Captain Marvel’s Backstory and Desiring God

Desiring God author Greg Morse takes issue with the latest Marvel movie, Captain Marvel, attempting  to be “the biggest feminist movie of all time,” in the words of the movie’s star, Brie Larson (emphasis in original.)

The reasons why are worth unpacking to answer the question: “Is this a cogent Christian critique of feminism in pop culture?”

Origin Stories and Male Glory

To begin, Morse is at pains to point out that the original Captain Marvel was a male alien. In doing so, Morse tips his rhetorical hand: his readers are now wise to the notion that the later Carol Danvers iteration of Captain Marvel is a deviation from the character’s original, male design–and that this matters to the author.


But, why should this fact matter? Is it particularly feminist (or any other “-ist”) to use the latest, female version of a comic book character in a film?

To bolster his case for the film as a feminist manifesto, Morse turns to the President of Marvel Studios: “This film is very much about this character learning to not hold back and not accept the boundaries put in front of her.”

Yet, isn’t this the character arc of all superheroes? Think about Neo in The Matrix: he has to realize he’s “The One” and cast off all constraints of self-doubt and fear in order to see the Matrix for what it is and defeat it.


Practically every superhero origin story from Aquaman to Iron Man has the same elements: the hero transcends their limitations, comes into their own, and defeats evil.

But for Morse, there’s a fearful side to this superhero trope when the story is billed as “feminist.” The mystique of that word! Something otherwise mundane becomes a threat to male identity, and–as we shall see–Christian identity, for Morse.

Nature Goes to the Movies

Morse, again: “I do not blame Marvel for inserting the trending feminist agenda into its universe. Where else can this lucrative ideology — which contrasts so unapologetically with reality — go to be sustained, if not to an alternative universe?”

Oh. There it is. That’s the problem: feminism is counter to reality, but it makes money because it is trending!

With whom is it trending? And, more importantly: how is it counter to reality, exactly?

For Morse, it hardly matters: he spends no time supporting  the statement that: “Verse after verse, story after story, fact after fact, study after study, example after example dispels the myth of sameness between the sexes.” (If he is concerned about the reality of claims, wouldn’t it be better to at least link to some of these studies?)


Nor does it matter to Morse that “sameness” and “equality” are different concepts, and feminism advocates for the latter, more than the former, by definition.

This is not a strong start, and we haven’t even seen what God has to do with it. Before we arrive at the supernatural, let’s consider the natural.

Society is not Natural

Morse neglects to explain why it should matter that feminism is a social movement counter to nature.

(I blogged on the natural and supernatural world, here, for those interested in further discussion of what it means to be “natural.“)

Society is decidedly not natural: from the houses and buildings we work in to the Internet on which I’m currently arguing against a stranger’s ideas, there’s nothing particularly natural about the modern lifestyle.

I attended a panel discussion about a Nigerian-British artist’s artwork. Everything in that past sentence is a human invention, from “artwork” to “nationality.”

Avoiding a Natural Society at All Costs

Even Richard Dawkins, who is a spokesperson for atheism and in favor of unguided evolution as the real origin of humanity, acknowledges a natural society would be a nightmare:

“Study your Darwinism in order to learn what to avoid in setting up society. What we need is a truly anti-Darwinian society. Anti-Darwinian in the sense that we don’t wish to live in a society where the weakest go to the wall, where the strongest suppress the weak, and even kill the weak.”

Being “unnatural” can be a good thing. Morse needs to go further than claiming feminism is “unnatural” to refute it. We can’t baptize everything that is not natural as somehow good, but nor should we dismiss it out of hand.

Gender Goes to the Movies: Cherishing the Superwoman

Morse laments this perceived unnatural attitude in the movie: “As I consider Disney’s new depiction of femininity in Captain Marvel, I cannot help but mourn. How far we’ve come since the days when we sought to protect and cherish our women.”


Are Disney princesses truly a better representation of what it means to cherish women or live naturally as women? That’s debatable.

And it doesn’t apply to every woman: how many children, peasants, workers, and wives are there for every one girl or woman who lives like a princess: an eventually eligible object of desire pining for her prince?

Protecting the Powerful

And Captain Marvel is not exactly fragile.

As a powerful character in a fictional world of superhuman gods and villains, I hardly feel like the average male offering to throw himself between Captain Marvel and a supervillain is a particularly effective sacrifice to cherish her.

I suspect I would be no match for Thanos…

Cherishing Captain Marvel might well mean acknowledging her strength and supporting her. It would be foolish arrogance to have her not contribute to saving the day out of some perception that men ought to do the dirty work.

Yet, that is exactly what Morse decries: “The great drumroll of the previous Avenger movies led to this: a woman protecting men and saving the world.” (We haven’t  seen the second part of Infinity War, so isn’t this getting ahead of ourselves?)

