I don't know who Dobson it, but, according to our last discussion about sexual objectification in the OTD, there is a portion of the Christian right that is also pushing it, albeit with a different emphasis than your usual Dworkin/MacKinnon/Wolf school:
Wendy Shalit's Return to Modesty which I only ever discovered from the wiki page on sexual objectification.
It most certainly is, and if you read some of the articles about Ms. Shalit (who is Jewish, not Christian, but nevertheless) you will see that she keeps going on about how a return to modesty is the cure for sexual objectification.
Like I said, different emphases.
Woops. For the sake of clarity,
That's more the usual "be pure and virginal or you're a whore" bull.
It most certainly is. Etc.
Well, I couldn't say, but I haven't read that far into it. I got the impression, though, that this particular crowd was more genteel than all that. More devout hand-wringing soccer moms than piggish Abrahamic patriarchs. But I could be wrong.
I am stunned that you can't see the objectification of women. Do you live under a rock? Have you NEVER seen an advertisement? And this is NOT a partisan issue at all. ANY woman who wants to be treated like any man on the job has to face this issue left and right alike. We are judged not on merit but on how attractive we look, while men with half the qualifications get promoted above us.
Not where I work - and I'm in the military! Like racism, I wonder how often people notice sexism because they are looking for it and not because it actually exists.
Stick with white queen,her outfits will serve your cause much better.Not really. White Queen, as either villain, hero, or anti-hero has always considered her sexuality another weapon to be used. Plus for the last decade-plus she can turn into diamond like Colossus turns into steel. It's not like she needs armor.
Pah. Secondary mutations were a horrid idea, and I loathe that this one has been kept where so many others were dropped.
Pah. Secondary mutations were a horrid idea, and I loathe that this one has been kept where so many others were dropped.Stick with white queen,her outfits will serve your cause much better.Not really. White Queen, as either villain, hero, or anti-hero has always considered her sexuality another weapon to be used. Plus for the last decade-plus she can turn into diamond like Colossus turns into steel. It's not like she needs armor.
They'd be fine if they fit a theme. I mean, your name is wolverine, you heal fast, are super tough, and have claws. But you're a telepath.... who can turn into diamond....???? How are those even remotely related?
Dr. Jackson: Egeria, Roman goddess of fountains.
Col. O'Neill: Fountains?
Dr. Jackson: Also childbirth.
Col. O'Neill: How do those two go together?
|
We are judged not on merit but on how attractive we look, while men with half the qualifications get promoted above us.
Not where I work - and I'm in the military! Like racism, I wonder how often people notice sexism because they are looking for it and not because it actually exists.
And I wonder how often people who aren't affected by it themselves overlook it while it's all around them. Much like racism.
I can honestly say that none of the female executives in my organisation were promoted for their looks.
Or the men, come to that.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And I wonder how often people who aren't affected by it themselves overlook it while it's all around them. Much like racism.
That's an excellent question. I suppose the obvious solution is to be outraged regardless just in case there really is some injustice going on somewhere, rather than to carefully consider the facts. After all, I wouldn't want to be perceived as sexist or racist for not showing enough knee-jerk outrage.
|
|
Or,
They could work in an industry that conforms to Equal Ops legislation?
Admittedly, I'm from the UK, so I don't know if that science fiction concept has made its way to the US yet. From what I hear, it keeps getting introduced, then overturned, or delayed, or appealed, or filibustered, or any of the many other ways US politicians have at their disposal, to avoid actually complying with the law of the land.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am stunned that you can't see the objectification of women. Do you live under a rock? Have you NEVER seen an advertisement? And this is NOT a partisan issue at all. ANY woman who wants to be treated like any man on the job has to face this issue left and right alike. We are judged not on merit but on how attractive we look, while men with half the qualifications get promoted above us.
I think his point is that the drawings are not responsible. There's obviously still sexism in America, but he doesn't believe scantily-clad heroines are part of the problem.
Personally, I think that—
*beepbeepbeep*
Hey, what's that?
*beepbeepbeep*
Oh my god! The "Derailometer" is going through the roof!
