Comments on Buzzfeed's real women in comic book poses

[renegade7]

I think it's a bit of an unfair dig to use plus-sized women for this. Wouldn't it make more sense to do this with supermodels or something like that to show that even if you have women who are widely regarded as exceptionally beautiful, even they still couldn't make themselves look like comic book characters? Because doing it this way makes it look more like they're trying to say "look how sexist the comic books are" rather than trying to have any critical discussion about the design philosophy behind many of the female characters.

Plus, that "real women" catchphrase again. Plus-size and plain aren't the only "real" body types. What is this, Harrison Bergeron?

No, it's not. Look, you are allowed to dislike the way women are portrayed in comics. But the reason male readers like seeing sexy women isn't to "take away their power." It's because the readers like hot women. Really. That's it.

I'm not really so sure it's about designing something that will sell on sex appeal. This story (http://www.today.com/health/ideal-real-what-perfect-body-really-looks-men-women-2D79582595) reports on a study done where men and women selected attributes that resembled what they would find most attractive. The results are noticeably out of line with what comic book women look like.

 

[RandV80]

This comparison with people that could easily cosplay as the Deathstar makes about as much sense as this one:

Or this one:

Spoiler

Hey that guy managed to capture the fine art of a Rob Liefeld crotch, good job!

 

[Areloch]

I'm not really so sure it's about designing something that will sell on sex appeal. This story (http://www.today.com/health/ideal-real-what-perfect-body-really-looks-men-women-2D79582595) reports on a study done where men and women selected attributes that resembled what they would find most attractive. The results are noticeably out of line with what comic book women look like.

That reminds me of the one episode of Mythbusters, where they tested the whole "the bustier the girl, the better the tips" by having Kari wear a disguise, and then work as a barista cashier. Over several days, they ramped up her bust size and observed the reaction of the people she served.


Unsurprisingly, males were rather fixated on her chest, especially on the last day where she was I a D cup. This also carried over to the tips she received. Sure enough, the larger the bust, the better the tip.

Where it got interesting though, is that tip size increase was shared between men and women. Men tipped 30% more as an average when she had the larger chest, but women tipped 40% more. Meaning both men and women found the larger breasts to be preferable.

That study seems to touch on a similar thread. Men are obviously going to pick a more ideal physical extreme in women they prefer: lean, good hips, large chest. However, the fact that women actually averaged to pick an even bustier 'ideal' woman than the men is interesting. (Amusingly, the ideal male seemed to be pretty close between men and women, with men preferring a slightly larger torso).

While obviously not definitive, it certainly implies that women, as a whole, are likely to find a busty superheroine more aesthetically ideal than otherwise, just like men.

And if that means that the exact same design can appeal to both your primary male demographic AND the female demographic, well geeze, why would you change it?

 

[HybridChangeling]

The whole "sexy poses" on comic book titles and even in them has always sort of made me step away from what would be a purchase of mine. Nothing is worse then convincing Parent/Friend/Significant Other that comics aren't as bad as the media/rumors want you to think, only for them to walk in and see like 50% of the comics are nothing but half naked disproportioned women (and even some men). Let me be clear with what I am saying, as to avoid flame.

I am not saying whatsoever that they are ACTUALLY bad all the time. But imagine it from an outsider, or somebody who was never shown a comic shop. It can be a little off-putting. I above all respect your opinion about them, and understand there is definitely a time and a place for them in comics.

I'm not saying that this is the same for all people, and I understand a measure of work goes into them, but this is stuff marketed to like kids and teens. This is almost to the point where keeping comics books is like hiding your inappropriate media. I remember in High School my mother was ready to kick out my friend for reading an old DC New 52 comic book with a cover she was not a fan of. For awhile after that, a trip to the comic store was hard as heck to arrange and I was never alone. (Not that I cared much, as I was interested in that sort of thing as much as a giraffe was interested in a porterhouse steak) I basically only ever read Transformers comics that whole time.

