The Nightwing Initiative

trueamericanenglish asked:

Hey, on your Thoughts about the HI post, I just had a question about the last picture with Batman and Catwoman vs Batman and Hawkeye. I get your point about it seeming homophobic to place Clint there and leave Bruce, but if the artist had completely redrawn the picture with, say, Natasha as Bruce and Clint as Catwoman, would that have been an acceptable parody of the art? Sorry, just trying to wrap my head around the situation. Thanks for your time!

Well, let’s take a look, shall we?

image

Consider this my artistic contribution to The Hawkeye Initiative! It’s just a quick sketch, sorry it’s not more polished. I went with Batgirl and Nightwing for my rendition, because Ms. Romanov doesn’t wear a cape.

(For those curious, these are their “Three Years Ago” costumes, from The New 52 flashback stories.)

Here’s where my main contention has been. With the roles completely reversed like this, I simply can not tell what is being critiqued about this piece. The piece portrays an intimate moment between the characters; if Catwoman/Nightwing was meant to be in combat I could see the problem with portraying the character in that pose, but for what’s taking place it’s perfectly appropriate. In both, one partner is portrayed as more feminine than the other, but in neither is this particularly out of character. The body language is a little difficult to read; I interpreted it as Batman/Batgirl seeking comfort from Catwoman/Nightwing (hence draping the cloak over the other’s shoulder), and Catwoman/Nightwing being a bit playful about it, knowing Batman/Batgirl isn’t prone to relying on others. The anatomy’s pretty good over all (the arms took a little massaging, on both figures); in mine Batgirl’s legs are crazy long, though her proportions aren’t too different from my own.

In the end, I think both the original and the gender-swapped piece have a sweetness to them. And even after working through it myself, I don’t know what’s inherent in the piece that needs to be highlighted and mocked.

Some More Thoughts On “The Hawkeye Initiative”

“I think the point is…”

There are a whole mess of comments on that article that begin with this refrain. And I would be able to take them much more seriously if they didn’t betray the fact that the people making them didn’t actually read the article.

In fact, the second point on the article (y’know, after “I hate everything”) is a very generous estimation of what I thought the point of The Hawkeye Initiative was. Unfortunately, I have to make an estimation of it, because the management at The Hawkeye Initiative have never really made their intent clear.

I would also be able to take these comments much more seriously if they didn’t betray the fact that the people making them don’t actually read The Hawkeye Initiative.

Some examples:

“The point of The Hawkeye Initiative is to make fun of the ridiculousness of female anatomy in comics.”

“The point of The Hawkeye Initiative is to point out the ridiculousness of female costumes in comics.”

“The point of the Hawkeye Initiative is to point out the over-sexualization of female characters in comics.”

Help me out here, please.

Here we have Spider-Woman, adopting a classic Spider-Man pose. The pose isn’t sexualized, her costume is one of the most conservative in comics, and her anatomy, while exaggerated, all fits together the way a human body should.

Here we have Hawkeye. Whose ass has been made into a focal point of the piece in ways not present in the original. Whose back is arched in a way not present in the original. Whose face is contorted into a coy smile with old-school Disney cartoon eyelashes, all features not present in the original.

Tell me where the satire is here, please. Tell me where the commentary is. Tell me where the humor comes from, if it doesn’t come from the fact that Hawkeye looks feminine.

This is Batgirl. Like Spider-Woman, Batgirl has one of the most conservative costumes in comics. It doesn’t just cover her head to toe, but it’s clearly got some built-in body armor going on. Her anatomy is well done, everything fits together the way it’s supposed to. And her pose isn’t overtly sexualized. Barbara Gordon’s athleticism has its origins in dance. She trained as a ballerina as a child, and that story element is communicated through this pose.

I love the exuberance of this picture, let’s be clear. It’s really cute, and I like Hawkeye’s smile (we don’t get to see superheroes smile enough). But I’m still not seeing the commentary or the satire that the site’s defenders (not necessarily the site itself) claim is there.

This one does have some issues. Poison Ivy’s pose is silly. Thrusting your chest out isn’t a necessary component of backhanding someone. Neither is wearing a thong/bustier combo. Catwoman’s costume, however, is fairly conservative. There’s no boob pouches or butt pouches. Her anatomy’s a bit wonky, but not in a manner that’s egregiously sexual. 

You’d think Ivy would be the focus of the following commentary.

Yeah, no. Hawkeye’s given a thong (which, again, Catwoman is NOT wearing in the original piece). His anatomy is more exaggerated than in the original piece. And in the place of Poison Ivy we have Black Widow. With bigger breasts, an even tinier waist, and a painful looking thong.

I can’t find the commentary in making the piece MORE anti-woman. 

This isn’t even comic book art. It’s pin-up art. It’s overt intention is to be sexy. And even still, the anatomy is really good, the craftsmanship in the painting is gorgeous, her body type is one we would NEVER see in a mainstream comic book (isn’t that sad that SHE is too big to be considered a superhero?).

