Well, it's not my personal taste, mostly. But also, You're starting out in that scenario with the women as disenfranchised, downtrodden, lesser. Yes, family violence is real and violence against women is real, and that's great the Amazons have a shelter. But the woman character, the one who's being protected, is having to be protected because she's a woman. Starting out from a position of weakness. She's not been able to avoid the violence or whatever, she's put up with an oppressive husband, and she's allowed her children to be put in danger. While I know people do exist in that situation, and I've worked for the cause of people in need, and hope that anyone in real life experiencing these things finds a better life, I don't want to read about this fictional woman, particularly. She's starting out from a place of weakness and despair.
Would you object to a story that began with, to maintain our example, Damien attempting to escape Ra's and Batman wanting to protect him?
Damien is a child. Not a grown woman.
To a scientist seeking political asylum in El Paso, who Jaime must decide what to do with?
That's closer, imo, but unless the scientist was being beaten and tortured for being a scientist, it's not as close to the same (again, imo, right this minute)as if he was abused because he was a man.
To an Intergang lieutenant who comes to Superman wanting to turn States' evidence?
Okay, I don't even know what Intergang is. But again, to me it's a different story if the person we are talking about doesn't need protection because of the sex they are born.
What is it about the women's shelter scenario, specifically, that you find so offputting? What I said above, and downtrodden characters who are starting out the story in a situation of abuse and flight from abuse. Just not my cup of tea.
And there's no arguing that Superman isn't limited, too. He is. He's just not limited to being concerned with stories that specifically pertain to men. Written by women.
It's, again, not about "repping the terrible struggle of being a woman." It's the fact that, if she is any kind of hero, she will not sit idly by and watch sexism happen.
Fair enough.
All superheroes fight injustice. That is what they are there for. That is what we, theoretically, watch them do every week...We watch them overcome the injustice of someone outsmarting the law or outgunning the law; of someone inflicting a hurt that the law does not prevent; we watch them protect the people who cannot protect themselves. Why should it perturb you if Diana is particularly concerned with social injustice?
Agreed. Good points. And it doesn't perturb me if Diana is particularly concerned with social justice. All of the heroes are.
Bruce has a special penchant for children, particularly orphans, because he relates to them.
But they're children. Not adult women needing special protection.
Ollie makes a point of looking out for the disadvantaged - a belief they're being overlooked is his whole shtick. "The disadvantaged" is also not synonymous with being a woman.
What makes it so problematic that Diana should be particularly interested in women?
When you put it that way, I certainly don't disagree. I'm absolutely fine with her being particularly interested in women. It makes sense. I'm glad we found some common ground. I believe my concerns have to do with whether women are sometimes portrayed as needing special help because they are women.