What is in a name? (part II)

Part I

The Graphical Logo:

Now moving onto the second aspect of the transgressing site, is their logo. At first and quick glance, it’s a picture of a dude spanking a lady. But, this is not the full depth of the image. When getting in good and looking hard at the picture, you have masked man in a costume, spanking a woman that is in a dress, has curled hair, and is wearing heals. One could infer that this is an image of either domination, bondage, or some form of roleplaying. However, PBH is not a sex site, nor is it a site focused on abuse.

I personally think there is less wrong, or negative in the image than in the title of PBH. I think the picture is a resounding and valid representation of satire. It is implied that the costume style of the male is similar in the unifying designs of american superhero costumes, and in fact the male looks very similar to “The Phantom“, a DC comic character that has been in production since the middle 30s (first appearance in 1936).

If indeed the male character is emulating or drawing off a cultural recognition of The Phantom, then the assumption of satire still holds. It is absurd, that a super hero, an icon of extra ordinary abilities, idealized senses, and cultural significance is forced to a position of chastising another. The dress of the woman and the style of drawing elicits thoughts of the early 60s and late 50s with overblown gender roles, and an idealized domestic lifestyle with very entrenched social gender roles.

What this creates is an image filled, first with stereotypes, and second an image that plays on what these cultural figures mean in relationship to each other. What develops is an image of one stereotype chastising another. But at the same time the roles of the stereotypes are being twisted, and played upon. I have found a few comments about the female’s clothing being in question, specifically that the clothes are tight, and she is wearing high heels. That these two aspects imply a sexual connotation is absurd in my mind. The dress may be drawn tighter, because of implied gravity. Within the picture, the lower portions of the dress are still loose and billowy. In fact the only tight areas, are on the highest points of the cloth, exactly how gravity works on cotton fabrics. The heels, instead of a sexual foot fetish are closer to the full costumed stereotype of suburban women.

It is conceivable that a person will only see a man spanking a woman, but this isn’t due to a similar fate as the website title. It’s not because the image begs great explanation, that one will come around to see an innocent side, but more this is an image that does speak of satire. The image is laden with stereotypes, including those personified by the ideal male hero (an ideal of rippling muscles, nationalism, do-goodedness, and the ultimate stalwarts of anything moral and positive…I’m a batman fan), but all is perverted and twisted, while emphasizing the absurd.

It is ridiculous that a superhero must resort to such base means of punishment, and I know that with my upbringing and social groups that I am part of it is just as absurd to assume that the image of the female in the logo is a realistic representation of women today. If someone accuses that the image helps to sustain the stereotypes amongst the ignorant, I argue that is not the responsibility of the site. In fact PBH’s responsibility is to maintain their content within the bounds of first impressions, or to not mislead those that enter the site.

The racy aspect of the logo, and the controversy it has developed are 100% in step with what PBH tries to accomplish, and also keeps within the definition of satire. It may be wise considering the debates that the name and logo have fostered, to create a specific subsection on the site about the two, and a page discussing the overview of the style of content that can be found on PBH, but it is not a requirement.

In my personal estimation it is hard to envision the logo as anything but satire. The context of the site name does damage the logo, and it’s intentions, but addressed on it’s own, the logo is more innocent than title. I also think that this counts as an example where intent can indeed override interpretation. One of facets of satire, is that is sits in that grey area where one must be in the know to get the joke, but not being in the know incenses someone enough to find out, but doesn’t make the joke wrong or offensive, it just means you’re outside the joke.

The Criticism:

This is something that I think has developed as my writings have progressed, I’ve done the best that I can to do a point counterpoint about the whole issue as I’ve gone along. I’m not going to spend much time with this other than saying a few small pieces. First, nothing is inherently simple or one sided. Both parts of this argument have real claims and grievances, what is worth doing is seeking a middle ground. Not necessarily about changing things, but really getting where the other side developed their views. The second stems from this, that while not being obligated or required to change, and personal disagreement about how both Alec, and Kit have framed some of their arguments, their right and stance in both title and logo are valid and acceptable. But, the feminist communities that have been deeply offended are not baseless, more this is a real matter of personal disagreement where life experiences have changed how this issue is perceived. I find that some of the attacks by the feminist communities over the issue have been in poor form with demanding ownership of the issue, PBH has also not been a good team player with avoiding personal or inflammatory insults.

In the end, I think everyone needs to take a breather and really relax over the whole thing, it is just a blog, but also remember that these are not faceless arguments with brainwashed misguided pundits, but a debate that involves real human beings with real and genuine emotions…ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE.

I call for letting it lie as it is, and placing this whole flareup into the realm of a communication breakdown. But, these are just opinions, and my opinions can be wrong.

What say you of those that care? Let’s start a real debate, not name calling.

The floor is open.

~C

(x-posted)

What is PBH? Part 1

What is in a name? (part I)

I Have Become Everything I Hate, Part 2

Building of Nazi Germany, Part 3