Gendered Power Dynamics in Superhero Films

REAL MEN, ZEROS, AND HEROINES:

GENDERED POWER DYNAMICS IN SUPERHERO FILMS

A Thesis

Presented to the faculty of the Department of Sociology

California State University, Sacramento

Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Sociology

Shelby Zahn

SPRING 2019

Shelby Zahn

REAL MEN, ZEROS, AND HEROINES:

GENDERED POWER DYNAMICS IN SUPERHERO FILMS

A Thesis

Shelby Zahn

Approved by:

______, Committee Chair Anne Luna-Gordinier, Ph. D.

______, Second Reader Heidy Sarabia, Ph. D.

______Date

iii

Student: Shelby Zahn

I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the

University format manual, and this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for the thesis.

______, Graduate Coordinator ______Jacqueline Carrigan, Ph. D. Date

Department of Sociology

Abstract

REAL MEN, ZEROS, AND HEROINES:

GENDERED POWER DYNAMICS IN SUPERHERO FILMS

Shelby Zahn

Despite the influx of superhero films in recent years, the genre seems to replicate the hegemonic gender relations of capitalist American society. Is there a difference between how these films from 1990-2019 use their protagonists to portray gendered power dynamics? This study analyzes thirty-six of the highest-grossing American superhero films from 1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2019 in a qualitative content analysis. Connell and

Messerschmidt’s conception of hegemonic masculinity (2005) is used as a framework.

Themes of demographics, violence, and relationship to the state are coded. Findings suggest that villains and heroines are often enemies of the state, and heroes are often allies.

Heroines encounter male threats in varying degrees of sexual violence.

______, Committee Chair Anne Luna-Gordinier, Ph. D.

______Date

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge and express my gratitude toward my parents, Pat and

Chris Zahn; my partner, Christian Schoenmann; Drs. Anne Luna-Gordinier and Heidy

Sarabia; Drs. Jennifer “Jey” Strangfeld, Ann Strahm, and Tamara Sniezek at California

State University, Stanislaus, my alma mater; and my friends and family. Thank you, Mom and Dad, for your endless support and everything in life that you have given me, all of the tools and resources that have enabled my success. Thank you, Christian, for always encouraging me and providing constructive feedback. Thank you, Drs. Luna and Sarabia, for greatly helping me to refine and redesign my study, always offering valuable insight and suggestions. Thank you, Drs. Strangfeld, Strahm, and Sniezek for urging me to apply to graduate school and giving me the opportunity to present at the 2016 and 2017 Pacific

Sociological Association Conferences. Lastly, thank you to my friends and family for your kindness, your patience, your utter faith in me. Most importantly, I thank each of you for the love that you have shown me. My life has been profoundly enriched by all of your presences, and you have all helped to make this thesis possible. Thank you all.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Acknowledgements ...... vi

List of Tables ...... ix

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 4

Overview ...... 4

“Real” Men and Their Women ...... 4

Working-Class Zeros and Violence ...... 8

Badass Bitches, Violent Vixens, or Damsels in Distress? ...... 11

Limitations and Proposed Expansions ...... 13

3. METHODOLOGY ...... 15

Overview and Justifications ...... 15

Selection Process: Six Films ...... 16

Selection Process: Thirty Films ...... 17

Analyzing the Thirty Films ...... 17

Analyzing the Six Films...... 18

Strengths and Weaknesses ...... 19

4. RESULTS ...... 21

5. DISCUSSION ...... 37

vii

Demographics ...... 37

Male Threats against Women ...... 39

Disposability: Disfigurement and Mental Illness ...... 45

Relationship to the State ...... 54

Concluding Remarks ...... 73

Appendix A: Coding Scheme ...... 77

References ...... 78

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

1. 1: 30 Comparison Films (by Decade) (High to Low Gross) ...... 22

2. 2: 90s Films (1990-1990) (High to Low Gross) ...... 23

3. 3: 2000s Films (2000-2009) (High to Low Gross) ...... 24

4. 4: 2010s Films (2010-2019) (High to Low Gross) ...... 25

5. 5: Characterization in Batman Forever and Tank Girl (1990-1999) ...... 27

6. 6: Characterization in The Dark Knight and V for Vendetta (2000-2009) ...... 28

7. 7: Characterization in Black Panther and Wonder Woman (2010-2019) ...... 29

8. 8.1a: 90s Hero and Director Demographics (Race and Gender) ...... 30

9. 9.1a: 90s Villain Demographics (Race, Gender, Mental Illness/Disfigurement) ...... 31

10. 8.2a: 2000s Hero and Director Demographics (Race and Gender) ...... 32

11. 9.2a: 2000s Villain Demographics (Race, Gender, Mental Illness/Disfigurement) ....33

12. 10.3a: 2010s Hero Demographics (Race and Gender) ...... 34

13. 10.3b: 2010s Director Demographics (Race and Gender) ...... 34

14. 9.3a: 2010s Villain Demographics (Race, Gender, Mental Illness/Disfigurement) ....35

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Scantily-clad in PVC leather, corsets, garters, thigh-high boots, and lingerie-like garments, modern-day female superheroes are often marketed as being empowering and as tough as their male counterparts; they too now engage in a battle of good versus evil wielding whips, swords, and guns. Although also dressed in fairly tight clothing, male characters seem to usually be completely covered, which seems more practical in combat.

The woman’s clothing seems to constrain her movements; how does one effectively defeat evil in high-heeled boots and a brassière, and what purpose does that serve other than to emphasize her female silhouette and vulnerability? Beyond mere costuming, these constraints seem further emphasized by writers’ tendency to relegate superheroines to roles of love interests and sidekicks for male protagonists (Bogarosh 2013; Charlebois 2010;

Gilpatric 2010; Waters 2011). It is puzzling, then, how these films seemingly promote gender equity and justice when by design they still privilege male dominance and women existing for the male gaze and support.

Life reflects art, and art reflects life. In larger society, capitalism constrains men and women‘s performances of masculinity and femininity in particular ways that are reflective of the patriarchal expectations placed on their socially acceptable roles based on an assigned gender order (Lee 2010:183). Men, within this gender order, are expected to perform what gender theorists Connell and Messerschmidt refer to as hegemonic masculinity, a pattern of behaviors that perpetuates men’s dominance over women, and

subordinated and marginalized men (i.e. LGBT men and men of color, respectively)

(2005:829). Women in patriarchal, capitalist societies are subjected to hegemonic

femininity, as well as characteristics and behaviors applied to women that perpetuate their

subordination to men and domination over certain types of women (i.e. women of color

and LGBT women) (Charlebois 2010:29). These hegemonic gender relations lend

themselves to the maintenance of a heterosexual matrix, wherein heterosexuality structures

gender and the social inequities between masculinity and femininity (ibid). Specifically, women are expected to be objects of male desire. Under capitalism, hegemonic masculinity and femininity impose stringent gender expectations on all men and women and are reproduced throughout media, notably film.

What, given their adherence to hegemonic forms of masculinity and femininity, is so super about superheroes? More specifically, what are the differences between how

American superhero films from three decades (1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2019) use their protagonists to portray gendered power dynamics? To explore this question, I have undertaken a qualitative content analysis of six (two per time range) of the highest-grossing superhero films from 1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2019. This study is important because firstly, the media informs our values, and we in turn inform its values (Moyers and

Puttnam 1988). Secondly, there is little sociological literature about protagonists (heroes and heroines) within the superhero subgenre (of the action genre) and how they are positioned in contrast to antagonists, particularly in terms of race and gender. Additionally, there are not many studies examining more recent films, let alone studies that compare

3 films from three specific, different time ranges. This study allows me to evaluate how patriarchal gendered norms are presented within the subgenre and what that says about what we as a culture—and audience—value as entertainment; how, if at all, the image of a superhero has changed from the 90s to the 2010s; and who is positioned as the villain. This study also enables me to determine if there have been any significant changes in gendered power dynamics between the three time periods.

Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

OVERVIEW

Because the superhero subgenre is still relatively new, I also review literature that

focuses on the larger action genre. As Christina Adamou explains in “Evolving Portrayals

of Masculinity in Superhero Films” (2011) in Gray II and Kaklamanidou’s The 21st Century

Superhero, the fewer studies of superhero films may be due to the perception of comics and films being perceived as mere low-brow pop culture (2011:94). Studies of action films should be relevant even now, as they still tend to focus on a violent battle of good versus evil (Boyle and Brayton 2012; Donovan 2009; Roblou 2012; Shary 2012) and themes of gender.

“REAL” MEN AND THEIR WOMEN

Both on and off-screen, there is much discussion as to what constitutes a “real” man and what allows him to maintain this status. Connell and Messerschmidt conceptualize hegemonic masculinity as a pattern of gendered behaviors that perpetuate male dominance over women and other groups of men (2005:829). It is reinforced through practices, beliefs, and values that denigrate women, GBT (gay, bisexual, transgender) men, and men of color as being less masculine and giving them less social access for not being “real” men (Burke

2016:589). Only some men are able to successfully perform this hegemonic masculinity.

For example, in an American context, these men are usually white, cisgender, heterosexual,

middle to upper class, able-bodied, intellectually-abled, and physically strong. Men that

lack these traits are not considered “real” men.

Furthermore, “real” men must compete with one another for dominance, typically

through violent means (Alcalde 2014; Ames 1992; Greven 2009; Locke 2014; Lu and

Wong 2014). In films where there are typically two male protagonists, there is a

competitive aspect where both fight for narrative dominance (Greven 2009:25). It

reinforces a hierarchy of masculinity in that one protagonist usually destroys the other,

implying that there can only be one dominant form of masculinity. Rather than having two

male protagonists peacefully coexist and cooperate to further the plot, the two must spar in

a test of strength. This also indicates the role of violence in maintaining masculinity. A

hero’s masculine performance is inauthentic if he has not been physically harmed and defeated and then attempted to regain his masculinity through violence (Roblou 2012:83).

This violence is justified by heroes’ refusal to use their weapons and tools for personal gain and evil; this is what differentiates them from villains (Ames 1992:55).

In contrast, women are constructed as subordinate to men in both film and real life.

Charlebois explicates that there are institutionalized power relations that differentiate men and women based on social tasks called a “gender regime” (2010:19). Within this gender regime, women as a group have significantly decreased access to wealth and positions of power in institutions than men (ibid). Ideal womanhood is constructed as thin, young, and sexually appealing (ibid:18). The media tends to depict younger female actresses in romantic relationships with older men, normalizing the fetishization of young women

(ibid). The message then is that women exist to serve and should be financially dependent

upon men; women are defined by their capacity to be objectified.

This is significant because, according to Pennell and Behm-Morawitz, men who view female characters as sexualized victims in superhero films are less likely to hold egalitarian views of women’s societal roles (2015:218). Giaccardi, Ward, and Seabrook note that men exposed to mainstream media featuring stereotypical masculine norms and expectations are more likely to see women as sexual objects (2016:153). For instance, men exposed to music videos featuring highly objectified female artists and performers are more likely to accept interpersonal violence and express misogynistic beliefs about sexual harassment (Pennell and Behm-Morawitz 2015:214). Patriarchy furthers the idea that women exist to be male property. Property is inhuman and can be treated however its owner sees fit; thus, violence against women, including sexual harassment, rape, physical abuse, threats, etc., are naturalized and accepted.

Yet, it is important to question how women become objects. Patriarchy had to arise from somewhere; it is not an innate part of “man’s nature.” It arises from capitalism, specifically a division of labor in which individuals are socially stratified based on gender, race, and class in capitalists’ pursuit of the accumulation of capital and endless profit

(Moore 2016:110). In order for the rich to continue to profit, they need laborers that can be continuously exploited in a system that can be perpetuated. As Moore highlights, there is a division of Humanity and Nature that provides this pool of skilled and unskilled workers whose labor can be appropriated (ibid:79). This division operates via misogyny and white

supremacy; Indigenous peoples, enslaved Black people, and women are deemed part of

Nature and denied their Humanity (ibid). These marginalized groups occupy a zone of appropriation, or “all those realms of human and extra-human ‘unpaid work/energy,’ including… ‘women’s work’” (ibid:158). Capitalists liken marginalized peoples to animals, plants, and other parts of physical nature, whereby they become property. It is both economically and morally acceptable for capitalists to exploit their labor because they are merely another natural resource that can be used, abused, depleted, and replaced with other unskilled labor if necessary.

Furthermore, as established through my review of Charlebois (2010) and Moore

(2016) above, women are paid considerably less and are less likely to hold positions of power than men. They are perceived as being part of Nature rather than Humanity; thus, their work is undervalued. This makes it considerably more difficult for women to be able to achieve financial independence, which puts pressure on them to partner with men to boost their stability. As Engels (1884) maintains in “The Origin of the Family, Private

Property, and the State” in The Marx-Engels Reader, “monogamy… appears as the subjection of one sex by the other, as the proclamation of a conflict between the sexes”

(Tucker 1978:739). Women have to rely upon men to survive in a society built upon patriarchy, white supremacy, and homophobia. Marriage allows women more advantages, such as marital tax deduction, social security, and prenuptial agreement benefits, than if they were to remain single. This also makes it difficult for women to leave abusive or unhappy marriages or relationships with men, as they cannot fully sustain themselves. Men

having this level of control over women and living in a capitalist society that subjugates

them means that the “woman becomes a piece of communal and common property”

(ibid:82). By law, women who marry are bound to their husbands as though they are their physical possessions, and there is often the familial and societal obligation to stay together due to the marriage contract. Thus, it is hardly surprising as to why women are fetishized, harassed, abused, and raped; they are not perceived as being truly human.

This study shows to what extent the objectification of and violence against women are perpetuated and thus normalized on screen within the superhero subgenre.

