telophase | I seem to be posting a lot about comics lately...

The unreality of comic-book women, body and mind, is a major factor in me not reading comic books. Which is too bad, because like many other women who do not read comic books, I have, you know, money to spend on things like that.

The lack of physiological reality in comic book artist's drawings reminds me of the lack of reality of women's bodies in art of the Middle Ages, in which nude or nearly-nude female bodies seem to be male bodies with a couple of half-apples stuck on the upper chest, hairless and wrongly proportioned.

The writer in that essay is too forgiving. None of the women drawn have real-looking bodies or costumes; even if glued on, they'd fall off when the skin moved or stretched. The Page-style barbarian would look like hamburger in a real fight, even with that sword; she's utterly unprotected. It's her boyfriend's sword and she's waiting for him to get home from the pub.

My favorite cartoon ever, from waaaaay back when I was reading Dragon magazine: it's one panel, of a female fighter and a dwarf sitting in a tavern, drinking and talking. The woman is wearing a tiny chainmail bikini. It is bristling with arrows.

The caption reads, "Fortunately, I was wearing my armor."

I, also, like cheesecake art and I like superheroines and superheroes. I also entirely agree with Mr. Berlatsky that they should rarely be mixed. Superheroines need to be competent and professional, just like superheroes, and that means practical costumes and reasonable (i.e. athletic) bodies.

And I did love his last comment, "Sexism may be bad, but incompetent sexism is just intolerable."

I had not seen the Marvel Divas cover before. Oh. my. gosh. *sigh*

I came across

meganbmoore's post (http://meganbmoore.livejournal.com/983158.html) pointing out Quesada's not-so-great response to someone challenging him on the cover and other pre-release Diva material before I saw that cover.

It lived down to that answer.

Yeah, in context, that answer makes so much sense. I mean, it made sense before, because I'm aware of the dynamics, but even more now.

*sigh* I have such respect for folks who keep fighting that fight, because I have given up.

I have to disagree about this being a matter of sexism.

Oh, I by all means agree that there is massive incompetance involved. No doubt about that. But it's not sexist in the sense that it's not aimed at female characters. Have you looked at the male super heros? They are just as absurd as the females.

It's not that they can't draw women, they just can't draw period.

Have you looked at the male super heros? They are just as absurd as the females.

I haven't, actually. Do the male superheroes have unrealistically gigantic, bulging, knee-brushing genitals straining in outline against their skimpy outfits?

Nope, but neither do the women. They both have crazily absurd chests. And backs, waists, hips, legs, arms, etc.

Women's breasts may be functional as well as sexual, but there's no denying that they're sexualized in a way men's breasts aren't. It's disingenuous to pretend otherwise when you're comparing male and female bodies in art.

Men's bodies in superhero comics generally aren't realistic either, but they're not treated the same way women's bodies are--they're they idealized image of what men want to look like, not what men want to fuck. The way women are treated in superhero comics is sexist because it's entirely one-sided.

Marvel and DC have little interest in selling comics to women; when they make an effort like this--in principle, this book is meant for women, and what little I've heard about the writer suggests that he's not a bad match for the material--they fall back on the same same tactics they use to sell books to men (images of women men want to fuck), because they don't know how to do anything else. Bad, sexist art in comics is nothing new; it's just particularly eye-roll-inducing when the entrenched sexism is highlighted so.

...they're they idealized image of what men want to look like, not what men want to fuck.

Don't be so sure. I sense a lot of repressed homosexuality in most of the male comic book readers I know.

I include myself in that. Well, except the "repressed" part. :)

It's an interesting theory, but I don't buy it. I don't think it'd scale well, either.

Back in 2006, there was a huge go-round in the feminist-and-comic-reading community over this very thing, and out of that came a couple of things that illustrate the differences between the way superhero men are drawn and posed and the way superhero women are.

