Video & Multimedia

SunSeeker

(58,278 posts)

122. Please look up "duplicitous" in Webster's.

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 02:56 PM

Sep 2014

It means dishonest. I have given you my honest opinion. Just because you disagree with it does not make me dishonest.

I am not holding Spiderman to a double standard. On the the contrary, I want Spiderman and Spiderwoman drawn by the same standard: as strong, dignified superheroes.

I am not "focusing my outrage" on a stupid Milo Manara depiction of Spiderwoman. Chill, dude. I was just commenting on a thread. I had never seen that Manara cover until I saw the OP. And then you jumped in attacking my comments and calling me a sexist. Hence our lovely ongoing conversation.

I think the most outrageous thing on this thread is your assertion that feminists cause sex crimes. Although, I have to give runner up props to the poster who opined that feminists object to the Manara Spiderwoman because they don't like any depiction of women that arouses straight men. I don't think even Rush Limbaugh has said anything that stupid.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

263 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Spider-Woman's Big Ass is a Big Deal! [View all] jamzrockz Sep 2014 OP

Here's the male version, 1999 Spiderman #30: NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #1

That is one uncomfortable pose jamzrockz Sep 2014 #3

He's part spider jberryhill Sep 2014 #5

It is not the same pose. Spiderwoman's ass is featured WAY more prominently and much higher. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #8

While not identical, the pose is the same. Veilex Sep 2014 #14

If it is "not identical" then by definition it is not the same. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #15

Actually, he's drawn as a beefcake. Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #25

No, he's drawn as a superhero. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #30

... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #31

"If it is "not the same" then by definition it is not identical." Veilex Sep 2014 #69

Oh please. Milo Manara repurposed his porn poster from Click. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #76

You can have a sexy, muscular Spiderwoman superhero without portraying women in a degrading manner. Veilex Sep 2014 #81

I am not telling you what to think. I am pointing out a fact. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #95

Still the same pose DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #225

Nope. In none of those is he swaybacked and his butt turned up, anus exposed. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #228

.. Ash_F Sep 2014 #17

Her legs are well below her butt. His legs are even with his butt. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #18

You seem angry. Ash_F Sep 2014 #19

So you resort to the standard sexist attack line: "You seem angry." SunSeeker Sep 2014 #22

Nah, not buying it. Ash_F Sep 2014 #41

why oh why jamzrockz Sep 2014 #46

Women tend to have bigger butts flying rabbit Sep 2014 #61

Not when they're supermodel thin, like the rest of her is drawn. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #64

"That is NOT the ideal standard of a woman." Veilex Sep 2014 #70

The poster I was responding to said that was the ideal, not the artist. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #73

So you think this artwork is "sexist bigoted crap" but you have no problem with other spiderman art? Veilex Sep 2014 #75

I can discern the difference between sexy and sexist. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #77

What is the difference between sexy and sexist? flying rabbit Sep 2014 #79

Look the words up in the dictionary. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #109

"I can discern the difference between sexy and sexist" Veilex Sep 2014 #115

Oh yes, I forget, you are arbiter of right and wrong... Veilex Sep 2014 #82

And since we're looking into the definition of the two words, let me google that for you: Veilex Sep 2014 #84

I'm not telling anyone what they should find sexy. I am just pointing out sexism. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #93

"If you find sexist depictions of women sexy, that's you're business. " Veilex Sep 2014 #96

Nope, Spiderwoman does not "equal sexism." But the Milo Manara version is sexist. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #100

I think you are just looking for something to be outraged about. flying rabbit Sep 2014 #112

Indeed Veilex Sep 2014 #116

Not at all. I clicked on the OP expecting to agree with it. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #124

When you focus your outrage on an exceptionally small segment of comic books Veilex Sep 2014 #113

Please look up "duplicitous" in Webster's. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #122

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #131

�"It's pretty sad to see so-called adults arguing over such ridiculous things" SunSeeker Sep 2014 #133

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #134

Becasue they are SUPER HEREOS, DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #183

I don't expect a superhero to look normal. But why can't she look strong like Spiderman? SunSeeker Sep 2014 #187

Because she's not She-Hulk DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #194

Not Hulk huge, but strong like Spiderman. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #195

No she didn't. DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #203

I would kill for spiderman's definition Ash_F Sep 2014 #68

I know flying rabbit Sep 2014 #80

Women have more pronounced rear ends than men. Thats life. 7962 Sep 2014 #128

The way Spiderwoman is drawn does not reflect real life. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #132

