Axel-In-Charge: The Mixed Message of Manara's "Spider-Woman" Variant, The Reason Behind No "Big Hero

[KittenLord]

If you re-read the article, Alonso never apologized for the cover. He apologized for the mixed message it sent. I respect that.

What I have read leads me to believe that most women don't have a problem with the cover per se. What they have a problem with is that this particular book was being built (and advertised) as being aimed at women. And then Marvel put an erotic looking Spider-Woman on one of the covers. An extreme example of what turns most women off from comics. The impossibly positioned heroine showing off parts of her body.
(I'd like to note that some have tried to come up with comparisons of men in highly sexualized poses for contrast. A seemingly futile effort since unless a guy has his hips thrust forward with a bulging cod piece there aren't many suggestive poses for men. This would also be a bad example because most men would laugh at how ridiculous that is. We're just wired differently when it comes to this stuff).

In the end, this may be overblown but it certainly necessary for the continued growth of a women audience. The fact that Marvel made this one misstep on the 8-10 female books should be applauded. I'm not saying this should be ignored, just that it's also important to note what they get right.

[Shinglepants]

I keep reading that Spider-Woman is aimed at Women. Is this like, legit. I mean, I'm a dude and I plan on picking it up. Will my dude friends make fun of me? Do women want different things from their comic books? Other than not wanting objectifying art.

I'm clinging to this for five minimum

Heh, I knew somebody would.

The end of this interview should hopefully put to rest all the nonsense reboot talk.

It wont! It will only feed their paranoia.

[Shaggy]

I keep reading that Spider-Woman is aimed at Women. Is this like, legit. I mean, I'm a dude and I plan on picking it up. Will my dude friends make fun of me? Do women want different things from their comic books? Other than not wanting objectifying art.

So are you afraid it will be full of romance and smooching? I'm a guy but I don't think I'm wrong when I say that women want good stories and heroes they can relate to.

[Shaggy]

That is basically my point. You make a book that does not drive female readers away. First you make a book that doesn't objectify female characters in every panel. Then you follow that up with including prominent female characters. They don't have to be necessarily kickass but they should have a personality and a level of independence as opposed to just being a love interest/reward for the male hero. And if you want to get really wild then you make a book with a female lead character keeping the previous points in mind.

[KingsLeadHat]

The problem that Marvel and DC has is that there are people in the companies that genuinely want to create an environment where females feels comfortable with the content. Unfortunately, Marvel and DC are profit first, and as long as sex sells, and as long as the vast majority of fans are male, this sort of thing will continue to happen. Why anyone would want to combine soft-core porn with mainstream superhero comics is beyond me (Why not Google REAL erotica?) as the sexual aspect of superhero comics has always been at the very bottom of my list of priorities as a fan of the genre.

[Shaggy]

The problem that Marvel and DC has is that there are people in the companies that genuinely want to create an environment where females feels comfortable with the content. Unfortunately, Marvel and DC are profit first, and as long as sex sells, and as long as the vast majority of fans are male, this sort of thing will continue to happen. Why anyone would want to combine soft-core porn with mainstream superhero comics is beyond me (Why not Google REAL erotica?) as the sexual aspect of superhero comics has always been at the very bottom of my list of priorities as a fan of the genre.

I wonder if comic book sales at Marvel and DC would really go down if they started placing less emphasis on eroticism...if women were drawn more realistically and not shown through an obvious male gaze filter. Serious question, would readers blast the companies saying that Marvel/DC are ruining comics?

[Pat Thomas]

I wonder if comic book sales at Marvel and DC would really go down if they started placing less emphasis on eroticism...if women were drawn more realistically and not shown through an obvious male gaze filter. Serious question, would readers blast the companies saying that Marvel/DC are ruining comics?

I think that if they did away with the flashy costumes and pretty, sexy people, readership would suffer big time. There would be a group of self-satisfied people who were happy
they got rid of the things that offended them, and another group of people who like all the flash and beautiful people doing impossible things that would probably hang in for awhile,
but lose interest eventually, since the comics were so different than what they liked in the first place. Maybe that's where we're headed. That's yet another way to make comics
unappealing to kids, if all the flash is gone. That's just my opinion, but I feel strongly about it. When you start taking things away from superhero comics that make them larger than life,
you are taking away what made them popular in the first place, regardless of who that audience is. That's who you alienate the most.

