Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 249
  1. #16
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7,322

    Default

    It is strange how most of these conversations seem to focus on the evils of cheesecake. Do people actually have a problem with women being pulled out of refrigerators,being the only team member crippled, 10 page rape scenes? etc.etc. Because those are actual examples of sexism that nobody seems to talk about.

  2. #17
    It's been fun. Toodles. Paradox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Millennium City MI/Kalamazoo MI
    Posts
    4,276

    Default

    Actually, people have been talking about such things for a good decade or more, quite frequently. These things end up being focused on cheesecake because a certain contingent of the fans is mad that the dirty feminists are trying to take away their cartoon boobies (they're not).
    'Dox out.

    "It’s cold and it’s mean-spirited and I don’t like it here anymore." - Alan Moore

    "Can it, you nit!" - Violet Beauregard

    "And Paradox is never correct. About anything."- Kid Omega


    The Conclave group page on Primus (a work in progress)
    Champions: The Conclave (an updating Facebook Gallery)
    Decorum & Friends (A City of Heroes archive)

  3. #18
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Mega-City One, USA
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox View Post
    Actually, people have been talking about such things for a good decade or more, quite frequently. These things end up being focused on cheesecake because a certain contingent of the fans is mad that the dirty feminists are trying to take away their cartoon boobies (they're not).
    The article actually includes many pictures of female characters showing cleavage as a self explanatory point. Some of which to me don't have broken back poses or anything that doesn't fit the tone of the book, especially the Catwoman and Rogue pics etc. And we often see a news story on BleedingCool etc about how one of the month's solicitations has cleavage on the cover, or people complaining in threads about a character having big breasts, we see this stuff all the time. People aren't making this up.

    More specifically, it's people who disagree on what context "boobies" are deemed apropos in, and according to the article it seems to be pretty much just Emma Frost who gets a pass. Who knows what logic dictates Emma getting a pass but not Catwoman or Black Cat. Plus I disagree with that whole concept. Anyways. These arguments have happened quite a lot, it's not a conspiracy theory. And I wouldn't specify a specific gender, political preference, or whatnot to any side of it, everyone is an individual with their own view on it.
    Last edited by Psycho; 06-17-2014 at 10:07 PM.

  4. #19
    Extraordinary Member t hedge coke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Weihai
    Posts
    7,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Psycho View Post
    Bhe opinion that say Catwoman unzipping her costume somewhat to show cleavage is bad is an opinion I disagree with for example. And one that makes no sense whatsover, why can't she do that?
    A) She's a character used to sell a lot of children's products.
    B) It's not conducive to the physical activities she's usually involved in
    C) She'd be flying out all over the place
    D) Catwoman's cleavage is less important to many people than her dressing like a cat, stealing stuff, and maybe doing some backflips or something off a rooftop.

    However, again, those are just criticisms. There are plusses, for Catwoman cleavage, too. And, clearly, there are comics where she's unzipped to her waist and running around anyway.

    I like Tarot. I like Fake. I like Spain's work. But those aren't used to sell children's inflatable pool toys.

    Tarot gets criticized frequently, usually on the basis of covers or one infamous storyline, and fair enough, but you don't really see Jim Balent worried anyone's trying to take away sexy Catwoman even though he drew a deliberately sexed up Catwoman, or that they're trying to censor his work on his own comics. Same for Perez, Waid, Doran, or McNeil, Fegredo, or a lot of talent who've done blatantly sexy work.

    The column isn't even really criticizing sexy comics, it's criticizing impractically objectified children's characters. Characters who are marketed heavily towards children but whose representation in comics seems, instead, to be dictated by what grown men who like looking at drawn cleavage want, instead of what all the audience the characters are marketed to might like. Would the author like to see less of that? Probably. But they're not petitioning a regulatory board, they're not establishing law, they're just drawing audience attention to something. They're just having a conversation.

