Frank Cho drawing variant covers

[The Darknight Detective]

Or is it rather that because men dont necessarily pick ip on the same sexual cues as men that they don't realize how sexualized the male characters are?

Gail Simone and Nicola Scott have both commented on Nightwings ass far to often for it to be an accident

Again, there are breadcrumbs out there for female and gay male readers, but if we did an accounting of sexualization between male and female characters, we all know which side would be the lopsided one. As I said earlier, I understand why this is so, but we shouldn't pretend it's not a fact.

[Shadesofgray]

In some cases - yes. I don't remember seeing Peggy Carter with her shirt off in Captain America The First Avenger.

There is also Catman's abs and whole lot of other examples. Gail Simone wrote a scene where Wonder Woman and a female doctor talk about how great Tom Tresser's ass looks while he is oblivious to the fact it's on display. Nobody questioned it.

The point is it's okay for female readers, writers, and artists to appreciate pics that show off the physical sexuality of male characters. Gender equality should mean that either that's not okay or that it's okay for the ladies male counterparts to do likewise.

Within reason. Seriously, Starfire in Red Hood and the Outlaws was just painful.

You are talking about exceptions, Catman mostly get used and sexualized when he is being written by Gail Simone. Nothing comparable to his equivalent Catwoman.
I don't know about tom tresser, but there was a whole run of wonder woman using a pantie by Deodato and whole runs of Benes sexualizing women.

the example of nightwing, that is the one that every male reader give to say that men are also sexualized on comics is also a exception.

There isn't gender equality when there is a systemis problem (not only comics, but the whole western social life) that women are only valued by beauty and hotness, catcalled and sexually harassed.
I see no problem if women can enjoy some sexyness now, there is a big debt for them.

Or is it rather that because men dont necessarily pick ip on the same sexual cues as men that they don't realize how sexualized the male characters are?

Gail Simone and Nicola Scott have both commented on Nightwings ass far to often for it to be an accident

hard to pick up a cue when there isn't any. When there is a cue women get for it, like nightwing or catman or hawkeye

[brettc1]

Again, there are breadcrumbs out there for female and gay male readers, but if we did an accounting of sexualization between male and female characters, we all know which side would be the lopsided one. As I said earlier, I understand why this is so, but we shouldn't pretend it's not a fact.

If we did a count of the whole history of comic books, sure. But if we did a count of the last few years, who knows how it might turn out.

For example...



There is no reason really here for Thor to be shirtless except that it looks hot. To me, ultra-cut shirtless Thor with his pants barely clinging to his hips is a sexualized image. If you showed it to women on the street I daresay a lot would think that Thor looks damn sexy there. Okay his mother nursemaiding him takes from it somewhat but without that he is still frakking hot.

You are talking about exceptions, Catman mostly get used and sexualized when he is being written by Gail Simone. Nothing comparable to his equivalent Catwoman.
I don't know about tom tresser, but there was a whole run of wonder woman using a pantie by Deodato and whole runs of Benes sexualizing women.

the example of nightwing, that is the one that every male reader give to say that men are also sexualized on comics is also a exception.

And now also Thor, see above.

Speaking of Catwoman, the Batman that appeared in her first issue where they have sex on the roof was looking pretty buff.

At some point exceptions become the norm. Superman looking ripped in a spray on tee shirt?

There isn't gender equality when there is a systemis problem (not only comics, but the whole western social life) that women are only valued by beauty and hotness, catcalled and sexually harassed.
I see no problem if women can enjoy some sexyness now, there is a big debt for them.

No.

This is false equality. At best it equality of discrimination which is just a completely flawed idea. At worst it's payback which perpetuates a cycle of resentment and ill-feeling.

Shall we continue until large numbers of men are suffering from eating disorders so they can look like Hugh Jackman's Wolverine?

You don't establish equality by swinging the pendulum the other way. You establish equality by grabbing the scissors and cutting the string.

hard to pick up a cue when there isn't any. When there is a cue women get for it, like nightwing or catman or hawkeye

It's easy to say that people are just making stuff up that isn't there. I'm pretty sure the women's suffrage movement heard that a lot.

[The Darknight Detective]

If we did a count of the whole history of comic books, sure. But if we did a count of the last few years, who knows how it might turn out.

I wouldn't make any bets about the last few years either, Brett.

[brettc1]

I wouldn't make any bets about the last few years either, Brett.

