Wonder Woman's and Supergirl's Origins

Home , Adventure Comics, Beau Smith, Decay (DC Comics), Diana Prince, Egg Fu, Fury (DC Comics)

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ...... 1 Thesis Abstract...... 2 Introduction ...... 3 Chapter One: Liberation ...... 14 Historical Background ...... 15 Second Wave Definitions ...... 17 Women’s History Background ...... 18 Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s Origins...... 22 Superpowers ...... 23 Independent Lifestyles ...... 33 Higher Education ...... 36 White-Collar Careers ...... 40 Financial Independence ...... 46 Without Powers ...... 52 Provocative Poses ...... 60 Bondage Scenes ...... 66 Target Practice with Wonder Woman ...... 69 Phallic Missiles ...... 71 Sexier Costumes...... 73 Emotional and Mental Stereotyping ...... 80 Summary ...... 85 Chapter Two...... 87 Silly Feminist, Superheroine Comic Books are for Men!...... 87 Telling Advertisements ...... 88 Letter Content ...... 99 Liberation Requests ...... 100 Superheroines with Masculine Behaviors ...... 112 Wonder Woman’s Male Intolerance ...... 118 Sexual Objectification ...... 123 Romance and Autonomy...... 135 Female Friendships and Team-ups ...... 140 Summary ...... 144 Conclusion ...... 151 Bibliography ...... 155

Acknowledgements None of this would have been possible without the loving support of my husband

Jim and my family. I am especially thankful for my mom’s support and her advice in my childhood to question the status quo. I would also like to thank my committee chair

Professor Katherine Hijar who kept me motivated. Professors Watts and Xiao were also invaluable in offering advice on my thesis.

Thesis Abstract This study argues that comic book publishers, editors, writers, artists, and fans

imposed multiple limitations on Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s powers and independence. Although Wonder Woman and Supergirl embodied significant liberated characteristics: superpowers, independent lifestyles, higher education, white-collar careers, and financial independence, they were most limited by advertisements aimed at males and were also portrayed as unintelligent women, disempowered, and objectified.

This study compares 242 of Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics from

1959 to 1984. The plots, images, and letter pages were analyzed in the context of Second

Wave Feminism and the Cold War era. This study indicates a change over time from the superheroines’ portrayals of liberation to sexual objectification and the editor’s, writer’s, artist’s construction and fans’ reception of the women’s movement in comic book culture. The present study enhances existing scholarship in the fields of Women’s

Studies, Media and Popular Culture Studies, and Sociology challenging popular cultural images of empowered superheroines. Although this study may seem of concern to only a small group of scholars and comic book fans, it should in fact concern anyone who cares about why gender inequity continues to exist. My original contribution shows how the influences of fans’ letters in Wonder Woman and Supergirl and the editors’ responses to the fans’ requests limited the superheroines’ liberated powers and behaviors by encouraging a sexualized style of superheroine art.

Keywords: comics, comic books, women’s movement, feminism, Wonder Woman, Supergirl, fan culture

Introduction

“You take feminine beauty and pervert it! You make your girls objects!”1 In

1972, Wonder Woman shouted this at a villain who used beautiful women as secret weapons. At first glance, the academic and feminist argument that women are objectified appears as neither new nor original. But on closer inspection, I argue that, on the one hand, Wonder Woman and Supergirl from 1959 to 1984, exemplified the following liberated characteristics and behaviors: superpowers, independent lifestyles, higher

education, white-collar careers, and financial independence. This was important as

Wonder Woman and Supergirl embodied feminist ideals during the Women’s Movement

era. On the other hand, I also argue that the editors, writers, artists, and fans imposed

multiple limitations on Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s liberated characteristics and

behaviors. These findings have important implications for the broader domain of

showing how power is distributed and limited based on gender. The first limitation that

publishers imposed appeared in the romance supplements, bodybuilding, and BB gun

advertisements in Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics. These images and messages shed light on whether the status quo that appeared in the supplements and advertisements directly challenged women’s changing roles in America or were products of sales and marketing. Second, I argue that the editors, writers, and artists imposed further limitations on the superheroines by making the superheroines adhere to behaviors that were expected of actual women during the Cold War era. The superheroines reflected these behaviors of real women who acted unintelligent to attract men and appeared overly emotional and mentally unstable in the superheroines’ plotlines. This discovery will have significant applications in interpreting how male influence on popular cultural icons

1 Wonder Woman 199/1972.

perpetuates women’s inequality.2 Third, I argue that the editors and writers imposed

limitations on the superheroines’ superpowers by making them endure lengthy periods of

disempowerment. This move was unprecedented in comic books. If I am right about the

reasons for the superheroines disempowerment, then major consequences follow for

actual women’s efforts towards empowerment and equality. Fourth, the editors, writers,

and artists imposed limitations by using multiple forms of sexual objectification which

included: provocative poses, bondage scenes, sexy costumes, bulls-eye targets, and images of Wonder Woman riding bombs and rockets. Although such poses may seem insignificant as they appeared to a finite audience in comic books, these findings should appeal to scholars and the general public alike who are concerned with the reasons that powerful female characters are sexually objectified.

Finally, I argue that the extent of fans’ contributions in Wonder Woman and

Supergirl and the editors’ responses to the fans’ requests shaped the superheroines’

liberated behaviors that resulted in a sexualized style of superheroine art. Ultimately,

what is at stake here is the cyclical role of DC’s marketing strategies to male audiences

that perpetuate women’s sexual objectification. My study of the period from 1959 to

1984 of fans’ letters and editors’ reactions in Wonder Woman and Supergirl, shows how

the fans’ direct influences from writing letters and sharing opinions changed the portrayal

of the superheroines from liberated to sexualized. This should interest those who have

previously given little thought to the idea that fandom has relatively no influence on the

real world. Beyond the world of fandom and scholars, my point should speak to anyone

who cares about the representation of female power on television, video games, movies,

and in comic books.

2 Certainly women have influenced women’s inequality, consider Phyllis Schlafly.

My core argument is that the comic book editor’s, artist’s, and fan’s sexual objectification of the superheroines limited their liberated strength given to them by their superpowers, careers, education, independent lifestyles, and financial independence. This conclusion points to a larger present world conversation about moving closer towards women’s equality that is free from controls and limitations by either gender.

Feminist scholar Lillian S. Robinson argued that Wonder Woman’s Amazonian powers were her most liberated quality.3 To a large extent, the present work agrees with her perspective, yet finds that by no means did the superheroines’ powers represent the totality of their liberated attributes and behaviors. My contribution adds to feminist and women’s popular cultural histories the importance of Wonder Woman and Supergirl reflecting actual women’s independence. Wonder Woman and Supergirl also fulfilled a void in the realm of superheroes by being liberated superheroines and role models for boys, girls, women, and men. The present study acknowledges that a minority of actual women held non-traditional careers and were both personally and financially independent during the Second Wave of the Women’s Movement era. Most importantly, no other scholar has determined the range of topics that appeared in the fans’ letters. These included women’s gendered roles in advertisements and Cold War era stereotyped behaviors of actual women in Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics. Another important contribution of my thesis that concerns the fans’ letters is that I quantified each time a fan wrote about women specific topics. My quantification of these fans’ reprinted letters demonstrates how Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s images and behaviors did and did not reflect actual women’s liberation.

3 Lillian S. Robinson, Wonder Women: Feminisms and Superheroes, Routledge, New York, 2004, p. 15.

Although not the first superheroine to appear in comics, when DC in 1941,

published Wonder Woman, she was the first superheroine character to challenge the real

world’s typecast women’s roles. Supergirl followed in 1969, making these superheroines

the first two long enduring comic book series that starred solo-titled women.4 From 1959

to 1984, an almost entirely male staff of writers for Wonder Woman and Supergirl scripted stories about women’s liberation for an almost all male audience.5 In 1969 and

1973, female fans enthusiastically applauded DC’s innovative presentation of liberated

superheroines in comparison to DC’s competitors.6

DC was the first comic book publisher to catapult a liberated superheroine into

mainstream American popular culture.7 DC portrayed their female characters as strong,

capable, and liberated. The liberated superheroines from DC represented an important

alternative for male and female readers who had, up to that point, primarily seen women

appear as only vamps, tramps, detectives, thieves, con-artists, and as hopeless romantics

in teen and romance comics.

The comic book format is more complicated than most scholars give it credit. For

this reason, I first analyze the placement of the art in the comic book. Some art that

appeared on the covers of Wonder Woman and Supergirl did not relate to interior

plotlines. Upon opening the comic, the first page, known as the splash page, the reader

found one continuous illustration, which more often reflected the actual plotline, but not

4 Marvel picked up the trend of solo-titling superheroines starting in 1977. Supergirl’s first appearance in 1959 did not yet appear in her own solo-title. 5 DC editors stated that much of their editorial staff college aged. Moreover, it is clear that many women influenced the earlier writing of Wonder Woman including supervisory staff that checked the content. For more information on their histories, see Les Daniels, Wonder Woman: The Complete History, Chronicle Books, San Francisco, 2000. 6 Wonder Woman 382/1969, Nicole Anne letter. Wonder Woman 208/1973, Veronica Perkins letter. 7 DC influenced Marvel to follow suit in the late 1970s with their versions of liberated superheroines, Ms. Marvel and She Hulk.

always. The subsequent panels found throughout the rest of the comic book told the

remaining story. In the early 1970s, larger rectangles and squares were shuffled around

on the page, instead of the stricter formation of six to nine parallel panels. Instead of

showing the superheroines in combat action, the larger squares and rectangles

emphasized a sexually objectifying style of art. This art more featured the superheroines’

busts and bottoms than it showed them in action sequences. Together, the cover, splash

page, and panels featured art that was less reflective of the liberated superheroines in

action sequences that appeared before 1970. The static poses in the larger art panels

sexually objectified Wonder Woman and Supergirl.

Most importantly, comic book letter pages, unlike narrative fiction, films, and

television, provided a form of immediate and interactive communication between fans,

writers, artists, and editors. DC published serial comic book titles once per month with

the occasional special extra issues. My analysis covers Wonder Woman and Supergirl

comics from 1959 to 1984 in which there were 242 comic book issues. Of these 242

comic books, fans responded to ninety percent, expressing their critiques and

endorsements of the superheroine characters and storylines. Their edited comments appeared from three to five months later in a section of the comic book known as letters of comment or letter pages. On average, editors published and responded to between seven to nine letters on the comment page.8 About ten percent of Wonder Woman and

Supergirl comics did not contain fans’ letters due to special feature length issues and first

8 Average attained from compilation of 242 total Wonder Woman and Supergirl comic books.

7 print issues for which fan mail was not yet generated. Other reasons included publication timelines that editors needed to meet or simply an absence of enough fans’ responses.9

This study does not analyze female villains, thieves, or bad girls who were featured in many comic books from 1959 to 1984. Though these types of comic book women certainly represent other types of liberation, none had the distinguishing and independently self-named title or long-running comic book series called for in this study.

This thesis does not include evidence from DC’s unpublished letters. Editors noted that some unpublished letters expressed the similar opinions and requests as those of actual published fan letters when they received large amounts of mail on topics such as women’s liberation, costume changes, and the superheroines’ disempowerment (when the editors and writers made the superheroines lose their superpowers).10

Comic Book History

Jules Feiffer authored one of the earliest American comic book history compilations in 1965.11 Authors like him gained expert knowledge of comics through having grown up reading the books and becoming artists or editors who also had access to first hand knowledge from publishers and fellow editors and artists. Though comic

9 Author’s note: not every comic book issue contained LOC’s for several reasons; some were first issues, publication constraints, too few letter received, new character development, and increasing advertising space. Changed to Wonder Woman Reader’s Write to September-October of 1968, to The New Wonderful World of Wonder Woman from November-December 1968. The letter’s column title changed in 1971 with Wonder Woman’s Write-In and then to Princessions in 1972. The Princessions title came from a letter column contest that received over 700 entries and remained the same until 1975. Wonder Woman 194/1971, Wonder Woman’s Write-In 203/1972, Princessions. Submitted by Anthony Kowalik. Wonder Woman 216/1975, Wonder Words. Wonder Woman 262/1979 to 315/1984 Wonder Words. 10 Disempowerment: Supergirl 2/1973, Mike Shoemaker letter. Supergirl 4/1973, Gregory Bennett letter. Liberation: Adventure Comics 409/1971, editorial response. Costumes: The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 5/1983, The editors led by saying, “#1 has been in the stands for about two weeks and already we’ve received over 100 pieces of mail commenting on our efforts.” Wonder Woman 179/1968, representative letters chosen. An example in Wonder Woman 201/1972, Denny O’Neill editor wrote, “Every mail delivery brings ten or twelve new letter; literally hundreds of you have taken time to wish us well.” 11 Jules Feiffer, The Great Comic Book Heroes, Bonanza Books, New York, 1965.

book history compilation books contain useful details such as colorful illustrations,

timelines, first appearances, and editorial staffing, the majority of the history is based on

approaches to studying the comic book industry that is more nostalgic than analytical. A

scholarly approach is absent. Nevertheless, these comic book experts have laid important

historical foundations on which the historian can expand. Les Daniels, in Wonder

Woman: The Complete History, 2000 and Roy Thomas, in the foreword of DC Archive

Editions: Wonder Woman, 2010, offer the best index and timeline of various editors and

artists in Wonder Woman. Additionally, their research shows that women working with

William Moulton Marston (Wonder Woman’s creator) had a much stronger influence in

the publication of Wonder Woman before 1959. David Hajdu, an exception to nostalgic

comic book history, offers a scholarly approach in The Ten-Cent Plague, 2008, and

provides a thorough background story of the Cold War era’s psychologist Fredric

Wertham and the censoring responsibilities of the Comics Code Authority.12

Researcher Michael L. Fleisher researched his 1976 book, volume two of The

Encyclopedia of Comic Book Heroes, inside the library archives of DC comics in New

York. His book offers a detailed reference guide to the first twenty-seven years of

Wonder Woman’s comics, primarily about character appearances. Trina Robbins, one of

the only female writers to write about comic book women in history, presents a wide

variety of liberated heroines and villainesses in her book From Girls to Grrrlz, 1999.

In the early 1950s, one event stands out in the comic book histories of scholars

and experts alike: Dr. Fredric Wertham’s attempts to make the government censure

12 David Hajdu, The Ten-Cent Plague: The Great Comic-Book Scare and How it Changed America, Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, New York, 2008.

comic book content in 1954.13 As a result, in 1954, comic books publishers offered to

self-regulate their book using a Comics Code Authority stamp that appeared on all comic

books to avoid government regulation. In the early 1960s, the Comics Code Authority

relaxed its adherence to the codes. Following these less restrictive codes, mild forms of

nudity and sexual inferences started to appear in Wonder Woman and Supergirl. After

1970, the combination of older male readers, relaxed Comics Code Authority guidelines,

and specialty comic book shops formed a culture that fostered the relationship between

adult male readership and comic books. In Comic Book Culture 1999, Matthew Pustz

argued that this relationship between present day comic book fan culture and comic book

characters influenced future comic book stories and characterizations.14 The present

study adds to Pustz’s work evidence from twenty-five years of fans’ requests and editors’ responses to these requests in Wonder Woman and Supergirl, which changed the portrayal of the superheroines from liberated to sexualized.

More recent scholarship, beginning in the early 1980s, analyzes the relationship of American comic book superheroines and their connections to women’s history and feminism. Thus far, all academic research on the topic of feminisms and popular culture comes from the fields of Sociology, Art History, Media and Popular Culture Studies,

Communication Studies, Women’s Studies, American Studies, and English Literary

Studies.15 These scholars argue that real women’s liberation became usurped by the

portrayal of sexy and powerful women in popular cultural media.

13 Richard Reynolds, Superheroes: A Modern Mythology, University Press of Mississippi, Jackson, 1992, p. 8. 14 Matthew J. Pustz, Comic Book Culture: Fanboys and True Believers, University Press of Mississippi, Canada, 1999, p. 22. 15 Women’s scholar Lillian S. Robinson’s research about Wonder Woman and feminisms has been very influential to the present study.

Susan J. Douglas, who analyzed the film industries, television shows, and comic

books argued that such portrayals of women’s roles promoted their sexual objectification

and subordinate roles to men. Sherrie Inness argued that women who appeared in

popular cultural media from the 1960s to 2002 demonstrated tough attitudes while

looking sexy but did not challenge conventional women’s roles. The present study

argues that comic book editors, artists, and fans challenged conventional roles for real

women in Wonder Woman and Supergirl but limited these liberated attributes and

behaviors on several levels. These included: making Wonder Woman and Supergirl go

without superpowers for longer durations than any superhero, making them appear as if

they harbored anti-male attitudes, making them appear sexier both in costume and

provocative poses, making them appear emotionally weaker and mentally inferior to men,

making their female friendships appear as plotline drivers, and finally, making them fight

with other superheroines instead of mutually fighting other villains and villainesses.

Chapter Layout

Chapter one of this thesis covers twenty-five years from 1959 to 1984 in Wonder

Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics, which emerged in tandem with Second Wave feminism

in the Women’s Movement. The chapter discusses the extent of Wonder Woman’s and

Supergirl’s liberated characteristics and behaviors: superpowers, independent lifestyles, higher education, white-collar careers, and financial independence. From 1968 to 1972, specific women’s liberation stories appeared in Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics. These topics closely reflected actual women’s barriers to equality over the course of just twenty-four pages; women’s domestic roles, insufficient women’s job qualifications, women’s wage inequality, women’s organizations, sexual harassment, loss

11 of actual men’s power, and women’s anger. Chapter one also shows how the writers constrained Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s liberated behaviors and attributes by portraying them as women who acted less intelligent, shopped to feel better, acted overly emotional, and behaved as if mentally unstable. The second portion of chapter one demonstrates how the editors and writers constrained Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s liberated attributes and behaviors when they made the superheroines live without any of their superpowers in their everyday lives. From 1968 to 1973, Wonder Woman lived as an action adventurer who faced lesser villains, but not as a superheroine would.

Although Supergirl kept being a superheroine when she was disempowered, she was forced to use her wit against villains when her powers failed her. In addition, chapter one demonstrates how the editors, writers, and artists portrayed the superheroines images in provocative poses, bondage scenes, sexier costumes, bulls-eye targets, and images of them riding bombs and rockets. Unlike superheroes, the superheroines sexier portrayal in action sequences detracted from their empowering and liberating superpowers.

Chapter two shows that Wonder Woman and Supergirl comic books enticed male audiences instead of female. It shows how and when comic book advertisements switched from marketing to girls and women with romance and educational supplements to mainly boys and men with bodybuilding and BB gun advertisements. This chapter also analyzes the fans’ most frequently published topics—superheroines’ powers, women’s liberation, women in charge, sexier costumes, domesticating marriage attempts, and female friendships—that appeared in the letter pages from 1959 to 1984 in Wonder

Woman and Supergirl. Letter page content indicated important demographic information such as the fans’ age and gender. In the early 1970s, male fans indicated for the first time

12 that they liked the sexier images of Wonder Woman and Supergirl. In addition, this study shows the editors’ responses to these fans’ comments and requests and the extent to which the editors acted upon them.16 Like the letter pages, advertisements indicated audience demographics by the public service messages and products marketed. Together, the letter pages and advertisements demonstrated a shift towards adult male readership in the early 1970s.

This analysis of how Wonder Woman and Supergirl simultaneously appeared as both liberated and sexualized, challenges popular cultural scholarship of women’s images and gendered behaviors and stereotypes. That editors, artists, and fans, meted out limitations to every liberated behavior and characteristic of Wonder Woman and

Supergirl, emphasizes the influential role that male comic book fan culture held from

1959 to 1984.

16 As studied from the author’s personal collection, a cumulative 277 issues, including DC giants and anniversary issues. Wonder Woman issue 140/1963 to 315/1984 and Supergirl in Action Comics 255/1959 to The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 23/1984.

Chapter One: Liberation Superheroine comic books are fantasy stories about incredible women with identical abilities as those of superheroes such as Supergirl’s flight and heat vision and

Wonder Woman’s herculean physical strength. In Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics anything could happen: their powers of flight could take them to outer planetary systems, their strength could save humankind. From 1959 to 1984, comic books featured superheroes in ninety percent of the publications in comparison to superheroines who appeared in their own comic books. In 1941 and 1959, Wonder Woman and Supergirl were the only two superheroines that DC published as solo-titles among numerous superhero titles. In the late 1960s, lesser superheroines like Saturn Girl, Triplicate Girl,

Shrinking Violet, Batgirl, the Huntress, and the Invisible Woman wielded superpowers, but their appearance in superheroes’ comics or in superhero teams suggested they had less status and importance compared to Wonder Woman and Supergirl. Despite their exemplary liberated behaviors and characteristics during the Women’s Movement, which included, superpowers, independent lifestyle, higher education, white-collar careers, and financial independence—comic book editors, writers, and artists portrayed Wonder

Woman and Supergirl as, above all else, sexy. In 1941, Wonder Woman debuted in a sexy costume wearing nothing more than an elongated bustier, however Supergirl did not wear a sexy costume in 1959. But their editors, writers, and artists did share a common emphasis of objectifying the superheroines’ images for the male fans’ visual pleasure starting in 1941 for Wonder Woman and 1968 for Supergirl. In the early 1970s, for the first time, male fans publicly praised the superheroines’ sexier appearances in the letter pages so that all parties—editors, writers, artists, and fans—mitigated Wonder Woman’s

and Supergirl’s liberated characteristics and behaviors by emphasizing the superheroines’

sexuality for the male fans’ visual pleasure. Wonder Woman and Supergirl challenged

the status quo for actual women but never gained complete utility of their potential

powers and abilities as superheroes did.

Historical Background

From 1959 to 1984 in Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics, the Holocaust, the

end of WWII, the Cold War, Vietnam, the hippie counterculture movement, the Civil

Rights movement, student activism, and race riots informed the storyline content of

comic books.17 After 1945, many American women left their Rosie the Riveter jobs and

returned to their roles as homemakers, a position society considered to be the ideal

occupation for women. Men returned to work while most women returned to the home,

which gave men an unequal advantage in the wage-earning work force. This advantage

gave men the ability to access a wider variety of job fields while women’s job skills and

income-earning potential became limited. In the 1950s, while American families enjoyed

the ideal mom at home and dad at work—a deep fear of Communism brewed in the Cold

War era atmosphere. This sense of mistrust permeated the storylines of popular culture

mediums such as the film and comic book industries. At this time, mostly children read

comic books and concerned parents and academics believed that the uncensored comics

showed content that rejected authority as well as portraying violence against women and

men.18 This perception of the comic book’s unwholesome influence on America’s

children and families escalated when psychologist Fredric Wertham associated

17 Bruce J. Schulman, The Seventies: The Great Shift in American Culture, Society, and Politics, DaCapo Press, Cambridge, 2001. This is a good general era specific history that reaches into the 1960s and 1980s as well. 18 Hajdu, p. 215.

delinquent juvenile activities with the content in comic books.19 Wertham’s accusations resulted in the 1954 Comics Code Authority stamp of approval as comic book publishers volunteered to self-regulate and label their comics to signify that the content did not contain violence, sex, or nudity. Though the child-friendly significance of the stamp was for the benefit of parents and children, many adults read comics as well.20 The censure

was relaxed in the early 1970s as comics moved off newsstands and grocery stores and

into new specialty comic book shops. This early 1970s shift is especially important in the

comic book industry as it cultivated a male adult following which led to the portrayal of

Wonder Woman and Supergirl looking sexier and acting less liberated.21

Though censured, comic books continued to reflect important events of the 1960s.

These included the 1960s hippie counterculture, which threatened to undo a 1950s ideal home and work life of parents, while their hip and laid-back children resisted their strict parents’ culture.22 The Civil Rights Movement of the mid-1960s raised awareness of the inequalities, intolerance, and injustice in the lives of African Americans. The sexual revolution in the 1960s emerged from the advances in birth control that led to American society experimenting with sexual freedoms. The Civil Rights Movement fueled student protests as models of successful political activism against the Vietnam War in the late

1960s.23 However, the storylines in Wonder Woman and Supergirl most reflected the

Second Wave of Feminism of the Women’s Movement, which began in the early 1960s

and dissipated in the mid 1980s. The superheroines’ storylines from 1968 to 1973

19 Ibid, p. 229. 20 Ibid, p. 285. 21 Mike Benton, The Comic Book in America: An Illustrated History, Dallas, Taylor Publishing Company, 1989, p. 82. 22 Lois W. Banner, Women in Modern America: A Brief History, Wadsworth, Belmont, 2005, p. 165. A great general history from a woman’s history perspective, 1890-2004. 23 Jo Freeman, The Politics of Women’s Liberation: A Case Study of an Emerging Social Movement and its Relation to the Policy Process, David McKay Co. Inc., New York, 1975, p. 12.

reflected the height of women’s liberation in comic books when the real world Second

Wave Women’s movement was also peaking in the mid 1970s.24

Second Wave Definitions

American society widely held ideas about how women should and should not behave as women attempted to break free from conventional roles of the 1950s. Society partly defined these ideas with the words “feminine,” “femininity,” “feminist,” and

“liberation,” which all signify many different meanings. For the purpose of this thesis, the meaning of the words “feminine” and “femininity” signify a woman’s acting out learned and assigned gender behaviors and roles, such as acting motherly in a nurturing and caring way or preferring the color pink over blue. The word “feminine” also signifies a woman’s socially constructed appearance, attitude, sexuality, and physicality.

From 1959 to 1984, comic book superheroines acted out stereotypical female behaviors associated with their femininity that limited their liberated behaviors, such as feigned ignorance and depending on men to confirm their worth.

The word “feminist” in the Women’s Movement era, signified a woman or man who pursued the ideals of women’s liberation. The words “liberation” and “liberated” signify a woman’s individual and conscious choices and attitudes that affect how she makes decisions about the equality and balance of power to men. Most of the comic book editor’s and writer’s ideas about women’s liberation centered around the superheroine portraying actual women’s equality by using their superpowers and being equal to men by having careers, independent lifestyles, and higher education.

24 Superheroines’ liberation stories: Wonder Woman 178/1968, Wonder Woman 203/1972, Wonder Woman 219/1975, Super DC Giant Supergirl S-24/1971, Adventure Comics 416/1972, and Adventure Comics 417/1972. Start of sexualization: Adventure Comics 382/1969, p. 13. Supergirl appears in only bra and panties.

“Sexualization” as defined in the American Psychological Association Report of 2007, is

the act or process of making a person or thing to be seen as sexual in nature.25 Comic

book editors, writers, and artists projected this type of sexualization onto the characters of

Wonder Woman and Supergirl. When readers, editors, and writers of Wonder Woman

and Supergirl used the terms “feminine” and “femininity,” these words almost always

referred to the superheroines’ appearance and sexuality. When comic editors and writers

referred to “liberated” in the letter pages, they referenced real world events in the

women’s movement.

Women’s History Background

The next section briefly explains the causes of the women’s movement and

importance in understanding how this era influenced the comic book editor’s, writer’s,

and artist’s portrayal of fantasy-liberated women. Many scholars acknowledge the work

of Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique, 1963, as marking the start of Second Wave

Feminism in the Women’s Liberation movement.26 Betty Friedan’s research analyzed

women’s magazines and challenged psychological and sociological research that argued

in favor of validating women’s desires and personal achievements as strictly belonging to

the home and family environments. She pointed out that magazine editors and writers

alike held responsibility for continuing the false notion that housewifery fulfilled an

occupational role for women.27 Betty Friedan named the predicament of the discontented

25 American Psychological Association Report, 2007. APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls (2007- 02-19). Report of the APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls, Executive Summary, American Psychological Association. Accessed January 2012. 26 Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 1963. Scholars include: Caroline Bird, Susan J. Douglas, Sara Evans, Susan Faludi, Jo Freeman, Richard Reynolds, Lillian S. Robinson, and Ruth Rosen. 27 Friedan, p. 44.

housewife as “the problem that had no name.”28 She argued that most middle-class women went about their domestic duties as unfulfilled women when motherhood and marriage left the women questioning, “Is this all?” Betty Friedan is credited for naming the unequal barriers that women faced in work and education and telling women what to do about it.

In 1966, with Betty Friedan’s book came a new social awareness of women’s equality, which quickly led to the formation of the National Organization for Women

(NOW).29 Later, feminist editor and publisher, Gloria Steinem used her new magazine,

Ms. Magazine, published in 1972, to give focus and publicity to the demands and

messages of the women’s movement. The magazine also gave recognition and a

designated print space to women who believed they faced the sense of dissatisfaction

alone.30 Although many more women assumed leadership roles in the women’s

movement, the mass media most heavily publicized the activities of feminists Betty

Friedan and Gloria Steinem.

Some of the legislation that resulted from the women’s movement changed the

social processes of male-dominated institutions that barred women from equal access in

employment and education. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a result of the

African American Civil Rights Movement and revitalized the feminist movement. This

act legally equalized wage and labor practices while Title IX of the Education Act of

1972 allowed women to fully participate in the benefits of a higher education at colleges

28 Ibid. 29 Other women-specific organizations followed suit, including the Women’s Bureau in Washington, D.C. and the Congress of Labor Union Women in 1974. Banner, p. 169. 30 Ms. Magazine, Vol. I, No. 1, July 1972.

19 and universities.31 The Supreme Court ruling of Roe v. Wade in 1973 proved to be and continues to be, one of the most debated areas of women’s rights to maintain legal permission for abortion.

In addition to legal advances, women took the most control of their reproductive capacities starting with the birth control pill in the early 1960s. The ability to prevent unwanted pregnancy emboldened women’s sexual behaviors. In cities, many single working women enjoyed, for the first time, the freedom and pleasures in experimenting with multiple sexual partners without fear of pregnancy.32 From 1968 to 1973, special comic book plotlines about women’s advances in work, education, financial independence, and sexual freedoms appeared in five issues of Wonder Woman and

Supergirl. The superheroines less frequently appeared in comic book plotlines when the editors and writers featured the superheroines as empowered. This included when the superheroines moved in and out of conflict and resolutions when the editors, writers, and artists portrayed them fighting off villains, freely dating, going to college, working, and spending their own money. However, the comic book editors, writers, and artists more often portrayed the superheroines in plotlines with limited elements of liberation throughout 1959 to 1984. Lillian S. Robinson argued that the superheroine’s superpowers allowed them to enter the world of superheroes who not only protected themselves, others, and fought against villains, but also used their superpowers for the ultimate resolution of conflicts.33 My argument shows the degree to which Wonder

Woman and Supergirl used their superpowers and the degree to which the editors, writers, and artists limited their superpowers.

