Sexy vs Sexist: Where do you draw the line?

[mathew101281]

Often when issues of sexism in geek culture come up I here someone say "I don't have a problem with sexuality in (what ever medium or genre they are talking about) but..." . This brings up the issue of of where the line of demarcation between sexy and sexist is. What are your views on the difference?

[Dispenser Of Truth]

Honesty. I could care less about porn or some artist doing a cheesecake book, but something like Starfire's revamp or the Power Girl boob window or Ed Benes' entire career where creators have to brush it off or craft some bullshit about how it makes total sense in the comic itself--as if that removes the actual reasons for skimpy costumes--annoys me. You want to sexualize cartoon characters, fine, that's your thing, but don't do it in the actual books to the point where something is being done clearly for the sake of that and that alone.

[afrocarter]

I always approach this question via the story: if a female superhero, for instance, is suiting up to fight/investigate crime, is she more likely to pick out something that's sexy and shows off her curves? Or will she pick out something that is functional and protective? Sometimes the answer is the former, but I would argue that in most cases it usually won't make any sense for the heroine to have her breasts bursting out of a ridiculously low-cut top. If there's no logic to it, chances are it's exploitative.

[ed2962]

While I'm pretty sure I know what you're asking, I think the title kinda confuses a couple of different concepts. I mean, Sexism is more about gender relations/politics while "sexy" is more, uh...what turns a person on?

It's possible to produce hardcore pornography that's not sexist. It's definitely possible to be sexist or express sexism without appealing to purient interests. Sure, there's overlap and discussing one often leads to discussing the other, but anyway...

If the question is where do you draw the line between sexy and exploitative or demeaning, I think for me it has a lot to do with the content and the execution, then the intent and the platform. I think it's valid to explore say sexual dysfunction using the comics medium, but it that really you want to see in Justice League? It's valid to do a straight up raunch fest, but why put that in Spider Man?

[t hedge coke]

I wish I could find Donald Rooum's Wildcat strip about the difference between the two, but the upshot is, they're not the same thing. No amount of being sexy can make something sexist, but something can be sexist without being sexy at all, to anyone. Objectification, either physical or in characterization, gender essentialism, that's sexist. How women or men are portrayed irrationally or for the sake of pandering in relation to how the opposite sex are portrayed, that can easily be sexist. But, sexy is something else, even if they may often go hand in hand with an artist or writer who's got personal hang ups (especially unexamined personal hang ups).

Thongs aren't sexist. All the women in your comic wearing thongs while the men where full-legged outfits, jutting their chest out in unnatural an uncomfortable poses that you defend as "helping with her martial arts," in situations that the rest of the sane world realizes are impractical and unreasonable, that's sexist. Unless, y'know, satire. And, even then, your mileage may, as they say, vary.

[ExcelsiorPrime]

Not being a woman...for me it comes down to story first. Is the character doing something in the comic beyond being a sexual object to ogle?

Sue DeConnick said something about a sexy lamp...which is perfect. If the character can be replaced by a sexy lamp and the story not suffer...there is a problem.

I think that is a fair litmus test.

[CSTowle]

Since I started reading comics when as a small child (X-Men comics, with Psylocke's ninja-thong outfit) I pretty much don't notice "sexy" outfits on female superheroes anymore. It's sort of expected. I do notice things like the Black Widow butt-jut in the Avengers group shot, and that does take me out of the comic. And while I grew up during the "bad girl" trend in comics I learned pretty quickly that comics with women writhing around on the cover like a porn star tended to have bad stories inside. I've been assured Zenescope's line of comics have some quality books, but when I see covers like this:

NSFW link

I won't even grab for it to see what's inside. And I'd imagine more than a few women see that and walk out of the shop altogether (not to mention parents with young children). As someone said earlier, if it serves the story I'm fine with "sexy". It's just that most of the time (at least in the superhero comics I read) it doesn't.

Edit: For clarity, since the previous editor didn't bother, the NSFW link is to a typical Zenescope cover with no nudity (though barely, as with most of their covers).

[Paradox]

There are no "lines of demarcation". It doesn't work that way (almost nothing outside of hard sciences do). There's lots of factors to take into account, including but not limited to venue, intended audience and intent of the artist.

[ExcelsiorPrime]

There are no "lines of demarcation". It doesn't work that way (almost nothing outside of hard sciences do). There's lots of factors to take into account, including but not limited to venue, intended audience and intent of the artist.

Exactly. Some women love artwork featuring what some would call sexist art-- its all about content and context.

[Marvel_Is]

Is there really a difference between the two? Some people find some things deemed sexist as sexy.

[Paradox]

Yes, in fact, they're nothing at all alike or connected.

Unless you're Nigel Tufnel.

[Alan2099]

I'm fine with the existence of books like Lady Death, Tarot, Witchblade, Vampirella, and all those other books about women running around and posing in under sized underwear. Sometimes they're even enjoyable. If that's your thing, more power to ya'.

But I'd just prefer it if they kept that kinda stuff out of books like Avengers, Teen Titans, or Wonder Woman. Let's keep the mainstream books suitable for a mainstream audience and let the characters that actually have some dignity keep it.

[t hedge coke]

Is there really a difference between the two? Some people find some things deemed sexist as sexy.

They have some crossover, but so does sexism and, say, money. But sexism isn't money, and it will never transition into money. Likewise, sexism doesn't transition, at any point, into sexy, and sexy doesn't transition into sexy. Some things can simply by about sex and sexist, and some things can be about (or portray) money and be sexist.

[MikeP]

"I can't define it, but I know it when I see it"

[ScottSummers]

Often when issues of sexism in geek culture come up I here someone say "I don't have a problem with sexuality in (what ever medium or genre they are talking about) but..." . This brings up the issue of of where the line of demarcation between sexy and sexist is. What are your views on the difference?

There's no clear line to analyze. I wouldn't overthink it. There was a judge who famously quipped about porn versus art saying "you know it when you see it".