Considering we've had covers with shirtless male Justice Leaguers posed as strippers, you might be surprised

[Shadesofgray]

If we did a count of the whole history of comic books, sure. But if we did a count of the last few years, who knows how it might turn out.

For example...



There is no reason really here for Thor to be shirtless except that it looks hot. To me, ultra-cut shirtless Thor with his pants barely clinging to his hips is a sexualized image. If you showed it to women on the street I daresay a lot would think that Thor looks damn sexy there. Okay his mother nursemaiding him takes from it somewhat but without that he is still frakking hot.

Then there is starfire on red hood that was much more explicit and exploitative. Then there was catwoman, spider-woman, magik, emma frost...

And now also Thor, see above.

Speaking of Catwoman, the Batman that appeared in her first issue where they have sex on the roof was looking pretty buff.

At some point exceptions become the norm. Superman looking ripped in a spray on tee shirt?

buff doesn't always mean sexy. I didn't thought he was sexy or saw any women criticizing the gratuitous nature think he was sexy. Just a mountain of muscles doesn't make one a sexy. saw the image again and the anatomy sucks on the scenes.

well maybe, don't remember women swooning on new52 superman.

No.

This is false equality. At best it equality of discrimination which is just a completely flawed idea. At worst it's payback which perpetuates a cycle of resentment and ill-feeling.

Shall we continue until large numbers of men are suffering from eating disorders so they can look like Hugh Jackman's Wolverine?

You don't establish equality by swinging the pendulum the other way. You establish equality by grabbing the scissors and cutting the string.

I have no problem with women having some fun now. It is selfish get all the fun and then later say: "sorry, no more fun for anyone."

women suffer from eating disorders and cirurgy intervention from decades ago and no one on comics seemed worried about that.

chubby guys get beautiful women all time on movies.

It's easy to say that people are just making stuff up that isn't there. I'm pretty sure the women's suffrage movement heard that a lot.

apples and oranges

[The Darknight Detective]

Considering we've had covers with shirtless male Justice Leaguers posed as strippers, you might be surprised

Based on the number of comics I read monthly, I'm positive I wouldn't be surprised.

[brettc1]

Then there is starfire on red hood that was much more explicit and exploitative. Then there was catwoman, spider-woman, magik, emma frost...

I've already mentioned that that version of Starfire was horrifying. But that's because it's completely incongrous to her character in past stories.

Emma Frost though is brazenly sexual as a choice of her character. She deliberately dresses in a provocative way because it makes her feel good. So is that wrong?

buff doesn't always mean sexy. I didn't thought he was sexy or saw any women criticizing the gratuitous nature think he was sexy. Just a mountain of muscles doesn't make one a sexy. saw the image again and the anatomy sucks on the scenes.

Maybe tha anatomy does look bad, but so what? Lots of "sexy" pics of women in comics in the past have them standing in poses that would cause crippling lower back pain as they thrust their chests out. I could just as easily say having big breasts and not wearing much doesn't mean a female character is being used exploitatively.

I have no problem with women having some fun now. It is selfish get all the fun and then later say: "sorry, no more fun for anyone."

No, it's mature and rational. You don't solve a double standard by inflicting in it the opposite way - not if you want to promote true harmony and understanding. Pretty sure Wonder Woman and Martin Luther King would agree with me on that one.

women suffer from eating disorders and cirurgy intervention from decades ago and no one on comics seemed worried about that.

Decades ago people acted out of ignorance. You're talking about having the information and wilfully inflicting suffering for the sake of payback.


Your position seems to be sexism okay as long as it acts to women's benefit.

[brettc1]

Based on the number of comics I read monthly, I'm positive I wouldn't be surprised.

We would have to draft out some criteria and establish take a sample

[Shadesofgray]

I've already mentioned that that version of Starfire was horrifying. But that's because it's completely incongrous to her character in past stories.

Emma Frost though is brazenly sexual as a choice of her character. She deliberately dresses in a provocative way because it makes her feel good. So is that wrong?

Well starfire on red hood happened, and she still uses very few clothes, ok that on rebirth she is using a bit more, they could just give the whole pants.

Being sexual doesn't mean walk with boobs almost out of the corset. Nighting is sexual and his costume cover everything. Also it is men that choose what Emma uses, so no excuses here.

