ext_134814 ([identity profile] tomoe-daeva.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] forchancookie 2007-05-26 11:24 am (UTC)

--Are we going to take a mud fight, now XD ?

I think that things must be placed in their context.
Am I saying that those pictures naughty pieces are not there to arouse a male audience? No, I'm not.
But indulging in someone fantasies don't mean offending/undervaluating the sex of the character that is the subject of that fantasy.
Are the most of covers (please, note: not ACTUAL COMIC ISSUES but COVERS) performing female characters in smexy situations? No, they aren't.
Are female characters usually treatened as sexual objects? I bet that they aren't.

Those are just two pieces (external collaborations by guest artists) and people is talking as if Spiderman turned into a Playboy issue.
If as an artist I would be told to make a cover for a comic issue I won't draw a female character like that, but as an artist I'm free to interprete a character how I want.

I'm not complaining about girls place in the society: I'm complaining of the fact that an artist can't do what he wants because people could be "offended" by it.

Post a comment in response:

(will be screened)
(will be screened if not validated)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org