*beepbeepbeepBEEPBEEPBEEPBEEP*
It appears to be detecting some sort of tangentially related contentious topic taking root in this chat!
*BEEPBEEPBEEPBEEEEEEEEEEP*
Quickly, lads! To the Above-It-All Mobile!
*Rides away on sparkling tricycle*
That's about as useful a response as to assume it doesn't exist because you personally don't see it and dismiss the reports of those who are affected and can see it.
You're right of course that sometimes people can be too sensitive. Maybe they've been hurt by it enough in the past that they see it everywhere, even when it isn't there. Some probably even make deliberate false claims for their own advantage.
OTOH, it's very common for such claims to be dismissed out of hand, either due to ignorance and lack of perception or due to deliberate blindness.
I wasn't trying to say it doesn't exist. I was trying to say it may be overblown and that perhaps some of the more overzealous posters in this thread should put down the torches and pitchforks; it reminds me of the Red Scare - instead of Communists, some people see a racist or a sexist under every rock and behind every tree.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The day that "Mega-Bag-Lady*" sells as well as "Contortia the Belly-Button Hypnotist vs. The Leather Baroness", sexism will be dead. (Either that or all the teenaged boys will be.) But I don't think any of us will live long enough to see that day.
* For the record, I think a bag lady who uses her super-powers to save the Earth and then gets hassled by the cops for sleeping under an overpass is much more interesting than Clark Kent.
Have you read the Dresden Files?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Um...I don't see how they all that different...except for them being of young girls...Mainly because their superpower isnt cleavage
This is the opening line of the article you linked...
"It's no secret that female characters are portrayed in a different way than their male counterparts are in comic art. But in a medium where superhero costumes are already so silly, why do we care so much about how our lady heroes dress?"
It occurred to me when I read it, that female characters might dress differently from male characters because females tend to dress differently than males.
Look at Halloween costumes and compare men to women... seems like men go for silly more often than not while the women often use it as a chance to get dressed up as a sexy nurse/kitty/hero/cop/fairy/whatever.
Then go to a club on your typical Saturday night... men decked out in jeans and t-shirts or button downs, women in high heels, low cut dresses with non-existent hemlines. And - believe it or not - not a single one of them were forced to dress that way at gunpoint as part of a vast male-dominated conspiracy to subjugate them. They liked how they looked, they wanted to dress sexy, to feel attractive and empowered... and there's nothing wrong with that.
At the end of the day, I feel like we're going to have to accept that women and men are actually different, inside and out... and that that's okay.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Psylocke's old costume makes much, much, less sense. When you skillset is 'ninja' (a group of people who don't like to stand out, or better not, not be seen at all) wearing something that makes everyone stare doesn't fit the theme.
15 eye witnesses and NONE of them remember her face... at all?
No ma'm.
WHY NOT? Was she wearing a mask?
Well.. ahh uhm.. not exactly she was.. uhm....
I partially agree with you, Wiggz (though your avatar made me think you were Crystal Frasier at first, which kinda confused me). However, it's pretty clear our culture cares more about women looking pretty than men looking pretty.
The reason a lot of women dress themselves up nice? Well, they kinda have to. Our culture (if you've been playing a "how many times will they mention culture" drinking game on this thread, I suggest you quit now) demands it.
Game of Thrones is a good example. How many ugly male characters are there? Plenty. Lots and lots and lots of fat old guys with beards. Too many to link. How many ugly women characters, though? Ugly personalities aside, there ain't exactly any of import. Fake Edit: I was wrong. There was that one knight lady from Season Two. Though I haven't seen the third season yet, so maybe she dies soon. ;D
Lost is another example (though I'm only referencing the first season here). In Lost, we have several characters that aren't exactly lookers. They're all men. The ugly parts are relegated to the gender that is allowed to be both ugly and cool.
This culture prioritizes attractiveness on both sides, of course. But if you compared the numbers of "badass ugly men" to the numbers of "badass ugly women" in our fictional works, you'd find a pretty clear disparity.
