After reading the previous post on the new Thor, I had to mention this latest comic book-feminism clash!
Again Marvel is the center of criticism around its depiction of female superheros after it released the cover image for the new Spider-Woman comic, whose first issue is scheduled to be published in November. The visual appears to be of a Spider-Woman waving her red body-painted behind in the air.
Read this article from Identities.Mic that explains the ridiculous situation wonderfully.
This cover has got to be a big disappointment for fans who were hoping for a more successful, committed step by Marvel in the direction of gender equality and respect for female superheros when the series was announced at Comic-Con's "Women of Marvel" panel in July.
It seems like the "vision" people at Marvel are trying to do this "woman" thing but the artistic people either haven't gotten the memo or are openly revolting. Either that or the PR people have veto power and think the whole T&A emphasis is the only way to get media attention.
ReplyDeleteThis burn from Nicki Minaj made me laugh : http://jezebel.com/nicki-minaj-as-spider-woman-wins-instagram-for-the-week-1625370275
ReplyDeleteThe comments section caught my eye and won’t let go. I’m noticing an insidious argument, along the lines of: she is comfortable with her sexuality so this is just her way of expressing it. For example from the comments section:
ReplyDelete“I respect Jess's right to dress in a way that expresses her sense of herself and her sexuality, which in fact, is related to her powers. If she wanted to dress in a sweater, I would support that, and if she wanted to not dress at all, that is her choice.”
Let me be clear. I agree with the feminist argument that women are sexual beings too and they should be allowed to own and express that sexuality as they choose. However, comments like the above misappropriate the feminist argument to justify the objectification of women.
If the character chooses to don a sexy costume in a private setting for her pleasure and the pleasure of a deserving partner (by her standards) fine. In no way does that cover artwork depict such empowered sexuality. As another commenter notes:
“Yes, she is aware of her sexuality, like most women are, but she chooses to employ it in more appropriate situations (like most women do). And, I think we can all agree, this is a pose more typically reserved for the bedroom.”
I know we are talking about an animal themed super hero, but we deserve better than the crude male fantasy of the female in heat, climbing to great heights in order to display her ample posterior indiscriminately to hordes of anonymous readers.
Yeah, I think it's pretty obvious in this case that the purpose of the sexiness is not the sexual expression of the character.
DeleteHere is another great role reversal response to the comic cover if anyone is interest. I like that the artist is making a point to distinguishing that 'sexiness' is not inherently bad. But objectification and exploitation of the female (or any) body is not. http://mic.com/articles/97494/if-marvel-drew-male-superheroes-the-same-way-it-draws-female-ones-here-s-how-absurd-it-would-look
ReplyDeleteFantastic! That reminded me of something a saw a while back. . . a male science fiction writer trying out some of the cover poses he saw in his genre:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.jimchines.com/2012/01/striking-a-pose/