firehose

bitchiel:

justaddtommy:

i think we’re out of ink

have you tried turning it on and off again

Mature is ‘and then they made love.’ Explicit is ‘and here’s how they did it exactly.’

To wit: mature.

He looked at the envelope, spread out before him.

God, he’d never been this hungry.

Could he be gentle enough? Slow enough? He didn’t want to damage it, didn’t want to do anything he’d regret… but no, no, it seemed the envelope wanted this as much as he did. It slipped into his hands, it folded as he asked. When it was time for more, the card was waiting, and he somehow knew exactly what to do. He moved with his correspondence in a dance as old as the mail system, and when it was over, he was smiling and the envelope was completely, thoroughly sealed.

Explicit:

The envelope waved its flap in the air slowly, gently, and he could see the faint shimmer of the adhesive traced along its fold. It was like a taunt, a dare: won’t you? And he would, oh, God, he would, lifting the envelope firmly to his lips, licking slowly at first, then faster, more firmly, tasting the envelope’s essence, the faint bitterness, the sweetness to follow—

Oh, he couldn’t help but smile at how it felt in his hands. It was so perfectly folded. Its paper was rough against his fingers, and its crossed folds shifted slightly as it opened for his eager tongue. Yes, yes…

Now the card, and his hand trembled as he lifted it, as he held the envelope, stretching it wide. Would it fit? Oh… oh, yes, it would fit, it slid in smooth and quick and filled the envelope to bursting, oh, made for each other, and he smiled in delight at how perfect it was.

He was ready. Now, now, now: with one swift movement he folded the flap over and he pressed, yes, he pressed the flap down and it stuck, God, it stuck perfectly, and he closed his eyes in bliss.

Afterwards, he stroked the envelope, and thought about addresses.

McQuilliams had lived up north — court records and his Facebook page say Wichita, Kansas — but left because he felt his contributions were not appreciated by his employer there, said Katie Matlack, who lived four doors down from McQuilliams in a small apartment complex near Barton Springs. “I’m not surprised at all” in McQuilliams’ involvement in the shooting, said Charles Witt, who lives in a nearby condominium complex. “When I heard the SWAT team was next door I said ‘Wow, I bet this is the bicycle guy.’” McQuilliams, 49, was a Renaissance Fair enthusiast and martial artist, Matlack said. He took care of neighbors’ pets when they were away. Matlack said she saw him every couple of days while walking her dog. McQuilliams loved “Barking Springs,” the spillway end of Barton Springs where many owners take their dogs to roam off leash, and where many of Austin’s free spirits go to hang out. He would help clean up the hike-and-bike trail when heavy rains washed through it. He felt at home in drum circles. He was also cynical about government, according to Matlack and his Facebook page. He was incarcerated in Texarkana, and his time behind bars — police have not released details of it, and online records are incomplete — meant a series of failed background checks that led, in the end, to a nearby car wash being the only place that would hire him, Matlack said. She said she thinks he lived off savings he brought with him. The frustration seemed to wear on him, Matlack said, though he did not strike her as significantly unbalanced, or willing to shoot off more than 100 rounds downtown. She had not seen firearms in his apartment, only a few of the medieval weapons that seemed consistent with a RenFair buff.

darrynek:

because he’s the hero gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now

purenonsens:

Breaking

Courtney shared this story from Super Opinionated.

---

bethama:

So not to enable people or anything, but Gail Simone’s entire run on Red Sonja is currently 0.99 an issue on Comixology.

And the first volume of Kelly Sue DeConnick’s Captain Marvel is 3.99.

And Bendis’ Ultimate Collection for Daredevil is on sale for 9.99 even.

And basically EVERY ISSUE OF BATMAN EVER is 0.99 each.

…why yes, I did just discover Comixology and it is ruining my life, thank you. Thank you.

I am buyin’ stuff!

Double digits, Nintendo DS! Little two-screened wonder, the machine that rose Nintendo to the heavens rather than the depths of hell, you turned 10-years-old earlier this month. How far you've taken us, Nintendo DS! As the GameCube floundered back in...

A Highland Coo and her calf wandering down an empty road, Argyll and the Isles, Scotland. Credit: Andy Maclachlan.

malformalady:

Ice washed onto the black sand beach of lake Jökulsárlón, Iceland.

Photo credit: Konstantin Khrapko

Domenicus van Wijnen, Temptation of St. Anthony, 17th century

Nintendo’s been stubborn about bringing at least some of its back catalog to 3rd party devices, but a recent filing with the US Patent and Trademark Office suggests they may be considering it as a possibility.

There’s a good chance you already have some Nintendo emulators on your phone anyway, especially if you own a device that doesn’t crack down on them the way Apple does, but some official apps from Nintendo would be exciting to say the least. A patent published yesterday titled “Hand-held video game platform emulation” suggests Nintendo may be at least considering bringing official Game Boy, Game Boy Color, and Game Boy Advance emulators to smartphones and other random places like the screens on airline seats.

It’s important to note that Nintendo already held similar patents and could just be refreshing them to cover themselves against 3rd party emulators, but the company has been dipping its toes in the mobile market with spin-off apps recently. With added pressure from investors amid poor Wii U performance, this may be an indication that putting old mobile games on new mobile devices is a move they’re at least considering.

