Wonder Woman in Pants is Not a Feminist Win

It’s the end of an era. At 69 years old, Wonder Woman has decided to put on some pants.

Actually, the new duds are not an act of self-determination by the woman (formerly) in red, white and blue. According to the New York Times, the new head writer of the series, J. Michael Straczynski, wanted to “toughen her up and give her a modern sensibility.”

This is modernity? Where are her red boots? What about modernization requires her trademark “W” emblem to fade into the background? How is covering her once rippling, now wimpy, muscles a nod to evolved images of womanhood?

I know what you’re thinking: Shouldn’t feminists be happy that Wonder Woman now looks more like a young woman freshly off a college campus, at once ready to go fight some bad guys in an alley or in a pay discrimination lawsuit? Haven’t we been fighting for women role models with more clothing as well as more substance? She couldn’t really fight evil in a bustier—is this not a feminist win?

No, not by a long shot. In fact, it feels like the sad loss of America’s first truly feminist comic book heroine.

This isn’t the first time DC Comics has tried to “modernize” the Wonder Woman character, which debuted in 1930 as the creation of psychologist William Marston. Marston, with the encouragement of his wife Elizabeth, designed her as a “new kind of superhero, one who would triumph not with fists or firepower, but with love.”  Wonder Woman, her creator said, was “psychological propaganda for the new type of woman who should, I believe, rule the world.”

As such, Wonder Woman, alias Diana Prince, was introduced as a protégé of the classical goddesses and, like her male crime fighting counterparts, possessed a variety of powers and tools, including superhuman strength, agility and cunning, the ability to fly, bracelets that made her invincible and a “Truth Lasso” that barred those bound by it from uttering lies. Unlike her male counterparts, however, she sought to rid the world of evil by first employing logic and mutual human understanding before breaking out the fire power.

A generation of role-model starved women, finally presented with a truly powerful heroine, proved themselves a reliable comic book fan base—at the height of her early popularity, Wonder Woman had a readership of ten million, appeared in four comic books, and a daily newspaper comic strip, reported Philip Charles Crawford in School Library Journal.

Yet, social progress for women wasn’t correlated with the evolution of their superhero. In 1968, DC Comics debuted a “modern” version of Diana Prince who’d lost her goddess heritage and all her superhuman powers, gained a male mentor and his martial arts skills, and developed a propensity for the domestic arts. She also came equipped with a new “mod” costume: a pantsuit with no “W” emblem, no flags, and no invincible bracelet cuffs.

Feminist outrage at the devolution of their heroine was quick. A group of activists, led by Gloria Steinem, leaned on DC Comics to scrap the “new” Wonder Woman in favor of the more powerful original—and they won, convincing the company to restore Wonder Woman’s powers and history during the next version of the series. They understood that along with equal pay and childcare and the right to hold  credit in their own name, young women need to be able to see themselves in strong pop culture role models in order to fashion themselves into the real life versions.

Here we go again, it seems. Wonder Woman donning what looks like skinny jeans is being spun as a direct result of the successes of the Women’s Liberation movement, a reaction to requests that female superheroes do a little less baring of buns and a lot more kicking them. Yet in stripping Diana of her overt sexuality the new writers have missed the reason Wonder Woman was a feminist heroine in the first place. As originally portrayed, Diana Prince was sexy not because of her bare legs and cleavage but because her personhood wasn’t defined by them and her powers not derived from fashioning herself for the male gaze. She could work a 9 to 5 job, hold down a relationship, subvert international conspiracies and toss the villains in jail, and perhaps, as the first cover of Ms. magazine suggested in 1972, even be president—and the way she looked was, as it should be, simply an aside.

While it’s yet to be seen whether this costume change signals an intent to again strip Wonder Woman of her super powers, it’s disconcerting to learn that the writers are creating a new back story for the character that deprives her of her upbringing on Paradise Island with her mother, Queen Hippolyta, and her Amazon sisters in favor of being smuggled out of her homeland as a baby as it was destroyed. Wonder Woman’s original feminist creator’s intent in giving Diana the Paradise Island upbringing was to insinuate she knew gender equality existed because she’d lived it and that her powers were derived from living with and learning from her sisters. In effect, all women could become “Wonder Woman” if they tapped into the feminine power around them and strived for a gender just world that, we know from real live history, really did and can exist. Is this rewrite an attempt to impose the myth of “post-patriarchy” on the character, in which she no longer needs to dream of and fight for equality because she’s achieved it?

