Latest Entries »


I know this might seem dramatic. I know so many of you are like “Nobody thinks its ok for adults to date teenagers!” But I’d be willing to challenge that assumption and say, “YES YOU DO!” Why do I know? To clarify my point, I need to bring up a situation that happened recently.

I have a friend. He is about twenty years old. He is constantly posting very dumb things on Facebook, and I am always commenting on them telling him how immature, sexist, or just plain ludicrous it is. Recently, he posted this:

evan idiot

Now, this isn’t that crazy or insane, and I am aware. But I messaged him and told him that it was intense for a guy his age to think this was normal. He is young and shouldn’t be putting so much pressure on a relationship. He proceeded to tell me that he has been in a relationship for a few months and its been going well. I was immediately skeptical. It was odd, not because he said he had a relationship, but because I had no idea it was happening. He is the kind of person who posts everything on social media. He thinks that his random 4 am musings are relevant. But not a single peep about this girl on social media. I begin to question him. Why do they never post picture? Why do they rarely tag each other? Why is this the first I’m hearing about her? He claims that they just don’t like using social media and use Snapchat mostly, which is an even bigger red flag (snapchats lasts a few seconds, and stories a few days). I understand people not wanting to post their relationship on social media, but if you knew him, you would think something was very wrong. Every other relationship he’s had, he’d post a picture with the girl, talk about her all the time, etc. It was just uncommon. And it started to seem like he was trying to hide something.

If you haven’t guessed, the thing he was trying to hide was that this girl is seventeen years old. And a bunch of you literally just decided that I’m overreacting – I’m willing to bet. I had a conversation with a few people after this revelation. Surprisingly, most people are completely fine with an almost 21 year-old dating a 17 year-old. “I was 14 when my boyfriend was 18” someone would say. “I dated much older men as a teenager.” Another would comment. “Men are more immature than women as teens” the general public might assert.

But no, they are not. At least, not because they are incapable of maturity. Not to bring personal anecdotes into this, but when I was 17, 14 year-old girls were gross. When I was 20, 17 year-old girls were gross. Now, I don’t think its too large of a leap to assume that a normally developed 20 year old should also think that undeveloped 14 year old girls are gross (gross may be dramatic, but lets say “unattractive” instead). Maybe I’m weird, but I don’t think so.

What I think is happening is that society has somehow decided that its ok for adult males to date teen girls. Try having a conversation with someone about this topic. It’s normal for a 20 year old male (A verifiable adult) to date a teenaged girl. But what if it was reversed? 20 year old girl dating a teenaged boy? They will immediately say something along the lines of “that is weird” because, in their heads, there is no reason a 20 year old woman would in interested in a 17 year old boy. And there really isn’t. But why should it be the other way around?

This issue is made starker when you view it in terms of life position. The way a high school student thinks is much different from the way a high school graduate thinks. The things that they need to think about are drastically different. And I’m not even including college in the mix, which many young men are in at that point.

It’s weird. And these young men are, in fact, young men. They are pretty much adults, and they are fully aware of their position and power over teenaged girls. And we accept that. Why do we, as a society, decide that older men dating younger women is acceptable? I’m not talking about when both people are adults and don’t have power dynamics in the way. I’m talking about when there is a clear issue.

Why do we think this is ok? I quite honestly think the “maturity” argument is ridiculous. The men who I know who date women in that situation tend not to be “immature” as much as they are manipulative, emotionally unstable, or just lazy.

Why date a woman your age, or at least in the same life stage as you,  who will challenge you to be better, when you can date a teenager who doesn’t know any better? By virtue of you not being in high school, or being in college, you are already better than every guy she could possibly know. Why would she push you to be better when you are already drastically “better” than her other dating options? What sort of personal development do you feel you need to do when you can easily get a young girl to fall in “love” with you without even trying?

This barbaric practice needs to stop. Young men should not be finding girls to be romantically or sexually attractive. One thing I learned as I matured is that I thought I was a lot more mature than I was as a teenager. These young girls are being taken advantage of by these boys who know for a fact that they have the upper hand. Why do we justify this behavior? Why do we think this is normal? Where do we draw the line?

It’s, quite frankly, disgusting. The more I think about it, the more I feel grossed out. The more women say “but I did it” or “but he was pretty immature” the more I say “Why is it acceptable for men to be more immature?” I know plenty of men who were not “immature” for their age. It’s not “normal” for men to be immature – it is just a societal construct that men are immature. Why do these “immature” men get a pass? why are we not calling them out on their immaturity?

Immaturity is not the reason we allow this. We allow this because we have a misogynistic society that doesn’t care about men taking advantage of young women. It doesn’t care about telling women that their role is to allow weak, immature men to control them. It’s disgusting.

Let’s smash these ideals. Tell men its not cool to date someone so young. Stop making excuses that minimize then men’s decisions and make it the woman’s responsibility to make the right choice. We need to make sure that young women understand that older men who are interested in them have something wrong with them. We need young men to realize that the is something wrong with finding a teenaged girl attractive. We need to break down these dangerous and oppressive relationship ideals and show young people that there is a better way.

We need to teach women that one of the signs of an abusive relationship is for a man to be attracted to a young girl. It shows that he is interested in dating someone he has a clear power advantage over. We need to stop this foolishness. Call out your sons, brothers, cousins, nephews, friends, colleagues, etc., who do this sort of thing. It is not normal. It is not cool.

Change the world.



When Star Wars: The Force Awakens revealed that Gwendoline Christie would be playing Captain Phasma, a Stormtrooper captain with unique armor, theories about her involvement and her role abound. Everyone believed that, at the least, Phasma would prove to be a dangerous enemy to our group of ragtag intergalactic heroes. The marketing surely portrayed her as such and many fans were excited to see what Disney would do with this character, which was truly a first for the franchise’s cinematic installments. Never had we seen a female Star Wars villain on the big screen.

When the Force Awakens came out, fans were less than impressed by what they saw. If you haven’t seen it, Captain Phasma plays almost no role in the movie. Her role is really just to provide exposition for Finn, a stormtrooper deserter who joins the resistance. Throughout the whole of The Force Awakens, Phasma is painted as a threat to Finn. We see Phasma and Finn as opposites: She is the obedient, loyal automoaton while Finn is the freethinking, independent rebel. The story plays with the idea, and we know that Phasma either wants to kill him, or force him back into subjugation. This causes viewers to expect, in some way, some sort of deciding conflict between the two characters. A conflict that confirms one of these ways of thinking as correct.