Who wouldn’t buy an old Pokémon game for an official emulator on a new device? It’d be an easy way for Nintendo to cash in on its software back catalog without devaluing its struggling modern hardware—especially since phone emulating is something people already do, so Nintendo might as well at least make some money off of it.

(via TechCrunch)

Previously in Game Boy

• Today’s kids could use a crash course in Game Boy anyway
• Some awesome facts about the original Game Boy you may not have known
• This chiptune album was recorded on two modded Game Boys

Are you following The Mary Sue on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, & Google +?

Shinesty has released a line of three incredible suits inspired by ugly Christmas sweaters. The three designs are The Ugly Christmas Sweater Suit, the Holiday Tree Suit, and The Rudolph.

Do you remember all those Christmas parties you went to last year dressed in your mom’s baggy vintage 88′ Christmas sweater complete with shoulder pads and shedding small trinkets from holidays past with each step you took? Do you remember going home to your sad, cold bed a little tipsy and utterly alone? Thought so. But what is there to do? You don’t want to be the stiff who shows up dressed all “normal and boring” to a holiday party. Well luckily for you, daddy (that’s us) went up North and got some of Ole man Nick’s hobbit friends to whip up something a bit more… dapper. You’re welcome. And no we don’t want milk and cookies, just give name your first born in our honor.

Thanks, Shelby Denike!

“Happy Birthday to My Loose Acquaintance” is a song by the musical comedy duo Garfunkel and Oates (previously) about leaving birthday messages on the Facebook walls of casual relationships. The duo has their own self-titled television show on IFC.

via Tastefully Offensive

Have we mapped the whole planet? There are mysterious, poorly charted places everywhere, but not for the reasons you might think.

At the beginning of The Imitation Game we are told explicitly that we’re watching a story based on real events. At the end, in case you somehow forgot, they stamp the truth label on the film once again with an epilogue about the legacy of Alan Turing, played in the film by Benedict Cumberbatch. Truth is, if you somehow made it into the theater without knowing this was based on real events (considering the trailers and posters) it would still be abundantly clear that you are watching a true story. The biopic banner covers every inch of this film, ultimately to the point that the film is more concerned with the prestige that comes with the true story/biopic genre than it is with telling a compelling story of Alan Turing’s accomplishments and his tragic downfall.

The story of how the Enigma Code Machine used by the Nazis during World War II was cracked is certainly a fascinating story that frames scientists and mathematicians as heroes of war and pioneers of modern technology – a story which should be told. But in the filmmakers’ attempt to make Turing the real hero of this story, they make his accomplishments less important than his personal problems. To do this, the brilliance Turing contributed to the world, which was lost too soon, is never given the attention it deserves. Likewise, because the filmmakers don’t have a clear understanding of how to convey Turing’s brilliance on screen; they simply make his team of scientists into useless men who are almost seen as morons by director Morten Tyldum and writer Graham Moore, rather than brilliant men in their own right who just don’t see the world in the same way as Turing. Likewise, there is no mention of the Polish machine Turing based his code breaking machine on, or the years of work they contributed, making this English production ring of nationalist misrepresentation.

The film tells essentially three chronological stories cut together about Turing’s life: a childhood story of him discovering his sexuality, the war story, and his arrest for indecency as a homosexual in 1953. The main plot of the story, however, is the war; his troublesome relationship with his team of fellow scientists and mathematicians, tension with his commanding officer, and his one and only friend Jane (Keira Knightley), the sole female member of the team. The arrest is used as primarily a framing device to allow for narration and, ultimately, the tragic ending of Turing’s life. The childhood story, despite being very sweet and sad, doesn’t fit into the rest of the film at all; it’s message would have been better conveyed in a monologue by the adult Turing, explaining how those events informed his adulthood. The way the flashbacks are handled in the film holds the audience at emotional arm’s length, and makes the film seem packed. It’s the one film this year which probably should have been longer than two hours.

In fact, watching the film, I kept thinking how much better than movie would have been as a mini-series, and how much the film felt much more like a high-quality BBC production. A rich, well-crafted TV production – but not exactly cinematic. The movie is the definition of over-scored, simply having too much music in it to have any impact; especially when Tyldum and composer Alexandre Desplat have music alluding to big moments before they happen. The movie also feels edited for TV, particularly in the out-of-place and out-of-character lines of dialogue seem inserted into the script simply to create trailer moments. The dialogue really is laughably bad at times, to the point that even great actors just can’t save it.

I’m about to make enemies here, but I have to say this about Benedict Cumberbatch’s award-winning performance: I didn’t like the choices he made in this film. I really like Cumberbatch as an actor (especially his voice); his performances in 12 Years a Slave, Hawking and Sherlock are just fantastic, and I couldn’t take my eyes off him in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. But Cumberbatch can go overboard with his signature ticks to the point of distraction, something he’s guilty of in The Imitation Game, which ultimately makes the performance seem manufactured. I would have preferred if Cumberbatch had been a bit more restrained in the way he reacted to events in the movie, so that when Turing experiences tragic events in his life (which require a truly big emotional reaction), it would have been noticeably bigger than his behavior throughout the rest of the film. Despite being told over and over again in the film that Turing is reserved and awkward to the point of alienating people, Cumberbatch plays him as a man who is unusually sensitive, as if constantly on the verge of tears. I couldn’t help but feel watching this that another actor would have been a better choice for the role - like Matthew Goode.

