Thursday, August 23, 2007


10 Hottest Superheroines (or Villians) To Sex-Up The Silver Screen

Comic Book Shops and Me

Comickal: Metacommentary

Conspiracies & Other Nonsense

DP Dot Com Super Heroine Series: THE WASP


I Think I See A Pattern Here

Let's Play Spot the Editor

One more thought on Birds of Prey #109

Out! Out! And Awaaaaaay!

Showcase Presents: Wonder Woman = Rock and Roll!

Spirit News

Superheroines EVERYONE Can Enjoy

The final word on the Batgirl cover controversy

The New DC Implosion?

The New Heroes (from Mother Jones article)

Tuesday Bat Blogging


Episode 2: A Question of Possibility


Lea said...

First rational madman, now cotton and sand. Why link to these idiots? I thought this linkblog was supposed to be when fangirls attack.

einatlanta said...

I had sort of hoped for more comment on D'Orzario's list of ways DC will/needs to change, but I guess the commentary on that will come next week.

K said...

Lea --

I view some of those links as R&K giving the co-oordinates on where to zero in the mortar rounds. ;)

Although with "Mad Thinker Scott"? Nuke from orbit is more like.

kalinara said...


Thank you for your input. We always appreciate hearing from our readers and we will take your recommendation under advisement.

Our current policy is to link discussion related to gender issue and women's issue in comics. Whether or not we agree with the discussion in question is immaterial.

If you would like to discuss the implementation of our policy further, you are more than welcome to email us.

Thank you,
Melissa Krause
Co-Maintainer, When Fangirls Attack

Willow said...

Dear WFA,

I know it's your policy to link to all discussion of gender blah blah sexists pigs included blah blah also pissed off women blah blah.

But could you maybe put a warning sign or something on them?

Pink for actual essays. Orange for crack pot dick wanker?


That top ten women stuff just pissed me the hell off and made me glad cell phones are sterilizing men.

And before you asked me why I clicked - I thought it was possibly an essay about how the women were portrayed or an essay judging sexual appeal by more than just "Naked /half naked girl! And boobies!"

kalinara said...

Everyone's reaction to a given post is different, which makes putting value judgements on them rather silly.

As a practical example, the post you mention actually made me, personally, laugh. Since I was compiling the post, it wouldn't have occurred to me to "warn" anyone.

Besides, there are things on WFA that seem a lot more offensive or annoying to me personally that other people actually enjoy and link around. I'd likely warn about those, leading other people, who find them worthwhile, not to read them.

I'm afraid, WFA is a crapshoot. You might like what you see, you might not. But, really, it's a risk you'll have to take. No one's forcing any of you to click the links, after all.

Ami Angelwings said...

I liked it better when you said who the author was tho. :\ Just cuz sometimes if I dun have much time I'll just zoom in on the authors I like (or avoid the ones I dun like). :)

And given that a lot of ppl seem to be annoyed at my writing, I'm prolly one ppl dun like running into by accident either XD

Mike Haseloff said...

Cotton And Sand certainly makes me feel more confident in my submissions!

Lea said...

Kalinara --

I am so gushingly glad you found the post about of Elastigirl's "holes of any shape or size", the lovely dropping in of the word "bulldyke", and the assertion that Wonder Woman would never be cast as "some ugly chick" amusing. However, how this can in any way qualify as "discussion" of gender in comics is beyond me.

I may not have come to WFA looking for people who agree with me, but I was looking for bloggers making arguments that make me think.

Ragnell said...

Lea, I'm sorry that my blog doesn't conform to your high standards but you don't get to decide what's on topic here. We do.

Like it or not, that qualifies. You're just going to have to face the fact that when you ask certain people in shop what they think about women in comics, a list of fantasy sex toys is what you'll get for an answer.

Kevin Church said...

God, can you bitches please shut the hell up? I can't watch the game over your caterwauling.

Seriously, though. One of the reasons I think WFA works is that Ragnell and Kalinara do their level best to avoid any sort of editorialization, leaving it up to the readers to make judgments. If you're not capable of doing that without blaming the messenger, then maybe you should maintain your own damn blog.

kalinara said...


I was polite, now I'll be frank.

I'm gushingly glad you feel that you have a say in our policies.

The fact is, you don't.

We note all objections to our policies, however, WE make the final decisions here. We have evaluated your complaint and determined that it does not merit a change in policy.

This linkblog is designed to provide a service, if you're not happy with the manner in which this service is provided, you're more than welcome to use another or even create your own.

Thank you kindly,

Mike Haseloff said...

While I'd agree with Church, I am always somewhat loathed to bare witness to the 'it's my bat and ball, so boo hoo!' defense.

Particularly as there's a much stronger point to be made about maintaining integrity through diversity of depth of discussions, and opinion specifics.

It's not exactly like visitors to WFA are drowning in discussions/lists/silliness wholely removed from the feminist topic of the week.

Even cringeworthy posts, not harmfully offensive, have their place.

But 'My rules, so sucks to your asthma' makes baby Franklin cry in the hangar.
I object to that policy. :-p

kalinara said...

Mike: Objection noted. :-)

Chris Sims said...

While we're making suggestions, I don't suppose any of you broads would be good enough to make me a sandwich?

Mike Haseloff said...

Kalinara: Cool! Now, about those sandwiches...

Ooohhh, I'm a naughty, naughty little girl! *pigtail curtsy*

Mallet said...

I want Samichs as well!