Reblogging for this response
Why is it that there are people out there who cannot accept a Wonder Woman who is made out of clay amidst the hopes and dreams of her mother and life is breathed into her by the Gods, yet they have no problem accepting another immaculate conception? You know, the one where the woman is a virgin and an angel comes down to her and tells her that she is going to have God’s baby? And suddenly, poof! Baby! No sex involved!
That’s believable, but Wondy’s incarnation isn’t?
I think the Virgin Birth is seen differently because Mary had a husband in Joseph, and God still fits the role “father” even if it wasn’t a typical conception! A lot of people probably consider God and Gabriel to be more active participants in the Virgin Birth than Mary herself. Whereas Hippolyta was a single mother when she created Diana, and most of the Gods who breathed life into her were female—so there’s no definitive father or father figure in the equation. When a lot of male readers say that origin for Wonder Woman isn’t relatable, I think it’s because they can’t wrap their mind around or are put off by the idea of women not needing men to have a child. You see this when conservatives go off on the “dangers” of single motherhood. Add in the feminist and queer implications of Wonder Woman’s conception and upbringing and there’s a lot of kneejerk dudebro hostility. So then Diana’s origin is considered more weird and unacceptable than being The Last Son of Krypton or whatever because it’s an actual challenge to a status quo, and the latest idea to “fix” Wonder Woman becomes giving her a dad. Bleh.
Reblogging because I need that response on my blog.