Marvel features spider woman's ass on cover of issue #1

[Liberal_in_LA]

Http://io9.com/check-out-spider-woman-1-starring-spider-womans-ass-1624535918


First of all, even the dumbest, horniest teenage boy on the planet knows there's no fabric on this earth that could possibly cling to Jessica Drew's individual buttocks like that. She looks like she's wearing body-paint, and that's a big no-no for an industry still trying to remember that women exist and may perhaps read comics and also don't want to feel completely gross when they do so. As for the position she's in... christ. It's like you want The Hawkeye Initiative to get so furious they have brain aneurysms and die.

Of course, sexy comic art has its place, and Manara is quite good at it. But perhaps asking an erotic artist to draw one of your most popular superheroines for a mass-market cover wasn't quite a good idea. Also a bad idea: Receiving this cover and pretending like you didn't notice Spider-Woman sticking her bare red ass three feet into the air. Here's a simple rule: If it's inappropriate for a male character, it should also be inappropriate for a female character.

[Heidi]

1. Kick!

[Warren DeMontague]

2. It worked for Nicki Minaj.

...what?

[In_The_Wind]

14. Indeed!

Does she do any videos wearing more clothes? After watching part of Anaconda yesterday, I went looking for her videos

[Agschmid]

60. Essentially no.

There is one with Sean Garret called "Massive Attack" it is from back in the day and it probably shows her the most covered up...

That isn't saying much.

[In_The_Wind]

66. After watching Massive Attack (she has a thing for bugs), I found this one ...

[Agschmid]

71. Oh Drake...

Those eyebrows though...

[underpants]

26. Not being an artistic type I am not sure of the essence of Nicki's latest video

There is some message, dare I say "vision", that she has endeavored to express in her latest contribution but it is being my ability to truly understand it minutia.

[notadmblnd]

29. I think it's clear, she's in love with her ass

Who loves Nikki Manaj's ass more than Nikki Manaj? Why, no one!

[Warren DeMontague]

199. She owns it, which is cool.

She's not worried about it going down on her perrrrramanent record that she promoted illicit naughty butt twerking or grinding or whatever.

If the Butt-luminati do establish their one world butt order and crack down on all dissenting buttpinions, along with all bad butt videos and their producers, Nicki Minaj will be right there saying fuck you, I did what I did, and I'm glad about it. I have no regrets, except that I have but one butt to give, for my butt.

In that, she is an inspiration to us all.

[Agschmid]

59. I LOLed.

[Warren DeMontague]

104. 0-7.

...yowch.

It worked for Nicki Minaj.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5431879

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Making a joke out of misogyny and objectification. It's such a standard part of his posting history that I wonder if this kind of spitting in the face of feminists is actually appreciated by some people here.

Nicki is a musician and has at least some say in what she does in her videos, and many of those videos are about sex. This is about a drawing of a superhero that is approved by a publisher and the comic book isn't actually about sex. This constant making fun of feminist issues is hostile. it creates a hostile environment for feminists.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Aug 23, 2014, 10:01 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Seriously? What kind of alert was this? Don't waste our time.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Loosen up a bit, folks
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Lighten up. Francis.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Are we so politically correct..
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nicki Minaj uses sex to increase her wealth, just like Marvel Comics uses cover art that is blatantly sexist to make money. As a feminist, I can't logically find a way to excuse Minaj for sexualizing her body while criticizing Marvel for doing the same thing.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Are you kidding? I want to see some Spider woman ass! Going to thread now.

[pintobean]

110. That's hilarious. /nt

[Warren DeMontague]

113. Way funnier than my original post, that's for sure.

[yeoman6987]

126. I wish we knew who the alerter was.........

I am stunned that whoever it was alerted this.

[pintobean]

128. I think I can guess

the alerter's favorite group. I wonder how many feminists were on the jury.

[Warren DeMontague]

131. I'm pretty sure I know.

I won't say, but I know.

[hifiguy]

138. It is blatantly obvious from the

paranoia of the prose style alone. Someone needs to get a life.

[pintobean]

141. Get something

anyway.

[redqueen]

150. Don't be a coward, spit it out.

[pintobean]

153. Can you alert

or do you expect someone else to?

[betsuni]

152. The alerter isn't aware that Nicki Minaj had done a photoshop on Instagram

of herself as Spider Woman in the same pose and didn't see the humor in the comment. (I assume, anyway, and didn't appreciate Minaj being the butt of a joke she didn't understand.)

[Warren DeMontague]

183. the butt of a joke?

[pinboy3niner]

216. Stick to the specific issue. No sense in making it global.

Oh, wait...

[Warren DeMontague]

218. Cheeky cheeky!

[rjj621]

336. Seriously?!?

That was deserving of an alert?!? wow.... just wow....

[hifiguy]

339. Some people see nothing but the demons tattooed inside their own eyelids

and live in a state of perpetual poutrage.

[Exultant Democracy]

343. "Explanation: Are you kidding? I want to see some Spider woman ass! Going to thread now" ROLF

[BainsBane]

3. He made her look deformed

That is not a position the human body takes. Her head is jutting out of her shoulders strangely, and there is no reason for ass to be sticking straight up that way. Also, you can't be boney and have a round ass. It's one or the other.

[pintobean]

15. It's a sci-fi artist's depiction of a human/spider hybrid.

Why wouldn't it look deformed?

[randome]

25. Another Todd MacFarland raises her inept hand.

Another 'hot' artist whose 'style' is to draw human beings freakishly.

I don't have a problem with displaying superheroes in a sensual or even sexual pose but I'd rather look at someone whose proportions are realistic and not drawn in a 'look at what I can draw' manner.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[hifiguy]

49. You think that's deformed?

Check out anything, and I mean anything, that Rob Liefeld has ever drawn. How he ever got a gig as a professional artist remains one of the great mysteries of the age.

[Liberal Veteran]

68. Surely, you jest? Liefeld is a genius at drawing accurate humans.

[hifiguy]

74. And pouches. Always lots of pouches.

And tiny little feet that would never support the 600 pound roided-up gorillas that are the only male figures he can draw.

Stick a Rapidograph in a chimp's hand and you will get better work than Liefeld's.

[SwankyXomb]

111. You're wrong

Liefeld never draws feet.

[hifiguy]

177. Touché

[tblue37]

187. Captain america is carrying that pregnancy quite high. I believe

that's supposed to mean the baby is a girl.

(Yes, I know that's an old wives' tale and not really an accurate way to predict the sex of a fetus.)

[BainsBane]

213. They aren't called superheros for nothing.

[BainsBane]

212. Ah, what is that sticking out of his chest?

Looks like a cross between the Hulk and Jayne Mansfield.

[Warren DeMontague]

258. Maybe it's a subliminal Deadmau5 shoutout?

[sibelian]

331. This is my favourite...

[hifiguy]

337. As I said, a chimp with a Rapidograph could do better.

Even in a career studded with incalculable amounts of staggering artistic incompetence, that one stands out. It would have received a D- in my seventh grade art class.

[ancianita]

155. Yeah, but it's typical of decades of this kind of comic art depiction of women's anatomy.

[Warren DeMontague]

200. Not a position a human body- that has been given super powers to fight villains with names like

"the green goblin"- takes?

[Prophet 451]

4. The fabric is probably UMF

Pretty much all costumes in the Marvel universe are made from Unstable Molecule Fabric, a substance discovered by Reed Richards that both clings like a second skin and resists damage better than normal fabric.

Yes, I'm a geek but I'm not even going to try defending that cover.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

32. What, is there a store that sells it?

You have to have a superhero card to get in? Or do everyday people in the Marvel Universe also wear it?

[Prophet 451]

77. It's high-end stuff

Heroes and villains use a tailor called Leo Zelinsky. He's completely neutral and patches everyone's costumes up. Some civilians also wear it but it's high-end stuff, expensive.

Yeah, I know this shit.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

79. I'm just surprised they got that detailed about it.

That they put the tailor and so on into the canon.

[Prophet 451]

259. Comics geeks notice EVERYTHING

Back in the Silver Age (Sixties-early Eighties), comics sold big enough and the fans were devoted enough that they thought about absolutely everything. So the writers had to invent whole support systems for both sides. There's a couple backstage tech guys who patch up the villains gear, a nurse who patches up the heroes and doesn't ask questions. Even a guy who trains all the henchmen that mastermind villains have.

[Xyzse]

268. WOW... You Sir, have outclassed quite a bit of comic-fans that I know.

I salute you.

[Prophet 451]

273. Thank you, sir.

I trained for years.

[hifiguy]

80. Probably in the Baxter Building.

Yes, I am a terminal nerd.

[TreasonousBastard]

5. I find this creepy rather than erotic...

the nose is odd and the mouth cruel.

Then, that huge, muscular thing sticking out the back is more reminiscent of a spider's abdomen than anything I would appreciate on a woman. It doesn't even make the grade for an orangutan presenting.

Now, to do it right (if indeed such a thing is possible) who else remembers R. Crumb's Big-Ass Comics from our substance abused days?

[whathehell]

7. R. Crumb was a sick bastard

I worked in a "head shop" in the early 70's and I came into contact

with his stuff frequently.

I remember one strip that featured Mr. Natural having sex

with an infant.

[cemaphonic]

72. There's a really interesting (and sad) documentary about him from the 90s

The movie makes it very clear that:

1) Yeah, he has some issues.

2) Compared to the rest of his family, he's a paragon of well-adjusted mental stability.

[4b5f940728b232b034e4]

105. What's a head shop?

Slang for a therapist?

