The more I think about this, the more I disagree. Your argument is that men aren't objectified, because they aren't posed in a sexually submissive manner. YOU don't view them as sexual objects. But sexually submissive is not the role of an average male in normal society, in regards to sex. Just because they're not being portrayed submissively, doesn't mean they're not being objectified.
" @Lokein.Lyesmith: If that's how you think then there's no point in arguing. Nudity has never a requirement for sexualazation. Just because a male or famale is nude says nothing about the
sexualiztion of both works. In all of the piece of art you post not one of them have a male character posing in a sexually submissive manner, nor are we suppose veiw them as sexual objects .
It seems your issue isn't sexism, isn't discrimination, or the objectification of women, but they're perceived roles in terms of sexual portrayals. You're arguing a different argument. If you want to talk about women's roles in sex, and what's considered the "proper role" of a woman in comics or society in general, we can do that. I'll even agree. Women are often seen unfairly as submissive and we are supposed to see them as more sexually explicit than men, both in women and in the world at large. Men aren't allowed to be submissive or sexually explicit. That's wrong. But again, that has nothing to do with sexual discrimination in comic books. Both sexes are objectified equally, as per their perceived roles.