<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" 

	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why the outcry over the Black Canary Barbie</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/</link>
	<description>Sociological Images encourages people to exercise and develop their sociological imaginations with discussions of compelling visuals that span the breadth of sociological inquiry.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2015 14:32:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Javier Pickle</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-527138</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Javier Pickle]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-527138</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This would be somewhat counteracted if parents knew it was a superhero costume I guess but I really don&#039;t think many of them do.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This would be somewhat counteracted if parents knew it was a superhero costume I guess but I really don&#8217;t think many of them do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Javier Pickle</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-527136</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Javier Pickle]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-527136</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yeah, I have to second this. The complaints against the Barbie seem to be a lot more &quot;think of the children!&quot; then they do general complaints about the appropriateness of the outfit at all. Also, I think this doll might actually be too sexual for many reasonable parents to tolerate, not because it seems to promote the wrong kind of sex through its sexualization (I&#039;m not entirely sure of what this is referring to but I have a general idea), it&#039;s that the sexualization is so much more explicitly about sex. Barbie just as-is, dressed in whatever type of outfit, is sexualized just by default, but her outfits are always appropriate for another activity such as swimming or being a secretary or whatever it is that Barbie is designed to be doing. This outfit, which has fishnet stockings instead of pants, is not really something you could ever reasonably expect to see on a women outside of an explicitly sexualized setting. So I can see why parents would get upset by this.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I have to second this. The complaints against the Barbie seem to be a lot more &#8220;think of the children!&#8221; then they do general complaints about the appropriateness of the outfit at all. Also, I think this doll might actually be too sexual for many reasonable parents to tolerate, not because it seems to promote the wrong kind of sex through its sexualization (I&#8217;m not entirely sure of what this is referring to but I have a general idea), it&#8217;s that the sexualization is so much more explicitly about sex. Barbie just as-is, dressed in whatever type of outfit, is sexualized just by default, but her outfits are always appropriate for another activity such as swimming or being a secretary or whatever it is that Barbie is designed to be doing. This outfit, which has fishnet stockings instead of pants, is not really something you could ever reasonably expect to see on a women outside of an explicitly sexualized setting. So I can see why parents would get upset by this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hi-Hi</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-401621</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hi-Hi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2010 01:41:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-401621</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[To be fair, both genders are portrayed...rediculously in comic books. Yes, Power Girl has an impossible appearance, there is no way a man could look like Captain America.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To be fair, both genders are portrayed&#8230;rediculously in comic books. Yes, Power Girl has an impossible appearance, there is no way a man could look like Captain America.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CJ</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-5573</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CJ]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2009 09:13:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-5573</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fred, you might be interested in seeing this post:

http://girl-wonder.org/girlsreadcomics/?p=66]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fred, you might be interested in seeing this post:</p>
<p><a href="http://girl-wonder.org/girlsreadcomics/?p=66" rel="nofollow">http://girl-wonder.org/girlsreadcomics/?p=66</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Business Memes &#187; ONLY HEARTS CLUB DOLLS: ALTERNATIVES TO BARBIE AND BRATZ</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-5536</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Business Memes &#187; ONLY HEARTS CLUB DOLLS: ALTERNATIVES TO BARBIE AND BRATZ]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2008 04:01:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-5536</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] with young children, the products regularly get flak for revealing, sexualized clothing. [The Black Canary Barbie, for example, provoked outcry, which we covered in a previous post.] Old Hearts Club Dolls [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] with young children, the products regularly get flak for revealing, sexualized clothing. [The Black Canary Barbie, for example, provoked outcry, which we covered in a previous post.] Old Hearts Club Dolls [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sociological Images &#187; ONLY HEARTS CLUB DOLLS: ALTERNATIVES TO BARBIE AND BRATZ</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-5519</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sociological Images &#187; ONLY HEARTS CLUB DOLLS: ALTERNATIVES TO BARBIE AND BRATZ]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 13:26:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-5519</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] with young children, the products regularly get flak for revealing, sexualized clothing. [The Black Canary Barbie, for example, provoked outcry, which we covered in a previous post.] Old Hearts Club Dolls [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] with young children, the products regularly get flak for revealing, sexualized clothing. [The Black Canary Barbie, for example, provoked outcry, which we covered in a previous post.] Old Hearts Club Dolls [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fred</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-2699</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[fred]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:39:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-2699</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;About the marginalization of women in mainstream American comics in general, see Girl-Wonder.org.&quot;

i really don&#039;t understand the whole feminist thing where they insist on ragging on male past times.  if men behaved in the same manner we&#039;d have to complain that not enough romance novels were being aimed at the male audience.  not enough beauty and fashion mags cater to the men! sexist sexist sexist!!