31 Banner, p. 181. 32 Schulman, p. 174. 33 Robinson, p. 13.

Present day scholarship of fictional action women in popular cultural media,

(television, film, video games, graphic novels, comics, music, and even reality television

shows) has ceased labeling action heroines as liberated or feminist. Feminist scholarship

is attempting to reconcile pop culture’s portrayal of tougher women’s attitudes with the

appearance of sexier images. In much the same way as I argued that the two contrary

ideas of women’s liberation and women’s sexual objectification were polar opposites, the

following scholars analyze this argument with a new twist. In 1991, Susan Faludi’s

Backlash compared the differences in films and television shows of the 1970s with those

of the 1980s. Women in the 1970s shows featured women as equal to men, while the

shows of the 1980s featured women’s roles as subservient to men.34 The 1980s films and television shows seemed to feature empowered women, but Faludi argued that these women’s behaviors and images only perpetuated a much broader social phenomenon.

This phenomenon was what Faludi called a backlash against the Second Wave of

Feminism from 1963 to the mid-1990s. Faludi argued that women never really reached equality to men, yet consumer culture and mass media made it appear as if they had.

Moreover, the increasing portrayal of sexier but tough women added to this illusion that women could have it all. Faludi warned that women needed to remain leery of such portrayals that promoted women as already having achieved equality to men.

In 2010, in Susan J. Douglas’s Enlightened Sexism, she argued that warrior women, (basically another depiction of tough but sexy women) fit into America’s false belief that women exhibited a greater equality to men since Second Wave Feminism.

Douglas argued that warrior women showed off their sexier bodies and acted tougher, which didn’t just endow these action heroines with empowerment, but seemed to make

34 Faludi, p. 67.

them surpass the toughness of any man or woman. Douglas argued that this combination

of fusing women’s sexual objectification with tougher attitudes was another

commercially produced push towards falsifying women’s beliefs about their equality to

men. These false portrayals of popular culture behaviors and images of women made

them appear as if tough and sexy women held power, when in actuality, men held the

power. 35 In 2004, Jeffrey A. Brown argued in Action Chicks, that filmmakers, television producers, and comic book editors still failed to balance out the dueling roles of the tough woman’s appearance and behavior. 36

I agree with Faludi, Douglas, and Brown that producers of popular cultural media

largely fail to sustain women’s empowerment when their female characters appear as

both sexy and tough. These twentieth century tough but sexy heroines still face the same

feminist interpretation as that of Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s. Wonder Woman’s

and Supergirl’s editors and writers claimed that the superheroines’ behaviors reflected

women’s liberation, yet the superheroines never completely measured up to the equality

of male heroes.

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s Origins

Wonder Woman’s creator; William Moulton Marston was unusual as a comic book writer

and artist due to his background as a psychologist, inventor of the lie detector, and his

radical relationship of living with two women in the 1950s. Marston believed that comic

books were educational and that Wonder Woman’s bondage was instructional. This

instruction stemmed from his philosophy that women were more peaceful than men and

35 Susan J. Douglas, Enlightened Sexism, Times Books, New York, 2010, p. 78. 36 Inness, ed., Action Chicks, Jeffrey Brown, Gender Sexuality and Toughness, p. 60.

22 therefore, should be submitted to, by bondage. Marston’s idea of a powerful woman was groundbreaking in 1941, yet his idea was understood as more radical than profound during the 1950s when women were being taught to submit to the will of their husbands.

It is generally known that Marston shared his affections with two women in the same household. These women were instrumental in influencing his writing about Wonder

Woman starting in 1941 and even scripted some of her stories.37

This unusual ménage a trois and contributions from it, made Wonder Woman different from Supergirl from the beginning. Supergirl was created solely from male minds who made a distaff characterization of her as the female equivalent of Superman.

She was always subordinate to her cousin Superman, though she had the same powers as him. Throughout chapter one and chapter two, these differences are discussed as Wonder

Woman became an instant sex symbol but shifted towards becoming a feminist icon.

Supergirl reflected feminist values but was later only known for her sexual appeal.

Superpowers

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s superpowers gave them the ability to perform super deeds just as their male counterparts did. Wonder Woman’s powers included super speed, agility, strength, mental telepathy, and a high degree of invulnerability from sudden impacts. Though her super abilities did not include flight between 1963 and

1984, she used the winds with such skill that she appeared to fly. As a trained Amazon warrior, Wonder Woman also had an assortment of weapons that included an invisible jet, magic lasso, tiara, specially forged metal bracelets, and a mental radio.38 Compared to Wonder Woman, Supergirl’s arsenal of superpowers represented the most powers that

37 Daniels, p. 26, Robinson, p. 45. 38 Scott Beatty, Wonder Woman: The Ultimate Guide to the Amazon Princess, DK Publishing, New York, 2003, p. 24-29.

superheroines had ever attained at the time of her introduction in 1959. They included

flight, x-ray vision, heat vision, super-breath strong enough to blow things over, strength, speed, agility, invulnerable skin, and super intelligence. Supergirl even had one more power that Superman did not have, a woman’s sixth sense or the ability to perceive incidents before they happened.

Jeffrey Brown in Action Chicks 2004, argued that a great portion of the editors’ and writers’ constraints on the powers of the superheroines stemmed from a 1950s stereotype of associating only men with power but showing power as, “systematically denied to women.”39 My own study supports Browns’ findings as shown in these types of power denials that occurred from 1968 to 1973 when DC’s editors absolutely limited

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s access to power. These occurred in an unprecedented

period in comic book history of five consecutive years without powers for Wonder

Woman and almost two years for Supergirl. No superhero ever endured such a long time

without superpowers.40 From 1968 to 1973, this disempowerment phase signified a

contrarian moment in comics when editors and writers specifically claimed to portray the

women’s movement in specially published comic issues released at the height of the real

world’s women’s movement. In 1969, to compound Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s

denial of power, the editors, writers, and artists began to frequently portray sexy images

of the superheroines. The superheroines’ sexier images constrained all aspects of their

equality to superheroes when editors and writers also continued to portray them as both

liberated and powerful.

39 Sherrie A. Inness, ed., Action Chicks: New Images of Tough Women in Popular Culture, Jeffrey Brown, Gender Sexuality and Toughness, Palgrave, New York, 2004, p. 57. 40 Based on corresponding periods 1959 to 1984.

From the onset, Wonder Woman’s earlier arrival in 1941 Action Comics issue #8

was much different from Supergirl’s arrival in 1959. This difference had major

significance in the editors’ and writers’ WWII portrayal of Wonder Woman with more

freedoms to wield her powers and the Cold War portrayal of Supergirl who initially had

less freedom to perform her powers. Wonder Woman immediately transitioned to her

own solo-title book within the next month after her first appearance but Supergirl’s

transition to a solo-title took ten years. Wonder Woman’s solitary status as the first

superheroine in a world of superheroes made her debut truly groundbreaking and

especially powerful as she challenged 1950s ideas about actual women who wielded

power equal to and often exceeding men’s power.

Ten years is a long time to appear as a subordinate in another superhero’s comic.

As a subordinate, Supergirl did not get to use her powers to their full extent. A conflict

existed between the editors and writers who not only constrained her powers, but also did

not solo-title her character and the fans who claimed they wanted her to be solo-titled.

An example in a 1962 published letter from Supergirl’s editor stated, “Thousands of readers wanted to see Supergirl reap the fame and recognition she had so richly deserved; we had no choice but to yield to their requests.”41 Her positive reception mattered in the

latter part of the Cold War era in the 1960s when superheroes predominantly starred in

comic books and America actively questioned actual women’s roles in society. That

thousands of readers sent in letters demonstrated this sense by requesting to place fantasy

women in empowering roles. In this instance, fans actively participated in showing what

they wanted to see in Supergirl and received a direct response, albeit slow, from the

editors. Action Comics published Supergirl stories under their title until 1962 and

41 Adventure Comics 289/1962, Andy Golub, editorial response letter.

switched to Adventure Comics Starring Supergirl in 1968, after which Supergirl starred

in Supergirl from 1969 in 1972.42 To be sure, from the editors’ initial acknowledgement,

to placing Supergirl in her own book in 1962, to actually doing so in 1969, showed a

seven year delayed reaction on the part of the editors. Sustaining regular publications

meant having a well-liked character such as Wonder Woman, but Supergirl met several

obstacles to getting published in her own self-title. First, Supergirl’s independence suffered under Superman’s fatherly guidance, as did her use of her own powers from

1959 to 1962. Superman forbade her to use them until he felt sure she would not misuse them, but he considered it her duty to assist him when requested. In the Cold War era, some men assumed that women’s domestic work at home was subservient to men’s work outside of the home.

Superman’s request reflected an adherence to America’s Cold War beliefs that

restricted women’s behaviors. A fan in 1970 tried to empower Supergirl by explaining

to the editors that Superman held up her independence as a strong female character due to

the Superman tradition.43 The Superman tradition included key elements from his origin

story in almost every Supergirl story: both had foster parents, both arrived on Earth in

rocket ships, both wore disguises, both carried their costumes in hidden pockets and hid

in small spaces to make quick costume changes, both Superman and Supergirl had

jealous antagonistic friends who sought to reveal their true identities, and both had meek

alter egos.

Supergirl’s writers and editors failed to establish early on in her creation a sense

of distinctive qualities that made her independent of a patriarchal Superman. Under

42 More than 100 Supergirl appearances/titles appeared in Action Comics /1959 and Adventure Comics from 1959 to 1972. Ended: Adventure Comics 368/1968. Supergirl starred. 43 Adventure Comics 400/1970, Jeff Haskins letter.

Superman’s guidance, Supergirl appeared incompetent. For example, during the three

years that Superman watched over Supergirl, he punished her for disobedience, made her

use a key to access his secret fortress, supervised her when performing feats, and often

interfered while she performed these feats.44 Compared to Wonder Woman, the initial

inability of Supergirl to use her own superpowers did not challenge actual women’s roles

in the Cold War era.

A comic book fan noticed inconsistent ways that Superman used his powers in

contrast to how Supergirl used her powers. In 1959, a fan pointed out that Supergirl had

to learn to fly when she arrived on Earth, but Superman did not.45 The fan observed that

her powers, in theory, equipped her with every superpower that Superman had and she

apprenticed under his tutelage for three years from 1959 to 1962. Supergirl’s identical

powers, abilities, and knowledge of using them reasonably inferred that Supergirl’s

powers closely matched Superman’s, yet editors restrained her abilities to perform them.

Rather than acknowledge that her gender prevented Supergirl from performing

like Superman did, the editors and writers responded to the fan that an age difference

gave the pre-teen Superman time to master the skill of flying. Since Supergirl arrived on

Earth as a teenager, the editors reasoned she did not have the years of flying experience

that Superman did. The editor’s explanation in 1959 suggested a continuation of 1950s

ideals that emphasized men’s superior status to women’s intellectual and physical

abilities.

For example, in 1960 Superman ordered her to stay hidden until he permitted her

to appear in public. In an agreeable manner, she acknowledged, “Yes, as a secret ace in

44 Adventure Comics 381/1969, p. 21 spying, Action Comics 262/1960, p. 9 correcting, Action Comics 265/1960, cover disobeyed. Adventure Comics 382/1969, key on cover. 45 Adventure Comics 255/1959, James Freeswick letter.

the hole, I can be of great value to you in all sorts of emergencies, when you’re weakened

by Kryptonite or when you’re up against criminals.”46 Superman’s demands that

Supergirl only use her powers for his own personal emergencies further hindered

Supergirl’s independence. When a red kryptonite comet caused Supergirl to forget her

promise to help Superman when he needed it, she was seen by the citizens of Smallville

doing incredible feats as Superman had once done. To erase evidence of Supergirl’s

existence, Superman used amnesia gas on the entire city of Smallville.47 Not only was

her heroic role as a female superheroine erased by Superman, but her powers were

limited by his demands that she become his super-helper. Though Superman introduced

Supergirl to the world in February of 1962, he held initial responsibility for limiting her powers when he first requested she stay in hiding in from the public in 1959.48 When the

editors kept her in a subordinate role to Superman, they continued the 1950s view that

women though superpowered, were incompetent. When DC publicized Supergirl in

1959, her comic arrived just four years before Betty Friedan’s Feminine Mystique in

1963, which challenged the 1950s Cold War ideologies that held Supergirl back for ten

years.

When Supergirl finally appeared in her own title in 1969, a fan emphasized the

importance of representing strong female characters in solo-titled comic books in her comment, “you give your females star billing! Congrats and keep it up!”49 But not all

fans expressed excitement in 1969 for a super kind of girl. As one fan stated, “Look out!

The women are coming! Females are taking over the last refuge of the real he-men, the

46 Action Comics 265/1960, p. 5. 47 Ibid, p. 13. 48 Action Comics 285/1962, cover bringing her out. 49 Adventure Comics 382/1969, Nicole Allen letter.

super-hero mag. What shall I do?”50 Yet, the fan did not need to worry as nearly all the

advertisements in superheroine comics targeted young males and editors and writers

limited the superheroines’ powers suggesting that the comic book industry did not intend

for women to take over or exhibit excessive power. In 1959, before the onset of Second

Wave feminism in 1963, the editors and writers gave Supergirl the most superpowers any

woman ever had. However, Superman’s oversight of her activities limited her character’s

sense of independence in comparison to Wonder Woman’s independence.51

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s writers limited the superheroines’ full potential

by adhering to Cold War ideologies that women could not hold positions of power. The

editors and writers most often reinforced this idea by limiting the superheroines’

superpowers and matching their strengths against weak foes. Superheroes used their

powers to defeat nemeses who either appeared more powerful or equally matched, but

very rarely appeared weaker than the superhero. This imbalance in power forced the

superhero to rise above his inadequacies thus increasing his credibility and power when

he vanquished foes. In contrast, when facing weak foes, superheroines did not gain

credibility nor appear as if they had accomplished significant feats like superheroes. In

this manner, editors and writers limited the superheroines’ full utility and equality of

power while superheroes continued to gain power and credibility.

When Wonder Woman and Supergirl starred in their own comics, the editors and writers had more creative freedom to portray the superheroines in action sequences in their own stories as opposed to superheroines who appeared in other superheroes’ stories.

By giving the superheroines star billing, the superheroines had to rely on their own

50 Adventure Comics 385/1969, Martin Jones letter. 51 Adventure Comics 382/1969, p. 17. Supergirl was one of the few beings who could actually harm Superman as exemplified when she accidentally scorched him with her heat vision.

powers to get out of trouble, save the world, and defeat villains. The superheroines

appeared in action from fifty to seventy-five percent of the time in the comic book.

However, Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s editors and writers limited their power as

action heroines by pairing them against second-rate monsters such as giant eggs, magical imps, and amphibious aliens.

Wonder Woman #158/1965 fighting an egg

These kinds of foes did not play to the superheroines’ strengths as the foes of superheroes did. When Wonder Woman fought, she often faced incompetent and childish foes that she too easily defeated. For example, the 1965 teaser-text on the cover of issue #158 read, “The Oriental EggHead! And his ‘Mustache Trap!’ Never before

Shown! Pitting Wonder Woman against ‘The Fury of Egg Fu!’”52 Besides the racial

stereotype carried over from the post WWII era, Egg Fu looked like a giant egg-shaped

creature who appeared sillier than he did as a menacing foe.

52 Wonder Woman 158/1965, cover.

Supergirl fought her own cadre of innocuous villains. A 1971 issue illustrated the type when Supergirl battled several Mer-men from a distant planet—bubble headed green fish-like men in tights. The battle lasted less than three pages as Supergirl easily overpowered them, while in the rest of the story she mainly spent her time figuring out how to save her friend and discovering the aliens’ purpose.53

Adventure Comics #409/1971 Supergirl faces Mer-Men

The editors’ and writers’ announcements about the superheroines’ powers compounded their interactions with ineffective foes. The superheroines’ actions appeared out of sync with the editor’s header text—the yellow narrative found above a comic panel. Wonder Woman’s announced, “Granted the Wisdom of Athena, the strength of Hercules, the speed of Mercury and the beauty of Aphrodite by the gods” whereas Supergirl’s hailed her as a “maid of steel” and “maid of might.”54 However, the

53 Adventure Comics 409/1971, p. 14. 54 Common narrative text that appeared in almost every Wonder Woman comic, example in Wonder Woman 270/1980.

boastful text appeared to be more of a marketing ploy than an actual claim of substance

as Wonder Woman fought an oversized egg and Supergirl faced-off with fish in tights.

From 1969 to 1983, seventeen fans of Wonder Woman and Supergirl commented

on the caliber of the superheroines’ opponents.55 The fans mainly remarked that no foes

adequately challenged the superheroines’ powers. In 1983, a fan asked the editors why

they did not make better use of the superheroes’ rogues’ gallery for the superheroine.56

The editors responded that they wanted to give Supergirl distinction and her own

personality.57 Yet when giving Supergirl her own foes, the editors and writers made her

fight lesser villains, unlike Superman’s more powerful nemeses. In this way, the editors

and writers reinforced America’s Cold War era ideas about actual women and their

perceived inability to handle or wield power.

When the editors and writers prevented the superheroines’ opportunities to prove themselves against advanced and more powerful adversaries, they inferred that no matter how powerful the superheroines’ appeared, their powers did not equal those of superheroes. For example, Superman had Lex Luthor, and Batman had the Penguin,

Joker, and Doc Octopus, whereas Wonder Woman’s well-known nemesis, the Cheetah, suffered from severe psychological issues and inferior physical strength.

55 Wonder Woman 185/169 Shirley A Gorman, Dr. Cyber. Wonder Woman 234/1977 Scott Gibson, Cheetah, Wonder Woman 256/1979 Sarah Finnegan Orana, Wonder Woman 256/1979 Mike Burkhalter, Orana, Wonder Woman 280/1981 Dusty Leart, Cheetah, Wonder Woman 280/1981 Anthony Peter Molchan, Cheetah. Adventure Comics 393/1970 Albert Franklin, Kimor, Adventure Comics 399/1970 Carlton Sloan, 401/1971 Donald Bryant, Nasti, Adventure Comics 411/1971 Gerard Triano, Nasti, Adventure Comics 411/1971 Bob Rozakis, Starfire and Nasti, Adventure Comics 419/1972 Paul Kupperberg, TDNAOS 5/1983 William Armstrong, TDNAOS 7/1983 Kent Phenis, PSI and Decay, TDNAOS 7/1983 Charles Brown, TDNAOS 8/1983 Melissa Hardie, PSI, TDNAOS 8/1983 Neil Ahlquist, Ms. Mesmer. 56 Supergirl 3/1983, Kent A. Phenis letter. A rogue’s gallery is a superheroes/heroines commonly used set of villains and villainesses. 57 Supergirl 3/1983, editorial response to Kent A. Phenis letter.

Wonder Woman #230/1977 Wonder Woman fighting the Cheetah

Unlike superhero villains concerned with world domination or obliteration— depending on the villain—the villainesses in Wonder Woman and Supergirl acted jealous and catty, chiefly concerned with the obliteration of the beauteous superheroine.58 For

Supergirl, instead of allowing her original and noteworthy foes, editors and writers handed down second-tier villains and villainesses that they borrowed from Superman’s old stories.

Independent Lifestyles

In this section on the independent lifestyles of the superheroines, I argue that

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s editors and writers overcame a 1950s belief that

58 The main villainesses from 1962 to 1984 were the Cheetah and Dr. Cyber in Wonder Woman comics and Nasti and Starfire in Supergirl comics. Wonder Woman 160/1966, Cheetah, Wonder Woman 180/1969, Dr. Cyber. Adventure Comics 404/1971, Starfire and Adventure Comics 406/1971, Nasti. One of Supergirl’s fans who referred to the villainess Nasti in a 1971 letter, questioned why DC “has to base a majority of its plots on a conniving female trying to figure out the main character’s secret identity.” Adventure Comics 411/1971, Dan Mulcahy letter.

characterized independent and sexually active women as unwholesome. The editors and

writers made Wonder Woman and Supergirl reflect the empowering traits of being

independent in the women’s movement era. Lois Banner argued that this double- standard, “was in force, and the arbiters of middle-class morality decreed that women must remain virgins until marriage.”59 The independent superheroine challenged

America’s expectations of actual women’s behaviors while reflecting the lifestyles of

women who made their own decisions in romantic relationships, living arrangements, and

careers.

From 1959 to 1984, Wonder Woman and Supergirl remained independent—even

though they dated men. It mattered that they appeared as independent women as they

role modeled an independent lifestyle, they engaged in love affairs, and had multiple

romantic partners. Up to 1977 and 1980, they reflected real women’s independence and

equality as the only two long-running and solo-titled comic book superheroines during

the Women’s Liberation Movement.60

A major part of the reason that the editors and writers caused Wonder Woman and

Supergirl to remain independent dealt with the superheroines’ superpowers and vengeful

enemies. The ongoing battles between villains and the superheroines prevented the

superheroines from having romantic relationships. The liability of a lovers’ possible

endangerment also endangered the superheroine. For example, from 1963 to 1967

Wonder Woman had to rescue Steve Trevor at least five times.61 Then in 1968 and 1971, when Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s romantic relationships superseded their purpose, they lost their powers. In both cases, when the editors and writers broke off the

59 Banner, p. 148. 60 Ms. Marvel first appearance 1977 and She Hulk first appearance 1980. 61 Wonder Woman 141/1963 to Wonder Woman 167/1967.

superheroines’ romantic relationships, they killed the male character and disempowered

the superheroine. This fail-safe plotline for the preservation of the superheroines’

character prevented her from becoming domesticated and always assured her

independence.

While in the romantic relationships, Wonder Woman and Supergirl also reflected

the behaviors of actual women who challenged the status quo by engaging in sexual

relationships with multiple partners. In this way, Wonder Woman and Supergirl

exhibited sexual behaviors that were similar to those of Superman and Batman. This

equality in sexual behaviors was an exception to how comic book editors and writers

typically constructed superheroines’ behaviors. Comic book editors more often made the

superheroines appear unequal to superheros in the areas of superpowers and sexualized

images.

Wonder Woman and Supergirl embodied the advice given by feminist Helen

Gurley Brown in her 1962 book titled Sex and The Single Girl. Brown encouraged actual

women to shop around for partners and enjoy multiple sexual partnerships.62 The behaviors she advocated involved dressing and acting sexy, staying physically fit, and achieving orgasms. For Brown, sex meant more than coitus, as it signified a physical attraction between a man and woman. Wonder Woman and Supergirl exhibited this sexual and physical attraction when dating men in their storylines.

Ten years later in 1973, the opposite real world advice of Brown’s appeared in

Marabel Morgan’s The Total Woman. Her marriage advice stressed the conservation of an idealized lifestyle where the husband worked at the office all day and the wife stayed at home. Morgan argued that women who did not want to put their husbands first, should

62 Helen Gurley Brown, Sex and The Single Girl, Random House, New York, 1962, p. 7.

stay single. Morgan’s higher valuation of the husband’s work dismissed the importance

of the wife’s work at home and did not reflect women’s movement ideals that sought to

empower women. Her greatest backlash against empowering women’s ideals argued that

wives should be more concerned with the sexual needs of their husbands than the healthy

pursuit of their own.63 To the contrary of Morgan’s advice that adhered to restrictive

Cold War ideologies, Wonder Woman and Supergirl reflected actual women who lived

out Helen Gurley Brown’s real world advice. For instance, from 1962 to 1969, Wonder

Woman dated only one man—Steve Trevor, though other men showed interest in her. At

one point in 1976, Wonder Woman turned down Steve’s sexual advances stating, “it’s

late and corny though it sounds, I’m getting a headache.”64 By turning down Steve

Trevor’s sexual advances, Wonder Woman showed a growing sense of independence not

always present in her storylines. Wonder Woman more often dropped almost everything

she was doing to be with Steve Trevor. After her writers killed off Steve Trevor in 1969,

Wonder Woman dated five men between 1969 and 1983 including neighbors, co-

workers, and other superheroes.65 When she dated these men, Wonder Woman did everything that Helen Gurley Brown advised, short of the editors and writers showing her in the bedroom, by looking and acting sexy.

Higher Education

The writers of Wonder Woman and Supergirl mostly challenged America’s post

WWII commonly held ideas that women attended college mainly to meet eligible

63 Marabel Morgan, The Total Woman, G.K. Hall & Co., Boston, 1973, p. 97. 64 Wonder Woman 224/1976, p.2. 65 Wonder Woman 182/1969, p. 13, Reggie kiss, Wonder Woman 199/1972, p. 25, Jonny kiss. Wonder Woman 224/1976, Steve Trevor reborn to 248/1978. Wonder Woman 256/1979, p. 13, Mike Bailey date. Wonder Woman 262/1979, p. 12, Wonder Woman 269/1980, p. 7, Tod the roommate. Wonder Woman 268/1980, splash, Animal-Man. Wonder Woman 300/1983, Wonder Woman 300/1983, p. 65, Steve Trevor break up. Technically, she dated six, due to the undead Steve, but this is a very complicated explanation.

bachelors. Wonder Woman and Supergirl reflected actual college-educated women who

attended college for the purposes of obtaining a higher education instead of looking for

marriage partners. I argue that the editors and writers did not uphold the liberating action

of women who sought college educations when they portrayed Supergirl acting like

actual women who pretended to be less intelligent than they really were. The editors and

writers portrayed Wonder Woman and Supergirl as intellectually gifted women with high

IQs. For example, in 1979, NASA accepted Diana Prince’s, aka Wonder Woman’s, first

attempt to become an advanced astronaut trainee. She excelled at top physics courses

and easily solved complex mathematical equations.66 In 1969, Linda Danvers, aka

Supergirl, easily translated Swahili in her literature course.67 Wonder Woman trained as

an Amazon warrior but also trained in advanced sciences on Paradise Island. Supergirl

not only had advanced training in sciences but had a superior intellect and attended

college and university from 1968 to 1984.68 Supergirl’s editors and writers sent her to

college earning multiple degrees at a time in the 1970s when real women also benefitted

from equal access to higher education. Of the two superheroines, the majority of

Supergirl’s years spent on campus at Stanhope College in 1968, Vandyre University in

1972, and at Lake Shore University in 1982 most closely mirrored Second-Wave

feminisms educational reforms for women such as Title IX of the Education Act of

1972.69

66 Wonder Woman 256/1979, p. 4. 67 Adventure Comics 385/1969, p. 6. 68 Phil Jimenez and John Wells, The Essential Wonder Woman Encyclopedia, Ballantine Books, New York, 2010, p. 319. Both Wonder Woman and Supergirl had the advantage of higher learning due to their upbringing in supernatural home environments, Paradise Island and Argo City. 69 Adventure Comics 369/1968, Stanhope. Author’s note: marking general start of Second Wave feminism from Betty Friedan’s 1963 work, The Feminine Mystique, where she named the woman problem as “the problem that has no name,” p. 15-22.

Linda Eisenmann’s research on women and higher education in postwar America

argued that existing barriers to women’s education included exclusionary admission

policies. Eisenmann also argued that actual women’s courses mainly prepared them for

domestic roles in the home as opposed to self-supporting careers such as engineering.70

In contrast to the real world, female professors in the comics instructed Supergirl in

history and science courses.71 Women characters portrayed as professors and doctors in

the comics reflected an anticipatory forecast of changes to come rather than the reality of

the postwar era that actual women lived in. Fewer actual American women worked in

white-collar careers compared to the women characters and superheroines who worked in

white-collar fields. According to Lois Banner, the mid-1950s “era of domesticity”

marked a time when actual girls had either dropped out of college for marriage or married

at age eighteen right after high school.72 In 1971 and 1974, Supergirl’s educational

career was the exception to this standard as she never married. Instead, she earned

degrees in Social Sciences and Theatre Arts by her early twenties.73

Despite Supergirl’s editors and writers showing her as an exception to women

leaving college early to get married, they limited Supergirl’s superior intellect by making

her act less intelligent than she really was in order to attract the attention of men. In this

way, she did not challenge typical behaviors of actual women in the Cold War era. For

instance, in 1969 Linda Danvers held back from correcting a professor’s equation in

Chemistry class in order to let a male classmate she liked offer the right answer first.74 In

70 Linda Eisenmann, Higher Education for Women in Postwar America, 1945-1965, Johns Hopkins University Press, Maryland, 2006, p. 6. 71 Adventure Comics 393/1970, p. 2, Dr. Alexander. 72 Banner, p. 141. 73 Adventure Comics 406/1971, p. 2. Superman Family 165/1974, graduates from Van Dyre with Masters Degree. 74 Adventure Comics 385/1969, p. 6.

another example, Linda purposefully selected just enough wrong answers on her exams

in order to appear ordinary.75 For the smartest woman on Earth, this behavior did not communicate her high level of intelligence. A fan in 1970 noticed this and wondered what kind of grades she received. The editors replied, “good, not perfect, she actually does a kind of negative cheating.”76 Rather than let Supergirl role model that women’s intelligence was an empowering and equalizing attribute, their reply reflected the reality that women sometimes faked being less intelligent to let men feel in control and in power. Supergirl’s editors and writers prevented her from showing her superior female intelligence and equality to actual men’s intelligence when she acted less intelligent in college so that she could date men.

As recently as 2004, a study of actual women in college revealed that they purposefully refrained from answering questions before men did and answering too many questions in order to attract male members of the class.77 Grace Palladino’s magazine

research showed that women’s behavior of acting dumb in order to attract boys stemmed

from an earlier era in the 1940s. She noted that magazine advice for girls recommended

that they did not point out their boyfriend’s errors—boys did not appreciate “brainy”

girls.78 Supergirl reflected this stereotype on two occasions in 1969 when in class and

when on a date. Supergirl’s behavior which reflected actual women who pretended to be

less intelligent than the men they wanted to attract, did little to dissuade readers that

actual women’s behaviors had changed from the 1950s.

75 Ibid. 76 Adventure Comics 392/1970, Howard Katzman letter. 77 Susan Jones and Debra Myhill, Troublesome Boys' and 'Compliant Girls': Gender Identity and Perceptions of Achievement and Underachievement, British Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol. 25, No. 5 (Nov., 2004), Taylor & Francis, Ltd, pp. 547-561 (p.548), http://www.jstor.org/stable/4128701, accessed 1/2012. 78 Grace Palladino, teenagers: An American History, Basic Books, New York, 1996, p. 25.

White-Collar Careers

Women encountered barriers to better educations, careers, and financial independence. Going against real-world statistics, Wonder Woman trained as a NASA astronaut in 1979 and Supergirl worked as a news camera operator in 1969, fields traditionally occupied by men.79 Their careers illustrated a break in the metaphorical glass ceiling for women as well as a break from women’s traditional careers such as clerical work, nursing, waitressing, and teaching. From 1969 to 1984, the leadership demonstrated by Wonder Woman and Supergirl in white-collar occupations made them exemplary liberated women who had achieved equality with men.