    Oglaf has more sex and nudity than any comic in the article. There are nurse porn comics for sale right now; those aren't on the list. Because it's not about sexy, or sexualized, or sex, it's about corporate-owned characters often marketed towards children in easy-reader books and toddler clothes, and a subsection of the fandom that apparently feels threatened by someone just saying, hey, maybe Catwoman or Black Widow don't have to be posed in brokeback with their butt raised to us and their top unzipped impractically all the time.
    Patsy Walker on TV! Patsy Walker in new comics! Patsy Walker in your brain! And Jessica Jones is the new Nancy! (Oh, and read the Comics Cube.)

  5. #20
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by t hedge coke View Post
    A) She's a character used to sell a lot of children's products.
    Robocop had a line of children's products, and a cartoon targeted at children, yet the movies had A LOT of blood and violence.

  6. #21
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Mega-City One, USA
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by t hedge coke View Post
    Tarot gets criticized frequently, usually on the basis of covers or one infamous storyline, and fair enough, but you don't really see Jim Balent worried anyone's trying to take away sexy Catwoman even though he drew a deliberately sexed up Catwoman, or that they're trying to censor his work on his own comics. Same for Perez, Waid, Doran, or McNeil, Fegredo, or a lot of talent who've done blatantly sexy work.
    I heard a great interview with Jim and Holly of Tarot on a podcast called Hexcast. They actually discussed a lot how their busty characters and pro sexuality stuff is positive and how it's unfair the body shame and whatnot you often see in comics. Pretty interesting stuff. I also liked an interview where Amanda Conner explained why Power Girl's busty curvy look and costume is a positive thing, so there's one woman for example who disagrees with this article on PG showing cleavage. Anyways, comic writers don't complain quite as much about comics as us fans do (though some are catching up on twitter).

    And I disagree with your post that sexuality should be barred because comics are kid friendly (the new 52 is not inherently), leaving us with kid friendly no-sexy books and adult anything goes nudity books. Why no range in the middle? People show cleavage in our society, it's often acceptable. Children might see this if they leave the house on a summer day! But the book Catwoman has a Teen+ rating or whatnot on it, and it should be treated as such, and cleavage is certainly something that shouldn't be taboo there, to me. And fits the character.

    And I get that the article is about "impractically objectified" characters to the author, and I disagree on several specific examples. And I also disagree that the direct comics market is for kids. And as mentioned Robocop, Alien, several gory rated R movies had children's toys. And even then, I think the violence should be much more of a concern to parents than a little bit of the human body. But anyways, we're talking about mostly Teen+ or Teen (or similar) rated comic books. The US comics market scene is not getting much bigger, and I don't think 4 dollar periodicals will be affordable to many kids or for many parents to give their kids. Due to the money issue alone, I'd say appealing to older readers is actually a good idea. That's a larger topic.

    And considering we're just having a conversation like you say, isn't it odd to arbitrarily assign one side of a debate as "feeling threatened"? A little subtle belittling goes a long way. And I've actually said before I agree broken back poses deserve criticism, I like well drawn anatomy. I do disagree that Catwoman showing cleavage and having overt sex appeal is bad.
    Last edited by Psycho; 06-17-2014 at 10:27 PM.

  7. #22
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,453

    Default

    As far back as I can tell, Catwoman has always been an overtly sexualized character, you could argue that older comics did it more subtly and tastefully it, but she's certainly never been an innocent children's character who was only sexed up recently as an attention grab.

  8. #23
    BANNED Mikekerr3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    3,296

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Psycho View Post
    But the article's hope seems to be that it will encourage this censorship (not that censorship is the word they'd choose from their perspective). How much have things changed since I last said things should change, etc.

    The opinion that say Catwoman unzipping her costume somewhat to show cleavage is bad is an opinion I disagree with for example. And one that makes no sense whatsover, why can't she do that? Doesn't she do things society frowns on a bit more than that? Will the breeze stop her from doing impossible gymnastic feats? But the context of these articles does seem to be that they're hoping to just never see these things they don't like, and that they hope they are censored.
    What is wrong with encouraging people not to do stupid BS? Most of us hope not to see to much of what is offensive to us and have the right to say so. Companies are free to disagree or agree and if they chose a way that loses them money that is thier responsibility, not that of the critics/ I guess the concept of free enterprise is, like censorship, too subtle for easy understanding.?

