Daredevil Typhoid Mary?

[Gr0oT]

I'm not sure she should be wearing any clothing revealing enough to require pasties. That's pretty bad. It means the character is so sexualized that we had to put stickers on her nipples or else Marvel wouldn't let us air it because children could be watching. I get that she has to have a ritual for going in costume anyway, but I'd prefer to stop at putting on makeup rather than putting on pasties.

God forbid a child sees a nipple.
But Daredevil beating people bloody within an inch of their life is fine.

I just meant it be a solution if you wanted to keep the Maleev concept as intact as possible.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

80's style!

 

[Mike Murdock]

Yeah, that's fine. I was just talking about combining the costumes in a way that didn't involve pasties.

ETA: This is in response to the bottom of page one.

 

[Loki882]

Every single MCU male hero has gone shirtless and we will never have that much from a woman hero because god forbid nipples!
So why the heck must we insist on covering them up all the time.
Feminism ruins everything.
So what if she is sexualized, it's a trap for the sort of man who would look to exploit her.
It takes our base male urges, which do render us easily manipulated despite ourselves, puts us in a false position of power where we feel perhaps she's exposed herself to us and is vunerable, and all a sudden not only is are our loins on fire but so is the rest of our body, and she's cackling, maybe even crying, as we die.

It's a ****ing tool man, and yes, for once, for the male viewer it is an added bonus albeit maybe a warning.

Male characters going shirtless in one or two scenes vs. the standard outfit/costume of a female one being overtly sexualized. Nice try, but those are not even remotely the same thing. Maybe once Thor, or IM, or Cap's actual COSTUME involves going around shirtless, or they're that way for significant portion of the movie, then maybe you'll actually have a case. Until then, you don't.

I don't buy that excuse, and that's what it is, an excuse. It seems like every time some people bring up how ridiculously oversexualized female characters tend to be, the excuse is always "well it fits their personality." It's funny how FEMALE characters seem to have "personalities" that involved overt sexuality at a FAR higher rate than male ones. Maybe it's because the actual reasons for the costume is that comic book artists wanted to draw cheap fanservice and needed to come up with an excuse/justification for it, no matter how lame/unconvincing that may be.

And spare us the anti-feminist nonsense, it's barely worth responding to.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Ah internet. Is there ever a time when you aren't enraged?

 

[Mike Murdock]

God forbid a child sees a nipple.
But Daredevil beating people bloody within an inch of their life is fine.

I just meant it be a solution if you wanted to keep the Maleev concept as intact as possible.

I have no problem with nudity (although I suspect Marvel does), but it has to be handled in a way that isn't simply objectivization. Although, admittedly, Typhoid Mary deliberately straddles that line anyway, but it still strikes me as going a bit too far.

 

[cryptic name]

A slightly modified version of that Maleev design would be really cool to see in live action. The punk sort of vibe with the leather and fishnets makes the makeup pop in a cool way. Really, I'd like to see that whole scene posted on the last page adapted for the show, really cool.

 

[Gr0oT]

Male characters going shirtless in one or two scenes vs. the standard outfit/costume of a female one being overtly sexualized. Nice try, but those are not even remotely the same thing. Maybe once Thor, or IM, or Cap's actual COSTUME involves going around shirtless, or they're that way for significant portion of the movie, then maybe you'll actually have a case. Until then, you don't.

The musculature of the heroes is often part of the costume and the shape of our bodies being emphasized is sexual in a way.
And if it's just one or two shirtless scenes for men where are my one or two shirtless scenes for women?

I don't buy that excuse, and that's what it is, an excuse. It seems like every time some people bring up how ridiculously oversexualized female characters tend to be, the excuse is always "well it fits their personality." It's funny how FEMALE characters seem to have "personalities" that involved overt sexuality at a FAR higher rate than male ones. Maybe it's because the actual reasons for the costume is that comic book artists wanted to draw cheap fanservice and needed to come up with an excuse/justification for it, no matter how lame/unconvincing that may be.

