Exclusive Preview: GRAYSON #13

OK at first it was funny but the Dick fanservice is getting insulting

Agreed its no longer tongue in cheek or commentary on objectification. Which is what I assumed it was.

Kinky cover

@beholdthevison: Insulting? Get over yourself.

Probably because you see how it is in the other end of the stick.

Personally, I really don't mind it. Its not as funny as it was but it doesn't bug me at all.

Love it.

@sprior93:

@luna_joestar: I like naked, objectified Dick, and I want other people to like it too

:|

"Oh...no. No, that's a mole" love it!

@sprior93: Nope

Dick as the Creature from the Black Lagoon? Sign me up!

@luna_joestar: chill out, coach

@sprior93:

Oh shit, was that the same guy from the run of Dick Grayson as Batman?

I love the whole fanservice with Dick. I don't like men or anything, but the sexy spy thing is just fun to read.

?????
I'm not sure why everybody is suddenly spitting insults at me or making assumptions about me, but I happen to be a feminist who hates the treatment of women in the media. I really don't appreciate this reaction, fellas.

My issue is that Dick Grayson, a multifacted character, is starting to dip into a bit of a more shallow area. I think King, Seeley, and Janin have done a great job of keeping the balance so far, but its getting risky.

As for the whole "other end of the stick thing" even if that was my reasoning (which, it wasn't) two wrongs don't make a right.

The fact that it annoys you shows how it feels to be in the other end, hardly an insult.

Grayson treated Dick better than any story since Morrison's B&R. It touched on his multi-persona, on his relations, his mentality and actually treated Dick with respect and didn't go with the well known cliche of second-rate Batman that all villains pointed out and impotence issues. An occasional joke is nothing. Its actually needed to set Dick's sexy, bond-esque Super-spy status.

Come on. Grayson is naked, Starfire is naked, Cyborg technically is naked, what did the new 52 do to the Titans?

@squalleon: There's also the difference between a character with full agency and characterization showing some eye candy, and a character with little personality who is defined mainly by fanservice (ie, Lobdell's Starfire).

@allstarsuperman: Teen Nudists!

Stripped them down....

yeah, totally. Glad to see that you actually have read RHATO instead of just talking shit about it.

Just look how aweful and shallow Starfire was under lobdell.

Gee Wiz. How horrid. Shes only a strong, independent, warrior, princess, that travels the galaxy freeing slaves. Im glad that the new team is really treating her swell.

By making her eat baking soda, turning her into an actual slut, and acting like shes never seen a black person before.....it's insulting. Now her only cares in the world are boys and shoes.

As you can see Kori was actually awesome under Lobdell, just cause you only saw one panel from the first issue, doesn't mean you know jack shit. She was probably the deepest character on the team.

If this is fanservice/pandering all I have to say is keep it coming! I am in love with this series! And just a side note.... There's nothing wrong with Someone being sexually active and sexualy free. The only time someone is a "slut" is if you label them(her) that, so Starfire being depicted the way she is in her new series isnt bad, she's just more free in what she does then what you might consider appropriate. I happen to like Starfire in her new series just they way they're writing her, she has more depth then when she was in RHATO. IMO

@allstarsuperman: I love the hypocrisy here. You throw a tantrum over someone you think hasn't read RHATO, and then turn around to pull a few select out-of-context panels from a comic piracy site, to call her a slut.

And yes, I have read RHATO. Have you? Throughout the first arc, she was completely stripped of her personality, memory, and ability to tell humans apart, just so she can be a nympho supporting character. It wasn't until later after the backlash, when Lobdell retconned her personality to make her more of a generic action girl, and even then, she was still written one-dimensionally. And her space suit is so stupidly designed, too.

@allstarsuperman: What's so insulting about the black person one? She more has complimented him,I like that lot actually.

@rurgandy: You say Lobdell retconned her. You have no proof. She grew as a character. Even if you are right, you're not, but even if, so what? Lobdell "fixed his wrongs", he wrote her as an amazing badass and emotional character

@kid_jakeriv: She's lived on earth for atleast 5 years, she's met black people.

@allstarsuperman: Yes, but there is nothing wrong with her saying she loved his skin color. She never said she has never seen a black person. She's never seen that guy's specific skin color, there is nothing insulting about that.

Loving this series.

@allstarsuperman: so she's written a bit naive and Palmiotti and Conner ignore Lobdell which frankly any good writer would bothers you because you want your time spent reading horrendous crap from Lobdell mean something. Lobdell objectified her to the point where every fan of the character saw it not only as an insult to character itself but to women in general. What he may have done later in his run does not prevent the guy from criticism. Bottom line, Lobdell can only write @$$hole personality and does not know how to respect women, Google it and see for yourself that Lobdell isn't just famous for for his horrible writing.

Since Dick Grayson isn't using his Nightwing name and persona, should DC bring in a new Nightwing? Or maybe update another character by using the Nightwing persona?

Smh...I can't believe it but....I'm on team "Lobdell was right". The ditzy "I dream of genie" take on the character sort detracts from me taking her as anything but the walking fanservice she apparently is inuniverse. I mean i get that in a way she's just a variation on the tropes set in by the Teen Titans cartoons' portrayal but....come on, i can't take her serious.

As Grayson...the fanservice hasn't bothered me as much, but i don't think it's a running joke i'll miss when this era is over for the character.

Kinky interior, also....

Oh sure, it's okay when the current Grayson does it but when it's the current Starfire it's a big deal... The current Starfire may be naive but she's constantly learning everyday. She's confident, fun, strong and likable. I mean come on guys, there's no reason why not to like the current Starfire.

So Dick Grayson a character that is very sexual.

Is having hot adventures and kinky covers.