WORKING-CLASS ZEROS AND VIOLENCE

Boyle and Brayton (2012), Locke (2014), and Donovan (2009) explore the on- screen portrayal of the alleged degradation of white muscular working-class men, better known as the masculinity crisis (Levant 1997). Boyle and Brayton contend that Hollywood film has divisions of labor based on masculinity, class, race, and aging (2012:473). Older white muscular men, including Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Bruce

Willis as presented in The Expendables (2010), become a class of men supposedly oppressed by a lack of job opportunities (Boyle and Brayton 2012). Locke (2014) also discusses their emasculation through his textual analysis of Fight Club (1999). Engaging in violence becomes a means of regaining one’s virility, particularly for middle-aged,

white, poor men. They do not hold positions of power in corporations and must be followers rather than leaders. In an office setting, it is unacceptable to lash out in physical violence, an act that is typically associated with manliness. The fact that their club has to

9 meet in secret can be construed as part of the emasculation process since they cannot practice hegemonic masculinity in a visible arena.

Films portray these men as working-class zeros, struggling to overthrow what they believe to be a matriarchal, technological society, one that is giving “their” jobs to women, immigrants, and racial minorities, and is becoming overly reliant on machinery (Boyle and

Braxton 2012; Donovan 2009; Locke 2014). This reflects a sense of entitlement and implies that men, both fictional and real, are fearful that hegemonic masculinity is losing its stronghold. They assume that just by virtue of being men, particularly white men, they should automatically be guaranteed job positions. When companies start outsourcing labor to people from other countries or employing more women, for instance, they feel threatened at the thought that they could be replaced by a minority, someone whom society tends to treat as replaceable. There is a crisis of masculinity in a post-Cold War America where a man’s masculinity that was once tied to his ability to fight in the name of his country against communism is now called into question (Donovan 2009:6).

These working-class men’s fears of technology taking over are not entirely unfounded. In the quest for the continuous accumulation of capital and profit, employers have been replacing human workers with technology. Foxconn, a supplier to Apple and

Samsung, has replaced 60,000 factory workers with robots (Wakefield 2016). Companies see boosted efficiency and productivity when they use robots, which does create even fiercer competition between men—both on and off film—for a dwindling number of jobs.

Feeling the economic and cultural constraints of traditional gender roles, these men feel

that they are no longer allowed to be “real” men, or the chief breadwinners or enactors of

violent retribution, which they blame on women and technology instead of companies, their

bosses, or capitalism itself. Seeing women take over “their” roles as providers, regardless

as to whether or not the jobs are actually ones to which they would ever consider applying, is threatening, and seems to contradict the gendered division of labor that capitalism supports where men are providers and women are nurturers. These men may feel that there is no social role for them and that women have “taken over” as matriarchs since more women are entering the workforce, never mind that they are still earning considerably less than their male counterparts.

One inherent contradiction of replacing men with machines is that there are less jobs available for them, which means that they are less likely to have enough money to buy the surplus products that the robots produce. Despite the increased productivity and cost-

efficiency of the robots, there would not necessarily be higher profits, and since the

generation of profit is crucial to the continuous flow of capital, capitalism would not be

able to function.

In my own study, I examine who is lauded as a hero and who is demonized as a

villain to see if this narrative of the working-class (typically white) male hero who is unable

to fulfill his traditional gender role remains consistent within the superhero subgenre. Is

the hero’s true enemy women, technology, men of color, or the capitalist state?

BADASS BITCHES, VIOLENT VIXENS, OR DAMSELS IN DISTRESS?

Within the larger action genre, it is difficult to find discussion of female protagonists; the heroine remains elusive. Even within the superhero subgenre, most protagonists are male (Bogarosh 2013; Gray II and Kaklamanidou 2011). On a larger scale, the Hollywood Diversity Report finds that, as of 2016, women constitute 31.2% (n = 173) of lead roles in top films, only a 2% increase since 2015 (2018:15). This is reflective of women’s role in larger Western societies; women are expected to be objects not moved unless acted upon, permanent immobile fixtures in the background that only come into sight when men deem women worthy of their male gaze. Once he sets his sights, she becomes his property; he must fight to maintain his ownership of her.

Despite this subordination of women on and off-screen, in recent years, a growing number of films have been released featuring supposedly strong female protagonists

(Bogarosh 2013; Gilpatric 2010; Gwynne et al. 2013; Pennell and Behm-Morawitz 2015;

Roblou 2012; Waters 2011). While it is true that there have been more female leads, women unafraid to engage in combat, these Violent Female Action Characters, or VFACs, as

Gilpatric dubs them, still seem to exist mainly for a male gaze (ibid:737). They are typically submissive, romantically linked to a male hero, and are usually sidekicks or damsels in distress in need of rescuing (Bogarosh 2013:76; Gilpatric 2010:743). Although they tend to have a muscular physique like that of their male peers, it is often in combination with a feminine silhouette (Roblou 2012:79, 92). Furthermore, their “power” in many instances seems to be derived from their sexuality combined with threats of violence and uses of

12 emotional violence, like manipulation and exploitation (Waters 2011:85). Even superheroines cannot evade gender inequities.

However, there are instances where heroines are on par with heroes and civilian female characters that challenge male heroes’ orders or egos. Gilpatric finds that heroines are less likely to be romantically involved with heroes and less likely to serve or be protected by them (2010:743). When they are violent, it is more likely as an act of vengeance against men for having taken advantage of their vulnerability (Waters 2011:11-

12). Many male action protagonists and heroes rage against the perceived matriarchal, industrialized machine oppressing them by constricting their job opportunities and rendering their physical labor useless in a technological society; female protagonists rage against the patriarchal, industrialized society that normalizes male violence against them.

This not only reinforces capitalism, it also maintains the gender status quo of women being subservient to men.

This battle of the genders conveniently distracts from the fact that both of these problems that men and women face have been created and structured by capitalism itself.

Women are not taking men’s jobs or “oppressing” them; capitalists, those with access to and control over the means of production (factories, machinery, land, labor, and capital), are responsible for such divisions.

For example, female sweat shop workers in a factory in Bangladesh earn less than their male counterparts, are employed for shorter lengths of time, and hold only primary

school levels of education (Fitch et al. 2018:352). If they make less money in a field still

largely deemed “women’s work,” do not have lasting work, and are largely uneducated, it

is difficult to see how they are taking away job opportunities from men. The giant

corporations from the global North that employ them, however temporarily, take advantage

of an uneducated, unskilled proletariat mass in an impoverished country, consisting of working-class men and women. Their excuse is that they are generating job growth in that area, but in reality, they are exploiting and appropriating poor workers’ labor.

Within my study, I can determine if the pattern of female superheroes being more likely to be violent as an act of self-preservation in a misogynistic, capitalist society has remained constant or changed from 1990-2019.

LIMITATIONS AND PROPOSED EXPANSIONS

Because research on superhero films is emergent, it is difficult to find as much in- depth, high-quality literature on the genre. Much of the literature focuses on action films as a whole. Of the existing literature specifically on superheroes, the sexualization of heroines, heroes’ sexualities, and attire are more common subjects. There is less available literature discussing the portrayal of heroes versus villains within the genre, specifically how they are coded in terms of race and gender. While the sexualization of heroines, heroes’ sexualities, and attire are important aspects, I am more interested in examining differences in male and female protagonists’ actions and to what degree they uphold traditional gendered norms and what groups of peoples are positioned as villains versus heroes.

My study focuses on a more expansive content analysis of American superhero films from 1990-2019. Rather than reviewing and critiquing one film, films from different genres, or films from a limited time period, I focus on the most watched superhero films from a period of three decades. This allows me to evaluate how, if at all, gendered power dynamics have changed within the same genre, and because I use multiple films, I decrease the possibility of overgeneralizing my findings. This study aims to add to previously existing literature by examining a more contemporary branch of film using an intersectional approach. This study specifically investigates how American superhero films use their protagonists to portray gendered power dynamics. Furthermore, what differentiates my study from others is my exploration of morality—who is the hero and who is the villain, and how is each racialized and gendered. Specifically, my study explores how American superhero films use their protagonists to portray gendered power dynamics.

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

OVERVIEW AND JUSTIFICATIONS

This study will utilize a qualitative content analysis in a study of thirty-six films,

using a non-probability purposive sample based on a social constructionist grounded theory

approach to explain the similarities and differences between the highest-grossing American

superhero films from 1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2019.

Due to time constraints, instead of watching all thirty-six films, I will only watch

the six highest-grossing films (two per decade) and conduct textual analyses of the

remaining thirty (the ten highest-grossing per decade) films’ plot synopses. I will use

predominant themes relating to gendered power dynamics from the thirty films as a

comparison to the themes in the six. This will show if themes of gendered power dynamics

have remained consistent or differed from 1990-2019. The thirty films under textual

analysis will boost the reliability and validity of my findings by increasing the sample size and thus allowing for greater generalizability. Although synopses provide useful data, watching the six films will provide more nuance since I will be able to visually see what is happening rather than relying on a description of the plot; there may be an element of gendered power dynamics that is not written about in the synopsis but that I notice while watching the film. The highest-grossing films can explain what Americans value as entertainment since their high gross indicates that these films were the most watched during their lifetime in theaters, and what cultural gendered messages are embedded in them.

Films from 1990-2019 will be analyzed in order to determine if there has been any

significant change in gendered power dynamics over the last three decades since previous

literature tends to focus on only one film, films from different genres, or films from only one time period. The 90s as a whole is a significant period because within the larger action genre at the time, films featuring Schwarzenegger types and their muscular, macho, hegemonic masculinity, as well as Fight Club (1999), were extremely popular. I aim to determine if within the superhero subgenre this type of hegemonic masculinity is also portrayed, who is positioned as the enemy, how violence against them is justified, and how this conception of a hero includes or excludes women. Because I want my study to be as current and relevant as possible, I will include films in the 2010s range.

SELECTION PROCESS: SIX FILMS

First, the six highest-grossing films (two per decade) will be selected using the

International Movie Database (IMDb) for titles and Box Office Mojo, an IMDb company that reports box-office sales, for the lifetime gross in theaters. My criteria is that one film per decade must include a female protagonist in order to determine if there is a difference

in themes in films with male versus female protagonists, and that only films with single

protagonists should be included. While it has become increasingly popular for superhero

films to have multiple protagonists, it is very time-consuming to code, especially in films

with five or more heroes. The unit of analysis is American superhero films featuring male

and female protagonists and their gendered roles in relation to each other. An advanced

search will be conducted using the IMDb search engine for each separate decade. I will

17 specify that I am looking at feature films from 1990-1999 (2000-2009, and 2010-2019, respectively), that the country is the US, that the language is English, and that the keyword is “superhero.” Once I conduct the searches for each decade and identify the six total highest-grossing films, I will search Box Office Mojo’s site for each title and record the film title, year, and lifetime gross in theaters in one table per decade in Microsoft Word.

SELECTION PROCESS: THIRTY FILMS

To select the thirty comparison films, my criteria is that each decade must have at least one female protagonist and that multiple-protagonist films be excluded. Again,

IMDb’s advanced search function will be used to separately search for the ten highest- grossing (after the six highest-grossing ones that will be chosen to watch) films per decade

(country: US; language: English; keyword: “superhero”). Repeating the same process as above when searching for the six highest-grossing films with at least three female protagonists, Box Office Mojo’s search engine will then be employed for each title and the title, year, and lifetime gross in theaters will be recorded in the same three tables (one per decade) (high to low gross) in Microsoft Word.

ANALYZING THE THIRTY FILMS

After identifying the six films to be watched and the thirty whose themes from the synopses will be used as a comparison, I will search each of the thirty film titles on IMDb and click “Plot Synopsis.” The synopses provided by IMDb are credible because they must adhere to specific guidelines (i.e. users may only submit one synopsis per title and it must include only plot details, not personal opinions or analysis; users are forbidden from

copying material from other websites; etc.) (International Movie Database 2018). This

information is then processed by Data Managers to insure quality and accuracy (ibid).

Within the synopses, I will code for themes of demographics (race, gender, and

nationality), violence (target, hero’s justification, and villain’s motivation), and the hero’s

relationship to the state (enemy or ally) (see Appendix A for a coding scheme). Examining these themes will show if a capitalistic, patriarchal gender order, in which more men than women, white people than people of color, and American-born than foreign-born have

power and status, is upheld.

ANALYZING THE SIX FILMS

Upon coding the thirty films, the same coding scheme will be used to analyze the

six. Three characterization tables (one for each time range) will be employed in data

collection, notating the protagonists’ names, demographics (nationality), violence (target,

hero’s justification, and villain’s motivation), and the hero’s relationship to the state

(enemy or ally) (see Appendix A). The characterization tables will illustrate who in terms

of gender and nationality is considered a hero; who is considered an acceptable target of

heroic violence; how that is morally justified; the villain’s or villains’ motivation; and the

relationship of the hero and villain(s) to the state. The characterization tables will also allow

me to examine how gendered power dynamics in superhero films have changed over the

last three decades.

Then, I will calculate demographic frequencies per decade for the director, protagonist, and antagonist in terms of race and gender, as well as mental illness/disfigurement for antagonists since it is a recurring theme in both the synopses and six films. Race will be categorized as: White, Black, Latinx, Asian, and Other (including racially ambiguous, non-human, or other racial groups not listed). Gender will be categorized as: Male, Female, and Other (including genderfluid, agender, and other genders, if applicable). Directors are typically wealthy and thus occupy positions of power based on class, as well as are the ones choosing what they would like to show and how they would like characters to act on film. They choose what cultural portrayals of gender they would like to portray to the general public, which means that they play an active role in shaping American culture. Antagonist demographics will be displayed to see which types of characters are positioned as villains and if it is due to racial or gendered stereotypes.

