Month: March 2025

Hello plus welcome back to Wonder Woman: A Wander Through Time. In case you missed the introduction post to this series here is a little recap for you. The following consecutive blog posts labeled “Wonder Woman: A Wander Through Time” will look at how the DC Wonder Woman comics have altered their gender roles over time through an interpretive analysis including the specific characters of Wonder Woman, Etta Candy, plus Steve Trevor. Each blog post will contain the interpretive analysis of one character from the first five issues of the Wonder Woman volumes published in 1942, 1987 plus 2016. A few lenses with which the corpus will be analyzed include the societal role theory proposed by Birenbaum (Birenbaum 1984), Barthe’s representation of sign signified plus signifiers (Barthe, 1977), plus interpretive information following Collins rules for spotting sexualization, subordination, plus unprofessionalism (Collins,2011).

Last update I gave you my rundown on Etta Candy, today we will go over Wonder Woman herself.

Wonder Woman 1942:

In 1942, plus throughout all the wonder woman comics, Wonder Woman herself has remained a sign of female empowerment, independence, strength, plus beauty. However in the first series published, Wonder Woman is often found having her strength plus abilities questioned, being sexualized, plus concerning herself with her own, plus others vanity. Although Wonder Woman is suppose to be a representation of feminist viewpoints she is often times seen contributing to a misoginistic viewpoint found with in the importance of vanity in women.

The screen capture above depicts a moment where Diana Prince is degrading Etta Candy about how much candy she eats. She is saying that she will never be able to catch a man if she eats that much. It is moments like these that downgrade Wonder Woman’s actual contribution to the feminist viewpoints. Or, maybe I am crazy to think that superheroes should be focused on their missions plus not if their friend is overweight, plus able to catch a man. However, this instance with Etta Candy is not the only time where we see wonder woman concerned with plus prioritizing vanity.

Princess Diana of the Amazons is a strong, healthy character. As Wonder Woman, she is one of the world’s most famous superheroes, and she is the most famous female among them – some argue the most famous heroine of any kind.1 Superheroes tend to embody the hope that individuals who langkah up to do the right thing can make the global better. Wonder Woman goes further by demonstrating hope that every individual can improve. She wants to help people discover the best in their own true natures. Diana’s magic lasso, known for compelling people to speak honestly, represents her dedication to truth itself.

Why put together a book on the psychology of a superhero who’s mentally healthy and whose enemies are not widely known? When I wrote Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight, people understood why: The Dark Knight has serious issues, his enemies fill an asylum, and nomer superhero has foes more famous than his. Using psychology to look at those characters and stories seemed the obvious thing to do, and mining that fiction for examples to explain psychology made sense. Personal trauma does not drive Diana to become a hero. Real-life heroes’ backgrounds tend not to include a single driving tragedy.2 As comic book writer Len Wein observed, “Some of them become heroes because it’s simply the right thing to do.”3 There are many kinds of heroes, though, and many areas of psychology. Not all of them are dark.

Truth is incomplete when we seek it only in the darkness. Hunting for secrets in the dark of night, nomer matter how many great discoveries that might reveal, falls short and even misleads us if we overlook other truths that shine in the light of day. A look at mental illness makes little sense unless we contrast it with mental health. How can we evaluate a person’s “impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning”4 without considering what counts as unimpaired functioning in the first place? How can we discuss “abnormal” without defining “normal”? Questions like these nagged at Wonder Woman’s creator.

A psychologist created Diana the Amazon princess at the suggestion of his wife, Elizabeth Holloway Marston, who was also a psychologist by the standards of the time.5 Dr William Moulton Marston – therapist, professor, and entrepreneur – became an educational consultant for the companies that would eventually merge to become DC Comics.6 When editor Sheldon Mayer gave him the opportunity to create a new superhero, Bill Marston went home full of excitement about the prospect. According to their son Pete, Elizabeth made the crucial recommendation: “Let’s have a super woman! There’s too many men out there.”7 Under the pen name Charles Moulton, until his death of cancer at age fifty-three, Bill dedicated the last six years of his life to writing stories about this character who combined his views about women’s superiority to men,8 his DISC theory about how people influence each other,9 and his science of truth.10