However, that moment doesn’t come in The Force Awakens. When Finn and Phasma finally meet toward the Film’s climax, she doesn’t even resist. He manages to force her to shut down the shields so resistance fighters can destroy the Starkiller base. Then, she is thrown into a trash compactor off screen. All without even putting up a fight.

Needless to say, this left a lot of fans unhappy. There were expectations that the movie set that were never fulfilled. It was a cheap shot, and it didn’t really fit with either the character of Phasma or of Finn. It was one of the biggest criticisms of the movie overall, and its important to note that this is the first cinematic female Star Wars villain we have seen. The way they treat her is similar to the way Hollywood treats most female characters: they have their use and then they are sidelined, often with little to no explanation, or just a single off-hand remark (for example, Han asking Finn about trash compactors).

Fans were excited when previews for the Last Jedi showed Finn and Phasma fighting in what seemed to be the middle of a battle. It seemed like Phasma would take a larger role in this movie, to make up for her lackluster role in the previous. The logical path for her character seemed to be that she would be angry at Finn for his betrayal, but also for her embarrassment at Starkiller. It would be logical that Phasma could potentially be a primary antagonist in this film, or at least to take a role similar to Jabba the Hutt or Bobba Fett, where she is hunting for the heroes and is still a looming threat, even if she is not a direct threat. But she does not end up playing much or a role in the story at all.

In fact, Phasma only appears at the very end of the film, after Finn and Rose have been captured by the first order. There is a very brief fight sequence between she and Finn, and he ends up defeating her by hitting her in the back of the head with a weapon. For me, it was one of the most disappointing parts of the movie. As a writer, I could have (and have) thought of a million ways to incorporate her into the already existing story without making her a cumbersome story element. Instead, what the Last Jedi did was make her into essentially a set piece. It disregarded a whole entire movie’s worth of characterization just for an average fight scene. And then we seem Phasma plummet into a fiery death, almost certainly gone for good.

I think it was the most disappointing part of the movie for me. Rian Johnson has stated that there was no room for Phasma in the movie’s plot – that she would make an already bloated movie bloat further – but I disagree. The decisions that Rian’s team made in regards to this movie were odd, starting with Phasma.

Phasma, in my opinion, is much more interesting than Hux, who I feel I still don’t really know after two movies of him. It also would seem like they are missing out on a fantastic opportunity to tempt Phasma. One of my thoughts about Phasma upon first meeting her, and one of the reasons why I though she didn’t fight back, and why I thought Finn didn’t just kill her, was that perhaps she was losing faith in the First Order. I thought that, perhaps, Finn would be able to convince her that the First Order was evil, or at least, that there was a better way.

After Kylo Ren becomes the Supreme Leader, my feelings about this idea grew stronger. I could see it now – Phasma seeing Kylo Ren growing increasingly unstable, and all of these soldiers blindly following him. She, being a smart and able woman, realizes that Kylo is not a worthy leader, and that he is endangering the system she worked so hard to help build and protect. This could give both she and Finn some much needed development and closure. This would have opened up doors that lead in the direction that Rian was going. The overarching theme of the movie was that ordinary people can do extraordinary things. She could have inspired a whole group of stormtroopers to betray the Empire and join the resistance!

I know I’m just posturing here, but my main point is that Phasma had a lot more promise than Rian and his team care to admit. If they wanted to include her in the story, they could have easily changed some scenes around to incorporate her. Hell, instead of having Finn and Rose get arrested by local authorities, they should have had Phasma after them instead. That would have taken absolutely nothing away from the movie.

My point is that Rian and his team intentionally chose not to have Phasma play a larger part. For whatever reason, Disney wants to use this character to market their movies, games, and merchandise, but not as an actual character in their movies. It baffles me, in all honesty. I can’t imagine why they would take a fan favorite character with so much potential and essentially make her a set piece.

Her role in the end of this movie could have been replaced with literally anything else. It could have been a random stormtrooper Finn was fighting and it would have made almost no difference. Rian says that the fight at the end was intended to show that Finn has overcome his past and is forging a new future, which is a strong theme of this movie overall – but even that I do not see. He did that in the first movie when he first confronted her. At this point, Phasma was only included as fan service, adding no real weight to the movie, emotional or otherwise.

I have decided that I need to see the movie again. This time, I am going to actively plot a storyline for Phasma that would not have interfered with any of the existing storyline. It might just be punishing myself, but I don’t really care. Phasma deserves more than this.


CW’s Female Problem

Three years ago, CBS announced they were creating a Greg Berlanti led Supergirl Show. I, among many others, were elated at the news. Still, many were unhappy that they chose Supergirl, throwing all manner of sexist insults at the show before it even had a teaser. I wrote a little op-ed about why we needed Supergirl, and I still stand by that op-ed (which ended up being almost 100% accurate, by the way). But after the first season of Supergirl, it was picked up by the CW to join the other Berlanti DC television series Arrow, Flash, and Legends of Tomorrow. I was worried, since that would lead to a smaller viewership, but it would also lead to more flexibility in the roles. Once going on the CW, Supergirl’s episodes became more culturally relevant, adding positive LGBT+ representation, as well as dealing with sensitive subjects like immigration and feminism. However, they also lost a few of their bigger name people. Calista Flockhart, who played Cat Grant in the show, was a powerhouse of feminism and female power. She returned for only a few episodes, as the CW couldn’t afford her as a series regular. Peter Facinelli, who portrayed Maxwell Lord, the series’ Lex Luthor stand-in, also was lost into the abyss, never even mentioned again.

However, this opened the door for some great female characters. We were introduced to Katie McGrath’s Lena Luthor, Lex Luthor’s adoptive sister, and throughout season two the audience was left guessing whether she would follow in her family’s footsteps or become an ally to Supergirl. We got to see Sharon Leal’s M’gann M’orzz, or Miss Martian. We got to see Dana Delaney’s Maggie Sawyer, love interest to Kara’s Sister, Alex. We even got some great villains along the way, too numerous to recount here.

Most of these characters were done well. They had fulfilling story arcs and felt like real characters. In the current season, we were introduced to Samantha Arias (Odette Annable), a seemingly original character. We are introduced to her separate from the main cast, and we see that she has just moved to National City for a new, high pressure job. She is a single mother and works very hard to take care of her daughter and deal with her high demand job. It is revealed in the season 3 premier that she had some sort of superpowers, and she spends the first half of the season exploring their lengths. We also learn after a few episodes that her new job is acting CEO of L Corp while Lena is acting CEO of Cat Co.