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

In terms of strengths and weaknesses, this study is cost-efficient, accessible, and safe. Many films are available on streaming websites like Hulu, Netflix, iTunes, and

Amazon Video, sometimes for free. There is no need for expensive equipment. Since I will only examine two films from each period, my results will not be as generalizable to the larger public, and due to time constraints, I will not be able to examine more than six films.

To try to address these limitations, I will compare these six films to the top thirty highest-

20 grossing films (ten from each of these periods) to see how their general characteristics vary, if at all.

Chapter 4

RESULTS

Using the methods and criteria described in the previous chapter, I conducted the separate searches per decade for the thirty-six total films, thirty of which were comparison films and six of which were watched and analyzed in further detail. In the first search, for

1990-1999, there were 48 titles (3 of which have been excluded because they are TV films).

In the second, for 2000 to 2009, there were 90 films, 20 of which have been excluded for

not being superhero films, featuring multiple protagonists, and/or for being in a different

language. In the third, for the time range 2010 to 2019, there were 130 films, 36 of which have been excluded for having multiple protagonists or being parodies.

All three searches determined which six films (two per time range, at least one of which had to have a female protagonist) I would watch. For 1990-1999, Batman Forever

(1995) and Tank Girl (1995) were selected. For 2000-2009, The Dark Knight (2008) and

V for Vendetta (2006) were compared. For 2010-2019, I examined Black Panther (2018) and Wonder Woman (2017).

As a result of those three searches, next, I determined which thirty films were the highest-grossing and would be used as comparison films (see Table 1 below).

Table 1: 30 Comparison Films (by Decade) (High to Low Gross)

Title Year Lifetime Title Year Lifetime Gross in Gross in Theaters Theaters Batman Returns 1992 $162,831,698 Batman Begins 2005 $206,852,432 The Mask 1994 $119,938,730 Superman 2006 $200,081,192 Returns Batman and 1997 $107,325,195 The Incredible 2008 $134,806,913 Robin Hulk Hercules 1997 $99,112,101 Wanted 2008 $134,508,551 Inspector Gadget 1999 $97,403,112 Catwoman 2004 $40,202,379 The Mask of 1998 $94,095,523 The Dark Knight 2012 $448,139,099 Zorro Rises Blade 1998 $70,087,718 Iron Man 3 2013 $409,013,994 Spawn 1997 $54,870,175 Captain America: 2016 $408,084,349 Civil War The Rocketeer 1991 $46,704,056 Deadpool 2016 $363,070,709 Barb Wire 1996 $3,793,614 Spider-Man: 2017 $334,201,140 Homecoming Spider-Man 2002 $403,706,375 Thor: Ragnarok 2017 $315,058,289 Spider-Man 2 2004 $373,585,825 Iron Man 2 2010 $312,433,331 Spider-Man 3 2007 $336,530,303 Man of Steel 2013 $291,045,518 Iron Man 2008 $318,412,101 The Amazing 2012 $262,030,663 Spider-Man Hancock 2008 $227,946,274 Ghost in the Shell 2017 $40,563,557 Sources: Box Office Mojo, IMDb

As predicted, there is still an overwhelming gender bias in the superhero subgenre,

notably in favor of male protagonists, as Table 1 (above) shows. Out of the thirty comparison films, only three featured female protagonists. Films with female protagonists from all three decades made considerably less than films with their male counterparts. For

instance, Barb Wire made approximately $160 million less than Batman Returns. Likewise,

Catwoman made about 10% of Spider-Man’s profits for 2000-2009. For 2010-2019, Ghost

in the Shell also made only 10% of the profits of the highest-grossing male-led film (The

Dark Knight Rises).

Comparing the ten films to the two that were watched from 1990-1999, Batman

Forever earned approximately $180 million more than Tank Girl (see Table 2 below). Out of twelve films, ten featured male protagonists. Out of all three decades, this one had the lowest-grossing female-led film.

Table 2: 90s Films (1990-1999) (High to Low Gross)

Title Year Lifetime Title Year Lifetime Gross in Gross in Theaters Theaters Batman Forever 1995 $184,031,112 Mask of Zorro 1998 $94,095,523 Batman Returns 1992 $162,831,698 Blade 1998 $70,087,718 The Mask 1994 $119,938,730 Spawn 1997 $54,870,175 Batman and Robin 1997 $107,325,195 Rocketeer 1991 $46,704,056 Hercules 1997 $99,112,101 Tank Girl 1995 $4,064,495 Inspector Gadget 1999 $97,403,112 Barb Wire 1996 $3,793,614 Sources: Box Office Mojo; IMDb

From 2000-2009, comparing the ten comparison films to the two films that were watched, V for Vendetta made about 14% of The Dark Knight (see Table 3 below). While

this gendered disparity is still vast, compared to the difference between the two highest-

grossing films that were watched in the last decade, this statistic has more than quadrupled.

This shows that superhero films with female protagonists were starting to generate more

interest and monetary value. However, once again, there were only two total (including the

one that was watched) films with female protagonists.

Table 3: 2000s Films (2000-2009) (High to Low Gross)

Title Year Lifetime Title Year Lifetime Gross in Gross in Theaters Theaters The Dark Knight 2008 $534,858,444 Batman Begins 2005 $206,852,432 Spider-Man 2002 $403,706,375 Superman Returns 2006 $200,081,192 Spider-Man 2 2004 $373,585,825 The Incredible 2008 $134,806,913 Hulk Spider-Man 3 2007 $336,530,303 Wanted 2008 $134,508,551 Iron Man 2008 $318,412,101 V for Vendetta 2006 $70,511,035 Hancock 2008 $227,946,274 Catwoman 2004 $40,202,379 Sources: Box Office Mojo; IMDb

In complete contrast to both previous decades, 2010-2019 featured a film with a female protagonist, which earned approximately eighty percent of the highest-grossing film with a male protagonist (see Table 4 below). For the first time, Wonder Woman, a female superhero film, was on par with Black Panther, a male superhero film.

Disappointingly though, once again, counting both the film with a female protagonist that

was watched and the one that was used as comparison, only two films out of twelve

featured female protagonists.

Table 4: 2010s Films (2010-2019) (High to Low Gross)

Title Year Lifetime Title Year Lifetime Gross in Gross in Theaters Theaters Black Panther 2018 $673,797,522 Spider-Man: 2017 $334,201,140 Homecoming The Dark Knight 2012 $448,139,099 Thor: Ragnarok 2017 $315,058,289 Rises Wonder Woman 2017 $412,563,408 Iron Man 2 2010 $312,433,331 Iron Man 3 2013 $409,013,994 Man of Steel 2013 $291,045,518 Captain America: 2016 $408,084,349 The Amazing 2012 $262,030,663 Civil War Spider-Man Deadpool 2016 $363,070,709 Ghost in the Shell 2017 $40,563,557 Sources: Box Office Mojo; IMDb

After coding the thirty comparison films using my coding scheme (see Appendix

A), I found that they had predominant themes relating to violence (hero’s justification and

the villains’ motivation) and the relationship to the state (enemy versus ally). With regards

to the hero’s justification, two categories emerged: relationship to the state (terrorism and

fascism) and male threats against female characters (rape, sexual harassment, and

kidnapping). For the villains’ motivation, their relationship to the state (the maintenance of

a fascistic state or destruction of the state through terrorism, both for profit and/or power), as well as disposability (disfigurement and/or mental illness) were themes.

Using the themes from the thirty films (ten from each time range) as comparisons for the results from the six films analyzed in-depth, it is apparent that the hero’s justification for using violence against villains, the villain’s motivation for using violence against the hero, and relationship to the state have remained fairly stable. Terrorism was a prevalent

justification for heroes’ opposition to villains, which I have defined as, “The hero’s home

state or world is threatened by a group of people or person who uses violence and antagonistic methods to gain control of or destroy the state, inciting fear.” Heroes were fighting against terrorism in order to protect the state.

Conversely, villains were motivated primarily by their quest for power, specifically being able to control the general population into serving their own interests, marking them as the enemies of the state.

In all decades, heroes’ actions against villains have been justified by threats of kidnapping, sexual harassment, and rape against female characters. It should be noted that there have never been threats of sexual violence made against male heroes. Villains were further motivated by profit, which often coincides with power, in terms of being able to have as high of profits as possible to have greater social power.

In many cases, villains’ disfigurements motivated them to become villains; they were wronged in some way and sought revenge on society for their mistreatment.

Comparing Batman Forever (1995) to Tank Girl (1995) (see Table 5 below), both films’ protagonists stood against villains due to sexual violence, and both featured villains motivated by profit and power. These reinforce the dominant themes found in the thirty

highest-grossing films for 1990-2019. However, some key gendered differences were that

Tank Girl and other female characters were at the receiving end of the sexual violence,

whereas Batman and Robin were the ones trying to defend women from it. The villains in

Batman Forever (the Riddler and Two-Face) were portrayed as desiring power because

they were mentally ill and disfigured, respectively. In Tank Girl, the titular character was

not disfigured, but a group of mutated kangaroo-human hybrids joined her and Jet Girl, wanting revenge for what the government did to them (see Chapter 5 for further details).

Additionally, Batman reinforced the state (representative of civil order), while Tank Girl

was against the state, which was presented as fascist.

Table 5: Characterization in Batman Forever and Tank Girl (1990-1999)

Hero Nationality Target Hero’s Villain’s Relationship Justification Motivation to the State Batman American -Two-Face -Rape -Profit -Vill: -The Riddler -Terrorism -Power Enemy -Disfig. -Hero: Ally -Ment. Ill. Tank American -Kesslee -Sex. Harass. -Profit -Vill: Ally Girl -W&P -Rape -Power -Hero: -The madam -Fascism Enemy -Disfig.

The Dark Knight (2008) and V for Vendetta (2006) both differed in terms of the

hero’s justification for violence against villains but were mostly similar with regards to the villain’s motivation (see Table 6 below). As was the case with the films from the previous time range and from the top thirty highest-grossing, the villains in both films were motivated by profit and power. In The Dark Knight, the Joker was portrayed as being evil as an effect of his disfigurement and mentally ill, which mirrored the depiction of Two-

Face and the Riddler in Batman Forever from the previous decade. In the film with a female

protagonist, once again, she as the hero was not disfigured, but male allies were and were

portrayed as wanting revenge against the corrupt fascist government that scarred them. In

both films featuring female protagonists from 1990-1999 and 2000-2009, the villains were

the state, and the protagonists were enemies of a corrupt, fascist state. With the films

featuring male leads from 1990-1999 and 2000-2009, both heroes helped reinforce the supremacy of the state (although Batman from The Dark Knight did later accept blame as the enemy of the state—see Chapter 5 for more details), while the villains were terrorists.

Table 6: Characterization in The Dark Knight and V for Vendetta (2000-2009)

Hero Nationality Target Hero’s Villain’s Relationship Justification Motivation to the State Batman American -Joker -Terrorism -Profit -Vill: -Scarecrow -Power Enemy -Russian mob -Disfig. -Hero: Ally -Falcone -Ment. Ill. Crime Fam. -Lau Evey English -Government -Rape Profit Vill: Ally -Media -Fascism Power Hero: -Bishop -Disfig. Enemy Lilliman

Black Panther (2018) and Wonder Woman (2017) differed slightly in terms of the hero’s justification for violence against the villain (see Table 7 below). For Black Panther, it was both imperialism and terrorism, whereas for Wonder Woman, it was only the threat of terrorism. Villains in both films were motivated by power, but in Wonder Woman, Dr.

Maru was portrayed as having a facial disfigurement that she hid with a mask, suggesting that her disfigurement was part of her villainy. The villains’ motivations remained aligned with the dominant themes of the thirty highest-grossing films (power and disfigurement),

but the hero’s justification differed slightly, as in Black Panther, it was not just terrorism

but also villains stealing from and attempting to destroy Wakanda (imperialism). Wonder

Woman can be explained as a war against terrorism, which reinforces patriotism in that

Wonder Woman was maintaining the state, just as Black Panther was working alongside

the CIA, while the villains in both films were direct threats to the state. Unlike in the previous two decades where films with female protagonists were fighting against a corrupt government, Wonder Woman was an agent of the government, as the terrorists were from

the German (an outside) government.

Table 7: Characterization in Black Panther and Wonder Woman (2010-2019)

Hero Nationality Target Hero’s Villain’s Relationship Justification Motivation to the State Black Wakandan -Militants -Imperialism -Profit -Vill: Panther -Ulysses Klaue -Terrorism -Power Enemy -Killmonger -Hero: Ally Wonder Themysciran -German army -Terrorism -Power -Vill: Woman -General Erich -Disfig. Enemy Ludendorff -Hero: Ally -Dr. Isabel Maru -Ares

Moving onto race and gender as demographics, including both the ten comparative

films and two films that were watched, Table 8.1a (see below) illustrates that

approximately 83% (n = 12) of films from 1990-1999 featured male protagonists, and 75%

of heroes were white. This is unsurprising, given that 92% of the directors were men,

virtually all of whom (with the exception of Mark A.Z. Dippé, Director of Spawn) were

white. When accounting for female protagonists, about 17% were white women.

Table 8.1a: 90s Hero and Director Demographics (Race and Gender)

Race Director Hero White 92% 75% Black 0% 17% Latinx 0% 8% Asian 8% 0% Other 0% 0% Total (n = 12) 100% 100% Gender Director Hero Male 92% 83% Female 8% 17% Other 0% 0% Total (n = 12) 100% 100%

As shown in Table 9.1a (see below), 90s villains were majority male (93%) (n =

15), 79% were white, and 1/3rd were disfigured or portrayed as having a mental illness.