In this case it does fit the characters personality, and if you weren't so busy being the progressive social justice warrior you seem to be and read the thread you'd see that the female creator crafted Mary in such a way intentionally.

So far as women being far more sexualized I find it funny that in real life real women are also more proned than men to be highly sexualized.
Life imitating art?
Plus the women who usually make a big deal out of such fashions are usually best off covered up anyway.

And spare us the anti-feminist nonsense, it's barely worth responding to.

Why?
It's usually feminist who fly into a rage over the most mundane of things and try to force their views into everything.
Of course I'll be labeled a misogynist for disagreeing with a feminist because this is all hateful patriarchy trying to keep women naked and in the kitchen making me sandwiches.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I wouldn't say you're gonna get labelled a misogynist for disagreeing with a feminist. You'll get labelled a misogynist because, if Misogynist Bingo was a game, false equivalency between objectification of men and objectification of women, complaints about social justice warriors, "women like it really" and a little dose of body-shaming on top would likely be enough to have me shouting "BINGO!"

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

I wouldn't say you're gonna get labelled a misogynist for disagreeing with a feminist. You'll get labelled a misogynist because, if Misogynist Bingo was a game, false equivalency between objectification of men and objectification of women, complaints about social justice warriors, "women like it really" and a little dose of body-shaming on top would likely be enough to have me shouting "BINGO!"

You really think misogyny is a game? Why don't you try to see it from a woman's perspective from time to time? I'm sure they don't think it's quite that fun.

[BLACKOUT]obligatory overly defensive comment[/BLACKOUT]

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Great, now I want a sandwich.

 

[Gr0oT]

I wouldn't say you're gonna get labelled a misogynist for disagreeing with a feminist. You'll get labelled a misogynist because, if Misogynist Bingo was a game, false equivalency between objectification of men and objectification of women, complaints about social justice warriors, "women like it really" and a little dose of body-shaming on top would likely be enough to have me shouting "BINGO!"

You're claiming false equivalency why?
Because to objectify a man is fine or you just going to say shirtless men are just male power fantasies?
I love this world I live in where women are never sexist and only whites can be racist...

SJW isn't a pejorative term when I use it, rather a proud appellation for the conscience of the Internet!

Women really like it?
Like what?
Objectification?
Didn't say anything about women liking anything, just pointed out by and large it is women that do dress in provocative ways, that being said in response to the disproportionate amount of sexy female costumes.

Wasn't body shaming, just making a facetious observation about how a lot of the women who criticize titillating fashion aren't the most alluring people.

mi- sog- y- nist
[mi- soj- uh-nist, mahy‐]
1.
noun
a person who hates, dislikes, mistrusts, or mistreats
women.

Still think this is not an appropriate label for me and half the time I see it used it seems dramatically out of place.

 

[Keyser Soze]

There's a lot been written about the whole idea of why male superheroes in revealing costumes is a totally different dynamic than female superheroes in revealing costumes, and by people much more eloquent and informed than I. But basically speaking, our society places very different dynamics on a man with his shirt off than a woman with his shirt off. Though much is made of "Ooooh eye candy for the girls," a shirtless man in a superhero movie is largely intended for the male view. It's an idealised version of ourselves, as a muscular male torso carries with it connotations of power, masculinity, strength, positive attributes we are meant to strive towards. A topless woman, however, is not in our society typically geared for the female gaze, but rather is meant also for the male gaze, and carries with it connotations of sexual availability, vulnerability, subjugation. When applied to a superhero context, male superheroes' skintight costumes have practical origins from the circus strongmen of the era many were originally created, or in how they allowed for quicker drawing for artists who didn't have to worry about extensive fabric folds. There are no practical origins for boob windows. I'm sure someone can explain it better than I can or link to one of the numerous articles written on the subject.

