Again: that's objectification for you. It's in the name: it ignores the personality of the character for the sake of a provocative image. And look at the reactions: it works.
Yes, please. If they're going to be written badly, then it's better to leave them alone.
I don't particularly like it, but I don't have a problem with the look per se. In this case, it's the choice of the angle/pose. It's not about the body or how revealing an outfit is either. It's the composition. A person/character can be entirely naked without any objectification.
Compare the two covers. They're both beautiful pieces of art. Same character. Same outfit. Different artistic eye:
https://i.redd.it/yzt0odlkgxw61.jpg
https://terrigen-cdn-dev.marvel.com/...sizexmen_0.jpg
You see the difference?
I think the gala is an good excuse for this stuff.
Also this preview is a good example of how males are also objectified in comics as well.Nightwing,Spidey are the 2 most common examples.They were skintight suits as a costume.
Again it's okay with the gala.Also it helps they are in semi-natural poses and not like that ridiculous starfire beach panel.Then again if the writing is good I don't mind this for either gender as long as they don't push it.It's comic books.A lit unrealism is part of the experience
The amount they are being has increased.Also with characters like Namor it goes back a long time.
I think people care less with male objectification tbh.In the MCU we get so many shirtless guy scenes and no one says anything but any revealing girl costume people get angry.I get why though just think it should go both ways.
hell Nightwing has the tarantula situation and recently(i think) some lady slapped him on his butt.Nightwing said that it was invading his private space and the lady said it was about time he noticed.If you switch the roles this would have a much stronger reaction.
I think they should make all people look good if they are meant to be there is a limit specially with someone with human bodies.Emma or Poison I get.Spider-man and nightwing if drawn moderately I get.Namor and Thor I get.I get all that but they should tone it down for all of them and just keep it down.
So...an illustrated depiction of Scott's well-formed and fully clothed buttocks is...porn and is reprehensible?
If that is the case...I've been reading "porn magazines" since I was six years old. And I'm not about to stop anytime soon. LOL
Lord Ewing *Praise His name! Uplift Him in song!* Your divine works will be remembered and glorified in worship for all eternity. Amen!
I think it just comes with superhero comics. Piotr in his underwear often while painting, the Goblin Queen and Prince. Not saying it's right or wrong but it's been going on for a while. I don't mind at all.
"Danielle... I intend to do something rash and violent." - Betsy Braddock
Krakoa, Arakko, and Otherworld forever!
Representational (not actual) "Porn" is in the eyes of the beholder. Is someone looks at that image of Scott and automatically thinks "XXX" then that's the viewer's issue.
Werneck is gay and has a gay following especially among the XM-fanbase...so he clearly knows what captures our attention (fabulush clothing and round firm derriers) and I love him for it.
Lord Ewing *Praise His name! Uplift Him in song!* Your divine works will be remembered and glorified in worship for all eternity. Amen!