#misogyny is obv a significant contributor to poor writing of women but the chances are if women are being written poorly

[roobylavender]

So I'm pretty new to comics and the DC comics fandom and I've been noticing this interesting parallel in the cultural ideas and fandom discussions with the star trek fandom, specifically the concept of Kirk Drift. In brief the term was coined by an article talking about how the cultural perception and modern conception of Jim Kirk is completely made up and utterly divorced from the Kirk we actually see in the original series. And your analyses of male characters as they were portrayed in the 70s and 80s (Hal Jordan and Bruce Wayne in particular) really reminded me of this article.

It's interesting how similar the warping of these massive cultural icons is given the similarities (being a part of a decades old property and having been written by multiple writers over a long stretch of time) and the differences (the sheer volume of material that dc characters get as opposed to 3 seasons of a tv show plus some movies, the mediums, different industries, and being a part of a genre that kind of espouses different ideals). Another interesting commonality is that they're both media that everyone knows about but very few people have actually engaged with.

I don't know how much of star trek you've watched but the idea of a hotheaded, rash, womanizing dick is wildly different from the canon Kirk who was a nerd, pretty by the book, utterly devoted to his ship and his duty to his crew as a starfleet officer, was on really good terms with his exes who were all accomplished and intelligent women with lives and aspirations of their own, sensitive, and extremely professional.

The reason why I'm explaining that is that it's really striking how the imagined version of Kirk and various superhero characters ends up diminishing the point of these stories and the progressive themes that they actually did have and ends up creating a version of the story that is significantly more regressive than the source material. This not only affects the character in question but often also ends up flattening and erasing female characters that actually existed. For instance the whole purpose of star trek is to imagine a better future, a world where we've moved beyond the issues of today. It wasn't always great at it but the intent was always clear. Similarly the superhero comics genre to my limited understanding is meant to inspire the idea of regular heroism in the readers, to make you feel like you could be a hero too. And I get that these male characters get treated significantly better than their female counterparts but the destruction of their characters doesn't just affect them it also affects the overall story and the world of the story and ends up destroying anything good these stories had to say in the first place.

I don't really have anything to conclude this with just noticed this similarity and thought you might find it interesting given your interest in looking at stories within their cultural context and would love to know your thoughts. Have a nice week!

i unfortunately never got into star trek! i do think i've watched the first chris pine movie but i imagine going off of what you're saying here that it wasn't entirely accurate to who kirk is as a persongjkdfjlhdf. still though, this totally resonates and i couldn't agree more! i really believe there is a huge issue with with the life span of various media allowing their core message to deteriorate over time, esp bc that life span means they evolve in response to political changes in the real world. we are progressively moving into a very conservative time period in our history right now and that could not be reflected more than in what is being propagated via popular, long-standing source material. it's a very worrisome and disheartening phenomenon and i imagine much won't change unless the public political spectrum changes first :/