>https://archive.is/58ZYr#selection-595.0-664.0
(mods pls don't delete i would like to be allowed to have a conversation about this)
why do people get this angry about anything sexualized marketed to nerds?
people like this sort-of used to have a point, in that it might be nice if there were also some things marketed to people who don't like sexy women in things.
but the linked article points out in its first paragraph that nowadays there are lots of non-sexy women in aggressively de-sexualized nerd entertainment. Star Wars is unsexy, Ghostbusters is unsexy. Here on /co/ you have unsexy Kamala, unsexy FemThor, unsexy Squirrel Girl, even unsexy Vampirella, unsexy Red Sonja and unsexy Dejah Thoris!
But still this guy is outraged because there exists somewhere, somehow, something sexy that nerds are enjoying, even if it's literally nothing more than a handful of fanart covers + one street fighter comic that will sell (maybe) 3,000 copies.
Why is this? Why are people so angry, in the year 2016, at the thought of a nerd getting to enjoy the *fantasy* of an attractive woman behaving sexually towards him? Why is this such a moral outrage?
>>82284659
Because pandering to one's carnal instincts is the lowest-common denominator, repulses and dehumanizes a potential marketing audience and just brings down the quality of a medium overall, unless that genre is pornography. Do you really think half the population wants to see some stupid rubbery ass plastered 3/4ths of the page as the defining feature of every character of that gender?
>>82284701
Maybe not half the population, but the majority of the intended market seems to tolerate it, if not overtly enjoy it.
And you can't deny that Cho draws a good booty.
>>82284701
>>>/tumblr/
>>82284659
because anything men like is bad
>>82284701
>dehumanizes a potential marketing audience
> Do you really think half the population wants to see some stupid rubbery ass plastered 3/4ths of the page as the defining feature of every character of that gender?
women don't buy comics. Just because women are half the population doesn't mean they are half the market.
>just brings down the quality of a medium overall
projecting
take >>82284781's advice
I used to feel some sympathy. But the more aggressive and hypocritical they've gotten, the less I give a shit. You watch a movie like Thor MoS and have scenes where he's shirtless and the girls are making faces at each other. That's apparently female empowerment. But the second a woman does something like say Harley in the trailer for SS, it's attacked for being misogynist.
Maybe a lot of women don't actually give a fuck? Maybe it's ok for guys to get a kick out of pretty girls? Maybe these idiots have pushed their contradictory logic too far and we should ignore them until they turn it down a notch?
Fuck em.
>>82284816
>thor or mos*
>this whole thread
>>82284701
I always wondered why Barbies aren't marketed towards boys as well. I mean, why alienate half your market?
>>82284781
So that's basically your rebuttal to everything? Wow what a marvelous intellect you've shown I'll have to quote you on that ingenious remark.
>>82284701
>Do you really think half the population wants to see
Why do you specifically and only care about what that half of the population wants to see, and visceraly hate the idea of the other half of the population getting to see what it wants to see?
Why is it so upsetting to you for someone to say "we are going to make this product based on what people who want to see this kind of thing want to see. People who want to see other kinds of things can look at the kinds of things they would like to see"?
>repulses and dehumanizes a potential marketing audience
Why is it so repulsive for women to be drawn sexually?
>unless that genre is pornography
Why is this an exception?
Why are you viciously and aggressively against any hint of sexuality in anything, anywhere - oh but if it's porn, go wild!
Why is someone who likes hardcore anal prolapse videos okay in your book, but someone who likes an occasional bit of cheesecake is responsible for destroying the quality of an entire genre?
>>82284890
>>>/tumblr/>>82284894
>>82284781
>>82284814
I obviously disagree with >>82284701 but i wish people wouldn't tell him to leave and go to tumblr because his opinions are exactly the sort of opinions I asked for.
I really want to understand the mindset of people who think this way. Why is it so important to them that nerds never ever ever ever get an evil evil evil evil evil evil boner from looking at a sexy butt on a comic book cover?
>>82284886
Watch as no one takes this guys argument seriously even though its 100% legitimate.
>>82284814
Notice the "Potential." Don't you think if say, Indians, African Americans, Asians and Mexicans were suddenly getting into some 50's style literature or comics they'd have to remove ridiculously racist and obscene caricatures before they aren't seen as extremely dehumanizing?
The same counter-argument would basically be "Well you guys don't read comics why should we take Nanny McNappyhead and Towel CurryDude off the cover?" When the reason for their excuse is WITHIN the justification?
>>82284894
If you look at posts by attractive women cosplayers or comic fans they all tend to love the cheesecake. There are tons of photos of Cho signing cosplayer's tits, JSC has a pretty big female following. Honestly its just frumpy unattractive no effort women then get upset about this shit.
>>82284940
I don't read Marvel, but I really enjoyed seeing Black Panther in the new movie. But I have an African friend and I thought of telling her about it... And I imagine the concept of a made up country and "in my culture etc" would probably annoy her. Shit still exists today.
Which side do I need to agree with to make them stop hiring artists who are bad at drawing, or draw stupid shit? Psylocke stop throwing your snatch in my face you're fighting for your life and your legs can't bend that way.
>>82284765
That he does.
>>82284816
Look, even when THOR or HULK are shirtless, they're still powerful figures. They're the main characters, and you want to BE them and watch them fight and win and identify with them as the heroes.
When fucking Blackwidow is swinging her latex ass and bootyshaking you want to nut her and give her a slap. That's the idea, it's not "Empowering" at all. The sexual objectification is completely different.
That's not to say there cannot be sexualized female characters that are also treated like real people and not objects, but it's so damn slow getting into it.
It doesn't help that you have dumbfucks going the opposite route and making Squirrel girl as ugly, unlikeable and obnoxious as possible like there's no medium way.
>>82284886
I can honestly say that as a kid I probably would have wanted some Monster High dolls. Heck I've bought a couple as an adult. They have such fun, creative character designs. Its a product that was made with girls in mind, but has enough lap over appeal (monsters!) to make them desirable by boys to. It would be idiotic to think that they should suddenly make Rambo Barbie or something.
>>82284886
They are dumbass. They're called action figures. Action figures came from dolls.
They literally invented the term "Action Figures" to market them towards boys so they could act like they were separate from girls toys. Are you just pretending to be this ignorant.
>>82284659
It's because it's resistance to a forced norm.
>>82284977
I have female friends who loved MoS because Superman was hot as fuck.
And I don't see how Blackwidow is at all a good example. She's hot as fuck, competent and intelligent. She's hardly a fucking sex object - she's the definition of a character being sexy and empowering at the same time. Please leave /co/.
>>82284997
Action figures have obviously evolved into their own genre of toy, but if you look at the origins like the original GI Joe's then yes they are very much a boys version of a doll.
>>82284977
>women don't like bootyshaking
explain twerking
>>82284977
Is it so hard to believe that there are women out there that would love the idea being a badass while also being sexy as fuck at the same time?
>>82284997
right, but barbies are still marketed toward girls, which is sexist towards boys
it's not good enough to stick boy's dolls in some "action figure" ghetto while girls are allowed to play with real dolls as if they were somehow ENTITLED to have the LEGITIMATE doll market to themselves! dolls won't be truly safe for boys until we've eradicated barbie's obscene collections of clothes and shoes and replaced them with guns.
>>82284940
>Don't you think if say, Indians, African Americans, Asians and Mexicans were suddenly getting into some 50's style literature or comics they'd have to remove ridiculously racist and obscene caricatures before they aren't seen as extremely dehumanizing?
No, I don't think we should retroactively censor things just because people might get triggered over things in the past.
>>82284977
so when thor and hulk are shirtless, they're sexual in a way that appeals to women, which is good
but when black widow is in a tight outfit, she's sexual in a way that appeals to men, which is bad
so it would be okay for black widow to be sexual, but only if she's sexual in a way that appeals to women?
why does all sexuality have to meet your personal definition of what's "empowering", which happens to correspond 1:1 with what women find sexual?
why aren't things men find sexual also allowed, just because you happen to hate other men?
>>82284894
>Why do you specifically and only care about what that half of the population wants to see, and visceraly hate the idea of the other half of the population getting to see what it wants to see?
Because I'm a self-righteous loon and hypocrisy pisses me off. Why are you more justified in getting mad from your fan-service being taken away then me having it exist at all?
>We are going to make this product based on what people who want to see this kind of thing want to see. People who want to see other kinds of things can look at the kinds of things they would like to see
Because that thing is shitty and dumb and offends me. Live and let live don't apply here buddy. Slavery, Leeches and Snake Oil were a thing once but I don't have to agree with them.
>Why is it so repulsive for women to be drawn sexually?
Because they're not allowed to be drawn otherwise and it pretty much cements their status as sex objects, because nerds reading it cannot tell fantasy from reality thus their social grasp.
>Why is this an exception?
Sex exist to sell sex, go nuts with that. If you're trying to tell a story or give entertainment be fair, or just put a 'Porn' stamp on comics and be honest with your smut.
As for the last line, because 9/10 times it interferes with the characters and story and is just unneeded.
How do I put this, say I loved Vampires. Me and my friends had vampire kinks so we started writing comics and stories and people bought them, but they started to notice that in nearly every issue there were vamps. Even in history and SoL settings there'd be some bitch going "OOoooh please bite me." These issues sell well and are good but won't change their bizarre focus.
Wouldn't you feel creeped out eventually because you cannot separate the medium from our gross vampire fetishes? (Or Feet, adult diapers, whatever) You might say "It's not for me then" but REALLY enjoy the stories if there weren't Foot shoved on panel or obscene amounts of vampire fetishizing.
>>82284922
Look, I'm a fucking perv and probably as hypocritical as it gets because I look at gross porn and get off to weird shit all the time but it's because of that hyperawareness of it that it rubs me the wrong way seeing it everywhere and ruining what might otherwise be a powerful story.
Like do you want me to enjoy the drama, the humor, the action or be moved by the characters? Or do you want me to oogle and punch my crotch as I masturbate furiously to your dumb ass-shots.