First, and there were several other posts by other people doing the same thing but I can't find them right now, someone posts a response to a Frank Miller cover, in which she imagines male superheroes on covers posed in ways that emphasize their sexual characteristics the way women are: http://odditycollector.livejournal.com/97166.html

And about the same time, someone scanned a series of pages (http://ratcreature.livejournal.com/175099.html) from some sort of How To Draw Comics book.

vito_excalibur parodies it by simply redrawing the images of women as men and men as women (http://vito-excalibur.livejournal.com/114588.html) - keeping the poses the same, just changing the gender. See how that completely changes the dynamic and shows the different ways in which the genders are objectified?

I'm not against a certain level of sexual objectification - I mean, I appreciate Hugh Jackman's Wolverine on, shall we say, many levels and have zero problem with the fanservice in the movie - but superhero men get to be characters first and idealized objects second, while the women get to be idealized objects first and characters second.

To be honest, I'm not seeing all that much difference in the poses. They're suggestive, sure, but so are many poses in many panels of many comics of superheroes.

There is one major difference: the package. But that's not parallel. At least I haven't seen many super-heroins drawn with a Grand Canyon of camel toe. Breasts are not the same as genitals.

Maybe I'm just reading the wrong comics. *shrug*

Breasts aren't the same as genitals, but they aren't the same as shoulders or thighs.

Good lord, I feel like I'm writing a cookbook.

First: *snicker*

Second: Perhaps you are right, but that's largely a cultural thing, isn't it? There are many cultures that don't put any more weight on the importance of the female breast than on that of the male. And my own personal observations of men and women and how they react are that women are generally as attracted to an athletic well-proportioned shirtless male as men are to athletic well-proportioned shirtless women. I think our culture is moving towards admitting there's not much difference, at least. Maybe I'm completely wrong about that.

Not that I mean to imply that comics are on the forefront of feminist equality, not at all. Just that they're also objectifying (and, if I may make up a word, disproportionating) men quite a bit as well.

PS to telophase: Sorry if I've created a ruckus in your comments, that was not my intention. If such commentary isn't welcome please let me know and I'll try to keep my big mouth shut in the future. :) I'll probably fail, of course, but I'll try.

Nah, everybody's behaving themselves reasonably well. :D

We're all opinionated jerks here, but goshdarn it, we're CIVILIZED opinionated jerks!

Oh, it's certainly been on my mind that breasts aren't seen the same everywhere; I thought about mentioning it and decided it was beside the point--we're discussing the NY Comics industry, and breasts are hypersexualized in the US. Therefore, I think it's perfectly reasonable to assert that the massive, funny-looking boobs in superhero comics art are not coincidental to their sexual significance.

The women's poses are engineered to show off their secondary sexual characteristics. They thrust out their breasts and asses, and the movement in the pose focuses on sensual curves instead of strong, solid power. And did you notice the focus on drawing female superheroes as sexy instead of, say, strong or fierce in the How To Draw pages? They stand in ways that are off-balance - in many pages STANDING ON TIPTOE - and that would cause them to be knocked flat on their asses if you gave them a push, unlike the male superheroes who are drawn in poses with solid stances.

Note that the male superheroes do not have to be attractive, but that an en tire chapter is devoted to making the women sexy. Not to mention that in the general "Here are the correct proportions for a woman, she is shows standing on tiptoe like she's wearing heels (http://pics.livejournal.com/ratcreature/pic/0008fd6h), with her breasts and putt protruding, and her hands in a horrible, horrible position. (There is NO REASON to hold your hands like that - and as that's a horrible way to make a fist and it makes your hands weak an vulnerable, it serious detracts from any impression of strength she might have otherwise. It's a girly pose, rather than a feminine pose.)

Note that the men standing in those positions in

vito_excalibur's version all look weak and off-balance. That's because they are.

And yes: breasts are secondary sexual characteristics that are over-emphasized out of all proportion in a sexual manner in these drawings. That curved-back-protruding-chest pose is a pinup pose, and anyone posing like that is deliberately emphasizing their sexiness, not their strength.

Edited 2009-05-08 23:22 (UTC)

Note that the male superheroes do not have to be attractive

Oh, but they usually do. Even the ones that don't are still absurdly muscular and would look just like any other superhero (i.e. supposed to be super-masculine and attractive) if it weren't for some sort of skin condition added on to try to make them look like a monster. With very very few rare exceptions do they ever actually make a misshapen hero actually misshapen (again, excepting that fact that they all are).

the movement in the pose focuses on sensual curves instead of strong, solid power

Here I agree. Female superheroes are almost always pictured this way. Just like male superheroes are almost always pictured in strong and solidly powerful poses of hyper-masculinity that are just as absurd.