Wonder Woman and Supergirl, with exception during their disempowered phases, held two careers at most times—performing as superheroines and holding day jobs. As contemporary standards went in the early 1960s, their full-time careers as superheroines rated as the least traditional for women in comics and made a powerful equalizing statement for actual women during the women’s movement. In 1968, Caroline Bird estimated that less than ten percent of all the professional or “knowledge” elites included women, excepting classroom teachers, nurses, librarians, social workers, and journalists.80 Wonder Woman and Supergirl made this top tier in the late 1960s to early

1980s in an era when few real women landed jobs that paid well in male dominated occupations. According to Caroline Bird’s 1968 research, women held jobs in clerical work and nursing positions that paid them lower wages in comparison to men in similar occupations.81 This is especially significant given that her findings appeared five years

79 Wonder Woman 256/1979, p. 4, NASA and Supergirl 406/1971, p. 12, camera. 80 Caroline Bird and Sara Welles Briller, Born female: The high cost of keeping women down, McKay, New York, 1968, p. 97. 81 Bird, 74.

after the Equal Pay Act of 1963 which made gender discrimination illegal when paying

men and women for similar work. The enactment of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act in

1964 sought to end discriminatory hiring, firing, and promotional practices in

employment that limited women’s access to equal employment opportunities. Despite

legislation that favored the equality of women’s employment and equal wages to men,

Bird’s research showed that American society still behaved as if women’s work deserved

less compensation.

In 1941, Wonder Woman worked as a nurse and a secretary. Her alter ego, Diana

Prince, briefly served as a nurse in order to be near Steve Trevor and later worked as a

General’s secretary in only a few comic book issues.82 Michael Fleisher noted that she

quickly moved up and functioned more as a covert operative than as a secretary, though

up to the 1950s she took these types of jobs only to be near Steve Trevor.83 From the

1950s to the 1960s, Wonder Woman’s writers and editors moved her away from typecast

job fields that women occupied. After her work as a covert operative, they made her a

boutique owner in a successful small business start-up in 1968, as a re-commissioned

Army spy in 1972, a technical film consultant in 1975, an astronaut trainee for NASA in

1979, and as an executive director for the United Nations in 1979.84 Her career as

boutique owner represented the least breakaway from traditional women’s jobs.

Wonder Woman portrayed job fields where actual women were poorly

represented. For example, in 1975, a scenario showed the United Nations pressroom with

82 Sensation Comics 1/1942, nurse. Sensation Comics 3/1942, secretary-intelligence operative. 83 Michael Fleisher, The Encyclopedia of Comic Book Heroes, Vol. 2, Wonder Woman, Collier Books, New York, 1976, p. 51. 84 Wonder Woman 179/1968, p. 10, rents store. Wonder Woman 186/1970 runs store. Wonder Woman 196/1971. Wonder Woman 201/1972. Wonder Woman 216/1975, p.10. Wonder Woman 226/1976, p. 19. Wonder Woman 256/1979, p. 4. Wonder Woman 256/1979, p. 19.

media relations specialist Diana Prince giving an interview to a female reporter—the

Black Canary in disguise—and stating, “You don’t know how good it is to meet a woman

reporter for a change!”85 Aside from Lois Lane, a secondary comic character, very few

comic book women in 1975 appeared as news reporters. In 1980, Diana Prince

interviewed for a position as executive director at the United Nations. She encountered

another woman in an atypical job field when meeting her potential boss, a female doctor

and director of International Relief.86 This woman’s higher education that led to her

becoming a doctor and director, enhanced her ability to be promoted in better career

opportunities. In 1980, these examples in Wonder Woman comics suggested that women’s equality had bridged the gap when women occupied jobs and earned salaries formerly unavailable to them. However, Caroline Bird’s “Loophole” study—actual women who deviated from traditional women’s work—revealed that these high achieving women, like Wonder Woman and Supergirl, proved to be the exceptions, not the norm.87

In 1968, Wonder Woman ran her own business during the five-years of her

disempowerment.88 Up to this point, Wonder Woman supplemented her living expenses with the gold from the Amazon’s Paradise Island in addition to her salary from her regular job. Without her immortal powers that granted her access to Paradise Island,

Diana Prince used the remainder of her savings account and opened a high-end clothing

boutique in a bohemian part of town.89 Though it was a clothing store, the financial

85 Wonder Woman 216/1975, p.10. 86 Wonder Woman 263/1980, p. 11. 87 Bird, 104-105. Loophole women were exceptions to the rule, they had made it in the world of men as executives, leaders, CEO’s, like Wonder Woman and Supergirl, p. 99. 88 Wonder Woman consented to go without superpowers and a costume to be near her boyfriend Steve Trevor. The alternative was to leave with the rest of the Amazons as Paradise Island had run out of magic. 89 Wonder Woman 196/1971.

independence that the ownership of that store gave Wonder Woman an advantage that

many women did not have.90

Like Wonder Woman’s earlier jobs in the 1940s, Supergirl also worked in jobs

that women primarily occupied. For example, in 1969, Supergirl worked as a camp

counselor over the summer break from college.91 Ruth Rosen argued that camp

counselor jobs fell into the realm of ‘pink collar work,’ and over half of women

employees in the 1960s worked in jobs described as “women’s work.”92 In 1981,

Supergirl worked as a television soap opera actress, which did not necessarily challenge

the parameters of traditional women’s work. Supergirl’s other jobs fell outside of

traditional women’s occupations like her work as a news camera operator in 1969,

student counselor at New Athens Experimental School in 1979, and a psychology intern

in 1983.93

Like actual women, Wonder Woman and Supergirl faced instances of sexual

harassment while at work and when looking for work. For example, in 1982, Wonder

Woman experienced sexual harassment when she worked as a secretary for a military

General. He inappropriately touched her on the shoulder while he ran his fingers through

her hair. Wonder Woman’s friend thought the General’s advances flattering, but Wonder

Woman responded, “I made it clear I’m not interested in his attentions or his protection.”94

Actual women experienced not only similar but worse instances of sexual harassment at work. The laws that promoted women’s equality to men in wage and employment

90 Wonder Woman 201 /1972, p. 7. 91 Adventure Comics 384/1969, p. 3. 92 Ruth Rosen, The World Split Open: How The Modern Women’s Movement Changed America, Penguin Books, New York, 2006, p. 25. 93 Adventure Comics 385/1969, p. 6. The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 3/1983, Intern, p. 4. The Superman Family 197/1979, splash. The Superman Family 210/1981, Secret Hearts actress. 94 Wonder Woman 288/1982, p. 13.

opportunities did not mandate immediate changes with men’s treatment of women in the

workplace.

Upon graduation from Stanhope College, Linda Danvers experienced sexual

harassment while job searching. In 1971, she turned in several applications to various

businesses when a male boss propositioned her by offering to take her out to dinner in

exchange for a possible job.95 A fan congratulated Linda Danvers on turning the job down stating that the “job situation Linda faced is too true and bravo to her for declining that dinner invitation.”96 This instance of sexual harassment reflected an imbalance in real world male authority that prohibited many American women from securing jobs without sacrificing their sexual integrity.

In 1978, a Ms. Magazine article corroborated the reality of Wonder Woman’s and

Supergirl’s experiences with sexual harassment. Ms. Magazines’s research showed that

real women commonly experienced sexual solicitation and harassment while at work.97

Female readers responded to Ms. Magazine’s requests for examples of their real life

experiences with sexual harassment. In response, their letters flooded the magazine. The

editors printed twelve accounts from real women that included instances of mauling,

requests to engage in oral sex, staring at their breasts, and demands for intercourse in

exchange for job opportunities—all from women who felt isolated in their encounters

with sexual harassment.98 The sexual harassment experiences of Wonder Woman and

Supergirl reflected American society’s raised awareness about the physical and mental harm that male sexual harassment of women caused. In both cases, Wonder Woman and

95 Adventure Comics 406/1971, p. 7. 96 Adventure Comics 410/1971, Gerard Triano letter. 97 Ms. Magazine July 1978, VII, No. 1, p. 86-87. 98 Ibid.

Supergirl role-modeled how to rebuff sexual harassment. Their role-modeling of these

behaviors mattered in the 1970s and 1980s as Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s readership was mostly male.99

In 1971, Linda Danvers contacted her cousin Clark Kent, aka Superman, who

informed her about a possible opening where the news station “lost two girls through

marriage!”100 Superman’s job lead referenced real world instances in the 1950s when

women gave up their careers and independence to get married. These marriage offers

came along when women went to college and work. Supergirl’s editors and writers

suggested that the two women who left work did so in order to fulfill their main desire—

marriage. In 1994, Joanne Meyerowitz argued that the 1950s ideology of marriage as the

only thing women had to look forward to, downplayed women’s agency.101 Contrary to

this ideology, I argue that Supergirl’s editors and writers promoted her independence as a

self-supporting woman with a higher education, multiple degrees, and a well-paying non-

traditional job.

Supergirl’s 1971 experience reflected one obstacle that women faced when

choosing work over marriage. Linda Eisenmann conducted research on actual college-

educated women that showed another obstacle when women were denied jobs though

they were equally qualified as men in the same field. For example, in 1966, Eisenmann’s

research subject Beth Isaacs requested an assistantship but a professor turned her down

reasoning, “I can’t Beth. You’re a very bright student but you’ll have children and quit

working in the field and not be publishing papers which redound to the credit and

99 As indicated by letters from fans during this time. Wonder Woman 180/1979, Tom Turner observed that the female ratio of comic book buyers was small. 100 Adventure Comics 406/1971, p. 8. 101 Joanne Meyerowitz, ed., Not June Cleaver: Women and Gender in Postwar America, 1945-1960, Temple University Press, Philadelphia, 1994, p. 4.

illustrious name of the university. So I will choose a male assistant.” Eisenmann’s

research subject agreed with the professor.102 The woman, though qualified, conceded to

the inequality in job access as she chose her family over her job—a choice that men did

not have to make. Supergirl’s editors and writers never made her choose between her

career and marriage. In this way, Supergirl exemplified idealistic liberated qualities as a

career woman. She did not reflect the complicated and liberated equality to men that

Betty Friedan promoted when telling actual women to choose both a career and a family.

Importantly, the editors and writers raised women’s issues that dealt with sexual

harassment Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics that were widely read by men.

From 1959 to 1984, Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s white-collar careers reflected liberated attributes that their editors and writers upheld throughout the comic book series.

Financial Independence

From 1959 to 1984, the editors and writers challenged the status quo through a

consistent portrayal of Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s financial independence.

Caroline Bird argued that, “35 percent of adult women had no independent income at all”

and noted that, “education doesn’t help a woman earn more money anywhere near as

much as it helps a man.”103 Contrary to Caroline Bird’s real-world statistics, Wonder

Woman’s and Supergirl’s education did help them earn more money in comparison to

actual women.

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s financially independent lifestyles afforded

them personal freedoms such as world travel, fine dining, home and business ownership,

designer home interiors, and endless shopping sprees. These tangible financial perks set

102 Eisenmann, p. 43. 103 Bird, p. 73-75.

them apart from actual women in Sara Evans’ Personal Politics. Her study of women in

1956 argued that Cold War America focused on a woman’s intangible wealth as reflected

through her family and home. Instead of having a personal income that afforded her

financial independence, her experiences of having a baby, being a busy housewife, and

having a shiny kitchen supplanted her need to earn an income.104 In the Cold War era,

the editors and writers of Wonder Woman and Supergirl gave the superheroine’s

financial independence which promoted the freedoms and benefits of their single

lifestyles. This difference in focusing on the liberated equalities of Wonder Woman’s

and Supergirl’s financial independence reflected women’s movement ideologies. It did

not reinforce domesticating Cold War ideals about actual women.

For the financially secure superheroines, their editors and writers portrayed the

activity of shopping as a stereotyped actual woman’s behavior on nine occasions between

the years 1969 and 1972.105 The editors’ and writers’ association with this stereotyped

women’s behavior appeared as both liberating and contradictory. On the one hand,

shopping reflected the benefits of Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s financial

independence which gave them the power to make purchases. On the other hand, the

stereotyped behavior of actual women shopping suggested women received temporary

feelings of elation through indulging themselves. For Wonder Woman and Supergirl,

shopping did not hinder their financial independence. For example, in 1968, Wonder

Woman went on a major shopping spree as one of the first activities after becoming

104 Sara Evans, Personal Politics: Roots of Women’s Liberation in the Civil Right Movement & The New Left, Vintage Books, New York, 1980, p. 11. See also, Constance Jones, 1001 Things Everyone Should Know About Women’s History, Random House, New York, 1998, p. 150. 105 Wonder Woman 178/1970, p. 2, Wonder Woman 182/1969, p. 13, Adventure Comics 397/1970, p. 2, Adventure Comics 413/1971, splash, Adventure Comics 415/1972, splash, Adventure Comics 414/1972, p. 1, Adventure Comics 422/1972, p. 5, Adventure Comics 423/1972, p. 2, Adventure Comics 424/1972, p. 9.

disempowered, exclaiming, “Wow! I’m gorgeous!”106 Up to 1968, the editors mostly

showed her in plain outfits, excepting her costume. Since her costume symbolized her

power and set her apart as a superheroine, Wonder Woman’s shopping for a new all

white wardrobe signified not just a major makeover, but also a way to transition her from

a 1950s wardrobe to a 1970s fashion style.

In 1971, Supergirl’s shopping activities appeared more commonly than Wonder

Woman’s shopping activities did. For instance, Linda Danvers shopped a Nacy’s sale—

comic book version of Macy’s—and purchased several outfits including a bikini that put her over budget. A nearby thought bubble stated, “she deserved it.”107 The editors

reflected a kind of narcissism that coincided with women’s independence and financial

earnings.

Adventure Comics #413/1971, Supergirl shopping at Nacy’s

In 1971, a female fan wrote in expressing her displeasure with the stereotype of

“shopping cheering a girl up!”108 While the fan wanted the superheroine free from

women-centric stereotypes, Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s writers hinted at a

personal satisfaction that women who earned their own incomes derived from shopping.

106 Wonder Woman 178/1968, p. 10. 107 Adventure Comics 413/1971, p. 1. 108 Adventure Comics 401/1971, Barbara Reader letter.

The shopping activity of Wonder Woman and Supergirl reflected actual women’s

financial independence from men’s incomes.

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s editors’ and writers’ use of shopping

stereotypes about actual women correlated with a rise in advertising aimed at women.

1970s marketing campaigns in magazine advertisements targeted women’s feelings about

shopping and their sense of self-empowerment. For example, the 1970s Virginia Slims

advertisements credited women’s achievements in the campaign slogan, “You’ve Come

A Long Way Baby,” but also encouraged women’s narcissistic behaviors as exemplified

by Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s shopping. Susan Douglas argued as recently as

2000 that, “Women’s liberation became equated with women’s ability to do whatever

they wanted for themselves, whenever they wanted, no matter what the expense.”109

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s financial abilities, which enabled them to do whatever

they wanted, were rarely frivolous activities. As superheroines, the well being of others

always came first.

From 1968 to 1973, the clearest reasons for women’s lack of financial

independence appeared in Wonder Woman: Women’s Liberation issue in 1972. The

roadblocks to a woman’s financial independence began with a woman first proving she

even wanted a job. This idea that an actual woman did not require her own income and

sense of self related to post World War II ideals of women’s fulfillment in roles at home

and men’s roles as providers outside of the home. In this example in the 1972 Wonder

Woman, a wife appealed to her husband to let her work outside of the home. As Diana

Prince and a friend listened to their conversation in a thin-walled upstairs apartment, the

109 Susan J. Douglas, Narcissism as Liberation, The Gender and Consumer Culture Reader, New York University Press, New York, 2000, p. 246.

husband remarked after arriving at home, “This place is a sty, Sue! What do you do when

I’m at work?” Sue replied, “Ed, I told you before we were married, housework isn’t my

strong point! Maybe if I got a job.” The husband rebounded with, “What could you

do?”110 The wife wanted to receive fulfillment outside of the home even if she could not

concretely identify what that something meant to her. By getting a job she also

challenged his ability to provide and questioned the importance of women’s roles in the

home. In 1979, Sara Evans argued that the root of a woman’s dilemma began when the

balances of male power at work started to shift. She stated the obstacle, “drew on visions

of a mythic past in which women and men knew their places and the patriarchal family

served as the stable foundation of a static social order.”111 Though the editors and writers

reflected actual male forms of resistance that women encountered in the real world,

Wonder Woman and Supergirl met little resistance to this imbalance in the areas of higher education, careers, and financial independence.

For actual women, Betty Friedan argued that the way to handle the obstacles of being a housewife, mother, and holding a job—was to be a superwoman. Betty Friedan’s recommendation in the Feminine Mystique, 1963 assimilated this vision of women’s lives as a unified trinity of mother, wife, and career woman in attempts to coax women out of the home and into male dominated job fields.112 She urged women to do it all in this

superheroine task. Wonder Woman and Supergirl exemplified only the professional

characteristics and behaviors of liberated and single women, not as moms or wives.

In the 1972 Women’s Lib Issue the writers also reflected one of the major barriers

to women’s financial independence, wage inequality. For instance, Diana Prince talked

110 Wonder Woman: Women’s Lib Issue 203/1972, p. 6. 111 Evans, p. 225-6. 112 Friedan, p. 375, also New Life Plan Chapter.

with a women’s group organizer who observed that, “Grandee’s—the male business

owners name—female sales help are getting a quarter an hour below the legal minimum

wage.” Another woman interjected with, “There’s a law that says it’s illegal to pay men

and women different wages for the same job!”113 The woman referred to Title VII of the

Civil Rights Act of 1964, chiefly enacted to equalize wage and labor practices for

women.114 Actual women faced a root problem from a post WWII era where a mostly

male and provisionary mindset undervalued the legitimacy of equal work and pay for

women.

The final pages of the 1972 Wonder Woman’s liberation comic book illustrated

one gateway to actual women’s access of equality through financial independence—

raised awareness. The woman’s group organizer verbally attacked Diana Prince with a

leading sentiment of Second Wave feminism when she stated, “perhaps I’m incompetent

and unsure, but I’m conscious of it and enraged at anyone who says I must stay that

way!”115 In addition to legislation that sought to give equality to women, in the early

1970s, a deeply personal and conscious-raising anger was reflected in women’s attitudes about their inequality with men. The editors and writers of Wonder Woman reflected this feminist awareness in her comic book, while actual women’s anger empowered women to reject the inequalities with women’s work and wages in comparison to men’s wages and labor.

Throughout 1959 to 1984, the editors and writers portrayed the superheroines with unlimited financial independence. However, the liberating equalities of the financially secure and college-educated superheroines were diminished by the editor’s,

113 Wonder Woman 203/1972, p. 12. 114 Banner, p. 193. 115 Wonder Woman 203/1972, p. 14.

writer’s, and artist’s construction of Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s physical

characteristics and mental behaviors that included; disempowerment, provocative poses,

bondage scenes, sexier costumes, and portrayals as emotionally and mentally unstable

women.

Without Powers

The superheroine’s higher education, white-collar careers, and financial

independence made them the equal of male characters instead of insubordinate.

However, Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s superpowers and single lifestyles were

constrained by the editors and writers. The superheroines’ disempowerment diminished

their equality in power compared to superheroes. In Cold War America, actual male

intolerant attitudes about women’s power and equality were prevalent during the

women’s movement.

These limitations of Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s liberated attributes

included lengthy phases of disempowerment, an overt sexualization of the superheroines through showing partial nudity, bondage scenes, phallic missiles, riding bombs and rockets, and an overly emotional characterization of the superheroines. When Wonder

Woman debuted in All Star Comics #8 in 1941, William Moulton Marston gave her an

array of weapons: a magic lasso, indestructible and bulletproof Amazonium bracelets, a

telepathic radio, and invisible plane.116 Her Amazon fighting skills and martial arts

expertise, swordplay, archery, mental telepathy, and Herculean strength, when combined

with her weaponry, made her the female equivalent of the top two superheroes—

Superman and Batman. Her purpose of protecting humans on Earth, maintaining peace,

116 Action Comics 8/1941, was the first debut. She appeared in Sensation Comics 1/1942 and Wonder Woman continued to appear in this series up to issue 106/1951 alongside her Wonder Woman title that also started in 1942.

and crime fighting remained unchanged from 1941 until she completely relinquished her

powers in 1968 for a man.117 In 1968, Wonder Woman’s powerful status as an Amazon

and superheroine changed abruptly. As discussed in chapter two, it is unclear why the

new editor Denny O’ Neill made this change to her status from an action heroine to an

ordinary woman. Wonder Woman’s characterization as an empowered women’s role

model for American men, women, and children nearly ceased when this happened.

Wonder Woman’s disempowerment resulted in the loss of her close association with the

promotion of actual women’s solidarity, superpowers, the abandonment of her costume,

and the connection of her Amazonian heritage. Without these signifiers, her character

less reflected women’s liberation ideals.

Though Wonder Woman originally modeled feminist ideals through encouraging

women’s independence and solidarity, she did not reflect a woman specific message

when disempowered. For example, in 1972, Diana Prince refused to support a women’s

group.118 Her refusal—in a women’s liberation comic no less—emphasized the comic

title’s “New Wonder Woman’s” contrast with Wonder Woman’s role since 1941, of

promoting female solidarity and women’s empowerment. Her transition from modeling

actual women’s strengths to rejecting women’s empowerment made her appear as if

women’s issues no longer held importance for her. At Wonder Woman’s weakest

moments as a disempowered superheroine, her editors still claimed she role-modeled the

strongest feminist superheroine voice.

In the first ever attempts to make Wonder Woman ordinary and more like actual women during the women’s movement, the editors and writers added in personal

117 Wonder Woman 178/1968, p. 9. 118 Wonder Woman 203/1972.

character details such as her cooking and music preferences. In 1972, editor Denny

O’Neill shared the following habits of Diana Prince: expertise in martial arts, cooking

ethnic foods, listening to pop and classical music, and reading English literature,

scientific journals, and horror stories.119 This especially unusual and detailed addendum

to her characterization in Wonder Woman’s storyline appeared all at once in the header of the letter page. The large amount of character information on the new Wonder Woman belied the editor’s efforts to gain traction on an unfavorable change in order to swiftly re-

build her character development.120 The disempowered Wonder Woman—from 1968 to

1973—and Supergirl from—1971 to 1973—still behaved as action heroines but relied on their wit and martial arts skills.121 This reliance on their physical skills and mental

agility, the editors maintained, made the superheroines seem more like actual women and

therefore more liberated. However, when the disempowered superheroines encountered aggressive men, the superheroines appeared sexually vulnerable, a condition that was absent up to 1968 when the superheroines had powers. The realism that the editors and writers sought to portray did not challenge the status quo for actual women who experienced sexually aggressive encounters with men.

From 1968 to 1973, Wonder Woman’s five-years and Supergirl’s intermittent

two-years without powers, the writers subjected the vulnerable superheroines to four

instances of male sexual aggression. In 1972, Diana Prince faced a rape situation as an

ordinary woman while walking home from work late one night. A group of six men

threatened to attack and rape her if she did not succumb to their unwanted advances.122

119 Wonder Woman 199/1972, Denny O’Neill editorial letter, no fan letters. 120 The unfavorable disempowerment phase of Wonder Woman is discussed in chapter two. 121 Chapter two discusses why this time was important. 122 Wonder Woman 203/1972, splash.

Wonder Woman #203/1972, Wonder Woman is attacked by six men

Her ability to fend off six male attackers in such a realistic situation with only karate kicks and judo chops appeared dubious. Before 1968, Wonder Woman’s superpowers made her undefeatable as she always put villains in their place. In contrast, when

Superman and Batman became temporarily disempowered, their sexual vulnerability was never breeched. Yet when Wonder Woman was disempowered, the rape scenario intensified her sexual vulnerability and physical weaknesses. In another instance in 1972,

a gunman forced Diana Prince into an alleyway where she pretended to act helpless

stating, “I won’t scream, I promise” but instead, knocked the gunman on the ground replying, “because not all females are helpless!”123 Though Wonder Woman took charge

of the attack situation, the initial verbal and visual cues in the art and textual narrative

conveyed a similar sexual vulnerability as in the rape scenario.

While disempowered, aggressive male villains confronted Wonder Woman using

anti-feminist rhetoric that demeaned women’s physical abilities. These encounters

reflected Cold War era male beliefs that actual women were physically inept. Wonder

Woman challenged these male beliefs as she successfully defeated every man that

behaved this way in battle. Comic book editors often used lingo like the word

“chauvinism” which broadly identified a number of offensive male beliefs: that women

should act and be treated like sex objects, that men should act macho, and that men should act superior to women. For example, in a 1972 battle, the disempowered Diana

Prince noted that, “Our attackers don’t consider me a threat! Male chauvinists that they

are!”124 Wonder Woman’s defeat of these villains during her disempowerment closely

reflected women’s movement ideals as the writer’s and editor’s emphasized her physical

skills in combat as a woman, but did not make her sexually vulnerable in these types of

scenarios.

In a 1973 example, Diana Prince traveled back in time to help an Asian Amazon princess defeat the Mongolian horde. The Mongolian army leader stated, “surround them men, no weak female can outwit my soldiers and not pay for it.”125 Importantly, Wonder

Woman and the ancient Amazons defeated the Mongolian army as these empowered

123 Wonder Woman 199/1972, p. 3. 124 Wonder Woman 201/1972, p. 4. 125 Wonder Woman 207/1973, p. 7.

women invalidated the stereotype that actual women were incompetent in physical

combat against men.

After Wonder Woman regained her superpowers, her writers continued to use

anti-feminist rhetoric in her storylines. For example, in 1975, a villain stated, “I’d sooner

die than be dominated by women!” and in 1979, Hercules scoffed, “What woman can

beat a real man?”126 Despite their words of ridicule, the villain and Hercules found

Wonder Woman a competent foe as she matched them in battle and sometimes out

performed them. In this way, the writers and editors challenged Cold War male beliefs

that actual women performed as well and sometimes better than men.

During Wonder Woman’s disempowerment from 1968 to 1973, DC’s editors and

writers also gave Supergirl an involuntary and intermittent disempowerment from 1971

to 1973. As a point of contrast to Wonder Woman, Supergirl’s writers and editors kept

both her purpose of being a superheroine and costume while she was disempowered.

From 1971 to mid-1973, the editors and writers took eighteen issues to restore Supergirl’s superpowers.127 Unlike the voluntary disempowerment of Wonder Woman from 1968 to

1973, Supergirl faced life without powers when a man she trusted poisoned her. The

effects of the poison weakened her at obscure moments, while at other times she regained

temporary control. Supergirl used a technologically enhanced costume that differed from

Wonder Woman’s abandonment of a costume for an all white wardrobe.128

126 Wonder Woman 219/1975, p. 15 and Wonder Woman 260/1979, p. 3. Hercules appeared in Wonder Woman’s stories from time to time as part of the Greek mythology that surrounded her origin. 127 Adventure Comics 402/1971-Supergirl 5/1973. No mention is made of Dr. Kangle’s pill after this issue, therefore the reader is left to understand that the power-inhibiting effects have finally worn off. 128 Adventure Comics 404/1971, p. 3. Instead of a costume, Diana Prince, aka Wonder Woman, wore modern Beatnik style white outfits in which she blended in more with the rest of her new comic book world.

During Supergirl’s disempowered phase from 1971 to 1973, she doubted her

worthiness as a part-time superheroine with irregular powers.129 Though she doubted her

worth, she always defeated the villains. Examples of the irregularity of her powers in

1971 and 1973, showed her hitching a ride on the wings of a 747 and taking public

transportation rather than flying on her own.130

Supergirl # 5/1973, Supergirl is forced to ride a bus when she cannot fly

Without superpowers, the editors and writers limited her full potential in a similar

way as when Superman in 1959 made her promise not to use her powers unless he gave

her permission.

Like Wonder Woman, Supergirl encountered anti-feminist sentiment from comic book men while disempowered. Supergirl’s writers and editors portrayed her in disempowered storylines with feminist resistant male leaders and monomaniacal interplanetary dictators who dismissed her equality of power to men based on her being a

129 Adventure Comics 404/1971, p. 2. 130 Adventure Comics 405/1971, p. 8, plane and Supergirl 5/1973, p. 5, bus.

woman. In 1971, Supergirl faced an all male city council board that didn’t uphold

women’s equality and stated they didn’t believe, “a female should be doing a man’s work

anyway!”131 Margie Spears, a frequent letter writer, noted that, “Supergirl says nothing

in her own defense!”132 The editors responded to Margie Spears that Supergirl did the

right thing by ignoring the comments. However, this enduring caricature of a resolute

Supergirl did not engage Supergirl’s ability to role model women’s liberation when

verbally assaulted by male leadership. Furthermore, Supergirl’s disempowerment compounded the lack of power and authority she exhibited in the confrontation with male leadership. In a 1972 example of anti-feminist rhetoric, an alien man captured her for

mating purposes. The alien commander wanted her because she appeared to be a superior female, but did not know she had superpowers. He stated to Supergirl, “of course, your inferior breeding will not allow me to consider you as an equal, but if you try hard?”133 Supergirl proceeded to dismantle his ship, (her powers did not fade in this

episode) and prove his inferiority. Supergirl never appeared completely disempowered

nor did she cease in her role as a superheroine. When both superheroines went without

powers, Wonder Woman encountered the severest forms of sexual aggression from male

comic characters in comparison to Supergirl. Of significance, during Wonder Woman’s

and Supergirl’s disempowerment plots from 1968 to 1973, the editors, writers, artists, and

fans started to shift the focus away from the superheroines’ equality in powers to male

superheros, towards the portrayal of the superheroines’ provocative and sexier imagery.

131 Adventure Comics 411/1971, p. 10. 132 Adventure Comics 412/1971, Margie Spears letter. She regularly submitted letters to the editor, of which three were published in the 1970s. 133 Adventure Comics 415/1972, p. 11.

Provocative Poses

Starting from 1963 to 1983, after the relaxation of the CCA codes that prohibited nudity, Wonder Woman and Supergirl appeared in fifteen partially nude scenes.134 The

early 1970s shift in looking at the superheroines as sexual objects signified an important

change in the portrayal of the superheroine and the diminishing focus on her liberated

equalities. In 1973, Laura Mulvey, author of the Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema

argued, “In a world ordered by sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split

between active/male and passive/female. The determining male gaze projects fantasy

onto the female figure, which is stylized accordingly.”135 Though Laura Mulvey’s

original theory pertained to film, her theory is similar to my argument that the male fan’s

gaze promoted the sexualization of Wonder Woman and Supergirl. This sexualization

limited their liberated characteristics: superpowers, single lifestyles, higher education,

financial independence, and white-collar careers. In the superheroines’ comic books, the

editors, writers, and artists both added to the projection of the male gaze and were

informed by it.

