nerd

So I've been getting a lot of comic books for free over the last month or so, after avoiding them for almost 20 years.

I am really, really, skeeved out by how women are drawn in comic books.

It's not that the women are all drawn in an attractive way. From movies to television to literature, protagonists (whether male or female) are often attractive, good-lookin' folks.

I don't even particularly object to the sexualization of comic book characters. I think it's inappropriate for children; I think it's a little bizarre; but if you draw an attractive female character in a sexy costume, okay, to some extent that's a genre trope. This was pretty much how things stood in the mid-to-late 80's, when I was reading comics as a kid.

But damn, there's a difference between drawing your characters to be attractive, and violating the basic rules of human anatomy. Some of these female characters are walking around with what looks like basketballs stuck to their chests. I am amazed that they can reach past their own breasts to punch people.

Lay it on 'em, Nietzsche!

"And when I came out of my solitude and crossed over this bridge for the first time I did not trust my eyes and looked and looked again, and said at last, 'An ear! An ear as big as a man!' I looked still more closely--and indeed, underneath the ear something was moving, something pitifully small and wretched and slender. And no doubt of it, the tremendous ear was attached to a small, thin stalk--but this stalk was a human being!"

Except, replace "ear" with "boobs." In a huge percentage of the comics each week, there are these female characters with absolutely absurd chests and asses, and in just about every panel they're striking a pose to reveal their bustiness or their cleavage. Once in a while? Okay. But every panel?

Like, in general, when it comes to media I'm all in favor of sex, or weird kinks, or tasteful nudity - but (a) I don't really want it in my silly superman comics, and (b) if you're going to include this stuff, does it have to be done in such an inept, sleazy, pandering sort of way?

I feel queasy having this stuff in my house, because I think the secret purpose of it is to provide emotionally underdeveloped 40 year olds with jack-off material as they grow increasingly desensitized to actual human proportions.

I don't really agree, after all the the men are just as anatomically fucked up. Women are just one of the many things that are over exaggerated in comics. I think it's sometimes just a part of the medium. Sure there are comics where the people are drawn in a more natural way but everything tends to be more natural.

I will believe this when 80% of the shots of male characters depict them with watermelons in their scrotums, or bending over to show us their shapely rumps. (I think that there's a difference between showing a character's power, and turning them into objects for sexual fetishes.)

I agree that improbable physiques come with the genre. FWIW, I'm not entirely convinced that's a good thing when I stop to consider it, but I grew up with that level of objectification, and whether it's right or wrong I'm okay with it.

But I think there's a point where art that's questionable or eyebrow-raising becomes downright ludicrous. This week's DC comics are pretty heavy with some character named "Power Girl" - a Google image search will give some idea of what I mean. Now, imagine this not only for this character, but for just about every other woman in the comics.

It's even worse when the artist has no concept of human anatomy

Tek, you might've thought no one read your post but I did and lost myself laughing. It'd be funnier if it weren't so sad that Liefield and other artists like him make so much damn money.

James wrote:I will believe this when 80% of the shots of male characters depict them with watermelons in their scrotums, or bending over to show us their shapely rumps. (I think that there's a difference between showing a character's power, and turning them into objects for sexual fetishes.)

Yep.

This topic has been hashed and rehashed ad nauseam elsewhere, but the link above pretty much puts and end to the discussion.

Incidentally Redtick, I'm totally fine with saying body-image issues in superhero comics are pretty messed up for both genders, and that boys as well as girls are presented with these utterly unattainable physiques. I just think sexual objectification is a related but distinct issue, and I was a little dismayed to see the state of things.

well I think you are missing the larger issue here...

They are drawing Thor these days as if he is wearing flannel long johns.



A travesty.

James wrote:But I think there's a point where art that's questionable or eyebrow-raising becomes downright ludicrous. This week's DC comics are pretty heavy with some character named "Power Girl" - a Google image search will give some idea of what I mean. Now, imagine this not only for this character, but for just about every other woman in the comics.

In the case of Power Girl at least, she's been around for a while and her bustiness has actually been written in as part of her character for a long time.

Power Girl is also Supergirl-From-A-Parallel universe. I think Kryptonian chicks are all supposed to have great racks.

James, is your objection moral or estethic?

I get hung up on the "objectification" tag, which implies a moral objection. To me, the term "objectification" exaggerates the harm of drawing women with big boobs. People of all genders are objectified all the time. Look at any advertisement: the people in them represent simple messages. They're depersonified, or objectified. Same thing with characters in a lot of movies. Do we see Subway's Jared as a person or as a representative of mushy sandwiches?

Secondly, I think the notion that depictions of exaggeratedly sexy women lead men to see women as sex objects has little basis. Men see women as sex objects without prompting.

Stripping away the objectification term, the real complaint here is that the women are drawn too sexy. I can see that could be distasteful, but you could always read something else, unless your objection is moral, in which case you probably want others to to stop reading it as well, or the artist to stop drawing it that way.