Comic book dude goes in on Spider-Woman fiasco and Feminists

[Remote]

Maddox is wrong about this.

Funny how a site full of dudes who complain about the fact that black men are stereotyped by the media can't take five seconds to realize they are dismissing a historical and very common trope in comics featuring women. There is no precedent for Spider Man with his ass sticking out being sexualized. There is one for women. The next time you get mad about another white person dismissing the injustices and stereotypes black men face, remember that you posted in and agreed with this thread, making you a dumbass hypocrite.

Did you not see the fukkin video? He literally posted a precedent.



Why don't you take the time to address the ridiculous view that there's nothing wrong with being sexual as a woman while at the same time trying to have the view that women being sexualized is somehow holding them back?

When Beyonce gets on stage and gives 15,000 people a goddamn stripper dance for 3 hours it's sexually empowering.

But a Spider-Woman comic in LITERALLY THE SAME EXACT POSE as the Spider-Man comic is sexually degrading and demeaning?

Please.

 

[Dwolf]

Maddox is wrong about this.

Funny how a site full of dudes who complain about the fact that black men are stereotyped by the media can't take five seconds to realize they are dismissing a historical and very common trope in comics featuring women. There is no precedent for Spider Man with his ass sticking out being sexualized. There is one for women. The next time you get mad about another white person dismissing the injustices and stereotypes black men face, remember that you posted in and agreed with this thread, making you a dumbass hypocrite.

Its comicbooks, everything is over exaggerated including the men. What the hell does being black have to do with this thread

 

[BlackAchilles]

Maddox is wrong about this.

Funny how a site full of dudes who complain about the fact that black men are stereotyped by the media can't take five seconds to realize they are dismissing a historical and very common trope in comics featuring women. There is no precedent for Spider Man with his ass sticking out being sexualized. There is one for women. The next time you get mad about another white person dismissing the injustices and stereotypes black men face, remember that you posted in and agreed with this thread, making you a dumbass hypocrite.

Because men have different body ideals, which are portrayed in an equally outrageous fashion. They got nikkas with biceps bigger than their waists and 60 inch chests n shyt.

 

[Remote]

Because men have different body ideals, which are portrayed in an equally outrageous fashion. They got nikkas with biceps bigger than their waists and 60 inch chests n shyt.

Men are never sexualized in comic books, breh.

I mean every real life dude has muscles on muscles on motherfukkin muscles.

 

[duck]

One of spider women's super powers is effecting the pheromones of men like a females spider would. She literally uses sexual desires as a power. So why is there any issue with her acting sexy?

 

[Remote]

One of spider women's super powers is effecting the pheromones of men like a females spider would. She literally uses sexual desires as a power. So why is there any issue with her acting sexy?

Because women suffer from this Joe DiMaggio syndrome.
It was said that Joe DiMaggio used to have 2 fears:

1) That someone would ask him for his autograph.
2) That no one would ask him for his autograph.

Women hate it when men desire them (in a perceived sexual way, unless it's reciprocated, I guess).
Women also hate it when men ignore them.

To apply....
They want to be and feel sexy...but they don't want to be and feel like sex objects.

And the reason they hate it is because women (stupidly) think that when men sexualize a woman...that we ONLY think of them as sexual objects to be discarded. Which, is really just insecurity and bullshyt.

BUT.......

This Spider-Woman wasn't even a sexual thing. It's just the same pose that Spider-Man himself was in.

 

[The_Sheff]

Comic book dude? Maddox is pretty famous, if you put his name in the title more people would enter this thread.

 

[sun raw]

Men are never sexualized in comic books, breh.

I mean every real life dude has muscles on muscles on motherfukkin muscles.