That being said, contorting and reshaping human characters in different ways could actually be applied in a really cool way. Like having an agile character dodge in a way that looks impossible, to capture the intense moment of the dodge, or have a strong characters body go into an entire punch like a freight train for the moment of impact. If it wasn't just for covers and stuff, imagine the cool ways our favorite heroes could be portrayed.

tl;dr I'm personally not a fan of the sexy covers and images without story context due to personal experience, but I understand and above all respect your opinion and decision about them. Also I think it could be applied to drawing fights.

 

[renegade7]

I'm not really so sure it's about designing something that will sell on sex appeal. This story (http://www.today.com/health/ideal-real-what-perfect-body-really-looks-men-women-2D79582595) reports on a study done where men and women selected attributes that resembled what they would find most attractive. The results are noticeably out of line with what comic book women look like.

That reminds me of the one episode of Mythbusters, where they tested the whole "the bustier the girl, the better the tips" by having Kari wear a disguise, and then work as a barista cashier. Over several days, they ramped up her bust size and observed the reaction of the people she served.


Unsurprisingly, males were rather fixated on her chest, especially on the last day where she was I a D cup. This also carried over to the tips she received. Sure enough, the larger the bust, the better the tip.

Where it got interesting though, is that tip size increase was shared between men and women. Men tipped 30% more as an average when she had the larger chest, but women tipped 40% more. Meaning both men and women found the larger breasts to be preferable.

That study seems to touch on a similar thread. Men are obviously going to pick a more ideal physical extreme in women they prefer: lean, good hips, large chest. However, the fact that women actually averaged to pick an even bustier 'ideal' woman than the men is interesting. (Amusingly, the ideal male seemed to be pretty close between men and women, with men preferring a slightly larger torso).

While obviously not definitive, it certainly implies that women, as a whole, are likely to find a busty superheroine more aesthetically ideal than otherwise, just like men.

And if that means that the exact same design can appeal to both your primary male demographic AND the female demographic, well geeze, why would you change it?

If we're going to get into that, then you have to keep in mind that it's proportions that matter. Kari is still an actual person and can increase her bust or torso size and keep the proportion within the limits of good health, likely even approaching the "ideal" ratio.

My point was that while comic book women certainly have a lot going on in the bust and torso, that alone isn't what matters because their proportions are outside of the bounds of what would appear normal and tiptoeing the edge of the uncanny valley. I get that it can be pretty subjective, but I'm having trouble seeing that particular style as being so universally seen as the ideal for female attractiveness, especially given that it seems to be unique to comic books.

My own guess is that it's not meant to appear sexually appealing but rather that the bombastic, "in your face" outfits are meant to look aggressive.

 

[briankoontz]

Superhero design represents the Ubermensch. It's supposed to produce submission in the "muggles" - it's overwhelming awe so that aggression is not actually required. Let's not forget that the philosophical creator of superheroes was Friedrich Nietzsche, with his Superman.

The Superman, in Nietzschian thought, is the solution to the chaos brought on by the death of God. Nietzsche considered humans in such a condition weak and without a moral center, so Supermen were invented (and later popularized in culture) to provide human civilization with strength and morality. Nietzsche's Supermen became the rulers of humanity, greater than humanity, and were the only good actors in a world bereft of value.

Cosplay is more subversive than it's typically considered. Human beings with all of their supposed "weaknesses" are now representing creatures designed to be superior to humanity and to save humanity from itself.

 

[JimB]

Did anyone seriously think that's how bodies work?

There are people who seriously think Stephen Colbert is a conservative pundit, that a Modest Proposal is serious about wanting to eat babies, and that Donald Trump is a viable presidential candidate. Yes, there are people who think the female body works that way, and there are people who think a female body that doesn't work that way is somehow deficient and shameful, and there are people who think they are owed a woman who has a body that works that way.

There's another strange disconnect. Complain about something even remotely approaching normal as fat or ugly, then chase anything with tits like a starving animal after raw meat.

I think a very big part of male psychology is territoriality. Ownership is huge to us. For instance, the comic book shop--and all of nerd culture, if you remember the "fake nerd girl" bullshit of a few years back--is our territory, male territory, property that belongs solely to us and that a woman is either a trespasser on or an inclusion in the claimed property. The lady cosplaying Robin belongs to the men there because she's part and parcel of the culture they own, so they feel they have the right to treat her as property.