I do agree with everything you have said about how women are portrayed. Really I do. I just see the same thing being done to the men.

This is all opinion on my part, and perhaps I am wrong. This I will admit. But ponder this: is a world where everyone is objectified in silly ways better than one where only one gender is? That's not ideal, sure, but it is a form of equality. To me it looks like that's the best we can hope for out of comics in general for awhile, and I think we are already there (although it doesn't seem to be a popular opinion).

I agree the men are being objectified as well, but they're being objectified in ways that focus on their power and strength, and women are objectified in ways that focus on their sexuality and vulnerability.

ETA: To address your last point, objectification is part of human life. Sexual attraction is, in part, objectification, but in real life most people tend to indulge in it as only a part of their sexuality (and the ones who indulge in it as all tend to be jerks. Of both genders. :D). However, there's a power dynamic involved in sexualizing women superheroes that seriously undermines their characters. I am ALL ABOUT objectifying them as powerful: look at the picture representing Sarah Connor in this article (http://blog.newsarama.com/2009/05/08/the-all-time-top-10-list-of-best-and-worst-mothers-in-comics/). The artist went a bit overboard in masculinizing her shoulders and torso (and placed her neck too far to one side), but she is also standing in a solid, powerful, non-sexualized stance. Right above her, Linda Park West. Same thing. Debbie Grayson below Sarah Connor: hips tilted, but that's because she's balancing the weight of a baby. Her shoulders are strong and her gaze is direct. She's sexy without being sexualized.

Edited 2009-05-08 23:42 (UTC)

Ah, I begin to understand. I see the hyper-masculinity of male superheros as being a very bad thing. They give people unrealistic depictions of male behavior, and most of the men I've known that have been hyper-masculine like that have been complete douches. The absurd strength and power of the superheroes - and how it is pictured as being used - is not something to live up to. It is something to avoid. And on the rare occasions when superheroes are pictured as being vulnerable, it is almost always about their strength being insuffient, instead of making note of their often deficient moral character or mental acuity.

That may be where my disagreement is coming from. I don't see that as a positive objectification any more than the simplification of female superheros to focus on their vulnerability. Both are atrocities to me.

However, you have located one thing on which we can agree: Sarah Conner is a hottie. :) But then I've always preferred powerful women (and I mean that about personality more than I do about physique).

... instead of making note of their often deficient moral character or mental acuity.

And now we tie back in to my Sabretooth rant! :D

I think my attitudes towards the male objectification and the female objectification ties in with a long historical and literary tradition that, as a woman, I can't get away from, that emphasizes women's powerlessness. So when their sexuality is objectified, it's Yet Another Way to take it away - women can be superheroes, but they also have to be pinups. They can't just be superheroes, they have to be sex kittens as well.

I think my most favorite female character in all of comic/mangadom is Integra (http://steeldame.livejournal.com/profile) Hellsing (http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/51b%2BTBh%2Bo1L.jpg). Strong, powerful, gifted with command presence, never backs down from a fight, and has a sense of humor. She's about the only one who'd make me rething this whole being straight thing. :D (Although in the anime they took away her sense of humor and turned her into a dour, dowdy, shell of a woman. Manga Integra FTW!)

Edited 2009-05-09 00:01 (UTC)

She's about the only one who'd make me rethink this whole being straight thing. :D

I fully understand. For me, I can only reply with one name that does the same for me: Nathan Fillion

Well, okay, I have to admit there are a few others, but it's not too long of a list (maybe a few dozen or so), and he's right at the top. :)

I have to disagree about this being a matter of sexism.

No, it's stupidity and male-centric marketing. It's less likely for a superheroine to be large-breasted than a regular woman. Think about it -- regular bras would not support that level of exercise without actual, physical pain. Having a chest encased in spandex and/or leather and/or alien material of whatever support would result in rashes, skin problems, pain, muscle strain, etc.