[whathehell]

115. ------

head shops were place which sold pot paraphernalia -- bongs, rolling papers, pipes, etc.

[4b5f940728b232b034e4]

134. Thanks

Here in Seattle I've always heard those called smoke shops.

[mimi85]

202. Guess it's a generational thing.

Yeah, we called them head shops. Remember roach clips, you oldies but goodies?

[RKP5637]

226. Yep!

[Blue_In_AK]

286. I have a really cool one

that's like a little switchblade. You push the button and the alligator clip pops out.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

253. I live in the Seattle area

and I've always heard them called head shops.

[edhopper]

117. Pot paraphernalia

and sometimes underground comics like ZAP.



I feel old.

[Warren DeMontague]

118. ...seriously?

[cwydro]

122. Lol,

I thought the same

[BainsBane]

205. I thought it was like when a young women I knew once asked what a slip was

It's been a while since women have worn them, so I guess it made sense she didn't know what it was.

[cwydro]

262. Omg yes

I remember slips!

[tazkcmo]

130. *silently weeps* n/t

[JVS]

263. A bong store. You can't say bong at the bong store though.

[Blue_In_AK]

284. Seriously?

Oh, my god, I feel so old.

[Warren DeMontague]

119. say what you will about the guy, he's not in the past tense yet.

Mr. Crumb is still very much alive.

His book of Genesis is something to behold, and I mean that.

[redqueen]

19. What exactly do you think he's doing "right" here? nt

[hifiguy]

82. "The WHOLE UNIVERSE

is COMPLETELY INSANE!!!!" - Mr. Natural.

And then there was S. Clay Wilson, who made Crumb's most perverse work look like effin' Disney by comparison.

[Luminous Animal]

106. I've lived next door to Wilson for 30 years. Before his head injury, we used to call him Ass Clay.

[hifiguy]

108. Met him at a signing in the bookstore I worked in

back in the early 90s. Hilarious and friendly guy. Nothing like his twisted comics. I think he drew me a Checkered Demon IIRC.

[Luminous Animal]

112. He gave me pork brains in a can that, after 20 years sitting on a shelf, burst open.

He's given quite a few things to my husband. He always had more respect and generosity for men than women.

I first met him at a corner bar, called Dicks, a few weeks after I moved in. His first words to me were, "Hi. I am a famous cartoonist, you wanna fuck?"

And yes, he COULD be friendly but generally, even to his best friends, we was an asshole, drunk or sober.

[alphafemale]

85. "that huge, muscular thing sticking out the back is more reminiscent of a spider's abdomen..."

Um....do you remember the character's name?

[Shrike47]

6. Gross. That's all I see. Gross.

[Reter]

165. Get your glasses chaged

I'd love to have a view from the back.

[TlalocW]

8. Eh, that's tame

Women superheroes/villains - and most of the men - are essentially drawn nude minus the nipples and any indication of something in the pelvic region, and then painted a non-skin tone to indicate a costume.

Case in point...



TlalocW

[Blue_Tires]

176. +1

[TlalocW]

191. Here's another one that I remember caused some hubbub like the Spiderwoman pic above

TlalocW

[littlemissmartypants]

9. Thanks

Butt (sic) no thanks.

I'll stick with my Betty Boop.

Love, Peace and Shelter. Lmsp 🙌

[wyldwolf]

10. this is exactly why I'm laughing at all the fanboys expressing outrage at the new Wonder Woman

She doesn't have large breasts and her ass isn't popping out of a bikini costume.

[PragmaticLiberal]

83. Most of the fanboys I've come across aren't upset that she doesn't have large breasts etc.

They feel that Gal Gadot is too small to play WW.

Not enough muscle etc.

[wyldwolf]

87. then they show a picture of Linda Carter

[PragmaticLiberal]

154. I don't consider those real fanboys.

Well, what I mean is there are "WW TV show fanboys" and "WW Comic Book fanboys."

The comic book fanboys are really just concerned with Gal being too petite.

At least based on my experiences.

[jollyreaper2112]

338. Not all comic nerds

Well, I don't really have a dog in this fight but I always thought to play Wonder Woman you would need a fitness model. She'd be tall and have power but not ridiculous definition. There's curves padding out all that muscle. She would not look like a competition female body builder.

I've seen some Brazilian dancers who have that kind of build.

For someone like She-Hulk, you'd have a little more definition but it would be really hard to pull off with a real live human without looking grotesque.

Here's the thing, though. The men get power poses in these comics. The women get erotic poses. The difference? You don't see Superman posing like a gay male model in erotica. If a straight man feels uncomfortable looking at the male pose, it's got a homoerotic vibe. Sometimes it has to be pointed out. There are many men who still insist the volleyball scene in Top Gun was not gay as hell.

I wouldn't find it offputting if everyone was naked like in Barsoom stories but when the men are clothed and the women practically naked, it makes me feel a little lecherous to read.

[hifiguy]

98. She's a bit

petite for WW, who is an Amazon, after all.

[reddread]

11. pig headed morality played for publicity

Thats a pretty nice piece by a highly regarded artist, and he didnt get that way by drawing clothes on women.
all this is just publicity fodder being stoked by faux outrage.
But mention Jack Kirby and outrage cannot be kindled.
there are no kind words for this sort of bogus double standard of outrage.
played as fools.

[tridim]

12. Yes, people have been freaking out about art and sex forever.

and vapors.

Never, ever, look at manga.

[Johonny]

28. Michelangelo should have put some pants on David!

Nuf said

[WinkyDink]

143. David isn't depicted quite so....ready........Dammit. ;-)

[Blue_Adept]

13. The outrage - except...

It's worth noting that this is a variant cover. It's available for retailers to purchase ONE copy of per 50 copies they order of the main cover. So if the title does "good" business of 100,000 copies, you might get 2000 of these made.

So it's not like it's every cover, the main cover and going to be on every newstand out there. comics aren't even on newstands anymore anyway.

[hifiguy]

50. Eeyup.

You have had to go to comic shops to get comics for going on 40 years.

[Blue_Adept]

107. I used to get them at my newsstand back in the 80's

Which is when the direct market really started to hit. I loved biking downtown with friends, buying new 60 cent books and delving into it week after week. It was a thrill.

I still read comics today, mostly trades though. And singles are bought digitally.

[pintobean]

18. If spider man was in that position

would you say the same thing?

[LloydS of New London]

21. Of course not!

Because male superheroes are never portrayed like that! If they were, you could bet the farm that Marvel would be flooded with homophobic e-mails and tweets! (You see, I'm against the misogyny.)

[ProdigalJunkMail]

35. see post #31... particularly the last image...

look familiar?

sP

[pintobean]

43. .

[Agschmid]

61. I'm down.

[Ilsa]

186. SNL parody. nt

[pintobean]

188. No shit. nt

[pintobean]

124. I didn't alert on your hidden post.

I disagree with your opinion, but you should have the right to express it.

[MadrasT]

22. Absurd question. Would never happen. n/t

[In_The_Wind]

23. ***unsee***

[img][/img]

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

33. Look at the last image of comment 31. With spiderman in pretty much the same pose.

I'm not fond of Manara's style anyway, all of his people look rather weird to me.

But if it's a 1 in 50 cover, I'm sure it was done intentionally both to generate more sales and more 'buzz'.

[gollygee]

40. It's not at all the same pose

One looks like he's crawling, the other looks like her ass is lifted up for sex. The only similarity is that you can see butt cheeks in each of them. I don't see how you think they're "pretty much the same pose."

[redqueen]

44. The denial is so thick in this thread

it'd be amusing if the broader implications weren't so fucking depressing.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

69. If you say so. (Edited)

(earlier text removed.)

I was a bit annoyed at your reply so I wrote something snippy back. It didn't deserve that sort of response, though. Just because it's a pose that strikes me as weird, and not sexual, and not much different from the other one posted doesn't mean that isn't how others see it.

[stevenleser]

193. It is pretty much the same pose and there are thousands like it in spiderman comics.

The spiderman crawl pose drawings are common in spiderman comics.

The other thing some folks who object to this picture seem to fail to see is that she is crawling from a higher position to a lower one.

Try doing that without having the back of you at a higher elevation than the rest of you.

Outside of how her butt is drawn, which is a little odd, there is nothing significantly different from the OP picture with the picture in comment 31.

[Iron Man]

37. Um, it looks like she just climbed up on the roof or landed on it.

That's the first thing you think of when you see that pic?

[msanthrope]

41. Your post is unintentionally revealing and hilarious. nt

[In_The_Wind]

47. unintentionally revealing

[img][/img]

[msanthrope]

48. Indeed....I'm always fascinated when a poster goes immediately to teh buttseks.

Me, I see a woman/spider hybrid landing on a roof ledge.

[In_The_Wind]

53. I see it that way too.

Go figure

[alphafemale]

229. Not much different than an extreme religious fundy seeing the perverse in the mundane.

Not much different at all.

It must be scary to be in their heads.

[hifiguy]

58. To be fair, Stan hasn't had anything to do with the comics

in about 35 years.

[NV Whino]

17. That's just plain ugly

And what's up with the nose?

[redqueen]

20. And OF COURSE, some people on DU are defending it.

This is fucking routine at this point.

[hifiguy]

56. What's it like to live in your ivory tower

and be omniscient? Must be an interesting experience to know everything about everything.

[Cleita]

76. The human body is divine and no one should be ashamed of it. eom

[redqueen]

81. My Goddess.

[Cleita]

86. It's a freaking cartoon.

Get over it.

[redqueen]

88. It's hypersexualization - her pose is pornified. It is a problem that many others manage to grasp.

Just because a noisy few here work so very hard to maintain the status quo, that does not oblige me to shut up about the issue.

