gailsimone:
gambitgrl:
gailsimone:
amboy00:
gailsimone:
clockworkvillain:
gailsimone:
j33zits:
gailsimone:
omnomnumbat:
I’ve been meaning to upload this for a while! This is the Catman collage I made for thewolverina(’s partner’s) PS3.
Well, this is awesome. :)
Also, for people who complain (understandably) about the way females are dressed in comics, I would like to point out that WE HAD BLAKE BUCK NAKED EVERY POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY.
;)
Seeing sexy half-naked women running around in spandex is a manchild fantasy.
Being a buff dude is also a manchild fantasy. This is not equalizing in any form of the word, and only feeds into the MRA idiots who think it does.
What the hell?
Seriously?
Why do you switch POV in your example, from an observer (“SEEING sexy half-naked women”) to the character himself, (“BEING a buff dude”) in your comment here? Do you not see how obvious a switch tactic that is? It’s not apples and oranges, it’s apples and orangutans.
And are we seriously trying to say that having sexy naked guys is purely so males will imagine themselves as…what, naked eye candy? What happened to the observer? Where did they run off to, suddenly?
Speaking as a female, having Nicola Scott draw hot naked guys makes me want to look at them, not BE them. The assumption that the viewer is automatically a het male is just WEIRD.
But I’ll throw it open to the readership.
Hot naked guys in comics. Are they purely for het males to imagine themselves being, or can they function as eye candy?
All opinions welcome.
It’s eye candy all the way, and damned fine eye candy too. For every naked Catman, we have about a hundred twist-spined, boob-socked, ass-focused panel of a female with a vacant expression on her face shoved at us and told that that is…somehow sexy? And that we shouldn’t complain? Yet you can when there’s even a hint of a dude being sexualized, often in a much less demeaning way than a woman is.
We deserve man-meat for putting up with that shit.
Hey, you made me laugh right there, thanks. :) Important not to get too serious.
What upset me about the poster was not the assumption that people might identify with Catman, it was the irritating goddamn assumption that the reader is de facto a straight male dude. I just don’t get that.
I will also say, regarding body types?
Nearly every guy in Secret Six was nude at least once, most several times. INCLUDING Bane, Ragdoll, and Mad Hatter. If the poster wants to make the case that these characters are all typical buff hunks, I would say that they have not read the book.
Maybe I’m missing something. But I hate hate HATE that assumption that the reader is always one type of person.
Okay. Catman’s inability to keep clothes on is not in it of itself a negative thing, especially in this context. One thing was very clear, from the start, even when it was called Villains United, the writer and artists never shied away from limits. Both the story and art explored all sorts of boundaries. I personally think they tried to see how much gay undertones they could make.
I always thought Catman was bi. At best, Slingshot is gay-for-pay.
Yeah, but you HAVE a hunky redhead dude, so you’re clearly biased. :) Hi, Chris!
It’s ‘Deadshot,’ not ‘Slingshot,’ but sure, I some gay subtext maybe, but I much preferred to be overt, as in Scandal’s case, and Jeannette’s.
GIMME MY MAN MEAT EYECANDY PLEASE
Now you’re just confusing me, do you want CANDY or MEAT. Or meat candy? Candied meat?
:)
Seriously, I find this discussion very interesting.
I disagree with what the original poster said (I guess I mean the original dissenting poster, here) but that person’s got every right to their opinion.
The only thing I find distressing is this idea of a de facto het male reader. Why in god’s name would we assume that ever reader is that person? Even if numerically, they are, aren’t we ALL always talking about casting a wider net and having MORE representation and MORE diversity?
I think this idea of a het male readership needs to be buried. Nothing against het males, I married one and all, but they are not all there is in the audience.
Someone made a point that a lot of the sexualized females are in positions of subjugation, which is absolutely TRUE. However, I have no intention of ‘balancing that out’ with males with their asses in the air after being beat up or whatever. I don’t want to see EITHER of those as sexualized.
When I do show a female character naked, it’s rarely in a bubble bath or trying on lingerie, she’s usually still in a position of power in some way.
I like characters to have a sexual component, but that doesn’t mean they’re only meant to be leered at (usually). There’s usually a storytelling element as well.
As a heterosexual, half-white, brown-haired, blue-eyed, 21 year-old, long-time reading male, I disagree with the initial poster’s comments. I’m very skinny. Too skinny, by most people’s standards. But, despite the health risks and overall unappeallingness of my body, I’m comfortable with it. It’s how I am and until I catch up to my metabolism (which will happen) or decide to start working out (which won’t), that’s how I’m going to be. And I really enjoy having characters like Ragdoll and Scarecrow and Joker and Riddler (why are there so many skinny Bat-foes?) whose body-types I can identify with. The idea that we look at these buff guys as some fantasy of what we want to be is completely untrue. As is the idea that hetero males enjoy having oversexualized female eye-candy rubbing their asses in our faces. I’ll admit, when I was 8, it was AWESOME. But as an adult, it’s just frustrating and annoying. Are there men who want to look like bodybuilders? Yes. But there are also women who want to look like supermodels. Are there men who will pick up a comic because it promises some shameless T&A? Absolutely. Just as there are women who will pick up a book and the first sign of Jason showering. But you have to acknowledge that both male and females identify with those characters in both of those ways (observing AND identifying with). And besides, to the majority of readers, I don’t think eye-candy or personal fantasies are really important.
Now, even I enjoy some eye-candy now and again, if it’s not done in a way that makes 0 sense storywise or, even WORSE, if it’s completely out of character. But I think most people would agree that nudity in a comic is best when Batman is getting his scars patched up, or Dick and Babs are sharing a morning after conversation, or Batwoman shares a night of passion with her girlfriend, or Ollie and Dinah are on their wedding night. Because a giant, shiny slab of lady-meat OR man-meat being shoved in your face isn’t sexy. Real moments of vulnerability between characters is sexy. And THAT’S what nudity should be about in movies, comics or stories in general: Vulnerability. A character can show defiant power by having the confidence to fight while vulnerable. A character can show trust by sharing their vulnerability with another character. Or we can feel scared for a character as they are approached or attacked in their most vulnerable state (that one’s not sexy; but it’s a way in which nudity can be used to serve a story). Nudity should be “revealing”. Most of us don’t like, pointless, uncharacteristic nakedness. But we like nudity to be as revealing of the character emotionally as it is of the character physically. And if it turns out to be sexy in the process… well, that’s probably because the character is an Olympic-level athlete. However, I’m not claiming that men get it as bad as women in comics. Nudity can be done wrong and, sadly, the crime is committed more often against female characters than male ones. But to say that when it’s done to male characters it’s to please males, and that when it’s done for female characters it’s to please males, is just… poor logic.