[Sea Hound]

That is basically my point. You make a book that does not drive female readers away. First you make a book that doesn't objectify female characters in every panel. Then you follow that up with including prominent female characters. They don't have to be necessarily kickass but they should have a personality and a level of independence as opposed to just being a love interest/reward for the male hero. And if you want to get really wild then you make a book with a female lead character keeping the previous points in mind.

I think you've got it exactly.

Honestly, the Marvel books I'm reading at the moment are fine. (I'm female btw.). I'm getting Magneto, X-Force, X-Factor, She Hulk, sometimes X-Men, and Thor God of Thunder. I don't think any female readers are calling for wholesale massive changes to the current output.

To be fair to Marvel, they've really made an effort recently with female led books, and up until appointing Land on the Spiderwoman title, they've done a sensational job picking artists and writers. I'd love to add Electra, Ms Marvel and Black Widow to my list based on artwork alone. (I have about ten problems with Land before I even get to his awful portrayals of females. Starting with his unforgivable tracing of more talented artists work.)

I also acknowledge that Marvel have much reduced the incidence of Brokeback poses, (definitely a deal breaker) and changed the really awful costumes.

If I wanted smoochy,romance-y books, or semi-erotic comics aimed at women,(they do exist) I'd look elsewhere. I like the MU characters, and how enormous and complicated and strange it is. Mostly I want a good story with quality art, which (and I think 3/4 of the current books are already doing this) isn't off puttingly hyper sexualised. I don't think Marvel needs to change everything to attract more women.

[Shinglepants]

That is basically my point. You make a book that does not drive female readers away. First you make a book that doesn't objectify female characters in every panel. Then you follow that up with including prominent female characters. They don't have to be necessarily kickass but they should have a personality and a level of independence as opposed to just being a love interest/reward for the male hero. And if you want to get really wild then you make a book with a female lead character keeping the previous points in mind.

This is something I wonder about. I'm happy to read books where the prominent character is a dude. I'm also happy to read a comic where the prominent is a woman, with no men at all. I don't feel like the if the Y-Chromosome is not represented then I am being excluded. I think I just don't understand the "here is a book featuring a female, it's for women" thing.

Also, I see a lot of people accusing Marvel of being hypocrites for using an erotic/degrading/sexy/objectifying (please select whichever applies) cover on a comic aimed at women. When really, its a limited edition variant for people who like erotic/degrading/sexy/objectifying (please select whichever applies) that wont even be readily available. Surely Greg Land is a MUCH larger issue.

[Shaggy]

I think that if they did away with the flashy costumes and pretty, sexy people, readership would suffer big time. There would be a group of self-satisfied people who were happy
they got rid of the things that offended them, and another group of people who like all the flash and beautiful people doing impossible things that would probably hang in for awhile,
but lose interest eventually, since the comics were so different than what they liked in the first place. Maybe that's where we're headed. That's yet another way to make comics
unappealing to kids, if all the flash is gone. That's just my opinion, but I feel strongly about it. When you start taking things away from superhero comics that make them larger than life,
you are taking away what made them popular in the first place, regardless of who that audience is. That's who you alienate the most.

But there is a difference between taking away beautiful people and toning down blatant sexualization

For instance, the new(is) look for Rogue. More loose fitting outfit without an unzipped top that shows off her cleavage. Would that be considered taking away the flash?

[Tiamatty]

The problem that Marvel and DC has is that there are people in the companies that genuinely want to create an environment where females feels comfortable with the content.

Yeah, there seems to be a few people in this thread who do think that's the problem.


Just to make a couple things clear to these people: Women are still not equal members of society. They still face systemic, institutionalized suppression. One of the forms is the imagery of women in the media. Women are still routinely presented in sexualized ways, with the Manara cover being an example of that. No, men being presented in sexualized ways is not at all, in any way, equivalent, because the sheer scale is vastly different. A "sexualized" man isn't being heavily photo-shopped to give him body proportions that are close to impossible, and he's not being posed in ways that suggest submission.

