Comics Bulletin logo
Search
  • Columns
    Random
    • Introducing the Reboot Comic Book Club podcast

      Kyrax2
      October 19, 2015
      Reboot Comic Book Club
    Recent
    • Revisiting the Witchblade/Fathom/Tomb Raider Crossover

      Daniel Gehen
      February 8, 2021
    • The Full Run: Usagi Yojimbo – The Wanderer’s Road Part 2

      Daniel Gehen
      December 4, 2020
    • The Full Run: Usagi Yojimbo – The Wanderer’s Road Part 1

      Daniel Gehen
      October 30, 2020
    • What Looks Good
    • Comics Bulletin Soapbox
    • The Full Run
    • Leading Question
    • Top 10
    • The Long-Form
    • Jumping On
    • Comics in Color
    • Slouches Towards Comics
  • Big Two
    Random
    • 3.5

      Review: AMAZING MARY JANE #1 Starts Strong But Plays it Safe With Messaging

      Kyrax2
      October 29, 2019
      Big Two Reviews, Marvel Comics, Reviews
    Recent
    • 3.0

      Review: X-MEN LEGENDS #1 Delivers A Dose of Nostalgia

      Daniel Gehen
      February 22, 2021
    • 4.5

      DCeased: Dead Planet #7 Presents a Hopeful Future (Review)

      Daniel Gehen
      January 22, 2021
    • Retro Review: Detective Comics #826 Remains a Holiday Classic

      Daniel Gehen
      December 3, 2020
    • DC Comics
    • Big Two Reviews
    • Marvel Comics
  • Indie
    Random
    • 3.0

      Review: Transformers #13 a tasty treat but not the main course

      Kyrax2
      October 16, 2019
      IDW, Indie, Reviews
    Recent
    • 4.5

      Review: THE LAST RONIN #2 Hurts So Good

      Daniel Gehen
      February 19, 2021
    • TIME BEFORE TIME—A HIGH STAKES TIME TRAVEL SCIENCE FICTION SERIES SET TO LAUNCH THIS MAY

      Daniel Gehen
      February 19, 2021
    • Image Comics and TMP Announces SPAWN’S UNIVERSE

      Daniel Gehen
      February 18, 2021
    • Reviews
    • Archie Comics
    • Boom! Studios
    • Dark Horse
    • IDW
    • Image
    • Oni Press
    • Valiant
  • Reviews
    Random
    • 4.5

      Review: Lovers' Lane: The Hall-Mills Mystery

      Kyrax2
      August 22, 2012
      Reviews
    Recent
    • 3.0

      Review: X-MEN LEGENDS #1 Delivers A Dose of Nostalgia

      Daniel Gehen
      February 22, 2021
    • 4.5

      Review: THE LAST RONIN #2 Hurts So Good

      Daniel Gehen
      February 19, 2021
    • 2.3

      Review: SAVAGE #1 Needs Taming

      Daniel Gehen
      February 16, 2021
    • Singles Going Steady
    • Slugfest
    • Manga
      • Reviews
    • Small Press
      • Reviews
      • ICYMI
      • Tiny Pages Made of Ashes
  • Interviews
    Random
    • Interview: Christopher Sebela: Crime, Comics, Crime Comics and Everything in Between

      Kyrax2
      August 29, 2014
      Interviews
    Recent
    • Interview: Jon Davis-Hunt Talks SHADOWMAN

      Daniel Gehen
      June 8, 2020
    • Interview: Becky Cloonan talks DARK AGNES and Her Personal Influences

      Mike Nickells
      March 4, 2020
    • Simon Roy

      Interview: Simon Roy on His Inspirations and Collaborations on PROTECTOR

      Mike Nickells
      January 29, 2020
    • Audio Interview
    • Video Interview
  • Classic Comics
    Random
    • Classic Comics Cavalcade: Death Is What Happens While You’re Making Other Plans: The Exiles Pt. 3

      Kyrax2
      June 12, 2015
      Classic Comics Cavalcade, Columns
    Recent
    • Countdown to the King: Marvel’s Godzilla

      Daniel Gehen
      May 29, 2019
    • Honoring A Legend: Fantagraphics To Resurrect Tomi Ungerer Classics