So no, thank you, I will not follow your rude command.

[Cleita]

90. So according to you porn is evil?

Many of us don't think so.

[zazen]

129. you'd never have the nerve to say that to an African American or gay civil rights advocate

but you feel you can mock feminist men and women who are concerned about the rampant harms of pornography.

I'm grateful to redqueen's "obsession" as you say with this single topic, like I was for Susan B. Anthony's obsession with that petty unwomanly selfish hysterical crazy thing called women's suffrage, or the "obsession" of the battered women's movement to keep women safe from domestic violence.

And the not-so-subtle suggestion that she's aligned with crazy religious kooks is part of the usual anyone-concerned-about-pornography-is-a-prude jibe.

Thank God there's a growing movement of women and men who are beginning to understand that widespread dissemination and masturbation to documented sexual violation of women and children is not men's God-given right.

[hifiguy]

145. I have said very similar things to

Obsessed extremists of various kinds i have met in my life including a guy I met in law school who admired Pol Pot and the occasional crackpot spouting "Communist conspiracy" bilge in the 1970 and 1980s and assorted religious loonies. I have little tolerance or regard for strident absolutists of any sort.

[sibelian]

334. YeeeaAACH.

"women and children"

FOUL.

This is the same junk Republicans used to aim at gay people, we were all paedophiles. Disgusting.

Get this - Men like sex. It is normal to like sex and there is nothing wrong with sex, nor is there anything wrong with finding women beautiful or erotic.

If some women can't handle being beautiful through some dumb inferiority complex, that's their problem, they are perfectly entitled to tell people they don't want sex, but they are NOT entitled to denormalise ordinary human biology by externalising their neuroses and claiming it's representative of a societal norm.

[hifiguy]

340. IT may be EXACTLY the same argument, just as you say.

But it's DIFFERENT when they and not right-wingers or fundies are the ones saying it. How dare you question a (fringe to say the least) viewpoint that is obviously 100% correct in every way?

AND a brohoof for you, sibelian!

[opiate69]

346. Ah, but doncha know??

Sometimes, cozying up to religous-right fundie nutbars is A-OK..... but apparently, only sometimes.

[hifiguy]

355. Yeah. The hypocrisy here reaches epic, freeperland-like proportions sometimes

on certain subjects. I really expect better of lefties as we generally pride ourselves on being pretty rational folks. Speaking of freepers, I wonder if that open-air nuthouse is still around. Sure ain't gonna go over there to check....

[ancianita]

164. I've read lots of comics and it's not. It's an art style depicting body fantasy that's not sexual.

I'm not in denial. I've read many comics since the seventies, and I've come to the conclusion that the audience is developmentally not into sexism but is definitely into power. This thread's visual is taken out of the historical context of typical comic book art style that seems sexist, but isn't once one reads how sex is almost never part any story lines. Even subliminally, teens have told me that they just fantasize about exaggerated body images, and that comics help them do that. There's no hate, submission, domination in superhero behaviors to support the argument of sexism.

Maybe what you might be perceiving as denial is just a difference of exposure that's more complicated than is being explained here. I don't pretend to be any expert on comic art, but I can, with some certainty as a feminist, not see these body depictions as problematic for young readers. Just suggesting that you consider further.

[LanternWaste]

275. So is it a human body to be proud of or a "freaking cartoon?"

So is it a human body to be proud of or a "freaking cartoon?"


"Get over it..."
Tough old world when not everyone share's your own sensibilities...

[Logical]

149. Seems your alert failed 0-7 also. n-t

[redqueen]

151. Thanks for alerting me to the little ... whatever it is ... upthread.

Sad that grown men won't come out and say what they're thinking. Typical of a certain kind of man, though. Very.

[pintobean]

166. "Sad that grown men won't come out and say what they're thinking.

Typical of a certain kind of man, though. Very."

[Rex]

181. Wait til

she finds out the internet was made for porn!

[Warren DeMontague]

221. ....a certain kind of man

a certain kind of man, indeed.

[Warren DeMontague]

195. What kind?

You should come out and say it, i think.

[Rex]

255. Bluto is curious.

[Warren DeMontague]

211. What's even funnier is, it's not even the ACTUAL comic book cover.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/comics/illustrator-spider-woman-1-cover-sexual-critics-article-1.1913918

The alternate cover by Italian erotica artist Milo Manara will be an option for customers beginning Nov. 19. Some have blasted it as sexist and in poor taste, while other comic fans aren't offended

Wait, what, whoops? oh, well. I'm sure the outrage and attention will ensure no one wants to buy it, certainly driving the price down for what invariably will be a limited release.

In fact, it seems totally insane that they would court such media outrage, if they wanted to sell copies of this limited alternate edition... I mean, it's not like telling people to be mad about something they would otherwise have no idea existed, raises its profile in the general awareness........ or anything.

I'm sure now they are going to have one heck of a tough time, selling this limited edition "controversial" art cover edition!


...the fooooools!

[sibelian]

222. It's a PICTURE.

Why should it even NEED "defended"?

WHAT is going on in your brain?

[Marr]

24. They also had Manara do an X-Men book a few years back.

I thought it was practically satire, personally. Manara's undeniably an excellent illustrator, and he's done a lot of really beautiful work, but his approach clashes so weirdly with the subject matter in US comics that it's right next door to comedy.

Some of my favorite comic artists these days are women, so I'd say the industry is actually improving on this front. I remember when there just weren't any mainstream female comic artists.

[hifiguy]

78. When I was a very young nerd in the early Seventies

Marie Severin was the only woman artist at Marvel. I don't think DC had any.

There are a lot of great young female comic artists out there today. Animators, too. And that is a good thing.

[underpants]

27. Nice deTAILed worked

[deathrind]

30. That is pretty tame...

Compared to many other comic book depictions of women.

[aikoaiko]

31. Have you ever seen male spiderman comics?

Skin tight
[IMG][/IMG]

Nice package.
[IMG][/IMG]

Ass up.
[IMG][/IMG]

really, have you ever read any comic?

[redqueen]

34. Really, do you know what an arched back looks like?

Not an artist, I presume.

[aikoaiko]

39. Oh my. A slightly more arched back. The horror. Red lipstick, too. Long hair, too.

:eyeroll:

[redqueen]

42. LOL @ "slightly more"

I'm sorry that you don't get it.

Thank Goddess for the good people at the Hawkeye Initiative, and the millions more who are no longer clinging so desperately to their blinders.

[aikoaiko]

46. I accept your apology.

[Rex]

276. You will never get one of those

some here at DU are incapable of admitting to making mistakes. I agree with you 100%...and...you can totally see spiderman's junk...oh dear!

[hifiguy]

280. +1

And I am existentially amazed this thread is still turning up on the front page of GD after two full days.

[Puglover]

347. It is illustrative of how at times DU

sadly parodies itself.

[hifiguy]

65. Your unfamiliarity with the conventions of superhero art

and the artistic license taken therein is apparently infinite.

[LittleBlue]

45. +1

Third pic is nearly identical. Outrage denied.

[Nye Bevan]

55. Actual testicles in the second picture, unless I am mistaken.

But that is totally different, because.... something.

[msanthrope]

67. Actual moose knuckles. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

116. He's spider-man, remember

those are egg sacs.

[hifiguy]

62. There you go, using extrinsic evidence.

That is NOT allowed!!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

103. I'd hit it. nt

[stevenleser]

175. Which is what I have been saying as someone who read the comics as a kid

The pose from that last picture is a very common one for spiderman and it looks a lot like the spiderwoman pose that people are freaking out about. I do think that the way her butt is drawn is a little over the top, but other than that, the drawing of spiderwoman is completely in line with how spiderman has been drawn.

[PoutrageFatigue]

179. If it's inappropriate for a male character it's.... wait....

... never mind.....

[Rhinodawg]

36. Thats disgusting.

[Iron Man]

38. Clearly nobody here reads Spiderman comics.

[stevenleser]

120. Exactly. The pose being complained about seems completely in line with spiderman crawling poses.

The artist went a little nuts with her butt but other than that its ok.

[WinkyDink]

144. No; that's what we call "disingenuousness." And Spiderman isn't clad in only body-paint.

[Orrex]

159. Then neither is Ms. Drew

If you look at pretty much any action shot of Spiderman from, say, the past 50 years or so, you'll see that his costume is drawn so that it hugs his physique with an intimacy far beyond the capabilities of mortal fabric. You can clearly see the outline of his ribs and his armpits despite the nominal cloth of his costume. If she's wearing body paint, then so is he.

Granted, the panels that Iron Man showed in reply #38 don't specifically feature the ass-cleavage, but male superhero buttocks are hardly overlooked:



In short, the portrayal of Spiderwoman is 100% in line with decades upon decades of superhero illustration. Have you seen poor ol' Namor's costume, for chrissakes?!?






Also:

[stevenleser]

171. If you think that's disingenuous, you dont know what you are talking about. I provided

similar shots of spiderman downthread. There are tons of them. All you need to do is a google image search of "spiderman crawl" and you will see hundreds upon hundreds of them.

Anyone familiar with the comicbook series will recognize the picture of spiderwoman as being in a stance very similar to that of thousands of those images of spiderman over the years. as I already said. the way her butt is drawn is over the top, but outside of that the stance is not out of line with how spiderman is drawn.

[CAG]

51. She's gonna have a super spidey wedgy

When she stands up

[brewens]

52. Sheesh! Might as well show a "camel toe" as well. LOL n/t

[Nye Bevan]

54. Why oh why has President Obama not yet weighed in on this?

Controversial pictorial representations of the buttocks of fictional superheroes should be at or near the top of his list of issues to address. Female superhero buttocks exposure culture is not just going to go away by itself.