I mean there's already R34 of everything in existence now anyway, why does it NEED to be inside the thing I'm reading and trying to enjoy? If I want to go touch my dick to someone I'll do it later on the internet. If anything it makes me want to do it less because they've jumped the gun and rather then get invested in a character they've already shoved the porn in my face.
>>82284997
>>82285023
The original action figure, the 11'' G.I.Joe, was patented specifically as a type of "toy figure or doll" with articulation.
http://www.google.com/patents/US3277602
They were distinct from dolls at the time, and modern action figures are distinct from the originals. Where the distinction starts getting weird is that modern dolls, like Monster High, have articulation similar to G.I.Joe, so by the original definition they are considered Action Figures.
Toy history is pretty interesting.
>>82285106
>Because they're not allowed to be drawn otherwise
Except that there's lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of comics where they are drawn otherwise?
>Why are you more justified in getting mad from your fan-service being taken away then me having it exist at all?
Because me having it literally doesn't affect you at all, except to the extent to make the focus of your life stomping out any and every trace of a thing i happen to enjoy
> Slavery, Leeches and Snake Oil were a thing once but I don't have to agree with them.
You sincerely consider sexual depictions of women comparable to slavery and fake medicines?
You do realize that sex has been a thing for the entire history of animal existence, and will literally continue to be a thing for the entire rest of human existence?
> it pretty much cements their status as sex objects
Why do occasional sexy depictions of women on comic book covers "cement their status as sex objects", but anal prolapse porn videos are empowering and fulfilling?
ITT: Bingo!
>>82285011
Superman in MOS was made attractive, but not a non-character. Even when in a tub he's not made into a fruitcake, and he's still a written (if badly) character.
And yeah, using Blackwidow is kind of a cherrypick because there are a lot of good chars out there, but they're the ones OP are complaining about.
Someone like Bayonetta is 'sexy' sure, but she's a good character too and making her unattractive wouldn't make her bad and uninteresting.
>>82285033
Real life = wanting to see things in stories
Tell me, do you want to see the PPG twerking? Well, do you?
>>82285056
Obviously a marketing getto exists for both genders in many genres, I don't deny this.
>>82285047
No, it's not unbelievable or wrong to like that. And that'd be fine if there was enough variety. It's not bad to have sexy badass characters, just making them all conform to that role and function sells a bad trend.
>>82285086
Changing work for the future is not retconning the past. We're not getting rid of Golden Age WW's hooker outfit or anything by trying to make designs that are just more standard and non-fanservicey.
>>82285099
> but only if she's sexual in a way that appeals to women?
It's all about presentation, and how agency is handled.
If you sell sex in like, Ghost in the Shell, the MC is still a badass cyborg whose smart and cool and still her own character. That's good.
Same for Kill Bill. Bayonetta, ect.
If you sell sex in "Sucker Punch" where the whole point of the movie is they're hot and you want to fuck them and blahblah it gets dumb. You can sell sex without selling a sex fantasy. And you can write female characters without them being catored towards men. Just as you can ruin them by drawing them like Greg Land-ian porn stars.
>why aren't things men find sexual also allowed
Good question. Why aren't things that men find sexual like adult-diapers, clowns, fur suits, futas, sissys and inflation, just because you hate people who happen to like those things?
>>82285146
>because I look at gross porn and get off to weird shit all the time but it's because of that hyperawareness of it that it rubs me the wrong way
Is it possible that people complaining about minor sexiness on comic covers are all like you - disgusting actually creepy fucked up porn addicts scapegoating other people's mostly innocent conduct for your own guilt and shame?
Have you considered the possibility that your hyperawareness is your fucked up damage to deal with, and not the fault of anyone who occasionally likes looking at a pretty woman's butt?
Have you considered the possibility that there are people who, unlike you, aren't giving themselves brain damage from overexposure to porn and haven't completely and weirdly separated that part of themselves from their normal existence, and are okay with just reading a story that has a small amount of incidental sexiness?
Maybe the entire world doesn't want to go to rule34.sluts.whores and look at triple-dicked Cammy fucking the bleeding hole in chun li's stomach? Maybe they just want to read a short comic book story about Cammy, a sexy woman who gets in fights and does an occasional sexy pose.
>>82285106
why do you think anybody cares about your opinions
>>82285047
It's not hard to believe, because there are women out there who aspire to be both and create both. The issue is when the sexual aspect overshadows the badassery and the same target audience that made those women so great are soon reducing them to fantasies to jerk it off to- this diminishing what made them great to begin with.
Eventually the guys wipe their hands and move on to the next eye piece.
>>82285270
>And yeah, using Blackwidow is kind of a cherrypick because there are a lot of good chars out there, but they're the ones OP are complaining about.
I can't think of any female heroes that are written to be cheese cake in the MCU movies. I might be wrong and I'll admit if I am, but they do female characters pretty well.
>>82285270
>Why aren't things that men find sexual like adult-diapers, clowns, fur suits, futas, sissys and inflation, just because you hate people who happen to like those things?
are you really trying to say that those things don't exist outside of porn?
>>82285290
The only time I can think of black widow in this scenario is
1. Iron Man 2 - Her sexiness is definitely played up
2. The scene where she's tied up in a chair? And them basically beats the shit out of the guys who were demeaning her
3. When she kisses cap?
That's all I can realistically think of.
>>82285290
>Eventually the guys wipe their hands and move on to the next eye piece.
there is literally nothing wrong with this
>>82285270
>If you sell sex in like, Ghost in the Shell, the MC is still a badass cyborg whose smart and cool and still her own character. That's good.
Why is it good for every woman in any piece of nerd entertainment to have to meet some forced definition of "badass" and "smart" and "cool"?
Why is it so wrong for there occasionally to be a woman who's just sexy and feminine and, you know, maybe has a grab bag of other non-masculine endearing personality quirks? Why - other than your ragingly out of control porn addiction - is that so "bad" and "uninteresting"?
When, if ever, does nothing but "badass" and "smart" and "cool" and "badass" and "smart" and "cool" and "badass" and "smart" and "cool" and "badass" and "smart" and "cool" start getting to be just boring and tired?
>>82285270
>Why aren't things that men find sexual like adult-diapers, clowns, fur suits, futas, sissys and inflation
1. why do you think "things that men find sexual" is 1:1 with "things that a very tiny subset of hardcore porn addicts and fetishists" find sexual?
again - have you considered that this outlook has more to do with your out of control porn addiction than what is actually normal male sexuality?
2. again - why do you think i would care about anyone making comics about things like that? If someone were to produce comic book stories that incidentally featured your weird fetish shit, i would be like "well hey, good for them" and then go and read the things that i enjoy.
>>82285391
>2. again - why do you think i would care about anyone making comics about things like that? If someone were to produce comic book stories that incidentally featured your weird fetish shit, i would be like "well hey, good for them" and then go and read the things that i enjoy.
This. It's similar to how I feel about all this talk about trans people these days. Do what you want, I don't give a shit, people who talk shit are pricks, but people who try to make it some hot topic issue need to piss off as well. No one should give a shit either way.
>>82285421
assmad virgin detected
>>82285214
>Except that
I'm aware. Did you read the OP?
The entire argument was "Why aren't there LESS of those unsexy girls drawn for me and MORE sexy drawn! Making all these characters unhot is ruining comics by not pandering!"
>Because me having it literally doesn't affect you at al
Oh, that's rich. But anon, it disturbs my EMOTIONS. And that triggering should be listened to. /Irony
Don't act like you're immune to this, for every badly handled POC and forced diversity character you and /co/ would complain too and demand they need to be stomped out with every trace someone might enjoy.
My nervous case is boobs, yours is brown people and diversity.
>You sincerely consider
Only so far as I'm concerned that I have a right not to agree with something and get fussy whether someone supports something or not.
>Why do occasional sexy depictions of women on comic book covers "cement their status as sex objects", but anal prolapse porn videos are empowering and fulfilling?
Porn is the ultimatum of fantasy and confined sex specifically to it's sole purpose. It's not supposed to be construed as anything to take real meaning, purpose, or information from and you know that hentai tentacle-monsters and asian schoolgirls aren't real and don't matter. They're to dick off and nothing more.
Are you literally telling me you don't consider (sleazy and low as many may say) Comics as no better a medium than porn? That the potential for characters and stories, for messages and ideas is nothing higher than the sum of anal fucking videos? Maybe I'm pretentious snob but what a cynical outlook.
>>82285358
>Why is it good for every woman in any piece of nerd entertainment to have to meet some forced definition of "badass" and "smart" and "cool"?
Because women have to be put on a pedestal anon. They can't have flaws.
>>82285456
Nobody has a problem with nigs in comics. What we have a problem with is characters we like being destroyed to make room for nigs.
I actually think this has been kind of a productive thread, in that I came up with one plausible hypothesis for at least some of the people outraged about this kind of thing.
Namely, that these people are hardcore porn addicts who are into all kinds of sick and fucked up fetish shit, so the rather tame and inoffensive sexuality of cho's covers 1. bores them, because their pron addictions mean they can only be aroused by the sickest and most hardcore filth, 2. reminds them of their own out of control porn addictions, filling them with shame that they then take out on Frank Cho (or whoever).
Basically these people are deeply ashamed of themselves and their sexuality, and because of their own shame, they want all of everyone's sexuality forever walled off into a tiny narrow unlit corner of human existence where they can pretend that it doesn't exist in their day to day "ordinary" lives.
>>82285454
You forgot to add "cuck". If you're gonna insult like an autist you might as well go all out.
Why is anybody talking to this triggernigger legitimately?
>>82285492
Or maybe, just possibly, that there are women who read comics who tire of seeing the same useless trite dominate the industry over and over again?
How did you miss the point of the controversy this badly?
>>82285535
Then they should go and write their own comics for their audience?
>>82285274
Because OP made this thread, hurr durr?
>I made thread to bait people into talking about shit
>Why you talk about shit
>>82285297
The movies are a different case. I was referring to the comics, the fact that she's made asexual (Or atleast unable to conceive) is even a plot point in the second Avengers.
>>82285302
I'm not saying they don't.
But can you really say to me you wouldn't start complaining if they started frequently piling up in your favorite comics, even say on the side or offhand?
