Wonder Woman and the UN

In case you haven't heard it yet - Wonder Woman was named a UN Ambassador for women recently. And some people aren't happy about it.

Now, I totally get why this is an issue for a lot of people. I also get why some people are happy about this announcement.

But - and this is the radical bit - this occurrence is neither the end of the world nor the saviour of humanity.






Let me sum-up a bit for you dearest nerdlets, and show you that all sides have some pretty impressive, and equally valid, points:





Not a 'real' woman


The evidence for the prosecution, m'lady, is as follows:

• Wonder Woman is fictional - she's not 'real.' There are plenty of non-fictional women who deserve the recognition of this role.

• She is often over-sexualised. Do we really want little girls looking up to a sex symbol as their role model?

• The creator of Wonder Woman was a man; her writers and artists are usually men. She is controlled by men.

• She has no voice of her own - only what people give her. She is a puppet with no agency of her own.

• Wonder Woman is commercial property - she is owned by DC comics. The UN currently has a women's ambassador who is beholden to commercial interests.

• Wonder Woman is too American to be a global ambassador.

Seems like there's a real case to be answered against her, doesn't it?

Women are warriors

The defence presents it's case m'lady:

• Wonder Woman is undeniably an icon with global recognition potential that needs little to no explanation.

• To many, she seems more real than the 'real' women - your average little girl is more likely to recognise - and relate to - Wonder Woman, than to Angela Merkel; so let's use that recognition for good.

• Wonder Woman was invented as a feminist icon - someone girls could look up to. This is a reclamation of her original identity - an undoing of the subversion of her original character; she wore a mini-skirt and knew it said nothing about her as a person. It was others who judged her for it.

• She saves the dude-in-distress constantly. Seriously, that's what she spent the first lord-knows-how-many years of her career doing - saving the useless dude's a*s, so that he didn't get his butt killed.

• She's canonically queer - any step forward for intersectional feminism can't be 100% bad.

• She shows girls that women can be whatever they want to be. A boob-tube and a mini-skirt doesn't make you stupid, weak, or ineffective.

So, valued members of the jury, what do you think? Is the case for or against Wonder Woman strong enough to make a valid judgement?

Here's my take: let's do something really radical, and assume that appointing one UN Women's Ambassador isn't enough! Let's appoint, oh, I don't know - 2 women? 3 women? 5 women? A whole team of women? Lord knows there's enough work for them.

The question shouldn't be: should we appoint a fictional character to this position?

It should be: Can we appoint this fictional character and this activist and this neuroscientist and this CEO and this charity worker and...?

Because Wonder Woman is going to a great job, regardless of who's for her, and who's against her - but why the hell should she have to do this alone?

Like this post? Try these:

• Review Time! - Last Night, A Superhero Saved My Life by Liesa Mignona (Ed.)
• Nerd Church - When Heroes Fall