Thread Drift: Male vs. Female Sexuality

[Iron Maiden]

To some this is the sexualzatoonn of women and it is wrong for whatever reason in there mind :



But this isnt:

It's a double standard that is getting out of hand.

Some might call it a stereotype to show citizens of an advanced nation dressed in tribal costumes instead of westernized attire. Can you quote me as to who called this a sexual thing? With the Dora Milaje I can see some making a case for it because it's frequenly mistaken as the harem of the BP when they really function as body guards. I think later depictions of them having wearing body armor which would make more sense. This was pointed out earlier in this thread...that if you're going to be a modern day combatant, you don't want you vital organs area exposed.

[Iron Maiden]

This panel being called out bothered me because those accusations ignored the intentions behind it and took it out of context in order to prove a poorly constructed point. And did you see the interactions that followed people complaining about it? Pretty telling.

I do think some context would help. What exactly is going on here and why are some of the females smiling??

[dragonmp93]

To some this is the sexualzatoonn of women and it is wrong for whatever reason in there mind :



But this isnt:

It's a double standard that is getting out of hand.

The whole thing is quite simply actually, from what i got from these kind of threads, is that if someone (who isnt a straight male) says that something is/isnt sexualization, then it's/it isnt. Period.

[Of Atlantis]

Some might call it a stereotype to show citizens of an advanced nation dressed in tribal costumes instead of westernized attire. Can you quote me as to who called this a sexual thing? With the Dora Milaje I can see some making a case for it because it's frequenly mistaken as the harem of the BP when they really function as body guards. I think later depictions of them having wearing body armor which would make more sense. This was pointed out earlier in this thread...that if you're going to be a modern day combatant, you don't want you vital organs area exposed.

It could be possible that the attire worn by the guards could be attributed to Wakandan tradition. It's an explanation, albeit a convenient one, that would explain the lack of armour for both examples. I think it might've been in the old boards where how they were dressed was pointed out as being sexist because they served under a man, insinuating that women were forced to wear revealing clothes because the king, above them all, told them to. I definitely think both examples should move forward with some type of body armour, though I'd aimagine it'd be boiling hot in Wakanda.

[Of Atlantis]

I do think some context would help. What exactly is going on here and why are some of the females smiling??

The context is Danny and Sparrow storming his former office building, now under the control of the enemy. What I got from it was that it's supposed to be a Tarantino inspired sequence of ninjas who happen to be female in order to add to the imagery, not one that's supposed to pander to sexual fantasies as some arguments suggested.

[Trident]

I don't think the topless male is a sexual thing. Wrestlers and boxers compete without shirts. But you don't see the panties and garters showing on the bottom left plus the women's bra slipping out of her top as sexual?? During a fight?

It's completely biased. Because the norm is for men to have their shirts off makes athletic portrayals of men non-seuxual. However, when a female who wants to be considered and treated as equal in what has been by culture a "mans" sport/work it becomes sexualization or it's turned into the reverse of being treated unfairly. (for the record as a man. NO, I didn't notice any bras or garters showing in that image. I saw women fighting because there is nothing sexual about that scene. )

Another example but in the real world... below is a woman doing what men have done for years.

But some called it indecent and others fought and said this is a women following the same cultural norms of the sport and that it is her right to display this free expression of here being a women and excited that she claimed a victory.

But which is it really? Can women not wear next to nothing in a comic without it being sexualized or can they? Is it only free expression when it is being drawn, written, and produced by women? If that is the case then why don't the same rules apply to men?

If women want more representation in comics should they not fall in to the same categories men have been placed in? If the room was filled with men in speedos fighting and nothing else it would be perfectly normal, would it not? Ok, then why is it different for women?

The true answer to this is there isn't a difference. Some would like to have all the benefits of being a certain sex/category/whatever but only when it suits them or when their is no actual accountability. It's completely hypocritical.

[Iron Maiden]

It could be possible that the attire worn by the guards could be attributed to Wakandan tradition. It's an explanation, albeit a convenient one, that would explain the lack of armour for both examples. I think it might've been in the old boards where how they were dressed was pointed out as being sexist because they served under a man, insinuating that women were forced to wear revealing clothes because the king, above them all, told them to. I definitely think both examples should move forward with some type of body armour, though I'd aimagine it'd be boiling hot in Wakanda.

True but our troops stationed in that part of the world don't wear loincloths. LOL. Not that I've traveled to Africa but in a lot of new feeds I've seen they wear khakis, shorts, etc. I don't think Wakandan warriors should like like this and I would think artists would be beyond the loincloth and spear look in Wakanda. This looks like an old Tarzan movie from the 1940s. But I didn't read this Daredevil arc to know why they are shown dressed like this.

[Iron Maiden]

It's completely biased. Because the norm is for men to have their shirts off makes athletic portrayals of men non-seuxual. However, when a female who wants to be considered and treated as equal in what has been by culture a "mans" sport/work it becomes sexualization or it's turned into the reverse of being treated unfairly. (for the record as a man. NO, I didn't notice any bras or garters showing in that image. I saw women fighting because there is nothing sexual about that scene. )

Another example but in the real world... below is a woman doing what men have done for years.
But some called it indecent and others fought and said this is a women following the same cultural norms of the sport and that it is her right to display this free expression of here being a women and excited that she claimed a victory.

But which is it really? Can women not wear next to nothing in a comic without it being sexualized or can they? Is it only free expression when it is being drawn, written, and produced by women? If that is the case then why don't the same rules apply to men?

If women want more representation in comics should they not fall in to the same categories men have been placed in? If the room was filled with men in speedos fighting and nothing else it would be perfect normal, would it not? Ok, then why is it different for women?

The true answer to this is there isn't a difference. Some would like to have all the benefits of being a certain sex/category/whatever but only when it suits them or when their is no actual accountability. It's completely hypocritical.