I think there's a distinction between idealized and sexualized. Like the male superhero is the idealized male form (hence the skin-tight spandex), the ultimate example of physical strength etc etc. Of course, there is an undercurrent of sexualization there but the difference, I'd say, is that it's just an undercurrent whereas with female superheroes it's right at the surface. Think of stuff like bodybuilding. Sure sure it's the male body pushed to a physical extreme but that's still a lot of attention and time spent looking at the male body. There's like a built in 'no homo.' Then there's other stuff like how a male superhero doesn't necessarily have to be attractive or sexy but it's something that's definitely expected of female characters.

Also to take on your other post, Beyonce (presumably) has some say in how she portrays herself to a mass audience. That's just me going off the assumption that Beyonce is her own manager though, I don't know what the reality is. And you kinda answered your question about the 'ridiculous view' in the question itself. Being sexual is something that someone does while being sexualized is something done to someone. One implies agency and choice, the other does not.

 

[Remote]

I think there's a distinction between idealized and sexualized. Like the male superhero is the idealized male form (hence the skin-tight spandex), the ultimate example of physical strength etc etc. Of course, there is an undercurrent of sexualization there but the difference, I'd say, is that it's just an undercurrent whereas with female superheroes it's right at the surface. Think of stuff like bodybuilding. Sure sure it's the male body pushed to a physical extreme but that's still a lot of attention and time spent looking at the male body. There's like a built in 'no homo.' Then there's other stuff like how a male superhero doesn't necessarily have to be attractive or sexy but it's something that's definitely expected of female characters.

Also to take on your other post, Beyonce (presumably) has some say in how she portrays herself to a mass audience. That's just me going off the assumption that Beyonce is her own manager though, I don't know what the reality is. And you kinda answered your question about the 'ridiculous view' in the question itself. Being sexual is something that someone does while being sexualized is something done to someone. One implies agency and choice, the other does not.

And that opening statement opens oneself up to argue whatever they want so far as it's convenient to their agenda.

 

[Elle Driver]

Did you not see the fukkin video? He literally posted a precedent.



Why don't you take the time to address the ridiculous view that there's nothing wrong with being sexual as a woman while at the same time trying to have the view that women being sexualized is somehow holding them back?

When Beyonce gets on stage and gives 15,000 people a goddamn stripper dance for 3 hours it's sexually empowering.

But a Spider-Woman comic in LITERALLY THE SAME EXACT POSE as the Spider-Man comic is sexually degrading and demeaning?

Please.

Like others have said, it's about how it's done. I guess the argument here is women being in control of their sexuality and the image that's being projected vs. some guy creating a (fictional mind you lol) overtly sexual woman.

 

[sun raw]

And that opening statement opens oneself up to argue whatever they want so far as it's convenient to their agenda.

Not really but I'm glad I gave you the perfect out to avoid the rest of the post!

 

[Remote]

Like others have said, it's about how it's done. I guess the argument here is women being in control of their sexuality and the image that's being projected vs. some guy creating a (fictional mind you lol) overtly sexual woman.

And it has people riled up

 

[Remote]

Not really but I'm glad I gave you the perfect out to avoid the rest of the post!

Girl please.

Your whole argument is basically some bullshyt that screams "we as women don't have control over the comic"
The comic isn't even sexual but you seem to think that if a woman drew it, it would be okay and empowering because she had control over the production.

 

[Greenstrings]

And that opening statement opens oneself up to argue whatever they want so far as it's convenient to their agenda.

You gonna go ahead and explain why that statement isn't true? Or do you really think that male heterosexual comic book readers are looking at the drawn figures of male comic book characters sexually?

I don't disagree with the overall argument here but you have to show that you understand the other side of things before you can dismiss it.

 

[Remote]

You gonna go ahead and explain why that statement isn't true? Or do you really think that male heterosexual comic book readers are looking at the drawn figures of male comic book characters sexually?

I don't disagree with the overall argument here but you have to show that you understand the other side of things before you can dismiss it.

It's not about there not being a distinction.
A distinction exists but not in this scenario.

But you can't argue that it's sexualization when you have no other leg to stand on besides the argument that "we didn't create it"