Show me a superhero with a costume that will, after enough movement, cause them pain -- you probably won't, or you'd have to point out characters like Doctor Manhattan or The Hulk, who by their very natures aren't likely to be hurt by much.

It's not sexism -- it's male creators / artists / marketers not believing and/or realizing that actual women do not want to read comics about women who look like porn stars / male fetish fantasies / are too stupid to be effectual.

I, as a comic reader, never identified with female characters; any female character. They look like movie stars / porn stars, they do not have realistic problems, they look like all their organs are in their breasts, and frankly, I'd bet a lot of other women feel like that, too.

The fact that they don't overemphasize male genitalia and do overemphasize female-- the fact the you're 99% more likely to end up with a female character wearing what amounts to a bikini or less than a bathing suit, while most male characters are covered from neck to toe or more, is a reflection of the problems with comic books, movies (Catwoman, anyone?), and society as a whole, not just one section of it.

The fact that male comic readers are beginning to notice that these female characters do not look like female characters and finding them unattractive is one step in the right direction. Women are supposed to have curves -- but they don't have waists like a Barbie Doll. Even in the worst cases, you never find men objectified the way women are.

It might not be sexism at it's worst, but it's sexism at it's most destructive; the impact of it is subversive, harder to fight against, because the only thing we're shown is one kind of woman.

Personally, I thought that Runaways was fantastic; the fact that there was a non-white, not-supermodelesque female protagonist with a love interest of her own was mind-boggling and perfect. I never thought they'd do something like that. It's a pity they don't do more.

The fact that male comic readers are beginning to notice that these female characters do not look like female characters and finding them unattractive is one step in the right direction.

Maybe that's why I can't agree with the sexism. I look at the superheroines and I see absurd proportions that are ugly. I look at the superheroes and I see the same thing, absurd proportions that are ugly. To me they seem equivalently bad, and not a matter of one being sexualized more than the other.

Sorry, I have to add:

I, as a comic reader, never identified with female characters; any female character. They look like movie stars / porn stars, they do not have realistic problems, they look like all their organs are in their breasts, and frankly, I'd bet a lot of other women feel like that, too.

It might not be sexism at it's worst, but it's sexism at it's most destructive; the impact of it is subversive, harder to fight against, because the only thing we're shown is one kind of woman.

See, I can't identify with male superhero characters for the same reasons. Those are not what real men look like, they aren't made of bulging muscles with clean cut lines everywhere and they don't all have rugged features and square jaws of steel. They don't act realistic either; they're either mentally deficient boy scouts or mentally deficient douches - usually the latter.

To make it worse there are some more realistically depicted male forms in comics, men who are reasonably proportioned or even overweight. But they're all villains, the evil ones. Would it make it better for you if realistic women were pictured in these comics more often, but they were always evil figures to be subdued and punished?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I really do see everything that's been said about the problems with female superheroes being equivalently pictured in the men. To me it seems as plain as day that everyone is being misrepresented badly. That this is a matter of an industry full of bad art all around, not rampant sexism.

I will admit one non-equivalency: skimpier outfits. But I'm not sure how much that applies when you consider that what is there for both of them is so form-fitting that it's really just a different color then flesh-tone, not what you would call actual clothing. In most cases - for both genders - the genitals is the only part of the costume that isn't shaped exactly like the character underneath.

He makes a number of valid points, although I'm surprised he didn't bring up the infamous Heroes for Hire "tentacle rape" cover that Leah Hernandez went after last year (I think it was last year; it might have been '07). That is an older example, though, so I think he may have just been focusing on new releases. With the exception of the Trinity cover, he's pretty dead on. I think the shot with Supergirl's bosom in the foreground was just poorly thought out and isn't intended to be cheesecake, but rather focusing on the Supergirl/Superman "S" on her chest, rather than her chest itself. Mind you, that is the stupid Supergirl costume, with the white bellyshirt, that DC made the artists change to because it had to match up with the cartoon (because, you know, viewers of the cartoon are stupid and can't tell that there are different costumes and appearances due to different artists), and it was designed pretty much for cheesecake's sake to begin with, so there's some inherent pinup ineptitude there to begin with.

