Skip to content


March 6, 2010

Just so you all know, I haven’t dropped off the face of the earth, but my laptop HAS died, so there will be a continuation of my lack of involvement until I get it mended. Sorry. On the other hand, the others have been doing some fab work, including posting to the blog 🙂 Thanks girls.

We’re also getting noticed by some people, and having lots of suggestions made. One of the questions asked was do we only feature living people? My personal view on this is that we ought to feature 99% living people, because the idea behind the site is to show that women ARE active, not that they WERE. However, perhaps there is an argument to be made for including people like Rosalind Franklin and MAry Shelley (mother of horror AND sci-fi, and often overlooked in favour of men).

Thoughts, people?


Girl Comics #1

March 5, 2010
Girl Comics 1 cover

Girl Comics #1

On the face of it, really, Marvel is going a Good Thing. Showcasing the talents of a range of female creator in a three-part series as part of what looks like an on going “Women of Marvel” theme for the year – the solicits page show further character-driven titles starring female characters by female creators. Which is why I’m writing about it here, of course – because it showcases the women working in a persistently male dominated field.

Now, I don’t read Marvel, but I know who’s-who in that universe, and I picked this up for very much the reason I imagine I was supposed to pick it up – because it was created by an all-women writing, art and editorical team, and I wanted to support female creators.

Which is the problem with the concept of Girl Comics. It’s not marketed on the thing that most people buy comics for: the stories and characters within. It’s not a showcase of Marvel’s wealth of female characters, but on its creators, and correct me if I’m wrong (please, do) but most people buy comics for the content. Buying this comic (as I did) because of the one thing all creators sends the message that female and artists can only be judged on their gender, and not their ability. And because of the way the comic was marketed, that’s all any sales figures are going to imply.

Which is a shame, because there’s a lot of quality content in this first issue. Amanda Connor’s cover, of course, is superlative, and the features on two legendary Marvel team members – Flo Steinberg and Marie Severin – are worth a
read. The stories themselves are hit and miss, which you’d expect in an anthology, even if for our money these days we’d rather have £2.50’s worth of all-quality comic.

Worth a mention are “A Brief Rendezvous” – a Punisher story on which both the writing (d’Orazio) and the art (Cook and Brietweiser) are great, Lucy Knisley’s adorable Doc Oct cartoon and Robin Furth and Agnes Garbowska’s ultra-charming tale of the Richards children. The other stories aren’t bad at all, but limited by length. Really, we’re so used these days to trade-length stories that last four to six issues, that stand alone issues seem short enough. Anything told in two to eight pages like these stories are going to be simple by neccessity, and once you accept that these are the sequential art equivalent of drabbles, it’s definitely an enjoyable read.

After last year’s Wednesday Comics, and as someone who misses the multiple-story format of the old Detective and Action Comics, I’d love to see more anthology titles like this, both women-only and in general. Let’s hope the sales figures are enough that this carries on, because a devoted DC girl like myself needs a little Marvel for variety.

Thank You Innerbrat and Stacey, and a Question

March 2, 2010

But particularly Innerbrat for doing all that work while I was out getting graded at karate and then getting a bit merry after passing my belt…

But thanks are due to both of you for volunteering to help with this. We now have some actual content! Yay!

The Question is this: are we aiming to be encyclopaedic here, or are we going to enforce some kind of quality criterion? I can see plus and minus arguments to both, but am leaning towards encyclopaedic myself even though it probably means more work… Comments?

Setting up

March 1, 2010

OK, I think we have the basic shape of the site now. Obviously, most of the content is going to be as a page with “index” as the parent. I was thinking of categories such as “film” “fiction writers” “music” “science” “sport” etc, and then having sub pages with sub categories under each one. So, for example, it would go index>sport>rugby and then on the rugby page would be a list including things like the women’s RFU and stuff.

I think that each entry should be a bold name, and  links to website, twitter, facebook, whatever the person/group has on one line, and then a brief description on the next two or three lines. Does this seem reasonable?

Also, does anyone want to join in?

Hello world!

February 28, 2010

Whisper it quietly because the world doesn’t want to hear: women exist. They exist in all sorts of sectors that women are not supposed to exist. The purpose of this site is to document and link to women who work in areas which conventional wisdom would have it they do not: whether that be in writing horror fiction or political analysis or any other field which we are told is male-dominated.

Watch this space to see how many of us there really are…