I saw you say that before so I knew you’d say it again, and I countered it with the fact that consumers have choice.
And that’s not actually what you did. At all. Wooooow.
You’ve honestly stopped making any sense.
You’ve argued TWICE now that comic book characters aren’t real. That’s completely irrelevant and completely misses the entire point.
(But, yes, consumers have choice. NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT THEY DON’T. Straw man. Also, yeah, no shit. Why do you feel the need to explain the blatantly obvious and already assumed? Your arguments are so elementary and I’m bored now.)
Could these comments be even more of a shitstorm of both sides trying their best to avoid coming to a reasonable solution that doesn’t blame the other side for all the ills of the world?
Why yes they could. Go for it. Focusing on the conversation itself, and the personalities of the conversants, rather than just speaking your mind on the topic. It will totally save the conversation.
(John Cleece Voice) Oh, its ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED, has it! I’m terribly sorry, I never would have tried to discuss something which had ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED, had I known. I can assure you once something has been discussed, I object just as strenuously as you to it being any further discussed in any shape or form.
I feel as if I’ve been perfectly reasonable when a perfectly reasonable argument has been presented to me. I don’t see how I haven’t been. but why should I be expected to treat people with respect when they won’t do the same for me. when the second comment out of the gate is intentionally derailing and hostile, how should we be expected to react to that?
Hey gang, I just got up. Oh a new comic post on BB, what’s going on here… oh lawdy, nope, nope, nope…
I don’t even technically collect comics any more. So I don’t even technically have a dog in the fight. Even though every time I am around them it is like an alcoholic taking a tour of the Jim Bean distillery.
But hey - let’s share the Shadow print and sketch I got from Tim Bradstreet, then we can be friends again.
Actually, you started off rough, but had some important points about the homoerotic nature of some comics. You probably should have started with that, rather than making a false claim based on a straw man (the actual title even says “equally sexualized” so it should be pretty obvious that no one eve claimed men were “never” sexualized…).
OK - I will say this. I think there is a different between drawing a fantasy ideal, and sexualizing. I think it can be a fine line. I think outfits can be the same, but depending on the pose, facial expressions etc it can become sexualized. (which my spell check says isn’t even a word.) And like many things, what one finds that crosses the line will vary from person to person.
For example, look at the bikini. If I was a the beach and an attractive woman was walking around in a bikini, I wouldn’t have problem with it and exposing my 8 year old girl to it. How ever if that same women took up a pose and was in say Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition, I wouldn’t want her looking at that. Same person, same outfit, different pose and context.
So I think comics can keep the fantasy female and male ideal archetype for their heroes, they just need to be more aware of over doing it with fan service with things like ripped costumes and poses.
The problem lies in the overabundance of the extreme sexualization of female characters in comics. It became an expectation and a given. Comics as a medium became really stylistically stagnant. Basically one sort of artistic style (and most of it isn’t even that good), aimed at one sort of gaze.
At a certain point, this samey-sameness just gets boring and trite, anyway.
Comics are doing better than ever and it’s because of diversity in both art and story. It’s astonishing to me that some people are against diversity and change in comics.
That sounds like a lot of work. Wouldn’t it be easier if I did whatever I wanted, blamed everyone else, and just lived generally in such a way that everyone should react to my whims?