Of course they do. Look at female tennis players, volleyball, MMA, ect. 7962 Sep 2014 #138

No, Spiderman is not in "pretty much the same pose." SunSeeker Sep 2014 #162

No muscle mass... DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #191

I didn't make her out as a helpless waif. Milo Marana did. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #192

it's a comic book right? is there not supposed to be creative expression? samsingh Sep 2014 #152

Of course. And am I not allowed to comment when that expression is offensive? nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #159

and i'm offended when there is to much offense taken. samsingh Sep 2014 #177

Why? nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #178

Calling that the "exact same pose" as the person in the OP video does is inaccurate. Gormy Cuss Sep 2014 #7

Exactly. I just posted pretty much the same comment before seeing yours. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #10

Maybe she has gas. Eleanors38 Sep 2014 #107

Maybe she has Manara. Gormy Cuss Sep 2014 #171

My opinion is... TheVisitor Sep 2014 #153

In searching for that one cover image, I looked over hundreds of others. NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #154

No one is regulating positions. We're just objecting to the degrading depiction. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #168

Agree to disagree... TheVisitor Sep 2014 #175

+1 Veilex Nov 2014 #262

Billo is a vagina... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #2

That was too funny Grassy Knoll Sep 2014 #13

Yeah... Veilex Sep 2014 #71

Achilles would make quick work of these philistines jberryhill Sep 2014 #4

Neither of those statues show men swaybacked with their butts in the air. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #39

The only thing degrading about Sipderwoman's pose Veilex Sep 2014 #72

No, it was Milo Manara who turned Spiderwoman into porn meat. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #78

"I didn't sexualize her" Veilex Sep 2014 #83

I am not ignoring anything. The Spiderman pose is not same nor similar to the Spiderwoman pose. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #87

"I am not ignoring anything." Veilex Sep 2014 #90

"And you're refusing to acknowledge it because you won't listen." SunSeeker Sep 2014 #92

"Again, more projecting. " Hardly... Veilex Sep 2014 #98

You think the way Spiderman is portrayed is sexist? nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #101

You think the way Spiderman is portrayed isn't sexist? nt Veilex Sep 2014 #102

Not in any of the comics on this thread. Do you? nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #104

"Not in any of the comics on this thread" Veilex Sep 2014 #114

Please cite a post in this thread that shows Spiderman drawn in a sexist way. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #119

The thumping music in the background was annoying Xipe Totec Sep 2014 #6

I thought that was the headboard in the next room. Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #21

Snort! Xipe Totec Sep 2014 #56

Excellent piece. . . Journeyman Sep 2014 #9

The artist is the legendary Milo Manara. SansACause Sep 2014 #11

Milo is in desperate need of anatomy classes Warpy Sep 2014 #33

He's just copying himself SansACause Sep 2014 #62

Copying past artwork is an exceedingly common practice... Veilex Sep 2014 #85

The interesting thing here is that our culture, thanks largely to the catholic church... Veilex Sep 2014 #74

Feminists are not causing sex crimes. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #111

Umm... Veilex Sep 2014 #117

Dude, you keep saying you're "done" but you keep posting. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #118

"Dude, you keep saying you're "done" but you keep posting." Veilex Sep 2014 #120

Good. That means I'll never get you on a jury. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #123

The key words are 'variant cover.' onehandle Sep 2014 #12

That is a classic spiderman pose. Ash_F Sep 2014 #16

I guess she's supposed to crawl up the side of a building side saddle. Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #23

No, she's supposed to crawl up the side of the building the same way Spiderman does. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #28

That's how Spiderman does it.... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #35

Spiderman does not crawl swaybacked with his butt in the air. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #38

Did you catch this? Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #42

Yeah...they would NEVER place spiderman in a compromising position... Veilex Sep 2014 #86

That does not compare to Milo's Spiderwoman. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #89

Except for DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #185

Except that SunSeeker Sep 2014 #189

It's still a bog standard DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #200

It's always the same pose DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #201

It's not just me. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #205

Sure you are DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #227

I am not trying to "prevent" you or any adult from having "access" to porn. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #230

Then why DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #234

oy I don't get all the controversy over a comic book cover if folks want to get upset azurnoir Sep 2014 #20