Maybe tha anatomy does look bad, but so what? Lots of "sexy" pics of women in comics in the past have them standing in poses that would cause crippling lower back pain as they thrust their chests out. I could just as easily say having big breasts and not wearing much doesn't mean a female character is being used exploitatively.

one thing is anatomy look bad, other thing is anatomy look bad because the penciller is awful. Batman case was only looking bad and nothing optimized for looking sexy.

No, it's mature and rational. You don't solve a double standard by inflicting in it the opposite way - not if you want to promote true harmony and understanding. Pretty sure Wonder Woman and Martin Luther King would agree with me on that one.

Doesn't look mature to me, enjoy decades of sexy women and then shut women down when it is their turn. I think it is far more interesting let just few characters on super sexy, than shutting everything down.

Decades ago people acted out of ignorance. You're talking about having the information and wilfully inflicting suffering for the sake of payback.


Your position seems to be sexism okay as long as it acts to women's benefit.

there isn't sexism against men.

there isn't any payback, heroes look fit and that is it. Or do you think scarlet johanson isn't a hottie? or gal gadot doesn't have a supermodel body?

[brettc1]

Well starfire on red hood happened, and she still uses very few clothes, ok that on rebirth she is using a bit more, they could just give the whole pants.

Being sexual doesn't mean walk with boobs almost out of the corset. Nighting is sexual and his costume cover everything. Also it is men that choose what Emma uses, so no excuses here.

There are women who dress like Emma Frost and enjoy it. Nobody is forcing cos-play girls to dress like Red Sonja in a chain mail bikini, but some do because they like to.

one thing is anatomy look bad, other thing is anatomy look bad because the penciller is awful. Batman case was only looking bad and nothing optimized for looking sexy.

That is merely you opinion of the art. Regardless of that, shirtless ultra cut Thor is far more sexualized than they fully clothe version.

Doesn't look mature to me, enjoy decades of sexy women and then shut women down when it is their turn. I think it is far more interesting let just few characters on super sexy, than shutting everything down.

A false premise - men born today have not had decades of sexy women to look at. Blaming sons for the sins of their fathers is never helpful.

there isn't sexism against men.

LOL

[Shadesofgray]

There are women who dress like Emma Frost and enjoy it. Nobody is forcing cos-play girls to dress like Red Sonja in a chain mail bikini, but some do because they like to.

another poor excuse. cosplay isn't justificative to anything. anyway, I still need to see women dressed as Emma. Maybe on gala awards, but not on day to day routine life, specially lecture on a school

That is merely you opinion of the art. Regardless of that, shirtless ultra cut Thor is far more sexualized than they fully clothe version.

Depends on who draw it, dauterman that is a gay man, do a really good job.

A false premise - men born today have not had decades of sexy women to look at. Blaming sons for the sins of their fathers is never helpful.

Well the have, even today there is lots of sexualization on women on games, comics, tv/movies. It really seems less than the past at least

LOL

hum? men are opressed?

[brettc1]

another poor excuse. cosplay isn't justificative to anything. anyway, I still need to see women dressed as Emma. Maybe on gala awards, but not on day to day routine life, specially lecture on a school

Telepaths aren't real either. If it's any consolation, a lot of us wish we saw more women dressed like Emma - for the same reason ladies stare at Fireman calendars.

hum? men are opressed?

First, there is a difference between attitude and agency. Sexism can be defined as an attitude or stereotyping.

Second, yes, in some ways, it's just that because of attitudes and stereotyping it largely goes unacknowledged.

As an example, in Australia at the moment it is popular in the news to talk about an "epidemic of violence against women." This is because of the dozens of women killed each year by men.

However, when one goes to the Australian Institute of Criminology website [a federal government website] one can see that in the last century, the number of men killed in acts of murder has consistently been more than women. Without fail.

http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide/victims.html

Despite this fact which is glaringly transparent to anybody with 5 minutes and access to Google, news reports in Australia invariable paint the violence against women as more significant. To the point where they will make patently inaccurate statements about more women being killed than men...

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2015/s4215739.htm

The point is, what is described as a horrible situation for women is actually a horrible situation for everyone - but for some reason, the murder of a woman is seen as more heinous than the murder of a man. Similarly, by overlooking the number of men as victims of violence and focussing on men as perpetrators, an attitude of 'women good/men bad' is created.

If you are going to say one persons death in an act of violence is worse only because of their gender, that is sexism.