In 1975 and 1976, the superheroines’ costume changes started to show subtle

nudity. DC’s relaxed policies about showing female nudity represented a drastic change

from not showing any compromising images of the superheroines in the early 1960s.

Since 1941 and 1959—start dates for Wonder Woman and Supergirl— editors, writers,

and artists depicted the superheroines with modest appearances that targeted a younger

134 Author’s note, there were many more examples than these, however, the examples mentioned in this part of the chapter were either main illustrations or very large panels showing the sexualization of the superheroines. Wonder Woman 251/1979, splash, 300/1983, burnt costume, 156/1965, bulls-eye, 139/1963, rocket, 136/1963, rocket, p. 24, 250/1978, bath, p. 5, 224/1976, bottom, p. 26, 189/1970, tub, p. 15, 251/1979, bra, p. 6. Adventure Comics 406/1971, p. 8, Supergirl 6/1983, privates, p. 2, Adventure Comics 422/1972, bottom, p. 8, 382/1969, panties, p. 13, 424/1972, bra, p. 6. 135 As quoted in, Inness, Action Chicks, p. 27.

audience of boys and girls. Yet, Les Daniels argued that the demographic reality showed

that, “Wonder Woman’s readers have always been predominantly male (estimates run as

high as 90 percent).”136 A readily available consumer and demographic comic book

resource is not yet available, however, based on fan letters and advertisements researched

in my study, Les Daniels estimation is reasonable. In the 1950s, Fredric Wertham and

the self-regulated Comics Code Authority held most responsibility for the modest

depictions of the superheroines. Wertham’s moral condemnations and the comic

publishers self-mandated guidelines prohibited nudity and disrespect of the female

form.137 From 1963 to 1969, when Wonder Woman and Supergirl appeared modestly,

comic artists drew the superheroines so that no reader could see up their skirt or between

their legs when in flight or fighting. To avoid this, artists drew the heroines with closed

legs and shaded in areas so as not to expose the superheroines’ private parts.

The art stayed modest until 1971, when relaxed Comics Code Authority

guidelines allowed comic publishers to produce provocative art and storylines that were

no longer objectionable. Their editors, writers, and artists portrayal in conjunction with a

mature male audience, encouraged the exposure of the superheroines previously obscured

anatomy.

136 Daniels, p. 33. He does not cite where this evidence comes from. 137 Comics Magazine Association of America, Congressional Record, United States Congress, March 14, 1955. Comic Books and Juvenile Delinquency: Interim report of the committee of the judiciary pursuant to S. Res. 89 and S. Res. 190.

Adventure Comics #414/1972 Supergirl’s bottom is featured

The editors, writers, and artists portrayed a sexier look for the superheroine that

coincided with actual women’s sexual freedoms that stemmed from the American sexual

revolution in the 1960s. Actual women’s sexual freedoms along with the rise in

American hedonistic attitudes promoted by Hugh Hefner and the advice from Helen

Gurley Brown in Sex and The Single Girl, appeared influential in the editors, writers, and

artists portrayal of the superheroines’ sexier imagery. However, these hedonistic

attitudes about actual women’s sexual freedoms and corresponding sexier looks disrupted

women’s liberated ideals of equality and empowerment. In this way, the male gaze in

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics promoted the sexual objectivity of the superheroines.

Up to 1978, Wonder Woman’s artists expressed her lightning fast costume changes with a blurred series of stages of undress and did not show nudity or her undergarments. Richard Reynolds argued that the costumes changes, “for the superheroine the process can (at least potentially) be viewed as the performance of an

uncompleted striptease.”138 The projection of fantasy onto the female form that Laura

Mulvey argued, was constructed by the editors, writers, and artists when they allowed

comic book readers to see more and more of her in provocative poses. In one of these

costume changes in 1974, Aquaman received telepathic messages from Wonder

Woman’s goldfish that she had changed into her costume. Did Aquaman see Wonder

Woman’s nude body through the eyes of the goldfish?139 The writers, editors, and artists

extension of voyeurism into the boudoir of a fantasy female figure suggested that the

comic book audience’s reading preferences had shifted. Moreover, the possibilities for

such displays increased with direct marketing in comic book stores and the relaxation of

the Comics Code Authority.

From 1970 to 1978, Wonder Woman and Supergirl performed strip tease shows

for their readers when they bathed, dressed, and undressed. For example in 1970, a recently mortal Diana bathed while crouched in a small tub covered only by her knees and long hair and in 1978, was covered only by bubbles.140 1970 was the first time that

Wonder Woman—who was also disempowered—appeared in the nude but the relaxed

CCA codes kept her magazine from earning an R-rated status. Loosely applied, the relaxed codes allowed partial nudity of women so long as breasts and privates areas remained covered. In 1971 and 1972, even when Wonder Woman was not shown bathing, readers watched her undress and viewed her in a bra and panties from the front and back, similar to scenes out of Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window.141

138 Reynolds, p. 37. 139 Wonder Woman 215/1974, p. 10. 140 Wonder Woman 189/1970, p. 15. Wonder Woman 250/1978, p. 5. 141 Wonder Woman 203/1972, p. 6. and Wonder Woman 194/1971, p. 21.

Wonder Woman #284/1971, Wonder Woman bathing

Supergirl’s artists also showed scenes in which she bathed, slept in lingerie, and wore only a bra and underwear. Linda Danvers’ costume changes differed from seeing

Clark Kent run into a phone booth and change into Superman. Instead Linda Danvers’ costume changes looked like strip-tease acts. For example in 1971, an embarrassed

Supergirl gave a sneak peek to a surprised male vagrant in an alleyway who looked up in time to see her lacy white bra. She only noticed him when he exclaimed, “Hi, girlie!”142

142 Adventure Comics 413/1971, p. 2.

Adventure Comics #413/1971, Supergirl changing into costume in front of man

Supergirl quickly covered up the vagrant’s eyes but the point of seeing her in

intimate apparel showed that she had reached a sexual maturity fit for her mature male

reading audience to see.

Drawing on Rear Window-esque voyeurism, Supergirl’s readers also had a clear view of her in the privacy of her bedroom.143 Supergirl’s editors showed her for the first

time in 1969 almost completely undressed as she appeared holding a top but wearing only

panties.144 In another example in 1971, Linda slept on the top of her bedcovers dressed

in a transparent nightgown that revealed her midriff.145 This type of sexy loungewear

conveyed a sense of her matured sexuality to the reader that had not been present in her

storylines up to this point. In another example in 1972, Supergirl’s editors showed her

143 Adventure Comics 424/1972, p. 6. 144 Adventure Comics 382/1969, p. 13. 145 Adventure Comics 410/1971, p. 7, and Adventure Comics 424/1972, p. 13.

wearing lingerie in her dorm with her roommates who also wore only lingerie.146 While

mild by today’s standards, Supergirl’s stages of undress started with minor exposures of

her in a bra in 1969 and resulted in more seductive exhibitions in the late 1980s. The

editors, writers, and artists appeasement for the male fan’s gaze directed attention away

from her liberated equalities and on to her sexual image.

Bondage Scenes

A mild form of Wonder Woman’s sexualization was always present with her lasso

and bondage in her comics from 1941 to 1963. Whether younger audiences understood

William Moulton Marston’s interpretations of bondage as empowering for women is

debatable. However, the early 1970s portrayal of Wonder Woman and Supergirl in

bondage scenes conveyed a clearer and bolder sexual connotation than in the 1940s

through late 1960s. When drawn in bondage, the editors, writers, and artists not only

constrained the superheroines’ superpowers, but also moved closer towards mainly

satisfying the male gaze.

From 1970 to 1975, bondage themes appeared eight times on the outside covers of

Wonder Woman and Supergirl comic books. The publisher’s prominent placement of

bondage scenes on the front covers enticed men to purchase these types of books.

Bondage art also appeared on the splash and interior pages but the position of the

bondage art often added no relevance to the story even if it appeared on the cover;

however, it did serve its eye-catching purpose.147

146 Supergirl 3/1973, p. 2. 147 The splash page was the first page a reader opened detailing the forthcoming story through a full page of art with no panels. Splash art typically stuck to the story, but cover art did not. Bondage scenes: Wonder Woman 188/1970, Wonder Woman 199/1972, Wonder Woman 219/1975, Wonder Woman 221/1975, Adventure Comics 400/1970, Adventure Comics 404/1971, Adventure Comics 414/1972, Adventure Comics 421/1972.

In 1941, creator William Moulton Marston’s association of Wonder Woman in

bondage associated her character a sexual and liberated and power.148 When she tied up

villains after their defeat, she held the power and appeared in charge of the situation.149

When other editors and writers took over from where William Moulton left off after his passing in 1947, she appeared less in charge and more in bondage herself. 150 This trend

continued throughout her comics where she regularly appeared in a near-perpetual state

of bondage often confined by her own bracelets or lasso. Wonder Woman’s editors and

writers portrayed her in bondage using items such as plastic wrap, shackles, chains, and

her own lasso.151 For example, in her disempowered phase in 1972, she appeared on the

front page bound and gagged while down on her knees, in a gauzy white gown that

outlined her full breasts as she looked up to a hooded executioner.152 In another example

in 1973, Wonder Woman’s mother joined her in the bondage act as both powerful women appeared on the cover.153

At one point in 1975, when wrapped in her own lasso on the front of the comic,

Wonder Woman beckoned to an all male squad while the superhero, Elongated Man

video recorded the forthcoming gang attack.154 These types of bondage scenes from

1972 to 1975 escalated the sexual tension between the male reader and Wonder Woman.

148 All Star Comics 8/1941 first appearance, debuted in Sensation Comics 1/1942, first issue was in Wonder Woman comics 1942. As noted in Les Daniels, Wonder Woman: The Complete History, Chronicle Books, San Francisco, 2000. This is an excellent, if non-analytical, history of William Moulton Marston and the interaction with Charles Gaines, Harry Peter the artist, and family history of Marston. 149 Whereas bondage themes were part of the superheroine during Moulton’s editorial days, Moulton’s real life bondage fetish was lived out through his character Wonder Woman. See Les Daniels, Wonder Woman: The Complete History, Chronicle Books, San Francisco, 2000. 150 Daniels, p. 75. 151 Wonder Woman 188/1970, cover, and Wonder Woman 221/1975, splash. 152 Wonder Woman 199/1972. 153 Wonder Woman 219/1975, cover. 154 Ibid.

Wonder Woman #219/1975, Wonder Woman making herself helpless in front of five men

Bondage, as one type of visual pleasure, objectified the superheroine for the male

gaze. Lillian S. Robinson argued that, “the sadomasochistic appeal to a consumer turned

on by the sight of scantily clad, nubile women tied or chained up and assaulting one

another’s sexy bodies is still present.”155 Though Wonder Woman always escaped out of bondage, the act of putting her in bondage created moments of heightened personal and sexual vulnerability that primarily appealed to male consumers of her comic book.

The editors and writers also placed Supergirl—the most invincible superheroine—in bondage on occasion. With Supergirl in bondage, there appeared to be slightly less sexual tension as the storylines indicated a focus on eliminating her, not

155 Robinson, p. 84.

sexually assaulting her. For example, during her disempowered phase in 1971, a

villainess tied her wrists and ankles with kryptonite-dusted cords in front of giant

bowling pins.156 Since a female villain positioned her as the main pin in the game, the

focus on ‘striking’ Supergirl out inferred little to no sexual connotation. In 1972, she

appeared twice in bondage. In one of these instances, she appeared on the front cover in

bondage on a public road.157 The major difference that made Supergirl appear less

sexually vulnerable in bondage than Wonder Woman, was that the objects that threatened

her were not phallic. Instead, she faced villainesses that focused on her power, not her

sexuality. The mid 1970s bondage themes that exploited Wonder Woman and Supergirl

coincided with another sexually provocative form of restraint, bulls-eye targets.

Target Practice with Wonder Woman

In 1965 and 1971, Wonder Woman appeared twice on the front covers as the center of a bulls-eye target.158 Her vulnerable position in the center of a bulls-eye frame, diminished her liberated powers and equalities to superheroes in a similar way that her bondage portrayal did.

With the superheroine intended as the target, the viewer understood her participation as a sexualized object, which obscured the significance of her liberated powers. Often, the weapon that was aimed at Wonder Woman in these bulls-eye scenarios, symbolized a phallic penetration rather than an object that was on the verge of annihilating her. This kind of visual assault exposed her sexual vulnerability. Bulls-eye images of male

156 Adventure Comics 400/1970, p. 10. 157 Adventure Comics 414/1972, cover, Adventure Comics 421/1972, p. 11, Adventure Comics 404/1971, p. 17. 158 Wonder Woman 156/1965 and Wonder Woman 196/1971.

superheroes like Batman and Superman, did not conjure sexually explicit connotations

that the images of Wonder Woman and Supergirl did.

Wonder Woman #156/1965 and #196/1971, Wonder Woman as a bulls-eye target

For example, in 1965, on Wonder Woman’s front page, she appeared forward

facing strapped to the center of a dartboard in a spread eagle pose. The actual scenario in

the interior pages inferred less of a sexual reference than it did on the front cover.159 In

another example in 1971—even more sexually explicit— the disempowered Wonder

Woman appeared on a front-page cover in torn clothing and bared back with a large bulls-eye mark painted on her. The reader gazed at her chained hands and spread eagle

posture.160 The story titled “Target for Today,” suggested that Wonder Woman was a

159 Wonder Woman 156/1965, p. 20. 160 Wonder Woman 196/1971, cover.

70 sexual target. However, the interior page gave away the plotline—that she needed to save a male dignitary multiple times. The more powerful visual image on the cover belied the editors’ intent to market her sexualized image for the male gaze. The images of Wonder Woman appearing in bondage and fastened to a bulls-eye target—or as the target—suggested that the editors, writers and artists purposefully marketed her as a sexual object for male consumers. In addition to partial nudity, bondage and bulls-eye themes, the editors, writers, and artists also showed Wonder Woman riding phallic missiles.

Phallic Missiles

Starting in the early 1970s, the phallic illustrations of Wonder Woman straddling rockets and nuclear warheads suggested that she was no longer in control of the situation and did not challenge existing relationships of power to men. Supergirl did not ride rockets. Wonder Woman’s association with bombs and rockets stemmed from her earlier connection to stories from the WWII era and explains why Supergirl did not appear as a rider of rockets.

An example of Wonder Woman’s rocket riding appeared in 1973 on the cover of an April issue, when Wonder Woman’s artists strapped her down with her own lasso to a giant blue nuclear warhead reminiscent of actor Slim Pickens in Dr. Strangelove, 1964.

As the warhead launched, she rode it in an upright position while the caption in the panel explained, “she rides her nuclear steed through space” but the missile situated between her spread legs and the steed as stallion, inferred she rode a phallus, not a nuclear missile.161

161 Wonder Woman 205/1973, cover.

Wonder Woman #205/1973 Wonder Woman strapped spread eagle on a bomb

In a November 1973 issue, the editor’s and writer’s text in the caption referred to another horse ride adventure while Wonder Woman straddled her own robot plane as the caption stated, “leaping onto her robot plane as if it were an obedient cowpony, Wonder Woman whips out her magic lasso.”162 The images of Wonder Woman straddling rockets and

planes conveyed more of a sexually suggestive meaning than the words “cowpony” and

“steed” presumed. The editor’s and writer’s text suggested attempts to mask the sexually

implicit images of spread legs and thrusting rockets with the act of horse riding. A

March 1977 issue showed another example when Wonder Woman fought off a red-

162 Wonder Woman 208/1973, p. 4.

tipped, guided-rocket headed straight for her chest while chains restrained her in

bondage.163 Though the phallic images appeared infrequently in Wonder Woman comics,

when they did, the front cover placement enticed reader purchases in a similar way as the

covers with images of Wonder Woman in bondage and bulls-eye targets.

Sexier Costumes

The most impactful and longest enduring form of the superheroine’s sexualization

started when the editors and writers changed Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s most

prominent feature—their costumes. The editors and writers transformed the costumes of

Wonder Woman and Supergirl from symbolizing their power to emphasizing their sexual

symbolism. The editors, writers, and artists made the superheroines appear sexier while

using their power so that the two—power and sexuality—became synonymous. As noted

in the beginning of this chapter, sexualization in the context of the superheroine is the act

or process of making a person or thing to be seen as sexual in nature.

In the mid 1960s, Jo Freeman noted that a female’s empowerment became

equated via her “look” after the sexual revolution.164 Significantly, Wonder Woman’s

and Supergirl’s readership consisted of a large percentage of males in addition to being primarily written and drawn by male writers, editors and artists. The superheroines’ creators combined the superheroines’ sexier images with their superpowers to signify power alone, which contradicted with the superheroines’ liberated behaviors and actual women’s movement ideals.

Susan J. Douglas argued of the 1970s and early 1980s, that a combination of sexier attire with new narcissistic attitudes that targeted real women in magazines

163 Wonder Woman 229/1977, cover. 164 Freeman, p. 12.

combined with advertising slogans like “Because I’m Worth It” by L’Oreal and the

previously mentioned Virginia Slims ads, “You’ve Come A Long Way Baby!”165 Such advertisements took the achievements of liberated women and told them they had achieved equality and should now enjoy it. Susan J. Douglas took her argument further in 2010 and argued that advertising and the medias’ messages stated, “it’s through sex and sexual display that women really have the power to get what they want. And because the true path to power comes from being an object of desire, girls and women should now actively choose—even celebrate and embrace—being sex objects.”166 Susan J. Douglas’s

argument is similar to my contention that the writers, editors, artists, and fans of Wonder

Woman and Supergirl distorted the superheroines’ sexual objectification as a

representation of empowerment that they also associated with their liberated

characteristics and behaviors. Like the advertising in magazines that proclaimed sexually

provocative women as liberated, the writers of Wonder Woman and Supergirl adopted feminist rhetoric while portraying sexually objectifying images of the superheroines.

This was an important shift that connected the superheroines’ liberation and sexualization. These contradictory concepts signified the same meaning for male audiences.

The visual appeal of the superheroines’ sexy and shrinking costume attracted the male gaze more than it empowered the superheroines’ statement of power in the costume.

The male gaze signified as Laura Mulvey argued, “women displayed as sexual objects is the leitmotiv of erotic spectacle: pin-ups to striptease, from Ziegfeld to Busby Berkeley,

165 Douglas, p. 267. 166 Ibid, p. 156.

74 she holds the look, plays to, and signifies male desire.”167 Though Wonder Woman and

Supergirl may have held the “look” their editors and writers did not attempt to balance this sexier look with their power. More often, the editors and writers limited the superheroines’ liberated behaviors in favor of promoting their sexier images.

In my study, I argue that the sexually suggestive 1970s look of the superheroines’ costume overpowered the 1960s patriotic significance of the costume. Starting in 1941,

Wonder Woman’s costume signified American ideals and democracy.

Wonder Woman #1/1941 Wonder Woman in her first costume

The costume’s blue, red, and gold colors along with the fitted fabric to Wonder Woman’s shapely body became associated with an instant recognition of the superheroines’ character. Whether dressed in stars and eagles like Wonder Woman or the vivid reds and

167 As quoted in Inness, Action Chicks, p. 27.

blues like Supergirl, the earlier superheroines’ costumes symbolized patriotic sentiment stemming from America’s involvement in WWII.168 Wonder Woman, in her stars and stripes costume, reflected an image of a powerful and sexy superheroine with the sentiment of patriotic Americans. When the editors, writers, and artists altered the

superheroines’ costumes to reflect contemporary fashions of the 1970s and 1980s, the

costumes correlated less with the superheroines’ strength, power, and patriotic values.

Instead of women’s empowerment, the costume emphasized the superheroines’ sexuality.

Lois Banner argued that Hugh Hefner’s Playboy in 1953 and Mattel’s Barbie in 1959,

“symbolized the appearance of a freer sexuality for women, but both also symbolized an increased objectification of women.”169 Significantly, the superheroines’ costumes’ symbolization of a freer sexuality soon turned into its only emphasis.

Throughout the 1970s, the shift towards the sexualization of Wonder Woman and

Supergirl continued with subtle variations in their costumes with some exceptions. From

1968 to 1973, the disempowered Wonder Woman wore an all white contemporary

wardrobe to include pants. Compared to her former bathing suit costume before 1968,

long pants offered her more protection and practicality when battling villains. At one

point in 1970, Diana Prince wore a mini skirt and stated, “one good thing about minis is

they give you plenty of room for knee action!”170 The mini skirt’s dual message not only

signified a liberating and sexualizing fashion statement but also showed how women’s

freer sexuality led to a kind of sexual objectification from men. Wonder Woman’s all-

white outfits from her disempowered era did reflect a utilitarian construction and sex

appeal from 1968 to 1973, but only represented a style of clothing, not a costume. From

168 Martin Pasko, The DC Vault, Running Press, Philadelphia, 2008, p. 43. 169 Ibid, p. 138. 170 Wonder Woman 187/1970, p. 7.

1973 to 1984, when Wonder Woman took up the idealistic republican bathing-beauty costume again, the artists depicted a number of minute adaptations in the style of her costume starting from her hairstyle down to her boots.171

In 1982, the most noticeable of the costume adaptations that Wonder Woman

wore showed more cleavage than before as her bulging breasts spilled over her halter-top.

The editors traded in Wonder Woman’s patriotic eagle emblem for a new trademark, an

elongated pair of Ws given to her by a woman’s group to promote equality for women

everywhere.172 The Ws held Wonder Woman’s bosom in its place and restored much of

her costumes original symbolism of patriotism and women’s empowerment. Still, the

renewed motto did not sufficiently supplant the more powerful message of Wonder

Woman’s sexualization.

Wonder Woman #288/1982, Wonder Woman accepts new costume designed by women’s group

171 Wonder Woman, 256/1979, Sarah Finnegan letter. 172 Wonder Woman 288/1982, p. 2. A women’s group offered this new costume idea to her.

From 1959 to the 1970s, editors and artists transformed Supergirl’s costume

through similarly minute adaptations as well when she mainly wore a breezy blue

shirtdress with a yellow belt. In January of 1970, fan Renata Riveras requested a new

costume in issue 388 where the editors agreed and tasked the readers to send in new

costume ideas.173 Eight months later, in September of 1970, Supergirl asked her fans on

the cover of the comic book which costume she should choose. Supergirl’s unusual

question to the fans displayed a unique kind of awareness between the superheroine and

her readers. Many of the fan costumes that the editors published showed conservative

variations of her original costume while others reflected 1970s real world fashions styles.

Notably, fans’ enthusiastic responses gave incentive to the editors to publish the

illustrations of thirty-five costume ideas that fans sent in from 1970 to 1972 in

Supergirl’s comic book. Of these new costume ideas, Supergirl wore six in her comic

books that fans designed in 1971 including an evening gown.174 In 1969, Supergirl

thanked and gave credit to her readers for sending in new costume ideas in Adventure

Comics issue 388.175 As an unprecedented moment in comic book history, the readers’

participation in creating Supergirl’s costume re-affirmed that editors not only reacted to letters, but that the fans’ input influenced Supergirl.

In a 1971 issue, editors debuted one of Supergirl’s sexiest costumes from fan

Margret Berg on the front cover—a revealing halter-top with cape and shorts.176

173 Adventure Comics 388/1970, Renata Riveras. 174 Adventure Comics 397/1970, Adventure Comics 398/1970, Adventure Comics S-24/1971, Supergirl 1/1972. Comics with new costumes worn: Wonder Woman 186/1970, Adventure Comics 402/1971, Adventure Comics 407/1971, Adventure Comics 408/1971, Adventure Comics 409/1971, Adventure Comics 410/1971, Adventure Comics 412/1971, Adventure Comics 413/1971, Adventure Comics 415/1972. 175 Adventure Comics 388/1969. 176 Adventure Comics 409/1971.

Adventure Comics #409/1971, Supergirl wears a revealing costume designed by fan Renata Riveras

The daring halter-top barely covered Supergirl’s breasts and had no side coverage. If not for the red and blue colors and the giant letter “S,” Supergirl’s costume looked more like a go-go dancers. Above all, the costume showcased the arrival of a matured superheroine whose editors and writers envisioned as capable of wearing sexier costumes and fighting villains. Supergirl’s first volume of comic books was short lived as it ended in 1974, but the editors, writers, and artists set a permanent path that emphasized her sexual appeal.

When Supergirl comics reappeared again in 1982, the artists drew such a short skirt hemline that her panties appeared in any pose. Could Supergirl still look sexy and behave as a liberated woman?

Mike Madrid noted in Supergirls in 2009, “a superheroine could appear to be liberated and still sport a sexy and revealing new costume.”177 The findings in my thesis

177 Mike Madrid, The Supergirls: fashion, feminism, fantasy, and the history of comic book heroines, Exterminating Angel Press, Minnesota, 2009, p. 155.

complicate his conclusion as deciding factors in interpreting a liberated look with sex appeal

emanated from a comic book culture with a primary male audience and male editors,

writers, and artists. Therefore, the empowered superheroines’ sexual image strongly

overrode her liberated powers and equalities. As fan Margie Spears noted, an all or nothing

approach was necessary to portray the superheroine as either liberated or sexy.178 Comic

book editors and writers mostly targeted female audiences by representing liberated

qualities in their superheroines, yet continued to appeal to the male gaze with the

superheroine’s sexy appearance.

This trend towards the least coverage of the superheroines’ body symbolized their increased objectification and resulted in the subsequent limitations of Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s liberated powers and equalities. The disempowered phases from 1968 to

1973 compromised the superheroines equality to superheroes. Beginning in 1969, the appearance of Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s sexually objectifying images inferred that their comics had shifted away from the censoring Comics Code Authority of the

1950s. These sexier images included partial nudity, bondage and bulls-eye scenes,

phallic missiles, and sexier costumes. These major limitations to the superheroines’

liberated powers and equalities ended with emotional and psychological stereotypes that

made them appear weakened and vulnerable.

Emotional and Mental Stereotyping

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s editors, writers, and artists carried forward post

WWII ideas held by some men who believed women were mentally and emotionally

unstable. Their association of overly emotional outbursts and weak mental states

178 Adventure Comics 412/1971, Margie Spears letter.

constrained Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s serious countenance that formed the basis

of their liberated powers and equalities.

Although appearing much earlier in the 1940s, psychological sabotage on Wonder

Woman’s mental state re-appeared in 1975 with the appearance of the villain known as the Duke of Deception. He employed subversive mind tactics that frustrated her and led to his ability to easily disarm her.179 However, his attacks and others like it, did not

compare to the intensity and duration of the psychological attacks on Supergirl. From

1969 to 1972, Supergirl appeared as mentally unstable in five issues out of thirty-nine comic book issues within a four-year period.180 DC consecutively published all but one

of Supergirl’s mentally debilitating plotlines in 1969 in issue #382 and #384 and in 1972

in #419 and #421. This pattern of making Supergirl appear mentally vulnerable

compromised her powers on two levels; physically and mentally. The editors’ and

writers’ continuation of stereotyped and Freudian traits about actual women sustained the

post WWII belief that women were prone to mental instability.

For example, in 1969, Superman’s father constructed a super-intelligent robot who secretly assessed Supergirl’s abilities. The robot meddled with Supergirl’s feats to the point that she believed herself a failure. When she figured out the robot’s part in her failures, she demanded a reason. The robot explained, “I had never seen a female with super-powers before! I was not programmed to accept the idea that a girl could use such abilities properly! So I set out to prove you were emotionally incapable of performing super-deeds correctly by making you doubt your own competence!”181 These types of

179 Wonder Woman 217/1975. Duke of Deception appeared in earlier Wonder Woman comics circa 1941. 180 Adventure Comics 382/1969, p. 21, Adventure Comics 384/1969, p. 10, Adventure Comics 401/1971, p. 14, Adventure Comics 419/1972, p. 9, Adventure Comics 421/1972, p. 14. 181 Adventure Comics 382/1969, p. 21.

subversive behaviors from the robot suggested that actual men needed proof that women

could handle high-pressure situations.

Throughout their comics, Wonder Woman and Supergirl handled high-pressure

situations ninety-nine percent of the time with relative ease, but also showed real human

emotions. At times, the editors, writers, and artists over abundantly expressed these

human emotions, especially with Supergirl. Comparatively, superheroes showed sadness

or remorse but very rarely shed a tear. From 1959 to 1984, the superheroines’ appeared crying in their storylines to the extent that their emotions undermined their strong liberated characteristics and psychological competence. In all, Supergirl cried thirty- three times and appeared on the front page of four comic books in a twenty-five year

period.182 Wonder Woman cried twenty times in a seventeen-year period from 1965 to

1984, with two crying episodes displayed on the front of her comic books.

However, from 1965 to 1984, as Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s emotional

outbursts continued, their editors and writers also introduced the emotion of anger

starting in 1972. Anger symbolized a transition for actual women as mentioned in the

earlier example from the women’s group organizer who stated, “perhaps I’m incompetent

182 Author’s note, crying incidents are not inclusive of reprint stories. 1964 to 1984, counts from Action Comics 1959 to first tears Action Comics 309 & 310/1964 Action Comics 373/1969, p. 23, Action Comics 374/1969, p. 9, Adventure Comics 382/969, splash, Adventure Comics 383/1969, p. 5, Adventure Comics 386/1969, p. 6, Adventure Comics 387/1969, p. 5, Adventure Comics 390/1972, p. 2, S-24 DC Giant/ 1974, p. 24, Adventure Comics 391/1970, p. 4, Adventure Comics 393/ 1970, cover, Adventure Comics 395/1970, p. 13, Adventure Comics 396/1970, p. 1 & p. 11, Adventure Comics 398/1970, p. 3 & p. 4, Adventure Comics 406/1971, p. 6, Adventure Comics 408/1971, p. 5, Adventure Comics 409/1971, cover, Adventure Comics 413/1971, p. 15, Supergirl 2/1973, p. 8, Supergirl 3/1973, cover & p. 16, Supergirl 4/1973, p. 10, Supergirl 5/1973, cover, Supergirl 8/1973, p. 14, Supergirl 9/1973, p. 3 & p. 4, The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 19/1984, p. 18, The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 22/1984, p. 15. Covers: Adventure Comics 393/1970, Adventure Comics 409/1971, Supergirl 3/1973, Supergirl 5/1973.

and unsure, but I’m conscious of it and enraged at anyone who says I must stay that

way!”183

Actual women’s anger challenged 1950s stereotypes of women as docile,

compliant, and mentally unstable. Susan Faludi in Backlash, 1991, argued that, “male

anger over women’s increasing demands and male fear over women’s growing

autonomy” attempted to counter women’s power and agency when women reacted in

anger.184 I agree with Susan Faludi’s argument as it helps to illuminate one reason why

the comic book editors, artists, and writers repeatedly portrayed the superheroines in

confrontations with angry and overly masculine villains from the mid 1970s through

1984.

