That just makes me sad.

I'm sorry; there are no other words. Sure, she's a very pretty woman, but there are a lot of very pretty women out there. I'd never seen or heard of Tiffany Fallon before today, so I'm at a disadvantage when it comes to figuring out what the hell makes her so special.

I should add that by "special", I don't mean "notable to the Playboy editors", but rather "the least bit remarkable like Lynda Carter is remarkable".

Ooooh noooooooo! $10 says that somewhere inside she says that being sexy/objectified is powerful.

The Playboy cover is just more of the same old, same old--what do you expect from them? If anything, a naked Wonder Woman, who was an Amazon, is better than a model in a bunny suit, right? Unless you're offended that Playboy is appropriating what is often thought of as a feminist symbol. Just keep in mind that Wonder Woman wasn't designed as a feminist symbol, she was designed to be titillating to boys and young men. It's why her suit is so small.

And there are some strong female characters on TV right now, although they mostly seem to be found in science fiction shows. The Bionic Woman was strong even before she got her "upgrades." I have a serious crush on Starbuck of Battlestar Galactica--the actress who plays Starbuck also has a recurring role on The Bionic Woman as her nemesis. There are strong female characters on Heroes & Lost, and we're about to get a new show about Sarah Connor of the Terminator series. I'm not a big fan of cop shows, but there's more than a few strong female characters on those. I'm sure others can come up with more shows.

Of course, there's a still a very long way to go--but there isn't a complete dearth of strong female characters on TV today.

yes of course, the world needs a "manufactured" beauty, because after all the real women... well we dont have any who are doing significant things.. like running for president, or being secretary of state or being lawyers and scientists and single mothers and stuff- oh those they do ot count at all, they are hardly real.. real women pander to a male definition of "super"....

I AM SO ANGRY IT HURTS

I'm sorry for this, I really am, but I can't resist: now we know the people who actually read those articles: feminists!

*sigh* now that I've gotten that out of my system...

None of the shows they mention in that snippet is particularly worthwhile -- and since when is attending an award show "honing TV skills" anyway? Beyond that, I agree that the selection of strong female characters on television is desperately lacking. I probably end up yelling "OH COME ON!" at the screen about 30% of the shows I watch; the non-annoying ones tend to be stuff like Iron Chef or Nova. Even female characters that I respect are constantly given mind-numbingly stupid moments.

@BluePencils -- I've also noticed strong characters more consistently in science fiction... amusing given that classic science fiction stories are often very mysogynistic!

She doesn't sound very "wonder"-ful to me.

As somebody who grew up watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer religiously, I can say that there are actually some very strong female role models on TV.

However, as somebody already noted they often seem to be restricted to Sci-Fi and other "genre" shows. Even Veronica Mars would probably fit that category, although it was a straight teen-detective series.

Not that that's a bad thing. Some of the best writers and directors in television work on those types of shows. But they don't get the same audience as your standard TV dramas.

"Just keep in mind that Wonder Woman wasn't designed as a feminist symbol, she was designed to be titillating to boys and young men. It's why her suit is so small."

You've got a point about the suit, but that's not really true.

The guy who created Wonder Woman was a psychologist and feminist theorist who worked as an educational consultant to DC comics. He wanted to make a character who would serve as "psychological propaganda for the new type of woman who should, I believe, rule the world,"

Actually, Kate, William Moulton Marston DID design Wonder Woman as a feminist icon. Specifically, to 'indoctrinate young men to accept female domination'.

Marston was kind of a perv.

Many shows seem to start off with strong female characters, and then they don't seem to know what to do with them so they make their character-development all about relationships with men. I'v ebeen frustrated over and over with TV shows that seem to have some actual quality to them, but they just don't know how to treat women like human beings.

The crime shows tend to be an exception because they don't focus much on character's personal lives and development. I think Olivia on Law and Order: SVU is a good example (not that the show is at all free from sexism). Women on those shows are more often allowed to be competent, professional and not just props for the men.

Oooh speaking of awesome women on tv, I also loove olivia from SVU!! Although, the woman who really has my heart is Gillian Anderson as Scully from The X-files.

She's strong, willful, determined, self-sustaining, doesn't need a man, tough, beautiful in a down to earth way, usually fully clothed, and a scientist.

Ps. I despise playboy. And I don't think it matters what outfit the cover girl has on. It's all disgusting and not at all empowering. How is it empowering to be objectified? Seriously?

I don't want to sound too blase, but this is _Playboy_ we're talking about here. What they type, what their models "say", doesn't mean anything. It's pure titillation (sorry about the pun). The "world I want my daughters to grow up in" feminist in me is more offended by what is implied by the headline above the masthead - "Red-Hot and Spicy: The Women of Hooters".

As for the question, "Where have all the Wonder Women gone?"; "Dr Quinn; Medicine Woman", "Murphy Brown", even "Roseanne". Each of these TV shows put a strong, thoughtful (or thought provoking) woman front and center.