I feel I shouldn't even have to tell you something this obvious but the breasts of a female are highly sexualized in our culture. It even took quite a few years before women could breast feed in public but it still causes a stir sometimes. In many areas, a female going topless can get her arrested. Many beaches will ban it. Have you seen that happen to men?

[Trident]

I feel I shouldn't even have to tell you something this obvious but the breasts of a female are highly sexualized in our culture. It even took quite a few years before women could breast feed in public but it still causes a stir sometimes. In many areas, a female going topless can get her arrested. Many beaches will ban it. Have you seen that happen to men?

To which it is understandable but in each of the examples shown all of the women did not have there breast exposed and all were placed in situations that men have been placed in. But it still considered sexualization in the minds of some even though men have had the same things happen to them in comics/tv/ect for years.

If men wearing less clothing with perfect physiques it's isn't sexualizing them then the same can be said for women.



There is nothing sexual about the above photo. Yet you claimed that it was since the bra and garters were showing in some of the images(which I failed to even notice)

So Yes or No is this sexualizing men?

[Iron Maiden]

To which it is understandable but in each of the examples shown all of the women did not have there breast exposed and all were placed in situations that men have been placed in. But it still considered sexualization in the minds of some even though men have had the same things happen to them in comics/tv/ect for years.

If men wearing less clothing with perfect physiques it's isn't sexualizing them then the same can be said for women.


There is nothing sexual about the above photo. Yet you claimed that it was since the bra and garters were showing in some of the images(which I failed to even notice)

So Yes or No is this sexualizing men?
[/img]

Men wearing trunks in a fight is not sexualizing them since we see this in competion. But you really don't acknowledge that panties and garters and a bra popping out the woman's top isn't?? When they are prominently placed in the foreground? If you don't think that there is a difference between the images you just posted then we have reached an impasse. It is not as bad as some examples but the sexual element is definitely there.

[Trident]

Men wearing trunks in a fight is not sexualizing them since we see this in competion. But you really don't acknowledge that panties and garters and a bra popping out the woman's top isn't?? When they are prominently placed in the foreground? If you don't think that there is a difference between the images you just posted then we have reached an impasse. It is not as bad as some examples but the sexual element is definitely there.

So you are sticking with that since women do not wear more revealing clothing in competitions that it isn't the same?



This is Ronda Rousey professional UFC fighter. Is this sexual or not?

[Iron Maiden]

So you are sticking with that since women do not wear more revealing clothing in competitions that it isn't the same?



This is Ronda Rousey professional UFC fighter. Is this sexual or not?

Since she is all glammed up I would say there is an attempt to look sexually attractive. She has lip gloss, eyeliner and shaped eyebrows. Would a male boxer do that? So that's not exactly a good example. The other female soccer player had no makeup, etc and was in the midst of a game. This is obviously posed.

But going back to the IF scene I don't think many female boxers wear stockings with garter tops and the POV of the drawing is looking up the woman's dress on the left and then you have the cleavage and the black bra popping out on the right side of the drawing. Again, there's a big difference there.

[Trident]

Since she is all glammed up I would say there is an attempt to look sexually attractive. She has lip gloss, eyeliner and shaped eyebrows. Would a male boxer do that? So that's not exactly a good example. The other female soccer player had no makeup, etc and was in the midst of a game. This is obviously posed

So for her not to be sexualized she shouldn't be following the social norms of most women? Really?

So then by your same argument then this male is being sexualized as well?



Due to the fact that for these shots makeup must be applied along with baby oil and spites of water to highlight his physical attributes. Neither of which is normal for the everyday male nor is it normal for baby oil to be applied to women boxers/fighters.

But going back to the IF scene I don't think many female boxers were stockings with garter tops and the POV of the drawing is looking up the woman's dress on the left and then you have the cleavage and the black bra popping out on the right side of the drawing. Again, there's a big difference there.

No female boxers do not wear that sorta thing in the ring. But in comic books, where situations vary all the time, men and women both sometimes end up fighting in weird poses and in skippy clothing.

To say one sex isn't being sexualized when the situations are basically the same as the other is hypocritical.

[Blacksun]

Choose attractive actors to portray the heroes is hardly sexualizing them. Most people on movies are attractive.

[Iron Maiden]

So for her not to be sexualized she shouldn't be following the social norms of most women? Really?

It's not normal for a boxer though is it? IMO she's a bit overdone and it's more of a glam shot than an atheletic shot. But I don't want to quibble about that and it's mainly the IF panel that you seem to be glossing over.

So then by your same argument then this male is being sexualized as well?
Due to the fact that for these shots makeup must be applied along with baby oil and spites of water to highlight his physical attributes. Neither of which is normal for the everyday male nor is it normal for baby oil to be applied to women boxers/fighters.

Baby oil to me is not makeup and I really don't think these are relevant to the scene from IF. IMO it's just simulating the glistening of a body perspiring after a work out. I don't even notice any enhancements in the first shot. Some may consider it sex-y but IMO it just as easily could be showing someone after a workout. The woman in the other shot is playing up her glamourous side particularly since she is a woman competing in what is typically a sport with male competitors. But even that is not really a big deal and not what I've been pointing out over and over about the IF panel.

No female boxers do not wear that sorta thing in the ring. But in comic books, where situations vary all the time, men and women both sometimes end up fighting in weird poses and in skippy clothing.

To say one sex isn't being sexualized when the situations are basically to the same as the other is hypocritical.

No they are not the same if the women in that IF scene are shown with their panties and bra exposed yet IF is in his normal IF attire. You honestly don't you see the difference there? If you don't then we have reached an impasse. So what do you think of when you are looking up a woman's dress? and be honest. Then I will truly wonder who is being hypocritical here.