Talk:Greg Universe/@comment-26364252-20150703204638/@comment-26285761-20150707222438

"There are more to Marval and DC than just the movies.  Back in the day there were no movies and tv shows, but people could still read and love them in comic book form."

It doesn't really matter if they were good in the past as much as it does that they show equality now.

 "They are tons of comics and comic series dedicated to the female superheroes."

Not nearly as much as the male superheroes, and most people don't read comics nowadays, anyways. They watch movies, where there are little to no female superheroes, and there are many, many more male superheroes.

For example, as far as I know, Raven, son of Trigon, is the most powerful superhero I have ever heard of, and yet all she gets nowadays is a ridiculously obnoxious and inconsistent TV show where she tapdances and acts like an emo. (And, in case you haven't noticed, "emo" is the stereotype. People only use the word "emo" to describe someone when they don't really know what that someone's going through and think they're being overdramatic.) When I was in school, we had a "superhero day," where you wear a T-shirt of your favorite superhero. Not only did nobody know who I was talking about when I said I was going to wear a T-shirt of Raven, but I looked all day and didn't find anything remotely Raven-themed. What I found instead was mostly Thor and Hulk-themed shirts, as well as other male-superhero-themed-tees. I do recall one Wonder Woman-themed shirt, but she was ridiculously erhm, physically exaggerated. It wasn't empowerment, it was turning a female into an object.

I agree with Gordan Ecker. I'm fine with there being TV shows with mostly males as the superheroes as long as there is about an equal amount of TV shows with mostly women as the superheroes.

Besides, it is ridiculously easier to have more women-empowered shows to balance out the odds than to change the plots of male-empowered shows, which would be kinds sexist in its own way anyways.