Sexist Comic Art the Fault of... ARTISTS?

I was responding to HexThis's forum thread The Month DC Brought Sexy Back...Sorta. and realized it was going to be a text assault, so to the blogmobile!

See Hex's thread for this and other examples

I'm going to surprise everyone and say I think most of the fault (maybe 37%, with 33% avid male gawkers, and 30% being editors who don't ask them to back it off even when it gets ludicrous) is the MALE ARTISTS!

Might as well be an overcoat compared to the comics...

I was into art big time years back, and what's on the mind is soon on the page (some of us outgrow that but I'm guessing most DON'T) in a way it isn't in other media. TV, movies, theater - some person has to embody the concept, so that person has a bit of veto over your fevered imaginings. So no spandex in the X-Men movies (and January Jones wasn't [as] in danger of catching her death of cold in her Frost couture), failed attempts at a panted Wonder Woman TV show (the art gods weren't havin' that!), and Lady Death and Vampirella movies mercifully unattempted. But in comics, your fevered imaginings ARE that person, which is why even in relatively conservative times there have been skimpy and sexual images, although mainly for villainesses in the distant past. Then there was Emma, then Fables, and X-Women and the wheels came off the Comportment Express. And yet, the comics market has been shrinking as fast as the hemlines -- and waistlines -- of the women of DC and Marvel. Might this mean the fans are not at fault? If this was their doing, X-Women would be a miniseries, and the comics industry would still be trotting out comics in black bags for reasons other than preventing spoilers, if you catch my meaning. Could the artists be the problem?

Red Sonya gets a movie and I'm stuck at home polishing my sword...

Think I'm wrong? Consider... if you were going to boycott artists who overly sexualize female characters, which artists would you buy instead?

*cricket chirp*

Yeah, me too, Amanda is the only one I had off the top of my head. Pay her to give an art class to all the guys where she teaches the art of emotional expression through the face and body, that would really change things. Seriously - I was thinking of getting back into art and I bought some books on comic illustration of the human form. They call for women to be illustrated with arched backs or always curved in their poses to show them off to best advantage - can't post the stuff here (copyright!), but that's why so many women are like Bobble Head dolls, only Bobble Hips! (See Miss Marvel's tete a tete with Norman Osborn above)

Plus it's freakin' lucrative. J Scott Campbell and others like Ed Benes can resell their female splash pages as posters, calendars... JSC can draw anything, but girls are fun and pay better.

Managed to find a postable Vampirella pic, no easy task...

I think Hex is right about everything, but I'd blame artists, not the fans. Morning Glories is awesome, X-Force, the Batgirl series that just ended, and they don't dip into overly sexy art. The readership wants it kinda hot but believe me 13-46 year old boys did not DEMAND the chest panel on Power Girl's uni, anymore than we demanded Jessica Rabbit. I can't even watch that movie, the misproportioning cheesecake hurts the eye; no I will not post an illo to prove my point, perv... Ooh! Another proof of my theory - remember the infamous money shot the artists added, and Disney had to quickly axe? We didn't ask for it! (Well, except you there in the back, yeah, the shifty one, we see you) The artists just liked drawing that stuff, and the editors aren't going to tell the artists that they've gone too far because they think that's what the "boys" reading comics want.

"Cool World" with Kim Basinger? Again, we didn't demand it, so it was a flop, he said, not having researched but lazily certain of his thesis...

Naw. Boys will be boys, but we want more real world, refined eye candy - bon-bons, not Butterfingers. We want a great, ongoing story with high stakes, a grand scale - okay, and I guess some fanservice, but not that much, and especially not of the mainline female heroes! Have the villainesses be dat, then the rolemodels can defeat them, symbolically overthrowing these tasteless harlots! Really, what's more likely - that Superman's cousin would wear a chest window, or some skank from space who wants to takeover the WORLD?! Then soccer moms could become comic moms, who chide their teens and tweens with "You're not going out dressed like that; why can't you be more like Power Girl? You look like that Kryptonian bounty huntress she took down last issue, running that bordell- uh, that boarding house on Epsilon-5... Now march straight to your room, and don't come out until you look like PG!"