The superheroines’ anger ranged from levels of frustration to embitterment—and

to the most extreme—a berserk type of uncontrollable rage. For example, in 1977,

Wonder Woman’s violent and berserk anger appeared when she nearly killed the

villainous Red Panzer. The comic book narrative text explained, “The frenzy of rage and

increased strength of the berserk Amazon makes her an unstoppable juggernaut.”185 In

this instance, anger empowered her and acted as a source of increased power. Though

the berserker episodes occurred infrequently, Wonder Woman’s intense rage halted the

strongest of villains. At another time in 1979, Wonder Woman angrily threatened two

police officers on the cover while shouting at them, “Impudent fools! No prison can hold

me!”186 Usually, she showed the utmost respect of authority, but when enemies broke or

removed her bracelets, Wonder Woman instantly spiraled into an uncontrollable rage.

183 Wonder Woman 203/1972, p. 14. 184 Susan Faludi, Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women, Three Rivers Press, New York, 1991, p. 367. 185 Wonder Woman 229/1977, p. 15 & 16. 186 Wonder Woman 260/1979, cover.

The bracelets she wore served as a reminder of Hercules’ domination over the Amazons, so it made sense that without her bracelets that kept her calm, her behavior turned to rage.

The removal of the bracelets allegorically signified that the shackles were men who attempted to keep women calm by domesticating them. The release of the shackles and subsequent anger represented the empowering elements of women’s raised awareness during the women’s movement.

Wonder Woman reflected this raised awareness when she appeared angry without the extra boost caused by her berserker rage in 1979 and 1980. In 1979, she admonished a group of three armed men on the front of the comic book, shouting, “You call yourselves warriors, you’re nothing but vermin!”187 This was out of character for

Wonder Woman as she usually fixed or prevented problems rather than directly address them. In 1980, an embittered and tiara tossing Wonder Woman walked away from a crowd of people exclaiming, “I’ve had my fill of the evils of man’s world! As of now—I quit!”188 Up to this point, Wonder Woman had never expressed her angry frustration with humankind to this degree, suggesting that the empowering emotion of actual women’s anger had raised the editor’s and writer’s awareness during the women’s movement.

The editor’s and writer’s introduction of the emotion of anger proved to be the only instance from 1959 to 1984 where they added a liberated behavior after limiting the superheroines’ mental and emotional states. The emotion of anger exemplified an instance where the editors and writers reversed the direction of the superheroines’ declining liberated agency and reinstated a portion of their power.

187 Wonder Woman 262/1979, cover. 188 Wonder Woman 269/1980.

Summary

In summation, Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s powers equipped them to accomplish almost anything in the fantasy realm of the comic book. Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s liberating characteristics and behaviors—superpowers, independent lifestyle, higher education, white-collar careers, and financial independence reflected ideals of the women’s movement. Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s editors, writers, and artists countered the superheroines’ liberated portrayal through subjecting them to long periods of disempowerment and portraying them in provocative poses, bondage scenes, bulls-eye targets, riding phallic rockets, and wearing sexier costumes. In addition, the writers and editors regularly introduced storylines that caused the superheroines to appear mentally and emotionally weaker than men.

From 1959 to 1984, a commonly reoccurring conflict with actual men’s and women’s ideas appeared in the storylines. The editors, writers, and artists simultaneously presented Wonder Woman and Supergirl as liberated women yet limited their superpowers with lengthy periods of disempowerment and matched them against weak foes. Beginning in the early 1970s, the editors, writers, and artists portrayed Wonder

Woman’s and Supergirl’s sexier looks in the early 1970s by showing partial nudity, bondage scenes, bulls-eye poses, phallic missiles, and sexier costumes. Lastly, the editors and writers portrayed the superheroines’ mental and emotional behaviors as debilitating stereotypes of actual women which continued post WWII beliefs that women were mentally and emotionally unstable. This portrayal of the physical disempowerment and mental weakening of Wonder Woman and Supergirl, yet coinciding increase of their

85 visual appeal, conflicted with the editors’, writers’, and artists’ concurrent portrayal of actual women’s liberation ideals in specially produced comics from 1968 to 1973.

The few portrayals of liberated equalities that the editors, writers, and artists sustained throughout 1959 to 1984 included Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s white- collar careers, independent lifestyles, and college educations. The editors and writers raised feminist awareness by reflecting prevalent issues during the women’s movement such as a woman’s lack of job skills, wage inequality, and sexual harassment. When the editors and writers introduced the emotion of anger with Wonder Woman, it was one of the only instances where they re-empowered her after consistently constraining her liberated behaviors.

Unfortunately, the sexier visual appeal that the editors, writers, and artists constructed around the superheroines’ liberated characteristics and behaviors advanced the male gaze. More so than constrained superpowers, emotional, and mental behaviors, the sexualization of the superheroines separated them from the importance of their liberated strengths—a development from which they have yet to recover.

Chapter Two Silly Feminist, Superheroine Comic Books are for Men!

From 1959 to 1984, male fans’ contributions in the letter pages of Wonder

Woman and Supergirl influenced comic book editors to make the superheroines look

sexier and behave according to conventional standards, instead of reflecting actual

liberated women. This simultaneous construction of a sexier look and constraint of

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s liberated behaviors began in 1969.189 DC’s editors

claimed that Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comic books represented aspects of real

women’s liberation. There were two key problems with DC’s claim. First, they too often

reintroduced Cold War era notions of women specific work and behaviors in the

plotlines. Second, the male gaze and sexual objectification of the superheroines

constrained their ability to represent ideals of women’s liberation.

Matthew J. Pustz argued that, “the intertextuality that links stories in the minds of

both creators and readers—also helps to define and limit the audience.”190 I argue that

fans participated in this intertexuality through their letters of commentary, praise, and

critique in Wonder Woman and Supergirl. My evidence both agrees with and supports

Pustz’s argument. Chapter one primarily dealt with external socio-cultural events such as the Cold War Era and the Women’s Movement that informed the storylines in Wonder

Woman and Supergirl. This chapter analyzes the intertextual set of influences that stems from the fans in Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics. Fan intertexuality is a primary

189 Superheroines’ liberation stories: Wonder Woman 178/1968, Wonder Woman 203/1972, Wonder Woman 219/1975, Super DC Giant Supergirl S-24/1971, Adventure Comics 416/1972, and Adventure Comics 417/1972. Sexy look starts with Adventure Comics 382/1969, p. 13. where Supergirl appears in only a bra and panties. 190 Matthew Pustz, Comic Book Culture: Fanboys and True Believers, University Press of Mississippi, Canada, 1999, p. 129.

feature of the comic book. The intertexuality from fans’ commentary and editorial

responses is comprised of several inputs and outputs of cultural influence.

The fans’ ideas about powerful and liberated women in Cold War era popular

comic book culture resulted in a dynamic exchange of ideas between the fans and

editors.191 I argue that the intertexuality between the fans and editors worked to establish

male audiences in Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics. These male audiences

influenced the construction of the superheroines’ liberation, sexy images, attempted

marriages, and female friendships. Fans’ opinions swayed the editorial construction of

the superheroine as a sex object while constraining her liberated behaviors.

Telling Advertisements

From 1968 to 1984, both Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics targeted a mature

male reading audience. A youthful audience was evident in Wonder Woman’s Clubhouse

pages from 1959 to 1968. Girls made comments about dressing up as Wonder Woman

and both boys and girls asked for advice on how to start fan clubs in their neighborhoods.

Supergirl’s fan pages reflected only a handful of youth compared to Wonder Woman.

Trina Robbins argued that, “Supergirl was very clearly intended for young girls” when

the editors added a cat and horse to her storyline. This conclusion is questionable, as

Supergirl appeared with her flying cat and white horse just five times over a nine-year

period from 1962 to 1971.192 Moreover, Supergirl’s letter pages indicated fewer children

read her comics. Without publication disclosures that identified the intended audience,

191 Another influential component from fans is their purchase power. This analysis does not argue this aspect however, their purchase power also influenced Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s character development. 192 Trina Robbins, The Great Women Superheroes, Kitchen Sink Press, Massachusetts, 1996, p. 107. Action Comics 293/1962, Superhorse, and Action Comics 373/1969, Streaky, Adventure Comics 398/1970, Adventure Comics 390/1970, DC Giant Special 3/1969. Appearances of superpets not inclusive of Superman Family of comics.

DC’s editors made it difficult for parents, educators, and consumers to discern content by

the appearance of the comic book alone. Advertisements in Wonder Woman and

Supergirl represent an important point of my analysis as DC obscured the demographic

data of readership.193

I argue that, unlike the letter pages that hinted at basic gender and age demographics of fans, the advertisements within the actual comic book directly targeted an intended reading audience. Moreover, the stereotyped ideas and gender specific images expressed in the advertisements often contrasted with Wonder Woman’s and

Supergirl’s powers and equalities to superheroes. From 1963 to 1984, when romance supplements and public service messages dissipated, they were replaced by bodybuilding and BB gun advertisements that directly focused on male audiences. These advertisements that directly focused on male audiences led to an increase in sexier images of Wonder Woman and Supergirl. Comic book advertisements contained their own world of ideas regarding women’s gender roles as evidenced in the romantic customs, public service messages, bodybuilding, and BB gun advertisements.

For eight years, from 1962 to 1970, romance supplements appealed to girls and women but mostly appeared in Wonder Woman. The high ratio of romance

193 In 1960, Supergirl shared a letter column with Superman titled the Metropolis Mailbag. When she starred in Adventure Comics in 1969, her title reflected her new solo-comic status and age in the letter column Super Maid’s Super-Mail. Adventure Comics 381/1969, Super Maid’s Super-Mail. From 1969 to 1972 Supergirl’s letter column subtly changed from Adventure Comics Super Fe-mail , Adventure Comics 386/1969, Ken Stephens won the title contest Super Fe-Mail. Super Spectacular Fe-Mail. Adventure Comics 385/1969, Adventure Comics Super Fe-mail. Adventure Comics 416/1972, Super Spectacular Fe- Mail. Supergirl’s solo title book was dropped in 1974 and re-published eight years later. The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl in 1982. In the eight-year interim, Supergirl appeared in DC’s leading titles including the Superman Family. The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl column title was equally lengthy, The Daring New Readers of Supergirl. The acronym TDNAOS was used in 1983 and changed to a simplified Supergirl, but used The Daring New Readers of Supergirl until the series abruptly ended in 1984. The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 14/1983 and 15/1983, The Daring New Readers of Supergirl.

supplements—twenty-seven out of thirty-one Wonder Woman’s—promoted women’s gender roles such as teaching girls about romantic traditions that prepared them for future dating relationships and marriage. Romance supplements included historical snippets about curious and strange superstitions, world customs, and myths that emphasized the significance of courtships, flowers, rings, love, marriage, kissing, and romance.194

Almost all of the ads showed how young women acted when receiving or giving attention

to men. The girls’ roles in the romantic supplements reassured the boys who also read

these supplements by showing them how to expect girls to act when dating them. In a

like manner, boys learned that girls expected flowers and wanted to be kissed. The

romance ads prepared girls for domesticity and contradicted the independent status of

Wonder Woman and Supergirl. In the 1960s, though male audiences mostly read

Wonder Woman, publishers attempted to attract female readers with their romance and

relationship advertisements.

194 These full-page illustrations were reminiscent of dating advice studied by Grace Palladino. Grace Palladino, teenagers: An American History, Basic Books, New York, 1996, p. 24. In her book, she noted that a Scholastic magazine column from 1936, advised teens on basics of courtship.

Wonder Woman #160/1966, Marriage advertisements sharing customs of the world

Mike Benton observed that, “nine publishers were putting out twenty-one romance comic titles” in the early 1950s.195 The popular women’s specialty comics that featured only

romance stories suggested that women liked reading them, so it made for a good

marketing strategy when short romantic tales appeared in Wonder Woman and Supergirl

comics. From 1962 to 1970, no other ads in the superheroines’ comic books targeted a

female audience like the romance supplements did. The romance supplements’

placement near bodybuilding and BB gun ads stood apart not only with the pastel colors

195 Examples of titles with images can be seen in Mike Benton, The Comic Book in America: An Illustrated History, Taylor Publishing Company, Dallas, Texas, 1993, p. 46 and p. 104. Example Titles: Young Love, First Love, Real West Romance, Love Tales, Lovers, Best Love, Real Love, All Love, Popular Romance, All Romances, Glamorous Romances, Love Experience, Love at First Sight, Romantic Adventures, Love Lorn, 1949 all. Dear Beatrix Fairfax, 1950, My Real Love 1952, Heartthrobs 1958.

used, but also that females were the main subject matter of the ad. That more girls and

women populated the romance supplements suggested the editors tailored the ads for

female readers as no saleable product appeared. Full-page romance and historically factual snippets in 1964 gradually decreased in size to one fourth of a page that showed public service messages, and hobby hints such as scientific facts, and rocket and car model building. Romance supplements disappeared altogether in 1970.

From 1963 to 1967, Wonder Woman’s advertising subjects transitioned from romance supplements to public service messages that appeared in one out of every ten issues. Public service messages promoted, for example, world health concerns of the

United Nations, saluted the courage of President John F. Kennedy, and expressed the importance of environmentalism.196 The educational message in each announcement

taught children the Golden Rule as it applied to the environment, other nations, and their

friends and families. In this context, the Golden Rule meant treating others as you would

want to be treated, giving to the poor, and leaving nature as clean or cleaner when

enjoying the outdoors. As editors of DC modernized the advertisements in the 1970s to

appeal to males, Wonder Woman and Supergirl focused more on male youth who eventually comprised the core audience. This male youth eventually matured and subsequently influenced the development of the superheroines’ character.

Unlike the romance supplements that were designed to appeal more to girls than boys, public service announcements sought to educate a wider audience of both boys and girls. When public service announcements stopped appearing in Wonder Woman comics

196 Wonder Woman 142/1963, United Nations, Wonder Woman 151/1964, President John F. Kennedy, Wonder Woman 163/1966, President Johnson.

in 1967, the bodybuilding and BB gun advertisements that took their place represented an

increase in marketing aimed at male audiences.

Since the early 1960s, the bodybuilding advertisements inferred that muscled and

stronger men attracted weaker, feminine-looking women. The feature message of the

bodybuilding ads emphasized the inherent difference in strength between men and

women. This message reinforced the curvier figures of women that contrasted with the

strength of men, but the core issue with the bodybuilding ads was that their presence and

feature message diminished the power of the superheroines. Supergirl agreed in 1968

that, “theoretically, Superboy is stronger than I, just as a normal boy is stronger than a

normal girl!”197 The bodybuilding ads went further than showing dominant male strength

as they also emphasized male sexual appeal to attract small, curvy, and petite women.

The sexual attraction of the physically stronger male in the bodybuilding ads competed

with the superheroines’ liberating powers. These sexier male bodies in the ads also

associated the superheroines’ strength with her sexuality.

Bodybuilding advertisements appeared in both superheroines’ and superheroes’

comics prior to 1962. However, before romance and public service messages stopped

circulating in 1970, bodybuilding advertisements appeared more conspicuously one year

earlier in 1969 in almost every issue of Wonder Woman and Supergirl. Bodybuilding ads

occasionally appeared in small one-inch spaces pre-1969, but after 1969 they frequently appeared in the centerfolds, insets of magic tricks and gadgets, and back pages of

superheroines’ comics. The late 1960s shift in the spatial placement and size of

bodybuilding ads in Wonder Woman and Supergirl indicated a real world social trend that

equated actual male masculinity with a muscular build. The reflection of this real world

197 Adventure Comics 368/1968, p. 7.

93 social trend in a superheroine comic book confirmed changing attitudes of comic publishers, editors, writers, artists, and readers. Their reticence to accept and construct stronger female images in popular culture reflected some of the reasons actual women struggled to access power during the Women’s Movement. Bodybuilding ads promoted actual male power without indicating a similar support of actual women’s power.

Adventure Comics #415/1972, Bodybuilding ads that promoted muscular male bodies

In 1972, Joe Weider’s and Charles Atlas’s muscle-building ads targeted male readers with promises of female appreciation of men’s muscled bodies by helping men obtain

“handsome bodies.”198 A smiling and petite woman who perched on one arm of the

muscled men in these ads served as a point of size reference that made the body builders

physique appear larger and stronger. These images of women being held up by muscular

men like objects on display, contrasted with Wonder Woman and Supergirl, who stopped

erupting volcanoes and saved the planet from impending doom.199 The promises of the

advertisements promoted health improvement but as noted by a male customer, his real

objective wanted “all the girls to notice.”200 The muscle ads suggested masculine ways

of looking and behaving for men. The superheroines’ bodies conformed more to the way

that the muscle ads presented actual women—no visible muscles. This lack of muscle

tone heightened the readers’ disbelief of female power when the superheroines lifted tons

of steel or stopped rockets in mid-air.

In 1969, fan Jeanne Takocs took notice of this discrepancy when she asked why

Superman’s muscles bulged and Supergirl’s didn’t. She proposed to the editorial staff that Supergirl should show “just a few muscles” didn’t they think? The editors responded with, “No, and neither does Supergirl. She knows that boys don’t go for muscular maidens.”201 The editors’ reply suggested that they believed in emphasizing women’s

figures over making them appear as powerful as men. Their comment revealed their true

intentions towards the portrayal of women in Supergirl. From 1959 to 1984, Supergirl’s

figure always looked more like a fashion model than a muscle-toned athlete in order to

attract male readers. The editors’ and writers’ determination for Supergirl to remain

198 Adventure Comics 415/1972, interior pages. 199 Action Comics 265/1960, p. 11, and Wonder Woman 129/1962, p. 24. 200 Wonder Woman 230/1977, p. 4. 201 Adventure Comics 386/1969, Jeanne Takocs letter.

attractive for the opposite sex contrasted with her abilities as the world’s strongest

female.

In a 1973 Wonder Woman, another fan who noticed the superheroines’ feats were

performed without muscled figures stated, “Being taller and tougher would not detract

from her great beauty, which even the Greeks ascribed to the Amazons.”202 Yet the

editors, writers, and artists of Wonder Woman gave more importance to her feminine

beauty than the muscles that gave her Herculean strength. In this way, the bodybuilding

advertisements cued male readers to believe that only muscular men were sexually

attractive, not muscular women. These types of beliefs in Wonder Woman and Supergirl contradicted the superheroines’ equality of power compared to superheroes.

BB gun advertisements appeared in tandem with the masculine bodybuilding ads from 1965 to 1980. The shooting activities pictured in the BB gun advertisements promised that through the purchase and use of their guns, adolescent boys could achieve manhood. Advertisers prominently placed the glossy and full color BB gun advertisements on the front and back covers of comics, directly marketing to boys aged eight and up.203 The advertisements that connected a boy’s attainment of manhood with

the shooting of guns contrasted with America’s most liberated superheroine Wonder

Woman. She “played” bullets and bracelets, but refrained from using firearms.204 The

chances of seeing a BB gun advertisement ran high as Daisy frequently placed these ads

in Wonder Woman comics which appeared in almost every third comic book issue out of

202 Wonder Woman 207/1973, Robert L. Krel letter. The editors response, “it’s the frame of reference that surrounds the characters that counts.” 203 According to Daisy BB gun advertisement that cited local and state gun regulations. 204 Wonder Woman deflected the bullets off of her Amazonium metal bracelets instead of using a gun. Wonder Woman 205/1973.

150 of her comic books during the years 1965 to 1980.205 Daisy’s advertisements

suggested that gun ownership signified a natural rite of passage for male youth by

connecting the responsibility of riding bikes safely with the responsibility of owning a

BB gun.206 The ads suggested that learning about the guns provided male bonding time

with Dad stating, “It’s a fun gun that you and your dad will enjoy practicing

marksmanship with.”207

Wonder Woman #258/1979, BB gun ads that did not promote female participation in the sport of shooting guns

Crosman ads, which appeared in 1977, did not encourage women to participate, showing moms and daughters observing the fathers and sons with approving looks in the

205 Daisy Manufacturing Company marketed the bulk of the twenty-six BB gun advertisements during this time period, but Crosman BB guns dominated the entire year of 1978. 206 Wonder Woman 210/1974, inside front cover. 207 Wonder Woman 201/1972, p. 7.

ads, but not touching or shooting the gun.208 Other advertising from Daisy linked a boy’s

maturation to his responsibility stating, “In marksmanship competition, a boy learns to

act like a man.”209 Daisy’s BB gun ads encouraged masculine behaviors that boys

learned to act out and also elevated the activity of gun shooting as a sport.

In 1974, Daisy advertisements asked readers if they knew the correct way to safely hold a gun. The ad showed two options: a girl holding a gun pointed upwards and a boy pointing the gun downwards away from his feet.210 Both the boy and girl held the

guns correctly, but the most important change in the advertisement after a decade of

advertising, showed a girl for the first time holding a Daisy BB gun. In 1976, Daisy’s

competitor, Crosman BB and Pellet guns, showed the whole nuclear family in their

single-page advertisements. However in Crosman ads, only the boy used the gun while dad supervised the indoor shooting, mom watched from the couch, and sister watched over her brother’s shoulder.211 Only five advertisements out of twenty-six from 1965 to

1980 showed images of girls holding a gun. The fewer images of girls holding BB guns

than of boys holding the guns, adhered to Cold War notions about women’s gender roles

in American society. Meanwhile, the BB gun ads from 1965 to 1980 continued to mainly

target young male customers with their newer BB gun models. Significantly, BB gun ads appeared in Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s special comic issues that pertained to women’s liberation from 1968 to 1973. The overall content, quantity, and frequency of the BB gun advertisements targeted a male market and thus suggested that DC’s editors of Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics predominantly wrote to a male audience.

208 Wonder Woman 239/1977, Crosman BB gun ad. 209 Wonder Woman 204/1973, inside front cover. 210 Supergirl 10/1974, back cover. 211 Wonder Woman 239/1976, p. 5.

Letter Content

The designated response page for fans in comic books is known as the letters of

comment or letter pages section and is crucial evidence that identifies the reading audience. The established space of the letter pages of Wonder Woman and Supergirl

provided a communication link between the reader and editor. Editors used the letters as

an important tool to identify fans’ likes and dislikes while attempting to create stories and

characters that sold well. The quantity of letters suggested a strong correlation between

audience demographics and the intertextual relationship between the readers and editors.

This intertextual relationship mentioned earlier in the chapter, consisted of the editors’

access to readers’ requests and opinions, which then influenced Wonder Woman’s and

Supergirl’s storylines.

Bodybuilding and BB gun advertisements from 1963 to 1970 targeted male

audiences. The letter content in Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics reflected these

male audiences but also showed an age range of readers in addition to gender

distribution.212 From 1963 to 1968, Wonder Woman comic books targeted a youthful

audience of boys and girls as reflected in the letter column Wonder Woman’s Clubhouse.

After 1968, the letter pages and advertisements reflected a core male audience.213 This

shift occurred within two years from the last romance supplement published in 1970.

Notably, younger boys’ and girls’ requests differed from older male requests as found in

the hints left by these readers in their letters to Wonder Woman and Supergirl. From

212 Example of fan ages Wonder Woman 151/1965, Connie Barbera age eight, Harry Seals, Wonder Woman 152/1965, Irene Summons age nine, Jim Rhodes, Wonder Woman 156/1965, Jenny Oberlin age twenty- three and mother of four year old, Wonder Woman 160/1966, Ann Satherwaite mom of teenaged girl, Wonder Woman 164/1966 Irene Vartanoff, fan with kids, Wonder Woman 190/1970, has survey eleven year old boy filled out, my copy, Wonder Woman 197/1971 Deborah Rust, reader since age nine, at time of writing, seventeen, Wonder Woman 237/1977, Robin Smith eighteen years old. 213 Wonder Woman’s letter column changed titles over six times from the last Clubhouse in 1968 to 1979.

1963 to 1977, eight female and three male fans who specifically mentioned their ages as

between eight years old and their high-twenties, wrote letters to Wonder Woman. Some

of their letters came from the Clubhouse era from 1963 to 1968, when young girls and

boys often sent in letters. Supergirl’s letter pages in 1969 and 1983 included three

college-aged men and women in addition to two mothers with children.214 These readers

shared their parental influence of reading comics. In some cases, parents shared the love

of reading Supergirl with their children who then grew up reading Supergirl.

However, these fans were exceptional, as the matured male fans’ comments in the

letter pages informed the editors about what was and wasn’t important to them. These

topics varied from rejection to approval of how the editors and artists portrayed women’s

liberation, women acting like men, women’s attitudes of male intolerance, sexy images,

domesticating attempts, and supporting cast female friendships for Wonder Woman and

Supergirl.

Liberation Requests

From 1959 to 1984, thirty-four fans wrote in over the course of twenty-three

Wonder Woman comics regarding the editor’s portrayal of her liberation and disempowerment.215 The fans’ awareness of women’s liberation in the 1970s through the

1980s permeated the letter pages with critical responses and praises about the six

214 Adventure Comics 384/1969, Lynn Gold, mom, Supergirl 5/1983, Neil Ahlquist, college age, Supergirl 5/1983, Stephen Scott Beau Smith, 27 years long reader, Supergirl 6/1983, Alicia Holland reader for 20 years. 215 Wonder Woman 184/1969 Peggy Sarokin, Randall Way, Wonder Woman 185/1969, Glen Baker, Jeff Quall, Wonder Woman 186/1970, Johnny Ubaiso, Edith Biddle, Tony Quintana, Ellie Resta, Audrey Valente, Kenneth Kraft, George Dolack, Wonder Woman 192/1971 Soo Kim Lee, Wonder Woman 194/1971, Lynne Pope, Wonder Woman 202/1972, Rush Glick, Wonder Woman 206/1973, Dennis Summers, Mike Shoemaker, Lynne Cullen, Connie Moore, Ms. Bronwen Jones, Jim Balko, Marilyn Littlejohn, Dennis Goza, Wonder Woman 207/1973, Mindy Kroll, Wonder Woman 208/1973, Joe Arul, Wonder Woman 234/1977, Carl Nicastro, Wonder Woman 235/1977, Carol Strickland, Wonder Woman 242/1978, Larry Cummings, Bruce Harris, Wonder Woman 244/1978, Mike White, John Calhoun, Robert Husk, Wonder Woman 262/1979, Charles David Haskell, Wonder Woman 265/1980, Jackie Deashy, Wonder Woman 299/1983, Gina L. Darrt.

100

women’s liberation stories in Wonder Woman and Supergirl. These plotlines most

reflected the ongoing actual upheaval of women’s and men’s social roles during the

women’s movement.216 Fans argued over whether the superheroines represented

liberation when they appeared liberated but sexy, feminine but powerful, and tough but

ultra-feminine. The editors’ and writers’ contradictory representations appeared most concentrated from 1971 to 1973, when comic titles and content closely reflected a growing awareness of women’s liberation.

In 1971, fans requested that DC publish more superheroines than Wonder Woman

and Supergirl alone. Editors met these fans’ demands as exemplified in the following

letter in 1971, “Please…Please, we give up! Here it is, a classic Legion of Super-Heroes

Tale, featuring the female side of the story. So all you women libs, stop writing! Our staff is having trouble handling all your mail.”217 Of note is that the unsolicited letters

received from a feminist-aware fan base in Supergirl indicated that both the editors and

staff responding to these large numbers of letters caused productivity to decrease. Some

scholars might argue that a literal interpretation of the quantity of fans’ letters sent to the

editor is an amplification of the actual letters sent in. However, those fans’ letters

persuaded the editors to publish an additional sixteen pages in that 1971 comic. The

fans’ requests and the editor’s willingness to comply with their requests suggested that

readers’ demands for more superheroine’s mirrored real world changes brought about by

the women’s movement. This increase in the quantity of empowered superheroines did

not make the superheroines more liberated as the editors, writers, and artists portrayed an

inconsistently liberated characterization of the superheroines.

216 1969 to 1975 Wonder Woman and Supergirl with liberation stories. 217 Adventure Comics 409/1971, editorial response.

101

A prominent fan noted in 1972, “For a nation in which women outnumber men,

we certainly have a lack of super-heroines.”218 To make up for this, former fan writer-

turned-editor Bob Rozakis indicated feminisms impact in his 1972 announcement, “talk

about Women’s Lib! Supergirl, Black Canary, Zatanna, and the Enchantress all in one

issue of Adventure Comics.”219 Fans sometimes overwhelmed the editors with their

correspondence when prompted in the letter pages. For example, over the course of just

two months in 1972 editors solicited responses from fans on polls about page titles,

hairstyles or costumes, and invited them to enter contests to appear on television and

movies. Editors wrote that they received over 700 fan entries.220 The large quantity of

fan mail indicated the fans’ participation levels and their direct influence on editors.

During the Second Wave Women’s Movement, editors responded to fans’

requests in Wonder Woman’s letter pages in an exclusive editorial address in 1972,

stating that Diana Prince’s new characterization put her “solidly into women’s

liberation.”221 In actuality, Wonder Woman, before 1972, already represented ideals of

women’s liberation such as being a powerful woman and promoting women’s solidarity.

The editors suggested that Wonder Woman’s new lifestyle and attitudes better reflected

actual women’s liberation.222 Yet her representation as a very sexy mortal without

powers, and as a woman who rejected women’s solidarity conflicted with this

218 Adventure Comics 419/1972, Carol Strickland letter. 219 Adventure Comics 423/1972, Bob Rozakis letter. 220 Another example: The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 5/1983, The editors led by saying, “#1 has been in the stands for about two weeks and already we’ve received over 100 pieces of mail commenting on our efforts.” An example in Wonder Woman 201/1972, Denny O’Neill editor wrote, “Every mail delivery brings ten or twelve new letter; literally hundreds of you have taken time to wish us well.” 221 Wonder Woman 199/1972, Editor Denny O’ Neill later conceded that he was mistaken for taking away Wonder Woman’s powers, according to Les Daniels p. 126. 222 Wonder Woman 203/1972, editors talked about women’s liberation and the message of Diana Prince and women.

102

proclamation. Besides representing women’s liberation, Wonder Woman’s greatest

milestone was that she continued to exist at all.

In 1973, a letter of praise stated that only Wonder Woman survived the Golden

Age in the 1940s (the first era of the superhero in comics) in addition to Batman and

Superman.223 Her existence was critical for actual women as she was one of DC’s two

solo-titled superheroines in the male dominated world of comic books. A mostly male

staff of editors, writers, and artists inconsistently portrayed her powers unequally to those of male superheroes and overtly emphasized her sexier image.

Starting from 1941, Wonder Woman’s empowered behaviors were soon associated with feminism. Her role modeling for the empowerment of actual women grabbed the attention of liberated women’s movement leaders who appropriated Wonder

Woman’s iconic image in 1972. In July 1972, women’s magazine editor and feminist leader Gloria Steinem, featured Wonder Woman on the first cover issue of Ms.

