Marvel pulls j. Scott Campbell' Riri William Iron Man cover

[t hedge coke]

Any line left on a drawing is a choice. How tight you draw clothes or how that tightness looks, is a choice. How you pose a character; choice.

He still got paid. You all got to see the drawing.

Nobody's getting appreciably hurt in this equation. Covers don't get run for a variety of reasons, and if this one wasn't being pulled for reasons relating to the (perceived) sexualization of young girls (who, apparently, "grow up fast these days") most of the hubbub wouldn't exist. This isn't frustration with censorship or pressuring artists to conform, it's frustration over a cover being pulled for (perceived) sexualization of young girls.

[Uncanny Mutie]

these days, no matter what side of the fence you're on, things like this get talked about more than actual stories.
that's the state of marvel now.

peace

Sad, isn't it?

[ZNOP]

Any line left on a drawing is a choice. How tight you draw clothes or how that tightness looks, is a choice. How you pose a character; choice.

He still got paid. You all got to see the drawing.

Nobody's getting appreciably hurt in this equation. Covers don't get run for a variety of reasons, and if this one wasn't being pulled for reasons relating to the (perceived) sexualization of young girls (who, apparently, "grow up fast these days") most of the hubbub wouldn't exist. This isn't frustration with censorship or pressuring artists to conform, it's frustration over a cover being pulled for (perceived) sexualization of young girls.

Good point... Although, I now wonder if Marvel's editorial will prove to be as vigilant and decisive in the future. And, on a side note -- Anyone hear on the news that the most popular Halloween costume this year for young girls is Harley Quinn from Suicide Squad?

[t hedge coke]

Good point... Although, I now wonder if Marvel's editorial will prove to be as vigilant and decisive in the future. And, on a side note -- Anyone hear on the news that the most popular Halloween costume this year for young girls is Harley Quinn from Suicide Squad?

Wonder Woman and Harley both outdid "princess" costumes this year, in America, but most of the teen and preteen Harley costumes aren't really her movie costume and those that are, are specifically desexualized and steer clear of aspects designed to be more revealing or to accentuate particular parts of the body.







It is a weird situation, I imagine particularly so for an artist who has had plenty of work in eras where standards were different, at least in his field. I don't think there is any malice or cruel intentions in Campbell's cover, for sure. Attacking him on that level is fruitless and wrongheaded. But, there are certain approaches he takes, not just to the items of clothing, but their tightness or how they hang or cling to a body that aren't defensible as "how it would be," but were consciously left in, if not consciously drawn.

If anything, this probably falls on the editor who initially approved, than it does on Campbell.

[CliffHanger2]

Good point... Although, I now wonder if Marvel's editorial will prove to be as vigilant and decisive in the future. And, on a side note -- Anyone hear on the news that the most popular Halloween costume this year for young girls is Harley Quinn from Suicide Squad?

That's the thing though it seems to be the sexy female characters certain ppl complain about that spark mainstream interest from women/girls.

[Tazpocalapse]

People need to stop having debates with others who don't get it, it's literally like trying to scrape dog **** off your shoe, just messy. It's like talking to a brick wall, basically you get nothing of substance in response ...well you don't get anything with a literal brick wall, and that would probably be better.

This whole thread is people whining about others who had a problem with a comic cover that belonged to a comic they kept *****ing about and saying they weren't going to buy b/c Bendis and Marvel had an agenda, so why are these same people angry and wasting their time posting their opinion about what happens to any part of it.

And then what's funny is, we have people saying those complainers are making a big deal out of nothing and art is just art and not that deep and yada yada yada while at same time talking about copyright infringement and free speech and none of that even actually correlates with what's going on LOL, people really like to sound smart.

I'm cryin, and by that I mean I'm laughing really hard at these posts, but it's also exhausting so I'm leaving with my second and final post here. Peace.

Yes indeed. What is really hilarious is that some of the people complaining and screaming whoa is me this is censorship and a attack on free speech, were the same people blowing a gasket about Riri taking the mantle and claiming they would not buy the PC AGENDA Manual to begin with.LOL. Some people on this furom just love to be the extreme opposition and want something to complain about even if it is complaining about somebody else complaining.

[Coin Biter]

I guess most of the arguments that could be made over the variant, the reaction, Marvel's pulling of the variant, and the reaction to the reaction, have been made to this thread.