But the real proof of my point comes from a dearly beloved animated series - Superman. In "The Main Man: Part Two" ... AAAH! Don't tell me the fans or the bosses were driving that crazy train when the wheels came off 6:53 into the below video...?!

92 Comments
92 Comments
  • 92 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by Grand Marvelous

It's not the fault of the artists it's the fault of the companies themselves.

Posted by PowerHerc

Don't blame the artists.

If sexy women didn't sell; the artists wouldn't draw them.

Posted by Cervantes

As you might guess, I'm not a great warrior in the cut-back-on-the-sexy movement. Just the weird new takes, like Hex deals with in her thread here: The Month DC Brought Sexy Back...Sorta. Like Starfire in an extra-nothing outfit over and beyond what she ever wore before, propositioning guys with this flattened affect that is a bit disturbing. Although, some artists don't get the dialogue before they draw, so that might not be the fault of the artist in this case, dk.

I don't disagree with you guys, I know sexy can sell, but skanky...? I predict a quick end to New 52 comics like that one.

Posted by Grand Marvelous

To be perfectly honest I wouldn't read Vampirella if she wasn't practically naked. She's a Vampire, I was under the impression that female Vampires like Succbi are supposed to be sexy..amirite? That's how they get their prey right?

Edited by CATPANEXE

I wrote something lengthy but decided to zap it because I really think this everyone making a new thread/blog to give there answer to an article made awhile ago is getting way out of hand. I'll quickly address then the points of yours that aren't as related to other blogs.

- what is it you find about the current writings of Vampirella's comics and Lady Deaths, characters whom I personally think define strong feminine archetypes, especially Hope who is one of the best feminist examples I can think of in comics today, that makes you feel the point is to try and sell masturbation fodder to

guys, to put it one way. (BTW Lady Deaths crappy animated movie was still not as crappy as Red Sonya's crappy live action, just saying it)

- X-Force doesn't? Domino is overly busty and frivolous and leather clad, Psylocke who replaced her is busty, scantily clad, and frivolous (all good here though)...

in fact this book would be a MAX title if the swear words weren't censored given the content, so I'm lost. It sounds like you just like X-Force.

- I'm pretty certain Vampirella and Lady Death, or any of Paulido's works are in their own class, and don't speak for the mainstream. They were created as diva's

and pin-up girls meant to show appreciation to the female, and have been since their inception, so it's not as if something suddenly was being presented in this that wasn't there before. The whole idea in fact of books like this in their beginning was to push the industry to become something more than something most of the world specifically called, and still calls " Kiddy Books ", and to provide and alternative to now maturing comic readers.

- Furthermore I don't see Jessica Rabbit (money shot? you mean the thing made up by depraved weird fans? An urban myth?) and Cool World having that much relevance to what's the standard in comics mainstream or not, still unsure were your trying to make the point here if at all? I'll get back to that thought), and sorry but maybe real out of date as well? (the 80's?). Jessica was actually a parody of character templates used in classic cartoons as it was. I really didn't get the sense from watching Who Framed Roger Rabbit that I was watching some sort of pornography, much less anything trashy. Cool World was a rated PG-13 with heavy warnings added, and was not targeted at young children. Again, the relevance to comic books isn't there. Ask Betty Boop.

- Is it possible that comic characters are fictional devices meant to aid readers who are inclined to do so to thrust themselves temporarily into a world were they're

either watching or pretending to be someone they wish they could be, even temporarily, meaning the way the act, their strength of character, their powers and abilities, and of course, their physique. The old formula, the civilian identity representing the characters ego, the super one the characters superego.

- You seem to find the comics you say you spent time reading favorable while the characters you've more seem to have just heard of and seen a few focused upon

particular images of. I'm feeling heavy implication of judging a book/character by its cover here, am I correct? Isn't that assumption and therefore not the artists directive?