[99Forever]

57. Good grief.

The things some people get their undies in a knot over.

With all of the crap happening in the real world and I'm supposed to get up in arms over a freakin' comic book cover?

Holy misplaced priorities, Batman.

[hifiguy]

63. This times a googolplex.

This is the flipside of the reichwinger who flipped out and had a cow over Land's End sending out complimentary issues of GQ to customers. I keep trying to believe we lefties are better than those mouth-breathers but things like this make it difficult sometimes.

[Nye Bevan]

70. But... but... but... BUTTOCKS!

Which is not quite the same thing as ZOMG BOOBIES!

[hifiguy]

75. LOLOL!

So true.

[Iron Man]

100. I like your comment.

It's the best on in this thread.

[alp227]

234. Just because we complain about a comic book cover isn't automatically a distraction from

the real world. I'm tired of this "this issue is too trivial compared to that" type of argument... I never thought i'd see it in du.

[99Forever]

239. Well bless your heart.

And never thought I'd see people needing a fainting couch over a comic book cover on DU.

[alp227]

240. Here's a simple question: Is sexual objectification immoral?

And another one. does sexual objectification in popular culture influence unhealthy sexuality among people?

There's a damn good REASON for the fainting couch.

[99Forever]

241. It's a freakin comic book cover.

One I would have never seen if it wasn't posted here.

[alp227]

242. You didn't answer my questions. Is sexual objectification immoral?

Fact: Many see the cover as having an undertone of sexual objectification. Answer my questions.

[hifiguy]

245. Many say they've seen Bigfoot in the woods

or Elvis at a 7-11 in Michigan, too. Believing something does not make it extrinsically true. An interpretation shared by few in the face of vast evidence to the contrary - see all the Spider-Man art posted in this thread - may just be a wee bit off-base.

[99Forever]

252. I'm not going to to let you make demands of me.

You are nothing to me. Just pixels on a screen, of no more consequence to my life than a comic book cover.

[Warren DeMontague]

260. No.

And No.

Both your questions are predicated on assumptions- like that there is some yardstick of "healthy" sexuality from which humanity has drifted away from due to sin popular culture or something-or-other- Which, to call them "spurious" would be

....overly generous.

[alp227]

264. Are you freaking serious?

Do you not think there should be a standard of healthy sexuality? I do not believe sexual attraction between humans is inherently sinful. But. There's got to be a moral line against things like incest, pedophilia, bestiality, etc. or abusive sexual conduct, or hypersexualization of women in popular culture.

I'm not blaming unhealthy sexuality solely on modern popular culture - after all, sexual abuse has existed as long as human beings have existed. But does popular media exacerbate, not solve, the problem?

[Warren DeMontague]

270. And murder, dismemberment, cannibalism and eating grapes are all horrible, too.

See what i did there?

I believe it is possible to have consensus on basic standards of normal human behavior and sex that don't include things like 'bestiality', without dragging imaginary bugaboos like "popular culture hypersexualization" into it.

Unless you're seriously arguing that the supposedly "hypersexualized" (...compared to what? The Victorian era?) culture is actually encouraging people to have sex with animals.

[alp227]

271. Guess what? Sex isn't sinful. But it needs its limits.

Just like fast food, alcohol, etc. That's real life.

I still stand by my view that hypersexualized culture creates an unhealthy, uninformed sexuality among young people.

[Warren DeMontague]

272. In my view the "popular culture" is an imaginary fiction, and the idea of "hypersexualization" is

Another one.

Furthermore every generation in its 50s and 60s think teens and twentysomethings fuck too much, or in the wrong ways. It never changes.

[alp227]

279. Last part is true, but I am a 20-something,

and while I don't have an opinion about "f__king too much", I have strong opinions on popular culture and sexuality.

[Warren DeMontague]

295. Clearly.

As do I, a crotchety old dude.

One thing i can tell you from my gnarled, yoda-like vantage point is that the so-called "popular culture" is apparently always going to hell in a frothy, frotting, fornicating handbasket.

Elvis's gyrating midsection was going to cause the impending doom of civilization. God knows what deviant acts the kingsmen described, in "Louie, Louie". The Kinks dared to explore transvestism, in a popular tune. Madonna brought bondage to America's coffee tables. 2 live crew said... Something upsetting. Janet Jackson's nipple appeared at the Superbowl, heralding the apocalypse for certain this time.

And so on.

[alp227]

297. Back then, artists got castigated for MERE sexuality,

but 2 Live Crew's obscene, over-the-top "songs" make Elvis shaking his hips seem really, really tame.

[Warren DeMontague]

298. I wouldn't know, i was too busy listening to the Dead at the time.

[hifiguy]

281. Comics fans are one of the countless sub-sub-cultures

of the nerd subculture. Not a huge part, either, though it is relatively common currency there. I am a nerd and have been for decades. I know. Just read the second half of my sigline.

[Blue_Adept]

283. Imagine the uproar if more anime designs, artworks, body pillows and figures were talked about here

Oh my. The body pillows alone. But at least those are marketed to both genres.

NSFW: https://www.google.com/search?q=anime+body+pillow&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS600&espv=2&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=55P7U5_hOcz-yQS6p4HwCg&sqi=2&ved=0CB0QsAQ&biw=1920&bih=955

[hifiguy]

285. Most of this thread is a perfect example

of people trying to engage with a specific and defined sub-culture that is completely and utterly alien to them and about which they know less than nothing. Moreover, they don't seem to want to learn anything about its conventions and history. The stuff in a lot of anime would make some around here actually physically explode. And the funny thing is that geek/nerd fandoms are among the friendliest, most open minded communities I have ever encountered. Speaking from recent first-hand experience I can certainly vouch for the brony community being such a place.

Ignorance in action is a terrible thing, as Goethe once said.

I type this while proudly wearing a Derpy Hooves button on my golf shirt while at the Minneapolis public library.

[Blue_Adept]

287. Exactly

I'm neck deep in it, have been since 1977 across comics, movies and anime, so it's near and dear and I see all the big positives that it does. I'm enjoying the way the comics community itself is forcing the change and growing up some, but there is also that honest and true respect to the fact that it is art and it can be employed in a huge variety of styles and designs.

I'd love to see people posting more about the positive books and raising the things that should be seen rather than continually going for the outrage. Imagine if people here discovered some of the great books written by men and women that appeal to both genders, or just to women, and understood the beauty and variety of the comics world.

But all they see are superheroes, and even then just a sliver of the types and styles.

[sibelian]

325. "Is sexual objectification immoral?"

... it needs to have demonstrable moral consequences, we have to know what actually happens as a result of it, otherwise you may as well replace the term with "representations of sexuality".

[alp227]

348. There's a difference between mere representation of sexuality and sexual objectification.

Examples of what sexual OBJECTIFICATION is: http://msmagazine.com/blog/2012/07/03/sexual-objectification-part-1-what-is-it/

Obviously not what can be objectively called healthy.

You wanna know the moral consequences of sexual objectification? The perception among the public that women are not human! Period! End of story, no debate, nothing but the TRUTH, no matter how much framing/evasiveness you try.

[Warren DeMontague]

369. At least that link tries to offer a somewhat workable, qualitative set of standards for what,

In reality, usually boils down to "that picture is sexually objectifying because i dont like it and other people think it is hot"

For instance, the 2014 SI cover. Oh, fuck, that was supposed to be the watershed of an example of "objectification"- but why? It was 3 undeniably attractive young women in bathing suits, on a beach. That's it.

So let's break this down regarding the spider woman image, since that is ostensibly what the thread is about;

1) Does the image show only part(s) of a sexualized person’s body?

No.


2) Does the image present a sexualized person as a stand-in for an object?

No.

3) Does the image show sexualized persons as interchangeable?

No.


4) Does the image affirm the idea of violating the bodily integrity of a sexualized person who can’t consent?

No.

5) Does the image suggest that sexual availability is the defining characteristic of the person?

This is a pretty subjective one, the biggest tent under which folks can park their objectionable "hot" images, but, still no, in this case I don't think so.

6) Does the image show a sexualized person as a commodity that can be bought and sold?

No.

7) Does the image treat a sexualized person’s body as a canvas?

No.

[alp227]

370. The article I linked isn't the *only* definition of "sexual objectification"

C'mon, you and I know damn well that SI swimsuit editions do have the intent of showing women as eye candy. The very friggin definition of objectification. BTW, are you a lawyer? Your posts make me feel like i'm in court!

[Warren DeMontague]

371. No, usually it's completely undefined.

If I have a goal here, it's to make people think about these concepts they just sort of accept as commonsense but for which there is very little "there" there, at least IMHO. (Which does not mean the concept doesn't exist, BTW)

This is by no means the only one.

Generally, beyond the piece you linked, objectification is "defined" (such as it ever is) as any sort of sexually attractive image that the definer doesn't like. That's sort of what I've been saying.

It's fine to say "eye candy is bad" or people finding scantily clad or nude members of the opposite (or same) sex is "bad" - I, personally, disagree - however, dressing it up in academic-sounding terms with broad and spurious assertions about spooky cognitive processes which take place when someone finds someone else physically, visually, sexually attractive- that to me deserves rebuttal or at least closer scrutiny or analysis.

[Blue_Adept]

244. Tell that to the people that are saying we should stop talking about 2016

and focus just on 2014. According to them, in every 2016 presidential election thread, we're not able to do two things at once or be distracted by other things.

