Agora: Red Deer Polytechnic Undergraduate Journal
Volume 16:2 (2025) Student Writer Awards

I Am the Man Who Can: Exploring
Female Empowerment in Wonder
Woman
Lacey Lizotte
A revolutionary female character was invented by a man
in 1941, and this may be enough to justify the rejection of that
character by fourth wave feminists. The mere fact that she was a
man’s idea warrants scepticism: she could not have been created
with good intentions in mind, surely, she is just another product
of the patriarchy tainted by misogyny, certainly she was invented
to satisfy the male gaze in a new way -- or was she? Diana Prince
was presented as an extraordinary woman, an incredibly strong
woman, an exceedingly beautiful woman with a penchant for
justice, the ideal, albeit sensationalized woman. She was a
wonder to behold, initially on the pages of DC comic books and
later in a TV adaptation starring Lynda Carter. Wonder Woman
creator, William Moulton Marston, intended for her to “set up a
standard among children and young people of strong, free
courageous womanhood and to combat the idea that women are
inferior to men” (Albertson, 2016, p.2). Clearly, the goal was to
narrow the gap of inequality between men and women with the
invention of the first well-known female superhero, not to
109

objectify them in a new way. Marston not only stated that he
wanted to portray womanhood as something good and powerful,
but he was personally involved in the suffragist movement
adding credibility to his claims (Albertson, 2016, p.2). We don’t
have to admit that he did something innovative in the field of
media and entertainment, but it remains true that Marston broke
a glass ceiling in an industry that almost exclusively sent little
girls the message that they’d only be fit for the role of doting
housewife or damsel in distress, too beautiful and frail to make
any sort of difference in their own suffering or the troubles
lurking outside. Wonder Woman showed these young women
that they could be more.
But what does ‘more’ include? For a season of American
history, it included living up to one’s potential as a woman and
freely following one’s dreams. Up until the emergence of
Second Wave feminism in America, feminist and social critic
Camille Paglia observed that “women’s achievement and public
visibility were very strong”, not necessarily politically but in
other spheres they received the recognition they deserved for
their accomplishments through the 20s and 30s (Paglia, 2008,
p.8). The new feminism of the 60’s though, dismissed these
“…enterprising, path-breaking women as “male-identified” and
allegedly indifferent to the needs of women as a group” (Paglia,
2008, p.9), which Paglia (2008) refers to as “depressing”, and

110

I’d have to agree. This outlook shows how feminism can be
considered a house divided against itself, as it’s not necessarily
unifying for frontline feminists to disregard the former progress
that made it possible for their stage of the movement to take root.
Women rode the high of that pre-second wave golden era for a
while, until the headway made was undone by the Great
Depression, the rise of fascism in Europe, and the outbreak of
World War Two (Paglia, 2008, p. 9). When men were at the front,
women had to follow Rosie the Riveter’s example and take over
factory jobs, but as soon as veterans returned, women were
expected to step aside. Following the second World War, there
was a collective longing shared by both men and women for the
comfortable normalcy of domesticity and family life,
subsequently, it didn’t take very long for gender roles to
repolarize (Paglia, 2008, p.9). According to Paglia (2008, p.9),
“In the late 1940s and ‘50s, movies, television, and
advertisements promoted motherhood and homemaking as
women’s highest goals.” Thus, Marston’s Wonder Woman
debuted against a backdrop of the resurgence of traditional
American gender-roles. Diana Prince presented women who
longed for something other than domestic bliss with the
possibility of imagining themselves as powerful, active
difference-makers, and that alone held power in the cultural
climate of the time. For girls who became women in this

111

recycled age of limited career and lifestyle options, the idea that
there could be an alternative to housewifery might not have even
occurred. For the first time raucous little girls could see
themselves represented outside of the world of dollhouses and
tea parties in the action-packed escapades of this never-beforeseen hybrid of a woman, who was both a beautiful Amazonian
Princess and a fierce warrior. Wonder Woman embodied this
new idea that brawn and beauty were no longer mutually
exclusive, in her they coexisted.
This is where the gender politics come in. We have a
perfect specimen who fits conventional American beauty norms
like a glove: a thin, white, gorgeous, heterosexual female, whose
comic sales skyrocketed when controversial writer Mike
Deodato began to gradually yet aggressively oversexualize the
Amazonian in the mid-1990’s (Cocca, 2014, p.2). Yet her sex
appeal and appearance are not what define her, as she embodies
many other honourable qualities that go beyond aesthetics. Few
would argue against Wonder Woman’s allure, but Cocca states
that “she also unsettles gendered boundaries through performing
a determined, astute, formidable warrior” (2014) while
simultaneously basking in the advantages of pretty privilege.
This dichotomy, Cocca argues, is what has led to many writers
exploring whether Wonder Woman can or should be considered
feminist, with some scholars going as far as declaring the