- Emma Frost began as a villain, and her costume runs a theme of domination and of the burlesque associated with her and the Hellfire Clubs origins.

And is a bad girl archetype. Lady Death even more so of that. Starfire has always been scantily clad. Powergirl is a pretty easy shot to take? Does her

character even out the fact that she has cleavage though.

- What you notice, you buy, and what you buy is what they research and sell?

- Your maybe the first to hit on this but I keep sensing the underlying preach here is the children. Particularly things with PG rated...are you sure about that?

I don't think so, in fact young children are actually not the target of most comic books, hence why specific books are printed for them. Vampirella and Lady Death

definitely were not to even be sold to minors.

- I'm not offended nor aggravated in the slightest (quite joyous actually), but curious as to why the large number of threads made as a response to this topic, including the one your making reference to? which are most repeat threads really. Is there a task associated with this?

-- Most important one, why does not being PG rated or catering to young children = sexism in your opinion?

In fact I followed your lead and posted it in my blog along with some more questions. Come follow me then. * waves hand * This way please. :P

http://www.comicvine.com/myvine/catpanexe/quick-questions-about-sexism-in-a-blog-go-team-now-is-now/87-74190/

* Sorry to seem like a badger with my response, just interested in the details in your opinion as I'm confused where you went with it. Tanx.

Posted by Doctor!!!!!

If DC brought sexy back, what has Marvel been doing?!

Posted by OmegaDynasty

Sex sells.

Posted by RoyalDivinity
@Grand Marvelous said:


                    It's not the fault of the artists it's the fault of the companies themselves.

                   

               
Posted by Darkmount1
@OmegaDynasty
That approach needs to be permanently retired. In ALL forms of media.
Posted by Nerx

Not the artist but the fans and I say let it continue

Edited by COBRAMORPH

You know, when I was at the anime Expo, I saw tons of female fans wearing the "overly sexual" costumes, & there were several female artists selling pictures of "overly sexual" female chracters. & male ones too.

So, I am quite offended by this notion that its the MALE fans, that its the MALE artists, that it is the MALE executives that are degrading females. Sure, there may be MORE males buying, making, running comics, but it seems quite obvious that FEMALE fans will do the exact same thing.

Really, what's more likely - that Superman's cousin would wear a chest window, or some skank from space who wants to takeover the WORLD?!

Well, considering what women wear nowadays, yes, Supergirl would in fact have a cleavagey top, with her bra-straps showing, her mid-rif, belly & tongue piercing, a tramp-stamp, & mini-skirt. Yes, she wouldnt mind that people could look up it when she is flying,because you'd probly see her thong any way.

Edited by moywar700
Edited by Vance Astro

It's not the fault of anyone, nor is it sexist. Women and Men alike in comics wear sexy outfits. I'm a male and not attracted to men but male superheroes wear costumes that show of parts of the male figure just like female characters do. Most SUPERHEROES are beautiful, perfect physical specimens. It's unrealistic but it's part of comics. It doesn't favor one gender though and i'm getting tired of people whining "sexism" in reference to the appearance of comic characters.

Moderator
Posted by lykopis

**sigh**

Female characters in comics more often than not are placed in poses that are blatantly sexually suggestive. Unnecessarily so. The only male character I am aware of that gets this treatment is Nightwing, but having said that, it doesn't make it any better. It shouldn't happen to either gender.

Woman characters are overly sexualized in comics. They are. Saying they aren't is head in the sand, straight out denial. Examples can be found easily, has been plastered on so many forums on the internet -- a quick google search will pop up many panels that you just shake your head at. It makes you think, what the frig were they thinking when they okayed it for publication? Of course super heroes are beautiful and powerful (usually). And of course female super heroes will have gorgeous bodies that are fit and attractive (like their male tightly uniformed counterparts). Celebrating their sexiness is one thing, but its the posturing and pouting and gesturing that has nothing to do with the storyline that I find annoying and yes, offensive. As a comic fan.