>>82285358
It's not about being 'cool', it's about Agency and Good writing. You can make a feminine, sexy, sweet as honey, porn-tits character the star of a series and make it good. There are series like Empowered based on this premise.
But 'can' doesn't mean will, and realistically it doesn't happen. You can also make the most unsexualized, bland character ever and still make it dumb if a cast conforms to that role.
>>82285391
The point---------------->Your head-------->
If it's clear someone is writing something to be fap material, they damn well better do a good job. Porn is a genre, it has standards. So does comedy, action, literature, whatever. I'm speaking from a purely writing standpoint.
Sex can be handled well in a story, or it can be distracting and obnoxious. Art is part of a comic's story as a visual medium so it's important not to mishandle that.
>2
You're acting like it's a Zero-Sum game here and there's no overlap.
Doesn't the possibility there 'might' be something you enjoy or appeals to you on presentation, but the oddities add up and distract you from what you might have enjoyed come to mind? I'm not just talking Kill Bill Foot-fetish stuff, but art being so important it's more like "What if Watchmen was drawn initially as a Furry Comic by an Inflation artist". Even if the story was amazing, you'd say what you said and any potential in the comic would be kill.
>>82285456
>Porn is the ultimatum of fantasy and confined sex specifically to it's sole purpose.
It's really interesting how you don't realize what a complete weirdo you are for thinking that sex somehow needs to be confined to porn and only ever porn, rather than being a general and normal part of human existence
It's also interesting how you seem to consider sexuality to be something inherently disgusting and shameful, such that any hint of it ruins "legitimate" mediums such as comics.
>>82285490
Blatant lies.
Every Marvel thread of the last 3 years has had some bloke baaahing about the newest darkie McSuper or newest minority superhero.
>>82285456
>The entire argument was "Why aren't there LESS of those unsexy girls drawn for me and MORE sexy drawn! Making all these characters unhot is ruining comics by not pandering!"
i mean this is kind of just overt shitposting/trolling on your part
i don't care if you're generally shitposting / trolling because you've at least been interesting but if you're going to just do "lol i'll pretend OP is saying the opposite of what he actually said" then idk congrats on finding a way to be super boring i guess
>>82285552
They do, you just don't hear about them since their comics don't target audiences who rake in cash.
The point is that big time artists should strive to create appealing comics targeted toward both genders and not just for guys oogle at. Yeah, women can be objectifying as hell, but its nowhere near the spectrum of how comics have catered to the tastes of dudes.
>>82285492
Have you considered the possibility that some people just like to enjoy things and like different things? I think that can be the simplest line of reasoning for this debate.
Changing art and characters to be more sexy in a visual space is part of the work.
That's paramount to an author going from writing their Novel proper, to spending paragraphs to pages describing someone's assets and how hot they are, in a non-pornographic or romance story.
Have you considered that people, like me, who like and accept both fun Entertainment and Porn want to see them excel and not be ruined by authors who don't know what they're doing and destroying both?
I mean, it's not like I haven't seen Porn ruined by people trying way too hard to tell a story or narrative at all.
>>82285621
>They do, you just don't hear about them since their comics don't target audiences who rake in cash.
Capitalism ladies and gentlemen.
>>82285507
So let me get this straight, you just came to this thread to circlejerk repeatedly and samefag about your opinion that everyone else shares concerning how terrible it is that any female character be made unsexy?
>>82285610
besides Kamala every minority superhero is just a legacy hero getting BLACKED
>>82285590
>You're acting like it's a Zero-Sum game here and there's no overlap.
haha, you're pretending you don't know what a zero sum game is now, lol, real good troll bro, you sure trolled good
> I'm not just talking Kill Bill Foot-fetish stuff
So you consider kill bill's foot fetishism non-distracting, but you consider cho's mild all-fours pose unforgivable?
Please stop trolling this obviously and try to find a way to be interesting again.
>>82285621
>>82285621
>The point is that big time artists should strive to create appealing comics targeted toward both genders and not just for guys oogle at.
except
>their comics don't target audiences who rake in cash.
women don't buy comics
>>82284814
Didn't they do market research recently that said women were about half the comic audience? Especially with the popularity of the Marvel movies bringing in even more female fans. The demographic of the target audience has really expanded.
>>82284659
You are not allowed to enjoy.
>>82285456
Holy shit fuck off dude.
>>82285652
So why does kill bill's foot fetishism not "destroy" the story, but frank cho's butt pose does destroy the story (of the comic you haven't read yet)?
>>82285735
>dude
>>82285599
Please, I'm not some ubber autist whose going to get all High-Lit on you, but genre blending aside have some common sense. Know what you're doing.
Even James Joyce wrote the most ridiculous sex scene in Ulysses, and Greek myths and stories were full of orgies and fucking nonstop. This isn't about the narrative conventions but the medium they're displaced in.
Don't you consider the art important to a story? The aesthetics, the choices and character design? Don't they affect how you relate to it, your emotions and so such? I'm saying whether you write a porno scene or not, making entire characters coded as porn star regardless carries implications. And if you're just ignoring those implications because of fan-service and stupidity you're De-valuing the effects and success that you might've had otherwise.
Refer back to my "Watchmen but all the characters are replaced with Furries" example.
>>82285456
You need to kill yourself soon.
>>82285686
Women are more likely to buy comics online, through the artist's own domain.
Also, you cannot deny the rise in female readership is growing.
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/sep/18/female-comic-book-readers-women-avengers-a-force
>>82285691
>Didn't they do market research recently that said women were about half the comic audience?
That's the same kind of research that says that women make up 50% of the gaming market. They buy different things.
>>82284922
I'm pretty sure nobody has said that they don't want nerds to never ever ever ever get a boner. They're just tired of how prevalent it is.
>>82285620
>why do people get this angry about anything sexualized marketed to nerds?
Tell me what about OP I misread?
Goddamn it how can you chums be so thick.
Drawing Squirrel girl like a Pornographic stripper with DD boobs is just as distracting and revolting to me as if she was drawn with Downs and tumblr-tastic art (Which she was), or re-designed like she belonged on someones Deviantart page.
The difference is people here are willing to disregard one of those.
>>82285747
I don't really understand this harping on Watchmen with Furries when Blacksad is a highly acclaimed comic.
>I don't like this thing you like!
>Change it for me so I'll like it!
>>82285492
i think it's a mix of this, plus good old fashioned hatred for nerds
After all, TumblrAnon has made it clear that the in-your-face foot fetishism in kill bill isn't "distracting" and doesn't "destroy" the story.
It's pretty clear that he finds this okay because kill bill is targeted to the sorts of tumblr hipsters he feels are entitled to be sexual. As well as created by Quentin Tarantino, idol of tumblr hipsters, and so if The Quentin likes it then it must be legitimate.
Conversely, frank cho's mild butt pose is targeted toward the sort of dorkish uncool men who like and enjoy comics, and allowing them to enjoy a bit of sexuality distracts him and destroys everything, because it forces him to think of nerds enjoying sexuality, and he really, truly hates nerds.
>>82285783
>is just as distracting and revolting to me
>to me
>to me
oh no, somebody has to stop this travesty! A woman has been insulted!
>>82285783
hahahaha, pro trolling again bro
you really trolled me good, hahahaha
>>82285801
>he
it's either a girl or a nu-male. Let's be honest here.
>>82285686
>>their comics don't target audiences who rake in cash.
>women don't buy comics
I already addressed this up here
>>82284940
The problem is circular you doofus. Who would want to draw comics where they're depicted like cum-rags readying to go licking their anuses every other panel?
They won't buy comics because blahblah and thus standard won't change.
This is an oversimplification of course. Woman don't buy comics generally, and all the comics marketed towards them are pretty bad. (The manga market fairs much better then the western counterparts) The problems for this have more to do with the Cape-shit ghetto medium rather then sexualification as a whole, Manga has different genres. Western comics are for Capeshit.
>Muh archie
Fuck off
>>82285747
>Even James Joyce wrote the most ridiculous sex scene in Ulysses, and Greek myths and stories were full of orgies and fucking nonstop.
right, and you're okay with that, just like you're okay with tarantino's foot fetish
but you're against cho's mild butt pose.
please, explain why the former is okay, but the latter "distracts" and "destroys"?
>>82285817
Waiting for it
>>82284701
What, like every male superhero ever?
>>82284659
Because the internet gives a bigger platform to those who ten years ago would've been ignored. You're always going to have white knights; people who insist on still fighting the feminist sex wars. The argument against Manara's cover is the idea that female characters exist to titillate or motivate the male heroes. Historically this has been true, but the cover became a symbol. Cho's insistence in not kowtowing to their new orthodoxy chafes at them.
There's nothing inherently wrong about the cover or drawing sexually attractive people. In fact, that's the point of cape comics: they're a male escapist fantasy where every hero is buff and all the women are gorgeous. Again, is this wrong? No. However, many women don't share in this fantasy and they resent the lack of stories that appeal to them and the fact that most heroines are just scenery in one way or another. Actually the same argument has been made by comic fans for a while: look at how Peter Parker's character growth was stripped away so the writers could revert back to a (literally) swinging bachelor?
Nobody really ever makes this point because the loudest voices on both sides don't talk to each other - they talk at them and attack strawmen.
tl;dr - It's a symbol but people are inarticulate and stupid so you'd never know it.
FWIW - Supergirl does a good job of balancing eye candy with plot. Yeah it's a little preachy and all the women are gorgeous but they're not overtly sexual. Even Lucy moved past her role as rival for James' affection. Ironically however, James hasn't and his only role all season was to be Kara's crush.
>>82285838
God damn. Handlebar mustaches barely worked for Old West saloon bartenders. Why would anyone think they would work when contrasted with a modern aesthetic?
>>82285681
So you're saying that if I put one Diapered Vampire-Furry in your favorite comic, that's it you're done? You're okay ignoring it and not getting mad, just gonna be chill and never read it again?
>So you consider kill bill's foot fetishism non-distracting, but you consider cho's mild all-fours pose unforgivable?
The foot fetish shit shows up for like 5, maybe 10 seconds max throughout the whole movie dingus. That'd be like for a panel or two in comic time. The character designs in a story you have to see throughout the ENTIRE story that they exist in. That was OP's complaint.
