Who says porn and comics don't mix?

Right now, Comic World News has an interview with Ty Gorton regarding his online petition for separating or eliminating non-comics porn from WizardWorld conventions.

For discussion purposes, here is the petition's text:

“This is a call for a clear separation of non-comic book, pornographic booths from comic book related booths at all Comic Book Conventions.

“Comic books, as other forms of entertainment, are created for all ages. Some books are for children, others for adults, while some appeal to a wide range of age groups. The issue the undersigned of this petition are concerned with is pornography that has no relation to comic books whatsoever.

“While some adult comic books feature nudity and/or sexual content, they are still comic books first. It damages the credibility and affects potential sales of comic book creators when their booths are positioned directly alongside pornographic booths that have no basis in comic books.

“In terms of the comic book industry as a whole, the casual mixing of non-comic book based pornography with comic book related booths causes widespread harm to creators. When families can no longer walk the aisles of a Comic Book Convention without worrying about coming face to face with non-comic book based pornography, it detracts from the entire industry, and makes it that much more difficult to gain momentum.

“The undersigned call for a clear separation of non-comic book based pornography booths from comic book related booths. Non-comic book based pornography should be located in a separate section that is clearly marked with warnings and easily avoidable by those people that do not want to come in contact with non-comic book based pornography.”

It is important to note that they are not asking for no porn at conventions--they just want a clear separation (that is something many of the signees failed to pick up on, or something they'd like to see added in). There is a part of me that feels that Gorton and some of those signing the petition have their hearts in the right place. Personally, I don't like the presence of porn stars at comics conventions. Not for any moral reason, really--it just kind of makes me sad. At the Pittsburgh show a few years ago, Myatt Murphy and I were talking about the porn chick a few booths down from his. I think her claim to fame was an appearance in Penthouse in the late '80s/early '90s. I'm sure those present at the WizardWorld shows are more current or successful in pornography, but there was something about that image that stuck with me: a woman selling pictures of herself that no longer resembled her to a guy for whom she was still way out of his league.

However, I can't bring myself to sign it. On the most simple level, I have no right to sign a WizardWorld focused petition, as I've never been to one, nor do I plan to in the near future--it would be disingenuous for me to do so. Oddly, it's at the small press shows--where comics-related porn is prevelant--that one is least likely to find pornography unrelated to comics.

I won't go into a "kids don't read comics, so why bother?" rant, because kids do read comics (although I would say that they probably don't read the comics some of the petition signees would want them to read, and, in some cases, they read comics that might shock some of the signees--I'm thinking specifically of certain manga titles here, and not in a pejorative way, as I tend to think kids--depending on the age and maturity level--are more capable of handling things than adults give them credit for). I also won't mention the questionable reasoning behind separating comics porn and non-comics porn--if I were concerned about parental outrage or "damag[ing] the credibility" of the creators present, I'd be more worried about people coming into contact with comics with explicit sex scenes if they haven't read the metric ton of "Bam! Socko! Pow! Comics aren't for kids anymore" slugs in newspapers across the country.

The first point I'd quibble on is the value of an online petition. Such petitions rarely carry any weight, due to the difficulty of verifying signatures. "Freddie" (187) has signed the petition, but who is Freddie? I also have the sneaking suspicion that "John Byrne" and "John Byrne, Jr." (162) is not who they say they are.

Secondly, read some of the comments signees have included:

• "JAM": A good baseball bat would help stop these xssholes!
• Dave H: Porn chicks make me wanna touch myself and the next thing I know Im looking at BENDIS!
• "John Byrne": No more porn stars at cons. Unless they're blond latinas.

To Gorton's credit, some lines have been removed already. But judging by some of those remaining, I shudder to think at what those voided lines said. These kinds of comments lessen the gravity of some of the more well-reasoned and cogent points, such as these three:

• Michael Pullmann: Nothing against porn, or even a small presence of adult stars at conventions, but comics stores have specific adult-only sections, so why not comic cons?
• Kathleen Webb: Speaking as an Archie Comics creator, what place does porn have next to work I might create? Time to remove it so parents can feel comfortable bringing their kids to the conventions.
• Lisa Lanier: I don't mind them being at the conventions, just as long as they're in a separate location exclusively for them. I think the parents who do not wish for their children to see them (or anyone who doesn't wish to) need to be able to have the choice and not stumble upon them when they're wanting to visit with various artists/creators of comics. It's distracting, and inappropriate, I feel, to have them located with everyone else.

It's a shame that points like these can be missed through the "get it the hell out of there" eruptions.

Even though I disagree with the scope of the petition, here's my suggestion for future attempts: instead of doing an on-line petition, do a group mailing. Start with a form letter, and encourage people to share actual experiences in addition to the main body of the text. This is a tactic employed by the Parents Television Council (PTC)--in fact, most of the complaints the FCC receives comes from this type of thing. While I don't agree with that group, either, their methodology has had some impact on broadcast television.

Honestly, when I'm at a show like the Pittsburgh Comicon (the only show I attend that has a comparable audience demographic and booth content to the Wizard shows), I tend to be more suprised by the "booth babes" and the attendees wearing costumes. In the interview, Gorton said:

Located on the 2nd or 3rd aisle of Artist’s Alley was a pornographic booth. The material was not comic book related. The young woman featured in the pornography also ran the booth, and to say her clothes were provocative would be an embarrassing understatement.

I fail to see how this differs from the booth babes that are standard at the more mainstream comics conventions (who, often, are wearing less clothing than the porn stars). In fact, I find the booth babes more worrisome than the pornography as it has nothing to do with the comics themselves (part of the language of the petition), but is used to draw attention to the comics. Where, exactly is the difference? Even more of a mixed message: the new publisher of Gorton's Runes of Ragnan, Silent Devil Productions, has used booth babes in the past (as I understand it), and has a picture section on their website of their mascot posing with booth babes (as well as other women--in all honesty, I don't know which are which).