Interestingly, 13% of villains did not have a clear race, as they were demigods or devils.

Out of all of the decades, this was the most ableist, with 33% of villains being mentally ill

or disfigured.

Table 9.1a: 90s Villain Demographics (Race, Gender, Mental Illness/Disfigurement)

Race Villain White 79% Black 0% Latinx 8% Asian 0% Other 13% Total (n = 15) 100% Gender Villain Male 93% Female 7% Other 0% Total (n = 15) 100% Ment. Ill./Disfig. Villain Yes 33% No 67% Total (n = 15) 100%

As was the case with Table 8.1a, Table 8.2a (see below) shows similar gender disparities, where 83% (n = 12) of films from 2000-2009 had male protagonists. This time range had even less men of color as protagonists than the 90s range (17% compared to the previous range’s 25%), making it predominately white. Whereas in the 90s, 92% of directors were white and male, 100% of the films’ directors in the 2000s were white men.

Again, out of all of the films, 17% featured women leads, but this time, one of the two had a Black protagonist. This showed that female-led films by the 2000s were beginning to be more financially successful than in the previous decade.

Table 8.2a: 2000s Hero and Director Demographics (Race and Gender)

Race Director Hero White 100% 83% Black 0% 17% Latinx 0% 0% Asian 0% 0% Other 0% 0% Total (n = 12) 100% 100% Gender Director Hero Male 100% 83% Female 0% 17% Other 0% 0% Total (n = 12) 100% 100%

Referring to Table 9.2a below, approximately 94% of villains in this time range were white and 91% were male (n = 33). Out of all of the villains, 9% were women and

15% were disfigured or portrayed as mentally ill. Compared to the 1990s time range, the number of villains overall grew (a total of 33 compared to 15) and the number of them, based on the synopses, who were portrayed as being mentally ill or disfigured decreased.

Table 9.2a: 2000s Villain Demographics (Race, Gender, Mental Illness/Disfigurement)

Race Villain White 94% Black 3% Latinx 0% Asian 3% Other 0% Total (n = 33) 100% Gender Villain Male 91% Female 9% Other 0% Total (n = 33) 100% Ment. Ill./Disfig. Villain Yes 15% No 85% Total (n = 33) 100%

Despite the assumed social progress that accompanies the passage of time, Table

10.3a (see below) still displays a pattern of gender inequity similar to the ones found in

Tables 8.1a-9.2a, but with some notable differences. For 2010-2019, 83% of films still portrayed superheroes as male (n = 12). Whereas in the 90s there were more men of color in superhero roles, the 2000s and 2010s both featured only one (Hancock and Black

Panther, respectively). However, in the 2010s, this one film was the highest-grossing superhero film out of all three decades and featured a mostly Black cast. The number of female leads remained the same (17%), and both were white.

Table 10.3a: 2010s Hero Demographics (Race and Gender)

Race Hero White 83% Black 17% Latinx 0% Asian 0% Other 0% Total (n = 12) 100% Gender Hero Male 83% Female 17% Other 0% Total (n = 12) 100%

Unlike the 90s and 2000s, the 2010s had a greater number of directors than heroes

(n = 13), thus why I created a separate table for the demographics of directors (see Table

10.3b below). In this range, 92% of directors remained male, but two directors (16%) were men of color. Additionally, like the 90s, 8% of directors were female. This is reflective of the number of female protagonists having remained the same from 1990-2019.

Table 10.3b: 2010s Director Demographics (Race and Gender)

Race Director White 85% Black 8% Latinx 0% Asian 0% Other 8% Total (n = 13) 100% Gender Director Male 92% Female 8% Other 0% Total (n = 13) 100%

As illustrated in Table 9.3a (see below), villains in this time range were slightly more diverse—15% were people of color and 20% were women (n = 20). More villains in this time range than in the 2000-2009 range were disfigured or mentally ill (20%). The

1990-1999 range remained the most ableist, however (33%) (see Table 9.1a).

Table 9.3a: 2010s Villain Demographics (Race, Gender, Mental Illness/Disfigurement)

Race Villain White 85% Black 10% Latinx 0% Asian 0% Other 5% Total (n = 20) 100% Gender Villain Male 80% Female 20% Other 0% Total (n = 20) 100% Ment. Ill./Disfig. Villain Yes 20% No 80% Total (n = 20) 100%

Regardless of the decade under observation, themes of terrorism, fascism, threats

against female characters (such as sexual violence), profit, power, and

disfigurement/mental illness (disposability) remained consistent themes. Directors,

protagonists, and even villains remained largely white and male. A considerable number

of the villains were portrayed as disfigured, mentally ill, and/or foreign. Over three

decades, only one female-led film has made nearly as much as the highest-grossing male-

led film (Wonder Woman), while the others could only be included when accounting for

36 my requirement of having at least one film per decade have a female protagonist rather than their gross. Up until 2010-2019, female-led films have made significantly less than their male-led counterparts. Only two directors out of all films from all three decades were women (Rachel Talaly, Tank Girl; Patty Jenkins, Wonder Woman), and both were white.

All of the female protagonists were white, and only 1/5th of the heroes were people of color.

Thus, despite the influx of superhero films and a greater call for diversity in film, the genre perpetuates racial and gender hegemony.

Chapter 5

DISCUSSION

DEMOGRAPHICS

As the results have shown, based on the thirty-six total films (including the six

watched under further evaluation—Batman Forever, Tank Girl, The Dark Knight, V for

Vendetta, Black Panther, and Wonder Woman), the superhero genre still upholds a

capitalistic sexual division of labor wherein directors and heroes are overwhelmingly white

and male. This is consistent with Bogarosh (2013) and Gray II and Kaklamanidou’s (2011)

findings that most protagonists are male.

The fact that only three of the thirty comparison films featured female protagonists,

all of which earned significantly less than films with male protagonists, shows that the few

female-led films that were available during those two decades were not as highly valued as

male-led films. The lack of single female-led films made during this time suggests that

society generally did not conceive of heroines and that, given that a majority of the directors

were male, they did not know how to (due to lacking the same life experiences as women)

or did not have an interest in writing female characters. This reifies Charlesbois’s finding

that within a gender regime, women hold less power and wealth in institutions than men

(2010:19).

Female protagonists in all of these films from 1990-2019 embody hegemonic femininity in that they are thin, young, and conventionally attractive (ibid:18).

Furthermore, all of the female protagonists are white, which indicates that even when

female characters are protagonists, writers and directors still associate whiteness with

heroism.

The hegemonic masculinity of a single male hero has been upheld in that most are

white, able-bodied, cisgender, physically strong, intellectually-abled, and seemingly heterosexual (based on their relationships with women). Thus, our conception of heroes is still largely based on whiteness and maleness, primarily because our directors are still overwhelmingly white; according to the Hollywood Diversity Report (2018:29), as of 2016, only 1.3 of 10 directors are people of color.

Meanwhile, although many of the villains are white and male, a number of them are mentally ill or disfigured, or given an accent to indicate a different nationality or ethnicity. In the first instance, this reinforces the idea that mentally ill and disfigured people are inherently monstrous and at war with the world. In the second, it reinforces the idea that people who are “different” from “Us” (“Us” being white, American, and English-

speaking) are evil, not to be trusted, and likely involved in gang or terrorist activity

(depending on what type of accent is involved).

The above demographics help to illustrate how women’s opportunities, as well as

those of men who are mentally ill, disfigured, or immigrants, both in real life and on screen,

are constricted by a sexual division of labor that still prioritizes men who embody

hegemonic masculinity. Over a period of three decades, solo female leads in superhero

films are still rare, as are female directors. On-screen, female characters face male threats

39 of kidnapping, sexual harassment, and rape; women and men who are disfigured or mentally ill are villainized; and when men are the heroes, men and women who are disfigured, mentally ill, and/or immigrants are depicted as enemies of the state. Off-screen, as of 2012, most perpetrators of sexual violence against women have been men, with 97.3% of female victims reporting only male perpetrators (Smith et al. 2017:24).

MALE THREATS AGAINST WOMEN

In discussing threats that women experience, I specifically frame them as male characters harassing, kidnapping, or attempting to rape female characters, rather than the threats that female characters have endured at male characters’ hands. It is important to phrase it as the first because the latter places most of the burden for the crimes on women

(the victims) instead of men (perpetrators). In order to discuss gendered power dynamics without echoing victim-blaming rhetoric, the people who have made the threats must be held accountable instead of focusing all attention on how the recipients reacted or what they were doing while the threats were made.

Male villains make threats against women—ranging from outright sexual assault and rape to sexual harassment—to reassert their dominance and reify their hegemonic masculinity, their place within the gender order. This perpetuates a narrative where female characters are largely defenseless victims that further the plot for the male heroes who now have the opportunity to prove or reify their hegemonic male statuses by saving her.

Whether the male characters are the predators or heroes, the female characters largely serve as props or plot devices, reflecting Engel’s (1884) discussion of women in marriage, as

40 cited in Tucker (1978:82), that “woman becomes a piece of communal and common property.”

Rape

Are women in films forever doomed to be props, plot devices, and victims? In the films with female protagonists, although they still experience male threats of sexual violence, they are not nameless victims and often fight back against their attackers.

In Tank Girl, a female-directed and led film, the heroine, as well as her sidekick, seek vengeance on men who try to rape and sexually harass them, echoing Waters’

(2011:12) discussion of female protagonists being more likely to be violent in response to men having taken advantage of their vulnerability. Water & Power, the corrupt all-male water company that controls the government, captures Tank Girl, and one of the soldiers tries to force her to strip, prompting her to fight back. When she escapes and they recapture her, one says that they “could have a lot of fun with her,” and en route to Kesslee, the leader of Water & Power, one tries to force her to give him oral sex at gunpoint, which she resists. Water & Power also kidnaps her boyfriend’s daughter and puts her to work at

Liquid Silver, a strip club, where the madam forces her to entertain a pedophile. When Jet and Tank Girl come to rescue her, Sam uses the clapper (a silver device that eviscerates whoever is holding it when one claps) on the pedophile. Tank Girl talks back to and attacks her assailants, and Jet Girl, at her breaking point, asserts her authority as a competent jet pilot and demands that the Rippers let her fly after enduring frequent sexual harassment.

In this way, the film uses its protagonist and other female characters to show how women and girls can and should defend themselves against male sexual violence and can rise above the image of women as subservient that society imposes upon them. The film is realistic about the sexual harassment and assault that women on and off-screen endure on a daily basis but shows how women can unite to fight for justice, unlike most of the other films under analysis (with the exception of Wonder Woman and Tank Girl) where women are victimized.

However, in some cases, female protagonists still rely on male characters to save them from these threats of sexual violence and are romantically linked to the hero, confirming the damsel-in-distress archetype (Bogarosh 2013:92; Gilpatric 2010:743).

When Bishop Lilliman in V for Vendetta speaks with Evey, he tries to rape her. She fights him out of self-defense and lets V kill him, and he attacks her because he expects, from his status positions as a bishop and man, that he can get away with it since women in a gender regime are expected to be subservient to men (Charlebois 2010:19). In the first five minutes of the film, the Fingermen, guards in the film’s fascistic society who insure citizens obey government orders, try to rape Evey for being out past curfew, and while she does struggle against them, it is ultimately V who saves her, reinforcing her status as a damsel in distress, albeit a more active one than most. Despite Evey being the protagonist, V enacts most of the violence against the villains, which makes Evey seem more like a symbol than an actual character—a symbol of everyday citizens and the power that they have to act against an oppressive government.

Likewise, in Batman Forever, a group of men attempt to rape a woman, and Robin, not even the film’s protagonist, intervenes to save her, which once again reflects a reality that most women face in real-life society but also still shows women as powerless.

Encouragingly though, all of the men committing these acts of sexual violence against female characters are portrayed as antagonists, not heroes to be admired or behavior to be exemplified.

Sexual Harassment

When male characters do not outright threaten to rape female characters, they sexually harass them. The Joker in The Dark Knight immediately greets Rachel Dewes,

Harvey Dent’s and Batman’s love interest, with, “Hello, beautiful. You must be Harvey’s squeeze,” saying he likes the “little fight” in her when she kicks him away at Harvey’s fundraiser at Batman’s penthouse. When Batman attacks him, he holds a gun to Rachel’s head and lets her fall out the window, but Batman saves her using his cape. The Joker targets her, and she eventually becomes a dead damsel, as the warehouse where he holds her hostage explodes.

Similar to rape, sexual harassment functions to keep women in their place in the gender regime where they exist as subservient sexual objects for male consumption.

Because the Joker is a villain, his actions are not celebrated, which thankfully reinforces the idea that sexual harassment and kidnapping are socially unacceptable. However,

Rachel’s entire character is defined in relation to men—she is Harvey Dent and Batman’s love interest, as well as the Joker’s target. While she does work alongside Harvey to

43 interrogate and threaten Lau, the head of Lau Security Investments in Hong Kong, which prompts him to give her the mobsters’ names and pooled investments, she is still a fairly passive character. Like Evey, she cannot adequately defend herself, illustrating how women are often powerless against sexual predators.

The “Gray Area”

On a much lighter level—in a domain we can call the “gray” area—Sameer tries to hug Wonder Woman, but Steve Trevor (Captain America) stops him; flirts with her in multiple languages; and, upon hearing from Steve that she is from an island of only women, asks how they can get there. This differs from all of the above examples in that Wonder

Woman has much more power in the situation; should she not like the direction of the conversation, she can stand up for herself, verbally and physically, unlike Rachel from The

Dark Knight, the woman Robin saves in Batman Forever, and Evey from V for Vendetta.