Samantha quickly becomes friends with Lena, Kara, and Alex. They have an amazing friendship that you just love to see portrayed on a television. Rarely ever talking about men – dealing with real life problems – open and accepting of each other’s differences, etc. Samantha is my favorite character on the show, because she seems like a real snapshot of a struggling mother thrust into a job she wasn’t really prepared for.

Before I continue with Samantha, I need to talk about the CW’s Flash. The character of Caitlin Snow, played by Danielle Panabaker, over the course of the previous two seasons, had become the villain Killer Frost. Up until this point, Caitlin was my favorite character. Caitlin’s story arc was characterized by struggle to control her negative emotions, and struggle to deal effectively with her feelings.


Caitlin was the good character that was always struggling. All her love interests ended up getting killed or being the villain in disguise. She had some pretty severe PTSD from all of her experiences. She struggled regularly. For whatever reasons, the showrunners decided to have that struggle overcome her. After a stupid time-changing plot point, Caitlin was losing control of her (new and unexplained) ice powers. She ended up joining with the season’s villain and turning on her team. In the end, she aided them, and went off to figure herself out.

At the start of the next season, Caitlin has regained herself, but whenever she is angry or scared, she can lose control and become Killer Frost. I mention this because both Caitlin and Samantha share a similar story arc, and a similar fate in the DC Television universe. For whatever reason, secondary female characters with powers become villains (or get killed off).


I don’t care if they become villains. What I care about it how and why. Caitlin is the perfect example of the kind, loving, sensitive woman who is also a bit of a badass. She ends up becoming a villain because of how good and kind she is. She becomes tired of being walked all over by everyone else. She wants to take control of her life. That’s a totally reasonable and something many women feel. However, most women do not become murderous ice queens when they reach this point. In fact, CW shows have men who experience similar struggle and end up becoming heroes who, surprisingly, do not struggle between good and evil (I’m looking at you Jimmy Olsen). Caitlin’s story arc seems to tell the viewers that those qualities are bad because they led her to become a villain. Either that they were bad qualities, or that they are too weak to cancel out her inherent badness. It’s a common trope in DC comics (and any comic, really) for a woman’s power’s to be triggered by her emotions, and to reflect her emotions. Presently in the show, Caitlin uses her ice powers for good, but she can still lose control as Killer Frost, as Killer Frost is actually a separate personality. There is even a scene in the four part crossover event, Crisis on Earth X, when Caitlin transforms and Killer Frost says something along the lines of “Where does she get this stuff?” or “I can’t believe she wears this.” I tried to find a clip, but I couldn’t. The point being, they are two completely different personalities. Which doesn’t really help the whole plight of women who are trying to prove that their emotions don’t turn them into irrational monsters.

This brings me back to Samantha. After Killer Frost, I was very jaded about how awesome Sam was, because as I saw her powers developing, I saw her mirroring Caitlin’s story arc. Overworked single mother with little support suddenly gains powers and becomes evil. It’s clockwork. I was waiting for that inevitable moment. I had hope that perhaps Samantha would be a counter to Caitlin – that she would actively chose to use her powers for good.

And while Samantha never descended into the depths of rage and fury, what happened to her was, if not worse, just as bad.

It was revealed in episode 7 that Samantha was a “Worldkiller” called Reign, which is one of Supergirl’s archenemies. This was a secret kept by the creators until then – nobody knew what Samantha’s purpose was. I was, needless to say, immediately disappointed. However, there was still hope. I hoped that, perhaps, Samantha’s strong ethics and well-developed character would have the will to overcome this revelation. The episode even ended on an unclear note. We were left waiting until the mid-season finale if she succumbed to her role or overcame it.


So now, instead of having a woman who succumbs to her weaknesses, we have a woman who becomes a monster and can’t do anything about it. She says she will fight it, but then is almost immediately overcome by it. When she learns she is Kryptonian, she wishes to become a hero like Supergirl. She is given no autonomy and no ability to control herself. Her entire characterization before this point now feels wasted. Why show her as such a strong, confident, kind woman if that is going to mean nothing? We see her give Supergirl a massive thrashing with none of Samantha’s actual character or personality.

I understand why the writers did this. It’s to create a sense of anticipation. Supergirl does not know that Reign is Samantha. Samantha doesn’t even know that she is Reign. I am assuming the idea is that their friendship will overcome Reign, but I am sort of tired of this trope. Why are none of these women strong enough to overcome this wickedness to begin with? Why can’t these women control themselves?

The fans are also an important element. Many fans were more than elated when Caitlin finally became Killer Frost (as her character in the comics is, in one iteration, Killer Frost). Many of these people were the ones who identified with Caitlin strongly, and wanted to see her take control of her life. This is not a fault on them. It’s also just a matter of just pleasing the fans. However, they could have empowered Caitlin in a way that didn’t immediately destroy all her previous characterization, or send a message that her qualities were not valuable. In any Comic Book iteration, there is a delicate balancing act between the source material and what makes sense for the show. The show tries to frame Caitlin’s transformation as somehow empowering, but it really just says that smart, kind, talented women are not valuable unless they can duke it out with the boys in the same way.

I have such an issue with this because of the way it represents women overall. Women are constantly trying to convince men that they are not made into irrational ice queens by their emotions. They are constantly trying to prove to men that they are not easily manipulated. They are trying to prove to men that they do not become irrational and emotional in positions of power. These stories actively fight against those ideals.

I’m tried of watching strong women fail. Society tries to convince women that no mater how strong they are, they will not do what they want. They will not control their emotions, they will not be successful, they will not resolve their inner turmoil. Why can we not see a strong woman who is being forced to be a “worldkiller” successfully say no? Why does a woman have to have some personal stake in something before she can get control? Making only once character capable of doing this while all others are failing is not hopeful.

What would have been better is if Samantha struggled against Reign, and then used Supergirl’s inspiration (a common theme of the show) to overcome Reign’s control. That would honestly be more entertaining that watching them fight for two minutes. There would be much more character and plot development if they did that. I’m not asking for much, I’m just asking for female characters who are good and strong to remain that way and don’t abandon hours of character development for the sake of shock.


I am a proud and active alumnus of my fraternity, Zeta Beta Tau. Since Joining in October of 2011, I have felt great pride in knowing that Zeta Beta Tau is one of the only, if not the only, Social Fraternities that has completely removed pledging from their New Member process. Many are flabbergasted by this, while many more praise it. Pledging is, after all, the time when the most numerous and intense acts of hazing are performed. In fact, in 1989, ZBT abolished pledging primarily to curb the instances of hazing in its organization. Had there been pledging in Zeta Beta Tau, I doubt I would have ever joined.