Instead, Matthew Good plays Hugh Alexander, a man who in English history was considered equal but different from Turing in terms of intelligence (something left out of the film in order to make him nothing more than a playboy). As an actor, I’ve come to like Matthew Goode a lot, and would have rather seen Cumberbatch and Goode switch roles. The would have let Cumberbatch’s reserved qualities play into Alexander’s charms, while still allowing him to appear a bit more intelligent – a quality Cumberbatch does consistently bring to roles – while letting that weirdness we saw in Stoker from Goode inform Turing. As for his role here, Goode (and all the supporting actors) are fine, but given almost nothing to do except react to Cumberbatch in disgust or awe. The entire supporting cast feels wasted, as they are used simply in service to Cumberbatch, rather than to the story. In fact the only actors given some meat to chew on here Rory Kinnear, as the detective in 1953, and Keira Knightly as Joan Clarke.

Keira Knightly is an actress who is rather fascinating to me because I almost exclusively like her in period films, while feeling she is often out of place in her own time. But, I do really like here, and that spunky quality which made audiences fall in love with her in Bend it Like Beckham and Pirates of the Caribbean is back on display in The Imitation Game. In fact, I think this might be my favorite performance from Knightly since Pride and Prejudice. It may have been better for the filmmakers to focus on Keira Knightly’s character and her struggles with Turing for at least for a fresh perspective on this story, and to justify the amount of screen time and character development she is given compared to the other members of the team.

And that, really, is what is lacking from this movie: a strong structure. The Imitation Game can’t decide the story it’s telling. Is this a procedural about decoding the Enigma? Or is it a character study about the man who happened to do this? Is the film a tragedy about being arrested for indecency because homosexuals were treated so abhorrently? Or because this specific man of brilliance was treated that way? Is he the story, or the case study? For the first half of the film, the movie feels very much like a procedural, until halfway through the focus abruptly shifts to being about his sexuality. The shift in perspective doesn’t work because the screenplay hasn’t weaved in anything about Turing’s sexuality earlier in the film.

In fact, the way in which Turing’s sexuality is portrayed in the film is problematic. I agree with the filmmakers that showing an explicit sex scene was not necessary in conveying his sexuality, but we never see any indication that Turing has a sexual or romantic life in any way. Apparently the script originally whitewashed Turing’s sexuality, suggesting a romance with Joan. Thankfully, that’s been removed; but in its absence, Cumberbatch plays turing as though he is asexual. Because we see nothing of Turing’s life between his government service and his arrest, we don’t know how this arrest and punishment really affected him. Was this a case of the last nail in the coffin of an already troubled life? Or was he at the very top when he was brought down by the authorities?

The Imitation Game won the Audience Award at the Toronto International Film Festival this year, and I have no doubt it will receive many Oscar Nominations. While I don’t hate this movie, the flaws strike me as so large it feels like a case of the Emperor’s New Clothing. The movie feels calculated to win awards, rather than to be a story to which the filmmakers have a personal connection. In this movie about mathematicians, The Imitation Game is the definition of by-the-numbers Oscar bait.

Lesley Coffin is a New York transplant from the midwest. She is the New York-based writer/podcast editor for Filmoria and film contributor at The Interrobang. When not doing that, she’s writing books on classic Hollywood, including Lew Ayres: Hollywood’s Conscientious Objector and her new book Hitchcock’s Stars: Alfred Hitchcock and the Hollywood Studio System.

Are you following The Mary Sue on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, & Google +?

On November 16, Observer columnist Rachel Cooke took the second series of BBC’s The Fall to task over her belief that the show was little more than a fetishization of violence against women. She noted the camera tends to linger for too long on star Gillian Anderson’s body in scenes where the show’s central figure (a hard-nosed female detective in a very male-dominated sphere) is just, say, having a shower or catching a work nap. And that the lead villain, played by Jamie Dornan, is a little too handsome, charming and good with children — leaving the show’s audience confused. How can they hate him, even when he’s brutally strangling women? Her argument is that critics overlook the show’s sexist overtones because it has great writing, acting and cinematography — but that, ultimately, the show is a celebration of the exploitation, rape and murder of women.

Allow me to disagree.

The show is absolutely attempting a 50 Shades of Grey aspect with Dornan’s character, Paul Spector, which could be misconstrued as condoning or glorifying his actions. After all, when he’s not stalking and murdering women, he does seem like a fairly nice guy. He’s a loving father and husband, works as a bereavement counselor, and even (confusingly) defends a woman whose husband appears to be abusing her. But it’s a mistake to argue that we’re meant to like him because of this, or excuse his murders because — gosh darnit — he sure is good with his kids. Instead, it seems all the more sinister that he can carry on a normal life while harboring his abhorrent compulsion. Rather than excusing his behavior, I feel that the show forces us to wonder how many seemingly normal people walk around with dark secrets. And Dornan’s attractiveness feeds into that — how could this guy (played by a former underwear model) really be evil?