Aside from Sameer’s initial comments, he does not make any further comments or advances on her. However, although this is not quite sexual harassment, it is still a scene played for laughs, which normalizes men seeing women primarily for romance or sex, which then, should the male character actually go further and outright harass her, further blurs the line between acceptable flirting and unacceptable sexual harassment.

Kidnapping

Female characters also face threats of kidnapping, characterizing them as damsels- in-distress with little to no personal autonomy. In The Dark Knight, the Joker kidnaps and holds Rachel Drewes hostage in a warehouse that explodes and kills her when Lt. Gordon

44 tries to rescue who he believes to be Harvey. He kidnaps her after having crashed Harvey

Dent’s fundraiser, sexually harassing her, and dropping her out of a window after threatening her at gunpoint, seeing how much she means to Batman. In Batman Forever, the Riddler and Two-Face kidnap Dr. Meridian alongside Robin, forcing Batman to choose which one to save.

Once again, both female characters are simply disposable props and plot devices— the Joker needs some way to antagonize and terrorize Batman on a personal level and knows that he cares about Rachel, just as the Riddler and Two-Face know Batman cares about Dr. Meridian. Rachel’s death triggers Harvey to seek revenge on her behalf. She is merely a motivating factor for Harvey to inadvertently become a villain hell-bent on revenge and Batman to become even further committed to stopping the Joker. There is not much defining her character outside of her death, kidnapping, and relationship to the two men—she is the love interest of both men but plans on marrying Harvey. Similarly, although Dr. Meridian is a psychologist, she is still largely defined by her relationship with

Batman. Outside of both women’s relationships with Batman (and Harvey Dent in the case of Rachel), the viewer does not see much semblance of a personality from either character; most if not all of Rachel’s dialogue revolves around her romantic interests, and most if not all of Dr. Meridian’s dialogue is sexual innuendos directed at Batman.

The Exception to the Rule?

Black Panther does not seem to have any of these elements. Women instead are warriors wearing actual heavy chain armor instead of sexualized impractical lingerie

45 costumes. Shuri, Black Panther’s sister, is a brilliant engineer who the Wakandans depend on to defend themselves against attacks. Black Panther’s ability and success in finding and stopping Klaue is due to Shuri, Nakia, and Okoye’s intel and technology.

Although there is a scene where it at first appears that Nakia and other women are being kidnapped by a group of militants in Nigeria and freed by Black Panther, thus fitting the damsel-in-distress archetype, this is not the case. Okoye helps to “free” the women and is the leader of the female warriors, the women fight back against their captors, and Nakia is actually undercover on a mission in the Sambisa Forest in Nigeria.

Despite Nakia being romantically linked to Black Panther as his former lover who she does end up reconciling with at the end of the film, she is portrayed more so as his equal than any of the other female characters in the other films. She is just as strong, capable, and intelligent as Black Panther, as evidenced by her ability to go on undercover missions. This difference in portrayal of women is likely because Wakandan society, despite having male rulers, seems to have a gender order similar to that of a matriarchal society in that it recognizes the equal value of every member (Goettner-Abendroth

2018:24). Wakandan women can be powerful warriors and engineers and fight alongside, rather than be defended by, men.

DISPOSABILITY: DISFIGUREMENT AND MENTAL ILLNESS

Regardless of the decade under observation, disposability is a common theme, one that I have specifically categorized as: disfigured-as-inherently-evil, total wackos, and

disfigurer-as-evil. Disfigured-as-inherently-evil characters are, as the name suggests,

portrayed to be inherently villainous because of their disfigurement, and total wacko

characters are depicted as inherently evil due to their mental illness. Both are disposable in that their mistreatment or deaths are excused because they are seen as less valuable, productive members of capitalist society. Disfigurers-as-evil are villains who usually occupy hegemonic positions of power in society—white, wealthy, heterosexual, cisgender, male, etc. The first two categories illustrate a cause-and-effect relationship—those who become disfigured become evil, and those who are mentally ill become evil. This relates to gendered power dynamics in that men or women who are disfigured-as-inherently-evil and total wackos are unable to embody hegemonic masculinity and femininity and are therefore marginalized. They are not seen as truly men or women and their lack of adherence to these norms makes their abuse socially acceptable. One common thread, regardless as to whether or not the character is evil or good, is that if a character is disfigured, he or she is determined to have revenge.

Disfigured-as-Inherently-Evil

Female disfigured villains from these six films are virtually non-existent, reinforcing the idea that it is unfathomable for women, even as villains, to have a condition or appearance that would make them “ugly” and therefore unable to embody hegemonic femininity. Of all six of the films under further analysis, only Wonder Woman features a female villain with a disfigurement, fitting the disfigured-as-inherently-evil category. Of course, it should be noted that there are only three female villains out of all six films, Dr.

Maru from Wonder Woman, Dr. Delia Surridge from V for Vendetta, and the madam at

Liquid Silver from Tank Girl.

In Wonder Woman, Dr. Maru is a chief chemist for the German army during World

War I who, working with General Erich Ludendorff, wants to create a stronger, more potent

mustard gas to use on enemy soldiers, and she has a disfigured face. Her motivation as a

villain is her allegiance to her country during the war, which positions her as an enemy of

the United States and Themyscira (Wonder Woman’s homeland). Her disfigurement

compared to that of male villains like Two-Face from Batman Forever or the Joker from

The Dark Knight is significantly less dramatic, appearing more like makeup or a less gruesome mask. Toward the end of the film, Ares, Wonder Woman’s enemy and the God of War, urges Wonder Woman to kill Dr. Maru after revealing her disfigured face, reinforcing the idea that disabled or disfigured people—but more specifically, women—

are disposable, inherently villainous, and deserving of mistreatment. Women are expected

to be beautiful in order to suit the male gaze. When they are not, they are pathologized as

being evil, undesirable, and unworthy of life itself. Thus, one of Dr. Maru’s crimes is to be

disfigured, as this means being “ugly” and therefore “useless” in her role as a woman.

Disfigurer-as-Evil

However, some films, like V for Vendetta and Tank Girl (both directed by women

and featuring female protagonists), illustrate how the greater crime than being disfigured

is disfiguring innocent, marginalized people for one’s own political agenda. Like Dr. Maru,

Dr. Delia Surridge in V for Vendetta is a medicinal chemist, but unlike Dr. Maru, she is

48 disfiguring society’s imprisoned undesirables (Black people, Muslims, immigrants, gay men and lesbians, and people who protest against the government) by experimenting on them with drugs rather than being disfigured herself. She says she finds them “pathetic,” reflective of Josef Mengele experimenting on twins, dwarves, Roma, and other

“anomalies” in Auschwitz (Walker 2015).

Similarly, in Tank Girl, a group of disfigured mutant human-kangaroo hybrids (the

Rippers) who were originally created to be super soldiers, imprison Tank Girl and Jet Girl.

After the war ended, the government was instructed to poison them, which did not come to fruition. The Rippers team up with Tank Girl and Jet Girl to stop Water & Power, the water company hoarding, selling, and turning people into water during a devastating drought. In both examples, Dr. Surridge and the government’s agenda is to destroy those deemed disposable by society—racial, religious, sexual, ethnic, and disabled minorities. Their interests are the interests of their respective fascistic states—to rid society of men and women and others who do not adhere to hegemonic masculinity or femininity and cannot, because of their disfigurement, disability, or other marginalized status in society, be

“productive” members of society. The directors’ depiction of the heroes as being the ones who are Othered sends a powerful message that says that the state is not always ethical or right and in fact can actively work against its own people for its own benefit. Since women are minorities who often face threats of sexual violence and intimidation because of their gender, it makes sense why their films would be more likely to show the disfigurer rather than the disfigured as evil.

Both Disfigured-as-Evil and Total Wackos

Most of the male villains in Black Panther, The Dark Knight, and Batman Forever

are both disfigured-as-inherently-evil and “total wackos” (in the expert opinion of Dr.

Meridian on the Riddler from Batman Forever). The Joker and Harvey Dent from The Dark

Knight, as well as Two-Face from Batman Forever, and Klaue from Black Panther, are all

shown to be extremely dangerous and exaggeratedly mentally ill. The Joker from The Dark

Knight says that he received his facial scars in two different, conflicting stories; in the first,

he says that he saw his alcoholic, abusive father was attacking his mother who had a butcher

knife for defense, and when his dad caught him, he asked “Why so serious?” and carved a

smile into his mouth with the knife. In the second, he tells Rachel, Harvey Dent’s fiancée

and Batman’s love interest, that loan sharks scarred his wife after she gambled and got into

debt, and to cheer her up and because they could not afford surgery, the Joker disfigured

himself, but she left him. The presentation of conflicting information portrays people who

are disfigured and mentally ill as unreliable liars, either intentionally in order to galvanize

sympathy, or unintentionally to show how dangerous they are to themselves. The message

is that if mentally ill and disfigured people are unaware that they are lying, they must be

an automatic danger to others since they are out of touch with reality.

When Harvey Dent is disfigured trying to escape the warehouse where he is being held hostage, he knocks over a nearby oil drum, and half of his face is covered in oil. Then,

Lieutenant Gordon goes to rescue Rachel (he believes that he is rescuing Harvey) and the warehouse blows up, causing the explosion to react with the gas on Harvey’s face, burning

50 it. Gordon does not understand how he can bear to stay disfigured, and Harvey reveals that he is refusing skin grafts because Gordon did not listen to him when he warned him about corrupt officers when he had worked at Internal Affairs, the cause of his disfigurement and

Rachel’s death. Harvey gets him to admit that their nickname while he was there had been

“Harvey Two-Face.” Adopting the name, Two-Face ends up joining the Joker because he wants revenge and believes that chance should decide people’s fates, using a double- headed coin that was found at Rachel’s grave.

Prior to becoming disfigured, Harvey is confronted by Batman about using a coin to determine if a member of the supposed honor guard lives or dies, and Harvey justifies potentially killing the man, Thomas Schiff, for his paranoid schizophrenia diagnosis, believing that he will not give them any valuable information. This furthers the idea that mentally ill people are naturally villainous, undeserving of life, and cannot be trusted. The above examples also highlight how disfigured people are portrayed as monsters; as soon as Dent is disfigured, he wants revenge and starts obsessively relying on a coin to make his decisions. He joins the Joker even though he is responsible for Rachel’s death. Dent’s actions, as well as those of the Joker, also suggest a supposed link between disfigurement and mental illness, insinuating that physical disfigurement moves beyond the physical to also disfigure a person’s mind.

Perhaps the most obvious examples of disfigurement mutilating a person’s mind are the portrayals of Two-Face in Batman Forever and Klaue in Black Panther. Two-Face, like the one from The Dark Knight, has a disfigured face and makes decisions by flipping

a coin. This version of Two-Face is more apparently mentally ill, referencing that “we’re

of two minds,” implying a stereotypical “split” personality. He continuously refers to

himself as “we.” At the beginning of the film, while robbing a bank, he starts to fill the

room where one of the bank employees is trapped with acid, the same one that disfigured

him, again presenting disfigurement as a punishment and act of revenge. Once again, his

behaviors further depict mentally ill and disfigured people as hell-bent on revenge. Klaue

has facial scars and while being held by the CIA for questioning, it seems like he is being

made to look mentally unstable. He keeps staring into the mirror saying, “I can see you”

and blowing kisses at himself, as well as singing, “What Is Love?” There is the possibility

that he begins acting like this to avoid being questioned and to be able to plead mental insanity, but it nevertheless reinforces the idea that villains are inherently mentally unstable and someone to be afraid of because of their unpredictable behavior.

Total Wackos

In contrast to the above examples where villains are both disfigured-as-inherently-

evil and “total wackos,” the Riddler/Edward Nigma from Batman Forever fits the latter

rather than the former. At the end of the film, he is imprisoned and placed in a straitjacket,

seemingly having lost his mind and claiming to be Batman. He is obsessed with his work

on brain waves and goes as far as to forcibly test it out on his boss, who calls him a

“demented… toad” and threatens that he will go to a mental institution for the rest of his

life. Without knowing anything about or seeing him, Dr. Meridian diagnoses him based on

the letters he’s been leaving Batman with “obsessional syndrome and potential homicidal

tendencies” and calls him a “total wacko.” His mental illness is portrayed as a humorous

spectacle, the implication that the struggles that mentally ill people go through are

laughable. Realistically, someone having to be constrained so that they do not hurt

themselves or others and having delusions of grandeur is someone in need of help rather

than censure. It is especially dangerous that his mental illness is correlated with his villainy,

that he is a threat to others and society just because he is ill.

This demonization of mentally ill people has real-world consequences. Wahl and

Lefkowits (1989:525) found that when they showed target film viewers depictions of

mentally ill characters on television films, viewers had lower sympathy for mentally ill

people and were more likely to perceive them as dangerous. This correlation reflects society’s fear of mentally ill people when in reality mentally ill people are more likely to be victimized by society itself due to stigma surrounding mental health. For instance,

Eckert, Sugar, and Fine (2002:1286) find that mentally ill women are more likely to be sexually assaulted by a stranger or multiple attackers with multiple penetration. Attackers are also more likely to use weapons or hit mentally ill women during the assault, resulting in increased bodily trauma (ibid). Mentally ill people are at an increased risk of violence than those without mental illnesses (Silver 2002). Therefore, it is not mentally ill people who are the villains and monsters.

Who is Disposable?

These negative depictions of mentally ill and disfigured people tell us that society devalues and demonizes people who are considered to be Others who cannot embody

hegemonic gender roles. With the exception of the two female-directed films, the message

is that these types of people are dangerous, untrustworthy, conniving, and abnormal, which

only reinforces ableism in everyday society. Furthermore, none of the heroes in these six films are shown as being mentally ill or disfigured, which largely reinforces the idea that these characteristics are reserved for evil people, particularly men. Only one female character in the six films is disfigured, and she is a villain. Compared to the male villains,

Dr. Maru’s disfigurement is less physically gruesome, and she makes an attempt to cover it.