...I really depressed myself writing that paragraph. These are not things I realized I knew until I articulated them. Christ, I feel a headache coming on.

Anyway. I don't mean to give the impression that all men are so devoted to this aggression-driven sense of possessiveness when it comes to sexual attraction, but I think for all of us it's a factor. Some leftover response to testosterone driving us to be the biggest, baddest caveman with the biggest club, the warmest cave, and the most women.

 

[Areloch]

If we're going to get into that, then you have to keep in mind that it's proportions that matter. Kari is still an actual person and can increase her bust or torso size and keep the proportion within the limits of good health, likely even approaching the "ideal" ratio.

My point was that while comic book women certainly have a lot going on in the bust and torso, that alone isn't what matters because their proportions are outside of the bounds of what would appear normal and tiptoeing the edge of the uncanny valley. I get that it can be pretty subjective, but I'm having trouble seeing that particular style as being so universally seen as the ideal for female attractiveness, especially given that it seems to be unique to comic books.

My own guess is that it's not meant to appear sexually appealing but rather that the bombastic, "in your face" outfits are meant to look aggressive.

Yeah.

Obviously, if the art is too stylistic, or poorly done, then it's going to appeal less. But like the study linked, or the Mythbusters video hinted at is men and women actually share a pretty close 'ideal' though obviously there's some variation. So it's not an unreasonable suggestion that the busty superheroine - while sexually appealing to males - is ALSO closer to the ideal form that women find appealing in much the same way that the superhero's super-toned muscular body is.

While it's easy to handwave superheroine's busty-ness as an obvious sexual appeal bid to males, and also the broad-chested, muscular, toned superhero is a power fantasy, the implication is that males AND females both consider BOTH of those to be the ideal look - it's merely a matter of how extreme it is, which is the line that some artists cross and the whole thing becomes absurd.

 

[The Lunatic]

I really think we should do "Super Heroes photoshoped to look like overweight people" next.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Fat ladies photoshopped to look unrealistic, look unrealistic. Breaking news, stay tuned for more obvious stories as we get them.

 

[Politrukk]

This buzzfeed article and some people in this thread truly make me want to give up on humanity.

Where did things go so wrong?

When did we start applying such absurd standards and heavy judging, when did we start feeling the need to compare ourselves to everything even stuff that doesn't involve us.


"The average woman does not look like that" I hear them say.

Honestly I never realised the average woman could stick to walls, fly, had superhuman strength, was an alien, a goddess etc.

The fact that people >THINK< that spider woman for example is supposed to be a figure that a woman should aspire to in looks and behaviour is ridiculous.


If I drew a stickfigure with huge knockers that wouldn't automatically mean that all women have to aspire to that nor does it actually imply I like women with huge knockers.

It just means I drew a stickfigure with boobs because I can't draw for the life of me and thought this was funny, or maybe I was just bored.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

That's simply some bad artwork. You can practically hear the artists screaming, "Capricious Lord Almighty! Why must you make mortal men choose by putting titties in the front and asses in back? Zounds to you spine! My eyes wish to behold both at once?"

That or the editor phones in and says "Yeah, Artist Guy? It's Editor Person. Listen... The last couple mockups won't sell. We need boobs and butts, man. Or as we call 'em in the office, boob-utts. We know there's a direct proportion between our sales and boob-utt percentages because Numerology and shit, so yeah.

Twist those spines into Eldritch postures that would make Shub-Niggurath's cultists warble with feverish abandon or lose the paycheck. Kaythnxbai!"

 

[Paragon Fury]

I still love in these kinds of topics when people come in and try to say "The women they're for the models aren't fat!"

YES. THEY. ARE.