Is fair to call it sexism? I've seen that term bandied about in these forums so many times -- it was ridiculous back in October. It made me decide to register just to enter the debates. For me - as a woman, I am uncomfortable seeing woman characters presented in an overtly sexual position for no other reason than the pose itself. I felt that way as a young girl, and it's gotten worse, not better. This is an industry that is predominately made up of male fans. Does that mean all male fans are okay with this? Nope. Even some women don't find a problem with it. But both women AND men are making noises, and the industry has heard the rumbling. There is some effort in addressing this (although in some cases in a horrifically wrong way) but it'll take a while before they get it right.

Getting back on topic I absolutely do not blame the artists. They are hired for what they do. It is entirely on the shoulders of the editorial team. That's why they get the big bucks. When something is wrong, its on them.

Posted by Rumble Man

Fanservice is the word, comics have been servicing male readers for a long time

its time for them to service female fans as well

Posted by KainScion

@Rumble Man: hell NO! dont ruin my comics so a female can 'get it going'. plus male readers outnumber female ones 32-1.

Posted by Rumble Man

@KainScion: Give em nude male heroes

because I am honestly sick of them whining about girls clothing and sh!t, they keep preaching on about real women

Edited by DocFatalis

Don't blame the artists, don't blame the companies, it's all because of us. Yes, I find it atrocious, the way women are being made an object of fantasy, and yet, at the same time I DO prefer slender booby ladies. It's an issue that's impossible to solve. Even greek statues depict a dream woman, nothing you can do about it. We're men, we've got instincts and our eyes are irresistibly attracted to beautiful curves. I apologize, but that's the way we are.

Posted by Redberry

Sigh... Porn is free to look at nowaday. I would prefer comic books to have less of those types of fanservice. I usually avoid artists that rely on sex to sell their arts. It doesn't add anything to the story itself. I have no problem with nudity, as long as the storyline calls for it, instead of blatantly put in there for no purpose at all.

Posted by Jorgevy

does that mean that Nightwing will have to stop showing off his goods too? and when I say Nightwing, I mean every guy with a cute butt in a leotard

Posted by ReVamp

No one's at fault, because there's no problem.

Posted by krilling

@ReVamp said:

No one's at fault, because there's no problem.

Posted by JoseDRiveraTCR7

@ReVamp said:

No one's at fault, because there's no problem.

When most of the female readership, and many of the male readership, have complaints about it, and when most non-comic book readers mock the oversexualization, then there is a problem.

Posted by TheBigRedCheese

I don't mind some of the female characters being sexually aggressive, especially female antagonist, but I think it would be nice to have more female characters to dress/act a bit more "appropriate". Just my opinion.

Posted by Duke_Nasty

No more six packs and biceps on male characters either. I demand every character be out of shape and wear several layers of clothing.

Posted by FullmetalChobit

I don't understand this because IT IS THE SAME FOR MALE SUPERHEROES TOO!! Look at how shockingly stacked all the male superheroes are and how they all wear skin-tight clothes; The Flash, Green Lantern, Blue Beetle, Superman, Spider-Man, Green Arrow, Cyclops...... all of these and millions more wear tight clothes. Then there's the topless heroes like the New Age Aquaman, Martian Manhunter, Hulk...etc

Not too mention how their clothes turn to tatters during fights, so much so that it exposes 'over-sexualised' muscles, six-packs etc.

BUT there's a reason these people are so strong, firm, flexible... because they're heroes/mutants and artistists get paid to draw women and men as adonis' of (meta)humans.

"Everything is about sex. Apart from sex, sex is about power" - Wilde.

Posted by danhimself

@JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:

@ReVamp said:

No one's at fault, because there's no problem.

When most of the female readership, and many of the male readership, have complaints about it, and when most non-comic book readers mock the oversexualization, then there is a problem.

I was just told the other day that main readership of Zenescope is female readers....if they aren't offended by those books then why the heck are they offended by what Psylocke, Emma Frost, and Ms. Marvel are wearing?