More shocking is that supposedly progressive DUers don't see what is wrong with that cover. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #24

This very progressive DUer believes in equal treatment... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #26

This isn't about fear. This is about respect. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #27

Maybe it's how you are raised.... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #36

This isn't about slut shaming a cartoon woman, it's about how a cartoonist portrays women. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #37

I thought the subliminal was the heart. Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #43

"Why do female superheroes have to be put in porn poses?" Lizzie Poppet Sep 2014 #130

"Sexual attractiveness" is not the objection. It's the degrading, powerless pose of Spiderwoman. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #137

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #142

Try doing anything with your head down, swaybacked, with butt cheeks spread open. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #145

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #146

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #140

The pose is degrading. You have a misogynistic view of what is "natural" for women. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #148

even more shocking... Veilex Sep 2014 #88

I am not ignoring Spiderman covers. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #91

Ahhhh so we're now moving the goal post Veilex Sep 2014 #94

You have yet to show a Spiderman pose in a Spiderman comic that warrants rebuke. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #97

Thank you for proving my point. Veilex Sep 2014 #99

No one has proven your point. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #106

Indeed. Veilex Sep 2014 #121

Is the problem that it's too realistic, or too unrealistic? immoderate Sep 2014 #29

Sorry, cowboy, but the poses are nowhere near the same Warpy Sep 2014 #32

ISIS, and now this! Cayenne Sep 2014 #34

LMFAO ... hilarious Trajan Sep 2014 #40

It is not nudity or asses that is the problem. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #48

Then don't buy the comic Cayenne Sep 2014 #103

Of course. But I have a right to express my opinion. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #105

Whew, glad to hear it Cayenne Sep 2014 #110

ISIS or ASSIS? Eleanors38 Sep 2014 #108

That guy needs an eye exam BainsBane Sep 2014 #44

Is it a carbon copy jamzrockz Sep 2014 #45

Feminists have no problem with sex. It's sexism we object to. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #47

Not entirely jamzrockz Sep 2014 #49

Stop saying what feminists do not do BainsBane Sep 2014 #52

I am not talking about photoshopped images jamzrockz Sep 2014 #57

Wrong BainsBane Sep 2014 #63

WTF? etherealtruth Sep 2014 #58

Point way over your head treestar Sep 2014 #59

Feminists do not "have a problem with anything that is female that arouses straight men." SunSeeker Sep 2014 #65

Right, they have a problem because it's for men's enjoyment BainsBane Sep 2014 #50

"Women's" magazines treestar Sep 2014 #60

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #141

The object is the comic book BainsBane Sep 2014 #143

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #144

It obviously communicates enough BainsBane Sep 2014 #147

Didn't we go through this a few years ago? TlalocW Sep 2014 #51

It's not the "cling" of the costume. It's the pose. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #67

The guy's not fooling himself Adenoid_Hynkel Sep 2014 #53

Wow. Now THAT is the same pose, waist up. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #66

You think explicit depictions of sexuality or nudity indicate perversion? Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #126

It's the pose, dude. It is not perverse to be turned on by the human body. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #135

So leaving aside a subjective disagreement on interpretation which is probably pointless to argue, Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #155

Why are you not more concerned with the impacts of degrading female images on 13 year olds? SunSeeker Sep 2014 #157

"the impacts of degrading female images on 13 year olds" - let's, shall we say, "unpack" that. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #167

Seriously, you don't think portraying women as sexual objects affects kids? SunSeeker Sep 2014 #169

More assumptions. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #170

It's a popular comic. I'd say a lot of kids are going to see it. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #172

As far as I'm concerned, there is at least one totally meaningless concept in your post. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #174

If this was a racist cover, no one would be saying no kids would be "impacted." SunSeeker Sep 2014 #176

And if it was a triple decker ice cream sundae, it would need to be eaten, or it would melt. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #179

It's nothing like racism because it's women being degraded. Who cares, amiright? SunSeeker Sep 2014 #180

Nope. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #188

Would you want your daughter in that position on a magazine cover? nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #190

My daughter would have to be a cartoon superhero. However, that cartoon superhero appears to be an Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #193

Yeah, I figured you wouldn't answer the question. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #196

I don't think it's degrading, no. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #197

I suppose Marvel will make money off this, with folks like you buying their porn comics. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #199

Yep. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #202

Good. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #206

Innit? Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #208

You sure make a big fuss defending something you "don't give two shits for." nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #209