As for the focus on Gillian Anderson’s sexuality, the show presents us with a much more complicated set of circumstances than Cooke gives it credit for. In the first season, Anderson’s character, Stella Gibson, sleeps with a police officer that she picks up at a crime scene, and it’s only after that officer is killed in the line of duty that she discovers he’s married with children. Gibson, who hardly knew his name, let alone the fact that he was married, is then censured and questioned by her boss about the inappropriate relationship and blamed for the distress that her one night stand has caused his already grieving wife. In something of a soap opera moment, she reminds said boss that he too slept with her while he was married — and wonders, to the audience more than to him, why it seems like she is forced to shoulder the responsibility for men’s infidelity. The second season continues that storyline, in which Gibson is publicly outed as a home-wrecker in the press and is forced to dress primly and lie low to avoid further embarrassment. Is this a simple exploitation of a female character, or is it a nuanced and progressive look at the way we still view women and sexuality?

Meanwhile, most of the killer’s victims are women that he finds in bars or on dating websites — women who all fit particular aesthetic (dark hair, pale skin, big eyes), but particularly those he seems to view as “fallen” or ruined. And indeed, the focus of the murder and the rituals he performs afterwards seem to be an attempt to purify his victims in death. It’s a pattern that Anderson’s character recognizes. In order to make sure that the media continues to view the victims as victims — rather than women who were “asking for it” — she asks that the other officers working the case not release information about the women’s sex lives to the press.

This is perhaps the show’s central theme: women comfortable with their sexuality are demonized even while men are committing far more egregious (and literal) crimes. The show asks us to question why a single woman sleeping with a man she doesn’t know is somehow on par with murder.

These are not moments that a misogynist show would delve into — and it’s at this point where I wonder if Cooke is mistaking the show’s exploration of sexism for sexism in and of itself. Because that is the real purpose of the show, from my perspective — it is an examination of the way we view certain victims as less innocent than others. That we are often willing to excuse the behavior of attractive or seemingly nice men, but we won’t extend that courtesy to attractive or seemingly nice women — particularly if they enjoy sex. To dismiss these moments of real introspection and investigation into our attitudes about women because Jamie Dornan’s got a nice ass or because Gillian Anderson wears a silk nightie is to misunderstand the show entirely.

So no, The Fall is not misogynist. But I dare say that Cooke’s article may have been.

Sarah Arboleda lives with a human and two cats in British Columbia, Canada and writes for a number of blogs including her own — the pop culture-based Tea Leaves and Dog Ears. If you’d like to yell at her, feel free to do so over Twitter.

Are you following The Mary Sue on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, & Google +?

Ray Rice's wife sat down with ESPN to detail the domestic abuse scandal from her own perspective.

For the first time since the domestic violence incident between her and her husband broke, Janay Rice provided her own in-depth account of the incident and the resulting scandal. Shortly after Ray Rice was reinstated by the NFL on Friday, ESPN released a one-on-one interview with Janay, in which she describes her husband as a loving partner who let alcohol and anger lead to a regrettable mistake -- a mistake that she still believes herself to be at least in part responsible.

"I still find it hard to accept being called a 'victim.' I know there are so many different opinions out there about me -- that I'm weak, that I'm making excuses and covering up abuse -- and that some people question my motives for staying with Ray."

In the interview, which was conducted by Jamele Hill, Janay details the events leading up to the infamous elevator assault in Atlantic City, stating that she and her then-fiance became drunk and annoyed with one another while partying with two other couples at a casino. Her memory of the incident itself is "foggy" -- she remembers going into the elevator and then coming to in the casino lobby surrounded by police.

"At first, I was very angry, and I didn't know what to say," claimed Janay, who said she questioned her husband after the pair were arrested. "This came out of nowhere. Nothing like this had ever happened before. I knew it wasn't him.

"I know some people disagreed with me publicly apologizing," Janay said of the May 23 press conference, the couple's first public comments since the incident. "I'm not saying that what Ray did wasn't wrong. He and I both know it was wrong. It's been made clear to him that it was wrong. But at the same time, who am I to put my hands on somebody? I had already apologized to Ray, and I felt that I should take responsibility for what I did. Even though this followed the Ravens' suggested script, I owned my words."

Janay also spoke about the Ravens' release of Ray, which she said caught her off guard.

"I was extremely surprised and angry that the Ravens released him, because they know him. They were our family, but I felt like the Ravens completely disregarded the past six years with him. Anytime the Ravens needed someone for a community event, Ray was their man. It seemed like a knee-jerk reaction for publicity reasons."

Her description of Roger Goodell paints a flattering picture of a commissioner concerned with the couple's well-being during a June meeting.

"Mr. Goodell seemed to be a really reasonable and caring guy and wanted to make sure other people would learn from our mistake. He wanted to confirm that alcohol was a factor. He actually seemed to care about the facts and wanted to make sure that we would help other people learn from this experience."

However, Janay's assertion that her husband came clean to Goodell during that meeting contradicts the commissioner's longstanding stance that Ray was not truthful about the incident, the foundation for the league's decision to increase the initial two-game suspension.

