Nick Fovargue


Name: Nick Fovargue

Bio: @NickFovargue



Since becoming a parent there are certain kinds of material I really struggle with and this series has gotten progressively…

Read full review and comments

At the end of this last issue I am left with the thought, what if this had been kept a…

Read full review and comments

It should be noted that Stephen Wacker has created a special little corner of mainstream comics. Books focused on character…

Read full review and comments
Bootmobile's Recent Comments
November 16, 2012 10:39 pm “judge not lest ye be something or other” is easily my favourite passage from the Bible. Great article.
November 11, 2012 12:58 am Like I said, I didn't intend to characterize you or accuse you of something, only debate a point. I wasn't trying to twist your words nor to deliberately misconstrue your meaning. Hopefully you can see I am making an effort towards at a calm and reasonable discourse. Obviously we both have strong feelings and opinions on the subject and in text it is easy to misread the subtext of something stated forcefully. I think it is fair to point out that the experiences being discussed can and do happen to men as well. You'll notice in my three points above I was careful to use "person" and "someone". I am not sure that anyone was trying to deny that the reverse can happen or was intending to set a double standard. I'd call it an oversight, a mistake that you have fairly corrected. I am personally pretty liberal about things like sexy cosplayers but I can recognize and respect that other people feel differently. I think it is fair to suggest that some cosplayers might go too far in what is supposed to be a family friendly environment. Where the line is and why it should be respected is a worthy conversation. Not the same conversation as the one brought up in the article but related and very fair. You may also be right that it is a bit naive to be surprised that the bad behaviour Molly described above, though that is a very sad commentary on the state of the world. What I would say, and I think you agree (please tell me if I'm wrong), is that it isn't at all silly, ridiculous or naive to go online or elsewhere and be pissed off about the bad behaviour and ask that people cut it out and try to act in accordance with some simple principles of respect and courtesy. Fair ball? Hopefully we are resolving something here and I am not just pissing you off even more because that is the opposite of my intention. If I am just making it worse tell me and I'll stop responding here.
November 10, 2012 9:54 pm @UNSPUNX You seem to have taken my comments more harshly and personally than I meant them. I apologize. Your pragmatic point is fair, a woman wearing an attractive costume to a convention is running a higher risk of being sexually preyed upon. If your intent is to protect and warn cosplayers of this, hoping they will be careful, that is a very fair and good point. I was attempting to say that it is a pragmatic point not a moral one. The central moral principles I am bringing to the discussion, you can call them my agenda if you like, are something like this: 1) To sexually objectify or exploit someone without consent is wrong. (I know we all agree on this one.) 2) Someone who has been wronged or is being wronged has the right to defend themselves, fight against that treatment and protest that treatment. (Again I think we are all on the same page here.) 3) What a person is wearing or where they are standing does not change points 1 and 2. (Maybe we agree here too.) So again your pragmatic point is good but that pragmatic fact does not change the above moral issues and the validity of Molly's points in the original article. If your only point or intent was to be pragmatic and/or protective then I did get things wrong. It seemed to me you were taking issue with a woman like Molly protesting her treatment when she wears sexy clothes or costumes. If I had it wrong and my words offended you, again, I sincerely apologize.
November 10, 2012 9:20 pm Whore is a vicious word whether it is directed at women, men or both together. If the point is that sexy cosplay is a vain thing to do and you don't respect it on those grounds that is one thing. Using the phrase "attention whore", especially given the context of this topic, seems out of line and unnecessarily crude to me. I thought and think it was offensive and was trying to say so in a measured and not harsh way. If it was read as harsh I apologize. If you think I am wrong then we can, I hope, respectfully disagree.
November 10, 2012 12:24 am Not to be the cynical, snarky guy but let's be honest, what chances are there that the new series becomes a success? Hell how likely is it to make it past a year? So there will be room down the road for someone to pick the Vertigo version back up, dust it off and give it another go. Everything in comics comes back around. Still I sympathize with the pain of all the die hard fans.
November 10, 2012 12:02 am Why is it that when a women expresses her sexuality, or just doesn't seem to be being modest enough in our eyes, do we seem to think they make themselves objects or less than deserving of simple human respect and dignity? I think that when we see someone who provokes a baser instinct in us to essentially use them as a sexual object, even if we know better than to act on that instinct uninvited, the sense of that person as an object remains because on some level we desire them to be an object for our use. In parts of the world women are required to wear burkas because, as I understand it, males are unable to control their desires and hormones and the woman is to blame if she provokes such impure thoughts in his head. A woman who does not practice extreme modesty at all times is a whore and is inflicting her sexuality on the males around her and polluting them with sinful thoughts. The men, of course, are blameless. Women are to be blamed for the response, thoughts and actions of men. In our society this same sexism is more subtle. It is found when a victim is accused of provoking rape or should have known better than to be sexual or immodest in public. I concede that it is a fact that there are more than enough, knowingly or unknowingly, exploitative men in the world that a woman who dares express her sexuality or be immodest is likely to be victimized. But that pragmatic fact in no way makes the bad behaviour any less wrong and in no way should take away a woman’s right to demand it stop. As decent people who want a better, fairer world how do we not say that it is a fact of life that needs to change? When a woman complains that she is being victimized or exploited and has the strength to complain and demand it stop, why do we tell her it is what she should have expected? Are we telling her to stop provoking the big, bad men and put her burka back on? . Molly, if you are still reading these comments, as a man about to be the father of two girls, I want to say how sad and sorry I am to hear about some the treatment you have received online and at conventions. I applaud you for speaking out. I have read about enough incidents in recent months to understand the kind of backlash and treatment you risk by doing so. I hope you persevere and that the good experiences outweigh the bad.
November 9, 2012 11:00 pm @ RaBoogie The difference is consent. Consent is the clearest difference between sex and rape and it is the difference between it being okay to take an admiring picture of a woman's appearance and not okay.
November 9, 2012 10:56 pm The word whore is vicious and I am sad to see it used here. Just because a woman is sexy or dressing in a sexy way does not mean by necessity she is objectifying herself. It doesn't even mean she is doing it for attention and it certainly doesn't necessarily mean she is doing it for the attention of men.
November 9, 2012 10:35 pm Just because a woman is sexy or makes a special effort to appear sexy or even enjoys the attention of being sexy it does not make her fair game or any less deserving of the right to demand to be treated with respect. What about a woman being attractive or enjoying that fact makes them less worthy of basic human consideration?