[lunatica]

64. How else would they attract teen boys to read the comics?

That is their targeted consumer isn't it?

Before this boys got their jollies from the National Geographic photos of women with bared breasts in Africa. This is a fight we will never win because humans are hard wired for sex. We can only hope to mitigate it at best. I would suggest we pick our fights where we can make a difference. Freedom of Speech is what it is. Good, bad or indifferent.

[busterbrown]

157. Lunatica Please!!! Don’t forget the Nudist Camp Magazines..

First time I saw a complete woman’s body w/o clothes..True.. At that time on 42nd st.. Porn shops only had magazines revealing breasts..(of course there was probably tons of underground stuff) but Nudist Camp Magazines, shot at Nudist Camps were the only way to go.. Oh and yes they showed full frontal nudity of men as well. Probably talking 59,60...

[lunatica]

236. Oops! Didn't mean to be non-inclusive or intolerant!

My bad!!

LOL!

[alp227]

235. So what if sex is natural? Doesn't mean EVERYTHING should be sexualized.

If more Americans knew what healthy sexuality was, "sex sells" would be obsolete!

[tkmorris]

289. Who gets to say what "healthy sexuality" is?

You? Me? A committee to be named later?

[alp227]

291. Do you object to a standard of healthy sexuality? nt

[opiate69]

292. Well,

how, then, do you define "healthy sexuality"?

[alp227]

349. You or I don't get to decide what's "healthy",

science and morality do.

Healthy sexual attraction between two people has affirmed, informed consent between two unrelated adults. Simple as that. There's a reason why pedophilia, bestiality, incest, etc are considered unhealthy. And why sexual objectification is immoral.

[Blue_Adept]

350. But it's not that simple

Have you seen the other sex/porn threads where what you list as healthy sexual attraction has been disputed and degraded heavily?

[alp227]

352. On which grounds is what I've defined "disputed"?

Religion? Jealousy? Ideology?

[opiate69]

353. Sorry...

As a free-thinking atheist, I simply don't "do" moral/immoral. And for someone who claims to be unable to decide what is healthy, you certainly seem to attempt to do precisely that.

Healthy sexual attraction between two people has affirmed, informed consent between two unrelated adults. Simple as that.

[alp227]

356. Wow...so in your opinion morality doesn't exist?

So how do you consider what IS right/wrong or moral/immoral? What IS your moral worldview?

[opiate69]

357. ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality_without_religion

[alp227]

358. OK, why'd you say earlier you don't "do moral/immoral"? nt

[opiate69]

360. Because I don't...

I know it must seem shocking that there are some who don't feel the need for an extrinsic motivation to be decent, equitable people, but there are. And whenever people start tossing around loaded terms like "moral/immoral", particularly in discussions about sex and sexuality, some of us see that as a huge dog-whistle, and start waiting for religious-right loons like Shelly Lubben, Judith Reisman, et al to start being referenced.

[hifiguy]

359. Sometimes there are very simple answers.

Aren't there?

And ironically enough "objectification" is a desperately subjective concept. The cosmos does have a sense of humor.

[Blue_Adept]

293. Yup

Because then you're starting to label things as unhealthy based on... what?

We've seen around here what's considered unhealthy and disgusting to many. Do they get to decide?

I was engaging in the conversation with my girlfriend this weekend about some of the conversations here and when I mentioned that quite a few people viewed smacking a woman across the face as an act towards violence, she laughed. Because that's what she asks me to do to her on various occasions over the course of our many years together. Naturally, I had to tell her that the fact that she asks for it just means she's been ingrained to want it by the patriarchy.

So when you set things as healthy in this regard, you then create a list of unhealthy sexuality. I think we had a lot of things called that over the years, including homosexuality?

[alp227]

351. I call things "unhealthy" because they are, not just my opinion.

Homosexuality? There's no evidence besides religious authoritarian bullshit that homosexuality is immoral or unhealthy.

And regarding the anecdote from your girlfriend, you're either conflating domestic violence and S&M (which are NOT comparable by ANY stretch of the imagination) or...gulp...your girlfriend is an abuse victim who has Stockholm syndrome.

It's an objective FACT that sexual objectification in media influences negative views of women, ranging from the mere belief that women are little more than eye candy/sexual objects to acting on the belief via rape or sexual harassment.

[opiate69]

354. Cite the sources for the claim...

It's an objective FACT that sexual objectification in media influences negative views of women, ranging from the mere belief that women are little more than eye candy/sexual objects to acting on the belief via rape or sexual harassment.

[Iron Man]

238. Many teenage boys read comics not to get titillation

but because the nerdy superhero fight and defeat bad guys. There's internet for titillation.

Broad brush much?

[lunatica]

243. I'm sure some gay teenagers also read it for the superhero and superheroine titillation

Loosen up Iron Man. Sex is here to stay.

[SomethingFishy]

73. Wow... how disgusting...

like all these... just disgusting:










?size=640x420

And any of you who find these to be.. artistic... or... beautiful, are just a bunch of disgusting pervs.

Quick!! Someone call John Ashcroft!!!!

[Nye Bevan]

97. OMG WTF NSFW!!! (nt)

[RandySF]

84. This is just bad artwork.

Ass notwithstanding, it doesn't look good at all.

[redqueen]

89. Even if it's good artwork, hypersexualizing female characters is fucked up.

http://thehawkeyeinitiative.com/

[redqueen]

93. that's like saying just don't buy racist sfuff

ignoring problems doesn't make them go away

[Nye Bevan]

94. We need the equivalent of Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, but for Spiderwoman's ass.

I have a dream that one day fictional female superheroes will be judged by how good they are at stopping the bad guys, and not by what their butts look like in spandex.

[Warren DeMontague]

121. It takes a nation of millions of badly drawn cartoon buttocks

to hold us back.

[zazen]

135. one day the commenters here are going to be so embarrassed. . .

I almost think that's why they're digging in more. When you've made derisive, ridiculing comments about the widespread sexual objectification and abuse of females and it's searchable on a database, you're dug in--you're invested. They've got such a long track record now of saying outrageous things that are Klan-worthy if said about African-Americans that I wonder if psychologically it'll ever be possible for them to own up to how entitled, blind, dismissive, and vicious they've been.

I appreciate your indefatigable attempts to nudge these folks to see reason. I never take the energy to try anymore, but I do jump in when I see them make comments about you reminiscent of the hateful comments made about 19th century feminists. They sound like men ridiculing women for public speaking in the late 1800s. It'd be funny if, as you say, the consequences of these attitudes weren't so dire.

[redqueen]

139. Thank you.

The consequences of sexual objectification include widespread male violence (including specifically sexual violence) against women. Which is at pandemic proportions and shows no signs of slowing, though at least we seem to be at least acting as if these crimes deserve to be discussed as if they matter.

Doesn't stop the defenders. Doesn't even give them pause. So, so very far to go.

[Warren DeMontague]

197. "the royal we"

[Nye Bevan]

156. YES. "Klan-worthy" is the perfect description for those horrible Spiderwoman buttocks-defenders.

Shame on them.

[Warren DeMontague]

207. Hyperbole. You know who else liked hyperbole?

Hitler, that's who!

[Warren DeMontague]

194. Yes, everything said here is going on your perremanent record!

Indeed.

I guess a lot is going to depend on who wins the revolution, hmmm.

For all we know, it might be the scantily clad superhero butt artists. What then?

[freshwest]

367. 'They sound like men ridiculing women for public speaking in the late 1800s,' because they are.

[alphafemale]

137. The true obscenity is imaging yourself oppressed because people disagree with you.

Don't buy it is exactly right.

Live by your own moral code and stop passing judgement/

[redqueen]

140. Exactly what people said when defending Duck Dynasty.

And progressives still spoke out.

[pintobean]

142. I guess a lot of things just aren't so ducky.

[alphafemale]

146. So what do you propose we do with people that express ideas you don't like?

I'm just wondering.

Will every piece of art. Every song. Every word uttered aloud pass by you for approval?

[redqueen]

147. Why are you focused on what I do or don't approve of? This is about *misogyny*.

Those who call out the sexual objectification of women will continue to do so, whether certain others whine about it or not.

Just as those who call out homophobia and racism do.

[ancianita]

161. For decades I've read the exaggerated female anatomies in comic book art as symbolic to readers of

the matchup of women superheroes' powers with their femaleness and maleness.

From my past exposure, I've read the context of their power in these comics as coequal with all the male characters and in no way submissive or demeaned. I don't think the female depictions here are any more or less exaggerated than are the bodily features of the males. The bodies match the power fantasies of the readers, which are actually not sexual, since sexuality doesn't enter into the comic plots I've read. I think these visuals are part of the typical developmental stage of pre-pubescent fantasies of their own wished for future body images.

Based on my past associations with lots of pre-teen comic readers -- as a mom and high school teacher -- I don't think the misogyny argument really works for the comic book population, who are quite sensitive to gender inequities in their age groups and are aware of sexism in their society.

I just can't agree here about "calling this out." I've read this stuff and see that the stories don't support sexism at all.

[redqueen]

163. Why are you focused on anatomy and ignoring the sexual objectification in the poses and costumes?

Male characters don't have boob-windows for displaying their ample chests, have half their ass hanging out, etc.

Have a look at this well-known project. It should make the misogyny crystal clear:
http://thehawkeyeinitiative.com/

That is, unless you're one of the many who don't consider the ubiquitous sexual objectification of women to be a problem. Goddess knows that'd be the overwhelming majority view, sadly.