"Ray told the commissioner, and his colleagues, everything that happened. There was no reason to lie because we knew that there was a video and we assumed the NFL knew what was in it, even though we didn't know whether or not they saw it."

The Spanish giants have a different crest in the United Arab Emirates, presumably to avoid turning Muslims off from supporting their club.

Real Madrid first unveiled a crest with a cross on top of a crown in 1920, and have displayed a similar crest uninterrupted since 1941. The crest doesn't have a cross because the club has any particular religious affiliation, but simply because that's what the royal monogram of King Alfonso XIII (and many others) looked like.

But this is not 1920, and Real Madrid's reach has expanded far beyond Spain. They're signing extremely lucrative sponsorship deals in the Middle East, and one such deal in Abu Dhabi has caused them to adopt an alternative version of the crest without the cross. It should be noted that Madrid haven't changed their crest, they just use a different one in countries where it doesn't make business sense to have an affiliation with Christianity, or display any Christian imagery as part of their crest at all.

Madrid have been a soulless corporate entity concerned with winning at all costs since ... well, forever, basically, but this seems to be a tipping point for some people, and a sign that the sport has now truly gone mad.

That RT re: Real Madrid might be the most soulless thing I've seen in world football. And this business is mad soulless. Like a TSwift show.

— Shawn Francis (@TheOffsideRules) November 29, 2014

@GrayConnolly @montie The lows that a football club will stoop too, for the almighty Arabian dollar. How soulless Real Madrid are.

— Elizabeth R (@elizabethrosie) November 27, 2014

Clear where power lies in modern football if Real Madrid have changed their logo to accommodate a sponsor. #rmcf http://t.co/uk3YrDAyJw

— Simon Ward (@siwardsport) November 28, 2014

Against Modern Football. #sellouts #MadridCabron http://t.co/XclyQPVS3d

— Chris Vereijken (@ChrisVereijken) November 28, 2014

Real Madrid removes Christian cross from its crest just for business. This is modern football. pic.twitter.com/kqmPL4mCXJ

— Lawrence S. (@lawrencesiloni) November 27, 2014

Madrid remove cross from crest to appease Abu Dhabi bank http://t.co/VvmBRolQRs pic.twitter.com/tJU3tRYEQV" WHATS WRONG WITH MODERN FOOTBALL

— seamus lalor™ (@topmanlalor) November 26, 2014

Alfonso XIII is rolling over in his grave, we're sure.

This is unintentional perfection. We'll let you decide if these Virginia Tech fans embodied the spirit of the Hokies Respect program. Okay fine, we'll give them a pass since this was against Virginia.

HOKIES RESPECT is a sportsmanship awareness program designed to promote first-class fan conduct at Virginia Tech sporting events. At Virginia Tech, we treasure and protect college game day.

Still HILARIOUS, though.

h/t @amblybee

A United Nations panel criticized the United States for police brutality, military interrogations and excessive use of force by law enforcement in a report released Friday. “There are numerous areas in which certain things should be changed for the United States to comply fully with the convention,” said Alessio Bruni, a member of the United Nations Committee Against Torture, referring to U.N. agreements on torture.

Traffic stops can be stress-inducing, but a new app called Driving While Black, specifically made for African Americans and other minorities, aims to make citizen resources more readily available to those who feel they are targeted by police. The Skanner reports that Portland lawyers Melvin Oden-Orr and Mariann Hyland developed the app to better educate African Americans about their rights when pulled over by police. Features include information about civil rights, materials parents can use when speaking with their children about driving, and possible traffic stop scenarios.

Truth time: Whether deep-fried, roasted, brined (dry or wet), smoked, pressure cooked, grilled, or stuffed with a chicken before being then stuffed into a duck, turkey is just not that great. Thanksgiving is really about two things: The sides and the pie.

Read more...

Next year, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice will be the first live-action film to feature Wonder Woman. Played by Gal Gadot, the Amazon superhero is set to star in her own solo movie and at least one of the upcoming Justice League films. In October, Dawn of Justice producer Charles Roven said these movies will use the new origin presented in DC Comics’ “New 52″ reboot (which began in 2011), rather than the story imagined by her original writer and creator William Moulton Marston. I think using the New 52 origin in general, much less in these films, is a mistake which diminishes the character and goes against why she was created in the first place.

Before we go any further – this is an opinion piece and I don’t expect or need everyone to agree with me. It’s also possible to enjoy a story or character and still find an aspect problematic.

Marston himself has been the subject of many discussions and writings. He was a feminist in a polyamorous relationship, a fan of bondage who wrote erotica featuring the Greek gods, whose work led to the development of the lie detector. Marston spoke openly of the potential for superhero comics to reach kids, teaching them values and opening their minds to new ideas. It got him a job as educational consultant at All-American Comics, then sister company of DC Comics (with which it later merged). He objected to the lack of superhero women in comics and pitched a patriotic character who would have “all the strength of a Superman plus all the allure of a good and beautiful woman.” This character became Diana, the Wonder Woman.

In her first appearance in 1941, it was revealed the Amazons of myth were real people who had eventually left “Man’s World” and lived on a Paradise Island under the protection of the goddesses of Olympus. There they didn’t age and lived in peace, keeping up their fighting skills while developing science and technology more advanced than the rest of Earth. Later, circumstances lead Queen Hippolyta to send a representative into “Man’s World,” one who would fight evil such as the Nazis, while also spreading Amazon ideals to women who didn’t know their own power. A contest is held and the princess Diana is chosen, as she was the best and brightest Amazon.