What I found surprising is that the British national newspaper the Guardian actually reported on this on Friday: https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...-riri-williams

Granted, the Guardian does cover comic news to a greater extent than the rest of Britain's national press, but it is fairly remarkable that it should report on a pulled variant cover that would have been sold in one shop that concerned an American comic book company/legacy Iron Man cover.

Of course, it's a pretty easy article to write - paste a comment by the Mary Sue, a twitter statement by Campbell, and a statement by Bendis, and Bob is your proverbial uncle The fact that about 99% of these news stories take place across social media make them the easiest news stories in the world to summarise.

[Sighphi]

I guess most of the arguments that could be made over the variant, the reaction, Marvel's pulling of the variant, and the reaction to the reaction, have been made to this thread.

What I found surprising is that the British national newspaper the Guardian actually reported on this on Friday: https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...-riri-williams

Granted, the Guardian does cover comic news to a greater extent than the rest of Britain's national press, but it is fairly remarkable that it should report on a pulled variant cover that would have been sold in one shop that concerned an American comic book company/legacy Iron Man cover.

Of course, it's a pretty easy article to write - paste a comment by the Mary Sue, a twitter statement by Campbell, and a statement by Bendis, and Bob is your proverbial uncle The fact that about 99% of these news stories take place across social media make them the easiest news stories in the world to summarise.

See, this is why i dont like this stuff. So now Bendis is saying that if he would've seen the cover he would've spoken against it.

So where were you on the standard cover that's the same thing? Or on all of the other times she appeared in the books before?

Now this magically becomes an issue because a couple website made a fuzz over it.

[Iron Maiden]

That's true. I've been a high school teacher and the vast majority of the girls definitely don't look noticeably different from age 15 to age 17 or 18 when they graduate high school and go off to college. That's why the comment, "it looks like they stuck a 15 year old's head on a college freshman's body" is so ridiculous and hilarious.

Thank you. These girls go to school and they have their parents approval on this so you really can't judge. Dress codes were still pretty strict in my high school days but I saw a big change when it did change soon after. Anyone else remember "Daisy Dukes" or "Hot pants", the extremely short shorts? These were being worn by plenty of teen girls as I recall.

Another thing. Some young girls are on birth control at an early age and one of the side effects that can occur is increased "development" if you know what I mean.

[anyajenkins]

Saying teen girls wear skimpy clothes rather misses the point of what people are complaining about: the over sexaulization of young black girls (in particular in this case, but can apply to all girls)

Yes, I remember daisy dukes, I remember many girls wearing them. I also remember that teenage girls weren't in their rooms with sewing machines making short shorts. They were designed by adults, advertised and marketed by adults and sold to teenage girls. In 'short' (no pun intended) it was a bunch of 40 year old men (and women) telling teen girls to wear sexy clothes to be 'pretty' and popular. i was a teen girl and knew a lot of other teen girls, and there were a heck of a lot of teen girls who wore 'sexy' clothes, not because they were secure and confident in their sexuality but because they were very, very insecure and that was a way to get attention and validation.

Comics obviously aren't the only medium to do this, emphasizes girl's appearance over almost everything else has been going on for a very long time. Think of the movies and tv shows aimed at girls, that are about girls and has a 'plain' girl whose very smart or nice or whatever, and she ends up getting a make over at some point so she's 'pretty' now too. That's probably a lot of the 'problem' that the 'Complainers' had. Marvel saying here's a great new hero, she can appeal to young black girls who don't have a lot 'heros of their own' , she's a super genius! and brave! .... and here's a picture where she's wearing tighter clothes and has bigger boobs. Because Kirby forbid she not be 'sexy' for five minutes...

[Sighphi]

if you want to continue this discussion so much about something you're not willing to understand,

- I'm not gonna answer dumb questions that have obvious answers that you don't really want answers to.

How am i going to understand when you dont explain?

This is the issue with this side of the argument for the most part. Miraculously im supposed to accept your view without any questions. I do not see any change based on the art for the character but you do, provide no proof, but that's ok it's dumb to question you...

- And people have problems with the newest variant cover as well, just like they had a problem with the original #1, one "outrage" just happened to blow up more than the other. So you trying to use this as some way to point out why there is no "outrage" is moot b/c it's there just not as loud with no media pushing behind it. Nice try tho.