In the case of the article here; the last three - the women trying to pose like Red Sonya, Storm and Psylocke. All three of them, unless they're like 6'3 r something (and therefore taller than my 6'0 self) are notably overweight and out of shape.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Buzzfeed going for the low hanging fruit again I see. What is there exactly here that hasn't been observed a zillion times already? Plus, as others have pointed out, making average/out of shape women attempt poses that are supposed to be done by humans at the very peak of physical capability is rather cheap. Look up videos of professional gymnasts and contortionists and maybe you won't scream "SPINES NO WORK THAT WAY!!" so easily anymore. Although in comics the poses are usually accompanied by tits the size of bowling balls, which would probably shift the center of the mass a bit higher.

Though this led to me reading that "Greatest hits of Rob Liefeld's awfulness" article again, so thank you, whoever posted that.

 

[Tilly]

I get a strong sense that THEY feel like they're making a point.

Anyone know what it is?

 

[NPC009]

Something about real women, blabla. I guess they're trying to make avarage (with avarage meaning: probably somewhat overweight) American woman feel good to get clicks.

Anyway, I think the biggest problem with comic book art is not so much that the poses are impossible (I'm sure gymnasts can pull many of them off, eh, not counting anatomy gone completely whack - what's up with those bendy leg bones?!), but that they are (very) unnatural. They're not meant to show off an action or movement, but to make female characters sexually attractive, basically putting sex before storytelling. I think that's bad - both for comics as a medium and the people reading them. The message seems to be: we assume you are a dumbass with a short attention span, so here's some boobs and butts, please keep giving us money.

Well, unless you're Rob Liefeld, in which case the message is: I have never seen an actual human being. What are feet? How do muscles work? I do not know. Please have some pouches.

 

[Something Amyss]

I think a very big part of male psychology is territoriality. Ownership is huge to us. For instance, the comic book shop--and all of nerd culture, if you remember the "fake nerd girl" bullshit of a few years back--is our territory, male territory, property that belongs solely to us and that a woman is either a trespasser on or an inclusion in the claimed property. The lady cosplaying Robin belongs to the men there because she's part and parcel of the culture they own, so they feel they have the right to treat her as property.

"fake geek girl" never really goes away. I think it's more a sign of mistrust and happens concurrently with harassment and hatred and all that shit.

Anyway. I don't mean to give the impression that all men are so devoted to this aggression-driven sense of possessiveness when it comes to sexual attraction, but I think for all of us it's a factor. Some leftover response to testosterone driving us to be the biggest, baddest caveman with the biggest club, the warmest cave, and the most women.

Errr...testosterone doesn't really work that way. Assuming there is an element of male psychology that deals with this, and it's not merely cultural conditioning (which I think is more likely, have you looked at the way we tend to raise boys vs girls?), it's not strictly down to the hormones your gonads spew out.

 

[JimB]

"Fake geek girl" never really goes away.

Mm. I hadn't heard from it in ages, so I figured everyone got over that little slice of bullshit.

Errr...testosterone doesn't really work that way. Assuming there is an element of male psychology that deals with this, and it's not merely cultural conditioning (which I think is more likely, have you looked at the way we tend to raise boys vs girls?), it's not strictly down to the hormones your gonads spew out.

Doesn't work what way? People with more testosterone aren't more apt to be aggressive? If there's some chemical I'm confusing it with, let me know.

 

[Something Amyss]

Mm. I hadn't heard from it in ages, so I figured everyone got over that little slice of bullshit.

It never really goes away. It's like herpes, with the occasional massive flare-up. But it's always just beeath the surface.

...also, some people are probably more prone to hear about it for reasons. >.>

Doesn't work what way? People with more testosterone aren't more apt to be aggressive? If there's some chemical I'm confusing it with, let me know.

People with more testosterone tend to be males and males tend to be more aggressive, yes. This has been traditionally linked to testosterone, but in more recent times there have been a large body of studies which find no causal relationship. Also, this isn't necessarily born out in the animal kingdom, though testosterone is a fairly universal hormone.

 

[JimB]

People with more testosterone tend to be males and males tend to be more aggressive, yes. This has been traditionally linked to testosterone, but in more recent times there have been a large body of studies which find no causal relationship. Also, this isn't necessarily born out in the animal kingdom, though testosterone is a fairly universal hormone.

Huh, no kidding? You got a link to a study or anything? I'd love to read it if you do.