We were told Diana was named after her godmother, the goddess of Olympus. Months later, her origin expanded in the pages of Sensation Comics #1. Diana was the only child on Paradise Island and had been born without the need of a father. Longing for a daughter, Hippolyta sculpted one out of clay and the goddess Aphrodite gave it life. Marston gave us the Galatea myth with a superhero twist. It’s a unique origin story and so much symbolism is wrapped up in it. The Book of Genesis says Eve was created from one of Adam’s ribs, but Diana is created out of the soil and “dust of the ground” like Adam himself. She has a support network around her, a community of warriors, philosophers and scientists who love her, yet her unique birth and status always sets her slightly apart. As the first and only child born on Paradise Island, she is their avatar of the future. The Amazons develop futuristic technology, but Diana is the one person there who is growing up and changing over the years who doesn’t just want to continue her studies in isolation, but looks to the horizon instead.

Marston would later tell comic historian Coulton Waugh, “Frankly, Wonder Woman is psychological propaganda for the new type of woman who should, I believe, rule the world.” You get a sense of that in her origin, even before she starts battling misogynists, Nazis, super-villains, conquerors and gods.

Wonder Woman’s origin was tweaked a few times over the decades. To keep it contemporary, writers stopped connecting Diana to World War II (which I also think is a mistake, but that’s another discussion). She was given powers which set her further apart from other Amazons. The 1987 version of her origin, presented by Greg Potter and George Pérez, made the Amazons multi-racial and said they were women who had been unjustly killed by men, then resurrected by the goddesses of Olympus. Diana was still made of clay but now named after a USAF pilot who had died while battling evil alongside the Amazons. The insignias on this pilot’s uniform became the inspiration for Diana’s own armor. Aprhodite was now one of several gods of Olympus who granted Wonder Woman gifts and powers, while Gaea herself was the one to give the princess life.

Despite these tweaks, the basic story remained: a girl immaculately born via love and magic, raised by a group of amazing women whose society represents both the future and the past, growing up to be an intelligent, compassionate and formidable woman who is equally a warrior and a teacher. That last part is key. She likes a good fight, but for the sport and competition rather than violence and combat glory. In the crossover DC One Million, she suggested superheroes should have their own Olympics so they could learn to celebrate their powers instead of only using them for battle. How fun is that?

For years, Marston showed Diana often reaching out to her enemies, sometimes even helping to rehabilitate them. Ares/Mars, the god of war, was her natural enemy in Martson’s eyes, who wrote Diana as a woman willing to fight, but preferring peace and understanding. For years now, several creators have flipped the emphasis, basically telling us: “She wants peace, but she’ll fight you too!” That is a different idea and I think is part of what has led to this new origin. Along the same lines, there have been some who think Diana’s upbringing must make her a cultural throwback, a person so stiff and formal that she is also rather humorless. That is not at all what Marston intended and successfully delivered for years.

There have also been instances where people have taken the wrong message from major stories. In 1996, the mini-series Kingdom Come showed a future where some superheroes lost their way, including Superman and Wonder Woman. This older, alternate universe version of Diana was colder, more a warrior, bringing a sword into battle because she believed some villains were simply monsters to be stopped. The story’s end showed her realizing this was a mistake, that she had lost touch with her principles, but some fans and creators seemed to ignore this and instead concluded yes, Wonder Woman should always act the way she did in Kingdom Come, she should always carry a sword and wear battle armor.

Let’s be clear, I’m not against Wonder Woman ever having a sword or armor. I think that can be very cool, just as it’s very cool when Batman sometimes gets to have a sword fight. But I think those elements should be used to emphasize that certain battles are more serious than others, or more epic. If Diana is always walking around with a sword, it becomes less special. Not only is she powerful enough to not need it most of the time, but there’s an added problem when several artists draw her carrying a sword but without a scabbard. It visually signals that she’s itching for a fight, looking for an excuse to shed blood. Even Wolverine doesn’t walk around with his claws out all the time.

In a 2005 story leading up to the crossover Infinite Crisis, Diana used lethal methods on a human villain named Maxwell Lord when she believed it was the only way to end a threat. Lord was physically restrained at the time with Wonder Woman’s lasso of truth and told her in no uncertain terms he’d have to be killed to resolve the dire situation. This led to conflict with Superman and Batman.

The Wonder Woman creative team wanted to emphasize that Batman was not furious at Diana but rather saddened that if someone as good and noble as she could corrupt their principles concerning the sanctity of life, then perhaps there was no hope for places like Gotham City. But this was outvoted by the higher ups and instead Batman was flat out angry that Diana took a human life, an act for which he would listen to no justification (which is out of character with how he has treated cops, military personnel and certain other heroes in the past). Likewise, when the Wonder Woman creative team brought up that Superman had killed three super-powered terrorists once because he’d seen no other choice, they were told this adventure was going to be wiped from continuity soon and could not be mentioned. Diana would be seen as the damaged one who had killed and Superman would not have any experience which would make him sympathize.