This, of course, is not true for most other people. Thousands of young people join Fraternities and Sororities each year and happily pledge. I, personally, do not think pledging is necessary, and am whole heartedly devoted to Zeta Beta Tau’s non-pledging position, and I am not trying to make a statement about pledging. Pledging can be successful, if done right – even if I maintain that the same or more can be done without pledging.

Our community was rattled recently with many large hazing stories. One, from my Alma Mater, the State University of New York College at Plattsburgh, one from Penn State, one from Florida State University, and apparently just last night, one from Ohio State university. As always happens when hazing comes to light, Fraternity and Sorority members step up to denounce the evils of the trade, proudly reporting how their own organization had a no tolerance stance on hazing (usually ignoring some of the very problematic things they would do instead of hazing).

However, what most interests me is the small conversations that sprout up around campuses and among those who personally knew those involved. These conversations are often ignored or undervalued. The conversations I refer to are those where people whisper “So it’s true” or “I thought they stopped that” or “I can’t believe they are still doing that” or, possibly the worst offender, “That’s exactly what they did to [inset name of person here].” Its these small, often short, often emotional conversations that warrant further inspection. It is these conversations that outweigh and immediately cancel out all those talks about how great an organization is, how empowered they made their members feel, or how against hazing they were.

After the Pi Alpha Nu incident at SUNY Plattsburgh, I felt guilty. I didn’t personally know anything about the hazing activities happening there, but I should have done my due diligence as a Fraternity and Sorority Life student staff member and as an Interfraternity Council Vice President to bring these things to light. I now know that they were occurring during my time there, because several of these small conversations from people I know, who either knew members or alumni, made comments confirming it. I was just too blind to see.

This caused me to think about my time as an undergraduate. Reflect. I realized that there were a lot of people who knew what was going on. Girlfriends, boyfriends, friends, alumni – who knows who else. I pondered: Why did none of these people say anything? I can understand why the hazing victims didn’t say anything – hazing psychology is clear on that. But of the countless others who knew, nobody said anything? Of the countless men and women who proudly purport that they are anti-hazing, how many of them said or did anything about it? We do know that a single person can blow the lid off of hazing. We also know it is hard, and a lot to ask of someone.’s Anti-Hazing Heroes are proof of that.

Unfortunately, we can’t rely on the random hero to show up and save us. Hazing is a community problem, and it requires a community solution.

One thing that I rarely ever see when people are discussing hazing is a dialogue about how chapters, even those that do not haze, contribute to the issue of hazing. We tout our organizations as social organizations, but never use that social power to truly affect cultural change, or accept responsibility. Rarely do I ever see professionals suggesting to members to refuse to support groups who are rumored to be hazing. Never do I see chapters calling out other organizations. I’m sure it happens privately, but never is that one of the first suggestions. I read a great article today from a Sigma Sigma Sigma alumnae about this very issue. She provided many ways people can help reduce hazing in their communities, but not even she mentioned using our organization’s social power to affect change.

Never do I see professionals suggesting that Sororities refuse to mix with fraternities who they believe, or more likely know, to be hazing, and vice versa. Rarely do I see people explicitly telling people to actively avoid going to programs and events of groups who haze.

Sure, these things are implied. It seems so obvious that it doesn’t merit mention. But that is not how it works. Our Fraternity and Sorority Community has developed by supporting each other. Many groups fear that by not presenting a united front they are confirming that Fraternity and Sorority Life is not as Idyllic as they try to claim. Sometimes it is out of fear of retaliation – perhaps taking a stand against hazing will get some of their own clandestine activities unearthed. Sometimes it is to keep the status quo.

I am not a Fraternity and Sorority professional, in as much as I do not get paid to work with these groups. As a volunteer, I am quite passionate about, and critical of, Fraternity and Sorority life. Whenever I see a group touting how against hazing they are, I wonder what sort of activities they do that are breeding grounds for hazing. Many groups, for instance, like to play games when it comes to big/little reveal. I have seen new members completely stressed, because the chapter is trying to trick them into thinking their big is someone it is not. Is this hazing? I would argue yes, but most others wouldn’t. However, in this case, where is the line? When do you cross over from fun little game to mental abuse? And how does this benefit anyone? Chapters rarely have those kinds of conversations with themselves, let alone other groups.

The problem with Fraternity and Sorority Life is that we, too often, ignore our faults. We, too often, ignore our own little quirks and blow up those of others. I cannot begin to tell how many sorority women I know who took no hesitation in blasting Pi Alpha Nu, though had no issue mixing with them or going to their programs. When the allegations against Pi Alpha Nu first became public, absolutely nobody was surprised. Even those who didn’t know what was happening were not surprised, because organizations like Pi Alpha Nu are breeding grounds for toxic masculinity. Everyone knew that something bad was happening, or was about to happen, because they saw the way the members acted. Instead, they were more often rewarded than challenged. This is the social nature of our groups at work. Why should Pi Alpha Nu stop hazing when it has not caused them any issues? In fact, they may have been rewarded for doing it with sex, drugs and alcohol.

And nobody did anything.

We cannot continue to post about how great and hazing free our own experiences were. We cannot continue to act like we are morally superior to those who haze when we are turning a blind eye to it. We cannot continue to claim that our own organizations are that different from those like Pi Alpha Nu. We need to take responsibility as a community, because if our community was really so against hazing, it would be doing more to prevent it.

I am tired of seeing groups denounce hazing thinking that is enough. We cannot continue to act like it’s not our problem if it’s not our organization. We are quick to use all positives to reinforce all of Fraternity and Sorority Life, and quicker to single out a person or a group for their bad actions.

The sooner we own our negatives, the sooner we can change them.

The sooner we tackle toxic masculinity and homophobia in our community, the sooner we can have true values driven organizations.

The sooner Fraternities and Sororities become more accessible to cultural and financial minorities, the sooner we can tackle the privilege that often leads to hazing behaviors.

Ignoring a group who I believe to be hazing doesn’t seem like it would really align with the values of any of the organizations I know of. We need to hold each other accountable to values. We can’t rely on the IFC or Panhellenic to fix everything. It starts with the individuals and the individual chapters.

It’s not enough to not haze. You need to make change, using the power you have. That’s the only way.