I hate making slippery slope arguments--it's just bad reasoning. While my gut reaction tells me, "stop them! They'll come for Love & Rockets next--don't listen to that 'non-comics porn only' bit--it's a trap," my head is warning caution. However, some of the less vitriolic comments did make me feel like a slalom skier, so I'll share those as well:

• Ismael Cueva: Nice to look at, but there were kids around. Not to mention the perverts. Distracts attention away from the creators.

I'd wager that some of the comics creators present at the show in question were selling things appealing to the same "perverts." Fan service isn't limited to manga alone.

• Steve Vernon: Comics are for kids. That's the market base you're going to draw your future collectors and/or customers from. Don't muddy the water by mingling porn and comic conventions. Draw a line.

This comment, and others like it, are enough to give any fan of art- and alt-comics pause. It's the kind of reasoning that gets quality books like Nick Bertozzi's The Salon labelled as "smut" (well, that, and idiotic retailers). Comics, as Dave Lewis pointed out in that column I linked to a few days ago, are a medium. And, while broadcast television provides Disney's Kim Possible, it also provides Law And Order: SVU, a show definitely not for kids. In fact, this may be the one thing I can agree with the defenders of shit comics like Identity Crisis--while I'm content to say that superhero comics, as a genre, tend to work best when created with kids in mind, I wouldn't say that they should only be created for kids (and, again, my complaint with Identity Crisis had nothing to do with tone or content, but with the fac that it was a shitty comic). Extending that argument across the spectrum of comics publishing, and "comics are for kids" arguments sound like little else than hot air from people who want to control the state of all entertainment in the United States.

• Jim Clark: Having adult stars grouped in with comic creators devalues the medium.

Shit, 75% of the comics published devalue the medium.

Sorry. I couldn't resist.

• Mike Thompson: Pornography has no business in places where kids can have access. I'd be embarrassed taking my wife to a convention if this stuff is present.

For non-comics-related purposes, this would also negate: Barnes & Noble, many gas stations and convenience stores, and other venues. I would think that the responsibility to keep pornography out of the hands of children rests with the parent first and foremost.

• John Rauch: What's the point? Didn't comics used to be kid friendly?

Some still are.

• Gregory Huber: I am a parent who loves comics, and would like to get my young daughter to love them as well. But there's no way I can take her to a convention with all of the half-naked women and graphic imagery. Meeting a creator is one of the most special times to a young fan. Let's make it possible for that to happen to her and make a new life-long reader.

Ahem.

Sorry. I must have had something stuck in my abdo--I mean, throat.

• "Locelaro": Wizard, as a magazine is little more than a tabloid that victimizes the fine art of comics. Everything they do seems to cheapen comics and devalue the art. Don't buy their rag!

Ok. I agree with him. Moving on, though... As much fun as I have bashing Wizard on occaision, it may not be fair to look at this petition as an indicator of negligence on their part. One respondent, Stephan Nilson, shared the following experience on the petition:

Wizard has been good about separating the booths at the show when notified of the problem. They moved us in LA when we showed them the problems we were having because we were next to pronographic material.

Perhaps if more people actively tackled the subject while at the show, there wouldn't be as much of a need to hastily craft an online petition.

Another complaint I've heard related to the presence of non-comics porn at conventions, succinctly stated in the petition comments:

• Ted: this is a good idea, too many indy artists suffer bad sales when put beside the porn people.

This may or may not be true. As anyone who regularly reads this blog would guess, I often lament the fact that indie comics don't sell better. However, I think there's a chance that, in some cases, blaming the porn presence may be a way of passing the buck--it's much easier for a creator with a sensitive ego to think that some malicious outside force is preventing his/her comic from achieving massive popularity due to outside factors, rather than coming to terms with the idea that people just don't like or "get" his/her work.

Over at The Great Curve, CWN E-I-C Michael May shares why he signed the petition:

I support it because it's another example of how something cool and comics related is becoming diluted by something else. Conventions'll stick Kenny Baker and Lou Ferrigno off in their own section of the show, but Chanel Ryan and Taylor Wane get to peddle their wares right next to Mike Oeming and Angel Medina. Don't miss my point. I wouldn't want Dr. Phil setting up shop next to Tim Vigil either. Or a political party. Or even Gil Gerard.

At the same time, WizardWorld conventions will highly publicize the appearance of more visible (to today's audiences) stars, such as Jessica Biel, Allison Mack, and Thomas Jane when they are attending, and I don't think (but, I should admit, I don't know for certain) that they shove these stars off to some back corner or Artist Alley section. Furthermore, would a strictly-comics convention be enough to draw a sizeable audience? Take the San Diego Comic Con, for example. I get Variety and other entertainment-focused periodicals for work, and I followed the coverage of SDCC. While some attention was given to comics-as-proof-of-concept, comics-as-their-own-thing, and Stan Lee, a big portion of the focus was on comics-related movies and celebrity appearances. Also, I don't know how SDCC advertises in California, but if they do TV and radio spots, and mainstream print advertising, I'm sure the exhibiting celebrities are given ample attention in the hype.

I don't mean to piss on the idea behind it as much as it may seem. There are quite a few creators who've signed that I respect and/or like (Rafer Roberts, Dave Roman, Christine Norrie, Trisha L. Sebastian and Richard Starkings, to name a few at random). Separating porn dealers and/or stars into their own section isn't a bad idea--there are just probably better ways to go about it.

As well-intentioned as the petition may be, I just can't sign it. I won't try to stop you if you feel differently.

But I may start an online petition asking you not to do it.