Magazine.224 Liberated women saw Wonder Woman as a role model with empowering

features in Wonder Woman such as her ability to control men with her lasso and her

constant message of telling women to believe in the power of women. Male readers’

requests de-emphasized actual women’s empowerment when they showed a preference

for her sexier images. These visual cues for male readers appeared as increasingly

sexualized images shown by the way editors, writers, and artists featured her in bondage

scenes, bulls-eye targets, and rocket riding scenes.

But the real question was, why were the superheroines disempowered to begin

with? It is not entirely clear why Wonder Woman and Supergirl were made

223 Wonder Woman 208/1973, York Anderson letter. As noted in Reynolds, Wonder Woman’s comics stopped briefly from 1986 to 1987, chapter one, note one, p. 127. 224 Ms. Magazine, Vol. I, No. 1, July 1972.

103 disempowered from 1968 to 1973. In 1968, a new editor named Denny O’Neill drastically changed Wonder Woman’s story and look. He made her disempowered, took away her costume, banished her from her Amazon family, and less emphasized her empowering women’s messages. In 2000, Les Daniels noted that Denny O’ Neill expressed regret at his decision to make Wonder Woman disempowered during the

Second Wave of the Women’s Movement.225 However, O’ Neill’s 1968 decision to make Wonder Woman disempowered in the first place remains unclear.

In this instance, DC’s editors seemed to join the backlash against the women’s movement. 1968 was an important year during the Women’s Movement when women protested the Miss America pageant. Most memorable of their actions, they threw articles of women’s clothing, including bras, in a trashcan. The media distorted these women’s protests against female objectification and created the myth that feminist women were radical, man-hating, and emasculating “bra burners.”226 In this way, the media undermined women’s movements towards equality. This protest at the Miss America pageant coincided with Wonder Woman’s loss of power and increased sexual objectification. Furthermore, this parallel to real world events suggested that her disempowerment was a backlash to real women’s opportunities to equality. Her loss of power was an especially strong statement given that Wonder Woman was emerging as a feminist icon, yet appeared at her weakest when O’ Neill made her disempowered. Not only that, the media’s promotion of man-hating rhetoric appeared in Wonder Woman’s comics during the same time she was disempowered from 1968 to 1973. Phyllis Schlafly was one of the leading opponents of the Equal Rights Amendment and acted as a major

225 Daniels, p. 126. 226 Evans, p. 214. No evidence ever appeared that bras were actually burned.

104

contributor to the backlash of the women’s movement that coincided with Wonder

Woman’s and Supergirl’s loss of power.227

In 1973, when both Wonder Woman and Supergirl received their powers back it

was only slightly more clear than why they had lost them to begin with. A new editor

had replaced Denny O’Neill in 1973. In both comic book and feminist histories, Les

Daniels and Robinson noted that feminist leader Gloria Steinem made a personal deal

with DC’s owner Steve Ross to have Wonder Woman reinstated to full power.228

Wonder Woman’s appearance on the inaugural cover of Ms. Magazine in 1972

proclaimed her restoration as a feminist icon.

Other larger developments in the women’s movement included the ruling of Roe v. Wade that was decided in 1973.229 Additionally, Billie Jean King beat Bobby Riggs in

tennis in 1973.230 These monumental developments in the women’s movement are indicative of mass cultural influences that motivated DC’s editors and writers to resolve the status of the weaker superheroine.

By 1969, prices for the disempowered Wonder Woman went up by a nickel but

had gone back down to twenty cents in 1972.231 Marketing strategies that disempowered

Wonder Woman and Supergirl also created a demand that coincided with the

227 Douglas, p. 232. 228 Robinson, p. 83, (Robinson incorrectly credits female editor Dorothy Woolfolk, however, Robert Kanigher replaced her during this period of Wonder Woman’s reinstatement to power.) See also, Daniels, p. 131. 229 Banner, p. 181. 230 Schulman, p. 161. 231 Publication data, found in Wonder Woman 183/1969 price increase to .25 cents. Wonder Woman 201/1972, price decrease to .20 cents. Another indicator of sales is that when Soo Kim Lee asked for monthly issues instead of bi-monthly, editors responded that sales regulated the frequency of publications, (meaning Wonder Woman sales were down). Wonder Woman 192/1971.

105

reinstatement of their superpowers.232 Additionally, as indicated by fan’s letters, the

reinstatement of powers was a response to fans who wanted their women super. Direct

comic book marketing emerged in 1971 and focused on specialized stores that were

frequented primarily by adult males. The loss of Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s

powers coincided with the emergence of specialty stores making the loss of powers less

evident to the general public.233

Nevertheless, whether it was marketing strategies or a combination of external

socio-cultural factors, DC reinstated Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s powers in 1973.

DC countered these messages of women’s empowerment with elements that made them

subordinate to superheroes and men in the comics.

From 1974 to 1983, six fans over the course of ninety issues went beyond simple

praise and proclaimed Wonder Woman as a personal feminist icon for women and

national icon for the women’s movement. After 1973, Wonder Woman regained her

power. Two women readers expressed gratitude for the symbolism of liberation that

Wonder Woman represented to them and they said, all contemporary women, feminists,

and comic book readers.234 Few popular cultural media icons reflected liberated roles to

the extent that Wonder Woman did. Other fans wrote in 1980 and 1982, “Wonder

Woman gives strength to all women by her determination and strength.”235 One of the

most prevalent women’s rights subjects that these fans recognized in 1982, was the Equal

Rights Amendment that sought to establish women’s rights in government infrastructure.

232 Schulman, p. 131. The recession affecting the U.S. economy at the time affected DC’s sales as they increased their prices in Wonder Woman comics from twenty cents in 1969 to twenty-five cents and back down to twenty cents again in 1972. 233 A fan makes mention of this when she came chanced across the new Wonder Woman which was still available in the grocery store in 1969. Wonder Woman 185/1969. 234 Wonder Woman 212/1974, Ann For Freedom letter. Wonder Woman 216/1975, Mary Jo Duffy letter. 235 Wonder Woman 264/1980, Fred Grandinetti letter, Wonder Woman 293/1982, Mike Sopp letter, Wonder Woman 299/1983, Todd Victor Leone letter.

106

The fans continued their expression of gratitude to Wonder Woman’s representation of women’s liberation by stating, “All of us will be asked to take a stand, one way or another.”236 Based on Wonder Woman’s Amazonian heritage and governing laws that promoted women’s equality, Wonder Woman stood for the ERA. Though the Equal

Rights Amendment never passed, the general public’s observations of Wonder Woman’s symbolism of liberation as meaningful and inspirational, signified the importance of her liberated presence. Another letter writer stated, “Diana Prince as a humanized superheroine became a vanguard of the women’s movement. I hope that Wonder Woman can help both girls and boys learn that a girl’s childhood can consist of more than playing house. For Women’s lib is human lib.”237 These letters indicated America’s changing attitudes about feminism; but more so, that Wonder Woman role modeled women’s liberation issues to a broader audience outside of her comic books.

Five fans in 1969 and 1972, disapproved of the disempowered Wonder Woman with letters that stated, “forget the new, bring back the old!” and “Wonder Woman is dead!! And You buried her!!”238 The fan referenced the Wonder Woman from 1941 to

1968, when Wonder Woman wore a costume that signified her purpose and wielded powers equal to superheroes and promoted women’s equalities. Without these identifying features and behaviors, some fans refused to accept the editor’s alternative vision of their favorite superheroine.

In 1972, one of the few adult female readers of Wonder Woman wrote a letter in which she noted that she was not only formerly employed and now had extra time to

236 Ibid. 237 Wonder Woman 212/1974, Tom Purchase letter. 238 Wonder Woman 184/1969, Randall Way letter. Wonder Woman 186/1970, Johnny Ubaiso letter. (this issue published three different fan dislike letters.)

107

write, she also expressed frustration at the editor’s representation of the disempowered

Wonder Woman. The fan stated, “Unemployed, I have taken to reading the letter page.

The editorial did it, ‘pity her, envy her.’ Ugh and ick. Your male chauvinism is showing.

I could say something nastier but I won’t; I believe in quiet, well-mannered commitment

to the cause of liberation.”239 The editorial letter she referred to was an unusual

introduction of new details about Wonder Woman’s habits and did not contain any fans’

letters. Typically, editors meted out tidbits of character information throughout the

publication, however this editor attempted to reconstruct Wonder Woman’s strengths and

weaknesses all at once. The ‘pity’ plea referred to Wonder Woman’s great tragedies in

sacrificing her powers and losing her Amazon family as well as losing the love of her

life, Steve Trevor. The editor’s entreaty to feel ‘envy’ for her, suggested that her

stunning looks and expert martial arts skills gave her strengths and physical beauty that

most other women did not have. The repugnancy expressed by the fan challenged the

editor’s representation of Wonder Woman as an introspective and self-absorbed action

adventurer rather than as a liberated superheroine.

In 1973, ten fans praised Wonder Woman’s return to power in three consecutive

comic issues.240 One of the fans claimed the editors made “a significant advance

backward” in restoring Wonder Woman’s Amazon past and powers.241 His critique

favored the Wonder Woman who appeared in costume and wielded superpowers before

1968. Fans noticed the editors’ attempts to stage women’s liberation stories that parroted

feminist rhetoric, but that these stories fell short of a feminist perspective when

239 Wonder Woman 201/1972, Mrs. Elizabeth Bleau letter. Editor Denny O’ Neill claimed he only referenced T. S. Eliot in Preludes in Wonder Woman 199/1972. 240 Wonder Woman 206/1973, 207/1973, 208/1973. 241 Wonder Woman 206/1973, Dennis Goza letter.

108 portraying Wonder Woman in sexually compromising positions. For example, in

Wonder Woman issue #205 in 1973, she appeared on the front cover in an extremely erotic and graphic depiction of her tied to a bomb with her legs spread wide open. In

1974, a male fan responded to the graphic bomb scene stating, “You try to do a women’s lib book, and then make the chick look like (CENSORED).”242 After Wonder Woman regained her powers, editors and writers continued with contradictory and dismissive ideas about women’s liberation when Wonder Woman appeared sexier than she did liberated.

In 1980, fan Kent Orlando pointed out the inherent issues with the male editors and writers writing about women’s issues. He asserted that the male comic book editors and writers portrayed the liberated superheroine in terms of her attitude as “not-to-be messed with.” He noted that the liberated posturing of the superheroine stemmed not from a feminists’ actual understanding of women’s equality, but from the comic book editor’s and writer’s self-conscious feminist attitudes gleaned from news media.243 Kent

Orlando’s insight only partly addressed the inherent issues of male editor’s and writer’s depicting liberated female behaviors. The other part included the influence of the fans themselves who wielded considerable input through their letter writing and purchase power.

Not all fans associated the loss of Wonder Woman’s powers and costume with the loss of her liberated attributes and behaviors. In 1968 to 1973 ten fans—six men and four women praised the mortal Wonder Woman’s expert knowledge of martial arts,

242 Wonder Woman 209/1973, Barry Keller letter, censored in the original. 243 Wonder Woman 265/1980, Kent G. Orlando letter.

109

independence, and business ownership.244 Wonder Woman surrendered not only her

powers, but also her lasso, costume, bracelets, tiara, and Amazonian friendships in 1968

to be near the mortal man she loved.245 The fans’ concentrated praise of Wonder

Woman’s realistic combat skills ignored that she abandoned her superpowers for a man

who did not recognize her as his equal or better.246 The editors’ emphasis of her mortal

liberated qualities in 1968, when she successfully defeated villains, owned her own

business, dated a variety of men, and gained expert skills in yoga and martial arts

reflected a real woman’s potential. I argue that her important feminist perspective was

lost when the disempowered Wonder Woman no longer equally matched the power of

superheros and villains. Lillian S. Robinson argued that the disempowered Wonder

Woman partially reflected women’s liberation but failed to fulfill this ideal when the

editors, writers, and artists perpetuated superficial knowledge of women’s issues in

Wonder Woman’s storylines from highlights they observed in the news.247 I agree, but

argue that Lillian S. Robinson omitted that the editor’s and writer’s characterization of

Wonder Woman from 1968 to 1973 was too representative of the experiences of real

women and made her appear too fragile without her superpowers. The editor’s realistic

characterizations of Wonder Woman included men trying to sexually accost her in

1972.248 To demote Wonder Woman from her superpowered status to that of an ordinary

woman and claim that she still represented liberated ideals signified the schism between

244 Wonder Woman 179/1968, 185/1969, 186/1970, 192/1971, 194/1971, 202/1972. 245 Wonder Woman 179/1968. When the Amazons exhausted their time in the Bermuda Triangle region where Paradise Island was located, Wonder Woman chose to leave to be with Steve Trevor. 246 Steve Trevor loved Wonder Woman at this point, not Diana Prince. 247 Robinson, p. 86. 248 Wonder Woman 203/1972, p. 1.

110

the comic book editor’s understanding of feminism and those ideals lived out by real

world feminists.249

From 1971 to 1974, Supergirl’s disempowered status also evoked several

response letters from fans. At least nine fans of Supergirl expressed disapproval of her

disempowerment while six fans approved of her vulnerability.250 With Supergirl’s intermittent superpowers from 1971 to 1973, the general consensus among Supergirl’s fans split between those who wanted her powers restored and those who wanted the editors to “eliminate the all-important literary disadvantage of physical invulnerability.”251 This conflict caused the editors to ask fans in 1972, “Should

Supergirl lose her powers?”252 One fan wanted to, “let her struggle along without powers

on a permanent basis.”253 Other fans expressed annoyance at her “fading out of

powers.”254 The editors summed up all of the fans’ responses in two representative

letters chosen out of many, where one fan stated, “I had hoped she was cured of that long

ago” while another fan noted in 1973, “Supergirl used her powers just enough without

overdoing it.”255 The primary issue with her being able to use her powers still remained

that since 1959, she struggled with keeping full access to her powers.

249 Wonder Woman 179/1968, martial arts and yoga. Wonder Woman 182/1969, dating. Wonder Woman 185/1969, business. 250 Disapproval: Adventure Comics 407/1971 Perry Berder, 408/1971, Bob Rozakis, 408/1971, Gary Swafford, 409/1971, Bob Rozakis, 411/1971, Dan Mulcahy, 4112/1971, Sandy Albrecht, 414/1972, Wendy Hutchinson, Supergirl 2/1973, Mike Shoemaker, 10/1974, Joe Peluso. Approval: Adventure Comics 409/1971 Richard Morrisey, 418/1972, Bob Pinaha, 420/1972, Dave Thompson, 421/1972, Dave Thompson (again), Supergirl 4/1973, Gregory Bennett, and 9/1973, Will Nash. 251 Adventure Comics 421/1972, Dave Thompson letter. 252 Adventure Comics 400/1970 Gregory Kent, Adventure Comics 407/1971 Perry Beider, Adventure Comics 408/1971 Gary Swafford, Adventure Comics 409/1971 Richard Morrisey, Adventure Comics 411/1971 Dan Mulcahy, Adventure Comics 412/1971 Gerard Triano, Adventure Comics 412/1971 Sandy Albrecht, Adventure Comics 418/1972, Bob Pinaha, Adventure Comics 421/1972, Dave Thompson and editorial response. 253 Adventure Comics 420/1972, Dave Thompson letter. 254 Adventure Comics 419/1972, Paul Kupperberg letter. 255 Supergirl 2/1973, Mike Shoemaker letter. Supergirl 4/1973, Gregory Bennett letter.

111

I argue that in 1973, Supergirl’s vulnerability reflected actual women’s

experiences with inequalities to men at work and with lower wages. The fan who

requested that Supergirl stay without her superpowers overlooked that Supergirl’s

physical invulnerability enabled her to overcome inequalities to men in the comics,

including superheroes. With so few liberated superheroines who starred in their own

books in comparison to superheroes, Supergirl needed her superpowers in full strength.

A final letter published in 1974 warned, “I’m all for a more “human” Supergirl, but if she starts pulling up her hosiery in the middle of a fight, I’ll lose faith in you people.”256 The fan’s idea about a woman’s femininity in combination with the editor’s

distorted ideas about women’s movement ideals compounded the contradiction of making

Supergirl look sexy and liberated.

Superheroines with Masculine Behaviors

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s powers allowed them to transcend Cold War

America’s expectations and behaviors of actual women. These expectations and

behaviors included women’s roles as housewives, women’s adherence to strict dating

protocols like waiting for men to call first, and socialized behaviors such as women

expecting men to open doors for them. In the wake of women’s liberation, the

superheroine’s behaviors reflected subtle and sometimes not-so-subtle changes taking

place for women in the real world.

Though Wonder Woman appeared at first glance as liberated and empowered, her

editors and writers featured eight storylines from 1963 to 1976 where she acted out unconventional masculine behaviors. For example, in a 100-page women’s liberation

issue in 1974, the superhero Green Lantern exclaimed as he spied on Wonder Woman,

256 Supergirl 10/1974, Joe Peluso letter.

112

“That’s our Wonder Woman all right, the women’s libber opening doors for the

gentleman!”257 American social practices taught men to open doors for women and for

women to expect this act of civility.

In 1972, evidence that gender specific etiquette practices no longer applied in a

liberated society appeared in Ms. Magazine’s inaugural issue which proposed alternative

and empowering social behaviors for men and women.258 These social behaviors

contrasted with conventional behaviors that appeared in Wonder Woman’s romance

supplements throughout the 1960s. These showed women performing specific customs

in order to attract men. The 1972 article in Ms. Magazine argued for a unilateral social

and behavioral equality between men and women by performing uncustomary tasks that

were easily accomplished by either a man or a woman.259

Fans wrote in twenty-six times between 1968 and 1983, requesting that the editors

and writers make Steve Trevor a self-sufficient man so that Wonder Woman wouldn’t

need to rescue him.260 Instead of promoting her assertiveness as a woman, fans

suggested that her behavior appeared to advanced Cold War notions of women

attempting to usurp and punish men. These fans rejected Steve Trevor’s role as a weak

male counterpart. When Wonder Woman rescued her boyfriend Steve Trevor from 1963

to 1967 in over five comic book issues, though she already surpassed him as a

257 Wonder Woman 214/1974, p. 6. A regular comic book page length was limited to 25 pages including advertisements. This 100-page issue dedicated to women’s liberation inferred the seriousness and wide scope of the subject. 258 Jane Trahey, Ms. Magazine, Vol. I, No. 1, July 1972, p. 39. 259 Ibid. 260 Wonder Woman 174/1968, 179/1968 x2, 185/1969, 208/1973, 235/1977, 226/1976 x2, 244/1978, 248/1978, 251/1979, 253/1979, 254/1979, 256/1979, 260/1979, 275/1981 x5, 276/1981 x4, 280/1981 x2, 288/1982, 289/1982, 299/1983. Steve Trevor died three times during this fifteen-year period.

113

superheroine, his need of her rescuing him was emasculating.261 The few times that

Steve Trevor helped Wonder Woman, their roles did not appear reversed.

Steve Trevor was an Airforce intelligence officer with top-secret clearance who seemed like a qualified partner for Wonder Woman, notwithstanding his need for her to rescue him. However, in 1976, after losing everything and being resurrected from the dead and having to establish a new identity before re-entry into society, Steve Trevor was forced to stay at home while Wonder Woman went to work. In response, he burst out in anger, hit a table, and shouted how useless he felt.262 Without a job, Steve Trevor

depended on Wonder Woman for financial support while Wonder Woman received a

sense of purpose and fulfillment from her job at the U.N. and as a superheroine. Steve

Trevor’s anger reflected the experiences of some women’s dilemmas when expected to

stay at home but desiring to be fulfilled.263 When the editors and writers reversed

Wonder Woman’s and Steve Trevor’s roles, he appeared inept when he was not

providing for Wonder Woman nor protecting her. With more power than some

superheroes, Wonder Woman appeared to challenge actual male power in the Women’s

Liberation era.

Supergirl’s editors published six reversed gender role storylines from 1968 to

1972, which portrayed women behaving as either too subservient or too dominant.264 An

example of a dominating Supergirl appeared in a 1968 issue of Supergirl. A visiting

261 Wonder Woman 141/1963 to Wonder Woman 167/1967. 262 Wonder Woman 225/1976, p. 2. 263 Friedan, p. 33. 264 Instances of Supergirl’s liberated characteristics and behaviors appeared throughout her series. However, women’s liberation topics were specifically published in these six comics: Adventure Comics 368/1968, mutiny of the superheroines, where the heroines encounter a being whose planet has a dominant matriarchal society. DC 3/1969 special header “see our fighting females do their thing” Adventure Comics 384/1969, where women are subjugated. Adventure Comics 416/1972, featuring 100 pages on only superheroines. Adventure Comics 415/1972, dealing with being captured by a man, Adventure Comics 417/1972, “All Men are But Slaves.”

114

women’s leader made the superheroines more powerful than the superheroes. With

enhanced superpowers, the superheroines outclassed the superheroes at every emergency,

as exemplified when Supergirl saved an entire city before Superboy had a chance. In this

same story in 1968, the superheroines prevented a supervillain prison outbreak without

help from the superheroes.265 The superheroes reacted as if the superheroines outdid them on purpose. The extreme empowerment of the superheroines led to their own revolutionary self-awareness which caused the superheroes to act jealous and act as if

they did not need the superheroines’ help.266

Sherrie Inness, in Tough Girls, argued that popular culture media such as film and

comics, acts out male and female gender roles in a way that maintains and perpetuates

male power even though women might seem empowered.267 I agree and argue that the

editors, writers, and artists did not make Supergirl adequately challenge traditional

female roles when she encountered or enacted reversed gender roles with men. In an

example of subservient behaviors in 1969, Supergirl visited another planet with not-so-

unrealistic domineering male ideologies which included an absolute type of obedience to

men by women and no equality. While searching for a possible love interest named

Volar, Supergirl encountered this male society that taught women to behave

submissively. Instead of welcoming Supergirl to their planet when she saved children

and stopped crime, the men insulted her with disparaging remarks like, “a girl—flying!

No female can stop me!” and “We don’t need a female’s help!”268 The hostile men on

the planet could only verbally resist Supergirl’s presence as her powers made her superior

265 Adventure Comics 368/1968, p. 14 & 21. 266 Adventure Comics 368/1968, p. 14. 267 Inness, p. 17. 268 Adventure Comics 384/1969, p. 9-10.

115

to them in every way. However, Supergirl ignored their criticism in search of the boy she

liked who turned out to be a girl. The twist in the story revolved around the girl

circumventing male hostility by using potions and disguises to fight crime.269

In 1970, fans requested a follow-up story on the girl named Volar to, “show those

domineering men that women have rights!”270 No follow-up story ever ensued. Two predominant issues became apparent when the editors and writers portrayed Supergirl in storylines where women behaved submissively to men. One issue was that actual women really behaved this way and men encouraged this behavior. The other issue was that stories such as these offered only perspectives of men with dominating behaviors, not successful women’s challenges to the status quo.

In dominant female societies, women took control by enslaving men. By featuring scenarios in which women dominated the society, the editors made women’s attainment of equality seem like a vengeful reaction against men. Actual women primarily sought equality to men in the Women’s Movement era, not vengeance against or punishment of men. For example, in a story titled, “All Men are But Slaves” in 1972,

Supergirl went to a planet dominated by women.271 The women on this planet enslaved

the men by forcing them to work in the fields and then placing them in cages when not

working.272 When Supergirl helped her male friend escape, the women shouted, “She is

a male-sympathizer!” and “A traitor to her sex!”273 The queen of the planet argued that

the men’s irresponsible actions and selfish behaviors led the women to revolt. In real

life, most women did not want to revolt against all men, instead they wanted to balance

269 Ibid, p. 13. 270 Adventure Comics 388/1970, Joe DeShon letter. 271 Adventure Comics 417/1972, p. 5. 272 Ibid, p. 8. 273 Ibid, p. 6.

116

out power. Four issues later in 1972, a fan letter commended the idea of a matriarchal

society but stated, “I don’t think that the Earth will become a Utopia if the female sex

takes over. Sorry, girls.”274 The fan’s interpretation of the plotline as utopian suggested

that some actual men felt threatened by women who desired equality in work, education,

and financial independence.

With stories so closely associated with women’s liberation issues, an enraged fan

named Margie Spears wrote to the editors in 1972 and suggested that, “a magazine that’s

75% male chauvinism and 25% Women’s Lib isn’t gonna work.”275 An imbalanced

representation of women’s liberated behaviors appeared alongside a more frequent

portrayal of male attitudes in Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics. This greater appearance of limiting male attitudes caused the superheroines’ role modeling of liberated behaviors to impart less significance to actual women.

In contrast to the 1969 Supergirl male-enslavement story, the allegory in a 1975

Wonder Woman story referenced top feminists’ names that mocked women’s movement leaders. This same mocking attitude offers a partial explanation to some of the reasons that Wonder Woman and Supergirl were disempowered. The language in the story was also reflective of the women’s movement, such as ‘macho’ and ‘sexist.’ The story titled,

“World of Enslaved Women,” featured feminist leaders STNM, (Gloria Steinem) and

FRDN (Betty Friedan) but also featured an antagonist named, MCHSM, whose name resembled the word “machismo.”276 The story involved the capture, brainwashing, and

enslavement of superheroines and feminist women such as STNM, FRDN, and Supergirl

274 Adventure Comics 421/1972, Jesus Monteagudo letter. 275 Adventure Comics 415/1972, Margie Spears letter. Interestingly, Mike Sopp took note in Supergirl’s comic book that three of Supergirl’s more vocal letter of comment writers were women. Supergirl 9/1983, Mike Sopp letter. Most likely Margie Spears, Barbara Reader, and Illona R. Arywitz. 276 Wonder Woman 219/1975.

117 on the planet. With this process, the male leader, MCHSM proclaimed that, “The females, physically stronger, though mentally inferior— are kept as slaves!”277 MCHSM forced the women to work for him on his planet. Published in 1975, the story mirrored actual women’s attitudes of women already feeling enslaved by patriarchal rule. Actual women were treated by men as mentally inferior although the statement that women were physically stronger inaccurately reflected real women.

Most of the stories with dominant women who displayed unconventional masculine behaviors concluded without giving Wonder Woman and Supergirl the ability to perform equally in powerful roles in comparison to superheroes or men in power. In the instance where the editors and writers showed women with subservient behaviors and unequal roles to men, the allegories reflected real life but did little to challenge perceptions of actual women’s subordinate behaviors to men. When Wonder Woman and Supergirl dominated male characters, their masculine behaviors made them appear as intolerant of men instead of empowered women who promoted women’s equality.

Wonder Woman’s Male Intolerance

Since 1941, Wonder Woman’s attitudes towards men seemed to reflect an intolerance of men but actually stemmed from her mythological origins as an Amazon.

Her Amazonian past showed that Queen Hippolyte—Wonder Woman’s mother—led the undefeated army of Amazon warrior women until Hercules tricked the queen and subjugated and enslaved all of the Amazons. Aphrodite restored them to power with one caveat—never to take off their bracelets of submission—a reminder of “the consequences

277 Ibid, p. 11.

118

of submitting to man’s domination.”278 Therefore, the emphasis of Wonder Woman’s

message rejected aggressive and war-like male behavior based on the Amazon’s experience of enslavement.

In the early 1970s, editors, writers, and fans held primarily male perspectives that misinterpreted the relationship between the superheroines’ power and liberated attitudes.

Since Wonder Woman’s beginning in the 1940s as the first feminist superheroine, male and female readers sometimes perceived Wonder Woman’s attitudes as hateful of men.

Some fans misinterpreted Wonder Woman when she made statements such as “I’m fed up with man’s world.”279 These fans believed her expression of exasperation reflected an

anti-male attitude. When she uttered these words of exasperation, she meant the entire

American social system, not only men. Editors and writers insufficiently oriented her

origins from 1941 forward to the 1970s and 1980s. This worked to complicate fans’

understanding of Wonder Woman’s pro-women’s message. During the women’s

movement, the editors and writers did not often enough defend why Wonder Woman

stood in opposition to male rule when responding to fan mail in the letter pages. Wonder

Woman’s Amazonian beliefs rejected the violence of men as well as women’s inequality.

Her 1940s beliefs mirrored real world anti-male sentiment in the Women’s Movement era. Some real feminist women during the women’s movement did express anti-male

sentiment and Wonder Woman did especially reflect women’s movement ideals from

1968 to 1973. For these reasons, comic book readers seemed to be especially attuned to

Wonder Woman’s intolerance of men.

278 Wonder Woman 159/1966, p. 8, p. 10. See also, Phil Jimenez and John Wells, The Essential Wonder Woman Encyclopedia, Ballantine, New York, 2010, p. 66. 279 Wonder Woman 229/1977, p. 15.

119

From 1973, fans especially wrote to the editors that they disagreed with Wonder

Woman’s male intolerant attitudes in the early 1980s.280 The fans’ responses indicated

that they had confused the association of her pro-women’s message with anti-male sentiment that American media instigated since 1968 with the alleged “bra burners.” For example, in a 1982 plotline Wonder Woman called a bank robber a “punk” and aggressively fought with him to the extent that while attempting to get away from

Wonder Woman, he begged his cohorts to help him “get her off my back!”281 A fan

mentioned Wonder Woman’s calling robbers ‘punks’ was a new behavior and that her

seeking out a fight was a behavior that he observed only superheroes performing.282

Wonder Woman’s assertiveness and power put her on equal footing with superheroes like

Batman and Superman. However, this equal footing, like most empowering actions and behaviors endowed to her by the editors and writers in the 1980s, was temporary. More often, Wonder Woman appeared in less assertive roles when she mainly rescued others.283

In 1982, another fan commented that the type of Wonder Woman storylines that

emerged from her disempowered era from 1968 to 1973 reflected a message, “that

women who are fighting for their natural rights are man-hating Amazons.”284 The fan

did not express if he was part of the backlash that Faludi described, just that he noticed

the correlation of man-hating behavior and rhetoric of women characters and Wonder

Woman in her comics to actual women’s behaviors. This correlation between the man-

hating Amazons that appeared in comics and fans’ perception of Wonder Woman’s man-

280 Schulman, p. 176. On the end of Second Wave feminism. 281 Wonder Woman 288/1982, p. 8. 282 Wonder Woman 293/1982, Bob Holum letter. 283 Out of 48 books in 1980 to 1984, she appeared assertive in five issues. 284 Wonder Woman 293/1982, Mike Sopp letter.

120

hating message is one of the reasons why some fans’ did not look back to her original

women empowering message.