I received an email from Planned Parenthood today telling me about Florida Senate Bill 444, which is a bill that would require the Florida Department of Health to have a contract with Florida Pregnancy Care Network, Inc, a network of what many care calling Crisis Pregnancy Centers in Florida. The goal of these places is to “encourage childbirth.” This bill would effectively make it the state government’s role to facilitate the encouragement of childbirth (and therefore, the discouragement of abortion). To combat this, Planned Parenthood has asked all Florida residents to contact the Florida Senate Health Policy Committee, who will be voting on this on Tuesday, November 7, 2017. The members, and their contact, are as follows:

Chair: Sen. Dana D. Young (850) 487-5018
Vice Chair: Sen. Kathleen Passidomo (850) 487-5028
Sen. Lizbeth Benacquisto (850) 487-5027
Sen. Dorothy L. Hukill (850) 487-5014
Sen. Travis Hutson (850) 487-5007
Sen. Bill Montford (850) 487-5003

I was able to contact Senator Dana Young’s Office via phone, but when i contacted Senator Kathleen Passidomo’s Office, they asked me to submit my opposition via their online contact form. I wrote a letter, quickly, to express my opposition. It can be found below. Please feel free to borrow from it.


Senator Passidomo,

I am contacting as a resident of the State of Florida to express my opposition to the SB 444. As the Co-Chair of the Florida Senate Health Policy Committee, I would expect you to want to encourage the health and success of your constituents. A well educated person knows that health comes in many forms, not just physical. The Senate Bill 444 threatens the mental, physical, social, and financial health of all of Florida’s residents.


I am primarily concerned with the fact that this bill requires the Health Department to have a contract with Florida Pregnancy Care Network, Inc. I do not believe it is in the best interest of Florida’s population to force a government contract with a group that is unwilling to provide the appropriate information. As much as I would love for the world to be filled with more amazing people, refusing to provide or acknowledge pregnancy termination services will negatively affect overall public health.


As Co-Chair of the Health Policy Committee, I hope I do not need to remind you that access to accurate, thorough information on all aspects of pregnancy, including ways to terminate, has positive benefits on public health. This is particularly true in more low income and rural areas, where overall access to healthcare in general is lacking. Florida has many areas like this.


I do not believe it is appropriate for the State Health department to “contract with the network for the management and delivery of pregnancy support services to eligible clients.” This wording effectively makes it the Health Department’s responsibility to provide this specific information, while not providing other information. It could, potentially, cut off the department from working with other groups and providing effective community healthcare. At best, it is ambiguously worded, at worst it is a formal and direct proclamation that the health department does not care about providing comprehensive health care services, be they clinical, educational, or otherwise, to the residents of the state.


Thank you for choosing not to support this bill. Doing so would be a betrayal of the state and its residents.



Sean Conklin

Palm Beach County

Boynton Beach

After sending this letter to her, i decided to look a little more into Florida Pregnancy Care Network, Inc. What I found – or did not find – was unnerving. I could find an address, but no other contact information. No website, so name to associate with it. Searching for the name on google provides you with a location and a website for Florida Pregnancy Support Services. This may be the same group, though nowhere on the webpage can i find the phrase Florida Pregnancy Care Network, Inc. I wish is aw this before, because this is a huge red flag. This information needs to be public so constituents can know who their government can potentially be trusting with their health care.

Take a stand against this ridiculousness and contact these Senators!

Verizon’s Hurricane “Relief”

As Hurricane Irma approached the coast of the Florida Peninsula, people were panicking. Fortunately, the benevolent Verizon wireless announced, as the hurricane drew nearer and stronger, that they would be providing “Hurricane Relief” to all affected customers.

I recall being stuck in a powerless house with scared and confused animals when I received a text from Verizon saying “We’ve got your back; we’ve got your usage.” It promised Domestic Data, Voice, and Text relief in affected areas from 9/9-9/11. This was later extended to 9/15. I was very excited, as I had a battery pack to charge my phone, but no internet connection. I could not use my phone to pass the time in the storm.

As I used the phone over the next two days, however, I still got my usual data warnings. 50%, 25%, 10%, then suddenly, I’m out! I follow the link Verizon provided so see what the details of this relief were. All it said was that all overage charges would be covered, so you don’t need to worry about going over. At first I was relieved, though I decided not to tempt fate and use more unnecessary data.

Monday morning, after the storm had passed and everyone was assessing the damage, I checked my home over. Fortunately, it was untouched though powerless (and, as of right now, still powerless). I went to my parent’s house because I had received a call from them saying their Florida patio (also called a lenai, Florida room, etc) was ripped up and trashed my father’s car. I went over to help them clean up the damage. They got power back that day, and internet soon after.

Once everything had settled down, I thought of all the data I had used. I thought of the fact that the relief was over on 9/15 and wondered what that meant. The next day, I returned to work, and took some of my down time to contact Verizon directly. I had realized that, after the storm, I would be left with less than 1gb of data, to last me and my roommate another 15 days. I figured there was some mistake. Verizon would probably do some sort of data restoration to the affected people so they do not accrue more overage charges.

I spoke with someone via the online chat, which I regret now because I think a lot was lost in translation and made it more difficult, and I had an error at my computer at work and was unable to save the conversation (the reason I used the online chat to begin with). I asked the person for the details on the Irma relief. He was kind and cordial, asking me if I was safe and all that kind of stuff, before getting to the nitty gritty.

He repeatedly told me that all overage charges during the relief period will be credited. This much, I explained to him, I already understood. I asked him repeatedly about what happens afterward, when people are back to a more normal life, but have less than 1gb to share among their family plan for the next 15 days. He either didn’t understand what I meant, or didn’t want to.

He said that any overages after the relief period would not be covered.

This frustrated me. Had I not received a text saying I’d get data relief, then I would not have used so much data. I knew I had finite data and that I needed it all month. Now, I knew, based on my phone usage, that I would definitely be using more than 1gb in the second half of the month. I asked him, struggling to find the best way to phrase it, if there was a plan for that.

He continued to tell me that the overages during the relief timeframe would be covered. He said he would put me on safe mode, which would, in the event I used up all my data, put me down to 3g speed, rather than add another GB of 4g speed. He hadn’t answered my question, so I then gave him an example. I said something along the lines of “I have 4gb of data between 2 people. I used it all during the storm. I got 1gb of overage data. I know that that will be covered. I appreciate that. But if I have .5gb left after the relief period ends, I am stuck with that, for two people, for the rest of the month, and if I go over I will be charged?”

And he still gave me the “overages during the relief period will be covered” line. I knew what that meant. It meant that yes, I would be charged overages after the relief period. So I asked him “Will I get the data I used refunded?”