Ugly women can't be badass, as our culture sees it. It's not even a matter of fanservice—the character could be dressed in nonrevealing full plate at all times, but she'd still have to be hot.
As somebody who's really into the visuals of movies, it's kind of a shame. I like my female protagonists attractive, yeah, but sometimes an ugly role would just work better. Besides, it's kind of unfair to those female actresses just not born with the "right" facial features.
Anyways, kobold ramble over.
...if you compared the numbers of "badass ugly men" to the numbers of "badass ugly women" in our fictional works, you'd find a pretty clear disparity. Ugly women can't be badass, as our culture sees it...Sometimes I have a nightmare that somebody is making a DC Comics-inspired movie and casting for Amanda Waller. And I wake up yelling, "No! No! Don't put a swimsuit model in that part, you hack!"
(Just kidding. When I scream myself awake it is not comics-related.)
If we've told you once we've told you 100 times no liquids after 7.
Those costumes are cute. Of course, if you watch your Saturday morning cartoons, you know this style is nothing new. There are plenty of "normally" dressed or covered up heroes on TV and in kids' comics. But a few points remain in order.
Right, because those are generally produced with oversight from people who are more conscious of these sorts of things.
Firstly, somebody has to point out that once again we have here the modern American hypocrisy. That is, that it is somehow wrong for a superheroine to show cleavage, but it's perfectly fine for little girls to run around with swords and knives. Read: sex = bad, mmm'kay? Violence = real, real good.
That's actually a fairly decent point, and remains so without the bizarre reference to little girls. In this context though, we're talking about costume design for a genre where big ol' drawn out fight scenes between people who are largely impervious to harm are the main attraction, so if you have issues with casual violence, you want to pull the plug on the whole thing. Sexualization isn't necessary for the stories being told though, so it's not a double standard so much as it's fix what you can where you can.
Secondly, not every female superhero shows cleavage. Some do, but as I've pointed out time and time again, the most naked heroes in Fantasy and Sci-Fi are generally male (Conan, Tarzan, etc.) and nobody ever runs to their rescue or complains about the exploitation of men.
If you've pointed that out "time and again" I'm sure you've seen a fair number of variations of the response that there's a difference between eye candy and power fantasy. This one puts a different spin on it than most, and as such is rather NSFW.
Can you tell me with a straight face that there is something inherently wrong with Spider-Woman's costume that cannot be applied to Spider-Man's? Both are tight fitting and both completely cover, or nearly so. Should I be afraid that because there are boobs on Spider-Woman's chest, that civilization is doomed to fall? How about the prominent bulge in Spider-Man's crotch that haunted his comics all through the 'nineties? Has the world ended and I just didn't notice?
I can't really speak to that particular pair of characters specifically with any real authority, or explain this without coming off a bit vulgar but generally speaking...
The issue on the table though, I believe, gives full body spandex costumes a free pass, and is focused more on plunging necklines, boob windows, bare midriffs, etc. etc. Possibly also arbitrary lines that draw attention to the fun bits, in which case spiderman actually does work as a rare counterpoint since a lot of variations on his costume do kinda turn the whole thing to a big red arrow pointing at his crotch, but I've never seen it with the equivalent pose and level of detail.
Have any of you ever - EVER - known a guy who looked at a picture of Ms. Marvel, put down the comic, and said to himself, "You know, now that I've seen that picture, I'm convinced that women are nothing but inhuman automatons built for my sole sexual pleasure?"
I actually have, yes. Horrifyingly enough, if you host any sort of convention or trade show with a heavy enough focus on comics, games, or anything else with serious, deeply ingrained objectification of women going on, you're going to draw in an alarming number of people who have so deeply internalized it to the point where they automatically assume any woman they see is some sort of professional model (or escort) hired for the event for photo opportunities or worse, regardless of how they dress and conduct themselves.
On nights out women dress up to make sure that other women don't say bad things about their looks; they dress up for women, not men.
I'm pretty sure "women" isn't some uniform group that all share the same motivation.