[ancianita]

167. I do. The difference is that these here are not "women." I've read much on the artists, and they

are geeky types whose body image philosophies match their superhero characters' total power depictions. I've had to listen to kids' reactions to my questions about about these images, and have learned that they don't see them through our lenses about typical male/female objectification politics; rather, they're interested in the story lines and overall artistry of cells and story details. You could claim that they're being lulled into sexist roles, but from how I've read the comic plots and seen kids talk about them, I don't get that.

I learned to read comics their way and stopped seeing them as an adult. What you call objectification poses I now see as power poses. It's more about fighting evil forces with powerful bodies than it is about sexuality.

[redqueen]

169. These would be the same geeky kids who grow up

and have to have a full blown protest in order to address the sexual harassment going on?
http://time.com/3045797/women-comic-con-sexual-harrassment-petition/


Of course they're absorbing messages about women when they see women depicted as sex objects (as THINGS), and men as actual human beings.


See the difference?

?3

[ancianita]

172. All I can say is, the most feminist kids I know are both gay, straight, college level functional and

Last edited Sun Aug 24, 2014, 02:25 AM - Edit history (1)

socially adept. Hundreds.

I think comics can reinforce desires for adult power and the morality of force, but they don't condition sexism. I can see that you're afraid that's happening, but attitudes of the general reader demographic just don't support your claims, in my experience.

There are plenty of men in arrested development who sexualize what's in comics, but I don't see the comic art style or plots inviting that kind of projection.

[alphafemale]

185. Just because that is YOUR perception of it does not make it SO.

Should artists that create what does not meet your approval be jailed?

[redqueen]

189. Jail? Really?

Not interested in your latest straw man argument.

[BainsBane]

215. You gotta give her points for creativity

Last edited Wed Aug 27, 2014, 07:08 PM - Edit history (1)

It ratcheted up the banning canard to new levels.

[alphafemale]

220. Him.

Seriously?

[Marr]

362. Wow.

Your use of "him" there is about as sexist as it gets, and you do it giddily.

People so often twist themselves into the thing they claim to despise.

[BainsBane]

364. You ever hear of a mistake?

You have a lot of nerve calling me sexist. This mind-reading act of yours is getting old. You have a 0 batting average.

Say, are you sure this thread really isn't about promoting Hilary Clinton for President? The OP didn't say Clinton was the sire of Satan. It could be part of the vast Democratic conspiracy. Spiderwoman could actually be code for Clinton.

[Marr]

365. Oh yeah, I'm sure you called a poster named "alphafemale" "him" by *mistake*.

And didn't bother to correct it, even though they pointed it out at the time, three days ago. And still didn't bother apologizing or acknowledging the error to the actual person you insulted.

You could at least have the guts to own your low insults. That was just embarrassingly chickenshit.

[alphafemale]

219. Reply to wrong post. edit nt

[BainsBane]

214. Should women who dare to talk about misogyny be jailed?

[alphafemale]

225. Not everyone agrees that it is misogyny.

But if you feel it is there must be someway you propose to stop it.

I am not in favor of banning anything.

All ideas should be in the open.

Being disagreed with does not make you oppressed.

It also does not make the person disagreeing a bad person.

[BainsBane]

246. Then don't invoke bullshit about jailing

If you can't mount an actual argument, just move on.

You are the only one talking about banning and you do so because you can't deal with the substance of the argument. Not everyone agrees on anything. That point is obvious.

The point of cultural critique is to raise awareness. Clearly that concept is lost on you.

[alphafemale]

254. If, as you assert, a certain depiction....nay, an entire genre of art

If, as you assert, a certain depiction....nay, an entire genre of art is an atrocity.

If it is so damaging to our society and females in particular as to prevent our meeting the full promise of our destiny?

And if you now propose to offer mere culture critique do not expect that you will not receive that in kind.

[hifiguy]

317. Disagreement with the Borg is not allowed.

They are always right in every way. You are always wrong. You shall be assimilated.

Gads, I am such a nerd.

[alphafemale]

366. I was a nerd before it was cool. And did you see this?

http://www.buzzfeed.com/kimberleydadds/the-star-trek-next-generation-cast-have-taken-the-ultimate-r#14japst

[hifiguy]

368. Me, too. We weren't even called nerds then!

We were just "weirdos" who read comics and liked Trek.

[Eleanors38]

96. Where's the long strand comin' out?

[orpupilofnature57]

101. Aeon Flux was sheer erotica !!! And a strong image for woman Everywhere .

[Comrade Grumpy]

102. Burning issue of the day.

[stevenleser]

109. I read Spiderman comics as a kid. I recognize this pose as very similar to Spiderman poses

Someone went a little crazy with the buttocks definitely, but other than that, there are a lot of times spiderman is shown in a similar pose.



http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Womqz559KOU/THW92cPM-0I/AAAAAAAAAoI/y0vHIIrwM9Y/s1600/spiderman+crawl+image.jpg

[conservaphobe]

114. Let's hope the cosplayers pick up on this right away.

[whistler162]

123. Not issue #1 just the re-re-vamped issue #1.

[PeteSelman]

125. I think it looks nice.

Is there really nothing else to complain about than a comic book drawing?

Jeez.

[Warren DeMontague]

203. My problem with it, artistically, is that her face looks smooshed and 2 dimensional.

I don't think it's a particularly good piece of art.

[jberryhill]

127. it conveys athleticism

And, yes, male superheroes are similarly depicted all of the time.

That is a classic spiderman pose.

[Orrex]

132. I was going to make that point as well

[Iron Man]

133. Like i said upthread

It's quite clear some here have never read Spiderman.

[redqueen]

136. Wow, ... a woman thrusting her ass out conveys athleticism? Now I've heard everything.

Anyway, from more enlightened places around the net:

New Spider-Woman Cover Puts The Comic Industry's Women Problem Right In Our Faces
http://mic.com/articles/96874/new-spider-woman-cover-puts-the-comic-industry-s-women-problem-right-in-our-faces

Spider-Woman isn't good for women when she looks like this
http://www.vox.com/xpress/2014/8/20/6046577/marvel-spider-woman-cover-sexist

Check Out Spider-Woman #1, Starring Spider-Woman's Ass
http://io9.com/check-out-spider-woman-1-starring-spider-womans-ass-1624535918


And of course the comments are... like they usually are. Full of the same logic fails and derailments. As always, proving Lewis's Law correct. Over, and over, and over, and over...

[tabasco]

158. I just KNEW this thread would be entertaining when I saw the title

THANKS FOR THE CHUCKLES.

[Warren DeMontague]

201. I would have been done after the one post, if it wasn't for the alert.

But shit, comedy gold. DU, you do not disappoint.

[hifiguy]

204. I would have passed it by as well butt

I knew what was gonna happen and couldn't pass it up. And as Steven Leser said, this has been a standard Spider-Man pose for fifty years.

[ancianita]

168. I think you need to study more about comic book art. It's not intended to prop sexism. It just isn't

People here who read and "get" comic book art are not a bunch of idiots trapped in some sexist unconsciousness. You're getting flac because you're underexposed. And I don't mean that sexually.

Your feminist hammer is seeing nails where it's not needed. The title was provocative, but comic art you're seeing has a whole history and philosophy behind it that isn't sexist.

[redqueen]

170. You can reply to every single post I make, but I'm not going to ignore reality.

I'll stick with the people who see the sexual objectification of female comic characters for what it is, thanks.

[ancianita]

173. Understood.

[Warren DeMontague]

208. Apparently not objecting to the cartoon butt pose is a vicious attitude worthy of the klan.

Which, like, totally makes sense.

[Iron Man]

210. Looks as though no one in those links you provided

read comic books or Spiderman.



Talk to people who actually know what they're talking about.

[stevenleser]

227. And therein lies the problem. No one who has read Spiderman comics would think this unusual.

I think what you have are folks looking for images of women to be concerned about and they happened upon this image of spiderwoman and without understanding the context and history of the genre, they said, "Aha, exactly what we are talking about, here is an example of the problem!!!!!11!11!"

The thing is, they are right in general. Images of women in media, particularly the superhero genre and online gaming is a big problem. I am totally on board with that.

But that does not excuse the knee-jerk reaction to this image of Spiderwoman which happens to be in line with how Spiderman is drawn. It does not help equality efforts of any group to react out of ignorance and that is what was done here.

[Iron Man]

228. It just seems odd to me that people are finding offense

in an image that isn't offensive.

Spiderman has been doing that pose for over 50 years. Why is it a concern now?

[stevenleser]

231. There are several groups scanning the internet for inappropriate pictures/images of women

one such group is the hawkeye initiative who specialize in hypersexualized images of female characters in the superhero genre.

And 99.999% of the time, they are right, the images raised are completely ridiculous when you compare them with similar male superhero poses and images.

One thing I will note is that the Hawkeye initiative does not seem to have taken up the issue of this Spiderwoman image. I think they would know better.

[LittleBlue]

261. Because this is the blather generation

If there isn't anything click bait worthy to write about, create something. This week it's Spiderwoman. Next week it will be some other frivolous concern.

[redqueen]

265. It was the fans who reacted negatively first.

It is so pathetic how many people simply ignore reality so they can keep defending the misogynistic status quo.

[stevenleser]

266. Just like it was "The Doctors" who objected to Obamacare first, right?

Yes, you can find a few people in any group who are not representative to make any kind of point.

[redqueen]

267. Yes, and in this case there is also a clear wrong and right.

http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/127045-experts-speak-out-in-defense-of-objectification-of-women-in-comics.html

http://comicsalliance.com/marvel-dc-female-audience-female-characters-female-creators/

http://whateveraspidercan.com/2014/08/23/artistic-critique-greg-land-milo-manara-spider-woman-covers/


I guess we will just have to keep explaining it.