Posted by ReVamp

@JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:

@ReVamp said:

No one's at fault, because there's no problem.

When most of the female readership, and many of the male readership, have complaints about it, and when most non-comic book readers mock the oversexualization, then there is a problem.

Oversexualisation =/= Sexism.

Posted by SoA

gratuitous pics of women posing weird (like bending over and other suggestive actions) for battle or wearing skimpy clothing does not give me a fan service , im not 11-14 or the creepy 35 and older audience. im a 26yro straight male , i dont get a kick out of that stuff. its why i never took power girl seriously till recently (costume actually gave her some protection), probably missed out on a lotta good stories but i cant just sit and read something so ridiculous and wonder why hasnt she ever been punched in her chest and is down for the fight (you would think that would be a usual occurrence )

ms marvel , ive read her solo series because she is a great character and im very happy to see her in a new solo as captain marvel , but like PG is ridiculed now, over actually wearing something that makes sense to wear in a fight , wonder woman wore pants for awhile and everyone hated it for whatever reason (the jacket and jeans combo looked kinda cool)

because of the objectivism i didnt read witchblade because i thought she was some kinda scantilly clad stripper , turns out thats just to sell comics as she never looks that revealing even when armored up , and she is one my favorite (independent company) characters .

if its not a big deal if you say, well sex sells, etc etc , there are female and gay male comic readers so where is their fan service ? superman is nigh invulnerable why doesn't he just wear the cape with a pair of daisy dukes? or hulk decide to not wear pants as he is always ruining them anyways ? why ? cuz straight guy readers would feel uncomfortable . so why isn't there a even playing field for everyone else? the artist is free to draw whatever he is the artist , but i think as far as comics go , leave the semi-nude drawings out of fights with giant robots, intergalactic warlords or super zombies , unless the character got out of a pool or was intimate with another character there really is no reason for it . that's my opinion , thanks for reading ;p

Posted by SoA
Posted by Madame_Mist

As a female, I like the fan service too. My problem is when "sexy" becomes exploitative and the females are treated as merely props, while the guy gets to walk around being macho-man.

Posted by lykopis

@SoA said:

gratuitous pics of women posing weird (like bending over and other suggestive actions) for battle or wearing skimpy clothing does not give me a fan service , im not 11-14 or the creepy 35 and older audience. im a 26yro straight male , i dont get a kick out of that stuff. its why i never took power girl seriously till recently (costume actually gave her some protection), probably missed out on a lotta good stories but i cant just sit and read something so ridiculous and wonder why hasnt she ever been punched in her chest and is down for the fight (you would think that would be a usual occurrence )

ms marvel , ive read her solo series because she is a great character and im very happy to see her in a new solo as captain marvel , but like PG is ridiculed now, over actually wearing something that makes sense to wear in a fight , wonder woman wore pants for awhile and everyone hated it for whatever reason (the jacket and jeans combo looked kinda cool)

because of the objectivism i didnt read witchblade because i thought she was some kinda scantilly clad stripper , turns out thats just to sell comics as she never looks that revealing even when armored up , and she is one my favorite (independent company) characters .

if its not a big deal if you say, well sex sells, etc etc , there are female and gay male comic readers so where is their fan service ? superman is nigh invulnerable why doesn't he just wear the cape with a pair of daisy dukes? or hulk decide to not wear pants as he is always ruining them anyways ? why ? cuz straight guy readers would feel uncomfortable . so why isn't there a even playing field for everyone else? the artist is free to draw whatever he is the artist , but i think as far as comics go , leave the semi-nude drawings out of fights with giant robots, intergalactic warlords or super zombies , unless the character got out of a pool or was intimate with another character there really is no reason for it . that's my opinion , thanks for reading ;p

This.

Posted by Strider92

This has been brought up so often I think i'm desensitized to it now.......

Posted by jrock85

ITS CALLED "FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION".

Posted by Savage_Hawkman

There is nothing wrong with being physically attractive.