Finally, to this, he said yes, and added 3gb to my account.

The reason I gave that long account of my experience was because I do not believe Verizon’s relief is really relief at all. I Do appreciate that Verizon is giving people relief during the storm for overages, that is great. But the manner in which they did it was, in my opinion, highly unethical. I feel like I was tricked into using my data so that I would end up getting overage charges later in the month. I would never have used the data if Verizon didn’t tell me about relief.

The issue is that after the relief period, people are going to start accruing overage fees, even if they are using their data like they normally do. Because it is the beginning of the month. Add that to the fact that people have lost income from work, lost their homes, had to spend money to either get away or prepare, and you see how this could be a potentially bad policy.

During the last hurricane in our area, Verizon gave free data. They just said “Your data is free.” And data you used during the free data time just didn’t come out of your monthly data allowance. I remember that, because I was out of state when I received that message, and I told people around me about it. It was an interesting tidbit for us all.

I wonder how many people used data assuming that was the same thing? I wonder how many people will be adversely affected by this “relief” they are providing. Imagine having your home or job destroyed and then on top of that getting an extra large bill just for using your phone like normal.

I am frustrated because Verizon seems to be doing this for publicity, rather than anything else. They had a press conference to announce this relief. They told everyone about it beforehand. This was calculated. It was no mistake that people will be left with almost no data for the rest of the month. I would be willing to assume that the analysts at Verizon figured all the overages they credited would be made back and then some in the rest of the month.

So, what do we do? Well, if you contact them and ask them questions, it seems like you will get extra data at no charge. But if you do not, I’m afraid you will be at the mercy of overage charges. I hope I am wrong, and I hoe Verizon rectifies this on their own. We will see.

It seems, also, that the other major Cell Phone providers are doing the same or similar thing. Most are waiving fees during the time of the hurricane, up until a specified date. But it seems they will all end up in the same ballpark.

I am not trying to say that they shouldn’t be doing anything. Of course, Verizon and other companies should be lauded for trying to help. However, it seems that announcing it beforehand, rather than afterward, was not the right thing to do. It created an expectation that data would not be a problem because of the hurricane. But it will still be a problem. People will be feeling the effects of the hurricane on their data plans for a while after.

Verizon is waiving fees for overages and other related things for monthly customers, but they will be “Credited on your next bill” which still seems like it will be inconvenient during the immediate aftermath. Prepaid customers will get 3 extra gb of data total at no charge.

Most other companies are waiving overage fees all around. Please check with your provider about their specific relief policies.


Fuller House Season 2 released on Netflix earlier this month. I, being a fan of both Full House and Season 1 of Fuller House, watched the show in my free time. On the surface, Season 2 seems to be more progressive than season one, with more LGBTQ+ representation as well as more challenging of gender norms. However, I couldn’t help but feel like I had been tricked and cheated by the writers of Fuller House into believing they were progressive (especially since they literally have the cast members proclaim that they are anti-Trump and that they are for a large variety of progressive ideals).

When thinking critically about the show, however, it seems that, sure, there are many progressive ideas, from sustainable backyard organic farming to female empowerment, and the show likes to challenge gender norms and expectations, but that certain things are only there as a joke. That is mostly the LGBTQ+ themed parts.

Take, for instance, the very first scene of Season 2. Season 1 ended with protagonist DJ deciding to take time to figure herself out before she decides whether she wants to date her high school sweetheart, Steve, or her new, hunky (better option, imo) work partner Matt. Season two begins and she has finally decided who she wants to date. DJ has not seen Steve or Matt all summer (even though Matt is her work partner? I’m not sure how that worked out. They’re veterinarians, not teachers), so this is her first time catching up with them. Apparently, Matt and Steve bonded over the summer and became best friends (for plot simplicity, probably). They come over together all buddy-buddy, making jokes about wanting meat. The scene was set up so that it actually seemed like they were a little too close to be just friends. The expectation that Matt and Steve were going to come out and say they were dating each other escalated as they stood next to each other, arms wrapped around each other, and proclaimed “We’ve actually found someone.”

Only for the punch line to be delivered by Stephanie: “Each other? I always had a feeling!”

And it’s played off as a big laugh, because obviously they weren’t dating each other. They each actually had found girlfriends, and their girlfriends were coming over to meet the Fullers/Tanners/Gibblers. This would not be a huge deal if this was how Matt and Steve’s friendship was – very close, a lot of touching, etc. However, this is one of the only times Matt and Steve are portrayed this way, and it is all a set up for a gay joke. I know I was a little disappointed to see that they built that up just to make a joke about it.

But Matt and Steve are not the only examples of this. We have an almost opposite joke in one of the following episodes. DJ and Stephanie decide to crash a wedding. While there, DJ meets Sean, a charming and attractive man around her age. She and Sean get along very well, and DJ is very interested in seeing him again. He even asks her for her phone number! It’s at this point that he informs Stephanie that he’s gay – and he suddenly starts behaving differently. He starts dancing flamboyantly, talking about the cute waiter – things that he hadn’t done in the last 10 minutes (of screen time) we were interacting with him. It’s played off as a big joke. Haha, the guy DJ was into was actually a gay guy all along. How could she not tell?! Let’s also remember that they live in the heart of San Francisco, literally the gayest place in America, and Sean is the only LGBTQ+ person they ever interact with.

But this post wouldn’t be complete without going into more detail about the apparent challenging of gender norms. We see this with both Steve and Matt’s friendship as well as the relationship between the older generation of brothers, Danny, Jesse, and Joey. I’ve already mentioned how Matt and Steve’s friendship is built up just to make a gay joke, but there is also a scene later that I am quite frustrated with. After Steve gets DJ a birthday gift and gives Matt the credit, they have a really tender broment (bro moment). Matt asks “Should we hug?” and Steve and he hug. After a few seconds, Matt asks “Should we stop?” Steve responds, “It’s your hug, your decision.” So instead of stopping, Matt slowly and awkwardly puts his hand on the back of Steve’s head and pats it tenderly. The scene then ends.

What I described above sounds like it’s awesome. Two male best friends who are not afraid to hug each other and be intimate. How great is that?! It would be great, if there wasn’t a laugh track over it.

The problem is that Fuller House is a show intended for children. Although there are adult moments overlaid there to appease the generation who grew up watching Full House, it is primarily a children’s show. That’s why making these jokes is bad. The reason it’s funny that Matt and Steve are hugging like that is because “Boys don’t hug like that!” Brothers hug like that. Kids hug like that. Adult men don’t hug that like. How silly.