      Daniel Gehen
      February 15, 2019
    • Reliving the Craziest Decade in Comics History: An interview with Jason Sacks

      Mark Stack
      January 2, 2019
    • Classic Comics Cavalcade
    • Classic Interviews
  • News
    Random
    • This Week in Boom! for 10/22/14 and 10/29/14

      Kyrax2
      October 22, 2014
      News, This Week in BOOM!
    Recent
    • TIME BEFORE TIME—A HIGH STAKES TIME TRAVEL SCIENCE FICTION SERIES SET TO LAUNCH THIS MAY

      Daniel Gehen
      February 19, 2021
    • Image Comics and TMP Announces SPAWN’S UNIVERSE

      Daniel Gehen
      February 18, 2021
    • SAVAGE DRAGON IS A FORCE TO BE RECKONED WITH THIS MAY

      Daniel Gehen
      February 17, 2021
    • Press Release
    • Kickstarter Spotlight
  • Books
    Random
    • Interview: M.K. Reed Explores Facts and Legends About Dinosaurs (and Her Imagination)

      Kyrax2
      August 24, 2016
      Books
    Recent
    • Collecting Profile: Disney Frozen

      CB Staff
      November 22, 2019
    • Collecting Profile: NFL Superpro

      CB Staff
      August 31, 2019
    • “THE BEST OF WITZEND” is a Wonderful Celebration of Artistic Freedom

      Daniel Gehen
      September 15, 2018
    • Review: ‘Machete Squad’ is a Disappointing Afghan Memoir

      Jason Sacks
      July 31, 2018
    • Review: ‘Out of Nothing’ is the Antidote to Our Sick Times

      Jason Sacks
      July 23, 2018
    • Review: ‘Bizarre Romance’ Shows Rough Edges in the Early Days of a New Marriage

      Jason Sacks
      July 10, 2018
What's New
  • Collecting Profile: Blue Beetle
  • Review: X-MEN LEGENDS #1 Delivers A Dose of Nostalgia
  • Collecting Profile: Kraven the Hunter
  • Review: THE LAST RONIN #2 Hurts So Good
  • TIME BEFORE TIME—A HIGH STAKES TIME TRAVEL SCIENCE FICTION SERIES SET TO LAUNCH THIS MAY
  • Image Comics and TMP Announces SPAWN'S UNIVERSE
  • RSS Feed
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google+
  • Contact Us
  • Write for us!
  • Visit Video Game Break!
Home
Columns

Does DC Care?

Kyrax2
October 7, 2013
Columns, The Squeaky Wheel

Click below to listen to an audio version of this post, or download the mp3 here .

I love statistics. So when Tim Hanley started posting his "Women in Comics" statistical analyses of DC and Marvel comics each month, I was fascinated…and curious. Tim's statistics lumped in all of the titles produced by each company each month. I wondered how the numbers would look if they were focused on each company's core products. I'm not familiar enough with Marvel to identify their core titles, but DC is easy: they put the vast majority of their marketing clout into, and receive the vast majority of their sales from "The New 52". I wrote to Tim and he very kindly sent me his raw data, which I then refined by removing non-New 52 titles like Scooby Doo, Ame-Comi Girls and Arrow.

The results were interesting.

Breakdown of creative staff working on The New 52 by gender, January through June, 2013.

    January   February   March
    Males Females   Males Females   Males Females
Writers:   79 4   58 3   64 4
Inkers:   101 1   75 1   86 2
Pencillers:   92 0   65 2   79 1
Covers:   145 4   110 3   109 6
Colorists:   76 7   60 6   62 6
Letters:   73 0   55 0   57 0
Editors:   61 9   43 7   48 7
Asst. Editors:   32 24   27 18   35 18
Total:   659 49   493 40   540 44
                   
    April   May   June
    Males Females   Males Females   Males Females
Writers:   59 5   68 7   56 5
Inkers:   88 2   104 2   63 0
Pencillers:   78 1   91 1   64 0
Covers:   116 4   119 10   99 10
Colorists:   67 5   71 8   52 6
Letters:   54 0   60 0   50 0
Editors:   42 8   51 8   43 5
Asst. Editors:   32 10   41 14   34 10
Total:   536 35   605 50   461 36

 

The number of female writing credits on The New 52 has increased slightly of late, even making it up to 10% in May of this year.  That's still awfully low – just one women for every ten writers. In most occupations the minimum is at least 17% women (which is also really low, just not as low as DC!)  But it's heartening to see that the number is trending upward, even if painfully slowly.  I just wish I could say the same for the rest of the creative staff.