if comic books about normally proportioned ugly people aren&#039;t being sold or bought by so called progressive politically correct types, then well..theres probably a good reason for it.  its a fantasy medium.  science fiction, magic, hyper reality. hyper sexuality and hyper masculinity catering to the male fantasy world of youth.  ugly reality is what they have to deal with in every day life, why would they want it to be in their comics as well.  if this is wrong and women are clamoring for comics as well, then go draw some and you will be rich!!  but perhaps there just is a different level of interest in such things between the sexes.  yes i know, theres anime comix, but those are hardly realistically drawn and are pretty much sold along gender lines as well.  

and if you think comics are warping peoples minds about sex, what about the rest of the content? that means men think they can shoot spiderwebs out of their wrists and fly? give me a break, sometimes fantasy is just that.  the whole outrage thing is just not giving people credit for knowing the difference. its a rather insulting view of people used by those who want to control others, it was the church in the past, now its the pc crowd and feminists and such.  

as for porn face. any reasonably attractive womans expression in a freeze frame tends to look porny]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;About the marginalization of women in mainstream American comics in general, see Girl-Wonder.org.&#8221;</p>
<p>i really don&#8217;t understand the whole feminist thing where they insist on ragging on male past times.  if men behaved in the same manner we&#8217;d have to complain that not enough romance novels were being aimed at the male audience.  not enough beauty and fashion mags cater to the men! sexist sexist sexist!!</p>
<p>if comic books about normally proportioned ugly people aren&#8217;t being sold or bought by so called progressive politically correct types, then well..theres probably a good reason for it.  its a fantasy medium.  science fiction, magic, hyper reality. hyper sexuality and hyper masculinity catering to the male fantasy world of youth.  ugly reality is what they have to deal with in every day life, why would they want it to be in their comics as well.  if this is wrong and women are clamoring for comics as well, then go draw some and you will be rich!!  but perhaps there just is a different level of interest in such things between the sexes.  yes i know, theres anime comix, but those are hardly realistically drawn and are pretty much sold along gender lines as well.  </p>
<p>and if you think comics are warping peoples minds about sex, what about the rest of the content? that means men think they can shoot spiderwebs out of their wrists and fly? give me a break, sometimes fantasy is just that.  the whole outrage thing is just not giving people credit for knowing the difference. its a rather insulting view of people used by those who want to control others, it was the church in the past, now its the pc crowd and feminists and such.  </p>
<p>as for porn face. any reasonably attractive womans expression in a freeze frame tends to look porny</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CoRri</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-2504</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CoRri]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 22:16:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-2504</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m gonna have to say it&#039;s obvious what the difference is here. The comic book is aimed at adults - or children with irresponsible parents who will let them read whatever they want. The Barbie is aimed at girls under the age of 8. Why one would even compare the amount of outrage between the two is beyond me.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m gonna have to say it&#8217;s obvious what the difference is here. The comic book is aimed at adults &#8211; or children with irresponsible parents who will let them read whatever they want. The Barbie is aimed at girls under the age of 8. Why one would even compare the amount of outrage between the two is beyond me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-2331</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:06:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-2331</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A comic book can&#039;t be played with, the legs and arms aren&#039;t movable. The figure is 2-D and can&#039;t be undressed. Not many pre-literate girls would be looking through a comic book. The outcry is because they are selling a barbie dressed as a hooker.