Comic books: Because women are sexual objects in these too!

but she only has half an arm

Weirdly, we were having nearly the exact same discussion on a vent thread on another forum, but it was more about games.
Fact is in comics, they're supposed to look perfect, they're heroes. Batman in the animated series is so top-heavy he looks ridiculous in his Bruce Wayne outfit. ALL male superheroes are made to be ridiculously triangular, with huge muscles that nobody save Arnold Swarschnenjekandjawdahwdegger could achieve.
Superheroes are all unrealistic and unattainable representations of the human form.

Wasn't Wonder Woman's weakness that she couldn't escape if she was tied up by a man?

Also:

Vec wrote:Also if the male super heroes were being sexualised.. they would have bubble-butts, soft lips and smooth backs. Just sayin'.

Spoiler:

this is why i go for disney instead of comic books .. lol

Lyniath wrote:Weirdly, we were having nearly the exact same discussion on a vent thread on another forum, but it was more about games.
Fact is in comics, they're supposed to look perfect, they're heroes. Batman in the animated series is so top-heavy he looks ridiculous in his Bruce Wayne outfit. ALL male superheroes are made to be ridiculously triangular, with huge muscles that nobody save Arnold Swarschnenjekandjawdahwdegger could achieve.
Superheroes are all unrealistic and unattainable representations of the human form.

A perfect ass and a nice rack, is that really the unattainable image we should be presenting? That's my issue, s'all. Not about having beautiful characters, but there isn't nothing beautiful about how their drawn, it's just cheap really.

Vec wrote:

Lyniath wrote:Weirdly, we were having nearly the exact same discussion on a vent thread on another forum, but it was more about games.
Fact is in comics, they're supposed to look perfect, they're heroes. Batman in the animated series is so top-heavy he looks ridiculous in his Bruce Wayne outfit. ALL male superheroes are made to be ridiculously triangular, with huge muscles that nobody save Arnold Swarschnenjekandjawdahwdegger could achieve.
Superheroes are all unrealistic and unattainable representations of the human form.

A perfect ass and a nice rack, is that really the unattainable image we should be presenting? That's my issue, s'all. Not about having beautiful characters, but there isn't nothing beautiful about how their drawn, it's just cheap really.

It's because of the audience these things appeal to.

Yeah, I know sex sells. But other things sell too, like a well crafted character, drawings that show skill and proper anatomy, things done well!

And it isn't just horny heterosexual teenage boys that read comics, not everyone reads them for the cleavage! The awesome fight scenes, the plots. More focus on those would be great.

The point I was trying to make with David and Venus here is that cartoons is not like sculpting or model-painting. The aim is not to portray reality as accurately as possible.

In cartoons, there is always going to be idealizations which push portrayals to extremes. Extreme ugliness, extreme sexiness. Heroes of course are supposed to portray the positive extremes. But this has been discussed in this thread already and does not seem to be what you take issue with.

Your issue is with so called "Objectization" of women. The reduction of persons to sex-objects. Complaints to this enterprise usually take on two forms:

1) Objectiviation is bad because it is demeaning to the woman being objectified, in that their dignity as a person is neglected in favor of some morally arbitrary aspect.

2) Objectivation is bad because the sexification sets an unrealistic ideal to young women, leading them to unhealthy behavior.

(1) Is an objection based in the act itself, (2) is based on the consequences.

When it comes to comic books, I do not think we can speak of (1). There are no actual real women being demeaned, just phantoms of our imagination. When we treat fictional character unethicaly, we do not make a big deal out of this. It would be absurd to do so. This kind of argument may work with pornography and slavery, but not on fiction.

One might argue that the portrayal of women in comic books directly influences portrayal of women in other media, like in film. If the Black Widow is over-sexualized in comics, she'll be hyper-sexualized in films also, where this argument may hold sway. This takes the argument outside of comic books though, which isn't a direction I want to take the argument in for this moment.

So, that leaves me to believe that the main objection has to be (2) in the case of portrayal of women in comic books. I'm no psychologist, nor have I read any research on this, but it appears to me that this sort of complaint can easily be exeggerated. Without any proper statistics to back this sort of thing up, it's doomed to remain foggy and way too stretchy.