[Initech]

148. Spider Ass Spider Ass does whatever Spider Ass does....

[pintobean]

160. There's always some smart-ass

ready to pounce.

[immoderate]

162. But that's what Spider Woman looks like.

Really!

--imm

[Gothmog]

174. This is in poor taste

[Rye Bread Pizza]

178. As a male chauvinist pig, all I can say is. Yeah Baby! n/t

[redqueen]

180. Don't believe those still busy trying to pretend the pose is no different than Spider Man's...

Last edited Sun Aug 24, 2014, 11:47 AM - Edit history (1)

On edit: It is depressing as hell that I have to explain that they put spider mans head on her body to show how different it is from his.

There are other side by side drawings showing how the illustrators don't arch his back so that he's thrusting his ass in the air, and I would paste one but seriously, there's really no fucking point, is there? If anyone still doesn't see it by now...

[Warren DeMontague]

184. A real superhero given crime-fighting powers after being bitten by a radioactive spider

could never do that, in reality.

[hunter]

190. "If You Turn Her Upside Down, She Turns Into A Penis”: The Mary Sue’s Favorite Comments of the Week

http://www.themarysue.com/the-mary-sue-favorite-comments-6

I got there from a link on thehawkeyeinitiative.com

Here are some fully clothed Super Heros:

http://www.themarysue.com/fully-clothed-superhero

What's more frightening than distorted comic book women?

Photoshopped magazine women!



http://www.psdisasters.com/p/greatest-hits.html

[hifiguy]

206. I see zero difference. ZERO.

given the long-established conventions of art in Spider-Man comics. Let me restate that: ZERO.

[Violet_Crumble]

224. It's like one of those spot the difference games. You've got to concentrate...

They're easy to spot if you scrunch up yr eyes, turn yr browser at a 76 degree angle, and stand exactly 2 metres from it while playing all 4 discs simultaneously from the Flaming Lips 'Zaireeka'. But even then you have to concentrate or you'll miss them.

1. Spiderman's butt is bigger
2. Spiderwoman has 'I am a tool of the comic book patriarchy!' written on her butt in invisible font
3. Their superhero costumes are different colours
4. He's male. She's female

btw, this is the funniest thread I've read for ages!

[hifiguy]

233. As Warren DeM said, it has been comedy gold.

Some people take incredibly trivial things as if they were some manifestation of the Unified Field Theory of Everything That Is, then have a snit and fall in it when the essential triviality of the thing is pointed out.

[Iron Man]

209. Are you being serious?

[Hosnon]

230. Look at the fingers.

Those two pictures seem to be quite literally based off of the same template.

[TheKentuckian]

248. What in the world are you talking about? What is supposed to be different in this side by side?

I don't think this distinction is anywhere near clear as you are making out. Like block of lead painted black with a brick wall in front of it kinda clear.

[alphafemale]

250. I have no idea what she is talking about with this.

Other than Spiderwoman has a more slender waist.

And the long hair and full face mask.

[hifiguy]

290. She is looking to her left

while Spider-Man is looking up and slightly to the right. Only difference I could see.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

269. Are you saying then, That there is No Difference in the bodies because they

photoshopped Spiderman's head onto Spiderwoman's Body and then changed the uniform to match his head thereby giving him to be Spiderman but, in a Spiderwoman pose?

Are you saying that this is typically NOT a Spiderman pose?

[Rex]

282. *CRICKETS*

When you are able to decipher that reply, please let me know what it says.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

299. I am really confused now.

Do you mean to say you do not understand my question to redqueen or, you will not understand if she replies to me because why?
you have her on ignore or, what exactly ... ?

I am totally Not a Comic book Fanatic but,
I understand the concept of mutated bodies and spidey tingling sensation.

Looks to me like that is exactly what they did with that side by side. Am I wrong?

[Rex]

302. They look the same to me too...after 300 replies I am still

confused as to what is different about them...besides the gender and costume. I guess we will never get an answer.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

303. OKay, Not sure But, I think the point she is trying to make with this side by side is how

ridiculous is the pose, Period. That Spiderman Looks Ridiculous ergo: so does Spiderwoman.

However, since this is fantasy comic book land and these creatures are mutated genetics of spiders and humans combined.

I also understand: both sexes/genders throughout this genre looks different/odd.

I do understand that for comics the rooftop picture is *maybe* OTT
even this genre but, I don't know because I don't read/look at comic books.

Thanks.

[Rex]

304. Read marvel and DC comics all my life, that is a standard 'pose' for spiderman to be in.

The fact that she is nude and just has some red ink to make it pretend like she has clothes on, might be bothering some people. She does literally look like she is running around in body paint.

But really that is standard fair for comics. The pose I guess means something different when it is a woman, is all I can come up with.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

305. Okay -

She does literally look like she is running around in body paint.

Does Spiderman also look like he is running around in body paint?

But really that is standard fair for comics. The pose I guess means something different when it is a woman, is all I can come up with.

I guess this is the point, too.

Spiderman does crouch spider-y like and on rooftops, I know that - So, to me, the real issue is the body paint and if spiderman is not painted on clothes then, perhaps neither should spiderwoman ... ?

[Rex]

306. No, spiderman looks like a fella running around in pajamas imo.

But he does sit on walls with his butt up and head down.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

307. Then to be fair,

I think Spiderwoman should also wear pajamas, right?

[Rex]

308. To be fair yes. If nothing else it should not look like body paint.

I agree with ya there.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

312. nice chatting with you, Rex

[Rex]

314. You too TA, been a while.

[Blue_Adept]

313. Honestly

Every artist approaches every character differently with their own style. Both in how the costume looks on them and how they move.

With a character like Spider-man, some make it more "spidery" with how he moves. Others make it more athletic. Same with Batman. Some go for more skulking in the shadows while others have him out in full force doing the action thing.

There are so many interpretations of a lot of characters that you can't nail it down, especially as art styles grow and change over the decades. Spider-man of today is not illustrated as he was in the 60's when he debuted, the 80's or the McFarlane style of the 90's.

Hell, the fact comics survived the 90's is amazing considering what an icon Rob Liefeld was as an artist (more of a marketer really of his work).

I mean, look at the body designs he used: http://www.progressiveboink.com/2012/4/21/2960508/worst-rob-liefeld-drawings

Those books sold hundreds and hundreds of thousands of copies. The Manara cover we're talking about here is a collector's item for probably 2000 at most.

I'm just glad there isn't a "house style" that artists have to adhere to and we constantly get reinventions and new explorations of characters and designs that change with the times. And while we're seeing the discussion about the cover, it's unfortunate that it's overshadowing the eight or so other female solo books that have come out in the last year that also have Manara covers but also have some fantastic stories within that's showing the changes Marvel has been making to appeal to a wider and more diverse audience looking for more than what the books offered for decades.

Here's a hilarious piece of both characters by Humberto Ramos:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-U8OvJwRiLsA/T7BWcJEXObI/AAAAAAAACWQ/sYpt57OFK0k/s1600/2012-05-09+12.26.48.jpg

[Tuesday Afternoon]

316. Keeping it all in perspective, I am not even minutely upset about 2000 collector edition copies

but, I do think that if one mutant wears pajamas

then it would stand to reason that the other mutations of that genre would also wear pajamas no matter the sex/gender ...

[Blue_Adept]

319. She's not the same.

It's actually interesting IP history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Woman_(Jessica_Drew))

Her origin is nowhere near the same as Spider-man:

"In her first appearance, Spider-Woman was to be an actual spider evolved into a human as imagined by writer/co-creator Goodwin. Her debut was shortly followed by a four-issue story arc in Marvel Two-in-One in which Wolfman presented a different origin retcon as he felt her original origin was too implausible for mid-1970s readers.[3] During this arc and the premiere issue of her own comic Spider-Woman was identified as the human Jessica Drew (combining the first name of Wolfman's daughter and the last name of fictional detective Nancy Drew[3]) who had memories of being a spider implanted into her by the terrorist group HYDRA. Her costume was also redesigned for her series so that her long hair was uncovered, becoming a prominent part of the character's appearance."

[Rex]

321. Always wondered why she had webbing under the armpits, now that makes sense

[Tuesday Afternoon]

323. I must say that I do find it odd

that the female mutation appears body painted while the male mutation (of different origin, I understand) wears pajamas.

meh.

[Rex]

328. Yeah I think that is what has some people upset, I saw someone use the term hypersexulization

to describe the image and I agree with that assessment. I think I spelled that word correctly.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

332. yes. And I can understand why it is used as an example of how

pervasive is the hyper-sexualization (sp?) of the female anatomy in our society. From a man in pajamas to a woman in body paint.

I am assuming that these copies are available to those not of majority status and that could be some cause for concern.

I think the target audience for comic books are men/boys, correct?

Although, I do realize that women/girls to a lesser extent also enjoy reading them.

[Rex]

333. Men and boys, no doubt.

Also the people drawing these cartoons are mostly men. It would have helped if they would have put her in a costume and not body paint...I think that is what half the argument is about.

Why does Spiderman get a skin tight suit...but Spiderwoman get practically nothing but body paint?

I can see the contention.

[Blue_Adept]

342. Market Research Says 46.67% of Comic Fans are Female

http://comicsbeat.com/market-research-says-46-female-comic-fans/

Mind you, that's fans. Not buyers. There are more women buying now than a decade ago, but there are more that are fans and are more involved in other areas of the comics than the actual purchase of comics. They tend to go for trades more, buy online rather than stores, attend cons more than they used to and are more merchandise oriented.