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A comic book can&#8217;t be played with, the legs and arms aren&#8217;t movable. The figure is 2-D and can&#8217;t be undressed. Not many pre-literate girls would be looking through a comic book. The outcry is because they are selling a barbie dressed as a hooker.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elena</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-2306</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Elena]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 10:23:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-2306</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[FWIW, I thought that the difference was that the average adult would vehemently deny any knowledge of any comic book character (doubly if said book character came from a superhero comic), while ignoring the main character of a *blockbuster movie* or a TV series would make the guy look like someone who has been living under a rock for a long time. So it&#039;s different to say &quot;Green Arrow? What&#039;s that?&quot;  than &quot;Batman? Is that a baseball player?&quot;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FWIW, I thought that the difference was that the average adult would vehemently deny any knowledge of any comic book character (doubly if said book character came from a superhero comic), while ignoring the main character of a *blockbuster movie* or a TV series would make the guy look like someone who has been living under a rock for a long time. So it&#8217;s different to say &#8220;Green Arrow? What&#8217;s that?&#8221;  than &#8220;Batman? Is that a baseball player?&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gwen</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-2295</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gwen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:45:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-2295</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would guess it has something to do with the difference in who the presumed audience is. We assume comic books are for boys, and it&#039;s ok for BOYS to look at sexualized images of women--they&#039;re just boys! But the Barbie might be played with by GIRLS, and we don&#039;t want girls mimicking that sexualized look...except when we do. So girls aren&#039;t supposed to become the type of girls that we tell boys it&#039;s ok to fantasize about and want.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would guess it has something to do with the difference in who the presumed audience is. We assume comic books are for boys, and it&#8217;s ok for BOYS to look at sexualized images of women&#8211;they&#8217;re just boys! But the Barbie might be played with by GIRLS, and we don&#8217;t want girls mimicking that sexualized look&#8230;except when we do. So girls aren&#8217;t supposed to become the type of girls that we tell boys it&#8217;s ok to fantasize about and want.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mordicai</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-2294</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mordicai]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 14:56:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-2294</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t mind the cheesecake Black Canary-- Birds of Prey is exactly why.  In it, she was hot, but not objectified; you know?  A character, one who also happens to be totally awesome at fighting.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t mind the cheesecake Black Canary&#8211; Birds of Prey is exactly why.  In it, she was hot, but not objectified; you know?  A character, one who also happens to be totally awesome at fighting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elena</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-2291</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Elena]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 14:23:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-2291</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You can also compare the Black Canary Barbie with the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/Barbie-As-Catwoman/dp/B0000E39PE&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Halle Berry- as- Catwoman Barbie&lt;/a&gt;, which IMO is a lot more along an SM vibe than the poor Canary. Must be the leather, the face mask and the whip.