There were no female letterers at all during the entire period.  None.  Additionally, the number of female pencillers and inkers working at DC is ridiculously low. In June, for example, out of over 120 credits for penciling and inking, ZERO of them were women. Nor is this an anomaly. In January, a five-Wednesday month with more than the usual number of titles, there were zero female pencillers and only one female inker.

I inquired about this at DC's "Superman: The New 52 Era" panel at San Diego Comic-Con this year. (I would have liked to ask about it at the "New 52" panel, but it ran long and there was no time for questions. However, there was enough crossover between the panelists and titles that I felt the Superman panel was still an appropriate place to ask.) "Why," I asked the panelists about my findings, "do you think this is?"

Jim Lee gave me a typically diplomatic answer, suggesting that there had been fewer female comic fans in the past and that was starting to change, as well as stating that DC doesn't care about gender, only about talent, and that it doesn't matter what someone's gender is – if they have the skill, DC will hire them. He also downplayed the fact that there had been no female pencillers or inkers at all in June, since the numbers will tend to fluctuate from month to month (a pretty weak argument, given the numbers for the rest of the months surveyed).

I thanked Jim, once again impressed by his smooth diplomacy (seriously, he could probably work for the government as a liaison to some war-torn country if he ever wanted to give up comics), and sat down.

I am left wondering, however, if DC actually wants to change.

 

The simple fact is, if you continue doing things the way you've always done them, you're going to get the same results you've always had. It is possible, however, to change the way a company does business and, in doing so, change huge gender imbalances in that company's publications, as the story of Tin House demonstrates.

What is Tin House? Tin House is an American literary journal. Literary magazines generally publish short stories, essays, poetry, book reviews and literary criticism. Several years ago, a grass-roots organization called VIDA was established. Every year, VIDA counts the number of books and authors reviewed and published by these publications and calculates how many of them are by women. The numbers are interesting, illuminating – and often depressing.

In 2012, for example, Harpers, one of the most prominent literary magazines, had 3 female book reviewers and 28 male book reviewers – about 90 percent men to 10 percent women. They reviewed works by 11 females and 54 males, and a count of their bylines showed 17 women and 76 men – both ratios of about one woman to every five men. These imbalances are not unique to Harpers, but exist across the industry, especially in well-known journals such as The Atlantic, The New Yorker, and New Republic. Furthermore, these ratios haven't shown improvement in the past several years, despite editorial promises after the first couple of VIDA counts that they "could and should do better".

The ratios haven't changed, that is, except for a handful of publications like Tin House.

 

What made Tin House different?  Says Rob Spillman, founder and editor of Tin House, "It really isn’t rocket science. For us, the VIDA count was a spur, a call to action. Our staff is 50/50 male-female, and we thought we were gender blind. However, the numbers didn’t bear this out."

At this point, Spillman and his company could have done what so many others have done: made vague promises to do better, then thrown up their hands the following year when nothing changed and claimed that it wasn't their fault because they just didn't get enough submissions from women.

Instead, Spillman and his staff thoroughly analyzed their internal submission numbers and "…found that the unsolicited numbers are evenly split, while the solicited (agented, previous contributors, etc.) were 67/33 male to female. We found that women contributors and women we rejected with solicitations to resubmit were five times less likely to submit than their male counterparts."

Now, there are a lot of reasons why these imbalances might exist. In this context, however, it doesn't really matter why women were less likely to resubmit. Once Spillman and Tin House identified where the imbalance in their numbers was coming from, they set about changing the way they did things. What did they do?

"We basically stopped asking men, because we knew they were going to submit anyway, and at the same time made a concerted effort to re-ask women to contribute."

What was the result of this drastic change? An almost 50/50 split between male and female bylines, book reviewers, and authors reviewed overall.

But wait, isn't this sexist? Isn't soliciting only women inherently sexist?

