With all due respect, I think you misunderstood the purpose of my comment:

I'm not talking about "how" these characters were written. I'm talking about "why" they written, and who wrote them. That they were written with various weaknesses, and humanized isn't my point. I'm making a broader statement. Peter Parker is a self insert for Stan Lee, Tarzan is a "mighty whitey", and as the author stated herself, Batman is a power and wealth fantasy for a lot of white guys. These are the kinds of characters white men identify with and admire and are written for the same reason that women write and create Mary Sues, as fictional aspects of themselves.

I mostly focus on comic book characters, but there are hundreds, if not thousands of characters written specifically to appeal to white men, and almost every one of them fit the description that certain critics use to denigrate Mary Sue characters.


The audience for these characters were white men, (not women like me) written by white men (not black or Asian men), to serve the needs of white men. I'm not talking about how to write good characters. I'm commenting on her statement about "why" such characters were written.

I'm critiquing the critique of female characters by certain men. Some of their critiques are disingenuous, and in bad faith. It seems it's okay for men to write the kinds of men they want to be, or how they'd like to be seen, sexy, powerful, wealthy, and loved. But when women do it these same guys want to denigrate female characters with pretty much the same characteristics.