This is not to say that there has never been a mentally ill or disfigured hero, but out of thirty-six of the highest-grossing films, there has not been any mentally ill and only one disfigured (Deadpool). Although characters like V (V for Vendetta) and the Rippers (Tank

Girl) are disfigured and presented as survivors rather than villains, they are still not the protagonists of the films and deviate from the genre’s norm of villainizing people with disfigurements. Additionally, their disfigurements are portrayed as punishments and motivations for (in this case) righteous revenge.

In terms of gendered portrayals of mental illness, women are not portrayed as being hysterical or having mental illnesses in any of the six films under further evaluation. This is perhaps in part due to the low number of female characters present in these films overall; there were only three female villains, and in V for Vendetta, the point is that people in positions of power are oppressing society’s “undesirables,” which would include mentally ill people.

Furthermore, as Clarke and Miele (2016:6) found through their study of the

depictions of mental illness in magazine articles from North America from 1983-2012,

mentally ill men are more likely to be associated with self-destructive behaviors, such as suicide or substance abuse, than mentally ill women, who are more likely to seek psychiatric diagnoses. Dingfelder of the American Psychological Association (APA)

(2011:14) confirms this finding, stating that women have a tendency to internalize while men externalize their distress, with women analyzing their negative thoughts and men being aggressive or coercive. Thus, characters like the Joker or the Riddler as mentally ill men would be more likely to be portrayed as engaging in self-destructive behaviors than female characters. However, the films have taken it beyond self-destruction and portrayed these characters as active threats to those around them because of their mental illness.

RELATIONSHIP TO THE STATE

Terrorism versus Fascism

As discussed in Chapter 4, a majority of the heroes justify their opposition to the villains through the villains’ terrorism, and every villain wants to maintain or claim power over the state. My definition of terrorism is: “The hero’s home state or world is threatened by a group of people or person in or outside of the state who uses violence and antagonistic methods to gain control of or destroy the state, inciting fear.” Similarly, yet more generally, the United States House of Representatives defines terrorism as: “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents” (2).

I differentiate terrorism from fascism in the context of these particular films in that

the latter is when the villains already have control over the state and meet Dr. Lawrence

Britt’s (2003:20) fourteen characteristics of fascism: powerful and continuing nationalism;

disdain for the recognition of human rights; identification of enemies/scapegoats as a

unifying cause; supremacy of the military; rampant sexism; controlled mass media;

obsession with National Security; religion and government are intertwined; corporate

power is protected; labor power is suppressed; disdain for intellectuals and the arts;

obsession with crime and punishment; rampant cronyism and corruption; and fraudulent

elections. In contrast, terrorism is an attempt to gain control over the state, or else an

attempt to disrupt how the state functions. Like fascism, terrorism is also politically

motivated.

Heroes and the Maintenance of the State

In all of the films featuring male protagonists, the heroes maintain the hegemony

and social order of the state. Since the majority are white—Batman in The Dark Knight

and Batman Forever—it is understandable why they would be more inclined to see the state as an ally. Women historically have had to endure attacks on their reproductive rights

(Roe v. Wade) (Porta and Last 2018), access to better pay, voting rights, etc., whereas white men (as long as they are cisgender, straight, able-bodied, and occupy other privileged societal positions) have not had to fight for any of the above.

Even in Black Panther, the titular protagonist collaborates with the state; he is friends with a CIA agent, and together, they try to stop Klaue and Killmonger. Given the

CIA’s history of dismantling the Black Panther party via COINTELPRO, a counter-

intelligence program active from 1956 to 1971 that sought to neutralize the actions of Black

nationalists (among other radical national groups) (PBS 2002), it is disingenuous to present

them as ever accepting or working with the party, however divorced from the actual

political group it may be. This is a way to reinforce ideology that supports the supremacy

of the state by aligning it with causes and interests of marginalized peoples to make it seem

as though it cares about their plights. The reality is that capitalism has structured society to

be inequitable in order to have a surplus of disposable labor in order to gain a surplus of

profits (Moore 2016:110). Therefore, capitalism cares more about generating profits and

capital than the actual human beings—often viewed as part of Nature and thereby not even

really human beings (ibid:79)—it commoditizes. The fact that the white CIA agent has to help the Wakandans also plays into a white savior narrative, likely in an attempt to distance the image of the CIA from the history of COINTELPRO. However, the film does show how compared to the Wakandan warriors (all women) and Black Panther, CIA Agent

Everett Ross is fairly powerless against Killmonger and Klaue.

Perhaps the most simplistically of any of the films under investigation, in Batman

Forever, Batman maintains social order by capturing criminals, which aids in their arrest.

It is a simplistic relationship that does not question or challenge dominant systems of power and, as with Black Panther, reinforces the supremacy of the state.

Heroines as Enemies of the State

With the exception of Wonder Woman, the female protagonists are enemies of the state—specifically a corrupt fascistic one run by greedy white men—as a means of fighting for their liberation from the gender order, from a capitalistic inequitable sexual division of labor. Water & Power, a giant corporation with overwhelming government influence, as well as Bishop Lilliman, the Fingerman, Chancellor Adam Sutler, Eric Finch, Peter Creedy,

Roger Dascomb, Lewis Prothero, Conrad Heyer, and Brian Etheridge in V for Vendetta, represent the social control that these hegemonic men try to exert over their lives. In Tank

Girl, this social control means no access to water, and in both films, it means the ongoing threat of rape, kidnapping, torture, and murder.

Why is there such a shift in the 2010s where Wonder Woman becomes an ally of the state? Wonder Woman lives in an all-women society where there is no gender inequity so the focus of the movie shifts to the military. She also falls in love with the American soldier, Steve Trevor, which means that she wants to join forces with him. Her own government is not presented as corrupt so there is nothing to wage against within her home country, but when the Germans attack a fleeing Steve Trevor on their soil, it becomes an attack on the Themyscirans. Also, the Germans in WWI are further made the enemy to her because she believes that General Erich Ludendorff is actually Ares, the God of War. For her, she wants to preserve the peace and sanctity of her state.

In two of the three films featuring female protagonists (V for Vendetta and Tank

Girl), the government itself is presented as fascist and the enemy of the everyday citizen.

In V for Vendetta, there ae numerous Holocaust and 9/11 parallels. Delia Surridge

experiments with dangerous drugs on Black people, Muslims, immigrants, gay men,

lesbians, and people who protest against the government—all peoples who represent

threats to a white supremacist fascist society that only wants its people to obey its orders.

These experiments, as previously mentioned, are reflective of Josef Mengele

experimenting on twins, dwarves, and other “anomalies” in concentration camps. When

Evey is imprisoned, one of the torture methods employed appears to be her being held in a

gas chamber, and she is also waterboarded, as done to terrorists (suspected and actual) in

the aftermath of 9/11, as with Guantánamo Bay (Shane 2016). While imprisoned, she finds

a note from a lesbian who was in that cell named Valerie, and the viewer is shown how the

Secret Police, much like the Nazi Gestapo, broke down gay men and lesbians’ doors to arrest them. Evey’s own parents were beaten and imprisoned for protesting against the government. The media routinely lies and shows propaganda in support of the Chancellor

and against immigrants and other minorities.

Although much more playful in tone, Tank Girl also shows the power struggle the title character, and truly all of the female characters, undergo against an all-male water company partnered with and protected by the military that has a monopoly over the water supply in the midst of a horrific drought. As in V for Vendetta, the government in this film

also experiments on a group of innocent people, but in this case, with the hopes of creating

a super soldier rather than outright genocide. Rather than portray the government to be a

source of benevolence and social order, as is a message that seems to be pushed in films

59 featuring male protagonists, the government becomes a symbol of corruption and white supremacy. Thus, the main characters must be enemies of the state because the state is unjust; these films reemphasize the message that just because something is legal does not mean that it is moral.

Why are films with female leads generally portraying the state as morally reprehensible and fascistic? This is likely because the government has historically tried to constrain women’s bodily autonomy by denying them reproductive rights (Roe v Wade)

(Porta and Last 2018). Larger society also generally does not believe women who report their experiences with sexual assault and violence, as reified by Suarez and Gadalla’s

(2010:2024) finding that men are more likely than women to accept rape myths (the idea that victims are at fault rather than perpetrators), which reinforces their powerless social position.

However, in The Dark Knight, although Batman starts as an ally to the state, he becomes an enemy by the end of the film, at least based on public perception. Originally, he captures criminals, which aids in their arrest. But, ultimately, in having to take the blame for Dent’s crimes as Two-Face, he becomes an enemy of the state at the end of the film.

For him, it means more to protect Dent’s honor and the civilians’ trust in him and the police—thereby reinforcing the legitimacy of the state—than to preserve his own reputation. Him doing so reifies patriotism and nationalistic pride; it tells us as an audience that we should sacrifice our well-being and selves for the betterment of the state.

Hero or Shero?

This leads us to the crucial question: Who is a hero? When a hero is male—ideally

embodying hegemonic masculinity—he will sacrifice himself for the good of society in

order to preserve social order, someone who is anti-terrorist and pro-American. When a hero is female, she is more likely to sacrifice herself, with the assistance of others in order to combat the fascism and white supremacy of the existing state. The male hero is often lone, whereas the female hero mobilizes with other women and men around her—Tank

Girl mobilizes with the Rippers, Jet Girl, and her boyfriend’s daughter to bring down a fascistic government; Evey mobilizes with V to overthrow the government; even Wonder

Woman mobilizes with Steve Trevor, Sameer, Chief, and Etta Candy to defeat the Germans and Ares in World War I.

Villains and Terrorism

If heroes are largely the allies of the state, who are the villains? With the exceptions of the films featuring female protagonists who were enemies of the state, the villains are often those who the US has demonized, especially in a post-9/11 world. Villains in these films are mostly mentally ill or disfigured, although some are portrayed as marginalized

Others, either due to their race or nationality.

For instance, in The Dark Knight, the villains are Russian, Italian-American, Black, and Asian. The Asian villain in The Dark Knight is presented as a coward; as soon as the

Joker tells the mob that he would not trust him, he disconnects from the meeting they are connected to via TV. He also releases the names of the mob members and investment

information that he is supposed to keep confidential. Lau working with the enemy of the

state and then turning on them out of fear is reflective of the yellow peril stereotype, the

view that Asian Americans are foreigners with lower moral and ethical standards than

white Americans (Yen 2000:6). Journalist Henry George (1869), as cited in Yen (ibid:7)

described Chinese immigrants as cowardly heathens. This reinforces anti-Asian,

specifically anti-Chinese, sentiment and the idea that Chinese-Americans are not really

Americans.

Additionally, the Italians are the mob, Black men being a part of the mob are

portrayed as being inherently affiliated with a gang and “thuggish”, and Russians have

heavy accents and are also affiliated with gangs. In the 1870s, the stereotype of Italians as

lawless developed and came to categorize Southern Italians, and American newspapers

characterized Italy as a nation seeking to send its criminals to the US (LaGumina 1999:12-

13). The characterization of Black men as being criminal upholds anti-Black stereotypes, such as having lower intelligence, moral values, and work ethic (Dixon and Rosenbaum

2004). Furthermore, the role of the thug specifically, as theorized by Schrock and Schwalbe

(2009) as cited in Dow (2016:165), is a way for Black men to define their masculinity since they are unable to attain hegemonic masculinity. While this image does grant Black men and boys some power and strength in that they are perceived as intimidating, this also justifies the attacks that they endure because they are perceived as threatening (ibid:182).

This negative stereotypical depiction of Russians likely stems from the US-Russian relations after the Cold War, where the west wanted to avoid nuclear threats from Russia

and Russia wanted the west to help reform its economy (Tsygankov 2009:1). This

relationship continued to be contentious despite the Russian-US partnership that emerged

after 9/11 when President Vladimir Putin pledged Russia’s resources to help the US in the

fight against terrorism (ibid:2). Their partnership ceased, in part caused by the US siding

with Georgia when Russia accused it of harboring terrorists and when the White House

accused Russia of lying about bombing Georgia (ibid:6).

Although they are not the main villains in the film, they still are clearly villains and

we as the audience are not made to sympathize with any of them, as we do not know their

backgrounds or anything about them other than that they are criminals. While realistically

people of color can be villains, the above reflect stereotypical xenophobic and racist

stereotypes. The villains are very much the ‘Them” in an “Us” (American) "versus Them”

(Foreigner) dichotomy.

Continuing with this perpetuation of an Us versus Them dichotomy and the theme of disfigurement, one of Wonder Woman’s villains representing the German army, Dr.

Maru, a chemist with a facial disfigurement who develops a more potent mustard gas, is

German and speaks with an accent. However, unlike in the other films under analysis, this villainization of Dr. Maru is not based on negative cultural stereotypes about Germans but instead based on World War I, where Germans were enemies of the United States. In this specific film, the Germans are also enemies of the state of Themyscira, Wonder Woman’s home state. The actions that they take can be defined as terroristic in that the Germans (a group of people outside the American and Themysciran state), particularly Dr. Maru and

General Ludendorff, use their country’s armies and mustard gas to attempt to gain control

over and kill civilians and soldiers from other countries (using violence and antagonistic

methods to gain control over and destroy the state).

When villains who are enemies of the state are not racial minorities or immigrants,

they are disfigured or mentally ill and remain mostly male. In Batman Forever, the Riddler

wants to enact mass mind control on Gotham’s citizens by placing Nygma tech boxes on

everyone’s TVs. He is out for revenge when Batman refuses to partner with him and his

boss fires him. He partners with Two-Face, who blames Batman for his disfigurement.