(EDIT: Here's (http://divalea.livejournal.com/456637.html) Ms. Hernandez's LJ entry on the Heroes for Hire (or as she calls it "Heroes for Hentai") cover.

Edited 2009-05-08 16:57 (UTC)

I get less offended by the shape female characters are drawn than I do about the position in which they're posed. Comic characters (in manga and DC/Marvel) rarely have realistic proportions, but it does tend to be only the women who get to stand in back-breakingly twisted poses so we can see their asses and breasts in the same picture. It would be nice for DC/Marvel to have a female character who didn't pose like a porn star in every frame.

(Actually, I'm less sure about the manga treatment of women, being more into shonen series. I'm mentally comparing, for example, Yaone from Saiyuki to those caracters in the link you posted; they all wear ridiculous outfits, but Yaone is strong, capable, and not a porn star.)

Yaone's manga character design is actually one I like a lot (see icon!), even with the early wonkiness of Minekura's anatomy in general--check out the shoulders to hips ratio on this shot. A lot of it is that though her battle outfit is skimpy and ridiculous (WTF giant bow), she rarely stands in ways that emphasize it.
Even on the pictures that are all HELLO BOOBS they're rarely cheesecake shots. And while my good Yaone-pics are at home, she often stands like this--one arm under or across the breasts, gripping the other arm--which I've seen in body language I and other tall/large-breasted/awkward women use. It's interesting that as the series goes on / Minekura's art gets more solid / Yaone gets more confident, her stance gets more open, plus she shows more solid hips/waist/butt to go with the HELLO BOOBS. And we see her wearing perfectly sensible and comfy-looking cheongsams in her "off" time, suggesting the bow-bikini-chainmail-thing is (for whatever reason) just her work uniform.

[/END tldr; TANGENT inspired by icon-making-occasion I had for looking at literally every manga shot of Yaone ever and then Noticing Stuff]

You're right that Yaone's body language has a lot to do with it. The big bow is for me the crowning bit of the argument against the idea that it's meant to be a sexy outfit ... it's just a strange outfit! Dokugakuji's original outfit was pretty bizarre too, really.

Body language has such a HUGE impact on how a character design comes across! I doubt I'd notice or care about the skin-exposing outfits worn by superheroines half as much if every shot weren't focused on THRUSTING and TWISTING the exposed and tightly-covered body parts for the camera. Again in Saiyuki, Lirin has proportionately large breasts, but she's seldom sexualized through the way she acts and carries herself. In the picture above, her position makes for HELLO BOOBS, but that wide hands-behind-neck pose is one I've seen most often used by shonen heroes like Ranma and Naruto.

Edited 2009-05-09 02:55 (UTC)

Lirin's large boobs have always thrown me--they just don't belong!--but never the extent of keeping me from connecting with the story, or ticking me off. They're always just a little bit of "What?"

Re: the shonen pose. OMG yes. Yes, yes yes.

In conclusion, I love Minekura and her comics very much.

Have you heard about this new breakthrough in the field of high-resolution 3-D graphics (http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/new_video_game_technology?utm_source=onion_rss_daily)?

Word word wordy mcwordy.

In a related note about 'cheesecake is okay as long as the person is able to kick ass too', I was watching a few episodes of Birdy: Decode the other day and was realizing how, despite how ridiculous Birdy's costume is (http://otakureview.today.com/files/2009/03/tetsuwanbirdy.jpg), that it really didn't bug me after I saw how the series handled her character. There's definitely fanservice in the series, but, compared to the 'lol diva boobs/ass TWIST' debacle, she's downright the opposite in how she just throws herself into situations like she's Superman instead of 'LOOK AT HOW SEXY I AM *liefield twist pose*'.

This isn't an East vs. West thing, btw- Anime/manga can be downright horrible or even worse when it comes to sexism. However, when I see something that impresses me from either side of the pond, that fact alone will keep me coming back to that series for more.

I seem to be posting a lot about comics lately...

blecccch

Re: blecccch

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject