Sex And Relationships In Comics

[ed2962]

Considering the divorce fest that real life marriage has become, I can't blame writers for portraying it as filled with strife.

But are we really getting that in mainstream comics? It seems that the direction now is to undo certain marriages and put a moratorium on others. It's less showing marriages breaking up and more going "this never happened, these people never reached this stage in life."

[ed2962]

A youtuber talks about how the graphic novel version of Blue Is The Warmest Color affected her on a personal level. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsmaIbZf4AU

[ed2962]

So my comic store had Image First Issues for a Dollar ( which I think is a great idea by the way) and I picked up Sex Criminals #1.

I actually pretty much liked it. I understand what some people said when they said it tries really hard to be clever, but I think the good outweighs the bad. What I really liked was the fact that it actually dealt with the insecurities and questions that young people have to face when it to sexual relationships.

I might try to find either the single issues if I can get them cheap or the trade

[Hypestyle]

Marvel and DC should have come out with the equivalent of Love & Rockets and Strangers in Paradise decades ago. Then again, it would probably get bashed relentlessly. Oh, well.

[Spike-X]

Marvel and DC should have come out with the equivalent of Love & Rockets and Strangers in Paradise decades ago. Then again, it would probably get bashed relentlessly. Oh, well.

Why? We already have those comics.

[ed2962]

Marvel and DC should have come out with the equivalent of Love & Rockets and Strangers in Paradise decades ago. Then again, it would probably get bashed relentlessly. Oh, well.

DC did release a comic called The New York Five about several college are women trying to get their lives together. It was a sequel to The New York Four which was part of their short lived Minx line.

[Dr. Jay]

Considering the divorce fest that real life marriage has become, I can't blame writers for portraying it as filled with strife.

A realistic divorce would be better than the ways they usually choose to end marriage--death, retcon, or kidnapping.

I wonder if comics' marriage problem is a limitation of the material ("super hero adventure comics") or a limitation of the writer.

[ed2962]

A realistic divorce would be better than the ways they usually choose to end marriage--death, retcon, or kidnapping.

I wonder if comics' marriage problem is a limitation of the material ("super hero adventure comics") or a limitation of the writer.

I think it's a perception of what they think the audience wants to read or what they think they can easily sell. Spiderman and Superman were married for years before those marriages were retconned and Reed and Sue have been married since the 60's. Many of the creators are married guys with kids so it's not like it's impossible to write married superheroes.

Despite all the talk about 40yr olds buying comics, I think management as an image of who they think the core audience is, and they they those people don't relate to superheroes who are "too old" and marriage "ages" characters.

[ed2962]

Earlier I was actually looking for that cover where Spidey and MJ get kicked out of their place, but in the process I ran across this, I thought it was an interesting analysis

olrattyg:
mrsspidermanmaryjanewatsonparker:
tierouy:
mrsspidermanmaryjanewatsonparker:
fuckyeahmelancholy:
It’s hilarious when people in Spider-Man fandom take shots at Mary Jane or Felicia for having a lot of sex, because do you know how many people Spider-Man has dated? Do you? The man is a whore, and that’s just if he’s straight.
Yeah there is a biiiiiiig double…
Disclaimer: The Spider-man analysis below will only take the pre One More Day continuity into account.

This whole “Peter Parker is player!” statements always makes me laugh because they couldn’t be further away from the truth. Peter is if anything (almost!) demisexual. He’s aspiration when it comes to dating have always been to be married. Yes, it’s no secret that Peter Parker have dated quite a few women but he have had romantic feelings each and every one of those women (albeit stronger feelings for some than than others) and he have only had confirmed sex with two women, Mary Jane Watson and Felicia Hardy. He has thus never had a one night stand in his life. Peter Parker is as far from a pick-up artist as you could possibly get, unless you have taken a vow of celibacy.

I can see two main reasons for why people insists on calling Peter a player:

1. They aren’t really that knowledgeable about what actually went down between Peter and the various women he have dated, having only really read their names and seen pictures of the women.
2. People feel (consciously or subconsciously) threatened about the fact that Peter feels so strongly for combining sex with love rather than just wanting to have sex with every attractive women he meets.

I have been a film student for several years and have studied (or rather to be honest dabbled in) feminist film theory. This school of film analysis suggests that the most crucial trope in the action film genre is to confirm to the audience as clearly as possible that the male hero is heterosexual. Every other genre convention, no matter how essential they might seem are secondary to this. The male hero can’t be in a committed relationship with a woman at the beginning of the film (well unless she is going to be killed of/kidnapped/taken hostage very early into the film) because that defeats the purpose of him “winning” a female partner as a prize for his accomplishment whether it is besting the villain, saving the life of president of the United States or similar.

But how can you then confirm to the audience that their hero is heterosexual?! I mean if he doesn’t have a female partner won’t that mean that some audience members might start questioning his sexual orientation, thinking that he just might be gay?!

There is a common solution to this problem and that solution is to include one or several one dimensional conventionally attractive women that the hero is shown to be having casual sex with. These women aren’t characters and are rarely even give names. They are nothing more than sex props for the male hero. Their solo purpose to the plot is to convey two things to the audience.

1. The male hero is heterosexual.
2. The male hero proves himself to be a so called “real man” as seduces and has sex with a lot of different conventionally attractive women.

These absolutely beautiful women are of course so dime a dozen to our hyper masculine male hero that he won’t bother with showing any form of respect towards them.

Let’s take X-Men Days of Future Past to use a recent enough example. Wolverine’s mind is sent back decades in time into his younger body and he wakes up in the 1973 next to a naked young and conventionally attractive woman that we immediately learn that his 1973 self is involved in a sexual relationship with. She is only included in that one scene, never showing up or even being mentioned again for the rest of the film. Her entire purpose in the plot was thus to establish to the audience that Wolverine is a heterosexual macho man who has sex with attractive women. Similar examples can be found in almost any action film regardless of setting.

This does of course apply to the entire action genre regardless of storytelling medium.


I want to add that I don’t in any way condemn casual sex in general. I’m in also no way opposed to the idea that men are perfectly capable of having casual sex with many different women whilst at the same time actually respecting the women in question and thinking of them as people rather than as prizes to be won. It’s the action genre that have historically been a cesspool of sexism and still is in many ways.

The Earth-616 Spider-Man had at the point when I stopped reading gone on for over forty years and it had still not once resorted to including female characters as one dimensional sex props existing solely to prove Peter’s masculinity. Not being into casual sex does not in any way make Peter superior but it makes him different, it really makes him stand out against the average male hero. (Although I guess that viewing women as people rather than as sexual objects only existing for him to put his penis in kind of does make him superior to most male heroes!)

That isn’t to say that Peter is perfect, I personally think that he does have a few notable sexist issues that he needs to work on/is working on. Mostly in the lines of benevolent sexism caused by the old fashioned gentleman ideals. Which I personally think is totally in character for him since he was after all raised by an older couple whom I could definitely see sporting old fashioned values*.

*Although my headcanon has Aunt May as an ardent feminist who have marched and participated in countless and marches and demonstrations for women’s rights throughout her life.
A thought provoking post, though if I might make a few points.
I don’t think he did have any serious feelings for Deb Whitman, but you’re right, it’s not like he ever went out with a woman just to bed her. He certainly wasn’t in love with her. He was only in love with MJ, Gwen and probably Felicia.
Actually he also had confirmed sex with Betty Brant too. Granted in theory nothing might’ve occurred but if you read that stuff it is pretty heavily implied. Hence why her husband was so pissed off
What sexist issues do you feel Peter needs to work on? I’ve talked about this before but the only thing off the top of my head that comes off as sexist about Peter was his issues about MJ earning more than him or his desire to be the provider, which wasn’t even that big of a deal and was more tied up with a) his old fashioned upbringing (because Uncle Ben and Aunt May were basically old enough to be his grandparents) and b) his guilt/responsibility complex. He mostly kind of grew passed that stuff and was cool with MJ earning more but he always felt he didn’t deserve her and so tried to again be the best to provide for her.
I always felt like his issues with MJ earning more more had to do with his responsibility complex. Pete hates not doing anything, and in his worldview not contributing to society or simply his own household is probably one of the greatest sins you can commit. He doesn’t have a problem with a woman earning more, he has a problem with himself not earning enough.
I actually addressed this subject here
olrattyg Source: fuckyeahmelancholy

[ed2962]

Finally got a print copy of Sunstone. I really enjoyed it. Not heavy on plot but the charming character interactions and introspection make up for it. The art is great. It's a really interesting look at a i guess "alternative' sexuality. And despite the kinky nature of the subject matter the comic doesn't feel like porn.


Not that I'm anti-porn, but...

[ed2962]

Finally, got around to reading the first Sex Criminals trade and for the most part I enjoyed it. Think the chemistry between the two leads feels relaxed and plausible. And I liked that there's a few honest conversations about the awkwardness that surrounds sex.

[ed2962]

Lately I've been enjoying the relationship between Matt and Kristen in Daredevil. They seem like actual adults and the portrayal has been pretty mature. Also, despite not having powers, Kristen for the most part seems to be presented as an equal in the relationship.

[PretenderNX01]

A realistic divorce would be better than the ways they usually choose to end marriage--death, retcon, or kidnapping.

I wonder if comics' marriage problem is a limitation of the material ("super hero adventure comics") or a limitation of the writer.

Limitation of some writers and a lot of editors. I've seen writers make good use of a couple's relationship and even now Aquaman has a queen in Mera but DC won't say "married" because of fears that means they are grownups.

Liberty Belle II and Hourman II were married and always flirting in the background of JSA. It doesn't kill a couple's relationship to commit.

But are we really getting that in mainstream comics? It seems that the direction now is to undo certain marriages and put a moratorium on others. It's less showing marriages breaking up and more going "this never happened, these people never reached this stage in life."

That's true. For some reason people think that marriage means "the end" and that it's boring. Obviously there is a lot of life in relationships and a lot you can deal with. Superman isn't really any better for not being married to Lois, they just stuck him with Wonder Woman. It's not like he's playing the field or anything, he went from one to the other so why?

Peter devolved after being broke up with MJ to the point they replaced him with Doc Ock

[ed2962]

I read the convergence WW issue this weekend. There was nice scene with Dina and Steve Trevor as a couple. It was played out in a naturalistic and believable way. I really wish we could get more scenes like this with her and non-powered lovers.

[ed2962]

Limitation of some writers and a lot of editors. I've seen writers make good use of a couple's relationship and even now Aquaman has a queen in Mera but DC won't say "married" because of fears that means they are grownups.

Liberty Belle II and Hourman II were married and always flirting in the background of JSA. It doesn't kill a couple's relationship to commit.

That's true. For some reason people think that marriage means "the end" and that it's boring. Obviously there is a lot of life in relationships and a lot you can deal with. Superman isn't really any better for not being married to Lois, they just stuck him with Wonder Woman. It's not like he's playing the field or anything, he went from one to the other so why?

Peter devolved after being broke up with MJ to the point they replaced him with Doc Ock

I think it's because in a lot of fiction the marriage is the end of the story. In some romantic comedies, sitcoms, fairy tales...the guy finally gets the girl so the story is over. Plus, like you say, in cape comics, marriage means you're old and setting down. You can't just go running off at the drop of a hat to have an adventure.