The same goes for the thanksgiving episode, where Danny, Jesse, Becky, Joey and their children come. Jesse and Danny end up sharing a bed. The next day they are talking about it, saying one was trying to snuggle the other, but then they reveal that they were actually quite comfortable snuggling each other. This, again, is played off as a joke, because adult men don’t cuddle in bed together.

The problem I’m having with this season of Fuller House is that they are turning intimate, close male friendships into jokes. They are telling the children the show is directed at that these are things that are weird and out of place, and they should think it’s silly. It shows that despite their progressive assertions, there is a bit of internalized homophobia going on here. It’s based in stereotypes and gender policing. It should be better than it is. You can have fun, interesting LGBTQ+ characters, or non-stereotypical men (like Jimmy Gibbler!), without making gay jokes.

Image result for the flash

If you are a fan of the CW’s Superhero TV shows Arrow, Flash, or Legends of Tomorrow, you have been seeing plenty about time travel. The way that the CW presents this makes it seem like all the time travel makes sense – however, it doesn’t stand up to even the smallest level of scrutiny and it is destroying the integrity of all of the shows. Here’s why.

Time travel is most evident in Legends of tomorrow, though it is most problematic in the Flash. In the Flash, our Villain, the Reserve-Flash travels back in time from the future and kills the Flash’s mother. However, in our TV universe, the Reverse Flash doesn’t have enough speed force to travel back to the future and therefore gets trapped in the past. He then takes Harrison Wells’ place so that he can create the Flash and siphon speed force from him so he can return to his own time.

Jump to the end of Season one, when the Reverse Flash is defeated when his ancestor kills himself. This is the first problematic thing. This literally puts us in an infinite loop. Had Eddie not killed himself, the Reverse Flash would never have come back. But then edit never would have killed himself to stop him, and the cycle continues. Viewers sort of just accepted this based on a whole bunch of time travel bull that the CW writers decided to make up – which makes absolutely no sense.

Then we have Season 2, which was light on the time travel, though introduced the incredibly convoluted concept of Time Remnants, which make even less sense than the previous infinite loop. I have tried to understand it multiple times and every time I can’t logically accept what explanation I come up with. I’m not even going to try.

Then enter Season 3, which takes the whole concept off time travel and decides to give a huge middle finger to the audience. The Flash decides to go back in time and stop the Reverse Flash from killing his mother. He then captures the Reverse Flash and imprisons him. However, Flash eventually realizes that he’s losing all his memories and that the world he created was not a good one, He’s also losing his powers, and he doesn’t have enough Speed force to go back in time and stop himself, so he asks the Reverse Flash to go back and kill his mother. Of course, Reverse flash goes back and kills Barry’s mother, but also decides to mess a whole bunch of other stuff up.

This is where it so far doesn’t make sense. This is the same Reverse Flash that originally, after having killed the Flash’s mother, didn’t have enough speed force to time travel and had to wait for Barry so he can use his speed to go to the future. Now, for some reason, after 3 months and absolutely no work, Reverse Flash is able to not only go back in time, but also mess up a whole bunch of stuff, suggesting he went back to multiple points in the past and changed them.

So why was Reverse Flash suddenly able to go back in time when he originally couldn’t? And, if for some inexplicable reason the Reverse Flash was magically back to full power, why did his existence as Harrison Wells not change? If Barry took him to the past, to the future (creating Flashpoint), and then he took Barry back to the past then back to the future, why would he return to the past and stay there? It makes no sense at all.

Throw that in with the fact that Reverse flash is currently messing up the timeline in Legends of Tomorrow – which I assume, possibly incorrectly, is supposed to be what he did right after leaving Barry – then you get a really crazy and intensely convoluted time travel story line.

Because of this, i feel increasingly disconnected from what is happening in the shows. i feel like I wasted two years watching Flash just to see the character arcs shift unexpectedly and disappointingly. This seems like lazy writing just so they can shoehorn Killer Frost in. The new season of Flash is a frustrating mess where we have no idea of what the character histories are or know anything about them, really. We don’t know what is the same and what is different. We assume that they are generally the same as before, but we know there are fundamental differences. It’s annoying. And then Barry tells them he changed time and it someone makes all of their problems less relevant tot heir personal interactions? No, it’s frustrating.

If someone can give me a legitimate understanding of the logic they are using, I’d love to get it.

I’m Here for Us

To my LGBT+ Brothers, Sisters, and other Siblings,


I feel your pain. I feel your anguish. I feel what you are feeling, though you may not know it. I am not as open or expressive in my queerness as you may be, but I feel it. I feel the fear. I feel the panic. I feel the uncertainty. I feel that lack of feeling – that numbness that makes you unable to move or act. I feel that feeling of helplessness. I feel that desperation where you seek desperately for a way to fix this – you seek for a way to make this somehow less frightening, less dreadful, and less terrible. I know you are seeking a way to come to terms with this – and better yet to fight against this – because I too am feeling it. I am fortunate to be surrounded by loving supportive people. If you are not, I am sorry. I am here for you. I am here for us.

I am here for you when you post your angry, sorrowful rant against those who voted against you. I am here for you when some idiot decides their opinion on your feelings is wanted or needed. I am here for you when all you want to do is vent and someone tells you to calm down – or worse – that you are wrong. I am here for you when someone tells you that your concerns have no merit. I am here for you when someone tells you that you are wrong about your assessment of the situation. I am here for you when someone erased your lived experience to replace it with their own.

I am here for you when you wonder if you are safe taking your significant other’s hand in public. I am here for you if you wonder if you are safe expressing your identity in public. I am here for you when you hear that random guy at work or school spouting hate. I am here for you when you get those remarks that you probably get regularly, only this time it feels a bit more personal. I am here for you when you feel threatened by the people who claim to love their countrymen. I am with you when you are not sure if it is worth it to go outside today. I am here for you when you are not sure it’s worth it to live.

I am here for you when the supreme court tries to invalidate your marriage. I am here for you when your parents force you into conversion therapy. I am here for you when you are sick but your doctor doesn’t accept you as a patient. I am here for you when you feel like nobody else is.

I am here for you when you just want to say that you are sad, and someone won’t let you. I am here for you when you just need a shoulder to cry on. I am here for you when you need a friend. I am here for you when you need an ally. I am here for you when you need a brother.