Following the death of Maxwell Lord, Infinite Crisis showed Wonder Woman, Batman, and Superman all realizing they had lost their way and gone down darker paths than they were meant for (in Diana’s case, partly because of the above-mentioned problem of thinking she could be warrior or teacher, but not both). Instead of Lord’s death being seen as an isolated incident in Wonder Woman’s life, it became a defining image for her in the minds of many. She wasn’t the woman who had once killed and still wrestled with the morality of the decision. For some, she was now simply a superhero who would kill, a humorless version of Xena.

In 2010, Wonder Woman had a year-long story “The Odyssey” in which she became a vigilante raised on the streets, outside of Amazon principles, a character who branded her enemies when she punched them. This story was followed by an even more violent version of Diana, a conqueror who warred against men and was featured in the crossover Flashpoint for several months. Flashpoint then led into the 2011 “New 52″ reboot across the DC Universe. I want to say there’s a lot to enjoy about the New 52 Wonder Woman saga which was presented by Brian Azarello and Cliff Chiang. I dislike how the Amazons were portrayed, but the series still delivered dramatic stories that often presented Diana as a woman with many facets, who would reach out in friendship and relied on intelligence even when others advised straightforward violence as the easiest solution. It was also great that other superheroes didn’t regularly stop by in Wonder Woman, showing the warrior princess could operate in her own world and be a leader. But I don’t think you needed to change the origin to write these stories. The new origin doesn’t work for her character.

So what was this new origin? In the new continuity, Wonder Woman was raised thinking she’d been made of clay, but now there were other young girls who grew up with her on the island. Due to her unique origin, many of the other girls saw her as a freak, not a human but a thing made of clay. Even her close friend Aleka uses the slur “clay” as a way to hurt Diana after the princess reveals she actually wants to leave the island one day. While some writers like Gail Simone certainly played with the idea that some Amazons might feel this way and become enemies, Diana now lost the support system Marston envisioned and grew up as an outsider who never truly felt part of her community. Before, the Amazons had advanced technology and Wonder Woman herself was a scientist. Marston had her create the healing Purple Ray device. Some stories implied she made her famous invisible jet. In his own run, Phil Jimenez showed us a Diana who would spend some of her free time doing research in the Justice League labs, enthusiastically experimenting with alien technology. That’s all gone now. The Amazons are warrior women who only rely on methods and technology of the past.

Along with all this, the new origin credits men with how powerful and formidable Diana is. Whereas before she had learned all her training from the Amazon women, her greatest teacher is now Ares. Then, as an adult, Wonder Woman learns she was never made of clay. This was a lie to cover-up the fact that her mother had slept with Zeus and fathered a child.

Diana was unique before, now she’s basically got the same origin as Herakles (traditionally seen as an enemy and rapist of her mother). Wonder Woman went from being someone raised in love, born and guided without the presence of men, given powers almost entirely by goddesses (Hermes being the exception who blessed her with speed and flight), to someone who got her powers from a father and truly became a warrior because of a male god who Marston considered to be her anti-thesis. I believe Marston would hate these changes. Should creators and companies be beholden only to what the original creator intended? No, times change, but I do think there’s a difference between updating a character and dismissing the purpose and core of their creation.

A major part of Azarello and Chiang’s Wonder Woman series was that Diana was now seen as sibling to many of the gods of Olympus, including Ares, and entered a family dynamic with them. That was interesting, but you don’t need Zeus to be her father for that to happen. If you go back to the original origin, then Diana already has two moms: Hippolyta and Aphrodite, a literal goddess. You could maintain the family connection with that. Or you could say Hera was the one to truly bless Wonder Woman with life, in which case she is still a sibling to gods like Ares. According to myth, Athena was born out of Zeus’s forehead and still counts as his daughter. These are gods of Olympus, other-dimensional beings whose physical bodies represent their minds and roles. They aren’t bound by what we understand as time and space, why would they be bound by biology and DNA? Why is Zeus having sex on a beach with Hippolyta the only way to consider Diana a child of Olympus? The old origin works fine for that interpretation.

There’s been an argument that making Diana a child of Zeus simplifies her origin. First, it doesn’t need it. A woman given power by Olympus, and raised by Amazons who have advanced science, decides to be a hero to the world rather than stay home where it’s safe. See? Did it in one sentence. Second, Warner Bros. and DC Comics have no problems adding layers and details to the origins of Batman and Superman in films such as Batman Begins and Man of Steel. The Flash used to just be this guy who liked comic books and was nice, so he became a superhero when he got powers. Years ago, his origin was changed to involve time travel, the murder of his mother and the unjust imprisonment of his father. Why is Wonder Woman the one who needs to keep things simple? Third, simplifying the story has resulted in the Amazons becoming less interesting and worthwhile. They are now people who seem to be stuck in a perception of the world that’s thousands of years out of date, instead of people who show a promising idea of what the future could be if we stopped fighting each other and embraced how amazing learning, understanding and science are. In such a case, I don’t want Diana to go around teaching Amazon philosophies, it sounds like it would be a terrible step backwards. It makes it seem like Wonder Woman would be better off turning her back on it and that’s terrible.