112

character anti-feminist (2014). The 1972 edition of Ms.
Magazine, a feminist publication founded by activists Gloria
Steinem and Dorothy Pittman Hughes, features Wonder Woman
on its cover. This decision was hugely criticized by fellow
feminists and received major pushback from radical feminist
group the Redstockings’ who said that Wonder Woman “looked
like a sellout of everything the feminist movement stood for”
(McNiell, 2016). The group also openly rejected Steinem and
Hughes feminism as they had ties to capitalist corporations
which the Redstockings’ considered contrary to feminist
ideology. Elaboration is needed to explain why Wonder Woman
was considered a sellout by the Redstockings’, but no evidence
of her abandoning the essential moral conviction at the core of
her character is provided. If one of the shortcomings of the brand
of female empowerment that Wonder Woman stands for is her
character’s perceived association with capitalism and vanity,
critics may be comforted by the fact that we’re dealing with a
fictional character here who has no consequential effect on
American politics or social issues. Batman and Robin will not
get taxes lowered, Spiderman will not eliminate the opioid crisis,
Superman did not come to us from Krypton to obliterate toxic
masculinity and machismo culture…and Wonder Woman is not
out in America as the devil on the shoulder of depraved men
convincing them that objectifying and exploiting women is

113

okay. We must become our own heroes in the real world. And it
is no crime that a character exists in the world of DC Comics
(regardless of how writers and illustrators have undressed her
over time) that may inspire young women to challenge limits and
dream of changing the world, defending the vulnerable, and
defeating the villains in their own lives.
In a 2013 article, Avery-Natale refers to Wonder Woman
as “one of the most fetishized superhero characters”, a far fall
from what Marston intended in creating “an alternative to the
obsessive masculinity of comic books…who had functioned as
a metaphor for American nationalism and women’s position in
American society” (Avery-Natale, 2013, p.2). Again, there is
little evidence to support this alleged fetishization of Wonder
Woman, other than references to her being illustrated in
bondage, which critics consider sneaky odes to BDSM that
promote heterosexual male and lesbian fantasies (Avery-Natale,
2013, p.6), and not at all similar to the conundrums male
superheroes find themselves in, bound by rope with their mouths
taped shut by henchman. Avery-Natale (2013) noted that women
appear in bondage more frequently than men, but is this
intentional or could it be chalked up to the fact that scientifically,
because of biological differences, women are more likely to be
physically subdued (Hunter et al., 2023)? Why is the situation
automatically sexual when it’s a woman being tied up instead of

114

a man? Is this not a sexist jump to conclusions? Isn’t this genderbased hyper-sexualization of the character exactly what is
supposed to be avoided? Why is it inherently sexy if it’s Wonder
Woman being restrained, but not if it’s Superman? These
questions remain unanswered. Another thing that is noted to
support this anti-feminist view of Wonder Woman is the image
coding prevalent in the comic book industry. A 2005 study
referenced a “How to Draw” guide by Wizard Entertainment
indicating that within the guide female characters were coded for
breast size, hourglass figures, lips, facial expressions, and
hairstyles using the guide’s discussion on how to make women
appear “sultry” (Avery-Natale, 2013, p.5). However, this guide
included very clear ideals for physical attributes of male
superheroes as well, making mention of coding for abdominal
muscles, including individual ab muscle definition, thinness and
form, and the assertion that men should be drawn with a standard
“V” shape (Avery-Natale, 2013, p.6). Thus, it can be concluded
that there is equal objectification across genders in comic books
and in widespread media, sex sells to both men and women. One
could also argue, and I will, that we are dying on the wrong hill
here.
Fictional,

animated

sexual

objectification

and

exploitation of either gender is not helpful, but the depiction of
characters defined by integrity, agility, impressive physical