Is this supposed to be funny? Biting commentary? Witty satire? What’s being said about the previous piece with this one? Honestly, I don’t even know at this point.

Um, she’s missing her right arm. That’s literally the only thing wrong with this piece, and when you’re drawing at least a page a day as a professional artist, some things are gonna slip through. Every single woman reading this has put on a pair of jeans and a t-shirt in her life. And where’s this “Mr. New Booty” coming from? The girl in the original piece HAS no booty, nor is she shaking it, nor is she wearing a thong or engaging in sex work or any of the other things that song is about. It’s just kinda thrown in there.

Last one, I promise.

If that’s supposed to be satire… Well, that’s just some straight-up homophobia right there.

A lot of the posts are okay-to-good. But there are a LOT of examples like this. And examples like these send the message loud and clear: Femininity is something to be mocked.

I am NOT mad at the Initiative. I’m NOT mad at the artists, either. Misogyny and homophobia and transphobia are SO prevalent in our world that it’s an extremely easy trap to fall into. But when the trap has been pointed out to you, and you insist on telling me that I just don’t understand the intent behind the people who fell into it, I’m gonna have to say something.

But I don’t expect you’ll read this. Cuz you didn’t really read the first one. You wouldn’t talk to me and my friends like we don’t know what we’re talking about. You wouldn’t talk about how this project is supposed to “benefit women” as if me and my friends were not ourselves women. Cuz, y’know, we covered this already, and you’d know that if you’d respected us enough to read what we wrote.

Thoughts On “The Hawkeye Initiative”

Artists: Lauren Armstrong (left) & Kenneth Rocafort (right)

Disclaimers may be in order.

First, I hate everything. It’s seriously the first thing out of my friends’ mouths when I’m done speaking to them. “Ceridwen, why do you hate everything?” Let’s just get that out of the way so I don’t have an inbox full of similar notes when I’m done with this. (What am I saying, people don’t read this blog.)

Second, I understand the intent behind The Hawkeye Initiative. The work that the management is busy with, drawing attention to the sexism inherent in mainstream comics art, is good work. It’s important that more people do this work, and on that level, I wish them success.

The Hawkeye Initiative has been live for about a week now, and the response has been incredible. Quite literally, in fact: It strains credibility to think how quickly this project has taken off. In seven days, the blog has been featured on io9, ONTD, Bleeding Cool, and Know Your Meme.

By comparison, Escher Girls, which has been doing the work of highlighting the sheer amount of sexist art in comics for over a year now, still doesn’t have the following that The Hawkeye Initiative has built in the last seven days.  In the interests of full disclosure, the woman behind Esher Girls is a personal friend, but I want to be clear this isn’t a case of envy-by-proxy. I’m more interested in exploring why this discrepancy exists.

My take? People care more about issues of sexual exploitation if that exploitation directly effects men. We see this time and time again in our day-to-day lives. The sexual abuse of young men and boys makes national news, and the narrative surrounding them explores the psychological damage caused by their abuse. “What he might have gone on to achieve” is a common refrain in these stories. Meanwhile, the narrative surrounding the sexual abuse of young women ignores all of this in favor of finding some way in which her rape and abuse was her fault. Even in cases that avoid this trope, such as (most, though not all cases of) the abuse of underage girls, “what she might have gone on to achieve” is never even considered.

While objectification is not as “serious” as rape, it remains a contributing factor in rape culture. So when that culture sees an instance of a man being objectified, even if that objectification is meant to draw attention to similar treatment of women, it reacts in ways it does not when the subject is female. As I said before, Escher Girls has been highlighting this issue for over a year now, but the focus has remained solely on how this issue effects women. Ami provides smart commentary, her readers have contributed redraws showing ways in which the art can not only be less objectifying but objectively better, and the focus remains on women. The Hawkeye Initiative, meanwhile, shifts the focus to a male character, and in so doing, draws the attention of our male-dominated culture.

And that’s assuming the best intentions of the management and their contributors. Go through the archives and count how many times a variation of “This is hilarious, I had to contribute” is used. Be careful here, friends. There’s some intense ugliness hidden behind why you find this so hilarious, and it’s steeped in misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia.

On tumblr, polerin elaborates:

There’s some really nasty shit lurking not too far under the surface of some of the drawings. In some cases, like the ones where they switch clothes, it’s not even too deep.

Making choices of clothing based in femininity/femme-ness on a dood isn’t a context free choice. Doubly so when you are mocking something. It relies on the deep history of cissexism and oppositional sexism in our culture. Even if that’s not the intent of the artist, it is impossible to look at these drawings and not have all the jokes about guys wearing women’s clothing or “acting like a girl” come up. That’s the POINT of these drawings.

And that point pins trans women to the wall as a side effect of (rightly) critiquing the sexism in comics.

Despite the best of intentions, the vibe comes across as really anti-femme, anti-trans women, and ultimately, anti-women. After all, if we’re unable to talk about the mistreatment of women without bringing men into the picture, what does that really say about us? If we’re unable to talk about the mistreatment of women without considering how it effects all women, what does that really say about us?