InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "I HAVE GINGIVITUS"

runespoor7 (runespoor7) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-06-07 21:34:00

Entry tags:

char: batgirl/cassandra cain, char: batman/bruce wayne, creator: dylan horrocks, creator: rick leonardi, series: one perfect moment week, title: batgirl

Cass Cain's one perfect moment
From Batgirl #50.

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

mysteryfan
2009-06-08 07:15 am UTC (link)

one that makes Cass the equal of Bruce

I think the sexualization of their relationship does the polar opposite of equalizing their relationship. Like any relationship between a mentor and child, it's not equalizing.

And Babs, of all people, would see that. And see it as wrong.

I strongly think sexual feelings for Bruce don't fit within the general father issues in the Batfamily. Strong feelings of love, obsessiveness and almost worship of Bruce do, for the whole Batfamily. It's sexist that Cass can't just have those feelings of obsession (like Tim) but instead has to have hers openly sexualized.

And if the beginning is about a father/daughter kiss, and I think it probably is, then it makes even less sense to change the story to one of romantic attraction between a father figure and daughter. WTF writer. That's really all over the place.

It makes me annoyed because the boys, and original!Babs get to admire Bruce and work to emulate him without being written as sexually attracted to him.

It's also a shame, because in my opinion two other elements of this story are things I like very much: she and Bruce fighting out their problems and her loyalty to his ideals over him as a person.

Speaking of which, that's another bizarre element to include if her relationship with Bruce is a crush. In that case, she shouldn't (story logic-wise) choose the Bat over Batman. This story is all over the place and doesn't make story sense. Still like the two bits I like, but the rest is... odd.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

jarodrussell
2009-06-08 03:30 pm UTC (link)

It's sexist that Cass can't just have those feelings of obsession (like Tim) but instead has to have hers openly sexualized.

I'm probably stepping in it here, but I would argue that it's not so much sexualized as it is physicalized. Anything we see her doing is best compared to someone with Asperger syndrome hearing the words but not understanding the tone. We can see what she does, but the core of her character's origin states, we're tone-blind to the subtleties of it.

If this was Babs or Steph in that position, I'd agree with you, but given the nature of Cass's upbringing and talent, I think there's room to assume a chunk of her motivations are unknown and alien to us.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

mysteryfan
2009-06-08 08:27 pm UTC (link)

Hmm. Let me go reread the issue.

My issue may or may not be actually so much with what Cass does, as much as how it's supposed to titillate us, if that makes sense.

Like Bab's narrating for us about the 'Kiss or Kill.' It feels like a big, big nudge nudge wink wink to me.

But anyway, I'll reread and see if I still think so (I think I will, but I could change my mind) and I'll respond.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

mysteryfan
2009-06-12 10:16 pm UTC (link)

Okay, I've been rereading (and sometimes, first-time reading) a lot of BG series 1.

And man, that's a pretty good title so far. Some issues being phenomenal. I shall keep going.

But I did overreact in my um... reaction to this, upon rereading the entire issue.

And it's weird, because the first time I read this, a while back, I remember being kind of squicked about the body language in the art, then this repost triggered that response again. So that panel 1 and 3 do evoke a response in me.

And I do think the 'kiss or kill' is needlessly reader titillating.

But I do love this arc, and (despite the fact that I still think there's a weird level of sexualization of some sort, and I don't like it--but at least, if it IS there, it's very short-lived. And if I squint I can pretend I'm just imagining it.) that it's not as bad as I thought it was earlier in this thread.

So thanks to you and to Runespoor7 and Bluefall and this thread for making me look harder into the BG series 1. So much good stuff there.

I love her character so much. And I'm up to more than half of the series (not all in order, though) and I'm very happy with the way her interactions with Bruce are written, out of what I've read so far, 98% of the time.

So I'll cut this issue some slack and keep reading.

I'll know more after I finish the series, but that's my take at the moment.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

runespoor7
2009-06-08 03:48 pm UTC (link)

Like any relationship between a mentor and child, it's not equalizing.

I think the idea behind sexualizing/romanticizing Cass' fascination/admiration for Bruce is that it takes her out of the mentor/child relationship. It doesn't add to the relationship, it changes its nature. Suddenly Bruce isn't a god-like, perfect figure anymore; he's a man Cass idealizes because she's in love with him.

I don't think it's either fair to their relationship nor very interesting, but that's how I interpreted the quote when I read it. It was much less ambiguous than the scene above.

it makes even less sense to change the story to one of romantic attraction between a father figure and daughter

To be fair, the attraction was only implied on Cass' part. Unless you wish to read Batman's overprotectiveness of Cass regarding Superboy that way, but that's another can of worms.

Also, I found the source of the quote I gave earlier, and it's from Scott Beatty's run on Gotham Knights, so definitely not Horrocks' fault.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Read comments) -