If the folks at DC Comics weren’t aware, 2010 America is far from a mythical Amazonian paradise. Take for example new statistics from the Geena Davis Institute on Gender and Media pertaining to female role models for young girls. In G rated movies, just one in three speaking   roles is female and in PG and R rated films, about 73 percent of the characters are male. While there are notable exceptions, like Dora the Explorer and the girl superheroes in The Invincibles, young women are still hard pressed to find pop culture role models that look and sound like themselves. If, as it seems, Wonder Woman is truly losing some of her characteristic fierceness, that’s one fewer strong female role model for girls to aspire to be.

Jim Lee, the artist responsible for Wonder Woman’s new design, claims he wanted her to look strong “without screaming, ‘I’m a superhero.’ ” Even today, in this “modern era,” it’s still hard not to wonder, what’s so wrong with screaming that?

(Agree? Hate the new Wonder Woman and want the old one back? Join the Facebook group: DC Comics: Bring Back the Original Wonder Woman!)



Filed under Uncategorized

9 responses to “Wonder Woman in Pants is Not a Feminist Win

  1. RMJ

    I’m glad to see this. I was also disturbed by the charecterization of the stripping of essential elements of what has made this character so iconic as feminist. Her boots are gone too, I hate that!!

  2. “Wonder Woman’s original feminist creator’s intent in giving Diana the Paradise Island upbringing was to insinuate she knew gender equality existed because she’d lived it…”

    This, to me, doesn’t make sense. How could WW possibly know about gender equality if she lived on an entire island of women?

    I’m embracing WW’s new look; IMO it’s a hell of a lot better than short-shorts and much more practical for kicking ass and stopping international incidents. Realism is important to me, even in comic books. The more truth to your fiction, the better your fiction. This WW is modern and I like it.

  3. Pingback: The Friday Five…vol 4 « What She Knows…

  4. S.

    She is certainly more fashionable now, but I agree that some of her “POW!” is gone.

    Though, I do appreciate her “average Jane” appearance, it appears as more of the Clark Kent character, and not Superman. If Superman can have power in a spandex suit, why can’t WW in a “jazzier” costume?

  5. Pingback: Wonder Woman’s New Look « Pinstripe

  6. How can you have a superhero called ‘Wonder Woman’ and not give her a look and outfit that screams superhero? or is that now what the ‘Wonder’ part is, wondering if she is just a woman or a superhero?

    I agree with the need to modernise her look but what they have come with is far too bland. She is meant to look flamboyant, sexy, tough and is someone who totally kicks ass. Now she looks like a shy accountant who has gone to a fancy dress party in what she thinks is a daring outfit.

  7. I’m not sure if you’re a comics fan or not, but I think you’ve misunderstood the intent behind the change.

    This is not eliminating her backstory – rather, this alternative timeline is happening in tandem with the current story, so part of the story is the characters who remember Wonder Woman needing to figure out how this alternate history came to be (aka the gods messing with time). Long story short, this alternate history for Wonder Woman is an event in the current story, so this urban, modern look may only be temporary. However, if the books sell, they may keep this look or a version of it going for longer.

    It’s been interesting to read the feminist blogs take on this – as a comics fan and a feminist, I understand the judgements being made, but it seems blogs are only touching on her new outfit and have no idea as to the story and intention behind the change.

    I for one am very excited at a resurgent effort in making Wonder Woman relevant – besides, we can’t really evaluate this event as a positive or negative move without actually reading the story, not just looking at a drawing.

  8. hellomimosa

    Amen, Megan! You’ve got it right. As a fellow comics fan and feminist I think that too many people are commenting on the situation without being familiar with the Wonder Woman story line (and how comic story lines exist, in general).

    If anything, I think the new arc and look makes Wonder Woman easy to relate to. She has a practical look and there’s an evaluation of identity, which is something we all know about. Why is everyone so huffy because she’s wearing pants? Seriously, put on a pair of hot pants, run a mile and then say they’re comfy. Lies! Because they’re not. What happened to women being evaluated on their abilities and not their looks? Why does she have to be half-naked and sparkle to have “wonder”?

    I admit that comic writers haven’t done a great job at being feminists or even conveying feminist ideas, but maybe it’s time we tell them how to do it right instead of only telling them what they’re doing wrong.

  9. Mark

    I have mixed feelings about the new outfit. For: the bun huggers and bustier could be seen as exploitative and promoting of an ideology that a woman must fit a certain image of man-serving passive sexuality before she can be successful. Against: the new look is not that of a superhero. So, for change, but not to this.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s