I'm not saying you are a misogynist, GrooT. I'm just saying that you're falling into a lot of misogynistic traps in your arguments.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Engaging with an SJW in the first place is the biggest trap of all.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I don't really see SJW as an insult, so whatever on that front. I just find it interesting that we've spent the majority of a 2-page thread talking about how essential Typhoid Mary getting her **** out will be to our enjoyment of the character once she makes it to the screen. And how apparently "I'd like the exact same costume but with a white shirt underneath" leads to "feminism ruins everything!"

 

[Whiskey Tango]

I don't really see SJW as an insult

It wasn't directed at you or anyone else in particular so yay.

I just find it interesting that we've spent the majority of a 2-page thread talking about how essential Typhoid Mary getting her **** out will be to our enjoyment of the character once she makes it to the screen. And how apparently "I'd like the exact same costume but with a white shirt underneath" leads to "feminism ruins everything!"

So change the subject. Let's have more discussion about the character and less about how some guy liking boobs makes him a terrible person. That conversation should be in community or politics, not the Daredevil section.

 

[Keyser Soze]

So change the subject. Let's have more discussion about the character and less about how some guy liking boobs makes him a terrible person. That conversation should be in community or politics, not the Daredevil section.

I don't think liking boobs makes you a terrible person. I love boobs. If Gr0ot was being challenged by Loki882 or myself, it wasn't for suggesting that he liked that Maleev character design - that prompted conversations about the uncomfortable line the character straddles, and ways to adapt that look for screen - but rather it was him raging against feminists and suggesting a Typhoid Mary without her baps out is the feminist agenda ruining everything. And it's weird you were fine with that ranting, but the second someone responds with an "Actually I disagree..." it's, "UGH sick of the OUTRAGE!"

 

[Keyser Soze]

But on the topic of Typhoid Mary, this may be a controversial opinion, but I actually like her more than Elektra. Maybe it's a generational thing, as when I first got into reading comics Typhoid Mary was quite a new and "in vogue" character and so I remember her being a villain in some of the earliest American Marvel comics I read. But I always thought she was cool: I love the striking visuals with the half-white face, she had cool powers and a persona that straddled the line between sympathetic and scary. And I remember getting a burst of nostalgia back when she resurfaced in the Bendis run and picking up that issue, even though I wasn't reading Daredevil regularly back then. It's a shame she hasn't been so popular in recent years.

I think she's actually due a big revival. I'd love to see a current comic writer do a big story to really re-establish her as an A-list threat to Daredevil and Matt Murdock. Her fractured identity and her personal connection to Matt is a really interesting dynamic I'd love to see creators with the nuance of today's comic market tackle. Now that Waid and Samnee's run is nearing its end I can't help but view the lack of a Typhoid Mary storyline as one of the biggest missed opportunities of their tenure.

Do I want to see Typhoid Mary in the TV series? Absolutely. Though given the nature of the character, and how she was designed as a follow-up to Elektra in certain ways, unless they reworked the character for television I don't see her being likely to show up for at least the first couple of seasons. Which is a shame.

 

[Gr0oT]

Fair enough Keyser.
Still the aerodynamic/practical origin of suits can still be applicable for lady suits, sans the boob window of course.

The male gaze thing still feels subjective to me and I'm sure some women feel empowered when garbed in a sexy manner, what with the way we get dazed by feminine wiles and just the fact of having a body they feel proud to display.

Boob windows, bulging biceps, it's all the same.

So far as Typhoid is concerned I was kidding about full frontals but maintain that the costume should be darkly sexualized but ultimately those who seek to benefit from this lost soul will get burnt.

 

[Mike Murdock]

I agree with that point about it being "darkly sexualized." As I said, Typhoid is about sex and violence. I'm just saying if you have to be careful with movement or camera angles to avoid overt nudity, scaling it down wouldn't hurt. Particularly since she had a legitimate shirt the first time she was encountered and it didn't prevent the same dynamics.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I agree with that point about it being "darkly sexualized." As I said, Typhoid is about sex and violence. I'm just saying if you have to be careful with movement or camera angles to avoid overt nudity, scaling it down wouldn't hurt. Particularly since she had a legitimate shirt the first time she was encountered and it didn't prevent the same dynamics.