>>82285877
because it's "quirky"
>>82285735
Wow great argument wait I've got a better one
>>>/Fuckoff/
>>>/tumbr/
>>>/TouchingMyDicktoWatchmenFurries/
Thanks anon I'm now a shitposting genius.
>>82285742
5 seconds of feet =/= entire character designs/art styles
>>82284814
Plenty of women buy comics.
>>82285329
Go fuck yourself.
>>82285900
yeah
but
you really should consider that tumblr one tbqh
>>82285879
>The character designs in a story you have to see throughout the ENTIRE story that they exist in. That was OP's complaint.
haha, you're still trolling that you haven't read op, hahahaha, good troll bro, haha
>>82285763
Give this man a mensa test already.
>>82285900
>entire character designs/art styles
Isn't the design and art in Street Fighter mostly the same as it was?
>>82285905
>Plenty of women buy comics.
well then they are obviously voting with their wallets, so why should companies listen to a bunch of keyboard wielding harpies over their consumers???
>>82285900
>5 seconds of feet =/= entire character designs/art styles
sure, in that kill bill's "5 seconds" of feet are in the movie, and cho's designs and art styles are in his personal fanart that he sells on commission and isn't in any actual comic, except for the one and only one comic that has put his work on one of their covers (and not the interior art, at all)
So again, why does cho's not-in-comics fanart + 1 comic cover upset you so much, when quentin tarantino's history of inserting foot fetishism into every single movie he produces is okay?
>>82285905
>Go fuck yourself.
#triggered
>>82284659
Good god. Remember when progressives rushed to defend Hustler's right to publish offensive material back in the 90s? What the hell happened.
>>82285784
I haven't heard or read from that.
Probably because it's a fur people comic.
>>82285785
Yes anon that is OP's chief complaint. Good job.
>>82285801
What a bizarre and stupidly obtuse comparison. Can you seriously not tell the difference between one girl wearing a catsuit, but still being a character in her own right, and one whose purpose is literally to oogle her tits and ass and look sexy but serve nothing else for the story?
>>82285948
The times changed is what happened. Better start catching up.
>>82285817
>>82285832
>>82285838
Congratulations on graduating middle school your PhD will await you someday pubes!
>>82285856
I don't but I don't care about Ulysses. If I did read more literature, I'd think an entire chapter reading 'Booty booty booty booty tits tits tits tits booty and then more fucking Booty booty booty booty' would be distracting as shit.
Actually why even stop there? Just grab stickers of woman from palyboy and plop them right over the words in the story I'm trying to read and enjoy, yeah that about levels it up.
>>82284659
Thanks based mods for letting me do this thread and not deleting it!
boring troll is boring now, but before that he was pretty interesting and i got some useful ideas on this topic!
>>82285948
progressives became the new fundamentalist christians. Or worse even. Pin up artists of the 40s and 50s didn't get nearly as much shit for drawing sexy ladies as they would get nowadays.
>>82285270
>Someone like Bayonetta is 'sexy' sure, but she's a good character too and making her unattractive wouldn't make her bad and uninteresting.
projecting so hard
fat and ugly chicks can't relate to sexy characters so they want them to be drawn ugly and fat too
why don't you let it inspire you? 85% of males in comics have aesthetic physique, but you don't see men complaining... Some ignore it and some hit the gym
literally who in the real world cares about *fictional* character's depictions
>>82285986
>pubes!
>he's literally just sticking random naughty words onto the ends of sentences now
>>82285954
>Can you seriously not tell the difference between one girl wearing a catsuit, but still being a character in her own right, and one whose purpose is literally to oogle her tits and ass and look sexy but serve nothing else for the story?
There's definitely someone in this thread having that problem.
>>82285954
>I haven't heard or read from that.
then you sound pretty uninformed 2bqh familia
>>82285909
Well Meme'd 4gagger XD :! >< !!!
>>>/reddit/
>/YourDick/
>>82285926
Vidya have their own issues.
Not touching that cancer with a 10 feet poll
>>82285941
When did I say that thing you mentioned upset me? I don't know what that is and don't care. It could be pinup art postered in the back of the comic and that's, a different issue of a similar topic but not what we're discussing.
If it gets in the way of the story and the author cares more about raking in the Titty-Bucks then writing a good story that's cause for concern. Same with anything else, whether it's tumblr art or SjW-Pandering, ect.
Let's not forget how fetishized men are by women here. Look at the yaoi market, how every pairing of men that incidentally appear on screen are shipped in the most obnoxious way possible. Men just appreciate sexy women art quietly, and you dont really see them smashing them with every other women character present.. They dont create bizarre cults over them and insist that Steve and Tony are the hard homos and ignoring their canon straight relationships. Not to mention the fact in most cases that neither character has shown the slightest hint of being homosexual.
>>82286008
>Pin up artists of the 40s and 50s didn't get nearly as much shit for drawing sexy ladies as they would get nowadays.
Yeahh, probably had to do with the fact that women were more like dolls/property back then.
>>82285970
They're regressing to what evangelicals and christfags were doing back during the bad old days of the CCA.
The Anglosphere have this bizarre puritanical and repressed interpretation of feminism, because literally nobody will give a shit about seeing the female form in Italy, France, or Spain. And god forbid if someone is exacting sexual pleasure in a way that you don't personally approve.
>>82286000
>I posted a thread to get replies and tell them they're wrong stupidly aren't I Archimedes heir
>>82285610
no, bring new heroes if you want to push diversity, not a fem thor out of the blue.
black heroes and women in comics has been around for decades.
and, you SJW comic will flop anon, because the people interested in buying those aren't the tumblr crowd.
>>82286019
>literally who in the real world cares about *fictional* character's depictions
Why don't you enjoy The Amazing Squirrel Girl then?
>>82286020
>he
also that's classic tumblr insult techniques. They won't call people real insults, like fag or retard, because they're "demeaning." Instead they use cutesy playground talk like "piss-baby," "shit-lord," and "pubes."
FYI, r/shitredditsays/ is a very active SJW nest that proudly states that they regularly raid 4chan, so you should learn to identify Tumblr tactics to spot them. They're really common on the "popular nerd hobby" boards like /co/, /v/, and to a lesser extent /tg/. They're on /qa/ too but you rarely find them elsewhere.
>>82286041
But we're not discussing fetishized men on the internet, we're discussing fetishized women on the big market which depends on these images for revenue. You're not gonna see some tumblerina's shippy fanart in theaters.
>>82286041
I'm sorry, when did Western artist capture into the Yaoi market dumbshit? Tell me about this breakthrough of Captain America and Batman Yaoi that's top selling on the shelves now. Show me the sales for these issues.
>>82285864
Not that it matters, but this was /thread.
>>82286044
Is this really what you people believe?
>>82286075
the same reason I don't like DeadPool, tryhard metahumor and plot armor
I give 0 fucks how a character looks
>>82286081
Why is shitlord okay when "lord" implies gender?
>>82285621
>The point is that big time artists should strive to create appealing comics targeted toward both genders
no?
you won't see me bitching because sex an the city was created with women and gays as the main target audience.
why people can't have their shit witouth being invaded by other's ideology?
try to do a sex and the city with a whole male cast you faggot, i dare you.
>>82286089
Why does that even matter? People enjoy lewds, both men and women. Don't be a spoilsport.
>>82286083
since when do sexy / sexualized women count as fetishized?
>>82286097
>you people
It's ok, anon, you can say it.
>>82286094
>approves of supergirl
>/thread
>>82286083
>You're not gonna see some tumblerina's shippy fanart in theaters
You will see all kinds of shirtless buff men on daytime TV and soaps. And yet, I don't see anyone getting buttblasted over it.
>>82286089
My point is that both genders appreciate seeing a sexualized image of the other gender, but honestly? It seems women get way more vulgar about it. Pinup art is usually very tasteful and more about sensuality then sexuality. Cho isn't drawing these women open legged and chained to a bed. They just have a slight playful tease.
>>82286103
I don't really know, but it's probably because the only time shitlord is used is when it applies to males. I don't think I've ever seen them use it on a girl.
>>82286050
Look you dumb cunt you're conflating a whole host of shitty issues and ideologies and projecting so hard you might as well be fucking your anal walls in the ass with that bit of rhetoric.
I don't. Give a fuck. If there's porn.
Just keep it out of my comics.
Tell a story dumbasses.
If you want to draw latex babes and melon-sized titty monsters, go ahead and try. Anime does it, manga does it, vidya tried to do it. But the moment you cannot handle your dick and start ripping it off and bleeding the semen on the page you've wavered any right for me to give a shit.
And maybe that's want you want? Then fine, hire Geoff Johns and Greg Land and screw writing, make porn works. But don't expect people to care when that sort of thing has no currency or staying power.
>>82286158
any idea when you americucks will stop with this SJW shit?
one year? two more?
>>82286104
>try to do a sex and the city with a whole male cast you faggot, i dare you.
I'd rather not do anything else in fear of rupturing one of your arteries in your rage. But sex in the city is a pretty good example, as it was considered revolutionary regarding the era it was brought in where women were inherently sexual and not tied down by marriage. The issue is that you're claiming comics belong to men and women shouldn't invade it. Such a large medium should be enjoyed by both without it being overshadowed by pandering to one side.
>>82286083
>we're discussing fetishized women on the big market
no, we're discussing sexualized women in four pieces of fanart + a video game tie in cover
( like >>82286131 points out, not all sexuality is fetishistic - just, y'know, yours )
>>82286169
When based Putin usurps the position of PotUS.
Then the age of feminism and degeneracy will be over.
>>82286161
>my comics.
you must be pretty new if you are talking shit about classic comics
>has no currency or staying power.
yeah, whor or black spidey are here to stay you dumb fuck
>>82286103
because they hate men
i'm pretty sure they invented "pisschild" to deal with the fact that "lord" isn't derogatory enough, though
>>82286169
Hey don't blame us all for this. We're trying to get rid of it too.
The PC culture in the 90's sort of died off after a while so hopefully they'll burn themselves out again soon.