Posted by JoseDRiveraTCR7

@danhimself said:

@JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:

@ReVamp said:

No one's at fault, because there's no problem.

When most of the female readership, and many of the male readership, have complaints about it, and when most non-comic book readers mock the oversexualization, then there is a problem.

I was just told the other day that main readership of Zenescope is female readers....if they aren't offended by those books then why the heck are they offended by what Psylocke, Emma Frost, and Ms. Marvel are wearing?

1. I don’t know the sale numbers for Zenescope books, but I’m sure they are much smaller than the number of people who complain about the oversexualization in comics. Also, the female readers that enjoy these books may not be the same who criticize the oversexualized art in comics.

2. Women can hold sexist beliefs.

3. The women Zenescope readers may read the books in spite of the art, or may enjoy the art but still believe it shouldn’t be as frequent as it is in comics.

@ReVamp said:

@JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:

@ReVamp said:

No one's at fault, because there's no problem.

When most of the female readership, and many of the male readership, have complaints about it, and when most non-comic book readers mock the oversexualization, then there is a problem.

Oversexualisation =/= Sexism.

@FullmetalChobit said:

I don't understand this because IT IS THE SAME FOR MALE SUPERHEROES TOO!! Look at how shockingly stacked all the male superheroes are and how they all wear skin-tight clothes; The Flash, Green Lantern, Blue Beetle, Superman, Spider-Man, Green Arrow, Cyclops...... all of these and millions more wear tight clothes. Then there's the topless heroes like the New Age Aquaman, Martian Manhunter, Hulk...etc

Not too mention how their clothes turn to tatters during fights, so much so that it exposes 'over-sexualised' muscles, six-packs etc.

BUT there's a reason these people are so strong, firm, flexible... because they're heroes/mutants and artistists get paid to draw women and men as adonis' of (meta)humans.

"Everything is about sex. Apart from sex, sex is about power" - Wilde.

Female characters are constantly drawn in implausible, scantily clad outfits that are all very similar, where as male characters are most likely to be drawn in different types of outfits that usually cover most of their bodies. Female characters tend to be drawn with similar body types, even though athletic women still come in different shapes and sizes and don’t all have D-cup breast. Male characters are more likely to be drawn in different body types. Female characters are constantly put in sexual positions while not performing sexual actions, i.e. butt shots while fighting. Male characters are much less likely to be treated like this. When female characters are constantly being treated like sex objects then that is sexist.

@jrock85 said:

ITS CALLED "FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION".

Criticism falls under freedom of expression.

@Savage_Hawkman said:

There is nothing wrong with being physically attractive.

That’s not what’s being argued.

Posted by TDK_1997

@PowerHerc said:

Don't blame the artists.

If sexy women didn't sell; the artists wouldn't draw them.

Posted by lykopis

@JoseDRiveraTCR7:

Oh my. That was -- stellar.

**followed**

Posted by Rumble Man

@Strider92 said:

This has been brought up so often I think i'm desensitized to it now.......

High five

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@PowerHerc said:

Don't blame the artists.

If sexy women didn't sell; the artists wouldn't draw them.

Posted by Strider92

@Rumble Man said:

@Strider92 said:

This has been brought up so often I think i'm desensitized to it now.......

High five

Posted by Rumble Man

@Strider92:

Posted by jrock85

@JoseDRiveraTCR7: Its okay to criticize, my friend, but if you're going to do so I believe you should offer a viable alternative (emphasis on the word "viable").

As long as the targeted demographic enjoys the "sexualization" of female characters (or at least aren't offended by it), its not going to stop.

Posted by RoboShark

That middle panel is great cause I'm a man...But somewhere inside me I know it's kinda wrong and unnecessary overall.

Posted by FullmetalChobit

As a straight female, I love the over-sexualisation of women in comics. I don't fine it subjective and I'm not offended. Sex sells, and I'm buying.

Posted by Onemoreposter

@ReVamp said:

No one's at fault, because there's no problem.

This.