Both villains, as every villain in each film under investigation, want power, and in this

particular case, their longing for power is gendered in nature. Both externalize rather than

internalize (as is associated with women) their anger at losing their job and becoming

disfigured, respectively.

Despite the film having been made prior to 9/11, the theme of villains wanting

power and seeking it through terroristic means while protagonists use that as their

justification for attacking villains continues. The presentation of this terrorism, however,

is presented in a much lighter-hearted, absurdist, humorous way in juxtaposition to films

like The Dark Knight or Black Panther. Furthermore, their goal is far more individualistic

than that of terrorists in the terms that we tend to think of them in a post-9/11 world, where terrorists are typically presented as being associated with religious organizations or racist groups.

As with the Riddler and Two-Face from the far more absurdist Batman Forever, the Joker in The Dark Knight is disfigured, mentally ill, white, and male and is an enemy of the state. The Joker robs a bank, offers to partner with the mob with the goal of killing

Batman. He threatens to kill people every day until Batman reveals his true identity and murders civilians who try to defend the city and impersonate Batman. He shoots at

Gotham’s mayor but ends up injuring Lieutenant Gordon who intervenes. He sexually harasses Rachel (Batman and Harvey Dent’s love interest), throws her out of a window, abducts her and keeps her in a warehouse with explosives, and kills her (via the explosives in the warehouse). The Joker tricks a cop into entering his cell in jail and holds him hostage to force the other cops to let him make a phone call, and implants a bomb into the man he captured that explodes when he uses the phone. He kidnaps Gotham City News (GCN) reporter Mike Engle and forces him to announce that Gotham City belongs to the Joker.

He forces fleeing citizens who are trying to escape via ferry to make the decision to blow up another ferry by pressing the detonator’s button by midnight with the threat of exploding both if they do nothing.

As consistent with the themes of male characters, particularly mentally ill ones, externalizing their anger and pain, the Joker is vengeful, corrupt, and power-hungry, and much of his dangerousness and status as an enemy of the state is attributed to his mental illness and disfigurement. Out of the six films that were viewed, his character’s actions are the most obvious examples of terrorism, using bombs to threaten and murder as many innocent people as he can until his demands have been met. Like the villains in Batman

Forever, his motives are much more individualistic than that of stereotypical fundamental

Islamic terrorists in a post-9/11 world.

In Black Panther, Ulysses Klaue is a white, English man with a scar on his forehead who, when captured by the CIA, is portrayed as being mentally ill, and he is also positioned as the enemy of the state. Klaue steals a quarter ton of vibranium, a metal that the

Wakandans had used to develop some of the world’s most advanced technology and buildings, from Wakanda and bombs the border in order to escape, killing Wakandans in the process. He plans on selling the stolen vibranium axe to CIA agent, Everett Ross, in

South Korea and tells Killmonger, with whom he has partnered, that Wakandans are

“savages.” He is able to justify his imperialistic, terroristic actions against them through white supremacy, once again perpetuating the idea that people of color, specifically Black people, are subhuman and part of Nature rather than Humanity (Moore 2016:79).

Perhaps the most unique out of all films, Wonder Woman features Ares, the God of

War, as a villain who is the enemy of the state. He disguises himself as Sir Patrick Morgan, a British, white, cisgender man who is trying to negotiate peace with Germany at the

Supreme War Council. Unlike the other villains who are the enemies of the state, in his true form, he is a God and cannot be identified by a human race, but when he chooses to take on a human form as a disguise, he chooses to represent a person who occupies multiple positions of power—white, cisgender, and man. While the other villains are disfigured, racialized, mentally ill, or in some way marginalized, he is not, which is more reflective of

66 the theme of female-lead films having white, cisgender men as villains, although in Tank

Girl and V for Vendetta, those villains are the state rather than its enemies.

Neither Fascist Nor Terrorist: Killmonger

While Klaue from Black Panther does more easily fit the label of terrorist,

Killmonger’s motivation for being an enemy of the state is entirely unique in contrast to every other villain in the six films under analysis. Killmonger, formerly Erik Stevens, is the son of Prince N’Jobu of Wakanda, who wanted to share Wakanda’s technology with people of African descent around the world in order for them to overthrow their oppressors.

Because the country is isolationist, it did not want the world to know about its technology, which prompted Prince N’Jobu to hire Klaue to steal the vibranium. King T’Chaka discovers this and is forced to confront and kill him, as well as abandon N’Jobu’s son, Erik.

Erik Stevens becomes Killmonger and allies himself with Klaue to steal a vibranium axe from a London museum, confronting the museum curator when she says that the artifact is not for sale by saying, “How do you think your ancestors got these? You think they paid a fair price? Or did they take it, like they took everything else?” Unlike the other villains who are positioned as enemies of the state, his motivation is anti-colonization; it is based on his race and his childhood experience being abandoned as a result of the murder of his father by the King of Wakanda.

Although he is similar to the white, male villains from the other films who are motivated by revenge and want to gain control over or destroy the state, Killmonger does not appear to want to destroy the Wakandan state, nor control it out of a sense of entitlement

67 or due to being mentally ill or disfigured and wanting revenge as a result. For him, it appears to be because he wants to assume the throne and power in order to fulfill his father’s legacy of sharing such advanced technology with people of African descent world- wide; he wants to dismantle white supremacy, in contrast to Black Panther, who is allied with the CIA. He wants to liberate Black people world-wide rather than assume power only to be able to abuse and weaponize it for his own selfish gains, unlike the white, male enemies of the state. He also murders Klaue and returns his body to Wakanda, which further shows that he understands the threat that he has posed to Wakandans, which reifies the idea that he does not only care about himself.

Continuing with this image of a more complex villain, when Black Panther and he fight for the throne in the final battle and Black Panther stabs him but offers to heal him,

Killmonger chooses to die free over living incarcerated. This speaks volumes about the harsh conditions for Black men in the United States’ prison industrial complex, as well as highlights how whereas white, male villains would see no ends to the depths of their quest for power, he understands that he has lost.

Villains and Fascism

In contrast to films with male leads where the enemies of the state are often disfigured, mentally ill, or racialized, films with female leads often feature male villains who head oppressive, fascist states. As previously mentioned, both Tank Girl and V for

Vendetta show villains as (mostly) male members of the ruling class who threaten female

68 characters with rape, sexual harassment, kidnapping, and death in order to maintain their power over the state.

Returning to Dr. Lawrence Britt’s fourteen characteristics of fascism, V for

Vendetta meets the following characteristics: powerful and continuing nationalism; disdain for the recognition of human rights; identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause; rampant sexism; controlled mass media; obsession with National Security; religion and government are intertwined; disdain for intellectuals and the arts; obsession with crime and punishment; rampant cronyism and corruption (Britt 2003:20).

The Norsefire Party has control over the government and is led by Chancellor Adam

Sutler, backed by the police (Eric Finch), Secret Police (Peter Creedy), and Fingermen

(men who enforce nightly curfews on when citizens are allowed outside and who attempt to rape Evey for being out past curfew—obsession with crime and punishment; rampant sexism; rampant cronyism and corruption). The Norsefire, with the aid of the media—

Roger Dascomb (TV broadcasting), and Lewis Prothero (the Voice of London)—and the

Eye (Conrad Heyer, the head of the government’s visual surveillance department), Ear

(Brian Etheridge, the head of the audio surveillance department), and Mouth (Roger

Dascombe, the head of the propaganda department) of the government control the dissemination of information to everyday citizens (controlled mass media; obsession with

National Security; rampant cronyism and corruption). They reinforce the fascist ideas that

Black people, lesbians and gay men, Muslims, Jews, immigrants, protesters, etc. are responsible for societal violence, disease, and war (identification of enemies/scapegoats as

69 a unifying cause; disdain for the recognition of human rights). The Voice of London recites the mantra, “Strength through unity, unity through faith” on TV (powerful and continuing nationalism; religion and government are intertwined).

It is implied that Bishop Anthony Lilliman molests young children, as his page tells him when Evey arrives to see him that she is older than expected, and he tries to rape Evey, who is dressed like a child (rampant sexism). Dr. Delia Surridge is a medicinal chemist who had worked in Larkhill concentration camp, administering viruses to society’s undesirables (marginalized peoples), who she says she found pathetic (powerful and continuing nationalism; disdain for the recognition of human rights; identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause). Evey’s boss, Gordon Deitrich, is executed by the government for satirizing the government on his talk show and for owning the Qur’an, gay photography, and art prohibited by the government (powerful and continuing nationalism; controlled mass media; disdain for intellectuals and the arts; obsession with crime and punishment; rampant cronyism and corruption).

With the exception of Dr. Delia Surridge, all of these villains are male and in positions of power that uphold the supremacy of a fascist state. Thus, the violence they inflict is largely gendered, xenophobic, and racist, reflective of hegemonic power dynamics. The Fingermen and the Bishop in particular try to suppress Evey with the threat of rape, knowing that they will not have to face consequences since they are men in positions of power operating under the protection of the government. The Fingermen can threaten Evey because they can accuse her of sedition and because, much like real-life

victims of sexual assault, they know that people will likely not believe her or will think

that her being out past curfew justified the consequence, echoing Suarez and Gadalla’s

(2010:2024) finding that men buy into rape acceptance myths.

Likewise, because the media and government’s propaganda team have effectively

convinced the public that society’s ills have been caused by minorities, they have

effectively succeeded in committing genocide via concentration camps against lesbians,

gay men, Black people, immigrants, those labeled political threats, Muslims, and all other

groups deemed to be a part of Nature rather than Humanity (Moore 2016:79). They have

reinforced white and male supremacy and reified the idea that those who are marginalized

or subordinated are disposable.

One key gendered difference among these villains, however, is that Dr. Surridge, the only female villain of the film, apologizes for her actions to the title character, V. She acknowledges that what she did was cruel, prompting V to allow her to die painlessly compared to the male villains. This implies that she is more likely to self-reflect than her male peers, perhaps because despite being in a position of power, she is still a woman who likely has had gendered experiences that the male villains have not that would prompt her to be more sympathetic.

However, the fact that she could still experiment on and torture innocent peoples and only apologize in death when confronted with one of her victims calls into question

her sympathy or the worth of such an apology. It also shows that white women are often

just as guilty as white men of upholding white supremacy.

Similarly, Tank Girl meets the following: disdain for the recognition of human rights; identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause; supremacy of the military; rampant sexism; corporate power is protected; obsession with crime and punishment; rampant cronyism and corruption (Britt 2003:20).

Like V for Vendetta, the film is set in a dystopian future. In this version of the future, the planet is in an ongoing, eleven-year drought with a corrupt corporation, Water & Power, as led by Kesslee, that has a monopoly over the little water that remains (corporate power is protected; rampant cronyism and corruption; disdain for the recognition of human rights). Kesslee and his soldiers attack Tank Girl’s home, as her boyfriend, her boyfriend’s daughter, and she own the only well that the corporation does not have, murdering her boyfriend, kidnapping his daughter, and imprisoning and torturing Tank Girl (disdain for the recognition of human rights; identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause; supremacy of the military; obsession with crime and punishment). One of the soldiers forces Tank Girl at gunpoint to remove her clothing (rampant sexism). The soldiers put her boyfriend’s daughter, Sam, to work at a strip club called Liquid Silver, where the madam pimps her out to a pedophile who tries to steal her silver (money) (rampant sexism). A

Water & Power soldier tries to force her to perform fellatio (rampant sexism). Kesslee puts her to work at the corporation against her will, and the soldiers force her into a tube to make her claustrophobic (disdain for the recognition of human rights; supremacy of the

military). Sergeant Small sexually harasses Jet, the mechanic (rampant sexism; supremacy

of the military). Water & Power has a partnership with the military, led by Captain

Darouche; the military-grade tanks and jets protect Water & Power (corporate power is

protected; supremacy of the military).

Most of the threats that the all-male Water & Power soldiers direct at Tank Girl, Jet

Girl, and Sam are ones of sexual violence, insulting their statuses as women. As in V for

Vendetta, because they occupy positions of power—as men, as white people, as a

corporation that has more rights than people, as an extension of the military—they sexually

harass and attempt to assault them because they can get away with it. With Jet Girl and

Tank Girl imprisoned at Water & Power, they do not have a choice but to do whatever is

asked of them if they hope to survive. As with Bishop Lilliman who can easily take

advantage of children, the madam and pedophile at Liquid Silver are able to sexualize and

abuse Sam because Water & Power forcibly separated her from her family and because she

is a (presumably) defenseless child. Unlike Delia Surridge, none of them shows remorse

or apologizes for their actions.

Water & Power being protected by the military and having a monopoly over the water supply is reflective of how Nestlé pays $200 a year to bottle water in Evart that it sells for a profit while citizens—mostly Black and poor—in Flint are charged over $200 a

month for lead-poisoned tap water that they do not use (Glenza 2017). The motivation of

continuous profits outweighs the value of human lives, particularly when those lives are

Black and poor. Similarly, Water & Power attempts murder, rape, and torture techniques on their female targets in order to preserve their both corporate and gendered power.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

In response to my initial inquiry, “What are the differences between how American superhero films from 1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2019 use their protagonists to portray gendered power dynamics?”, themes of disfigurement and mental illness

(disposability), male threats against women, and the relationship of the hero and villain to the state (terrorism or fascism) have emerged. In the highest-grossing American English- speaking single-protagonist American superhero films, most of the heroes are portrayed as white, male, mentally well, non-disfigured, and allies to the state. Most of the highest- grossing films are directed by men, particularly white men. Most of the villains are white men as well, although they do not fit hegemonic masculinity in that they are disfigured or mentally ill (or both).