>>82286144
The anon I was referring to meant seeing gay couples of popular superheroes getting hot and heavy on the big screen, not of general buff guys. And honestly, correct me if I'm wrong, but I always figured it was other men who reinforced the whole "not buff = a useless lard ass with no sex appeal".
>>82286161
If you don't like comics with sex appeal, then don't buy them.
Don't sperg out and force your tastes on others.
>>82286104
>why people can't have their shit witouth being invaded by other's ideology?
First of all did a chimp fuck your skull because your grammar is atrocious and secondly an ideology is always dominant. The irony of what you're saying is so thick you could drown in it.
You're basically saying
>Why cannot comics be made for men, be made for meeee! How dare you like something I like!
And I'm not saying it's up to any individual artist to be forced to change their work or fear the censor. It's a shaky road that way, but trends are trends and I'm just refuting OP's complaint.
>>82286150
I'm not doubting that men and woman are equally pervy, but there's a time and a place. If you draw men with Minotaur dicks and pseudo-bara porn expect it to match up with what you're reading or just flake off.
>>82286178
>should be enjoyed by both without it being overshadowed by pandering to one side.
ok, now that we established how stupid you are lt's go again, very slowly.
it is a large medium, so you can create content for BOTH parts, not necesarily in the same product, you can do stuff for men and for women (protip, women won't buy comics).
again, push for a version of sex and the city with a male cast, but you can't do that, right?
you just want so shit on the evil men media.
>>82286169
It depends on how fast the movement eats itself alive.
I always find Americans' crusade against sexual stuff to "legitimize" their art funny, because Europe is always viewed as a center of high art, and they never get tired of sex and nudity.
>>82286214
Pot calling the kettle black. The irony, it brews so sweet with your retardation. And ends on a whistle of a note completing the siren of an imbecile.
If you don't like comics that don't pander to you then don't buy them you dumb cunt. Don't whine like a bitch about not having it your way and force your tastes on me.
>>82286178
>Such a large medium should be enjoyed by both without it being overshadowed by pandering to one side.
so you agree that comics should stop pandering exclusively to SJWs and should allow a small amount of pandering to straight men as well?
>>82286228
Are you the same anon who keeps saying "women don't/won't buy comics" over and over in this thread? I already provided a link stating otherwise >>82285764 here
I guess a male sex in the city would consist of five guys gossiping about their sex lives, going into full detail of their romantic trysts over lunch and having midlife crises eps...I mean, would you watch that?
>>82286222
>your grammar is atrocious
if you didn't notice english is my second language my nazi friend, but let's keep going.
> ideology is always dominant.
yes, and i don't want yours in my comic.
don't read it or write your own shit.
let's change every book written so far so they can appeal to how you see the world, shall we?
>>82286222
>>Why cannot comics be made for men, be made for meeee! How dare you like something I like!
And yet your ilk doesn't seem to mind when comics are made specifically for them though. Like that morbidly obese superheroine. See, this is the problem, you are perfectly fine with being pandered to, but you go batshit insane when other target demographics are being pandered to and worst of all, you are too dumb to even realize the hypocrisy in all of this.
>>82286229
What can you expect from a country founded by people who sailed across the globe to avoid the anything goes debauchery of Elizabethan England?
>>82286228
>it is a large medium, so you can create content for BOTH parts, not necesarily in the same product
No we cannot. Because autistic dumbfucks like you scream and cry and bludgeon your heads to the walls when something isn't made specifically for you. You're incapable of even handling the very idea.
> (protip, women won't buy comics)
Okay so you're trolling and retarded got it.
>>82286272
Lazy bait.
>>82286279
>a small amount
You're right, Anon. I can't remember the last time a big time comic pandered to straight men...jesus, it's been ages.
>>82286286
>I mean, would you watch that?
maybe, who knows, i don't hear you bitching for my right to see a more inclusive version of a product created specifically for women, are you?
We should remake pretty woman too, with inversed roles, because that was written for women in mind as the audience.
the point is that the market appeals to both sides, but no one wants all the stuff mixed (except for people like you) because in case you didn't notice women and men wants different things in their media.
>>82286286
I'm pretty sure Entourage would be this show.
>>82286325
any time they try it's met with controversy and protest. just look at this Cho debacle
>>82286301
>No we cannot. Because autistic dumbfucks like you scream and cry and bludgeon your heads to the walls when something isn't made specifically for you.
That's because you people never actually create anything for yourself, you only ever infiltrate and take over already existing characters and story and then you have the audacity to get mad at the original audience when they don't like it.
>>82286301
>when something isn't made specifically for you
create your own tumblr content, stop fucking with stablished characters.
it's not that hard to understand.
>>82286279
>and should allow a small amount of pandering to straight men as well?
THEY.
HAVE ALWAYS.
PANDERED TO YOU.
Holy shit.
This is like a niggerass bitch whining to a cop "Heyyy maybe you can sodomize us a little more and share some of those rarely won beatings from the white boys over to my black ass."
>>82286290
>don't read it or write your own shit
Okay here's where your retardation shines again. Don't read what, 'Your' comic? What, the comic that you wrote? That you own, I didn't know you were a comic author. Great, we got Dobson here fuckos! You don't want me reading 'your' comic huh?
Oh wait shitstain you didn't write it and neither did I. So who the fuck are you to tell me what I can and cannot read?
>let's change every book written so far so they can appeal to how you
It does appeal to me already, sure must be great huh! Must be a lottery of cuntbucket semen cockguzzling dickdrips to get wacked off every day by the assholes and tools huh? Let's take pride and give ourselves a spank right now and demand congratulations for being given everything we want in life already, woo great job! Woops all we accomplished was being huge pieces of shit and killing ourselves.
>>82286295
>See, this is the problem, you are perfectly fine with being pandered to, but you go batshit insane when other target demographics are being pandered to and worst of all
That is LITERALLY the problem you are facing. Also I love how we're both making full assumptions about the other and refuting the arguments in our head that seem to align with that fantasy.
Why even go on an imageboard at all for this anon, honestly? Just open up a Word Doc or something and argue with yourself and imagine the made up lines of code are working with the enemy. Thinking and Reasoning sure is easy when everything conforms to a caricature of reality you believe to exist!
>>82286339
>no one wants the stuff mixed
Well apparently people other than me do, considering the controversy. That's how the market works, dude. It's not a stagnant wheel gathering dust, it's constantly in motion.
Demand changes over time, and the same useless covers of half-naked women won't attract the same revenue anymore. Women want to be included in a way that isn't awkward as hell for them. Do you want a male version of Pretty women? Fight for it, make a big stink of it like women are doing right now.
>>82286286
it's called Entorage
>>82286343
That show was pretty good.
>>82284659
What is with the passive aggressive fuccbois in media lately? Men like booties, deal with it.
I like how the author goes after comic book nerds instead of more gratuitous displays of sex in rap, R&B, or reggaeton. Reminds me of how Peta would only go after women in fur and not bikers in leather, just an observation.
>>82286388
isn't that magic mike?
>>82286399
>entourage
>good
bitch it is fucking embarassingly bad
>>82286364
>>82286385
>>82286388
welp, we lost him/xhe/she or whatever the fuck.
>Fight for it
you should, i don't care about girl movies as you shouldn't give a fuck about what men wants to read.
go fight for "faith", i am pretty sure they are selling a lot of comics with that fatso in the cover
>>82286349
"You people?" Which people, Marvel? DC? Who do I work for anon. Which comics have I created? Which ones have I read and enjoyed and touched my dick over, hmm?
The nutcase conspiracy is /pol-tier pants on head retarded and it's just pathetic that you have to resort to this because a company doesn't give you exclusively what you want and how you want it. That's how spoiled entitled you are and minuscule your ego is.
>>82286363
Create your own Swedish characters barvitzmah, stop fucking with jewish rabbis like a dumbshit and ruining our private pics.
>>82286388
>Well apparently people other than me do, considering the controversy.
you mean a bunch of tumblr trannies bitching about things they don't buy
>>82286385
>That is LITERALLY the problem you are facing.
No, not at all, as plenty of people have explained to you already, we might ridicule your tumblr comics, but we are fine with you having them. The problem is that you don't create your own shit, you shame and bully comic book publishers into changing already existing stories and characters who already have an audience, just to pander to you. And then you naturally get a backlash from that original audience who doesn't like those changes too much.
>>82286407
yeah, except magic mike is made for women too
>>82286364
>they always pandered to you
the comics' purpose and target audience has changed many times over the years, even when speaking about capeshit only
>Don't read what, 'Your' comic?
I think anon meant don't take over beloved characters but make your own
>>82286417
I'm not even baiting, I think you're too pissed to hold a decent conversation at the moment. Maybe jerk off for a bit to cool down.
>i dont care about girl movies
I'll take your word for it.
Faith is cute.
>>82286422
what?
are you drinking anon?
>>82286422
Marvel, obviously.
>>82286423
Women buy comics.
>>82286445
>mfw the only white man is the one they can't get rid of because of movies
>>82286349
this
>>82286417
Tell me about me anon.
You're the genius right! You 'get me', you have all the answers and are a psychic piece of shit who apparently understands everything going on and any of the fuck what I'm talking about. So make my day, "Own me". I'll go full sado on you bro.
No backing out of this now sissytits.
We're entrenched in your ass-cunt so open up. Gonna go full Prop. 8 on this with how close we've clearly come to understanding anything with semblance of sense right now.
>>82284922
>I really want to understand the mindset of people who think this way
They're never going to explain it to you in a way that makes sense because they're not coming from a place of logic and reason, and if you try to ask them to turn their thoughts into something that does sound logical, it will only make them mad because they don't know how to do that and the fact that you don't already understand and agree with them just frustrates and offends them.
https://popcultureuncovered.com/2016/04/18/comics-youve-got-your-diversity-so-why-dont-you-buy-them/
>Out of the top 200 books, that’s 38 titles where the lead is not a white heterosexual male. It’s not perfect, but it’s a much more diverse spread of characters than we had five years ago. (Also worth noting: this list excludes books like Justice League or We Are Robin which include a mixed cast.) Certainly, this is not demographic perfection: “white female” seems to be the dominant category, there’s still a ways to go in getting more Asian- and Hispanic-led books on the market, and religion is seldom seriously represented in comics. But like I said, this is a lot better than five years ago.