The problem with the Manara cover is that it's not an isolated instance. If it was an isolated case, then yes, you would be absolutely right that the objections to it have been out of proportion. But it's not an isolated case. It's part of that systemic and institutionalized misogyny I mentioned earlier. The outrage erupted over this particular cover for a number of reasons - Marvel has been doing well lately in regards to representation of women, so the cover felt like it ran counter to that; the normal cover was also objectionable, and no other variant has yet been shown, so it stands out; and there's also an element of blind chance, with this just happening to be the one that set a couple people off, which led to other people also commenting on it. If it hadn't been this cover, it would've been another, because, again, this is a systemic problem, so it's something that happens all the time, and most people can only put up with so much **** before they need to say something about it. This was just that last turd that clogged the toilet, and in this metaphor, complaints are the plunger.

Regardless, this isn't about "I don't like this kind of art." This is about, "This kind of art is genuinely harmful, as it plays into the ongoing issues with how women are presented in the media, and I think that the media should be taking some responsibility to be more respectful towards women." See the difference? One is about personal taste, the other is about combating a social problem that exists (and I'm just going to say flat-out that anyone who doesn't think the problem exists is a jackass who should be excluded from the conversation for being too stupid and self-absorbed to have their opinion considered valid).

Alonso was right to apologize for this. And I think most people will actually accept the apology, but they're still going to demand that **** like that cover not happen again. People are disappointed at him saying they'll keep employing Manara for covers because they're worried this will happen again, with Manara doing an erotic cover for a superhero comic. Erotica is fine and dandy, but it has its place, and that place is not on the cover of mainstream superhero comics aimed at a general audience. The apology isn't going to lead to anyone pushing harder - the people upset by the cover don't need an invitation to keep pushing. They're pushing because they care about the treatment of women in society and in the media, and apologies aren't really the point. The point is to get the people in charge to do better in regards to the treatment and presentation of women.

And maybe you think anyone pushing for that sort of thing has some sort of sinister end goal in mind. I assure you, they don't. The end goal is "women receiving respectful treatment and representation." About as non-sinister as it gets, really, to anyone who isn't one of those Men's Rights Activist shitsmears. There's no conspiracy to . . . I don't even know what it is you're worried about. Kick men out of comics? Is that what you think this is ultimately all about? I honestly have no idea. Whatever it is you're scared this slippery slope will lead to, that's really not where it's going. It's actually not a slippery slope at all - it's an ascending hill. And women are trying to climb up to the top of that hill. You're on top of that hill, so you're worried they're going to try to push you off, but they won't. There's plenty of space on top of that hill. Enough for everyone. If it gets a little less exclusive if all those people are allowed to reach it, well, it also becomes a lot more interesting.

[Kieran_Frost]

Yes it does make sense. He does understand that the issue runs much deeper than just one image and is more prevalent...hence his statement/decision to be more sensitive going forward.

"We understand the issue... and will continue to hire artists most famous for their female erotica." Doesn't strike me as Axel understanding the issue, personally

Consider this, for every taste-less and objectionable "Manara-cover" that I like, there are three and more covers that the vast majority (including SY-fans) can adore. Why must you "prudes" have all the fun and enjoyment?

People who think wanting to see women treated more than sextoy, eye-candy objects makes them prudes? By the same logic... those who want to look at Manara's art are misogynists. See how silly that arguement is

Thank you for writing that because now I don't have to What's the point of apologizing if you're going to do it again? Obviously they don't see anything wrong with what they did, they're just sorry people got offended.

Welcomes, and QUOTED FOR TRUTH!!!

Because Artists cant change how she or he draws and one mistake is a lifetime curse. Aren't you glad no one judges us with the same level of damnation.

Errrr... I'm an actor, so actually they do

And again...because apparently the point was missed and I was not making myself clear enough...I was not comparing SY's work to Manara's. I was merely using it as a reference to show that wot you find objectionable, I may think of as perfectly fine and acceptable and vice-versa, and that wanting Marvel to stop working with Manara simply because a group of people find his work (this cover in particular) offensive, is ridiculous.

I don't know how much more simplistic I can make the phrase: "aesthetic preference" to Skottie Young's art and objection to the continued sexualization of women are not even remotely the same thing. You say you are not comparing them... yet continually draw parallels between the two. That is the very definition of comparing.

[Kieran_Frost]

No I did understand what you were saying. Your analogy doesn't work. Not liking SY's work is not the same thing as someone being offended by a picture Manara draws of a woman in a submissive position. You're going to have to tell me what exactly is offensive about Skottie Young's art because I fail to see it.