Oh, and then there&#039;s the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.barbiecollector.com/showcase/product.aspx?id=1003626&amp;t=modern&amp;y=t150034&amp;sort=name&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;French Maid Barbie&lt;/a&gt;, which &quot;celebrates the working woman&quot;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can also compare the Black Canary Barbie with the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Barbie-As-Catwoman/dp/B0000E39PE" rel="nofollow">Halle Berry- as- Catwoman Barbie</a>, which IMO is a lot more along an SM vibe than the poor Canary. Must be the leather, the face mask and the whip.</p>
<p>Oh, and then there&#8217;s the <a href="http://www.barbiecollector.com/showcase/product.aspx?id=1003626&amp;t=modern&amp;y=t150034&amp;sort=name" rel="nofollow">French Maid Barbie</a>, which &#8220;celebrates the working woman&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KJK::Hyperion</title>
		<link>http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2008/07/18/why-the-outcry-over-the-black-canary-barbie/comment-page-1/#comment-2285</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[KJK::Hyperion]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:01:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/?p=1882#comment-2285</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m a little more familiar with the debate about objectification in american superhero comics, so let me riff and nitpick a little.

The &quot;pornface&quot; thing is aimed to a specific artist: Greg Land. He&#039;s praised for &quot;photorealistic&quot; artwork and always delivering on time (apparently the only sensible reason he still has a job), but the &quot;photorealism&quot; really is tracing, and very transparently so. A character will have several different faces throughout the same volume, because photos of different actors or models were traced. Facial expressions will always look a bit off, because they were &quot;borrowed&quot;, not tailored to the situation. And poses will look awkward, when not completely inappropriate. He&#039;s not above recycling his own artwork, naturally. &lt;a href=&quot;http://jimsmashextended.blogspot.com/2008/07/greg-land-tracing-swiping-recycling.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Online communities of comic book enthusiats have dug up dozens of examples&lt;/a&gt;, but Land and his employers somehow keep denying it. &lt;a href=&quot;http://kungfurodeo.com/2006/12/22/greg-lands-most-obvious-porn-swipe-ever/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The most blatant example&lt;/a&gt; is the first hit in a &lt;a href=&quot;http://images.google.com/images?q=greg%20land&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Google Images search for &quot;Greg Land&quot;&lt;/a&gt;. He&#039;s been called &quot;the new Rob Liefeld&quot;, but I find it a bit too flattering to Land. Liefeld is a legend in the field, having single-handedly defined the aesthetics of superhero comics of the &#039;90s - a rather dubious achievement: &lt;a href=&quot;http://progressiveboink.com/archive/robliefeld.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;impossibly huge guns, impossibly muscled heros, impossibly thin heroines, impossibly numerous pouch belts, constipated looks, painstakingly rendered muscles that the human anatomy doesn&#039;t actually have, tiny or completely hidden feet&lt;/a&gt;. Liefeld is now pretty much universally hated.

About &quot;How to draw: heroic anatomy&quot; by Wizard, let me direct you to &lt;a href=&quot;http://vito-excalibur.livejournal.com/114588.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;a hilarious and thought-provoking reimagining&lt;/a&gt;. At a minimum, it shows that superhero aesthetics go both ways perfectly, so the industry has pretty much no excuse outside of pandering/reinforcing bigotry.

About the marginalization of women in mainstream American comics in general, see &lt;a href=&quot;http://girl-wonder.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Girl-Wonder.org&lt;/a&gt;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a little more familiar with the debate about objectification in american superhero comics, so let me riff and nitpick a little.</p>
<p>The &#8220;pornface&#8221; thing is aimed to a specific artist: Greg Land. He&#8217;s praised for &#8220;photorealistic&#8221; artwork and always delivering on time (apparently the only sensible reason he still has a job), but the &#8220;photorealism&#8221; really is tracing, and very transparently so. A character will have several different faces throughout the same volume, because photos of different actors or models were traced. Facial expressions will always look a bit off, because they were &#8220;borrowed&#8221;, not tailored to the situation. And poses will look awkward, when not completely inappropriate. He&#8217;s not above recycling his own artwork, naturally. <a href="http://jimsmashextended.blogspot.com/2008/07/greg-land-tracing-swiping-recycling.html" rel="nofollow">Online communities of comic book enthusiats have dug up dozens of examples</a>, but Land and his employers somehow keep denying it. <a href="http://kungfurodeo.com/2006/12/22/greg-lands-most-obvious-porn-swipe-ever/" rel="nofollow">The most blatant example</a> is the first hit in a <a href="http://images.google.com/images?q=greg%20land" rel="nofollow">Google Images search for &#8220;Greg Land&#8221;</a>. He&#8217;s been called &#8220;the new Rob Liefeld&#8221;, but I find it a bit too flattering to Land. Liefeld is a legend in the field, having single-handedly defined the aesthetics of superhero comics of the &#8217;90s &#8211; a rather dubious achievement: <a href="http://progressiveboink.com/archive/robliefeld.html" rel="nofollow">impossibly huge guns, impossibly muscled heros, impossibly thin heroines, impossibly numerous pouch belts, constipated looks, painstakingly rendered muscles that the human anatomy doesn&#8217;t actually have, tiny or completely hidden feet</a>. Liefeld is now pretty much universally hated.</p>
<p>About &#8220;How to draw: heroic anatomy&#8221; by Wizard, let me direct you to <a href="http://vito-excalibur.livejournal.com/114588.html" rel="nofollow">a hilarious and thought-provoking reimagining</a>. At a minimum, it shows that superhero aesthetics go both ways perfectly, so the industry has pretty much no excuse outside of pandering/reinforcing bigotry.</p>
<p>About the marginalization of women in mainstream American comics in general, see <a href="http://girl-wonder.org/" rel="nofollow">Girl-Wonder.org</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