Danger and Deliverance

And, since when does protecting someone mean allowing them no exposure to danger? It means ensuring they come through the danger.

Take a real-world example: Watching our kids at the park doesn’t mean allowing them to take no risks, just acceptable ones.

What’s an acceptable risk? It depends on the competence and strength of the person involved, as well as what the situation demands.

On the Battlefield

Yet, Morse states: “Few actions display our resolve to honor our women more than excluding them from the carnage of the battlefield.”

Yes, keep people out of danger if possible. But, if danger comes anyway, what then?

In the case of Captain Marvel, we see a fictional superbeing, who will doubtless be caught up in an interstellar war with Thanos in the next Infinity War movie. War will come to her.

In any case, philosophizing about a superpowered  woman has its limitations as a fruitful exercise, anyway. She doesn’t exist, and doesn’t need our help.

Defending Women from Ideological Danger

But not so fast, says Morse. We are putting our daughters in harm’s way by the very act of exposing them to Captain Marvel:

“The ideology that sends Brie Larson soaring fictionally around outer space has sent our real daughters, mothers, and sisters — devoid of such superpowers — to war to serve and die in place of men.”

First, we have no indication that Captain Marvel will die in the place of anyone, or that men will cease to fight alongside her. From a financial standpoint, killing off its new feminist icon or cancelling the popular male heroes’ roles in the upcoming ensemble movie in her favor makes no sense.

Perhaps, if Morse taps into his financial acumen about feminism a little deeper, he will arrive at the insight that the franchise has been about creating a team of heroes, all along. Is having a woman fighting alongside men still shameful?

Morse, again: “Along with Disney, we abandon the traditional princess vibe, and seek to empower little girls everywhere to be strong like men. Cinderella trades her glass slipper for combat boots; Belle, her books for a bazooka. Does the insanity bother us anymore?”

The Battlefield or the Boardroom?

I am happy to abandon the traditional princess vibe, as a father to a daughter. I don’t want her to be passively waiting for a man to give her what she needs any more than I want her on a battlefield: both are unrealistic in their own ways. Why shouldn’t the “insanity” of the old-fashioned princess vibe bother us?

Women in our society do need to support themselves, especially if they are single. What we need to instill in children is the discernment between the fantasy and reality of what people do in the world.

Discernment at the Movies

On that note, is what the men do in these movies a better role model for our sons?

We should likewise be concerned that our sons might arrive at the conclusion that the collateral damage and killing that the supermen engage in is a solution to life’s problems, when in many cases, it is not.


Yet, for Morse, this is what men are made for: fighting and defending. Killing, if needed.

If, as Morse says, “real wars” are “the amalgamation of every temporal evil,” perhaps the problem is not that feminism urges women to join the fight, but that we view the fight as somehow virtuous for anyone to engage in.

Back to Reality

It is, for many of us, an extraordinary circumstance that would require us to engage in these combat behaviors, in the first place.

Really, other roles are more in line with the society to which we aspire.

As male role models, a bookish professor, a businessman, a scientist, handyman or an engineer are more realistic for boys, but perhaps not so exciting as superheroes waging interplanetary warfare.


A more mundane profession.

Should we stop telling whimsical stories about gods, wizards, superheroes, and monstrous evils, because they are “insanity,” or do they teach a lesson apart from their sensational trappings?

Inspiration vs. Insanity

Could these movies, with appropriate guidance, inspire girls (and boys) to be assertive, but not reckless, inspired, but not “insane?”

Morse sees no room for this: “Am I nitpicking? It is a movie after all. I wish it were.”

He delivers his strongest statement criticizing the movie’s female heroics, from a religious standpoint, here: “our God, our nature, our love must firmly say, You are too precious, my mother, my daughter, my beloved. It is my glory to die that you may live.”

But, what’s God got to do with it?

Christianity Goes to the Movies

Is Morse’s God the God who promised: “I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world” (John 16:33)?

No. Morse claims: “God’s story for all eternity consists of a Son who slew a Dragon to save a Bride. Jesus did not put his woman forward, and neither should we.”

Is Morse’s God the God who told his disciples that “”Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves” (Matthew 10:16)?

Apparently not. I cannot imagine Morse’s God “putting his woman forward” by telling His followers: “And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.” (Matthew 10:38)

Now, perhaps feminism in some forms is an overreach, but it isn’t because the God of the bible shelters the church from harm. Indeed, He calls her into the trenches with Him, to suffer, to fight a battle not against flesh and blood, and to triumph through His power.

Marvel at that, Mr. Morse.

Should we stop telling whimsical stories about gods, wizards, superheroes, and monstrous evils, because they are “insanity,” or do they teach valuable lessons apart from their sensational trappings? Click To Tweet