In closing, while I am not denying there might be a problem in hyper-sexualized portrayal of women in comic books, I do not think the problem lies where you think it does, and I am not sure how big of a problem this truly is. Historical comparisons often help in situations like this. Heroic Literature and Poetry from the classical ages also hyper-sexualized their Heroes. Considering homosexuality was much more acceptable in Ancient Greece (amongst the elite, mind you), one might argue that something similar was going on there. It might be helpful to consider if you can find a similar problem with the portrayal of Men/Heroes in ancient Greek literature. If you do, you'll have a way to strengthen your argument by comparison. If you don't, there may be cause to reconsider your position.

And now I will get the hell out of this thread before things get too volatile!

*Slams the eject button on his rocket-chair and jets off*

Very valid point Thelos and I'm keeping it civil, if I've come across a little fiery then I apologise! all in the name of a good debate, discussion, whatever you want to call it.

My main point is that sexy shouldn't really be tied in with beauty, we should be teaching younger generations about the value of being unique in both personality and body.

Example

Spoiler:

Simply put I just feel the perfect ass-boob-combo (I've repeated a lot, I know.) really goes against that lesson. Trying to avoid being a WHITE KNIGHT OF THE INTERNET, but y'know. I just kinda wished comic books were more about actual heroism, action and adventure rather then predictable characters and idolising unattainable figures that only further shake the insecurities of our youth today.

Male or female.
But I suppose you can't please everyone and the only perfect thing your gonna find in comic books is Superman's buttock and Wonder Woman's cleavage.

Vec wrote:Yeah, I know sex sells. But other things sell too, like a well crafted character, drawings that show skill and proper anatomy, things done well!

And it isn't just horny heterosexual teenage boys that read comics, not everyone reads them for the cleavage! The awesome fight scenes, the plots. More focus on those would be great.

pretty certain that comics has alot of focus on the plot and fight scenes, and doesnt focus only on cleavages, even if such attributes stand out. I very much so doubt that's their focus.

They are indeed heroes in the "Classical sense" for the main: "perfection with flaws" - usually mental or psychological flaws, they're not gods (for the main!) but something for mere mortals to aspire to... it's all terribly Greek. Or something. Cartoons, like David and Venus, like Thelos said. Cartoons of an ideal.

But DC has recently with it's relaunch of a lot of titles really gone for broke with some kind of 1980s softcore porn vibe.

And I'm not even (that much of) a comic book geek. Or, well, not these comics anyway...

Genuine cover of a Birds of Prey comic.

Spoiler:

Vectoria - two things.

1) Why should the demands of this "younger generation" overrule the demand of others who obviously have a (lecherous or not) taste for this sort of thing? You shouldn't neglect them, even if you personally dissaprove of their tastes. I feel this is an argument very similar for a call to ban any and all violence and sex from movies and videogames. There's age restrictions on these things for a reason, you know. Perhaps you should be lobbying on stricter age restrictions on comic books, rather than a full ban?

2) Don't underestimate these "younger generations" you wish to protect. Kids are much smarter than you think, and are much more capable of seperating between reality and fiction at a much earlier age than you might think.

I'm a bit torn on two things tbh. I don't mind mind the oversexualized women in skimpy outfits when it's common, cause I dare admit that for me they're very pleasing to look at. I've always played male characters in MMO's, but I broke that trend in TERA and rolled a high elf female, because she looks sexy in revealing outfits and a curvy body, and is pleasant to look at. Note that I'm not sexually turned on at all by looking at her, I'm using the word pleasant to describe the feeling in a light form of the word.

For me, when the norm is to portray female characters in this oversexualized way, it makes me appreciate the "normal" female characters once they pop up so much more. Perfect example is Lady from DMC 3, a character I found intriguing to the end, despite DMC's story's low priority, and who was decidedly portrayed as "cute" rather than the sexy standard.

The other thing I'm torn on is if you should throw feminism into the debate. I don't think feminism has to do with clothes at all, but that's probably just my own opinion.

Vec wrote:A perfect ass and a nice rack, is that really the unattainable image we should be presenting? That's my issue, s'all. Not about having beautiful characters, but there isn't nothing beautiful about how their drawn, it's just cheap really.

But it's okay to present an unattainable image for male characters.


And you cannot say that you're against the 'perfect ass-boob' combo when you present other images of perfect ass-boob and call them 'okay'.

And no, just because the picture of Anne Hathaway is a picture of a real person, doesn't make it any less 'perfect'. It's still an overly sexualized body that is unattainable for the majority of viewers. It's still objectifying those assets.