Then some people dont like it, because they forget that his character is very sexual.

Also Nightwing and Gambit were the most objectefied or whatever males in comic books and now people is having problems?

Next time people will find that objectification of male soccer players is the same that the objectification of female soccer players.

@punk_wondergirl said:

That's bull. A person is only a slut when someone else labels them? That's ridiculous because if I murder somebody, I'm a murderer, plain and simple. Just because I choose to identify myself as, how would Zsasz put it... "liberating the worms" doesn't change anything. The action defines my status (It's not who you are inside but what you do that defines you). Starfire has been illurstrated as being a slut as she hits and bangs guys without thought about the repurcussions or the feelings of said person. There's a fine line between sexually active and "free" and reducing other people for the sake of whims which you can't resist. That's not sexual freedom; that's mind-numbingly stupid.

Differences I find between the objectification of Starfire and Grayson:

• Starfire: Her "sexual agency" is some big part of her character to Lobdell and was written to be someone who just did it (which was okay) but gave no crap on the repercussions early on. It wasn't portrayed in a postive light (though it tried and failed). Not to mention she was dragged through the mud. The only character in RHaTO really allowed to do anything super great was Jason Todd.
• Grayson: While it is eye rolling at times, portrayed as a much more positive light. It's not a central focus but it's making itself known for it. Happens in a page or 2 at max except Issue 4. Still has a plot that follows a lead character who's book was previously used a lot to make way for Batman events, he still does what he does best: Save people and the world.

Bottom line, It's not the double standard being played. Male/Female objectification is different, but I think when it's done on men it doesn't stop their characters whearas people like Lobdell when he did Starfire made it a central focus and made her come off as almost purely a sex object.

Everybody RUN!

did Agent 1 just said being compared to Batman is an INSULT ?! ....That's it...he is next on my hit list.

@knightsofdarkness2 said:

@beholdthevison said:

@squalleon said:

@sprior93 said:

@beholdthevison: Insulting? Get over yourself.

Probably because you see how it is in the other end of the stick.

Personally, I really don't mind it. Its not as funny as it was but it doesn't bug me at all.

@captainmarvel4ever said:

Kinky cover

Love it.

?????

I'm not sure why everybody is suddenly spitting insults at me or making assumptions about me, but I happen to be a feminist who hates the treatment of women in the media. I really don't appreciate this reaction, fellas.

My issue is that Dick Grayson, a multifacted character, is starting to dip into a bit of a more shallow area. I think King, Seeley, and Janin have done a great job of keeping the balance so far, but its getting risky.

As for the whole "other end of the stick thing" even if that was my reasoning (which, it wasn't) two wrongs don't make a right.

Everybody RUN!

r u ok

@squalleon@rurgandy@deathpoolthet1000@sprior93

http://comic-commentary.tumblr.com/post/131849332649/grayson-13-tim-seeley

http://nightween.tumblr.com/post/131823247378/lets-look-at-grayson-13

This summarizes my opinions about this well.

@beholdthevison: What's so bad about sexualization exactly?

I posted a few pieces of commentary above. Did you read them? Sorry f you have, I just want to check before I start rehashing stuff from them which would be an insult to your intelligence.

Tumblr brand of feminism believes in the Cultivation theory.

The main problem is that they believe in an outdated version of the cultivation theory.

It seems like they're attacking Seeley personally by posting a number of out-of-context quotes. Why not post Seeley's entire conversation, instead of picking out ambiguous sentences, and using them to respond to the blogger's own questions? The blogger is trying too hard to paint their own narrative, which is that Seeley is trying to glorify sexual molestation. That's just sensationalist writing.

It also ignores the obvious context that Dick is clearly not pleased at the invasion of privacy, Helena is not comfortable subjecting Dick to this, and that Netz is portrayed as a creepy pervert. And that's not even taking into account that Netz is a villain putting on a persona that would make readers and other characters dismiss her as weird and non-threatening.

The second blogpost consists mainly of characters commenting on Dick's attractiveness, many of them out of earshot. This is hardly out of the norm, especially for Nightwing, who is often acknowledged as being a sexy character in-universe. Midnighter makes a crack about his butt, but doesn't actually care otherwise. A group of perverted teenagers lust after him, and the comic recognizes them as being perverted and out for mischief. Starfire's latest ongoing has her turning quite a few heads, and she has always drawn attention from passersby. Same goes for Power Girl. All of these characters still exhibit a great deal of agency, and are defined beyond simply their looks (a few past exceptions notwithstanding).

This response seems very reasonable: http://kleine-asbar.tumblr.com/post/131874597147/grayson-13-tim-seeley

@beholdthevison: Except there is absolutely nothing in the comic to suggest it as "molestation". It's a joke for comical effect, and it's completely fictional. Also, the second tumblr article states that complimenting or making a joke over a fictional character's looks is "sexual harassment". What a ridiculous SJW/Pro Censorship viewpoint.

There is nothing wrong with sexualization. Tbh, I quite enjoy it in general, just as long as it doesn't get too much and even when it does, it's completely fine.

Except the cultivation theory as a whole is complete trash. I'm pretty sure your average human being should be able to tell that fiction =/= reality. This "rape culture" BS is simply not true.

Yeah, definitely. I did not pick a good thing to argue with, but I can see your point. I am not sure I agree with it 100%, but I agree that I am overreacting to an extent.

...You'd be surprised how often I see rape culture at work in society.

probably. also DC publishes plenty of cheesecake with powergirl, harley quinn and starfire. it's time to share.

I dont believe in the cultivation theory, i believe that the social change changes tv, comics, etc, not the other way.

Art is a reflection of our society, but not an obvious one.

If the soccer world cup prove something, was that women like to see sexy hot males as men like to see sexy hot women.