  9. #24
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Mega-City One, USA
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikekerr3 View Post
    What is wrong with encouraging people not to do stupid BS? Most of us hope not to see to much of what is offensive to us and have the right to say so. Companies are free to disagree or agree and if they chose a way that loses them money that is thier responsibility, not that of the critics/ I guess the concept of free enterprise is, like censorship, too subtle for easy understanding.?
    Because we don't agree Catwoman's actions there are stupid BS, that's a bit of a loaded question. And I understand the difference between criticism and what censorship is, we've discussed that specifically. Instead of explaining your thoughts you'd rather just make baseless insults on people's intelligence, like it helps your point? Why not stick to the topic.

  10. #25
    Extraordinary Member t hedge coke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Weihai
    Posts
    7,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PwrdOn View Post
    As far back as I can tell, Catwoman has always been an overtly sexualized character, you could argue that older comics did it more subtly and tastefully it, but she's certainly never been an innocent children's character who was only sexed up recently as an attention grab.
    And she should be a sexualized character, to my tastes, but I also don't want her sexualization to overtake her validity as a threat, and sitting there wondering how the unzipped top works (and never catches skin) instead of "can she get away from Batman with the jewels this time?" means that the objectification, the sexualization, has overtaken everything else. When the point of Catwoman is to show up, bend over a bit, purr, and we're done, that's not a crime, but it is sad.

    Take a Catwoman artist, and just ask: Did they ever draw a dangerous looking Catwoman? Or a actiony Catwoman? A fierce, dangerous looking Catwoman? Or is it pretty much all sexual-pretzel impersonations?

    That, to me, is an easy way to judge. There's a difference between what I've seen of Howard Chaykin using Catwoman and Guillem March. I think Frank Miller's recent Catwoman illo looked great, but it was a poor choice, regardless, especially as a standalone piece. Sometimes in life "I like it" or "it's technically very good" don't create a "get out of criticism free" card.
    Patsy Walker on TV! Patsy Walker in new comics! Patsy Walker in your brain! And Jessica Jones is the new Nancy! (Oh, and read the Comics Cube.)

  11. #26
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Mega-City One, USA
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by t hedge coke View Post
    And she should be a sexualized character, to my tastes, but I also don't want her sexualization to overtake her validity as a threat, and sitting there wondering how the unzipped top works (and never catches skin) instead of "can she get away from Batman with the jewels this time?" means that the objectification, the sexualization, has overtaken everything else. When the point of Catwoman is to show up, bend over a bit, purr, and we're done, that's not a crime, but it is sad.

    Take a Catwoman artist, and just ask: Did they ever draw a dangerous looking Catwoman? Or a actiony Catwoman? A fierce, dangerous looking Catwoman? Or is it pretty much all sexual-pretzel impersonations?

    That, to me, is an easy way to judge. There's a difference between what I've seen of Howard Chaykin using Catwoman and Guillem March. I think Frank Miller's recent Catwoman illo looked great, but it was a poor choice, regardless, especially as a standalone piece. Sometimes in life "I like it" or "it's technically very good" don't create a "get out of criticism free" card.
    Your idea that the mere inclusion of cleavage nullifies everything else about the character is something you're bringing to it. And I'd say Guillem draws an excellent Catwoman all around, fierce, some of the best action scenes, conveying emotion well, while also looking sexy. And that one wonky cover he revised aside for the most part his anatomy has been very good, at least as good as most of his peers, not too pretzel-ish. I think Catwoman as a multifaceted character still works with cleavage and blatant sex appeal. But it is all personal taste.

    And Batman's cape is far more likely to cause problems than a zipper.
    Last edited by Psycho; 06-17-2014 at 10:44 PM.

  12. #27
    Extraordinary Member t hedge coke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Weihai
    Posts
    7,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Psycho View Post
    Your idea that the mere inclusion of cleavage nullifies everything else about the character is something you're bringing to it. And I'd say Guillem draws an excellent Catwoman all around, fierce, some of the best action scenes, conveying emotion well, while also looking sexy. And that one wonky cover he revised aside for the most part his anatomy has been very good, at least as good as most of his peers, not too pretzel-ish. I think Catwoman as a multifaceted character still works with cleavage and blatant sex appeal. But it is all personal taste.