Ruth Rosen argued that the real world battle between men and women genderized

and polarized American society after the 1960s.285 Her argument illuminates the fans’

rejection of Wonder Woman’s anti-male sentiment that she expressed in her comics in the 1980s. I argue that the reflections of the real world battle of the sexes appeared in

Wonder Woman comics. These battles portrayed men who aggressively dominated women in the early 1980s. In 1983, a fan wrote that she didn’t understand why underlying anti-male sentiment appeared in Wonder Woman comics stating, “a recent editorial showed you were not in favor of the current sex war and that statements such as

‘the folly of submitting to men,’ and ‘the male-dominated world,’ only exacerbated the differences between men and women.286 The fan suggested that when Wonder Woman

projected anti-male attitudes, she no longer appeared as if she were fighting for all real world women. Instead, her anti-male sentiment appeared singularly targeted at actual men instead of women; however, Wonder Woman’s stance against male villains who believed they were better than women, characterized one of the reasons that real world feminists related to Wonder Woman. Feminist leaders like Gloria Steinem looked at

Wonder Woman as an icon with her original empowering woman specific message. In

1980, Gloria Steinem summed up America’s general consensus for most liberated women who fought for natural and equal rights to men by stating, “Any woman who chooses to behave like a full human being should be warned that the armies of the status quo will

285 Rosen, p. 333. 286 Wonder Woman 313/1983, Francis Hertzberg letter.

121

treat her as something of a dirty joke; that’s their natural and first weapon.”287 In this

regard, belittling comments about men that appeared in Wonder Woman’s comics in the

1980s, seemed to reflect this sense of actual women’s defensive attitudes towards men

that Gloria Steinem warned women to be ready for.

In comic books, editors and writers portrayed Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s

assertive and aggressive anti-male behaviors in realistic plotlines but met with resistance

from fans. These fans did not relate her original attitude of male intolerance and

women’s empowerment from the 1940s to the Women’s Movement era. Instead, the fans

were informed by real world behaviors of feminists who expressed anti-male sentiment for which the fans associated with Wonder Woman’s anti-male rhetoric.

The reason actual women struggled to move forward from the status quo during the Second Wave of the women’s movement and their quest to assert women’s natural rights came to a basic difference between the behaviors of American men and women.

American men were neither questioned when they acted out assertively nor made to explain why they behaved defensively when they displayed assertive behaviors. In this way, actual men continued to hold the power, while women only seemed empowered temporarily.

The editors’ and writers’ carried forward this real world practice of men holding power and was reflected by the male villains in the storylines of Wonder Woman and

Supergirl. The editors and writers made Wonder Woman and Supergirl seem empowered, when they truly were limited by conventional real world ideas.

287 Levine Lyons, The Decade of Women, A Ms. History of the Seventies in Words and Pictures, G. P. Putnam’s Sons, New York, 1980, p. 232.

122

Sexual Objectification

From 1959 to 1983, Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s costumes were drawn with

less fabric that was skin-tight, in order to appeal to the male gaze. The sexual characterization of the costume represented a male way of looking at Wonder Woman and Supergirl. The male readers who looked at the superheroines in this way, preferred this sexualization to the superheroines’ character in place of their liberated characteristics and behaviors. From 1968 to 1983, seventeen fan letters from men requested to see more instances with Wonder Woman and Supergirl in sexy poses and risqué costumes.288 Male fans supported the sexual objectification of Wonder Woman

and Supergirl when they asked for pin-ups and posters, praised the larger art panels that

showed sexier images, and admired Supergirl in her bikini and hot pants costumes.

Wonder Woman’s tight spandex bottom and breast-enhancing bustier became an

instant sexual icon from the moment Charles Marston put her image to paper in 1941.289

The WWII era influenced Wonder Woman’s 1960s costume in which, according to Lois

Banner, “breasts were molded by bras into pointed shapes that resembled the tips of

bombs.”290 Up to the late 1960s, even with a sexy image, Wonder Woman’s empowering

message of women’s solidarity, female achievements, and womanly strength were

understood by readers as important in her storylines, less so her sexy image. In the early

1970s, Wonder Woman’s sexier images gradually increased when she appeared in

288 Wonder Woman 174/1968, Frank Bell, Wonder Woman 253/1979, Rich Archer, Wonder Woman 293/1982, Randall Moreau, Adventure Comics 407/1971, Gerard Triano, Adventure Comics 414/1972, Karl Merris, Billie Collins, Adventure Comics 417/1972, Johnny Achziger, Gerard Triano, Adventure Comics 419/1972, David Michilinie, Adventure Comics 421/1972, Dave Thompson, Supergirl 7/1973, Jim Balko, Supergirl 10/1983 Jack Mc Nee, Terry Krauter, TDNAOS 10/1983, Richard Lessman, Supergirl 17/1983, Robert Hagiwara, Charles Brown, Doug Grant. 289 Action Comics 8/1941. 290 Banner, p. 144.

123

bondage art, bulls-eye targets, and sexually suggestive poses. Supergirl’s sexier images

increased when her newer costumes debuted in 1969.

From 1969 to 1979, Wonder Woman and Supergirl separately appeared six times

in their bras, panties, and nude while bathing.291 These partial nude scenes exemplified

an important change in comics until 1969, editors and artists refrained from showing

partial nudity due to the CCA codes. Wonder Woman’s editors, writers, and artists

departed from the 1940s to 1960s conservative art styles that did not show her in her bra

and panties to a comic art style just short of R-rated in 1982. The gradual increase of partially nude scenes imparted a sense of voyeurism to the readers who watched Wonder

Woman undress from being fully clothed to wearing only her bra and panties in 1971 and

1972— similar to scenes out of Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window.292 Plotlines with

images of the superheroines as the bulls-eye targets mainly appeared on front covers and the opening pages as exemplified in a 1971 issue. This issue depicted Wonder Woman in torn clothing and bared back with a large bulls-eye mark painted on her skin. Such depictions of her in a submissive position with chained hands and a spread eagle posture made the reader gaze at her as if she were a sex object. This bondage pose implied an imminent violent and sexual male encounter while exposing her absolute vulnerability both as a woman and disempowered superheroine.

From 1963 to 1983, Wonder Woman and Supergirl appeared in sexually suggestive ways on ten front covers and opening pages either in giant bulls-eye targets or

291 Wonder Woman 189/1970, p. 15 bath, Wonder Woman 250/1978, p. 5 bath, Wonder Woman 251/1979, p.6 bra, Adventure Comics 382/1969, p 13 panties, Adventure Comics 406/1971 p. 8 bath, Adventure Comics p. 6 bra. 292 Wonder Woman 203/1972, p. 6. and Wonder Woman 194/1971, p. 21.

124

with targets painted on their back, in provocative poses, and wearing sexy costumes.293

From 1970 to 1975, eight bondage poses appeared on the front covers of Wonder Woman

and Supergirl. The chief purpose of these bondage poses seemed to encourage men to purchase the superheroines’ comics.294 In 1975, an example of Wonder Woman in

bondage inferred a kinkier than usual scenario. She pretended to wrap herself in her own

lasso (as shown on the front cover of the comic), and beckoned to an all male gun

squadron while the superhero, Elongated Man, video recorded the forthcoming attack by

six men.295 The sexual tension in the scene completely limited the readers’ perception of

her as a liberated superheroine.

The editors, writers, and artists provided the bondages scenes without requests

from male fans. However, male fans did request pin-ups and posters of the superheroines in a similar way that American soldiers requested pin-ups of sexy actresses Rita

Hayworth and Betty Grable during World War II.296 The pin-up style of art showed

women posed in sexually suggestive ways, though Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s

editors did not provide pin-ups for at least ten years in the comic book.

Editors published two pin-up requests in the letter pages in 1968 and 1974 when

male fans asked to see Wonder Woman and Supergirl in sexy poses.297 In 1968, a

teenaged fan who claimed he’d been reading Wonder Woman since he could read asked,

293 Bulls-eye, rockets: Wonder Woman 136/1963, Wonder Woman 139/1963, Wonder Woman 156/1965, Wonder Woman 196/1971, Wonder Woman 224/1976, Wonder Woman 251/1979, Wonder Woman 300/1983, Adventure Comics 414/1972, Adventure Comics 422/1972, TDNAOS 6/1983. 294 Bondage scenes: Wonder Woman 188/1970, Wonder Woman 199/1972, Wonder Woman 221/1975, Wonder Woman 219/1975, Adventure Comics 400/1970, Adventure Comics 404/1971, Adventure Comics 414/1972, Adventure Comics 421/1972. 295 Wonder Woman 219/1975, cover. 296 Kathryn Weibel, Mirror Mirror: Images of Women Reflected in Popular Culture, Anchor Press, New York, 1977, p. 119. 297 Editors typically published fan letters to stop the flow of future requests for pin-ups or other already answered questions.

125

“where’s our pin-up of Wonder Woman?”298 In response, the editors promised a full- page splash in the near future—they did not say when—but noted they did not offer pin- ups of Wonder Woman. As a maturing youth, he wanted the female icon he grew up with to reflect his sexual maturity as well. In 1974, another reader requested a poster-size reproduction of a curvy Supergirl wearing hot pants and a tight fitting blue blouse while being kissed by a gang member. He also requested a poster-sized reproduction of the cover —a similar pin-up request as the one for Wonder Woman—in Supergirl issue #6, but the editors did not provide such a service.299 Meanwhile, editors and artists continued to produce sexually evocative images of Wonder Woman and Supergirl, only not on a specific pin-up page.

Wonder Woman #305/1983, Pin-Up page of Wonder Woman

298 Wonder Woman 174/1968, Frank Bell letter. 299 Supergirl 10/1974, Terry Krauter letter.

126

Over a decade later, Wonder Woman’s editors published two eight and one half by eleven black and white full-page size illustrations on both the inside front page and back page of

her 300th anniversary issue in 1983.300 Just five issues later, DC offered a full-color

cover page poster in issue #305.301 Compared to images of Wonder Woman in bondage,

bulls-eye, and riding phallic rockets, the full-page picture of Wonder Woman in action did not look sexually suggestive. This modest pin-up of Wonder Woman in the 1980s complicated the usual trend of the editors, writers, and artists portraying Wonder Woman as a sexier superheroine.

During the same period as the pin-up requests from 1968 to 1983, fans sent in letters that expressed appreciation of updated art panels—bigger and smaller squares and rectangles—that made more space on a single page. The art panels were re-sized and shuffled around the page which allowed the artists to show off the superheroine’s physical assets. The panels in the comics served as transition points while displaying action sequences. In the 1940s, editors and artists started out with a traditional format of four to six squares and rectangles per page. Within these small panels, word bubbles took up considerable space, thus impinging on the images of the superheroine figures and other cast. Larger panels that appeared in the early 1970s made space on the comic page for what one fan noted, “it must be harder than anything to cover up any of those gorgeous visuals with words.”302 The structural enlargement of the panels allowed for

the artists to emphasize the superheroine as a static sex object which ultimately catered to

the visual pleasure for the male reader.

300 Wonder Woman 300/1983. 301 Wonder Woman 305/1983, pin-up. 302 Wonder Woman 293/1982, Randall Moreau letter.

127

Since the early 1970s, the larger panels spread from the splash page (the opening full-sized illustration page with no separate panels) and into the margins and white spaces. At this point, Wonder Woman comics featured more than one full-page single panel of a sexy Wonder Woman image per comic book. Larger panels also appeared in superhero comics at the same time in the early 1970s; however, the resulting art showed the superhero in more action sequences, as opposed to a better view of the superheroines’ bottoms and breasts in Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics. A male reader of

Supergirl in 1972 commented that Supergirl’s action sequences and artwork came through more effectively in stories where six and seven panels were not frequently crowded onto a single page.303

When the superheroines’ images were no longer crowded into smaller panels, the artists had more freedom to emphasize the busts, bottoms, and full body poses of the superheroines. While editors didn’t supply pin-ups of the superheroines for the fans directly, the editors and artists still acted upon the fans’ requests indirectly. They did so through these panels that emphasized the illustration of the superheroines’ sexier body that resembled Good Girl Art. Richard Reynolds argued, “Good Girl art takes the signs of pornographic discourse (whips, chains, spiked heels, beautiful but blank faces) and integrates them into the context of non-pornographic story structures.”304 Wonder

Woman nearly always appeared with bondage props, such as her lasso and in spiked heels. In this way, the editors, writers, and artists sexualized her character but limited her performance as a liberated woman. Unlike mature male audiences that understood the

303 Adventure Comics 421/1972, Dave Thompson letter. 304 Reynolds, p. 34.

128

significance of these props, younger audiences looked at them in their more obvious and

practical form, appearing as nothing more than a rope or woman in impractical shoes.

Before her editors and artists transformed her into a sex symbol, Supergirl dressed

modestly. Prior to 1971, Supergirl’s editors, writers, and artists characterized her as a

good adopted daughter, obedient cousin to Superman, and helpful child minder. Her

costume was loose fitting and she wore an unrevealing knee length skirt in which no

womanly curves were apparent. From 1968 to 1974, when she attended college,

Supergirl’s wholesome qualities started to diminish when her costume revealed more skin

and emphasized her breasts, waist, and hips.305 From 1970 to 1984, in a total of nineteen

published letters, men requested and affirmed the sexualized image of Supergirl.306

Action Comics #262/1965 and Adventure Comics #410/1971 Supergirl’s original costume to her hot pants costume

305Adventure Comics 381/1969, (started college in 1968), Adventure Comics 406/1971, p. 2. Superman Family 165/1974, graduates from Van Dyre with Masters Degree. 306 Adventure Comics series, 8x from 1970 to 1974. Supergirl, 4x from 1973 to 1974. Supergirl’s publication did not appear again until eight years later. The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl, 7x from 1983 to 1984.

129

Supergirl’s male fans took notice of her sexier image as she matured from the

1970s to the 1980s. In 1971, Supergirl’s costume changed from a modest skirt to little

red hot pants that caused male fans to write in, praising how sexy she looked in the

costume. In a rare occurrence in 1971, a fan’s request for Supergirl to wear the hot pants

costume was granted at the same time the editors published the fan’s letter. This kind of

instant gratification for the fans typically didn’t happen so quickly and sometimes not at

all. However, in the 1971 Supergirl #401 issue, she appeared for the first time wearing

hot pants.307 In total, she appeared in thirty-seven issues from 1971 to 1983 wearing the hot pants costume, which forever altered her character as sexually symbolic instead of liberated. The superheroines’ sexual symbolism and liberated behaviors were not cohesive ideas. Supergirl’s editors, writers, and artists attempted to associate the two ideas together, but to raise one of the ideas is to demote the other. By raising Supergirl’s sexuality, the editors, writers, and artists demoted her power and liberated attributes. Not only that, the editors, writers, and artists perpetuated actual male power through the control of Supergirl’s sexuality in the male gaze.

In 1971, frequent letter writer Gerard Triano made the first mention of Supergirl as a sex symbol in the letter column. He remarked of her hot pants costume, “it seems that she wanted to rival The Thorn as National’s sex symbol.”308 The Thorn was a

vigilante woman with no superpowers who appeared in the secondary stories of other DC

superheroes comic books. Triano’s proclamation of Supergirl as a sex symbol affirmed

307 Adventure Comics 410/1971, Joe Maxsween letter. National was DCs former publication name from 1949 to 1970 and the superheroine Thorn wore a brassiere attached to a mini-skirt. Adventure Comics 401/1971, p. 16. 308 Adventure Comics 413/1971, Gerard Triano letter.

130

the male fan’s stronger approval of her sexier appearance. Female fans wrote in with

more concerns for her characterization to reflect actual women’s liberated behaviors.

From 1971 to 1972, Supergirl in hot pants drew the attention of fans like never

before. In just one year, editors published ten letters from male fans who favored her

new look in hot pants. One reader applauded the editors’ transformation of turning her

“dull, stuffed-blouse character into a living doll!”309 With Supergirl drawn so sexy, a

reader pondered, “why does Kara always wear hot pants? Keeps my mind away from the

plot-line.” The editors replied, “it’s eye-catching and that’s the whole idea!”310 The eye-

catching images indicated Supergirl’s newest and most male-oriented superpower, the ability to manipulate men’s minds. Fans affirmed that Supergirl’s new and sexy art style also increased readership as two fans specifically mentioned buying Supergirl due to her new hot pants costume and low cut shirt.311 The relationship between Supergirl’s sexier

image and men purchasing her comic book deepened the schism between her reflecting

actual women’s liberation and female readers like Margie Spears who could not justify

the editors, writers, and artists inconsistent portrayal of Supergirl.312

The editors and writers incorporated fans’ requests and affirmations of Supergirl’s

sexier images into the plotlines. The editors, writers, and artists marketed this kind of

male visual pleasure back to the fans who originally requested it. For example, in 1970,

when Supergirl appeared in a bikini, the editors published three letters from males who

confirmed their approval of a bikini clad Supergirl. A male fan stated seeing Supergirl in

309 Adventure Comics 423/1972, Greg Potter letter. 310 Adventure Comics 424/1972, Jesus Montegudo letter. 311 Supergirl 7/1973, Kurt Bocco letter and Supergirl 10/1974, Barry Rosenstein letter. 312 Adventure Comics 415/1972, Margie Spears letter.

131

a bikini “sure turned me on!!!”313 Another provocative costume, yet short lived,

appeared on the cover of issue #409 in 1971, where she appeared in a monokini that

defied the laws of physics and wardrobe malfunctions like revealing her nipples when she

moved.314 The editor’s, writer’s, and artist’s production of Supergirl’s sexier images in

tandem with the fans’ requests for a sexier Supergirl, detracted from her incredible

powers.

Supergirl’s sexy look did not turn on all fans. A fan, gender unspecified, who

signed as “The Critic,” stated that Supergirl looked ugly and needed an “ideal fashion

figure,” recommending Romilda Dilley’s 1967 Fundamental Fashion Drawing book for

reference.315 Editors responded to the fan’s complaint of Supergirl appearing “too

muscular, too short, too fat,” with their idea that Supergirl as a fashion mannequin would

look “unnaturally tall, gaunt, thin-limbed and walking with a slouch—nix! It might suit

you fashion buffs, but it would sure upset us girl-watchers.”316 In actuality, Romilda

Dilley’s book first showed accurate human anatomy and musculature of the female form,

then demonstrated how to draw the clothes on the drawn figure. None of the figures

showed women in extremes as too tall, too thin, or slouchy except for examples of how

not to draw them. Seemingly, comic books artists drew the eye-catching figures of the superheroines for girl-watching males.

From 1972 to 1974, when men wrote of their appreciation of Supergirl’s hot pants, their comments did not discuss the violent and forceful sexual scenes that were

313 Adventure Comics 391/1970, Joseph D. Shaw letter. Adventure Comics 395/1970, Jack Stein letter. Adventure Comics 395/1970, Alan Portillo letter. 314 Supergirl 3/1973. This costume also appeared in a large watermarked sketch in a letter page in 1973, where usually only an image of a small Supergirl and letter page title appeared. 315 Romilda Dilley, Fundamental Fashion Drawing, Sterling Pub. Co., New York, 1967. 316 Adventure Comics 395/1970, The Critic letter and editorial response.

132

also portrayed while she wore the hot pants. The fans’ who appreciated these scenes did

not comment on the use of physical force and unwanted sexually aggressive advances in

the same scenes where Supergirl appeared in her hot pants costume.317 Violent and

sexually aggressive comic book art exemplified a shift away from Supergirl’s liberated

representation from 1969 to 1972. For example, in an Adventure Comics issue in 1972, a

male fan in the letter pages liked the cover, art, and story that depicted a man dragging an

unconscious Supergirl—as a cave man would—towards his leader. The text announced,

“Let the wedding begin.”318 The narrative inside revealed that Supergirl demolished the older man’s ship and turned him in to the interplanetary authorities, but the sexually implicit front page cover of a knocked-out Supergirl in no way showed her in control of the situation. Instead, the scene showed an older man on the verge of ravaging her unconscious body. This display of sexual aggression was not just a demonstration of a shifting away from the portrayal of her liberated attributes, but also a display of how the relaxed CCA codes no longer preserved Supergirl’s sexual invulnerability. In another example, a reader liked a 1974 cover that depicted a curvy Supergirl wearing hot pants and a tight fitting blue blouse while a gang member passionately kissed her.319 Supergirl

did not resist the aggressive kiss on the front cover as she did in the interior story of the

comic. Supergirl often appeared as a non-resistant sex object on the covers of the comics. The comic book plotlines revealed that Supergirl still defeated the villains.

However, the editors’, writers’, and artists promotion of her sexual vulnerability on the front of comic books influenced male readers to think of her as a sex object.

317 Author’s note: Some scholars might argue that fans did write in concerning the sexual violence, but this information is not yet available from DC’s archives in New York. 318 Adventure Comics 415/1972. Adventure Comics 420/1972, James Balko liked the cover, art, and story in 415. 319 Supergirl 10/1974, Terry Krauter letter.

133

Fans’ requests for a sexier Supergirl also set the tone for future representations of

most superheroines in comics with more focus on how the artists drew superheroines than

on the superheroines’ empowerment. When new artists took over Supergirl’s book in

The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl in the early 1980s, a male reader applauded the

modern fashion style—mainly her costumes and hairstyles—by noting, “I hope you have

fun with this book, especially its beautiful women.”320 Another fan summed up the

emphasis on her sexual appeal when he wondered, “if being Supergirl lowers her to just a

[sex] symbol.”321 If Supergirl was just a sex symbol in 1983, than she was joined by

DC’s developing cast of sexy superheroines who did not especially reflect liberated

women as Supergirl did in the 1960s.

Supergirl’s costume changed many times from 1969 to 1984, but her most

dramatic changes included the following: She started out with a long blue skirt and red

blouse in 1969. In the early 1970s, she wore a loose but low-cut blue blouse with red hot pants. In the 1980s, she dressed in a short red skirt. These sexier changes to her costumes’ stylization demonstrated a shift away from female readership to a growing male audience. In 1983, Supergirl’s artist Carmine Infantino, emphasized her sexuality more than any other artist had up to this time. Male fans commented on his art:

“Carmine draws a terrific Supergirl, so maybe you should show her in action 99% of the time” and that Supergirl, “doesn’t look seductive and she doesn’t look dingy, both of which I’ve seen in the past.”322 When the latter fan wrote in 1983, Supergirl was wearing

the very seductive short red skirt that showed her panties 99% of the time in action. In

320 The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 4/1983, David Breseke letter. 321 The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 4/1983, Christopher Sullivan letter. 322 The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 8/1983, Marlon Reynolds letter, Supergirl Vol. 2, 14/1983, Darryl Trapp letter.

134

1983, fans wrote in concerned letters about the revealing shortness of her skirt. One fan proclaimed his happiness at seeing she wore panties while another worried about what would happen when she landed.323 Some fans offered a competing point of view. In

1983, Mariano J. Vara thought that Supergirl’s costume was modest enough and asked,

“What is wrong with a bit of modesty anyway? Would you like Playboy or some other such publication to run an edition featuring Super-heroines?”324 The editor’s, writer’s, and artist’s overall portrayal of Supergirl as a sex object stopped short of a pornographic

Playboy look. Towards the end of the Women’s Movement in the 1980s, when the artists, editors, and majority of male fans limited the liberated behaviors of Supergirl and

Wonder Woman, they had made Supergirl a sex symbol and Wonder Woman a much sexier superheroine.

Romance and Autonomy

The love interests of Wonder Woman and Supergirl often compromised their personal autonomy and sense of liberation when their editors and writers consistently introduced plotlines that focused on the superheroines’ romantic relationships with men.

With the exception of Wonder Woman’s on again, off again romance with Steve Trevor, from 1959 to 1984, Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s independent status remained a powerful signifier of their equality with superheroes, especially when they became disempowered starting in 1968. The independent status of the superheroines challenged post WWII ideal that the only successful women, were women who married and had families. According to Les Daniels, romance themes in the 1950s superheroine comics signified “a male attempt to domesticate a powerful symbol (the superheroine) of female

323 TDNAOS 17/1983, Charles Brown letter. TDNAOS 18/1983, Mike Sopp letter. 324 Supergirl Vol. 2, 20/1984, P.B. letter. Mariano J. Vara’s letter appeared in Supergirl Vol. 2, 16/1983.

135

autonomy.”325 While Wonder Woman and Supergirl maintained their autonomy, the

editors and writers repetitive plotlines of Supergirl pining over men and Wonder Woman

missing Steve Trevor made the superheroines seem less independent.

Part of the reason that editors and writers featured romantic plotlines in the

comics stemmed directly from fans’ requests for Wonder Woman and Supergirl to date

superheroes, get married, and date a variety of boyfriends. Richard Reynolds argued that,

“Sexuality is simultaneously presented and then controlled, or domesticated, by a simple

denial of its power and appeal.”326 Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s liberated and

independent status largely broke from the status quo but editors and writers more often

reinforced traditional notions of domesticity than they promoted the empowerment of the

superheroines. For example, in Wonder Woman comics, two fans in 1979 and 1980

requested that she pair up with Superman.327 In an extremely rare scenario, Wonder

Woman and Superman paired up romantically. More importantly, their pair-up represented an equal relationship between a superhero and superheroine with very little imbalance in a hierarchy of power or roles. However, when this fan’s idea was featured in a 1983 dream sequence, both Superman and Wonder Woman committed to their work more than to the development of their marriage. Although fans enjoyed Superman passionately kissing a nude Wonder Woman, the conclusion of the dream plotline left both superhero and superheroine single.328 Throughout 1962 to 1983, Wonder Woman

mainly dated Steve Trevor, except when she was disempowered from 1968 to 1973.

325 Daniels, p. 201. 326 Reynolds, p. 80. 327 Wonder Woman 262/1979, Robin Kasten letter, Wonder Woman 264/1980, Victoria Schodowski letter. 328 Wonder Woman 300/1983, p. 50.

136

Wonder Woman refused Steve’s marriage proposals nine times from 1962 to 1968.329

From 1977 to 1983, Wonder Woman’s editors and writers paired her with a variety of

men in eight different relationships.

Wonder Woman’s long-lasting relationship with Steve did not prevent her from

successfully thwarting evil. However, Wonder Woman’s rescuing of Steve Trevor often

impeded her superheroine tasks and sense of independence. Steve Trevor typically

failed when he attempted to stop villains. Steve’s inadequacy and Wonder Woman’s love

of him caused Wonder Woman to drop everything else in order to rescue him.

Amazonian women usually abstained from male companionship but she already broke

this mold by dating Steve. Wonder Woman’s stories seemed to focus on her romantic

liaisons with Steve and other men instead of on her adventures and superheroine abilities.

This focus on her romantic life sometimes made her appear as if male companionship

completed her, rather than the fulfillment she received from being a superheroine. This

sense of dependency on men marked a great departure from her liberated independence

she displayed in the 1960s.

Supergirl’s fans, like Wonder Woman’s, also requested romantic relationships for

her to pair up with superheroes and regular men. From 1969 to 1971, Supergirl arrived

three times at the marriage alter: once as a rehearsal, once literally being dragged, and

once willingly.330 The marriage question for Supergirl was asked early on in 1969 when

a fan wondered which “member of the Legion of Super –Heroes will Supergirl

329 Wonder Woman 133/1962, Wonder Woman 137/1963, Wonder Woman 139/1963, Wonder Woman 154/1965, Wonder Woman 159/1966, Wonder Woman 160/1966, Wonder Woman 166/1966, Wonder Woman 167/1967, Wonder Woman 175/1968. 330 Adventure Comics 385/1969, p. 11 rehearsal, Adventure Comics 411/1971, p. 10, Adventure Comics 390/1970, Toran, p. 5.

137 marry?”331 The fan apparently assumed that Supergirl would naturally marry one of her colleagues. His assumption demonstrates Les Daniels argument that actual men wanted to subdue powerful women by attempting to place them in domestic roles, in which I agree. However, it did not appear that this male fan understood the implications of

Supergirl losing her independent status, should her writers and editors let her get married.

He appeared to view marriage as a natural evolution of major life events for women, but these types of ideas about actual women’s roles were rapidly changing during the

Women’s Movement era.

The marriage plotlines embodied a 1950s ideal that appeared inconsistent with the superheroine’s personal autonomy in the 1960s and 1970s. For example, in 1970,

Superman told Supergirl, his cousin, why he would like to marry her. He stated, “If I ever did marry, it would be to someone super and lovable like you!”332 The editors and writers consistently set Supergirl up for marriage but made either her or the men back out at the alter. These marriage plotlines focused on her marriage appeal and without any emphasis on her amazing superpowers and liberated attributes of independence, financial wealth, career, and college education.

From 1962 to 1983, Supergirl dated six superpowered men and ten non- superpowered men, but none of the dates ended in marriage.333 Like the marriage plots in which Supergirl’s independent status as a superheroine took a back seat to

331 Action Comics 382/1969, Alex Fedyk letter. 332 Adventure Comics 390/1970, p. 10. 333 Action Comics 293/1962, Superhorse, p. 3, Action Comics, 369/1968, Gary Sparks, p. 5, Action Comics 372/1969, Brand Burton, p. 9, Adventure Comics 382/1969, Nick Gray, p. 3, Adventure Comics 384/1969, Volar, p. 5, Adventure Comics 386/1969, Mike, p. 10, Adventure Comics 388-389/1970, Kimor, Adventure Comics 390/1970, Toran, p. 5, Adventure Comics 398/1970, Dick Malverne, splash, Adventure Comics 402/1971, Derek, Adventure Comics 406/1971, Geoffrey Anderson, p. 10, Adventure Comics 410/1971, Mike Merrick, p. 14, Adventure Comics 420/1972, Togran, p. 7, Supergirl 7/1973, Tony Martyne, p. 2, The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 3/1983, Professor Metzner, p. 5, The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl 13/1983, Phil Decker, p. 17.

138 domesticated roles, a similarly limiting plotline emerged when she dated these men.

From 1969 to 1983, six fans requested that Supergirl date a variety of men. The fans suggested romantic relationships with Dick Malverne—one of her first boyfriends from

Midvale High School in the early 1960s—and dating other boyfriends.334 When

Supergirl dated men, she usually pined over them to the extent that her performance suffered.

Adventure Comics #402/1971, Supergirl’s forfeits the public’s safety for her own romance

For example, in 1971, Supergirl’s text on the cover of the comic book announced,

“Oh, Derek, when I’m with you, nothing else matters!”335 For a girl with no human weaknesses, she easily succumbed to love and sacrificed her importance as a superheroine. The power that men held over her in these relationships exemplified

334 Adventure Comics 400/1970, Selina Zane letter. Adventure Comics 409/1971, Richard Morrisey letter. TDNAOS 14/1983, Rachelle Stein letter. 335 Adventure Comics 402/1971.

139

another way that the superheroine seemed empowered, but in actuality, the power

belonged to the men in the relationships. More examples of this imbalance in gender and

power appeared in 1972 and 1983 when fans requested that Supergirl date her boss and

professor.336 By dating men whom she worked for, the editors and writers limited her

sense of independence that made her liberated. Ultimately, the frequent representation of

Wonder Woman and Supergirl as marriageable countered their independent status and

powers.