My money for "Best Feminist TV Show" would be "Roseanne", actually, because it talked about class / race / gender in really subversive ways.

speaking of strong female characters on tv today, dr. temperance brennan of "bones" is a great example. i don't watch my television, but i enjoy that show. it's one part x-files, one part CSI. y'all should check it out.

There are strong female characters on Heroes

4srs? Who? Granted I haven't watched all of this season, as it's kinda sucked - but most of the women seem to me to be depicted either as manipulative, cruel, or are simply used to further the plot.

I miss Xena. I know the costumes were problematic - but *sigh* I miss that show.

For the younger set (or the terminally immature like myself) Kim Possible was pretty good until they tripped at the finish line with that god-awful finale:

"For the finale, let's have Ron finally step up!"

"But he stepped up in the second episode to ever air, and has done so regularly ever since. Since the theme of the episode is the direction of their relationship after high school, wouldn't it be better to show them working as a team?"

"Never mind all that. This sequence I have in mind for the Mystic Monkey Power is soooo cooool."

"But that sequence involves rendering Kim a helpless damsel in distress in the grand finale of her own show! A show we've marketed heavily on its girl power merits!"

"So what's your point?"

Yes, I'm still bitter.

I miss Xena, too. Except for the last two seasons when it became Xena: Sex Object and Xena: Are they or aren't they... We're too cowardly to answer.

There are so many negative comments to this posting that I feel like I should contribute- I think the woman on this cover looks incredibly sexy. Yes, Playboy's existence does make me nauseous and yes I do think playboy halloween costumes are revolting. But out of its context I think this picture is really hot. Isn't making oneself beautiful and visually appealing part of feminism too?

Wouldn't the modern-day Lynda Carter be...Lynda Carter? She's still alive!

You know, people laughing about the idea of reading the articles - people do! It is a separate entertainment in and of itself.

Can't say I've ever read a Playboy but I quite like Penthouse. The pictures are very seldom arousing as they're kind of boring but they have some great journalism in there at times. The theory basically being that they're a mainstream publication that is allowed to be politically out there because it's porn anyway so who's going to object?

I used to read FHM for years because I found the articles amusing and the women sexy. In the though the women got more airbrushed and the writing got more rote and less clever.

But I don't necessarily think this kind of media is always bad.

"Is this really the face of today's Wonder Woman?"

Is it really her face that you're worried about? :)

It always cracks me up when people say that Playboy is the "classy" titty rag. So no spread eagle = classy? Makes just about as much sense as calling a nekkid, surgery-sculpted reality show wannabe a "champion of truth and justice".

"However, as somebody already noted they often seem to be restricted to Sci-Fi and other 'genre' shows. Even Veronica Mars would probably fit that category, although it was a straight teen-detective series."

Hey, mystery is a genre too. ;)

"Isn't making oneself beautiful and visually appealing part of feminism too?"

If it's an *option* instead of a *requirement,* then yes. Pushing someone to make herself "prettier" isn't feminist, and allowing someone to make herself "prettier" (instead of punishing her for dishonoring the family if and when she does that) is feminist.

Alright that one is hitting below the belt. Leave the heroins alone for pete's sake. I feel it is very imappropriate to degrade the wonderwoman image like that. I get that wonderwomen and all superheroins are sexy, but the painted on costume is just wrong.

I don't have a problem with playboy normally, but there are limits.

When I think Wonder Woman I think Kids WB. I'll admit it, I still watch the cartoon. Wonder Woman, coming from the remote Island of Themyscira, is able to raise interesting ideas as an outsider looking in.

*Woman is testing make-up at the counter*
Wonder Woman: Why would a woman want to cover up her natural beauty?
Woman at the counter: Easy for you to say, Ms. Cheekbones.

When I think Womder Woman, I think TV14, not TVG or TVMA.

So, in essence, that is why I think that Fallon posing for Playboy will actually make the character stronger, not weaker. The only difference from the original Wonder Woman (Lynda Carter) and this one is just that. Wonder Woman has been dressed in the same objectifying attire since the series began in the 1970s.

Sorry, Jovan1984, I don't follow your logic. How will Fallon's posing signifying Wonder Woman for Playboy make the Wonder Woman image stronger?

Unlike the Wonder Woman in comics and television, Fallon's Wonder Woman is mute. The purpose of the cover image is to titilate and intrigue, with no expression or dialogue (as there is in the comics and TV series) to provide the character any sort of depth. The cover image is there as an empty shell meant to sell issues and make Hugh Hefner even richer.

Therefore, I disagree with your statement, "that is why I think that Fallon posing for Playboy will actually make the character stronger, not weaker". I think that at best Fallon's Wonder Woman inspired pictures will have a neutral effect on the perception of the character with those persons in Playboy's demographic. It's more likely that the images will have a negative effect, reaffirming the viewpoint that female comics characters are there just for men and that women who get upset at certain authors' treatment of these characters are just silly girls reading content that's not meant to be accessible to them. It may not seem like much, but this viewpoint is damaging, and unfortunately it's quite prevalent in comics now.