On nights out women dress up to make sure that other women don't say bad things about their looks; they dress up for women, not men.I'm pretty sure "women" isn't some uniform group that all share the same motivation.
This statement applies equally to those who say women all dress up nice because they want to nab a man (or would feel inadequate if they didn't).
At least call out both sides on their blanket statements if you're going to do one.
This statement applies equally to those who say women all dress up nice because they want to nab a man (or would feel inadequate if they didn't).
At least call out both sides on their blanket statements if you're going to do one.
I can't even begin to guess what you're on about. Sorry.
You know, since women in the nude getting hit on by swans is accepted as great art, are comic book characters really a problem?
HarbinNick those are historical female (and male) nude art pieces. I am less concerned about that then the constant bombarding of young girls with impossible body images and near pornographic dress codes the comic industry and media in general expects them to conform to.
You know, since women in the nude getting hit on by swans is accepted as great art, are comic book characters really a problem?
If, because this particular piece was considered great art, all other art was also only about nude women getting hit on by swans, the parallel would be more apt.
I haven't noticed anyone really calling comic book characters out as 'a problem' in this thread (though, admittedly, I skipped a bit). I think the "problem", as such, is that there aren't a very balanced selection of heroine costumes. If your like your rolemodels in hotpants or miniskirts (and I'm not saying it's wrong to like that), then congratulations, you have a lot of options to pick from. If you prefer anything else, not so much.
I also think this is more of an issue with the "legacy" characters. I'm not deeply vested in the comic book scene, but the vague impression of this outsider is that there seems to be much more variety today than there used to be. I could be wrong though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
HarbinNick those are historical female (and male) nude art pieces. I am less concerned about that then the constant bombarding of young girls with impossible body images and near pornographic dress codes the comic industry and media in general expects them to conform to.
And how many gallons of steroids would you have to main line to look like this?
Comics are not a realistic or possible style for men or women.
I think they're adorable.
|
|
Game of Thrones is a good example. How many ugly male characters are there? Plenty. Lots and lots and lots of fat old guys with beards. Too many to link. How many ugly women characters, though? Ugly personalities aside, there ain't exactly any of import. Fake Edit: I was wrong. There was that one knight lady from Season Two. Though I haven't seen the third season yet, so maybe she dies soon. ;D
TAKE THAT BACK! She is AWESOME, and one of the sexiest reasons I watch the show.
I demand satisfaction for milady's honour!
<swats Cleaver with glove>
HarbinNick those are historical female (and male) nude art pieces. I am less concerned about that then the constant bombarding of young girls with impossible body images and near pornographic dress codes the comic industry and media in general expects them to conform to.
And how many gallons of steroids would you have to main line to look like this?
Comics are not a realistic or possible style for men or women.
And yet despite drawing that piece as if he was a younger Arnold Schwarzenegger he IS fully clothed. Yet women get drawn as if they had broken backs to maintain the crazy totally sexist poses often wearing very little clothing at all.
I can't even begin to guess what you're on about. Sorry.This statement applies equally to those who say women all dress up nice because they want to nab a man (or would feel inadequate if they didn't).
At least call out both sides on their blanket statements if you're going to do one.
Simply put, if you're going to expend the effort to tell someone women aren't a hive mind when they make a blanket statement, at least call out EVERYONE who does it instead of one specific person making a blanket statement to refute an opposing blanket statement.
And yet despite drawing that piece as if he was a younger Arnold Schwarzenegger he IS fully clothed.HarbinNick those are historical female (and male) nude art pieces. I am less concerned about that then the constant bombarding of young girls with impossible body images and near pornographic dress codes the comic industry and media in general expects them to conform to.
And how many gallons of steroids would you have to main line to look like this?
Comics are not a realistic or possible style for men or women.
His outfit is practically painted on and you can pretty much see that well... cyclops isn't jewish.
Yet women get drawn as if they had broken backs to maintain the crazy totally sexist poses often wearing very little clothing at all.
And i'm pretty sure that trying to fight while standing in most of these positions would cause you to be pretty easy to tip over, but they look cool.