Female leads still largely embody hegemonic femininity in that they are white, cisgender, non-disfigured, physically-abled, and mentally well. The occurrence of female villains is rare, but in the three instances—Dr. Maru (Wonder Woman), Dr. Surridge (V for

Vendetta), and the madam (Tank Girl)—where they do appear, they are portrayed quite differently. Dr. Maru is portrayed as disfigured (albeit less gruesomely than her male counterparts and trying to hide it) and German, and Dr. Surridge is portrayed as embodying hegemonic femininity and upholding the supremacy of a fascist state. The madam plays a much more minor role than Dr. Surridge or Dr. Maru and still embodies hegemonic

femininity in that she is white, thin, non-disfigured, and is not made to appear to be mentally ill. However, all work to preserve the supremacy of their respective states.

The genders of the directors also influence the portrayal of female characters.

Female directors tend to depict their female protagonists as more powerful, often confronting their enemies head on, but through their mobilization with other characters.

The one male director who features a female protagonist tends to still portray her as a damsel-in-distress who still ultimately has to rely on a male (anti)hero for help. Male directors’ overall characterizations of women still perpetuate gender stereotypes, regardless of the decade under observation, reifying Bogarosh (2013) and Gilpatric’s

(2010) previous findings that women are often shown as damsels-in-distress, passive love interests, and sexual objects. Thus, female superheroes still seem to exist for the male gaze or to be supportive of male characters.

As anticipated, similarly to in real life, women still experience male threats of sexual violence in differing degrees, ranging from the “gray area” of sexual harassment to rape. However, on film, these threats are more often than not portrayed as morally reprehensible and are perpetrated by the villains rather than the heroes. But the people who are portrayed as sexual predators are often mentally ill or disfigured, which reinforces the idea that these types of people who less embody hegemonic masculinity (or femininity, in one instance) are more likely to be hazards to others. It also makes it seem as though people like the male protagonists in these films who better embody hegemonic masculinity are less likely to be predators.

In terms of the relationship of the heroes to the state, most of the male villains and

female heroes are enemies of the state. A majority of the male villains who are the enemies of the state are portrayed as mentally ill or disfigured and thereby disposable; white; racialized; and/or immigrants. When villains are mentally ill or disfigured and male, they tend to be more physically violent and thus direct threats to the other characters, and their villainy itself seems to stem from their disposable status.

Future studies may consider viewing a greater number of films in order to determine

if these patterns are as prevalent and similar in more films throughout the decades. This

greater number of films may include films with multiple protagonists, as in recent years,

these films have become more commonplace and may reveal deeper intricacies of gendered

power dynamics. Due to time constraints, this is one weakness of this study—only being

able to examine films with one protagonist, and only being able to watch six as opposed to

all thirty-six.

However, in terms of strengths, my study has allowed us to observe the reciprocal

relationship that the gender order that superhero films and society have with one another,

how society mirrors film and film mirrors society and how that relationship has remained

fairly consistent over the last three decades. This enables us to see not just what gendered

norms in society are but how capitalism is reproduced and continues to reproduce the social

stratification of marginalized groups both on and off-screen. The study being qualitative rather than quantitative, unlike many previous studies, has also allowed me to explore the

76 richer depths of gendered power dynamics by explaining who is positioned as a hero and villain and offering possible explanations as to why.

Thus, we have effectively moved beyond mere costuming, as referenced in Chapter

1, the physicality of what it means to be a hero and villain in American superhero films, and thus in our culture itself. We have come to understand how gender is embedded into capitalism and facets of our society, including film.

Based on the box office numbers and the continuous popularity of superhero films, we can see that the American public clearly values this type of entertainment, just as we can see more implicit values that these films feed the American public that reinforce dominant gender dynamics and capitalism. While Black Panther and Wonder Woman offer some hope in that they offer more nuanced villains, motivations for villainy, heroes, and gendered power dynamics, they are still products of the deeply misogynistic, ableist, racist, classist society in which we live. If we wish to see heroes who are more diverse, villains who are not racist, xenophobic, or ableist stereotypes, we need to see changes to the fabric of society itself. Only then can we see true changes in who gets to be a hero and who has to be a villain.

Appendix A: Coding Scheme

Categories Definition 1. Demographics The heroes’ and villains’ cultural traits and physical appearances, such as gender, race, accent a. Gender If subjects are women, men, or other (gender-fluid, agender, or no clearly identifiable gender) b. Race If characters are Black, white, Asian, Latinx (a gender-neutral term for Latino/a), or other (racially ambiguous, non-human, or another racial group not listed) c. Nationality Indicators of characters’ nationality, such as accent 2. Violence Any act of harm committed by a protagonist or antagonist against another character, with or without the use of a weapon a. Target Name (if given) of the character being attacked by the protagonist and antagonist b. Hero’s Justification Why the hero’s use of violence against this character is acceptable or unacceptable c. Villain’s Motivation Why the villain uses violence against the hero and other characters 3. Relationship to the State The hero’s relationship to the state (i.e. enemy of the state) a. Ally The hero or villain works with the state to maintain civil order. b. Enemy The hero or villain works against the state.

References

Alcalde, M. Cristina. 2014. “What It Means to be a Man?: Violence and Homophobia in Latino Masculinities On and Off Screen.” Journal of Popular Culture 47(3):537- 553.

Ames, Christopher. 1992. “Restoring the Black Man’s Lethal Weapon: Race and Sexuality in Contemporary Cop Films.” Journal of Popular Film & Television 20(3):52-59.

Bogarosh, Nichole A., et al. 2013. “The Princess, the Damsel, and the Sidekick: Women as the ‘Other’ in Popular Films (2000-2011).” ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2013.

Boyle, Ellexis. 2010. “The Intertextual Terminator: The Role of Film in Branding ‘Arnold Schwarzenegger.’” Journal of Communication Inquiry 34(1):42-60.

------, and Sean Brayton. 2012. “Ageing Masculinities and ‘Muscle Work’ in Hollywood Action Film: An Analysis of The Expendables.” Men and Masculinities 15(5):468-485.

Britt, Lawrence. 2003. “Fascism Anyone?” Free Inquiry 22(2):20.

Brook, Heather. 2015. “Bros before Ho(mo)s: Hollywood Bromance and the Limits of Heterodoxy.” Men and Masculinities 18(2):249-266.

Burke, Nathaniel B. 2016. “Hegemonic Masculinity at Work in the Gay Adult Film Industry.” Sexualities 19(5/6):587-607.

Charlebois, Justin. 2010. Gender and the Construction of Dominant, Hegemonic, and Oppositional Femininities. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Clarke, Juanne N., and Rachelle Miele. 2016. “Trapped by Gender: The Paradoxical Portrayal of Gender and Mental Illness in Anglophone North American Magazines: 1983-2012.” Women’s Studies International Forum 56:1-8

Connell, R. W., and J. W. Messerschmidt. 2005. “Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking the Concept.” Gender and Society 19:829-859.

Dingfelder, S. 2011. “Study Uncovers a Reason behind Sex Differences in Mental Illness.” Monitor on Psychology 42(10):14.

Dixon, Jeffrey C., and Michael S. Rosenbaum. 2004. “Nice to Know You? Testing Contact, Cultural, and Group Threat Theories of Anti‐Black and Anti‐Hispanic Stereotypes.” Social Science Quarterly 85(2):257-280.

Donovan, Barna William. 2009. Blood, Guns, and Testosterone: Action Films, Audiences, and a Thirst for Violence. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

Dow, Dawn Marie. 2016. “The Deadly Challenges of Raising African American Boys: Navigating the Controlling Image of the ‘Thug.’” Gender & Society 30(2):161- 188.

Eckert, Linda O., Naomi Sugar, and David Fine. 2002. “Characteristics of Sexual Assault in Women with a Major Psychiatric Diagnosis.” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 186(6):1284-1291.

Esposito, Jennifer. 2003. “The Performance of White Masculinity in Boys Don’t Cry: Identity, Desire, (Mis)Recognition.” Cultural Studies/Critical Methodologies 3(2):229-241.

Fitch, Taylor Jennelle, Xiao Yu, Lung-Chang Chien, Mohammad Monjurul Karim, and Hasanat Alamgir. 2018. “Traumatic Life Events and Development of Post- Traumatic Stress Disorder among Female Factory Workers in a Developing Country.” International Journal of Social Psychiatry 64(4):351-358.

Giaccardi, Soraya, Monique L. Ward, and Rita C. Seabrook. 2016. “Media and Modern Manhood: Testing Associations between Media Consumption and Young Men’s Acceptance of Traditional Gender Ideologies.” Sex Roles 75(3):151-163.

Gilpatric, Katy. 2010. “Violent Female Action Characters in Contemporary American Cinema.” Sex Roles 62(11):734-746.

Glenza, Jessica. 2017. “Nestlé Pays $200 a Year to Bottle Water Near Flint – Where Water is Undrinkable.” The Guardian, September 29. Retrieved March 7, 2019 (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/29/nestle-pays-200-a-year-to- bottle-water-near-flint-where-water-is-undrinkable).

Goettner-Abendroth, Heide. 2018. “Re-Thinking ‘Matriarchy’ in Modern Matriarchal Studies using Two Examples: The Khasi and the Mosuo.” Asian Journal of Women’s Studies 24(1):3-27.

Gray II, Richard J., and Betty Kaklamanidou, eds. 2011. 21st Century Superhero: Essays on Gender, Genre and Globalization in Film. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc.

Greven, David. 2009. “Contemporary Hollywood Masculinity and the Double- protagonist Film.” Cinema Journal 4(48):22-43.

Gwynne, Joel, and Nadine Muller, eds. 2013. Postfeminism and Contemporary Hollywood Cinema. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave MacMillan.

Hunt, Darnell, Ana-Christina Ramón, Michael Tran, Amberia Sargent, and Debanjan Roychoudhury. 2018. Hollywood Diversity Report 2018: Five Years of Progress and Missed Opportunities. Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los Angeles, College of Social Sciences.

International Movie Database (IMDb). 2018. “Help Center – Adding Data.” Retrieved February 4, 2018 (https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/contribution- information/adding-data/G6BXD2JFDCCETUF4#).

Lee, Nancy. 2010. “‘Let’s Hug It Out, Bitch!’ The Negotiation of Hegemony and Homosociality through Speech in HBO’s Entourage.” Culture, Society and Masculinities 2(2):181-198.

Levant, Ronald F. 1997. “The Masculinity Crisis.” Journal of Men’s Studies 5(3):221.

Locke, Brian. 2014. “‘The White Man’s Bruce Lee’: Race and the Construction of White Masculinity in David Fincher’s Fight Club (1999).” Journal of Asian American Studies 17(1):61-89.

Lu, Alexander, and Joel Y. Wong. 2014. “Stressful Experiences of Masculinity among Young U.S.-born and Immigrant Latino American Men.” Culture, Society and Masculinities 6(2):111-128.

Moore, Jason W. 2016. Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, History, and the Crisis of Capitalism. Oakland, CA: PM Press.

Moyers, Bill D., and David Puttnam. 1988. “Hollywood’s Role in Shaping Values: David Puttnam.” Retrieved November 14, 2016.

Pennell, Hillary, and Elizabeth Behm-Morawitz. 2015. “The Empowering (Super) Heroine? The Effects of Sexualized Female Characters in Superhero Films on Women.” Sex Roles 72.5(6):211-220.

Porta, Miquel, and John M. Last. 2018. A Dictionary of Public Health (2 ed.) Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Public Broadcasting System (PBS). 2002. “COINTELPRO.” PBS. Retrieved February 5, 2019 (https://www.pbs.org/hueypnewton/actions/actions_cointelpro.html).

Roblou, Yann. 2012. “Complex Masculinities: The Superhero in Modern American Movies.” Culture, Society and Masculinities 4(1):76-91.

Shane, Scottt. 2016. “Abu Zubaydah, Tortured Guantánamo Detainee, Makes Case for Release.” The New York Times, August 23. Retrieved February 18, 2019 (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/24/us/abu-zubaydah-torture-guantanamo- bay.html).

Shary, Timothy. 2012. Millennial Masculinity: Men in Contemporary American Cinema (Contemporary Approaches to Film and Media Series). Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.

Silver, Eric. 2002. “Mental Disorder and Violent Victimization: The Mediating Role of Involvement tin Conflicted Social Relationships.” Criminology 40(1):191-212.

Smith, S.G., Chen, J., Basile, K.C., Gilbert, L.K., Merrick, M.T., Patel, N., Walling, M., & Jain, A. 2017. The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010-2012 State Report. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Suarez, Eliana, and Tahany M. Gadalla. 2010. “Stop Blaming the Victim: A Meta- Analysis on Rape Myths.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 25(11):2010-2035.

Tucker, Robert C., eds. 1978. The Marx-Engels Reader. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

U.S. House of Representatives. U.S. Code: Annual Country Reports on Terrorism. Title 22, Section 2656f(d). Washington, DC: U.S. House of Representatives.

Wakefield, Jane. 2016. “Foxconn Replaces ‘60,000 Factory Workers with Robots.’” BBC News, May 25. Retrieved August 5, 2018 (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36376966).

Walker, Andy. 2015. “The Twins of Auschwitz.” BBC News, January 28. Retrieved March 7, 2019 (https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30933718).

Waters, Melanie, Dr., eds. 2011. Women on Screen: Feminism and Femininity in Visual Culture. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave MacMillan.

Yen, Rhoda J. 2000. “Racial Stereotyping of Asians and Asian Americans and Its Effect on Criminal Justice: A Reflection on the Wayne Lo Case.” Asian Law Journal 7(1):1-29.