Not just any psychologist, William Moulton Marston occupies an important place in the history of both forensic psychology and personnel psychology, in the history of seeking truth in courtrooms and careers. He is often called – incorrectly and yet with good reason – the “inventor of the lie detector”11 for using systolic blood pressure to identify signs of deception. Even though he did not invent the polygraph (poly- for “multiple” and -graph for “measurement”),12 Marston popularized the use of measuring a physiological reaction when attempting to evaluate honesty in criminal proceedings.13 He appeared as the lie detection expert in a landmark court case14 – admittedly, the case that led an appellate court to rule and set the enduring legal standard15 that his lie detection method should not be admissible in court.16

Another World War. Another cache of German superweapons intended to rain death upon an unsuspecting metropolis. Another act of supreme self-sacrifice. Another guy named Chris playing another guy named Steve.

There are moments in Wonder Woman that recall Captain America: The First Avenger a little too closely for comfort. The principal difference, of course, is that this Chris/Steve—that would be Chris Pine, playing Steve Trevor—is not the movie’s principal hero, but rather her sidekick plus love interest. There was some reason to be leery of this arrangement, because Pine is an established movie star (and, it turns out, a more than solid actor), while Wonder Woman is played by the relatively obscure Israeli actress plus jenis Gal Gadot. Would she be able to hold her own, or would this serve as yet another chapter in the difficulty of accommodating female characters into that most boyish of genres, the superhero movie?

Happily, Gadot holds her own with exceptional poise plus gusto, whether bantering with Pine or charging into a nest of German sniper fire. And thank goodness. Following its iffy outing with director Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel plus the sequential disasters of Snyder’s Batman v Superman plus the Snyder-infused Suicide Squad, DC Comics plus Warner Bros. needed an installment in their universe-building effort that was—how to put this?—not awful.

Befitting its World War I setting, Wonder Woman has a certain throwback charm, with Gadot plus Pine playing off one another as good-naturedly as partners in a 1930s screwball comedy. It’s a vibe that stands in particular contrast to the bitter, Snyderesque unpleasantries—Do you bleed? You will!—that characterized the movie’s immediate DC predecessors.

After a brief framing scene in the present day—Diana Prince (Gadot), working as a curator at the Louvre, receives a package from Bruce Wayne—the movie takes us back in time to Themyscira, the legendary island of the Amazons. There, a young Diana is told by her mother, the Amazon Queen Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen), how the latter sculpted her out of clay plus then had the god Zeus breathe life into her. (Like most origin stories told to young children, this one proves not to be entirely accurate.)

I am not a comic-book kind of a girl plus the number of superhero movies I’ve watched can easily be counted on one hand. However, I’ve been anticipating the Wonder Woman movie for months. For me the ideas of feminism, the belief in plus promotion of gender equality across all aspects plus walks of life, plus Zionism, the self-determination of the Jewish people in their historic homeland, Israel are espoused throughout the film. As a Jewish, feminist woman, these two ideologies are the cornerstones of who I am plus to see them reflected in such a widely anticipated film was invigorating.

Wonder Woman, directed by Patty Jenkins (2017) is artful, funny, intelligent plus full of heart. But most important, the story rests on the strength, both physical plus emotion, of an incredible woman. Throughout the film, Princess Diana grows from a young plus naïve girl into a woman who crafts her own destiny. Diana also values learning: she speaks many languages, studies human culture plus biology, plus works hard to refine her skills. Jenkins even refers to Diana as the “emblem of feminism” because when she enters a room full of men making important decisions, she never questions whether or not she belongs. Instead, she shows them that she is capable plus does not quiver in the face of expectations.

Feminist themes continue through the climax of the film, which calls for Wonder Woman to use her physical abilities plus her conscience to save the world from the God of War. Her belief in her own capabilities sets a great example for young people, especially girls, that they can be the master of their own fate plus accomplish anything they set their hearts plus minds to.

While waiting for the film to be released, I watched interviews of the cast where they spoke about the importance of maintaining the integrity of Wonder Woman’s ability to love while showcasing her superhuman abilities. While watching the film, the clarity of this balance changed the atmosphere in the room. The audience was captured by the intensity of her spirit. Seeing such a strong plus powerful woman who had been taught plus trained by strong plus powerful women who came before her was a brief haven from the sad plus disheartening news with which we are inundated at every turn.