1). First of all I'm 19 myself, I'm still pretty young. It's not so much about censoring sexual content, and such the likes. But this is just incredibly un-realistic, it's deranged. The posing, the anatomy, it's just not believable! We could argue till the cows come home about how comic books shouldn't be taken seriously, but at the end of the day they do to a degree effect our culture. Sexy stuff is great, but it has to be believable to a point, else it just causes all sorts of issues.

2). And separating reality and fiction isn't so black and white, were influenced by things all around us all throughout the day without us even knowing, we take in so much information from just a glance. You'd be surprised. We have to be more cautious what were exposing people to, young or not. I'm not saying it should be banned 'cause it's improper and not realistically proportioned! But where do you think body image comes from? It's the images we see photoshopped, it's the heavily mutated drawing and it's the constant urge to compare ourselves with these influences.

Dru.

First of all I'm not condoning the super-hench guys either, I just feel it's more obvious with female characters.

And one image was too perfect, the others were perfectly reasonable.

Lastly Anna Hatheway has a great figure yes, but it isn't unattainable, far from it. It's quite obtainable, with the right diet, exercise. She's quite a natural beauty: though she quite honestly could've had work done? I'd have to check that?, there is a difference between an actual person having a great body to an artist drawing a ' great ' body, because at least to a degree one could aim to be similar to Anna Hatheway.

Oskar wrote:I'm a bit torn on two things tbh. I don't mind mind the oversexualized women in skimpy outfits when it's common, cause I dare admit that for me they're very pleasing to look at. I've always played male characters in MMO's, but I broke that trend in TERA and rolled a high elf female, because she looks sexy in revealing outfits and a curvy body, and is pleasant to look at. Note that I'm not sexually turned on at all by looking at her, I'm using the word pleasant to describe the feeling in a light form of the word.

For me, when the norm is to portray female characters in this oversexualized way, it makes me appreciate the "normal" female characters once they pop up so much more. Perfect example is Lady from DMC 3, a character I found intriguing to the end, despite DMC's story's low priority, and who was decidedly portrayed as "cute" rather than the sexy standard.

The other thing I'm torn on is if you should throw feminism into the debate. I don't think feminism has to do with clothes at all, but that's probably just my own opinion.

Very good point.

I myself am too used to the whole skimpy outfit / big curves / whatever sexual enhanced attributes to the women in comics, games, movies, shows since it's been going on since ever.
But often, I also find myself frowning at certain character's outfits or forms. For example I found myself annoyed by how practicly every female had a nice ass on "The Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes", because it became "too often".

But then there are some characters I don't mind it with, or mind their outfits. And I can never quite decide how to react, it's always different.

Although I'd like to say that the "Young Justice" show has managed to tone down alot on the whole sexual theme, which pleases me when I watch it.

Vec wrote:Genuine cover of a Birds of Prey comic.

Spoiler:

Gotta love fighting crime with your bathingsuit (or whatever) up your bum! xD

Not in the exact same category, but I was reminded of this:

Spoiler:

Oh by the way, an interesting side note that totally strengthens the comparison between Greek Heroism and Comic Books:

There is actually a tradition of AchillesXPatrocles slashfics. No really. Poems have been written to argue that they were totally gay for eachother. Actual ancient fan fiction.

And yes, it is as bas as you think.

Vec wrote:Dru.

First of all I'm not condoning the super-hench guys either, I just feel it's more obvious with female characters.

And one image was too perfect, the others were perfectly reasonable.

Lastly Anna Hatheway has a great figure yes, but it isn't unattainable, far from it. It's quite obtainable, with the right diet, exercise. She's quite a natural beauty: though she quite honestly could've had work done? I'd have to check that?, there is a difference between an actual person having a great body to an artist drawing a ' great ' body, because at least to a degree one could aim to be similar to Anna Hatheway.

The point is this: The problem is not the proportions (which is what you seem to be ranting about). It's about the objectification, period. It's about the fact that the medium focuses on those assets. Again, with Anne Hathaway... it's not about her figure. It's about her posture, clothing, and the camera angle. It's about the fact that the audience is intentionally being presented with her assets and being told, "pay attention to these!". It's showing the audience that who she is isn't important, it's her body that is important.

That is the problem, and that is what is glaringly apparent in every image you've posted. Thus they are all equally bad.

She's cat woman, you do realise how much of a tease the character is right?

Of course it's about the deformity! By deforming you create an unattainable perfect-body that no human woman can hope to achieve!