>Except. For. One. Thing.
>It’s the sales. A substantial quantity of diverse titles means nothing if they’re plummeting towards cancellation, and many of these books are headed in that direction. Comic books are a remarkably competitive marketplace, and Marvel and DC are businesses first and social justice pioneers second. If a title isn’t selling past a certain point, it will inevitably go and be replaced with the next hot property.
lol
>>82284977
I've been waiting for an excuse to post this.
>>82286443
i am having a conversation anon, you need to polish your debate skills, chimping out won't help you.
>Faith is cute.
good, it's a good seller?
Why do you think that the comic readers want to see what you propose in their media?
>>82286349
I think you're referring to the vast majority of women who prefer to post comics online instead of reaching for a higher market like those of DC and Marvel. I think women are more comfortable with online advertisement, but the issue is there isn't too much room for women in the big leagues.
>>82286451
no.
now tell me how they play videogames in such amount that merging genres will give a boost in the profit of the developers.
>>82286443
You know, this post is just UMADBRO, which comes across really dumb after >>82286364
>>82286455
nice pasta
>>82286474
this
let people vote with their wallets
it's obvious that companies will pander to those with the money
>>82286497
This was literally Google's first result, dude.
>Casual games on cellphones and social media have helped broaden gaming's appeal, with the number of female gamers over the age of 50 increasing 32 percent between 2012 and 2013, the Entertainment Software Association said.
But the average female gamer has played for 13 years, and many are increasingly dedicated. The number of girls and women playing those consoles more than five days a week has soared since 2011, to about 5 million this year, Newzoo said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/10/17/more-women-play-video-games-than-boys-and-other-surprising-facts-lost-in-the-mess-of-gamergate/
But this is about comics, not video games.
>>82286493
>is there isn't too much room for women in the big leagues.
there would be if they do something interesting.
that Gwenpool shit wasn't drawn by girls?
>(mods pls don't delete i would like to be allowed to have a conversation about this)
so this is how the things are going on sjwchan nowadays huh?
>>82286499
That was my complete intention tho
>>82286479
The best part about the original is that its a double strawman, as its a guy writing what he thinks girls like in order to show up the strawman.
>>82286424
Why is everyone in this world so Daft. Could this site of dolts literally just drop dead already? Let's look at the praxis of all your propositions you had to make just to maintain your argument and see how far off the shittrain we've gotten.
>we
We who? You guys? I'm a guy. Marvel readers, DC? Americans, niggers, homos, Website users? I'm 4chan you fucker. People with a functioning IQ about a coherent threshold?
>tumblr comics
Wow that sure is a fun made up term with absolutely no contours or designation. What tumblr comics, do you want to run down a list of this? I've been thinking about getting into Black Panther, we might need to host an evaluation for this to qualify.
> you don't create your own shit
And you do? And this means what exactly, since we're both stupid fuckers on the internet and obviously not content creators.
>, you shame and bully comic book publishers
>you
You, as in me? 'Me'? I do that? Really, when? Show me the link, the source for these attacks. Show me the tweets and twits and facebooks and whateverthefuck of me doing this, because I certainly don't recall.
>just to pander to you
If comics pandered to me there would be animeseque fetish-fuel stripper magical girl catbitches in dominatrix leotards fighting DBZ style in a story that reads like Lord of the Rings and is more obscene than Bible Black itself. With 300+ LB Muscle-Fat ninja maids, transvestites and traps fighting in the 9 circles of hell.
Evidently that doesn't exist, so where's the pandering anon?
Like I said earlier, this argument has gotten beyond asinine.
>Just open up a Word Doc or something and argue with yourself and imagine the made up lines of code are working with the enemy. Thinking and Reasoning sure is easy when everything conforms to a caricature of reality you believe to exist!
We've lost any objectivity from this debate.
>>82286560
>I'm a guy.
*Nu-Male
>>82286560
>We've lost any objectivity from this debate.
there was never any objectivity. You were seizing up like a psychopath and lashing out at everybody because we didn't want comics stuffed with trannies and niggers.
>>82286462
Anon don't be dense. Everything that you don't agree with doesn't sound logical and reasonable, have you ever considered that you're just dumb?
If you cannot understand that I don't mind porn and comics but don't to be tricked into reading a porno in comics anymore then I do opening up a playboy and getting Batman issues issues, there's no reasoning with you.
>>82286530
dude, that's why i said merging genres, boys will play call of duty and girls will choose candycrush.
if you give the chance a minority will choose a mixed content, otherwise every genre will choose the media that they find appealing.
>>82286479
as some anon pointed out earlier >>82286019
if males inherently have a "power fantasy" and are "empowered" by characters like Thor and Cap, why do females feel put down by characters like Black Widow, WW and Captain Marvel? Do they inherently have an "inferiority" or "objectification" fantasy?
>>82284701
Get a load of Anthony Comstock here.
>>82286506
>Pasta
Where? Show me.
You don't live by reasoning or logic anon, given everything you say follows your own fantasy world where everything you believe is perfectly consistent, but turns out to be wrong. As always.
Like this post for instance, as always.
>>82284890
Nothing else needs to be said. This - >>82284701 - is just a thinly-veneered attempt to justify your displeasure at people enjoying things on their own terms and not the ones you and your social group would like to set.
>>82286600
And what I've been saying is the minority is no longer as such- women and others who want mixed media will become the majority, as it's happened over and over again with entertainment. So there's hardly a point in trying to play gate-keeper to comics that have hardly done anything else besides plaster ridiculous bodies on covers.
>>82286560
>If comics pandered to me there would be animeseque fetish-fuel stripper magical girl catbitches in dominatrix leotards fighting DBZ style in a story that reads like Lord of the Rings and is more obscene than Bible Black itself. With 300+ LB Muscle-Fat ninja maids, transvestites and traps fighting in the 9 circles of hell.
This is such a pathetic and cringy attempt of you trying to fit in by acting like what you imagine the stereotypical male 4chan user to be into it's not even funny, just sad. The very fact you think that people don't immediately see through this is kind of insulting, but probably speaks more to how out of touch you tumblerinas actually are.
>>82286579
>Don't state gender
>SHE
>I'm a guy
>NUMALE KEK KEK /VIDYA/ EPIC MEMES HURR DURR TIME TO FILL MY BRAIN WITH MORE BUTTONMASHING
How does it feel to see everything in black and white and fit the world into tiny tiny boxes that conform to your reality anon?
>>82286560
>We've lost any objectivity from this debate.
some PC wants to change the media and we say we are ok with the current state, if leftists wants to change the media they should create their own content and see what happens, that's the entire argument.
for some reason when we say "you" you actually believe we are talking about yourself and not the part of society you are trying to poorly represent.
>>82286590
>into reading a porno in comics
what do you do when a sex scene happens in a movie, you walk out of the theater?
>>82286540
Yeah it was, so was Saga- and regardless of your opinion of it, it made headlines. So you could say they're starting off good.
>>82285747
>James Joyce
You are ofcourse aware that that specific scene is incredibly mild by our standards and that Joyce book was banned from being printed due to 'perverse content'.
It was literally prosecuted for its content and they tried to censor it. It took a decade to publish because of censoring fucks worrying about the children.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_%28novel%29
Written over a seven-year period from 1914 to 1921, the novel was serialised in the American journal The Little Review from 1918 to 1920, when the publication of the Nausicaä episode led to a prosecution for obscenity. In 1919, sections of the novel also appeared in the London literary journal The Egoist, but the novel itself was banned in the United Kingdom until the 1930s. The novel was first published in its entirety by Sylvia Beach in February 1922, in Paris.
In Americe, it took until 1933. Because they're even touchier about Sex.
So fuck off with your Joyce comarison, if your knid had it's way it would never even have seen the light of day.
I don't understand the problem here.
The picture images were done for individual consumption as commissions. Only 1 copy of each exists and only that goes to whomever wants to purchase such a thing.
The Cammy one was directly commissioned by the company Udon for an alternate cover for their Street Fighter comic mini series.
Street Fighter is targeted to a male demographic.
BOOM! Studios didn't hire Frank Cho to do this type of cover for an Adventure Time comic.
Marvel didn't hire him to do this for Captain Marvel or Ms Marvel or Squirrel Girl.
It was created for a specific demographic that's already the core audience for such an image.
How is this bad?
>>82286635
capitalism is the ultimate gatekeeper. We don't even need to do anything, just wait. >>82286474
>>82286560
>Could this site of dolts literally just drop dead already?
and yet here you are
if you don't like it, I'll kindly ask you to fuck right off back to tumblr or reddit or 9gag or wherever the fuck you came from
>> you don't create your own shit
>And you do?
he's already happy with the current comics, why would he need to create new ones
it's you who's trying to take over comics with your SJWness
>If comics pandered to me there would be...
nobody fucking cares, there's plenty of diversity of themes, motivations and characterisation in comics
also, it seems like by comics you mean the big 2, I'm sure there are comics that pander to your retarded fetishes somewhere out there
>>82286587
I started out and stated reasons why I might disagree with sexualification in comics.
The response was predictably
>NO U FROM TUMBLR 'ooowned!' i WIN
With idiots amassing strawmen and shallow arguments from a position of authority they never possessed, on assumptions that only exist to confirm their ideology and allow their superficial presumptions to be true.
Just admit it, you've reached the point where I 'have' to be a She/Xe/NuCuckShemaleOtherkin on tumblr right now, rambling about pronouns and male privilege for your further arguments to make any sense, less you be ranting about nonsense with no ground. And you can do it too, because I'm an anon and anything you want to be true, is, with extra wanting and brain-blinding. Willful ignorance sure is great huh.
>>82284659
>>82286000
>Thanks based mods for letting me do this thread and not deleting it!
We've had multiple bump-limit threads about this topic. Each one has been exactly the same.
>>82284886
/thread
>>82286635
>women and others who want mixed media will become the majority
yeah, good luck with that.