This is a good point. A character can project sexual energy without nudity being required. You could put Typhoid Mary in a suit and tie and, if the actress pulled it off, she could still be sexy as hell.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

And it's weird you were fine with that ranting

Why, because I didn't join in on the dogpile? You complained about the thread derail, I suggested taking it back to topic. Simple as that.

"UGH sick of the OUTRAGE!"

I really thought you were better than to just outright make **** up, but I can see I was mistaken.

 

[Loki882]

I don't have a problem with boobs, or nudity in principal. I'm fine with scantily-clad women (and men for that matter) in the right context. What I take issue with is the double-standard. The fact that the sexualization is SO MUCH more prevalent when it comes to female characters. And the fact that many writers and artists go-to option for depicting the "insanity" of female characters is to have them wear very-little clothing and empathize their sexuality to an absurd degree. You don't see that nearly as much with insane MALE characters. Do writers show Joker's insanity by having him wear nothing but a speedo and be all about sex, no. Do they show Carnage's insanity by having him wear a thong and flirt with people all the time, no. Do they show Maximus the Mad's, well madness, by having him wear very little clothing and be all about sex, no. I could go on and on listing examples of the double-standard, but we'd be here all night. So yes, I stand by my comments and if that makes me a SJW, well then I'll gladly take that as a compliment.

And no, having problems with this trend DOES NOT mean that you have a problem with the female form, or sexuality in general. Anyone who would argue that it does with a straight face only undermines their own credibility. They don't have an actual LEGITIMATE argument/defense, so they have to resort to gross generalization to try and insinuate that there's something wrong with people who have a different perspective on things. It's actually rather sad and pitiful really.

 

[The Overlord]

But on the topic of Typhoid Mary, this may be a controversial opinion, but I actually like her more than Elektra. Maybe it's a generational thing, as when I first got into reading comics Typhoid Mary was quite a new and "in vogue" character and so I remember her being a villain in some of the earliest American Marvel comics I read. But I always thought she was cool: I love the striking visuals with the half-white face, she had cool powers and a persona that straddled the line between sympathetic and scary. And I remember getting a burst of nostalgia back when she resurfaced in the Bendis run and picking up that issue, even though I wasn't reading Daredevil regularly back then. It's a shame she hasn't been so popular in recent years.

I think she's actually due a big revival. I'd love to see a current comic writer do a big story to really re-establish her as an A-list threat to Daredevil and Matt Murdock. Her fractured identity and her personal connection to Matt is a really interesting dynamic I'd love to see creators with the nuance of today's comic market tackle. Now that Waid and Samnee's run is nearing its end I can't help but view the lack of a Typhoid Mary storyline as one of the biggest missed opportunities of their tenure.

Do I want to see Typhoid Mary in the TV series? Absolutely. Though given the nature of the character, and how she was designed as a follow-up to Elektra in certain ways, unless they reworked the character for television I don't see her being likely to show up for at least the first couple of seasons. Which is a shame.

I think Typhoid Mary is more compelling then Elektra. Frankly Elektra doesn't have a good reason for what she is doing beyond greed, Mary at least has mental issues that mitigate her actions. Elektra has murdered at least one innocent person for cash, why do super heroes tolerate her? She should be in prison.

I agree with Frank Miller on her, Elektra should have stayed dead. Elektra murdered Urich's contact and tried to murder him and for what, just some more money? Elektra's death was her redemption, her last act was to spare Foggy and then she was killed by Bullseye. She did the right thing in the end, but karma still got her. Now that she is back, that redemption is nullified, she received no real punishment for murdering an innocent man. Heck Miller tried to make her mentally ill in the Man Without Fear mini.

I find Typhoid Mary more compelling, because the Mary Walker character is more compelling then Elektra is, she seems more innocent, more sympathetic and more a victim of circumstances then Elektra is. Elektra had a character arc that ended with her death, bringing her back ruined that.

 

[Mike Murdock]

Frank Miller may be right that Elektra should have stayed dead, but it's also kinda his fault she's not