Female Friendships and Team-ups

From 1969 to 1983, five fans requested female friendships for the

superheroines.337 The editors and writers might have fulfilled these requests by

strengthening the superheroines’ female friendships, solidarity with other women, or

mutual empowerment in the storylines. Instead, the editors and writers relied on

stereotyped notions of jealous women and catty behavior towards other women. This

absence of solidarity with other women countered Wonder Woman’s message of

women’s solidarity. The catty and jealous bickering between the villainesses and superheroines perpetuated stereotypes of actual women’s behavior. For example,

Supergirl’s fans in 1969 and 1979 wanted to know about her roommates at college while other fans worried about the inconstant nature of Supergirl’s friendships.338 When the

editors and writers complied with the fans’ requests, nearly all of her female friendships

never lasted more than one issue. Instead, such friendships appeared as characters of

336 Adventure Comics 417/1972, Gerard Triano letter. TDNAOS 7/1983, Wallace Lee Hopkins letter. TDNAOS 7/1983, Kent Phenis letter. 337 Adventure Comics 383/1969, Jane Evans letter, Adventure Comics 395/1970, Gregory Kent letter. Other fans that wrote on friendships for Supergirl: Adventure Comics 396/1970, Richard Morrissey, Adventure Comics 397/1970 Gerard Triano, TDNAOS 10/1983 Andrew MacLaney, and TDNAOS 10/1983 Kent Phenis. Wonder Woman 275/1981, Chuck Small. 338 Adventure Comics 395/1970, Gregory Kent letter.

140 convenience whose only purpose was to drive the plot. For example, in 1969, Linda helped get a girlfriend out of jail, yet the editors did not build upon this friendship or give it closure.339 In another example in 1970, Supergirl and three of her classmates drove from Stanhope College to a haunted house, but these girls only appeared in that comic issue.340 Supergirl did have one consistent girlfriend starting in the first issue of The

Daring New Adventures of Supergirl in 1982 to the last issue in 1983, through a total of twenty-three issues. 341 In 1982, one fan stated she understood the importance of having strong superheroine characters that fans could relate to.342 The importance of mirroring actual female friendships encouraged the fans to relate to the lives of the superheroines.

Wonder Woman’s fans did not make as many friendship requests like Supergirl’s fans. Wonder Woman already had a built-in network of friends and a close relationship with her mother, Queen Hippolyte, as well as the other Amazon women on Paradise

Island. Additionally, since 1941, Etta Candy regularly appeared in Wonder Woman comics as Wonder Woman’s longtime friend.343 In 1981, a fan’s request in the letter pages showed concern for Wonder Woman’s happiness and ongoing male and female friendships as the editors and writers moved Wonder Woman into a new city away from her old friends.344 The editor replied that reader reaction (meaning if enough readers sent in correspondence regarding this same topic) could prompt the return of Diana Prince’s original friends from New York. Wonder Woman’s more frequent female friendships indicated a stronger sense of women’s solidarity than in Supergirl’s comics.

339 Adventure Comics 369/1969, p. 5 340 Adventure Comics 395/1970, p. 1. 341 TDNAOS 1/1982 to TDNAOS 23/1983. 342 Wonder Woman 288/1982, Pat White letter. 343 Etta Candy appearances, Wonder Woman 280/1981, 281/1981, 282/1981, 283/1981. Etta also appeared before from 1963 to 1968, but not from 1968 to 1973. 344 Wonder Woman 275/1981, Chuck Small letter.

141

From 1969 to 1983, thirteen fans—ten male and three female—made requests for

other superheroines to appear in team-ups in Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s

comics.345 The concept behind the team-ups promoted actual women’s friendships and female support. Team-ups were structured so that when one superheroine appeared in either Wonder Woman’s or Supergirl’s comic book, it also benefitted the marketing of the comic book. The other superheroine was usually a secondary DC character, but not always. Popular superheroines, such as Batgirl, boosted readers’ interest in Supergirl’s and Wonder Woman’s comics when she made team-up appearances. Richard Reynolds noted of this additional benefit, “Extra superheroes, especially popular ones mixed with the new or the less popular, mean extra sales.”346 When editors and writers crossed-over

other superheroines into Wonder Woman and Supergirl books, the majority of plotlines

adhered to stereotyping actual women’s jealous behaviors like Betty and Veronica in

Archie comics.

For example, in 1971, a fan requested the appearance of Supergirl and Black

Canary and the editors responded, “that’s possible soon.”347 A few issues later, in March

of 1972, DC published a 100 page World’s Greatest Super-Females, which included the

Black Canary, Batgirl, Hawkgirl, and Zatanna, but they each appeared in individual stories without interaction with one other.348 Eventually, in a more direct response to the

1971 fan’s suggestion, the editors joined the Black Canary with Supergirl in September

345 Men=Thirteen Team-Ups, Adventure Comics 399/1970, Stan Timmons, 400/1970, Jeff Haskins, 401/1971, Gregory Kent, 411/1971, Dan Mulcahy, 419/1972, Paul Kupperberg, Supergirl 4/1973, Billy Menzies, Wonder Woman 254/1979 Michale Burkhalter, 257/1979, Anthony Mizzi, 263/1980, Kent Orlando, 263/1980, Eric Hoover. Women=Three Team-Ups, Adventure Comics 400/1970, Selina Zane, 413/1971, Judy Mah, 419/1972, Carol Strickland. 346 Reynolds, p. 37. 347 Adventure Comics 413/1971, Judy Mah letter. 348 Adventure Comics, World’s Greatest Super-Females, 416/1972.

142

of 1972 on the cover only; the interior story did not feature the Black Canary.349 This

misrepresentation did not fulfill some of the fans’ expectations of female friendships.

When the editors and writers responded to fans’ requests to show more team-ups,

the superheroines did not join forces in the team-up stories to defeat villains, instead, they fought with each other. For example, in 1970, when the powerful witch Morgana guest starred with Wonder Woman, they fought against each other in attempts to prove their superiority over one another.350 Since Wonder Woman’s reading audience contained

mostly male readers, Wonder Woman’s and Morgana’s rivalry appeared more as an

objectification of fighting women than as an act of establishing equality or mutual

support.

In these types of storylines, editors and writers presented men as valuable

commodities for the superheroines to fight over. For example, in 1968, Supergirl co-

starred in a Wonder Woman story where the title caption announced, “Fight to the Death!

For the honor of marrying Klamos!”351 The evil villain captured both Wonder Woman

and Supergirl and told them that only one superheroine could win and so must fight one

another to the death. Both superheroines cooperated to vanquish the evil villain towards

the end of the story, but not before Wonder Woman and Supergirl first attempted to

defeat one another.

In 1973, another example of the fighting-for-a-man story appeared when

Supergirl joined with the superheroine Zatanna—a talented magician—and fought against one another throughout the first half of the story.352 Both unwittingly loved the

349 Adventure Comics 423/1972. 350 Wonder Woman 186/1970. 351 Wonder Woman 177/1968. 352 Supergirl 7/1973.

143

same man and attempted to claim his love first. The stereotype of jealous women

fighting over a man neither viewed the perspective of the polyamorous man as violating

basic dating practices by dating three women all at once, nor did the superheroines shun

the offending man. By presenting the superheroines as bitter rivals only capable of using their powers to destroy one another over a man, the editors and writers diminished the importance of their liberated attributes.

In 1970, the editors and writers sometimes featured superheroine team-ups on friendlier terms. For example, in 1970, Wonder Woman guest starred in Supergirl to help her select a more fashionable costume, showing that they could at least get along when shopping and trying on clothes.353 Wonder Woman happened to have an off-the- rack Supergirl costume that Supergirl selected. Nine years later in 1979, Hawkgirl teamed up with Wonder Woman and worked together as a team.354 Compared with the

five examples of team-ups where the superheroines were non-cooperative, these last two

examples appeared to honor fans’ intended requests for female friendships and team-ups.

Instead of fore fronting the possibility of women’s empowerment, the editors and writers more often constrained the superheroines by making them fight one another.

Summary

The title of this chapter, Silly Feminist, Comic Books are For Men! emphasizes the male audience as the primary consumers of superheroine comics. Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics from 1959 to 1984 were situated during the Second Wave

Women’s Movement era. The intertextuality that linked fans of Wonder Woman and

Supergirl comics in this era appeared throughout their letters of commentary, praise, and

353 Adventure Comics 397/1970. It is a mystery as to why Wonder Woman had a ready made Supergirl costume off the rack in her boutique. 354 Wonder Woman 249/1978.

144 critique. The initial audiences for Wonder Woman (fewer for Supergirl), were comprised of mostly boys and girls from 1963 to 1968. Wonder Woman and Supergirl comics shifted from these child audiences to a matured male audience forward from 1968 to

1984. This was evidenced in both the letter content sent in by fans and from the advertisements in Wonder Woman and Supergirl. This was important in demonstrating the differences between a mixture of boy and girl audiences and matured male audiences’ consumption of real world representations of actual women’s experiences during the women’s movement.

The advertisements reflected boy’s and girl’s as well as men’s and women’s gender roles in the romantic customs inserts, public service messages, body building, and

BB gun advertisements. Within two years of the 1968 shift from children writing letters to male fans predominantly writing to the editor in the letter pages, was another shift in the romantic advertisements, which ceased to appear in Wonder Woman. Instead, masculine body building ads featured sexier male bodies in 1967 associated the superheroine’s strength with her sexuality. The body building ads promoted actual male power but failed to support actual women’s power in a similar way. This was especially apparent when Wonder Woman and Supergirl appeared with little to no muscle tone.

BB gun advertisements targeted adolescent boys and nearly always adhered to

Cold War gender roles where the mom and daughter passively watched the dad and son shoot guns. These ads appeared frequently from 1965 to 1980 and were also most heavily populated by images of boys and men, instead of women and girls. These images stood in great contrast to the empowering role modeling for actual women by Wonder

Woman and Supergirl.

145

From 1959 to 1984, Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comic book culture reflected an interactive social community in the letter pages between fans, editors, and their contemporary reflections of the women’s movement. Fans mailed in their letters of requests and praise, which influenced the editors, writers, and artists to limit the liberated characteristics and behaviors of Wonder Woman and Supergirl in favor of the superheroine’s sexier images.

Topics that fans most frequently discussed in their letters included: women’s liberation, women acting like men, women’s attitudes of male intolerance, the superheroines’ sexy images, the superheroines’ potential marriages, and female friendships and team-ups.

From 1971 to 1973, Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comic titles and content most closely reflected women’s liberation ideals. Fans argued with the editors’, writers’, and artists’ representation of Wonder Woman and Supergirl as not being able to appear both liberated and sexy and feminine but powerful. The core issue with these opposing ideas, was that the sexier images of the superheroines were appropriated by the male gaze of the fans while the superheroines’ liberated behaviors were given by male editors and writers. These male editors and writers did not fully grasp women’s issues as they appeared to regurgitate only the most popular topics about women’s equality. However, the editors and writers simultaneously introduced post WWII and Cold War notions about actual women’s roles in Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s storylines. By doing so, the editors and writers rarely accomplished unrestricted representations of the superheroines as equal to superheroes or as role models of liberated women.

146

One area that severely limited this perception of the superheroines as liberated role models was when the editors and writers caused Wonder Woman and Supergirl to be disempowered from 1968 to 1973. Fans more often disapproved of the disempowered status of the superheroines as they claimed that their power was part of the reason that the superheroines’ originally symbolized women’s liberated ideals and behaviors.

When the editors and writers made the superheroines behave more aggressively like male superheroes, the superheroines’ behaviors appeared to challenge Cold War ideas about actual women’s roles. However, the plotlines most often offered the perspectives of men with more dominating behaviors than the superheroines. When the superheroines did confront the dominating men, fans perceived Wonder Woman and

Supergirl as acting intolerant of men. During the Second Wave of the Women’s

Movement Era, some actual feminist women did show intolerance of men as they sought basic equal rights for women. In the superheroines’ comics, the fans appeared to reject the empowering behaviors of Wonder Woman and Supergirl when it came to confronting dominating male behaviors. The editors and writers appeared to carry forward the real world accepted ideal that perpetuated the portrayal men holding power, even in plotlines where the superheroines seemed empowered.

From 1968 to 1983, male comic fans requested or praised the sexier images of

Wonder Woman and Supergirl. This shift from showing liberated role modeling to appealing to the male gaze affected the superheroines in two ways. First, the editors, writers, and artists portrayed the superheroines in sexier costumes and provocative poses.

This was a shift away from the conservative CCA codes for which among other things, it moderated female nudity and sexual violence in comics. Second, the sexier costumes and

147

poses caused the superheroines’ liberated behaviors and characteristics to appear as

ancillary attributes, which was an off-putting change for the worse for some female fans

and feminist leaders.

Together, this intertextual relationship between the predominant male readership

praised this increasing sexualization for which they editors, writers, and artists supplied.

All parties, editors, writers, artists, and male fans, constrained Wonder Woman’s and

Supergirl’s liberated equalities to superheroes and the superheroines’ ability to reflect

actual women’s empowerment.

From 1968, one of the coinciding shifts that furthered the male gaze of the sexier

superheroine appeared in the basic construction of the comic book page. This change in

the size of the rectangular or square panels on the pages of comic books allowed the

artists more freedom to modify the superheroines’ images. However, instead of featuring

the superheroines in more action sequences like superheroes, the art featured the

superheroines’ bottoms, breasts, and in phallic poses while riding rockets. This major

shift of looking at Wonder Woman and Supergirl heightened public perception of the

superheroines’ changing status as sexual objects instead of as liberated women’s role

models.

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s portrayal of independence largely broke free

from the status quo yet the editors and writers more frequently surrounded the

superheroines with romantic relationships. These serious romantic relationships, such as

Wonder Woman’s years long courtship with Steve Trevor appeared to relate more to post

WWII women’s roles with domesticity than they did to empowerment. When Wonder

Woman and Supergirl became too involved romantically, the editors and writers killed

148

off the boyfriend characters and disempowered the superheroines. For superheroines

with nearly complete invulnerability, being in love with men shifted the perception of

power over to the men in these relationship. This caused Wonder Woman and Supergirl

to appear weak when it came to showing affection and love. While Wonder Woman and

Supergirl always stayed independent, when the editors and writers limited this

empowering feature by consistently presenting the superheroines in marriage plotlines or

long-enduring romances, they did not uphold the powerful significance of Wonder

Woman’s and Supergirl’s independent status.

From 1969 to 1983, when fans requested team ups and female relationships for the superheroines, they indicated a type of friendly and mutual female support. Instead, when the editors and writers complied with these fans’ requests, they featured plotlines in which the teamed-up superheroines fought over men or behaved in jealous ways. The superheroines did not join forces to defeat villains. For Supergirl, when the editors and writers gave her friendships, they appeared as characters of convenience that moved the plotline along. In this way, the editors and writers appeared to sideline fans’ requests that appeared empowering for actual women and promoted stereotyped actual women’s behaviors with jealous rivalries over beauty and men.

From 1959 to 1984, Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics reflected types of unsupportive reactions to the Second Wave of Feminism in the Women’s Movement era.

Based on the evidence from the comic advertisements and fans’ letters, the intended audience for Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s comics shifted from children to mature male audiences in the early 1970s. At this same time, while actual women struggled to gain equality to men, Wonder Woman and Supergirl struggled to maintain their

149 empowering role modeling of women’s liberated behaviors and characteristics. The superheroines’ statement of power and equality was ultimately lost to their sexier representation in comics, an appropriation by the male gaze.

150

Conclusion In this thesis, I argued that Wonder Woman and Supergirl from 1959 to 1984, exemplified the following liberated characteristics and behaviors: superpowers, independent lifestyles, higher education, white collar-careers, and financial independence. My core argument is that the comic book editor’s, artist’s, and fan’s sexual objectification of the superheroines limited their empowerment given to them by their superpowers, careers, college education, independent lifestyles, and financial independence.

The editors, writers, artists, and fans and demonstrated these limitations in the following five ways: First, DC comics imposed limitations on the superheroines through the romance, bodybuilding, and BB gun advertisements that appeared in Wonder Woman and Supergirl comic books. Each of these advertisements adhered to Cold War era conventional roles for women. Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s roles as empowered women challenged the actual women’s roles that these ads proposed, however none of the ads that appeared from 1959 to 1984 ever promoted women’s empowerment.

Second, although Wonder Woman and Supergirl appeared empowered, their editors and writers frequently made Wonder Woman and Supergirl follow similarly restrictive women’s gender roles as the advertisements did. In the storylines, the superheroines reflected behaviors of real women who acted unintelligent to attract men and appeared overly emotional and mentally unstable. When the superheroines were shown crying too much, acting crazy, and acting unintelligent, the editors and writers diminished what little empowerment they gave Wonder Woman and Supergirl.

151

Third, the editors and writers imposed two of the greatest limitations on Wonder

Woman’s and Supergirl’s superpowers. The first of these limitations began with the complete removal of Wonder Woman’s (1968) and Supergirl’s (1971) superpowers.

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s superpowers represented an absolute equality to

superheroes and gained them access to a male dominated occupation in comics. From

1968 to 1973, Wonder Woman and Supergirl were disempowered. The editors and

writers took away the superheroines most identifiable feature that made the superheroines

empowered and role models to actual women, their superpowers. The editors and writers

also limited Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s superpowers by making the superheroines

battle incompetent foes, which decreased the superheroines equality to superheroes.

Instead, the villains were more often humorous than threatening. For Supergirl, they

were handed down to her from Superman’s cache of second-tier villains. Both

superheroines faced villainesses who were more jealous of Wonder Woman’s and

Supergirl’s beauty. When the editors and writers adhered to such Cold War stereotypes

of actual women’s catty behaviors, they limited the superheroines’ ability to move

beyond the status quo.

Fourth, beginning in the early 1970s, the editors, writers, and artists imposed

limitations by using multiple forms of sexual objectification which included: provocative

poses, bondage scenes, sexier costumes, bulls-eye targets, and images of Wonder Woman

riding bombs and rockets. These forms of sexual objectification overpowered Wonder

Woman’s and Supergirl’s liberating message of women’s empowerment. At this point in

the early 1970s, the male audience predominated the letter page requests for sexier

images over other fans’ requests for the superheroines’ liberated portrayal.

152

Finally, the fans’ contributions in Wonder Woman and Supergirl along with the editors’ responses to the fans’ requests, shaped the superheroines’ liberated behaviors.

This intertexuality resulted in a sexualized style of superheroine art. This portrayal of the sexier superheroine in the early 1970s demonstrated an important shift from the Comics

Code Authority’s censorship of featuring nude women or sexually explicit images in the early 1950s to late 1960s.

Many superheroines, villainesses, and anti-heroines appear on comic book store shelves today, such as Batgirl, Zatanna, Powergirl, Spiderwoman, and Vampirella to

name a few. There are team-ups that consist entirely of superheroines such as Birds of

Prey, 1995. This showcase of five superpowered women breaks from the co-ed male and female groups such as the Justice League of America and X-Men. In Birds of Prey, the

sexy heroines battle villains in a collaborative team effort. However, this is where

progressive reflections of women’s empowerment stops. Lillian S. Robinson argued in

Wonder Women, 2004, that it is impossible for new comic book readers to get beyond the

visual. 355 The superheroines in the Birds of Prey appear in extremes: extremely large

breasts, extremely tight costumes, and extremely sexy poses. Everything, their

empowered behaviors and their bodies have been appropriated for the male gaze. Comic

books portray tough superheroines as if they have achieved equality to superheroes and

men and are inarguably for a male audience. This is a major difference from when

Wonder Woman’s and Supergirl’s editors and writers connected actual women’s equality

to the behaviors and characteristics exhibited by Wonder Woman and Supergirl from

1959 to the late 1960s.

355 Robinson, p. 84.

153

Wonder Woman and Supergirl continue to appear as solo-titled books. Wonder

Woman, ran as a continuous publication except for one month in 2006. Supergirl’s comic was cancelled and republished five times since 1984, but is currently published. Wonder

Woman’s and Supergirl’s characters developed under male influence and continue to reflect American society’s beliefs about women’s equalities towards men. Today’s comic book audience for the superhero/superheroine genre is still mostly male; this is not likely to change, nor is the disempowering effect of the male gaze on women’s images.

This historical account of women’s and popular cultural histories adds to other scholars continuing trend of challenging popular cultural images of empowered superheroines.

The comic book industry is only one small part of lucrative media industries. This is important to remember when blockbuster films and television series reach worldwide audiences by using stories originally found in the comic book.

154

Bibliography

Primary Sources:

Action Comics 262/1960, 265/1960, 285/1962, 289/1962, 293/1962, 299/1963, 369/1968, 372/1969, 373/1969, 374/1969.

Adventure Comics Starring Supergirl issues 381/1969 to 402/1971 and 404/1971 to 424/1972.

Avengers 200/1980.

Brown, Helen Gurley. Sex and The Single Girl. New York: Random House, 1962.

DC Giant Supergirl, S-24/1971.

DC Special All-Girl Issue, 3/1969.

Dilley, Romilda. Fundamental Fashion Drawing. New York: Sterling Publishing Company, 1967.

Jimenez, Phil and John Wells. The Essential Wonder Woman Encyclopedia. New York: Ballantine Books, 2010.

Lee, Stan, Gerry Conway, Carla Conway, Roy Thomas, Linda Fite, Tom DeFalco, et al. Women of Marvel, Vol. 1. New York: Marvel Comics, 2006.

Marvel. Women of Marvel. Vol 2. New York: Marvel Comics, 2006.

Morgan, Marabel. The Total Woman. Boston: G.K. Hall & Co., 1973.

SuperGirl 1-10, 1972-1974.

SuperGirl Showcase (Compilation) 1970-1979.

Supergirl, The Official Adaptation of the Movie, 1/1984.

The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl, issues 1-23, 1982-1984.

U.S. Congress. Congressional Record, United States Congress, March 14, 1955. Comic books and Juvenile Delinquency: Interim report of the committee of the judiciary pursuant to S. Res. 89 and S. Res. 190.

Wonder Woman, issues 130 through 315, 1962-1984.

155

Wonder Woman Showcase (Compilation) 1970-1979.

Secondary Sources:

Banner, Lois W. Women in Modern America: A Brief History. Belmont: Wadsworth, 2005.

Beatty, Scott. Wonder Woman: The Ultimate Guide to the Amazon Princess. New York: DK Publishing, 2003.

Benton, Mike. The Comic Book in America: An Illustrated History. Taylor Publishing Company: Dallas, 1989.

Bird, Caroline and Sara Welles Briller. Born female: The high cost of keeping women down. New York, McKay, 1968.

Caputi, Jane. Goddesses and Monsters: Women, Myth and Power in Popular Culture. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press/ Popular Press, 2004.

Chesler, Phyllis. Wonder Woman: Introduction by Gloria Steinem. New York: Bonanza Books, 1972.

Cullen, Jim. Popular Culture in American History. New York: Blackwell, 2000.

Daniels, Les. Wonder Woman: The Complete History. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 2000.

Dicus, Elena Raine. Black Butterfly, Jaguar Girl, Piñata Woman, and Other Superhero Girls, like Me by Luis Alfaro, Theatre Journal, Vol. 52, No. 3 (Oct., 2000), pp. 421-422.

Douglas, Susan J. Where the Girls Are: Growing up Female with the Mass Media. New York: Times Books, 1994.

Narcissism as Liberation, The Gender and Consumer Culture Reader. New York: New York University Press, 2000.

Enlightened Sexism. New York: Times Books, 2010.

Eisenmann, Linda. Higher Education for Women in Postwar America, 1945-1965. Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006.

Epstein, Barbara Leslie. The Politics of Domesticity: Women, Evangelism, and Temperance in Nineteenth-Century America. Middleton, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1981.

156

Evans, Sara. Personal Politics: Roots of Women’s Liberation in the Civil Right Movement & The New Left. New York: Vintage Books, 1980.

Faludi, Susan. Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1991.

Feiffer, Jules. The Great Comic Book Heroes. New York: Bonanza Books, 1965.

Fleisher, Michael. The Encyclopedia of Comic Book Heroes, Vol. 2, Wonder Woman. New York: Collier Books, 1976.

Frail, James H. Jr. “Powers and abilities far behind those of mortal men: An examination of the comic book industry and subculture through a feminist sociological perspective.” Dissertation, Marshall University, 2004.

Freeman, Jo. The Politics of Women’s Liberation: A Case Study of an Emerging Social Movement and its Relation to the Policy Process. New York: David McKay Co. Inc., 1975.

Goulart, Ron. Ron Goulart's Great History of Comic Books/the Definitive Illustrated History from the 1890s to the 1980s. McGraw-Hill/Contemporary, 1986.

Gruenwald, Mark, Peter Sanderson, Eliot R. Brown, & others, John Byrne, Dave Cockrum, et al. Essential Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe - Deluxe Edition, Vol. 2. Deluxe. Marvel Comics, 2006.

Hajdu, David. The Ten-Cent Plague: The Great Comic-Book Scare and How it Changed America. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2008.

Hall, Kelley J., and Betsy Lucal eds. “Tapping into Parallel Universes: Using Superhero Comic Books in Sociology Courses.” Teaching Sociology, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Jan., 1999), pp. 60-66. American Sociological Association (accessed 3/23/2009).

Harvey, Robert. The Art of the Comic Book: An Aesthetic History. New York: University Press of Mississippi, 1996.

Hollows, Joanne and Rachel Moseley. Feminism in Popular Culture. Oxford, Berg Publishers, 2006.

Horn, Maurice. Sex in the Comics. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1985.

Inge, M. Thomas. Comics As Culture. Chicago: University Press of Mississippi, 1990.

Inness, A. Sherrie. Action Chicks: New Images of Tough Women in Popular Culture. New York: Palgrave, 2004.

157

Disco Divas: Women and Popular Culture in the 1970’s. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2003.

Jones, Susan and Debra Myhill. Troublesome Boys' and 'Compliant Girls': Gender Identity and Perceptions of Achievement and Underachievement. British Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol. 25, No. 5 (Nov., 2004), Taylor & Francis, Ltd, pp. 547-561 (p.548), http://www.jstor.org/stable/4128701, accessed 1/2012.

Kaplan, Janet A. and Andrulla Blanchette, Bailey Doogan, Laurie Fierstein, Seth Michael Forman, Joanna Frueh, et al. “Picturing the Modern Amazon.” Art Journal 59, no. 4 (Winter 2000): 81-99.

Kitch, Carolyn. The Girl on the Magazine Cover: The Origins of Visual Stereotypes in American Mass Media. Chapel Hill : University of North Carolina Press, 2001.

Klein, Sheri. “Breaking the Mold with Humor: Images of Women in the Visual Media.” Art Education 46, no. 5 (September 1993): 60-65.

Knowles, Christopher. Our Gods Wear Spandex. San Francisco: Weiser Books, 2007.

Krensky, Stephen. Comic Book Century. Minneapolis: Twenty-First Century Books, 2008.

Kunzle, David. Father of the Comic Strip: Rodolphe Topffer. Mississippi: University Press of Mississippi, 2007.

Landay, Lori. Madcaps, Screwballs, and Con Women; Female Tricksters in American Culture. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998.

Lupoff, Dick and Don Thompson, eds. All In Color For A Dime. New York: Ace Books, 1970.

Lyons, Levine. The Decade of Women, A Ms. History of the Seventies in Words and Pictures. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1980.

Madrid, Mike. The Supergirls: fashion, feminism, fantasy, and the history of comic book heroines. Minnesota: Exterminating Angel Press, 2009.

McCloud, Scott. Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art. New York: Harper Perennial, 1994.

Reinventing Comics. New York: Harper Perennial, 2000.

Making Comics. New York: Harper Perennial, 2006.

Morgan, Marabel. The Total Woman. Boston: G.K. Hall & Co., 1973.

158

Muir, Kenneth John. The Encyclopedia of Superheroes on Film and Television. London: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2004.

Mulvey, Laura. Visual and Other Pleasures. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989.

Palmer, C. Eddie. “Pornographic Comics: A Content Analysis.” The Journal of Sex Research 15, no. 4 (November 1979): 285-298.

Pasko, Martin. The DC Vault. Philadelphia: Running Press, 2008.

Pustz, Matthew J. Comic Book Culture: Fanboys and True Believers. Canada: University Press of Mississippi, 1999.

Radway, Janice A. Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature. London: University of North Carolina Press, 1984.

Reynolds, Richard. Super Heroes: A Modern Mythology. University Press of Mississippi, 1994.

Robbins, Trina. From Girls to Grlzzz. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 1999.

The Great Women Superheros. Northampton, Mass: Kitchen Sink Press, 1996.

“Gender Differences in Comics by Trina Robbins.” trinarobbinslink(1 January 2007).

Roberts, Graham and Philip M Taylor, eds. The Historian, Television and Television History. London: University of Luton Press, 2001.

Robinson, Lillian S. Wonder Women: Feminisms and Superheroes. New York: Routledge, 2004.

Rosen, Ruth. The World Split Open: How The Modern Women’s Movement Changed America. New York: Penguin Books, 2006.

Rosenberg, Robin S. Ph.D., ed. The Psychology of Superheroes: An Unauthorized Exploration. Texas, Banbella Books Inc., 2008.

Savage, William W. Jr. Commies, Cowboys, and Jungle Queens: Comic Books and America, 1945-1954. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1990.

Schlafly, Phyllis. “Interview with Phyllis Schlafly,” Washington Star, January 18, 1976 in Ronald Story and Bruce Laurie, The Rise of Conservatism in America, 1945- 2000, New York: Bedford/ St. Martins, 2008.

159

Schulman, Bruce, J. The Seventies: The Great Shift in American Culture, Society, and Politics. Cambridge: DaCapo Press, 2001.

Spiegelman, Art. Maus I: My Father Bleeds History. New York: Pantheon Books, 1986.

Steinem, Gloria. Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions. New York: Holt, 1983.

Sturgis, Susanna J. “Review: Writing Women into Myth.” The Women's Review of Books 22, no. 1 (October 2004): 13-14.

Thom, Mary, ed. Letters to Ms. 1972-1987. New York: Holt, 1987.

Valcour, Francinne D., Ph.D. “Manipulating the Messenger: Wonder Woman as an American female icon.” Arizona State University, 2006, 372 pages, Proquest (1 January 2007).

Versaci, Rocco. This Book Contains Graphic Language: Comics as Literature. New York: Continuum, 2007.

Weibel, Kathyrn. Mirror Mirror: Images of Women Reflected in Popular Culture. New York: Anchor Press, 1977.

White, Rosie. Violent Femmes: Women as Spies in Popular Culture. London: Routledge, 2007.

160