It feels too much like the origin was altered to make Diana more understandable to men and heteronormative standards. I also can’t help thinking the new origin was intended to justify how, outside of her own series and the new Sensation Comics anthology, most New 52 stories focus on Wonder Woman as a warrior with little interest or understanding that she can also be something else.

In the recent issue Superman/Wonder Woman #13, we see that during one of her earliest adventures, she is taken aback by how “weak” non-Amazons are. She ignores Superman’s pleas that she also protect innocents rather than focus only on killing monsters, and sneers at him when he says he trained under the guidance of a man despite the fact that she did in this continuity as well. Although she shows some sympathy to an injured bystander, she lectures him on being weak rather than acknowledging that he urgently needs medical care or helping him find it. Superman steps in, takes the bystander to a paramedic, and then lectures the smiling Wonder Woman about the need to consider the lives and safety of others.

It’s great to see Superman give this lecture and point out the need to protect bystanders (especially considering that was a big issue for many with Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel). It is awful to think Wonder Woman would need such a lecture as an adult. But that’s what we got. Once again, she needs a man to tell her the truth about the world, this woman who was intended to be an avatar of truth and compassion. She can and should be flawed, but this was something else. In contrast to this warrior who has no time to coddle the weak, the new alternate universe “Earth 2″ version of Wonder Woman has generally been shown to be a more majestic and hope-inspiring figure, one who is decades older than Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent and even saved their lives as children so they would be heroes later on (which is an amazing idea). It’s a shame that only an alternate universe version of Wonder Woman (who died in the same issue that introduced her) is allowed to be closer to what Marston would’ve enjoyed.

Thousands of people read a comic book. Millions will see the films Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, Wonder Woman, and Justice League. I wish these films well and I love that a director like Michelle MacLaren will be guiding Diana’s first feature film. But we’re already going onto the wrong track if we use the New 52 origin. Doing so can further cement ideas about Wonder Woman that Marston never intended and which, honestly, I don’t believe has as much impact or inspirational power (something superheroes are supposed to have).

With this origin and its justification of her as a warrior without remorse, we’re getting a character who sounds like a lot of other generic women warriors. Stop it. Wouldn’t it be great to see Diana as something different again, someone unique who made us all think that maybe, even though it’s often the more difficult path, it would be better to try and rely on compassion and understanding first? Wouldn’t it be great to see a woman whose greatest guidance came from her mother and adopted sisters rather than a god who occasionally shape-shifted and raped women in mythology and a god of war who was originally intended to be her arch-enemy? Wouldn’t it be great if we let her stand proudly with her own legend instead of being yet another demi-god like so many other warriors of myth?

If this version of Wonder Woman’s origin works for you, ok. It doesn’t for me and I’m saddened by the potential I think is being squandered. You can disagree. These are just my thoughts.

Alan Sizzler Kistler is the author of Doctor Who: A History. You can follow him via Twitter: @SizzlerKistler

Are you following The Mary Sue on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, & Google +?

Budsies are custom handmade plush toys based on drawings and photos of children’s artwork submitted by customers. Once a customer places an order with attached artwork, Budsies staff creates a one-of-a-kind pattern based on the drawing, selects matching fabric, and sews each toy together.

Budsies founder Alex Furmansky was inspired by his younger sister’s drawings.

My sister Michelle was born when I was already 16 so I had the privilege of seeing her art evolve throughout her childhood. She brought home dozens of drawings each week from pre-school, camp, and a host of art classes. But sadly, the drawings went from being displayed on the fridge to being buried in a dismal box in the basement. From wacky shapes to advanced illustrations, Michelle’s creativity was getting forgotten.

The idea for Budsies came when I saw Michelle hugging her stuffed animals and tucking them in at night. What if I could turn a drawing into a stuffed animal friend that would last forever? Quite literally bring her drawings to life!

images via Budsies

via Mashable, Design TAXI

A pregnant St. Louis woman lost her left eye after a violent run-in with law enforcement earlier this week. Dornnella Conners says an officer fired a non-lethal bean-bag round at the car she was in – shattering the passenger side window. Shards of glass bloodied her face and robbed her of sight in her left eye, according to reports. “I will have justice for what they did to me but I’m happy I’m alive,” she wrote on Facebook on Thanksgiving.

A white, middle-aged gunman, in what appears to be a politically motivated anti-government attack linked to immigration, fired more than a hundred rounds at buildings in downtown Austin early Friday and tried to set fire to the Mexican consulate before he died of a gunshot wound. The unidentified suspect was described as white male in his 50s with a criminal record.

Acevedo said the suspect unloaded a small green cylinder, typically associated with portable BBQs, to ignite a fire at the consulate. The fire was put out before it could cause any real damage. "He was in full gear so he didn't seem like a civilian, but there was no writing on any of the equipment," said Van Wallene, a waiter. "It seemed like he was wearing a bullet-proof vest and he was wearing a helmet with a clear visor over his face." Van Wallene said the gunman started shooting at a building opposite the police headquarters. "He was firing in bursts of about five shots," he recalled. "He didn't even seem to acknowledge we were there, he just seemed very focused on firing at the building, which had no lights on inside. The girl in my car said, 'Go, let's get out of here.' We ran the red light."