THANK-YOU!!!

This. Pretty much this. Marvel had no reason to apologize whatsoever as they did nothing wrong, nor did they even do anything new. The reaction of the complainers in this thread alone is proof positive that nothing is EVER enough for them. An apology won't satisfy them, they won't be happy until anything and everything is changed to fit their narrow view of society.

OBSERVER: "Please stop hiring erotica artist to draw women"
AXEL: "We are so sorry about that and we apologies, we understand your objections and have listened. We will still be hiring that artist."
OBSERVER: "Errrr... so you didn't listen?"
NAYSAYER: "GOD!!! There's not reasoning with you feminists"

Really? REALLY?

Likewise I could say you can't win an argument with a misogynist because they downplay every issue facing women and call feminists miserable people just for not agreeing with the status quo.
I never really considered myself a feminist and never paid attention to the sexism in comic books, but reading some of the comments on this board really made me rethink my position on this whole subject.

I wanted to highlight this because JUST TODAY I had exactly the same thought. I've never considered myself a feminist, but seeing this reactions... I guess I am one. And I couldn't be more content with such a title.

[Kieran_Frost]

If you re-read the article, Alonso never apologized for the cover. He apologized for the mixed message it sent. I respect that.

What I have read leads me to believe that most women don't have a problem with the cover per se. What they have a problem with is that this particular book was being built (and advertised) as being aimed at women. And then Marvel put an erotic looking Spider-Woman on one of the covers. An extreme example of what turns most women off from comics. The impossibly positioned heroine showing off parts of her body.
(I'd like to note that some have tried to come up with comparisons of men in highly sexualized poses for contrast. A seemingly futile effort since unless a guy has his hips thrust forward with a bulging cod piece there aren't many suggestive poses for men. This would also be a bad example because most men would laugh at how ridiculous that is. We're just wired differently when it comes to this stuff).

In the end, this may be overblown but it certainly necessary for the continued growth of a women audience. The fact that Marvel made this one misstep on the 8-10 female books should be applauded. I'm not saying this should be ignored, just that it's also important to note what they get right.

I highlighted both because I agree completely with both comments. Marvel have been so awesome recently, and that must not be forgotten; nor should people forget when things like this are an issue and do happen more than "a blip". Women (in all media) are still so vastly more sexualised than men; and that needs to change.

I keep reading that Spider-Woman is aimed at Women. Is this like, legit. I mean, I'm a dude and I plan on picking it up. Will my dude friends make fun of me? Do women want different things from their comic books? Other than not wanting objectifying art.

Women (like men) want good stories with great heroes. What they don't want is to see males her great heroes and women be sex toys who do heroics in provocative poses. It's not asking for the moon...

That is basically my point. You make a book that does not drive female readers away. First you make a book that doesn't objectify female characters in every panel. Then you follow that up with including prominent female characters. They don't have to be necessarily kickass but they should have a personality and a level of independence as opposed to just being a love interest/reward for the male hero. And if you want to get really wild then you make a book with a female lead character keeping the previous points in mind.

So beautifully expressed. This x 1,000,000

[aquitaine]

THANK-YOU!!!
OBSERVER: "Please stop hiring erotica artist to draw women"
AXEL: "We are so sorry about that and we apologies, we understand your objections and have listened. We will still be hiring that artist."
OBSERVER: "Errrr... so you didn't listen?"
NAYSAYER: "GOD!!! There's not reasoning with you feminists"

You see, the issue you folks are having is that you don't understand that people are allowed to disagree with you. Art is subjective. You can find it tasteless and poorly done and he can find it lovely and well designed and you can both be right! That's what's so great about art!

He absolutely DID listen to you. If he had not, you wouldn't have gotten a response at all. What he obviously did NOT do, is AGREE with you. He listened, and disagreed. But even though he disagreed, he went out of his way to apologize to you and explain his side of the situation to you, neither of which were required of him. He pointed out the same thing that many posters have also said: This is a very rare variant that the vast majority of people will never even see. Variants "do not reflect the sensibility or tone of the series" to quote the article. But that's not enough, because anything short of him agreeing with you 100% and changing everything you demand he change instantly will cause the incessant whining to continue.