    And Batman's cape is far more likely to cause problems than a zipper.
    Batman's cape helps him look dramatic and heroic and huge. It doesn't help readers feel a twinge in their pants.

    My niece can tie a sheet around her neck and be Batman by flapping it a bit, then pretending to punch her brother before he says a riddle or something. My kids at school can all be Batman by going "I am Batman! Swear to me!" and posing strongly, because Batman is all crouching menace and strong poses. The cape helps with that. Faux-capes help with that. But telling one of those kids she should unzip her top and twist around into a sex-pretzel because that's equally as badass is... not gonna work. Not just because they're kids, and these superhero and supervillain characters are heavily marketed to kids, but yeah, they are heavily marketed towards kids, and these sexualization-first representations aren't an anomaly, they're not once in awhile, they're standard with some of these characters, at this point. And if you try to make it an anomaly, if you say, maybe there should be a less objectified Catwoman in something, some fans seem to react as if everyone's anti-breasts and trying to take cleavage out of all comics.

    Nobody said anything about "the mere inclusion of cleavage," though I did say something about when it gets to the point where it's more important than anything else in the visual, but carry on.
    Patsy Walker on TV! Patsy Walker in new comics! Patsy Walker in your brain! And Jessica Jones is the new Nancy! (Oh, and read the Comics Cube.)

  13. #28
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by t hedge coke View Post
    Batman's cape helps him look dramatic and heroic and huge. It doesn't help readers feel a twinge in their pants.

    My niece can tie a sheet around her neck and be Batman by flapping it a bit, then pretending to punch her brother before he says a riddle or something. My kids at school can all be Batman by going "I am Batman! Swear to me!" and posing strongly, because Batman is all crouching menace and strong poses. The cape helps with that. Faux-capes help with that. But telling one of those kids she should unzip her top and twist around into a sex-pretzel because that's equally as badass is... not gonna work. Not just because they're kids, and these superhero and supervillain characters are heavily marketed to kids, but yeah, they are heavily marketed towards kids, and these sexualization-first representations aren't an anomaly, they're not once in awhile, they're standard with some of these characters, at this point. And if you try to make it an anomaly, if you say, maybe there should be a less objectified Catwoman in something, some fans seem to react as if everyone's anti-breasts and trying to take cleavage out of all comics.

    Nobody said anything about "the mere inclusion of cleavage," though I did say something about when it gets to the point where it's more important than anything else in the visual, but carry on.
    Batman New 52 comics aren't marketed at kids. Only an irresponsible parent would buy a comic with this art to his/her kid...

    batman-5-cover.jpg

    And this wasn't even on interiors, this was an actual cover. Issue # 5

  14. #29
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tonamelt View Post
    Robocop had a line of children's products, and a cartoon targeted at children, yet the movies had A LOT of blood and violence.
    Lots of people have issues with that too. And with the marketing and glorifying of violence towards kids in general. So that isn't really a good example. Gore/violence shouldn't be marketed towards kids either.

  15. #30
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    621

    Default

    Also, regarding the whole "but what about violence?" thing, which always comes up in these kinds of discussions:

    -Noting that american culture doesn't have a problem with it doesn't really help. Maybe american culture *should* have a problem with it.
    -Being shot at or shooting someone, unless you've served in the military, is something that the average person is overwhelmingly unlikely to ever see or experience.
    -Sexism and/or sexual violence is something that the average person has a minor but pretty substantial chance of seeing or experiencing, or being the victim (or possibly perpetrator) of.

    It's more relevant to day to day life, because it's something you may actually cross paths with. That's why people get up in arms about it more, especially if in media (like comics, movies, games) women are depicted as prizes or as something primarily to be looked at or wanted. That mentality, that other people are prizes and/or property, is part of what leads some folks to decide that it's "ok" or within their rights to perpetrate those crimes. Anything that can be done to reduce that "this is ok" idea should be done.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •