Wonder Woman Message Board >> View Post
·
Post By
christian

In Reply To
little kon-el

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 506
Subj: Re: It makes sense socially not be heterosexual...
Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 at 05:48:04 pm EDT (Viewed 10 times)
Reply Subj: It makes sense socially not be heterosexual...
Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 at 04:57:48 pm EDT (Viewed 133 times)

Previous Post

In Earth One: Wonder Woman, we have an Amazon society that has built extravagant rituals centered around bondage and chains that recreate and their bondage from Hercules as a way to show justice and love within their courts. In the Perez run, you have all of these women who were doubly scarred by men (at least those that follow Hippolyta)...once when they were killed by men and again when Hercules and his troops drugged and raped them. They were defined by an endless war to keep the doorway to hell closed. The Banas of Antiope's tribe were different. They had inter-married, but they still had a very distancing culture from men. In the current run, we have some conflicting ideas as to what is and is not canon, but we do know that the Amazons are a warrior culture that either raped men for only reproduction (which is the original interpretation of Amazons) or were traditionally immortal, fighting to always keep Ares from escaping and keeping everyone out. So that constant state of war is very similar to Perez's interpretation.

I understand that Asexuality seems to be there, but there also does seem to be a degree of lesbianism there too. It was there with Perez's run with Hippolyta and Philippus' relationship. I really don't see asexuality there. If anything, lesbianism seem to be there in the text.

I still don't understand why asexuality would be more relevant than lesbianism? And why wouldn't the writers ideas matter, they're writing the book. Shouldn't there be credence to that work?

As far as a "higher existence" is concerned...they're more interested in keeping the evils of the world at bay, right? I mean, in Perez's run, they are charged with keeping the dooms' doorway closed. In the current run, they're charged with keeping Ares at bay. In the silver age, they were charged by the Gods to send out a champion to keep the world's evils at bay.

- little kon-el

Hmm, we seem to be debating at cross purposes. I thought you were originally arguing that your view was what SHOULD be the representation of the Amazons in the comics, not what the various writers have actually done. But it seems that you're discussing the actual representation. And I can't really comment, since the Perez run was the only Wonder Woman comics I ever read.

My argument was what I thought should have been the Amazon depiction. What would make the most sense if I was writing the title. From that perspective, asexuality makes more sense to me, than the notion that a heretofore predominantly heterosexual group of women would suddenly become lesbian in the absence of men. While some homosexuality can be explained by environmental circumstances, most people agree that homosexuals are generally born that way. So, I don't see many women converting, even in a fictional scenario. Having left sexuality behind sounds like a better narrative to me, especially since these women are immortal, and don't need to procreate.


Posted with Google Chrome 58.0.3029.110 on Windows NT 4.0
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2017 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2017 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2017 Powermad Software