I'm defending the idea that the picture of spiderwoman's butt is not, actually, that big of a deal Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #211

You're defending selling a comic with a degrading rear penetration porn shot on the cover to kids. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #214

Right. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #217

No, there's a difference between disagreement and abuse. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #220

Again, there's no point in trying to argue over subjective interpretation, but you're wrong. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #221

Post 202. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #222

Oh, right, I called you "Nostradamus", which is a well-known abusive insult. After, of course, you Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #223

Yes, it was mocking name-calling. After you asked, repeatedly, that I make a prediction. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #226

Right. You insist on making it personal because you seemingly can't deal with the fact Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #229

You obviously have plenty of time to keep badgering me with long-winded pointless posts. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #232

Yep. Got nothin' but time. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #233

Still at this? DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #245

The guy must have some fetish for that bone/muscle BainsBane Sep 2014 #173

Her ass isn't bigger LuvLoogie Sep 2014 #54

Post removed Post removed Sep 2014 #55

"People were tripping over themselves to be offended" Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #125

Mods? merrily Sep 2014 #127

This should be on a list of most outrageous outrage of the year 2014... pipoman Sep 2014 #129

Yes, let's give Marvel an award for profiting off selling woman-degrading porn to 13-year-olds. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #136

LOL pipoman Sep 2014 #139

How old are you? nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #149

Old enough to know and be able to identify selective outrage when I see it... pipoman Sep 2014 #150

No, you apparently are not. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #158

Usually liberals are more tolerant of artistic license pipoman Sep 2014 #182

This isn't art for adults. It's a Spiderwoman comic for kids. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #184

Because DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #186

Have you been to comicon? The comic industry is driven not by kids, pipoman Sep 2014 #212

It's a rear penetration porn pose on the cover of a comic sold to kids. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #213

I suppose it depends on where your mind is when you look at it.. pipoman Sep 2014 #215

Yes, the nerve of me commenting on your post. On a discussion board. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #216

Lol...you are the one playing the victim. ..ffs pipoman Sep 2014 #218

The cover degrades women. As a woman, I am a victim of that. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #219

Yeah...you have been victimized by spiderman. .. pipoman Sep 2014 #236

No, Spiderman has nothing to do with this. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #239

The truth DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #224

I refuse to accept lies. I'm not going to apologize for that. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #231

And yet DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #235

Other progressives and liberals get sick to fucking pipoman Sep 2014 #237

Are African American s victimized by Sambo comics? nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #240

"victimized"? Only if they allow themselves to be. pipoman Sep 2014 #243

Sambo you say? DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #246

I see. Racism is bad. Sexism not so much. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #247

Theres no DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #249

There's an AA man on this thread. He seems to get the sexism here. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #252

Still a false equivalence DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #255

I'm fucking sick of sexism. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #241

Um, no again.... pipoman Sep 2014 #238

I see. You're one of those guys who MUST have the last word. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #242

No, I'm "one of those guys" who is going to point out that pipoman Sep 2014 #244

CONSERVATIVES are the biggest consumers of porn. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #248

LIBERALS defend freedom of speech pipoman Sep 2014 #250

Liberals defend human dignity. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #251

Lol...now a comic book has violated your "human dignity"? pipoman Sep 2014 #253

So--- which Presidential candidate in recent years was responsible for this quote: Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #256

No they don't DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #258

I don't think those studies "prove" what you think they do. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #254

Selection bias DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #257

Even better than those Drain-o ads that had "One Million Moms" so upset. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #156

Hey ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2014 #151

True Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Sep 2014 #160

And most would argue ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2014 #161

Obviously, the narrator thinks calling a man a vagina is a bigger insult. SunSeeker Sep 2014 #163

Actually I agree with the guy for the most part Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Sep 2014 #164

... SunSeeker Sep 2014 #165

My point, exactly. eom. 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2014 #166

Ok, so what's the big deal? DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #181

The big deal is that people don't think it's a big deal, which PROVES it's a big deal. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #198

It's DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #204

Im kidding. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #207

Reply SecureExpert Sep 2014 #210

Stupidest controversy ever. Anyone offended needs to get over themselves. Darkhawk32 Sep 2014 #259

haha, the guy in this video's great big lu Sep 2014 #260

I take it DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #261

A BIG shout out to........ Darb Nov 2014 #263