>>82286655
You act like a woman so when you claim to be a guy you're obviously a Nu-Male
> TIME TO FILL MY BRAIN WITH MORE BUTTONMASHING
what the fuck does this even mean? are you having a stroke?
>>82286655
>How does it feel to see everything in black and white and fit the world into tiny tiny boxes that conform to your reality anon?
you tell me.
>>82285056
>right, but barbies are still marketed toward girls, which is sexist towards boys
Oh man, I'm done. You've literally reached a level of autism that you'll never recover from if you truly believe this.
>>82286474
>inb4 tumblerina says this "doesn't count"
>>82286605
Pandering =/= deluding.
Porn can be art. Porn can be literature, and porn can be praise-worthy.
Less so when you're trying to mix it up with other pathetic fantasies however. It's like soiling sugar and chocolate into cheese fondu and cotton candy and sushi and oh god this should all be so good but wow it ends up really fucking gross why did these mix?
>>82286685
exactly, they hired him to draw Hulk but nobody's crying how "objectifying" that is
people just need to realize some things weren't created with them in mind so they should stop trying to change shit just because they don't enjoy it
>>82286272
It's like I'm really reading a Tumblr post on /co/.
1) That's a lot of words, purple prose and simile you've employed in a failed attempt to appear more intellectually-capable than you actually are. Brevity is important in effective communication.
2) Your 'argument', such as it is, makes no sense. You're seeking to disenfranchise everybody besides yourself by demanding that 'porn' be kept out of 'your' comics; for one, a woman's ass in tights is not by any conventional definition 'porn'. God help you if you ever try to read any Eurocomics, you'll have an apoplexy. Secondly, your idea that nudity and sexualisation - in both directions - somehow nullify artistic merit is a conceit so puritanical in its conception as to be laughable.
You live in a free market economy. If you don't like there being any content in comics that you see as 'sexual' in nature, like an 18th-century protestant, then you're very free to vote with your wallet and not buy those comics, and you're also completely free to start your own competing franchise.
Except we all know how that would end for you, because this isn't a communist dictatorship where you happen to be a friend of The Party, and you constitute a tiny minority of wailing, handwringing, deleterious cretins seeking to undo hundreds of years of progress in ensuring freedom of expression in the arts.
>>82286676
then they should work towards that.
you know how do you do a cultural revolution? by creating something better or bolder than the existing media.
PC are just trying to replace the current status quo, they won't consume this media once they achieve their objective and the regular guys won't touch it either now that it changed.
no one wins.
that's why mention that SJW crowd should do their own content, if it is so good it should overcome the media you hate so much in no time.
>>82284701
What a fag we have here. Nerds want this and thats who comics should be.
>>82286744
Not every issue will have people crying over them, you'd have to be an idiot if you think that. If you want, you can start, but I guess you already did by bringing it up now didn't you?
>>82286645
See anon you did it again. You did it AGAIN.
You, the psychic anon have predicted who I am and my tastes and everything about me and already propped up everything on their autistic strawmanning.
Tell me about myself then anon? Show me the enemy. You're so pathetically, disgustingly ignorant and willfully deceptive that you're forcing your perception on me JUST to save face, and you'll never drop the screen in front of you because you're retarded like that and wouldn't even consider for a second that those might be my fetishes and you're actually just stupid and ignorant.
But you mind. You might consider it.
Too bad you won't. Retard.
>>82284984
>Heck I've bought a couple as an adult
Same. Some of them are cool as shit.
Except now that they lost the Disney Princess licence Mattel is rebooting the line to make it more appealing to the segment of the female market they lost.
>>82286772
>Nerds want this and thats who comics should be.
I'm a nerd who loves cheesecake and I wouldn't want to be associated with you with that terrible grammar.
>>82284659
Because jocks got cucked out in the 90s, and now they are trying to do it to us nerds.
>>82286741
Except, you know, when it produces salted caramel or chocolate with spices...
>>82284886
I thought Barbie was actually originally a German porn character or something.
Shit I had to read this horrible story freshman year about a guy who bought a Barbie to jack off into it.
>>82284659
>ITT people getting triggered over other people getting triggered
I mean do people even realize the stupidity going on here? This shit works both ways. Just because something is out there for you to appreciate, doesn't mean someone else can't criticize it. The hypocrisy that people are willing to spout here is downright hilarious. You might say something is art, but it doesn't stop someone from saying whether it's good or bad art.
>>82286791
>My kangaroo fat pouch, where I store male tears
Saved.
>>82286781
please Kurt Cobain yourself
>>82286819
>You might say something is art, but it doesn't stop someone from saying whether it's good or bad art.
no, but if someone tries to change the mona lisa because it looks too white you would tell him to fuck off.
>>82284765
Why do tampon makers alienate potentially half the market? I demand they start manufacturing manpons immediately, even if no-one buys them.
>>82284659
>That pic
My god, I've never seen this amount of passive agressive butthurt concenced into less than 120 words
Seriously though, article is nothign new:
Neo-Puritain Tumblrite upset that people enjoy something xe disaproves of while being incapable of just reading comics they enjoy or create a market for it, it's been the same shit for like 3 years
Buy what you enjoy, recommend it to others, and you'll see more of it; I do it, /co/ (I hope) does it, "Progressives" instead write articles bitching about the lack of appeal to a market which (as we've seen from an article ITT) don't buy enough comics
It's ridiculous how everything lost compartmentalization. Everything must be for everyone. If women don't like men's comics, they should be allowed to have their own comics. But that doesn't mean men should lose theirs.
>>82286838
Except no one is literally doing that. People are just writing shit on their blogs and everyone thinks that's somehow the literal equivalent of censorship. What, people can't say bad things now without someone crying over it like a bitch? I think the SJWs are retarded in their criticisms but that's all they are, criticisms.
It depends it's not a black or white issue.
People who throw in awkward cheesy hot people gyrating around and talking about sex out of nowhere in a mainstream thing when it makes no sense for the story or characters just because it makes them wet or hard, that's irritating.
The occasional sexy pin up is not a big deal though.
>>82286876
>But that doesn't mean men should lose theirs.
Except no one is literally saying that. Problem is, companies like Marvel and DC try to create a brand that's open to everyone. You can't expect to pull off whatever shit you want to do without ruffling some feathers. It's dumb yeah, but it's on them for even trying to appeal to such a wide market.
>>82286881
>Just writing on their blogs
And slandering anyone who speaks out against them. And harassing creators. And attempting to get people fired. And attempting to create lists of individuals guilty of 'wrongthink' to circulate to potential employers.
It's censorship by way of shaming, a bizarre mix of old-fashioned puritanism and new-age Marxism.
>>82286901
>Problem is, companies like Marvel and DC try to create a brand that's open to everyone
That's what I'm complaining about, actually. That's the loss of compartmentization.
>>82286075
because she's shit, her character is shit, her writing is shit, her artist is shit and her design is shit
>>82286657
>>82286693
>he's already happy with the current comics, why would he need to create new ones
So tell me what content you have created?
>it's you who's trying to take over comics with your SJWness
I, a person who doesn't make comics, am trying to take over YOUR comics, which you ALSO didn't create, when I- know what, fuck this. There's no line of reasoning or rationality that will ever contradict your double think.
Annnd I'm done. I concede, you're the dumber cunt. You know what why are you arguing with me, no seriously why? You're so convinced of everything you know and what I think and
I don't even give a shit about the Smutty censorship anymore. I just think it's ridiculous. Do you just go out with random people on the streets and yell at them for arguments they don't uphold and hold them to the opposition like an insane person? You're fucking insane. But I'm stuck here arguing with a literal retard so I too apparently.
And just to show how all knowing you areI've been self-arguing and samefagging both sides the whole time sempi. Great job debating with yourself spergy.
>>82286881
Browbeating someone into neutering their artistic expression is fucked up, and you can't rationalize that away.
>>82286881
>I think the SJWs are retarded in their criticisms but that's all they are, criticisms.
do you even read any comic in the last five years anon?
miles morales? whor?
>>82286881
Yeah that's another thing, people complaining about something on their blog is fine, of course people are free to counter complain too. People trying to stop something from being drawn are a different story.
>>82286920
Damn, you SJWs really are lunatics
>>82286710
>You act like a woman
I'm an anonymous text.
>what the fuck does this even mean? are you having a stroke?
It means you spend too much time playing videogames and sucking your boyfriends cock off.
See what I did there :^)
>>82286920
Wait, this whole thread has been one guy arguing with himself, like Fightclub? Who even gets trolled in that situation?
>>82286941
where are you getting this argument about video games?
>>82286923
That's the writers faults for pandering and not really whiny bloggers faults though. People online will always bitch and cry about everything.
>>82286923
Marvel's fault for keeling over, they didn't have to but they did.
>>82286920
MOM'S GONNA FREAK!
>>82286920
so you samefagged half a thread, lost time and energy in the process and you think anon got "trolled"
heh
>>82286947
>Who even gets trolled in that situation?
I guess any unsuspecting idiot who takes one of the sides? Not gonna lie, while it's not in this thread in particularI've done that a couple of times in other threads.
>>82286947
I've done that it's usually to try to get other people to fight with each other, make fun of both the positions, and see if other posters ever catch on.
>>82286920
>Dumber cunt
>You're fucking insane
>Literal retard
>Samefagging to inflame the argument and ensure your viewpoint comes out on top
The cunning and college-level vocabulary of an adult married to the capriciousness, emotional maturity and crippling sense of self-entitlement of a spoilt child. Millenials, everybody.
>>82286953
Writers got replaced or complied with the new direction BECAUSE of the complaining.
>Was just pretending to be retarded: the post
>>82286972
>lost time and energy in the process
Not that anon, but that's literally what trolls do so that's hardly even an insult.
>>82286762
>You're seeking to disenfranchise everybody besides yourself by demanding that 'porn' be kept out of 'your' comics
Which comics. Comics that I'm writing and making? What are 'my' comics?
I'm not writing or publishing this shit, are you seriously this retarded that you believe I'm actually in the industry?
I stated as such earlier that no individual author should be forced to change their work or be censored. All I (in the posts I made) helped explain why some sex might be bad for a story and some not and whatetheshitever.
