Behind Batwoman's Gayness

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-daum15jul15,0,65867.column?coll=la-opinion-center

Today's women are pigeonholed as either girly girls or lesbians.
July 15, 2006

GUARD YOUR daughters closely. On Wednesday, Batwoman will come out as a 
lesbian. No, it's not as big a deal as if, say, Strawberry Shortcake 
were appearing on the cover of Out. Most people — myself included — 
don't really know who Batwoman is. But the media have been all over this 
for months, and I'd be remiss if I didn't jump on the bandwagon (make 
that the Subaru station wagon; I used to own one, so I'm allowed to say 
this).

Batwoman is turning up in a DC Comics' series called "52," which 
launched in May. Among the characters is Kathy Kane, a buxom, red-haired 
socialite with romantic ties to a female ex-cop. On Wednesday, when the 
much-anticipated (or at least much-hyped by DC Comics) issue of "52" is 
released, we will learn that Kane is really Batwoman.

I don't know if the new Batwoman will be bulletproof, elastic or able to 
fly, but if Kane's manicured appearance is any indication, I don't think 
she'll be using power tools or even playing acoustic guitar. So unless 
there's an abrupt character change, it looks like DC will steer clear of 
the stereotypes I've invoked in the preceding paragraphs.

The other day, I visited my local comic book store to inquire about the 
cultural significance of Batwoman's coming out. That should give you an 
idea of just how committed I am to this column. If there's anything more 
intimidating than the kind of used-record store that only seems to sell 
Radiohead albums, it's a comic book store. You can multiply that by 20 
if you walk in wearing a peasant blouse and flip flops, using words like 
"signifier" and trying to act all informed by mentioning that Batwoman 
hasn't been around since 1979, when she was killed by a bronze tiger (I 
swore I'd read that in one of the news articles).

Suffice it to say that I was upbraided by the clerk, who told me that a) 
superheroes rarely die but are instead transported to other realms (or 
something like that), and b) there are lots of gay comic book characters 
and the fixation on Batwoman was just another example of the media 
exploiting a topic it knows nothing about. We then proceeded to have a 
conversation about "Commissioner Barbara Gordon," and it took me several 
minutes to realize he was talking about a comic book character and not 
an actual politician.

So, yes, I'm a dope when it comes to comics (also apparently about city 
government). But I'm not a dope about that 51% of the population known 
as women, many of whom seem to be undergoing a sexual identity crisis 
without even knowing it. Maybe baby-doll dresses, chick lit and the 
Olsen twins have infiltrated our consciousness to the point of oblivion. 
Whatever the reason, it appears that there are only two ways to go about 
being female these days: You are either a midriff-bearing, gum-snapping, 
engagement ring-chasing girly girl or you are a probable lesbian.

We used to think of this dichotomy in terms of "separating the women 
from the girls." Perhaps you remember how this went. Teenagers and early 
twentysomethings wore nameplate necklaces and waited for the phone to 
ring, and adult women owned condos and knew how to unclog a toilet 
without losing their sex appeal.

But in a culture that's as allergic to subtlety as it is obsessed with 
youth, acceptable versions of womanhood seem to be melting away with the 
polar ice cap. You either get the Botox, the boob job, the bikini wax 
and baby doll dresses, or you take the radical step of looking and 
acting like a fully formed, grown-up female.

Once upon a time, these fully formed creatures were called "real women." 
Now they're called lesbians. This is especially true in cases in which 
the women in question are not known to actually be lesbians. What do 
Hillary Rodham Clinton, Condoleezza Rice, Christiane Amanpour, Oprah 
Winfrey and Martha Stewart have in common? It's not that they're 
accomplished, independent, talented, ambitious or rich, it's that 
they're all secretly gay! Ask anyone who reads Internet blogs.

I'm allowed to say this because I'm secretly gay too. Or at least I try 
to be. What choice do I have? Apparently "lesbian" is now the de facto 
label for any woman who asserts her own tastes and opinions and does not 
necessarily need to get married tomorrow. Granted, this might be 
confusing for people who lack opinions and their own tastes, and are 
desperate to settle down, but happen to be actual lesbians. But, 
according to the current cultural mind-set, a heterosexual woman who has 
her act together simply does not exist in nature.

Is it any wonder, then, that we (at least we in the media, who have high 
rates of secret lesbianism) are so fascinated by Batwoman's newest 
incarnation? DC Comics might be touting the idea of diversity, but I 
suspect what we're really seeing is an antidote to the rampant girliness 
of our era presented — how's this for ironic? — in the safest way possible.

If there's anything scarier than a strong lesbian, it's a strong 
straight woman. Now there's a superhero we could use.


Reply with a "Thank you" if you liked this post.
_____________________________

MEDIANEWS mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to