening in a vacuum...Not to mention that feminism doesn't care about having 50/50 male and female representation in anything, what it does care about however is that women have the same opportunities as men or vice versa. At its core equality is about choice.

I don't even understand where you're getting at. Single test group? Why are you assuming that multiple studies on sex differences happened with only one test group? Here's a couple of sources from neuroscience alone (not even including evolutionary biology and biology) that confirm vast differences between men and women:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_sex_differences
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131202161935.htm

I believe in that. You keep believing in feminist hogwash and gender pseudo-scientists making shit up as they go along only to parrot their misguided view on sexes.

I didn't assume a single test group across multiple studies. You mentioned the documentary which I watched and then commented on. See how that works. Also congratulations you are going to ignore sociology, world history, and psychology in favor of biology alone without the context or acknowledgement of human cultural constructs and all those have done and mean to us humans. So yeah lets pretend that all of those things have no affect on the human condition because since there are quantifiable differences between the sexes then that means that there is no point in equality, right? Note: That equality doesn't say that we are all the same, it says that we all deserve the same opportunities.

I'll say it again. You are trying to simplify something complex with long standing societal issues and bias with a scientific outlook that while it might shed some light on the human animal as an animal, does absolutely nothing to actually address human society or by extension us human beings beyond the specifics of biology. And then you're using it, not very successfully to strawman feminists into some sort of irrational science haters, which doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

I kinda find it, well bullshit, seeing people bring up a genre of a medium (romance) vs the medium (comic books), on another note. May as well say there's plenty of bats in baseball, when there's not a while lot of bats in sports in general, or something like that. It's not a great argument, IMO.

Trashy romance novels are a genre in the medium of books, every bit as superheroes are a genre in the medium of comics.

Equating "comics" to either "superheroes" or "Marvel/DC" shows a woeful lack of knowledge of the medium.

You missed the whole

Kinda surprised it's that high, myself. I'm kinda of an off, and on comic fan.

part of my post, huh? As in not hugely into it? I never claimed to be an expert. Still, hope ya feel better.

I'm aware of more comic brands than Marvel/DC, but honestly, Super Hero is damn near all of them.

 

[Ogoid]

I kinda find it, well bullshit, seeing people bring up a genre of a medium (romance) vs the medium (comic books), on another note. May as well say there's plenty of bats in baseball, when there's not a while lot of bats in sports in general, or something like that. It's not a great argument, IMO.

Trashy romance novels are a genre in the medium of books, every bit as superheroes are a genre in the medium of comics.

Equating "comics" to either "superheroes" or "Marvel/DC" shows a woeful lack of knowledge of the medium.

You missed the whole

Kinda surprised it's that high, myself. I'm kinda of an off, and on comic fan.

part of my post, huh? As in not hugely into it? I never claimed to be an expert. Still, hope ya feel better.

I'm aware of more comic brands than Marvel/DC, but honestly, Super Hero is damn near all of them.

Okay, first and foremost I see I obviously came across as more confrontational than I intended, for which I apologize.

My comments about equating comics and superheroes was not directly aimed at you; if anything, it'd be directed at whoever wrote the original piece, and at that particular and - as far as I'm concerned - misguided attitude of taking a genre (a grossly over-represented genre, no arguments here, but a genre nonetheless) for the entirety of a medium.

Case in point, one wouldn't have to look further than more than half of the links in my first post in this thread, and I wouldn't even have to strain myself to throw in some more, even without going into Japanese or European stuff.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

I kinda find it, well bullshit, seeing people bring up a genre of a medium (romance) vs the medium (comic books), on another note. May as well say there's plenty of bats in baseball, when there's not a while lot of bats in sports in general, or something like that. It's not a great argument, IMO.

Trashy romance novels are a genre in the medium of books, every bit as superheroes are a genre in the medium of comics.

Equating "comics" to either "superheroes" or "Marvel/DC" shows a woeful lack of knowledge of the medium.

You missed the whole

Kinda surprised it's that high, myself. I'm kinda of an off, and on comic fan.

part of my post, huh? As in not hugely into it? I never claimed to be an expert. Still, hope ya feel better.

I'm aware of more comic brands than Marvel/DC, but honestly, Super Hero is damn near all of them.

Okay, first and foremost I see I obviously came across as more confrontational than I intended, for which I apologize.

My comments about equating comics and superheroes was not directly aimed at you; if anything, it'd be directed at whoever wrote the original piece, and at that particular and - as far as I'm concerned - misguided attitude of taking a genre (a grossly over-represented genre, no arguments here, but a genre nonetheless) for the entirety of a medium.

Case in point, one wouldn't have to look further than more than half of the links in my first post in this thread, and I wouldn't even have to strain myself to throw in some more, even without going into Japanese or European stuff.

It did come across as confrontational, yeah. I apologize, too. No hard feelings here.

Yeah, super hero is so overwhelmingly common in comic books, it's easy to see how it'd be mistaken for the be all, and end all of comics. I'd imagine it's about all people are aware of most of the time. Heck, I scarcely hear of non-super hero stuff, and am guilty of occasionally forgetting there's more out there, myself.

 

[Lightknight]

Are superhero comic readers at least 30% female?

Media should mirror its consumer demographics, not world demographics. Take affirmative action for example, you don't require a business in North Dakota to have at least 14% of a minority employed just because the US has that number. You figure out what the demographics are specific to that region and you make it relate.

These businesses are catering art and literature for specific groups of people, the people that buy comics. I don't complain that panty hose companies overwhelmingly cater to women because men don't buy them (in any legitimate number). So I don't care if the crotch is ball-friendly or not because males aren't the target market for the product. There is also no guarantee that making them more female representative would ever increase female purchases to match standard human demographics. This is because women do trend towards different genres of media than males do and comics are typically mostly in the vein of action genres which happens to be one of the least preferred genres for women in other forms of media.

If you want to discuss something that matters, it should be regarding the genres comics portray, not the heroes themselves. It's really weird when everyone assumes that genders are exactly the same in every way when we're clearly a sexually dimorphic species. Men and Women have different tastes. We've evolved that way and that's OK. But we need to get to a point as a species where equality doesn't have to mean lying to ourselves that differences don't exist when they so clearly and measurably day. Our differences should be acknowledged and even celebrated. That's when women are going to be more catered too. Not just giving them male heroes with breasts slapped on like that's enough for them. Not in aggregate.