is it time for frank cho and milo manara to die or what
That’s basically a naked woman I’m YELLING
What a pervert. What the FUCK does he not know how clothes work? What the hypothetical fuck is she wearing then if we can see all that?
It’s like how bath towels in comics miraculously wrap completely around breasts. Or how even when injured and dead on the ground women in comics have to be twisted into “sexy” poses. Or how women in comics walk like they’re in high heels even barefoot.
It’s the only way men know how to draw women, because to them female characters are only there to be sexy. They only think of “women” as exploitative costumes and camera angles, high heels and titillation. Sex objects to ogle, plot objects to further male heroes’ narratives and drama, not heroes to cheer for.
I’m sorry, I was labouring under the impression that this was the crowd that thought women should wear what they want..?
And that applies to fictional women who are depicted by men how? You can’t apply agency in the plot to something metatextual when it comes to fictional characters.
Come on, let’s not pretend this is a male exclusive thing.
We’re going to have this argument are we? Not to mention you’re deviating from the original point that attributing agency to fictional characters’ clothing is asinine.
What you have here are images of power, and do you really believe these characters are designed with titillating heterosexual women and bisexual and homosexual men in mind? Because I don’t think you do.
This is why the Hawkeye Initiative exists. Take common female poses in comics, put a man in the role, and see how “empowering” and “strong” it actually looks:
Also:
He got the painting for fighting against ‘censorship.’ Note that they handed him a gross design of a female being objectified, because at the end of the day, that is all they really want, to be allowed to objectify women. They don’t care about censorship in general it is about their ability to sexualise and degrade women without consequence.
You can see her butthole for chrissakes
I think the best imagery I’ve seen to explain the difference between what men think male objectification is vs what women actually want to see is the Hugh Jackman magazine covers.
Hugh Jackman on a men’s magazine. He’s shirtless and buff and angry. He’s imposing and aggressive. This is a male power fantasy, it’s what men want to be and aspire to – intense masculinity.
Hugh Jackman on a women’s magazine. He looks like a dad. He looks like he’s going to bake me a quiche and sit and watch Game of Thrones with me. He looks like he gives really good hugs.
Men think women want big hulking naked men in loin cloths which is why they always quote He-Man as male objectification – without realizing that He Man is naked and buff in a loin cloth because MEN WANT HIM TO BE. More women would be happy to see him in a pink apron cutting vegetables and singing off-key to 70s rock.
Men want objects. Women want PEOPLE.
This is the first time I have EVER seen this false equivalence articulated so well. Thank you.
and i’ll thank you not to use the gay male gaze to justify objectification of women either. sure, i like muscles and i enjoy the occasional spandex crotch but if you think batman brooding against the skyline is a sex fantasy for me equivalent to the dipped-in-paint porn in the op, you are failing to make a crucial connection.
sex poses are INVITING. power fantasy poses are INTIMIDATING.
the only male superhero who does inviting poses in his own canon is deadpool.
and funny thing, he makes sexist, homophobic comic fans REAL NERVOUS. is this not your power fantasy, boys? are you sure?
What I found absolutely impressive and stunning about this comic is the way the artist explained the identification and elimination of the confounding factors in the Rat Park study. This is one of the hardest parts of experiments to explain to the public, and I think it was just brilliantly done.
“These nominations come just days after Marvel’s Vice President of Sales, David Gabriel, went out of his way to blame Marvel’s lagging sales on comics—like Black Panther and Ms. Marvel—starring people of color and women. Suffice it to say that the optics of this whole thing don’t reflect well on the publisher, but the Hugo nominations send a telling message to Marvel about just how the public actually feels about its “diverse books.”
In his presentation to the Marvel Retailer Summit, Gabriel said that he and other executives heard from retailers that readers weren’t interested in change, despite the company’s many “fresh, new, exciting ideas.”
“What we heard was that people didn’t want any more diversity,” Gabriel said. “We saw the sales of any character that was diverse, any character that was new, our female characters, anything that was not a core Marvel character, people were turning their nose up against,”
While it’s true that Marvel’s sales have been steadily declining for some time now, the drop has been seen across its entire portfolio, not just with titles starring leads who aren’t straight, white men. Both Black Panther and Ms. Marvel have regularly charted as New York Times best sellers over the past few years and that isn’t by accident. It’s because of interest from communities of fans (like the body that makes up the Hugo Awards voting committee) who make the effort to critically analyze the titles despite the fact that Marvel doesn’t do the best of jobs when it comes to promoting them effectively.
Writing for The Guardian, JA Micheline correctly notes that while Marvel may have a handful of progressive characters, it doesn’t go out of its way to let new potential readers know about them in a meaningful way.
“Marvel seems to outright misunderstand capitalism when it largely limits its marketing efforts to comic-book shops – spaces that have historically been unwelcoming to marginalised people,” Micheline argues. “[I]t largely presents white male heroes to the public via its cinematic universe, then makes public comments that outright concede that its main interest is selling comics to white men.”
Johnston says [sales] numbers are off by about 15% on average, and notes that they don’t include digital or international sales, or the potential for sales in the bookstore market (which is high for many of these titles), and that the numbers aren’t even inaccurate consistently, making it difficult to compare them month to month.
So.
1) Marvel doesn’t count digital sales.
2) Marvel doesn’t count international sales.
3) Marvel doesn’t count comics that are sold as trades in book stores or online.
4) Marvel only counts monthly issues of physical comics sold in stores.
And that’s really not where they’re getting most of their sales from any longer.
Not to mention that:
5) Comic book sales in general have been slumping for a while–at least if you only look at the monthly sales of physical comics sold in stores.
6) Most of Marvel’s money now comes from its movies, not its comics.
7) Oh, and the potential readers who refuse to buy Marvel comics during the run of Secret Empire (i.e., the one with Hydra Cap)? That’s probably not helping sales, either.
But sure, Marvel. It couldn’t be that your business model is outdated, that the types of sales have changed, that your sales figures are wildly inaccurate, that monthly purchases of physical comics are just not as affordable for customers as they used to be in the 1980s and 1990s (especially since the cost keeps going up), or that some potential customers have been boycotting your comics for a year.
No. Clearly all of your problems stem from diversity. Because that way, you don’t need to change your way of doing business or your attitudes.
Marvel blaming diversity for their lack of sales when in actual fact a LACK of diversity, a lack of PROMOTION of the diversity they do have and the fact that as storytellers and salesmen they are doing a SHITTY JOB at marketing their comics to the people who would be interested in them and writing some truly GARBAGE stories (Like the Civil War II crap or this Secret Empire nonsense) that puts people off bothering to buy them
Because that way they can use this scapegoating bullshit as an excuse to fill their comics with yet more heteronormative shit featutring yet more utterly tedious cishet characters, most of whom are all white
wait wtf they don’t count digital sales or trades
jfc
like how many different kinds of abhorrent and incompetent can they be
Right?
It’s 2017
SO MANY SALES come from digital sales and trade sales
just moving along like everyone else 