Also, the Wonder Woman series began in the 1940s, not the 1970s. If you only meant the television series, perhaps you might specify next time.

Reb, I was talking about the television series.

Either way -- comics or Playboy -- I'm sorry, but Wonder Woman wasn't meant for the under-14 crowd.

Oh! I think I understand what you mean now. I still disagree that Fallon's photos will do anything good for the character's image, but the statement "When I think Womder Woman, I think TV14, not TVG or TVMA" makes a lot more sense to me.

Wow. That is all I can say. I have always been so proud of Lynda Carter for being such a remarkable Hispanic woman. She has always been one of my role models and when I see women doing extraordinary things, I tend to nickname them "wonder woman". Playboy just makes me so very sad. I respect Tiffany's right to do what she pleases with her body but to compare herself to someone who was so WONDERful is just plain sad. And yes, I realize wonder woman's outfit is sexy and not exactly a feminist statement but at least she proved she could be powerful in more than the bedroom. Not that it should be the best statement we could hope for, but I think the public had to be slowly introduced to equality. Adults are like small children, you need to slowly make them realize the difference between right and wrong, scolding is just not enough.

Y'know, I actually find the use of Wonder Woman on the cover way, way, way, more offensive than the plain ol' bunny images. The way I see it, the association of rabbits with women and women with sex toys is fucked up, weird as shit, and a little crazy. But they are just rabbits.

To bring down Wonder Woman, on the other hand, to the level of "regular" women (not that there's anything wrong with us, and not that we shouldn't strive to be crazy powerful, but...) *and then* downgrade women into sex objects is...nauseating, infuriating, and ultimeatly unbelievably despressing. It's the exact opposite of reclaiming a name or a symbol; it's having something stolen from us and then used against us. Fuck.

Y'know, I actually find the use of Wonder Woman on the cover way, way, way, more offensive than the plain ol' bunny images. The way I see it, the association of rabbits with women and women with sex toys is fucked up, weird as shit, and a little crazy. But they are just rabbits.

To bring down Wonder Woman, on the other hand, to the level of "regular" women (not that there's anything wrong with us, and not that we shouldn't strive to be crazy powerful, but...) *and then* downgrade women into sex objects is...nauseating, infuriating, and ultimeatly unbelievably despressing. It's the exact opposite of reclaiming a name or a symbol; it's having something stolen from us and then used against us. Fuck.

Y'know, I actually find the use of Wonder Woman on the cover way, way, way, more offensive than the plain ol' bunny images. The way I see it, the association of rabbits with women and women with sex toys is fucked up, weird as shit, and a little crazy. But they are just rabbits.

To bring down Wonder Woman, on the other hand, to the level of "regular" women (not that there's anything wrong with us, and not that we shouldn't strive to be crazy powerful, but...) *and then* downgrade women into sex objects is...nauseating, infuriating, and ultimeatly unbelievably despressing. It's the exact opposite of reclaiming a name or a symbol; it's having something stolen from us and then used against us. Fuck.

Whoa triple posting. Very sorry.

Disgusting. She wouldn't have even gotten any of those TV jobs if she weren't conventionally attractive and pornified, which seems to be her only talent anyway. I would think a true Wonder Woman would have something to show for her existence besides being SUPAR HAWT AND SECKSAY.

As noted above the genre shows have some good kick-ass women in it (and thanks for remembering the Justice League toons--the Legion of Super-Heroes toon has some too).

That's still no excuse for this kind of bilge, though I'm not sure if it's the sexism or the vapidity (Celebrity Apprentice and Simple Life add up to Amazon heroics?).

Lynda Carter's Hispanic? I had no idea. Out of curiosity, did anyone see her cameo as the principal in Sky High?

And yes, despite the kinkiness of some of Marston's thinking, it was definitely geared for small kids. Nobody was publishing comics for adults back in the Golden Age (though it's true lots of GIs wound up depending on them for a quick read). And some of the sentiments are startling for the time ("Learn to depend on yourself, then you won't need a man around.").

NO, feminism is NOT about making oneself beautiful and attractive. Not at all. No no no. Where did you get that from?

Some men here say that they don't find Playboy problematic. You don't find it sexist and degrading to women? Really? You don't have a problem with women being portrayed as fuck sticks? Fuck holes? Really? No problem with that? Then what the HELL are you doing on a feminist website? Seriously. If you really think Playboy is different than "those other porno mags" you need to think harder. And pay attention.

Check out this site for some really awesome Playboy ads. Not disturbing at all, no way!

http://www.oneangrygirl.net/wackyrape.html

And also, men coming on to a feminist website and talking about what kind of porn they like- NOT OK. That is fucking sick, really. Talking about reading Penthouse? You need to check your male privilege and do some reading and learning about porn and how YOU contribute to the oppression of women.