115

strength, strong moral conviction, and beauty could be inspiring.
I find a much more damaging phenomenon in the elevation of
real human women, “perfected” by surgical procedure and the
beauty industry, as an ideal. This convinces consumers that
perfection is not just something to be daydreamed about, in the
same way we imagine we can fly, but it’s something to be
attained. With the deification of these celebrities, the lines
between what is fake and what is real are blurred, and image
becomes everything instead if just an element of the whole as it
is with many females in fiction. Lynda Carter in a patriotic
polyester one-piece is a much better role model than Kim
Kardashian. Illustrations of fictional characters are supposed to
be sensational and, in a sense, unreal, which Wonder Woman is,
and this isn’t another transgression against Western women to
add to the list. I specify the Western woman since “feminists” in
developing countries may be too preoccupied with causes such
as the right to attend school, fleeing child marriages, or healing
from female genital mutilation to worry about the unrealistic
perkiness of Wonder Woman’s breasts.
The fact that reprehensible and oppressive practices are
everyday realities for women in the third world does not negate
the fact that we have our own issues here, but I think it does help
to put issues such as the Wonder Woman debate into perspective.
As much as there is obvious sexualization in the later depictions

116

of Wonder Woman as writers deviated from Marston’s original
vision for the character (Cocca, 2014, p.2), this is not enough to
label the character a legitimate threat to feminism. We live in an
era of hyper-sexualization, with a departure from traditional
modesty being hailed as progressive. Modern culture is flooded
with claims that freedom to express sexuality in a very open and
enthusiastic manner is an indicator of authentic postmodern
feminism. This is contradictory: Wonder Woman is a
hypersexualized depiction of a woman, and that is antifeminist…but it’s feminist to hypersexualize oneself? One
cannot rely on cherry-picking, double standards and mining for
offenses to underpin and fortify positions. Are we, women of the
West, so bored with the various freedoms afforded to us in a
progressive and prosperous society that we’re perpetually
displeased unless we have something more to fight for? Because
this isn’t a solid foundation to build a healthy brand of feminism
upon. We are not the women of the 50’s anymore, confined to
the kitchen and a long life of baby-making, child-rearing,
cleaning, homemaking, swallowing opinions, smothering
preferences, and burying aspirations that don’t align with what
is proper for a lady. To the women of that time, Marston sold a
dream, by putting a female character in a position she’d never
been in before, the main character of her own story, alongside
these amazing heroic characters that were predominantly male.

117

These days, we can be anything we want…go to any postsecondary institution we want for as long as we can afford, stay
single forever or get married, have zero kids or have ten kids,
wear booty shorts or burqas, gain a position in a male-dominated
industry, read what we want, watch what we want, eat what we
want…the sky is the limit, a sky we seem to rage against. Many
prolific women who successfully juggle a career, a husband,
self-care, the duties of motherhood, personal hobbies, and
maybe even a side hustle, who are commended for “doing it all”
are commonly referred to as “Wonder Woman”. A character’s
name doesn’t become synonymous with female excellence if she
is not something to aspire to, or at the very least, a remarkable
female to admire. Wonder Woman as a concept is feminist and
Wonder Woman as a character is feminist. If she is sexy, and
satisfying to the male gaze, feminists can be angry that men get
some bonus eye candy without realizing the irony of
simultaneously delighting in a shirtless Clark Kent, but her sex
appeal clearly wasn’t the point of her existence (Albertson,
2016). Wonder Woman is undeniably for women, even if we
can’t imitate her in being as “strong as Hercules”, as “wise as
Athena” and as “beautiful as Aphrodite” (Albertson, 2016, p.1),
we can still follow her example of strength, shrewdness, ferocity,
grace, bravery, and the pursuit of truth, justice, and moral
goodness above all else.

118

References
Albertson, Cory. (2016). the new wonder woman. Contexts,
15(3), 66–69. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26370414
Avery-Natale, E. (2013). An Analysis of Embodiment among
Six Superheroes in DC Comics. Social Thought &
Research, 32, 71–106.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/24642398
Cocca, C. (2014). Negotiating the Third Wave of Feminism in
“Wonder Woman.” PS: Political Science and Politics,
47(1), 98–103. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43284491
Hunter, S. K., S Angadi, S., Bhargava, A., Harper, J.,
Hirschberg, A. L., D Levine, B., L Moreau, K., J
Nokoff, N., Stachenfeld, N. S., & Bermon, S. (2023).
The Biological Basis of Sex Differences in Athletic
Performance: Consensus Statement for the American
College of Sports Medicine. Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise, 55(12).
https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000003300
McNeill, L. (2016). The Secret History of Wonder Woman by
Jill Lepore. Journal of the Midwest Modern Language
Association, 49(2), 195–198.
https://doi.org/10.1353/mml.2016.0039
Paglia, C. (2008). Feminism Past and Present: Ideology,
Action, and Reform. Arion: A Journal of Humanities

119

and the Classics, 16(1), 1–18. JSTOR.
https://doi.org/10.2307/29737373

120