If a character intends to stroll around in a bikini with the same amount of fabric as a tissue, then that's fair game: might not be treated seriously, but at least if she's done with a believable body you don't run the risk of feeding that age old horror of Society's body image.

She wants to flash her arse, fair play. It better be a believable arse though.

Vec wrote:1). First of all I'm 19 myself, I'm still pretty young. It's not so much about censoring sexual content, and such the likes. But this is just incredibly un-realistic, it's deranged. The posing, the anatomy, it's just not believable! We could argue till the cows come home about how comic books shouldn't be taken seriously, but at the end of the day they do to a degree effect our culture. Sexy stuff is great, but it has to be believable to a point, else it just causes all sorts of issues.

2). And separating reality and fiction isn't so black and white, were influenced by things all around us all throughout the day without us even knowing, we take in so much information from just a glance. You'd be surprised. We have to be more cautious what were exposing people to, young or not. I'm not saying it should be banned 'cause it's improper and not realistically proportioned! But where do you think body image comes from? It's the images we see photoshopped, it's the heavily mutated drawing and it's the constant urge to compare ourselves with these influences.

The only thing I can conclude from this is that you are against censorship, but in favor of heavily scrutinizing the way in which women are portrayed in comics, which is a form of censorship; a very severe one at that, one arguably more severe than outright banning things.

If I really thought that images and ideals do not influence thought of actual humans, I would never have made the argument I did. How could I possibly say that children were capable of making a distinction if the distinction was black-and-white? Capability implies incapability. So I actually argued the exact opposite. Fiction heavily influences actual thought - but you musn't underestimate to what degree, and you musn't underestimate the ability of kids to tell fiction from reality in the way that we do, which is a common response I give to people calling for age-restrictions and stronger censorship.

I'm afraid I cannot understand your position if you maintain you are against censorship while simaltenously preaching the dangers of unrealistic objectification of women in comic books. That seems inconsistent to me. What are you suggest that needs to be done in order to counteract what you obviously see as an important issue? Because it seems to me that nobody is actually argueing that there is no such issue. Nobody is argueing that there is no such thing as demeaning over-sexualization. We are argueing about the implications of it. How much of it is over-sexualized, how badly it is over-sexualized, whether there are any significant difference between types of over-sexualization, and finally what should be done against it.

Vec wrote:She's cat woman, you do realise how much of a tease the character is right?

Of course it's about the deformity! By deforming you create an unattainable perfect-body that no human woman can hope to achieve!

If a character intends to stroll around in a bikini with the same amount of fabric as a tissue, then that's fair game: might not be treated seriously, but at least if she's done with a believable body you don't run the risk of feeding that age old horror of Society's body image.

You really, really don't get it if you think that only unattainable proportions are to account for society's focus on body image.

Newsflash, it's not the comic book heroes that encourage young girls to buy butt floss and pushup bras.

It's attractive celebrities, chosen for their attractiveness and made to play hyper-sexualized, personality-less female characters in movies. It's the models portrayed in advertising campaigns and magazines.

Comic book heroes and video game characters come into play, sure. But they're hardly the only, or even the worst, offender.

Drustai wrote:

You really, really don't get it if you think that only unattainable proportions are to account for society's focus on body image.

Newsflash, it's not the comic book heroes that encourage young girls to buy butt floss and pushup bras.

It's attractive celebrities, chosen for their attractiveness and made to play hyper-sexualized, personality-less female characters in movies.

Err...Yes, this is basicly part of what I was trying to say, but with a lot less words, and a lot clearer, too >_>.

Vec wrote:

A perfect ass and a nice rack, is that really the unattainable image we should be presenting? That's my issue, s'all.

... Why shouldn't it be? It a common modern set of standards for what is attractive playing off a number of natural triggers. ("Common" does not equal "universal", obviously)

Vec wrote:Not about having beautiful characters, but there isn't nothing beautiful about how their drawn, it's just cheap really.

I was going to make a simple comment about how this sounds more like jealousy than anything, but wether or not that is true it doesn't really have any bearing on the argument itself so I'll just leave that there and move on to an actually relevant point:

If they're* drawn with big boobs and perfect hips and sexy posing, that's usually the artist trying to make it look sexy and/or beautiful. If it looks cheap instead, that's often because the artist is bad at his job. I know this because I've been trying to draw an asari for a while now and trying very hard to make it look realistic, but it still looks very stylized instead. That's because I'm not a good artist, not because I'm being cheap.