I am here for you when you are celebrating your triumphs. I am here for you when you tell the one you love that you love them. I’m here for you when you dance into the night, surrounded by friends and happiness. I am here for you when you lie down to sleep with a smile on your face.


I am here for you, forever and always. And I will fight for you. I will fight for us.

Image result for love is love is love

Image result for wonder woman 2017

When CBS has first announced their decision to run with a Supergirl TV show, I was – needless to say – very excited. As a hardcore DC fanboy and an even harder-core Superman fanboy, I was excited. But the feminist in me was also excited. Supergirl would mark another step toward female superhero domination. And for the feminist hoping to see some great female storylines, Supergirl delivered. Before I knew how great Supergirl would actually be, though, I penned a little opinion piece called “Why the world Needs Supergirl,” which was, of course, a play on the article written by Lois Lane in the 2006 Superman Returns “Why the World Needs Superman.”

When wonder woman was announced, I was, of course, excited – but nervous, too. DC had been making some odd creative choices with their holy trinity in the cinematic universe, and I wasn’t totally sure if I would like their interpretation of Wonder Woman. I was much happier when I learned that a woman would be directing the film, and that Christopher Nolan was not going near it. Zack Snyder is a producer, which is concerning, but Geoff Johns and Allan Heinberg are writing the script. They are two big names in comics whom I have faith will be writing a great Wonder Woman. Johns, due to his great work on Smallville and also for his overall great job as CCO for DC; and Heinberg for his experience with the character.

When Batman vs. Superman came out (which I loved, so shut it), I cannot tell you how exciting it was to watch Wonder Woman fight Doomsday. Her theme music sounding in the moment she is first shown in her armor and bracers is one of the most powerful feminist images in modern history. I remember bringing the extended edition to watch with my parents and seeing how excited my mother got when Wonder Woman appeared in battle was one of the most exciting moments in recent memory. She probably didn’t even realize it, but I watched her body language change from “slightly interested” to “heavily invested” in what was happening as Wonder Woman entered the scene.

And then they released a trailer. It was good, but it didn’t give much away. But then they released another trailer, and OH MY GOODNESS did that trailer give me so many feels. I have never seen a movie trailer that literally gave me hope for the future. After watching that trailer for the third or fourth time, I sat back and said to myself, “This movie may literally change the world.”

It sounds exaggerated and extreme, but after thinking about it more, I am even more certain that this movie has the potential to be a massive catalyst for change, in a way that no modern female-led movie has before. Below are the reasons why:


This can open the door for female-led superhero movies, as well as more female led movies overall.

Superhero movie goers are all too aware of the lack of female leads in superhero movies. Marvel fans have been begging for a Black Widow movie since the first Avengers film and so far there are no plans for it. It is difficult to get original movies with female leads to be created unless they are rom-coms.

I foresee wonder woman bringing in large scores of women. I foresee Wonder Woman being successful and therefore teaching the movie producers that action and superhero movies are – in fact – marketable to women. This, in turn, will result in more action movies with female leads, and will most likely result in more female roles in action movies – outside of the roles we are already accustomed to. This in turn, will lead to a larger female cinematic audience, which will hopefully result in more women involved in the production and creative levels.


Wonder Woman will be a feminist dream!

Maybe dream is a bit of an oversell, but I believe, based on my knowledge of wonder woman and my knowledge of this movie, that they will have strong feminist themes in the movie. And, if it is anything like the comics, this movie will not hide its feminism in undertones like Frozen and Tangled did, requiring the viewer to be very critical to learn the basic message. It will be in your face and quite possibly patronizing at times. We’ve already seen some feminism in the trailers, particularly in the scene where Etta Candy explains who she is to Diana, and Diana says it’s like a slave.

I’m very confident in the theming of this film, mostly due to the scene in the newest trailer of Diana climbing out of the trenches and walking into No-Man’s land, deflecting bullets off of her bracers. This woman, walking out into a land the men feared to enter. If that doesn’t set your little feminist heart alight, then I don’t know what will.

I just think of the message that she will be sending to young girls and women everywhere about their own power and determination to succeed. I just think about women and a mainstream message about women working side by side, hand in hand with men, each building each other up.


This will reinvigorate the DC Cinematic Universe

I think it is safe to assume that DC is expecting there to be a large Wonder Woman demand after this movie comes out. I think that, if they are smart, they are already planning to make Wonder Woman a key player in the future DC Cinematic Universe. They would be wise to give her a lot of screen time to appease the desire for Wonder Woman that will exist if the movie does well.

This will reinvigorate the salty fanboys who can’t get over the very logical and literary “Martha” scene. It will draw new fans in who have been waiting for a female headed superhero flick. It will give the DCCU the momentum it needs to propel forward.


If Wonder Woman fails, so does hope of female lead superhero movies.

If wonder woman does not succeed in the box office, or in our hearts, we may be looking at the last superhero film lead by a woman in a while. If it is determined that “female superheroes don’t sell” then the field will stick to that assumption. Studios will not be as willing to make a movie with a female superhero as the star. Marvel is already apprehensive about giving Black Widow a movie and she’s got as high off a following as the other Avengers. DC, fortunately, has faith in Wonder Woman, but if that faith is not rewarded, we may not see another female superhero in the titular role for a while.

If Wonder Woman succeeds, we can probably expect to see more female DCCU superheroes.

We already have confirmation that Supergirl was on the crashed Kryptonian ship that Superman finds in the arctic. We just don’t have her in universe. We have a large group of people who are obsessed with Catwoman and Poison Ivy comics. We have people straight up demanding a solo Harley Quinn movie. If Wonder Woman succeeds, we will get more of this. They may not get their own movies, but they will become important. We will be more likely to see Supergirl in a movie with Henry Cavil if Wonder Woman succeeds. Harley Quinn will be more likely to get her own movie if Wonder Woman succeeds.

If Wonder Woman succeeds, the DCCU will become much more queer.

Wonder Woman is not only a feminist icon, but a queer icon. DC’s current cinematic universe like to take a lot of direction from the Earth One comics. As I explain in my Wonder Woman: Earth One review, Wonder Woman: Earth One is incredibly queer. If the Universe continues to take creative freedoms from the Earth One stories, expect to see a LOT of queer characters in the future, at least in Wonder Woman titles. If there isn’t a queer character in the movie, I’d actually be surprised, even with its WW1 timestamp. Wonder woman is both a feminist icon and a queer icon.


Well, I have rambled on enough about Wonder Woman. Please take the time to view the trailer if you haven’t already (or if you have, too!), and buy some Wonder Woman comics! She’s great!