The answer to that depends on a couple of factors. First one must consider whether the process or the result is more important. By changing their proc
ess, Tin House ended up with far more equitable results. They did not exclude any men's submissions based on their gender, but they did make more of an effort to invite women to participate.

More important, however, is the idea that perhaps the existing process by which one gets published is inherently biased toward men. Consider: Harper's Magazine launched in 1850. Their entire structure of how articles are submitted, reviewed, and solicited, was put into place over 160 years ago. It was, at the time, created by men, for men, and featured men. It's not surprising, when you think about it, that the process itself would be more comfortable for men, since that's who it was designed by and for. If women had been the ones to establish the magazine, the process for submission, review and solicitation of articles might be entirely different.

Even setting aside possible sexism by editors whereby women's submissions are dismissed as "chick-lit" or simply receive less attention and consideration than those of their male counterparts, if the process itself is easier, more comfortable, and more streamlined for men, then it makes sense that there would be a significant gender imbalance at most literary magazines – as, in fact, there is.

The solution, as Tin House discovered, is to change the process. I doubt that Tin House will retain their current model if it becomes imbalanced in other ways. I am certain that they will continue to evolve and re-invent their corporate culture and methods in order to produce a product which is both balanced and of high quality.

Speaking of quality, did the quality suffer when Tin House changed their process to target women? Did doing so cause women who were undeserving to be included in their magazine, causing the overall quality of the magazine to go down?

The short answer is "no". As one analysis put it, "…the quality of the magazine remained as high as ever; the publication received about the same number of nominations for Best American Short Stories, O. Henry awards, and the Pushcart Prize." If anything, I would suggest that changing their process to include more women probably caused their overall quality to go up, simply because their pool of writers actually became larger with the inclusion of more women, not smaller. Now they're publishing the best writers of all genders, not just the best writers of a single gender.

 

The take away from this is that, as the Amy King states on the VIDA website, "Improvements will happen with effort, not accidentally or by ignoring the glaring disparities."

If DC Comics truly wants to have a more balanced staff of creators, they can't simply continue to do the same thing they've always done and expect the situation to somehow become more equitable. If the process by which they hire new creators favors men – as the numbers strongly suggest it does – they need to change the process.

Does DC care enough about the shamefully large gender gap in their creative staff to make the effort to effect real change?  Are they willing to do more than pay lip service to the issue?  Are they ready to walk the walk, not just talk the talk? 

Only time will tell.

Kyrax2The Squeaky Wheel

Share On:
Tweet
Robot Chicken Season 6 Blu-Ray Review
Review: 'Forever Evil' #2 is packed with fun imagery and unbridled mayhem

About The Author

<a href="http://comicsbulletin.com/byline/kyrax2/" rel="tag">Kyrax2</a>
Kyrax2

Most of the time Kyrax2 is a mild-mannered bookkeeper and fan of superheroes, science fiction and fantasy. However, sometimes she becomes, "The Batgirl of San Diego", known for asking tough questions and her thoughtful commentary on a number of fannish subjects.

Related Posts

  • The Geekie Awards…”It was a really crazy idea and nobody thought it could be done.”…An Interview with Kristen Nedopak.

    Kyrax2
    July 7, 2015
  • Why I Love “My So-Called Secret Identity”

    Kyrax2
    June 30, 2014

Latest Columns

  • Revisiting the Witchblade/Fathom/Tomb Raider Crossover

    Daniel Gehen
    February 8, 2021
  • The Full Run: Usagi Yojimbo – The Wanderer’s Road Part 2

    Daniel Gehen
    December 4, 2020
  • The Full Run: Usagi Yojimbo – The Wanderer’s Road Part 1

    Daniel Gehen
    October 30, 2020
  • Comictober 2020: DRACULA MOTHERF**KER

    Daniel Gehen
    October 27, 2020
  • What Looks Good for the Week of 10/14/2020

    Daniel Gehen
    October 12, 2020
RSSTwitterFacebookgoogleplusinstagramtumblr

Comics Bulletin is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for website owners to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com, audible.com, and any other website that may be affiliated with Amazon Service LLC Associates Program. As an Amazon Associate, Comics Bulletin earns from qualifying purchases.

All content on this site (c) 2018 The Respective Copyright Holders