[Rex]

318. Wow those are horrible!

Plus Spidey has a great sense of humor! Not so sure about the Hulk.

[hifiguy]

327. Liefeld is a topic all by himself.

He has essentially zero talent as an artist. As is discussed and illustrated wayyyy upthread, he is horrible. A John Byrne, George Perez or Neal Adams wouldn't employ him to sharpen pencils. How he makes a big-bucks living doing something at which is so manifestly horrible is up there with the Riddle of the Pyramids.


IIRC, the biggest selling comic of the modern era was the "new" X-Men book, just called "X-Men" as opposed to "The Uncanny X-Men" which was the flagship. I was manager of a sci-fi/comic shop in Mpls when it came out. We ordered 1200 total copies of all the cover variants for the first issue. 1200 copies for one shop. I think we sold about 900 copies. The rest are probably still in the back room at he new location...

[hifiguy]

309. And has been doing so for more than fifty years.

I think Steve Ditko, the co-creator of Spidey, came up with that pose. Ditko took the "spider" part of Spider-Man pretty seriously.

[Rex]

310. He did here is Spidey in his standard pose, pretty good mural imo.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

320. Is this a picture of a real person in a skin tight body suit?

possibly photographed on a brick floor and then turned to make it appear to be a wall ... ?

[Rex]

322. I don't know, it is a mural.

But as you can see, he is wearing a costume...no body paint.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

326. yes, there appears to be a costume as opposed to body paint. Skin tight but, stretched across the

butt cheeks. Yes.

[Blue_Adept]

324. Nope, it's a mural on a wall.

And probably the last thing I'll contribute here for a bit (work and all) is that one of the things that I love best about comics is that it does continually reinvent itself, even if it adheres to some tropes longer than it should.

Characters have evolved and changed with the times. Art styles have changed. Characters are re-interpreted by artists across all spectrums (you should see the Japanese Spider-man live action show!). And one of the best things is that they are continually looked at differently as new generations of artists approach them with different sensibilities.

While not all may work for all people, some may be more offensive than others, each should be explored in its own way to see what can be unearthed from it. I love the interpretative nature of art and what it brings to the table and comic books are one of those few pieces of truly American culture out there that's unique.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

329. I understand Mural on a Wall. My question was concerning how it was made.

Appears, to me, that is a blown up picture and they changed the perspective/shadowing so that the angle is a wall and not a floor.

Then they pasted the huge mural onto a wall.

[Rex]

330. Plus we need to remind ourselves that at one time, comic books were considered deviant reading

material. Now they are as mainstream as any other form of entertainment.

[Rex]

182. THANKS OBAMA!

[jberryhill]

192. She is a powerful woman

[OilemFirchen]

196. NSFW

If you happen to be a scrivener.

?w=584&h=822

[Warren DeMontague]

198. "Kapow! Biff! SPLAT!" GD hasn't seen this sort of comic book excitetement since that time

Superman dropped Lois Lane.

[Warren DeMontague]

217. "The alternate cover by Italian erotica artist Milo Manara will be an option for customers

...beginning Nov. 19."


Just, you know, so everyone knows that this isn't the main cover of the comic book.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/comics/illustrator-spider-woman-1-cover-sexual-critics-article-1.1913918

This is the actual cover, which, I don't know, probably bugs some people too.

[Kaleva]

223. And how is this different then Spider Man?

[edhopper]

232. You want to see sexualized women in superhero comics?

Just Google art by Greg Horn and Greg Land.

[img][/img]

[img][/img]

[War Horse]

237. The pic in the OP

looks like something from Ju-on or something like that to me...

[Owl]

247. A rather lousy caricature. Otherwise, seems much ado about nothing.

[TheKentuckian]

249. I was led to believe I'd see a controversial ass picture and all I got was normal spider folk shit.

What is the meaning of this? Is this an underhanded intentional effort to discredit all similar concerns? Hyperbole? I don't get it.

[Liberal_in_LA]

257. it is "contoversial ass pic" to me. guessi didnt realize comicbooks are so ass centered

I read Richie rich, Archie and Casper as a kid. No asses in spandex in those comics

[egduj]

251. Hillary and Bill's silence on this speaks volumes.

[reflection]

341. This made me laugh out loud.

Well done.

[itsrobert]

256. Just watched the VMA's

Art imitates Art.

[JCMach1]

274. She's not bad, she's just drawn that way...

[Atman]

277. Leave it to DU to post nearly 300 responses to cartoon art.

Yes, this is essentially a drawing of a nude woman painted red. But of course, versions of Batman didn't have nipples and big cod-pieces. Oh, wait...

Anyway, it's not like most male superhero's are wearing underwear and...oh, wait.

Never mind the fact that I don't think it looks even remotely "Spider Woman"-y, it's still a pretty silly argument to be worked up about on DU.

[lumberjack_jeff]

278. Comic Book Guy says...

[GOLGO 13]

288. Oh my a cartoon is oppressing me

Thread needs more pics of Spiderwoman "suggestive" pose... just to be sure.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

294. This is the funniest thread I've read in a LONG time.

People don't understand that comic book art has ALWAYS been about giving adolescent boys a glimpse of something they know deep down they will never EVER get next to in real life. 'Tis ever thus.

[hifiguy]

311. It's POWDERED TOAST MAN!

Gads I loved Ren and Stimpy, at least when Kricfalusi ran the show.

[retread]

296. That looks like it might chafe. Next issue she teams up with Olive Oyl.

[hifiguy]

315. I see what you did there.

[Blue_Adept]

300. CBR Offers A Different Take

Kelly Thompson at ComicBookResources.com has put up another take on the Manara cover piece that's certainly interesting:

Marvel knew exactly what they would be getting, and we can only assume that they are happy with it – or else surely they wouldn’t have released it? So if you want to criticize the Manara Variant existing, you need to aim your questions at Marvel, not Manara who is just doing what he does and has for years. Worth nothing (possibly?) is that there is also a Skottie Young Spider-Woman Variant forthcoming, which will surely be adorable. It might have been wise to release the Manara and Young variants at the same time, but Marvel clearly made a decision not to do that, possibly because they knew they were going to get this attention for their book and wanted it. And look it that. Here. We. Are.

So why are we (the collective we) up in arms about this one when so many others have come before it? Well, there are several reasons for it by my estimation but let’s lay them all out, since we’re here.

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2014/08/25/she-has-no-head-the-manara-variant-isnt-the-problem/

Also a look at some artwork from a past Marvel Swimsuit special that gave the men their time in the sun:

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=55072

[samsingh]

301. instant collector's item

[HooptieWagon]

335. Her rear is facing towards the back on the cover...

... so there's nothing to see. And of course the "fabric" clings impossibly tight... its not real, ITS A FREAKIN COMIC!
I suppose that if one spends hours a day scouring the internet to find stuff to be outraged about, sooner or later you're scraping the bottom of the barrell. Knock yourselves out. Miley Cyrus shows more on her videos, which are hugely popular with teen girls. I doubt they care about Spiderwoman.

[Exultant Democracy]

344. She is using one of spider-mans most iconic poses, its called an homage.

As stevenleser pointed out spider-man is drawn in the pose very often. Obviously the outrage has outpaced the information here, and any one who is actually interested in buying one of these book wouldn't be as confused as the drama brigade around here.

[hifiguy]

345. Ol' Spidey has been hittin' that pose for 50+ years

It is kind of a trademark of the character. Some people's kids, man....

[justiceischeap]

363. You're right, it's exactly like one of Spiderman's iconic poses

Especially the one's where he looks like he's about to get mounted from behind, doggy style. 'Cause we see Spiderman posing like that all the time.

Like this one:


Or this one:


Or maybe this one:


Then there's this one:


Sadly, this is the closest I could find (so lets put the two side by side):



I'm not part of your so-called "drama brigade" but I know something that's erotic when I see it and this is erotic (as it should be since it was drawn by a master of erotic art). I can totally see boys of all ages liking, even loving, this art but young girls who want to read comics and feel empowered will be a bit disappointed, I suspect. 'Cause, you know women and girls read comics and play video games, etc. It's not all about the guys, or at least it shouldn't be.

[Warren DeMontague]

372. Did you know then that it's not the main cover for the comic, but instead a special alternate

Edition?

So anyone who doesn't want the milo manara cover will have to go to all the onerous trouble of not seeking it out and deliberately buying it instead of the actual edition, i know.

[yuiyoshida]

361. yOU KNOW WHATS funny? I used to hang out

with one of the original Spiderwoman Artists, Steve Leialoha!!
He looked way Younger when I knew him..

Some where I have a signed Spiderwoman picture, kinda like this...


My dad knew him, and I was pretty young when we used to go over his house, and his girl friend Trina Robbins, who was also an artist, and a very good one!

[Blue_Adept]

374. And the cosplay result is in

How would it look in "real life"? Or as real life as comic book portrayals can be? Well, cosplayers definitely do their best to bring a lot of things to life and the folks at Ivy Cosplay have done just that.

Good night everyone!!! MC Illusion Photography, JP Designs and myself tried to duplicate the art of Milo Manara of the Spider Woman #1 variant cover. What is your opinion of our work?

Thanks a lot in advance for your response.

Love to all, take care and have a beautiful weekend,
Ivy

https://www.facebook.com/IvetteCosplay?fref=photo

[Liberal_in_LA]

375. exact replication. i hope she's not really on a building ledge

[Blue_Adept]

376. I'm sure it's just a background image.

But definitely spot on in general in bringing the image to life.

[AngryAmish]

377. 378, jackasses.