![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I really should know better, but I clicked on a link to the DC message boards, topic of the new Frank Miller cover.
In summary... this is why I’m going to stay way the hell over here okay thanks. However, one exchange did catch my attention and would not let me shake it as it might have a sane person.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
maelithil:
Depicting [women] as an ass, a pair of tits, some gorgeous thighs is doing them a disservice. Distilling them into nothing but their sexual attributes is objectifying. And that's exactly what this cover does.
Random Fanboy:
And notice that Superman's chest is OFTEN a whole panel unto itself. Not Superman fighting the bad guy. Not Superman standing full figure. Superman's chest. Just his chest. His huge, massive, S-draped, extraterrestrially muscular chest. Is Superman being objectified? Is he being used? Should I cry for Superman?
And. Just. What? This is the counterexample?
But! Maybe it’s not that his logic is just that scary. Maybe it's hard to understand what she’s talking about because it really, honestly is that there’s no comparable example featuring a male denizen of the DCU. I mean, even the occasional Nightwing crotch shot *tries* to have context.
Obviously, something had to be done. For The Good Of Fandom.
Luckily, much like Miller, I have no shame.
Totally Appropriate Covers (with bonus, never before seen script excerpts!)
Hal’s flying away from us through a generic starfield, nothing interesting to see except him. Have him wriggle around, giving us a good shot of his package. Add some details, something fancy for the fanboys to drool over, but don’t let it draw attention away from the point of the cover – that Kyle has nothing, NOTHING, on my boy Hal.
Be careful with this one – we don’t want Supes to come off as too powerful, too imposing. Maybe have him lean a bit, off balance, the better to show off his *well filled* briefs. He's fiddling with the waist line, such a cock *heh* tease. He knows he’s got what we want, and if we turn the cover, he’ll let us have it.
Well, we’ve done just about every variation on the theme by now, so let’s go back to the basics: Black on black, a full cover shot of Batman’s ass. Add in the utility belt for colour – give it that Sin City look. Show me thick, powerful legs under that latex or whatever the hell he wears. Clenched butt muscles. Make it obvious this is no BatGIRL we’re talking about.
In summary... this is why I’m going to stay way the hell over here okay thanks. However, one exchange did catch my attention and would not let me shake it as it might have a sane person.
maelithil:Depicting [women] as an ass, a pair of tits, some gorgeous thighs is doing them a disservice. Distilling them into nothing but their sexual attributes is objectifying. And that's exactly what this cover does.
Random Fanboy:
And notice that Superman's chest is OFTEN a whole panel unto itself. Not Superman fighting the bad guy. Not Superman standing full figure. Superman's chest. Just his chest. His huge, massive, S-draped, extraterrestrially muscular chest. Is Superman being objectified? Is he being used? Should I cry for Superman?
And. Just. What? This is the counterexample?
But! Maybe it’s not that his logic is just that scary. Maybe it's hard to understand what she’s talking about because it really, honestly is that there’s no comparable example featuring a male denizen of the DCU. I mean, even the occasional Nightwing crotch shot *tries* to have context.
Obviously, something had to be done. For The Good Of Fandom.
Luckily, much like Miller, I have no shame.
Totally Appropriate Covers (with bonus, never before seen script excerpts!)
Hal’s flying away from us through a generic starfield, nothing interesting to see except him. Have him wriggle around, giving us a good shot of his package. Add some details, something fancy for the fanboys to drool over, but don’t let it draw attention away from the point of the cover – that Kyle has nothing, NOTHING, on my boy Hal.
Be careful with this one – we don’t want Supes to come off as too powerful, too imposing. Maybe have him lean a bit, off balance, the better to show off his *well filled* briefs. He's fiddling with the waist line, such a cock *heh* tease. He knows he’s got what we want, and if we turn the cover, he’ll let us have it.
Well, we’ve done just about every variation on the theme by now, so let’s go back to the basics: Black on black, a full cover shot of Batman’s ass. Add in the utility belt for colour – give it that Sin City look. Show me thick, powerful legs under that latex or whatever the hell he wears. Clenched butt muscles. Make it obvious this is no BatGIRL we’re talking about.
From: (Anonymous)
no subject
If 'objectification' is as bad and insulting as you say, why would almost every single female be consciously objectifying herself with her choise in clothes ? If it's bad, why do they do it to themselves ?
Like you do yourself, your jeans pants must be very snug on your ass. There is no doubt about that. This makes the whole thread pointless and cynical, since you actually use the thing you pretend to be upset about for personal benefit.
Every single actress, singer, whatever, use sex. Are they being objectified ? Poor objectified victims, with millions of american dollars in their bank accounts and a personal airplane.
Women use sex to succeed in life. Sex gives women power. It's a simple formula. Sex is used in comics and ads, because it's the strongest thing. It makes it sell. A comic that had superman's ass on the cover wouldn't sell.
Sex must be the strongest force in the world after money.
And women own it.
So what are you whining about ? That your gender is considered sexy and beautiful ?
From:
no subject
Walking around college campus today, I see a number of girls dressed as I am, in not particularly tight pants and either a loose t-shirt or a sweatshirt. But you know what? YOU don't see them. Most guys don't. They see the sorority girls in the mini-skirts and tight tops with their tummies showing.
Do I care that guys don't notice me? No, because I have one and I'm very happy with him. But if I was looking for someone, I'd need to dress up just to be noticed by a large number of guys to whom I am invisible without my curves. :P Including you. Epic win, sir.
As for my gender being "sexy and beautiful," yours is too. However, the guys who present themselves as most appealing sexually are frequently branded as homosexuals. Most straight guys, faced with such a designation, would go back to dressing in shapeless sacks. Since so few guys make an effort to dress in a sexually appealing way, there's no pressure to do so in order to become "visible." This does not lessen the pressure on females.
Your stupidity and blindness sickens me.