Scribbles and Ramblings

contextisfortheweak:

So, what is this thing?
It’s cheesecake, as is evident on the cover. It’s nasty-violent, which isn’t evident on the cover, but the “Teen+” is a license to kill, I guess. It’s sex in the form of a blatant sex scene - “Teen +” strikes again.
I guess that’s what DC, Winick and March were going for. If so, they accomplished it well. Luckily for Winick, basic story-crafting and wordsmithing skills were not required.
A publisher can sell publications featuring T&A, violence and sex. A publisher can make the protagonist a thief, a self-appointed executioner and abusively, sexually aggressive. It’s up to them.
If you find any or all of the above offensive or of no interest, don’t buy Catwoman. What’s the alternative? Storm DC with torches and pitchforks?
If DC Comics thinks this is a good way to go, that it serves their goals, let them.
But, jeez, Louise, did they have to drag Batman into it?

(Commentary on Catwoman #1 by Jim Shooter, excerpted from his blog. Click on the source link to read further.)