Yes, because outrage is not a few people disagreeing. That's a norm.

Websites writing articles calling Marvel sexist and people agreeing with that is outrage.

You linked a convo that was pretty tame, that's not outrage.

If you want to define any disagreement as outrage, ok, but that just devalues actual conversation.

- There isn't any variant of her that has been praised, if you look around you'll see people wondering why her hair is getting less kinkier, why her skin keeps changing tone, why her face looks older etc. Once again wrong example to use, nice try tho.

Like i said above, saying you dont like the hair is different that saying that changing the hair was done cause Marvel is racist.

It's kind of strange that you are classifying normal conversation with crazy claims on the same level.

- You act like people being angry means there's no concern, or no logical reason, or that somehow trying to make sure there are positive images of black female teens is insignificant b/c it happens to only effect one location... If you know any history, a maybe is a good enough reason.

No, im asking to explain how they reached these ideas and their replies are just, "look at it, just look at it!"

And, like a normal human, if you dont see it their way because you are not a telepath, you then get attacked, too.

Why is it difficult to explain your position?

- No you're not asking questions, you're baiting, and not being very good at it, just really annoying. Anybody with good eyes can see Campbell increased her boob size and accentuated her hip area.

What's the bait asking where did you get the idea she has bigger boobs?
What's the bait asking how is her face older?

Much like you definition of outrage, your definition of bait seems to include anything you wish to declare so.

And with this you continue to not provide information for people to understand.

How did he increase her boob size? Where are you getting your comparison from? How did he accentuate the hip area?

- What part of this aren't you understanding, he traced Mary Jane's body to create the Riri cover, you asked why there was was outrage for Riri and not Mary Jane and I told you why.

Can you link to this? You keep mentioning it but you dont show it.

- I doubt you care about what's happening in this thread, if no one was talking about Campbell you wouldn't have made a post, like please come up with a better excuse or don't, the sooner you get that I don't really care the better this thread will be.

Now lets see if you actually care about having a discussion and reply to this or you just want to push your side only and move other sides away.

[Majin_O.A.W.]

See, this is why i dont like this stuff. So now Bendis is saying that if he would've seen the cover he would've spoken against it.

So where were you on the standard cover that's the same thing? Or on all of the other times she appeared in the books before?

Now this magically becomes an issue because a couple website made a fuzz over it.

Hey, I was honestly in the Twitter discussions talking about this 'outrage.' Many of the complaints came from people who are new to comics and not aware of art styles. About two weeks earlier I defended a Scottie Young variant of Ri Ri, that some found offensive. I explained that this is Young's style and I even posted art from many of his covers.

But the problem is, you have many that are new and see this as offensive, where we have seen far worse. Comic characters aren't drawn realistically. Well some aren't. But you have a contigent of new readers, either introduced through the movies, or other media, that are expressing their opinion and crying out for change.

[Sighphi]

Hey, I was honestly in the Twitter discussions talking about this 'outrage.' Many of the complaints came from people who are new to comics and not aware of art styles. About two weeks earlier I defended a Scottie Young variant of Ri Ri, that some found offensive. I explained that this is Young's style and I even posted art from many of his covers.

But the problem is, you have many that are new and see this as offensive, where we have seen far worse. Comic characters aren't drawn realistically. Well some aren't. But you have a contigent of new readers, either introduced through the movies, or other media, that are expressing their opinion and crying out for change.

I know this has to do with the art style because a lot of the explanations boil down to just saying, "LOOK AT IT!" Like that's supposed to explain anything.

Which is why i keep using the standard cover for comparison. Because in both drawing all the same elements exists. It's basically the same cover.

[Majin_O.A.W.]

I know this has to do with the art style because a lot of the explanations boil down to just saying, "LOOK AT IT!" Like that's supposed to explain anything.

Which is why i keep using the standard cover for comparison. Because in both drawing all the same elements exists. It's basically the same cover.

The Twitter debate centered around race and age. The original poster said something to the effect of Marvel over-sexualizing a black teen. That's where this originated from.

I reached out to Bendis via Twitter, and his reply to me was that this was a retailer variant and he hadn't seen it. Erik Larsen even jumped into the debate for a minute. You can search my mentions (just lookup Majinoaw on Twitter) for the details. They tore Larsen apart by the way.