@RoboShark said:

That middle panel is great cause I'm a man...But somewhere inside me I know it's kinda wrong and unnecessary overall.

There is nothing wrong with that panel. NOTHING. In fact that's an area of Emma I don't think gets half enough panel time.

Edited by Cervantes

Good points, everyone -- especially

How about this theory: artists decide to sexualize more than usual the characters that don't have a strong rationale, power, or identity. For example, Power Girl is Supergirl from another world -- and she gets the window and attributes unattainable in any woman on the planet not named Carrie Keegan (see *ahem* evidence above). Batgirl, meanwhile, would seem to scream for some gothic trampy vampy costume, yet, it's just a bat suit. In fact, the most (arguably) powerful Batgirl -- Cassandra Cain -- had the famous mouthless mask that further deemphasized her body as a, um, Wonderland. The X-Women and X-Girls who had the strongest powers and rationales were "most dressed", shall we say. Rogue had full body unitard AND gloves and a headband, boots. Meanwhile over in DC, Fire has -- well, green fire, and wears that and little else (please no hate! I loved Fire on Justice League: Unlimited, but was she originally in the comics presented as the Brazilian sweetheart she was there? And even that was a bit light on characterization...). Terra in DC should be similarly a cipher -- however, since her power (terrakinesis? What's her power called?) to move earth and stone through the air is so powerful, she is modestly dressed and has a whole **ages old spoiler alert** betraying the Titans arc.

Now before we go, "Yeah, Emma Frost is just Jean Grey with less clothes" -- somewhat true in terms of power type, Emma Frost and the Hellfire Club were actually a steal of the "Touch of Brimstone" ep of The Avengers (the British TV show) in 1966. Check out Diana Rigg herself -- I didn't want to get in trouble so you miss the full effect with pic below but, yes, that is a snake she's holding. Then again, does a British accent indemnify oneself from complaints about wardrobe? (possibly - no definitely...)

LET THE DISAGREEMENTS BE-GIN! :p

Posted by Glitch_Spawn

Anyone see that girl in Hoax Hunters? lol

Posted by The Stegman

It's not the fault of anyone, nor is it sexist. Women and Men alike in comics wear sexy outfits. I'm a male and not attracted to men but male superheroes wear costumes that show of parts of the male figure just like female characters do. Most SUPERHEROES are beautiful, perfect physical specimens. It's unrealistic but it's part of comics. It doesn't favor one gender though and i'm getting tired of people whining "sexism" in reference to the appearance of comic characters.

Posted by Cervantes

A couple thoughts about why overdoing it (and I think everyone knows we're talking about extremes like Emma Frost and '90's Witchblade which gave Barbie anorexic nightmares of inadequacy, or non-Amanda Connor-drawn Power Girl) is a problem that haven't been brought up:

1) Ideally, we want teens and tweens, etc. to be reading these, right? Channel their angst into a more constructive worldview. Obviously Lady Death and Vampirella are for a different audience. And yeah, yeah, I know: Nightwing is yours and you won't share him with some teenage hussy, or you won't sacrifice your ongoing one-sided "relationship" with the White Queen just so some comic geek's buddingly prurient interest gets puritanically smacked down on yo a$$. I'm just sayin' - shouldn't the magazines at the checkout lines be the ones causing the eating disorders, where women have no exceptional talents and can accomplish nothing but drive speculation as to their hotness, makeup tips, face without makeup, marital status, and desirability - not the comix rack? (as if they existed -- *World's Tiniest Violin Solo*)

2) It essentially writes those characters out of the movies. Good thing X-Men: First Class was set in the '60's, or Emma would have continued her lock-out of the big screen. Heck, cosplayers at the Conventions are a good proving ground for what works and what is never realized. Think of what you felt when you first saw Iron Man on the big screen -- it makes the comics more entertaining now that he has a voice. How many women will have such a voice? *WTV And Orchestra--Requiem for a Dream* FADE TO BLACK.

  • 92 results
  • 1
  • 2