I'm sorry, are you writing and drawing comics? Am I hypothetically censoring ones that you make? Oh I get it you're an editor or some shit and have a say in what's being made, therefore whoever should be attuned to your demands.
Obviously we have different opinions on fiction and entertainment. This argument is asinine because you, yes you, do not make comics. I don't either. I buy comics, I'm sure you do too, but that doesn't really make a shit of difference in the big picture of things. You may think it does, but it doesn't, and you're too busy frothing at imaginary strawmen you prop up to see that.
>>82286995
*the thread
>>82286992
Yeah and did they have to? No, it's still on them for listening to the retarded complaints. People on the opposite side obviously didn't scream loud enough for them to care.
>>82287015
thanks
>>82286988
>Millenials
if you're not in your late 30s you're a millennial too.
It is funny how people on 4chan still assume that any given post is how people feel and isn't bait or other bullshit but I guess you have to to stay sane. Trolls trolling trolls.
>>82287012
here the SJW attempts to hide behind semantics.
>>82286791
Yes, I am sexually attracted to that.
Good job anon, you proved me wrong. I feel bad about mocking you.JK I know you actually believe that and are still retarded. No I mean you're actually autistic enough to think that, like your mind literally works in sweeping, broad and cartoony ways, like a toddler. I'm not going to keep playing games with an autistic child, it's just too futile.
>>82286995
and you fell for it
who's the real retard
?
>>82287032
shouldn't be born around 2000 to be a millenial?
>>82287005
meh, you can bait a thread in 2 minutes and a single post, I wouldn't consider 2 hour samefagfest to be "trolling"
also, I wasn't using it as an insult, it just seems like anon was just trying to start drama adn got BTFO
>>82287044It gets pretty funny to see how many believe what you're saying when half the time I'm just making up bullshit to say so people would get riled up.
>>82286881
Did you see that boycott list that was made that THe Mary Sue was pimping out?
>>82287047
>Yes, I am sexually attracted to that
>that
>not her
the gift that keeps on giving
>>82287048
>implying you are not trying to save face now
>>82286899
This^
Describes my opinions so much simpler. And without the paragraphs of garbage I've had to type out for down syndrome children. It's a Christmas miracle. But instead of 12 reindeer we just get 12 flipping Filipinos being noisy and yelling the least of necessities.
>>82287066
Which one? Last I read, people just got triggered over Mary Sue talking shit about them yet when I checked the actual article, they even go out of their way to make a disclaimer that they're not trying to censor shit but just criticize them. Do correct me if I'm wrong though and if they made a new one or something.
>>82286899
Sshhhh, this is /co/, you're not allowed to make sense here.
>>82286982
>>82287005
Thing is, that kind of trolling only works if you receive more than you invest.
Invest two dollars - receive 2 thousand.
In this case, it's trolling's equivalent of throwing money in the river, then finding a cent and thinking you got richer.
>>82287047
>I'm not going to keep playing games with an autistic child, it's just too futile.
you keep calling people dumb and saying you're leaving yet you keep posting
>>82287049
you would think so, wouldn't you? Originally Millennials were people born around the Millennium and the generation after Gen X was called Gen Y.
Millennial just stuck as a better name when news orgs needed to blame people for things so now it applies to everyone born from like the late 80's up to... like the mid 00s or something. It basically means "anybody younger than me" now.
>>82287012
>are you writing and drawing comics?
Yes.
>Am I hypothetically censoring ones that you make?
Yes. Or at least someone like you. Everything I publish, no matter how hard I try to ignore cumstains like you, has me stressed out over whether or not the internet mob is going to roll over the Twitter hill into Instagram village with flaming torches and pitchforks because I did something to 'offend' you/them. I have a family, and the last thing I want is for them to be on the receiving end of a Tumblr harassment campaign like other creators I've known over the years.
You people are the scum of the earth, and you've done more to damage artistic freedom in the last decade than most people could possibly realise.
>>82284659
>kamala
>unsexy
>>82287128
>has me stressed out over whether or not the internet mob is going to roll over the Twitter hill into Instagram village with flaming torches and pitchforks because I did something to 'offend' you/them
Not even that anon but holy fuck, way to be a fucking beta faggot. You deserve whatever shit you get if you can't even feel strongly about what you do.
>>82287096
There was an article that's pretty much pimping out a site that's designed to call out injustices in the comic industry. Totally not going to be abused by less than scrupulous people, nosiree.
>>82287142
DELETE THIS
>>82286936
>>82286952
>>82286962
>>82286972
>>82286988
>>82286995
I was originally arguing for, but the opposition was so weak I got bored and started to debate myself.
It's not much different than what most of you have been doing, so who gives a shit.Did you guys know we had a Quest Board? I just found this out today.
>>82287074
Are you implying my tastes would be localized to just one meaty trumpet?
Okay this has gotten boring, happy dicksucking everyone.
>>82287118
But how is batman supposed to fight crime looking like a mulatto twink?
>>82287165
Tell that to Tim Hunt or the Meteor shirt guy.
I haven't read most of this thread but I don't like comic books sexualizing women because it's so base and surface level. You can make a woman sexy without making her look like the millionth blonde Playboy model. It's what 12 year old me would find attractive: skintight outfits, giant orb tits, long flowing hair, and the characters going out of their way to pose for the reader. It sometimes throws you out of the story.
And a lot of times it's as bad as some of the unnecessary over the top gore that happens every so often. Like in Siege, did we need the 2 page spread of Ares being ripped in half? In Ultimatum did we need a splash page of the Blob eating the Wasp? These scenes play into cheap shock value just as hypersexual females play into boner points.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against sex or violence in comics, just an overabundance and sterilization to the point where it's no longer shocking or sexy.
This isn't even going into the singular body-type that artists draw constantly
>>82284659
>why do people get this angry about anything sexualized marketed to nerds?
Because nerds get angry when something that used to be sexually marketed to nerds suddenly isn't.
>>82287142
>brown skin
>sexy
Might as well jerk off to Clayface.
>>82287165
Yeah, it's completely unreasonable for me to not want lunatics sending syringes of mystery liquids to my home or tracking down my kid's school and heckling them during playtime.
Also you already admitted to samefagging your way through this thread, so nice try.
>>82287202
Top kek. It's funny because it's true.
When did liberal becomes the new religious right?
Any day now i expect the Mary Sue or Salon to publish an article about how playing a KISS record backwards summons Satan...I mean the patriarchy.
>>82287112
Very true. That's why I used to do it on /r9k/. Two posts starting a "fight" about anything to do with a girl or girls nets 500+ posts of sperging with zero upkeep. They could even both be stale copypasta and it would work. Not that this was a good use of time but less than three minutes and no effort led to days of entertainment. Not proud of it but there you go.
>>82287207
Wew lad. Now you're just reaching retarded levels of paranoia. Keep crying about it though, it's pretty entertaining. It's good to know that you're such a beta faggot that you literally lose sleep at night over shit like this.
>>82287207
Grow a backbone you fucking cuck.
>>82287245
Wew cunt. Back to Tubblr with your terrible impression of the average 4chan poster.
Not to defend the samefagging anon, but I can understand why he did what he did.
Let's face it. The opposition would never actually try to go to 4chan, and the ones that do? Their arguments are very weak in general, hence why they need safe spaces in the first place. That anon gave us a punching bag that's a lot meatier than what real SJWs would do, because the real thing would never say half the things he did to bolster their arguments because that would require SOME thought and not purely driven through emotions.
>>82287245
And yet somehow I can't help but think that your sympathies would lie with any woman claiming harassment...
>>82287237
They are both people whose emotional welfare depends on everyone playing along with them. Dissent causes them distress to unhealthy levels.
>>82287276
Nah I couldn't give two shits about them. Nice projection though, makes it easier to have an argument when you write up for the opposing side.
Good god the strawmanning
>>82287202
Basically, yeah. It's like babby arguing that sister took away their rattle and throwing a tantrum.
Both don't realize that sugar belongs to mommy and daddy anyway. It's a ridiculous argument at any length.
>>82287128
>Or at least someone like you.
But you don't know who I am, or people like me :^)
You don't know anything about me, and have made all your assumptions based on a few miserly posts. And all other people that you assume are 'like me', are actually a mob of stupid imbecilic hoards with their own agendas, opinions, and stupid assumptions as well (Including about people like you). There is no hivemind or global agenda.
We're all gonna die and crash because the internet has misinformed us about how reality works.
Life is going to become like Metal Gear Solid, with the internet as the AI instead. It's insane.
I'm not saying there aren't people trying to censor you, or people that won't. Just that these catagories and stories you've told yourself in your mind will fucking destroy you long before those 'enemies' ever can. You're like two morons with blindfolds thrown into a cave trying to vaguely identify the candy of victory, when all you'll get is misery. You, people like you, and people against you, will both be responsible for the undoing. Just by actively contributing to it, it's already a repeat of last century as we've all seen. But of course you'll be on the right side, right? Everyone thinks that. And then suddenly there are no right sides and everyones dead. See the Nika Riots and Chariot Racing.
Wow this is getting ballsy. I forget what the hell I gave a shit about in here anyway.
By the way I find Rubber dress PPG cover pretty cool. They should've stuck with this one.
>>82287264
>implying
You triggered faggot?
>>82284659
Because how dare nerds get any sort of sexual attention or stimulation. And how dare men get anything they want, either.
>>82287197
Only reasonable post in this thread tbqh
>>82287307
>implying it's not gay men who want more male lewdsI know I do.
>>82287270
Yeah, this is true. I mean have you even BEEN on tumblr? They're idiots. The worst you'll have to deal with is Bloggers and shit.
Not like that matters anyway, if you cannot convince Execs and Editors. But when the fuck were you ever going to do that anyway?
>>82287197
Stop making sense on /co/
>>82287203
Delicious brown, you homo.
>>82284701
>lowest-common denominator
Do you even know what that means, you filthy animal?
>>82287355
>that caveman talk
>still taking the bait
Newfags should check the thread before posting
>>82287302
Oh boy, they 'I am le smarter than everyone else' edgy teen on the internet.
Yes, yes, Metal Gear Solid gave you a complete and holistic view of geopolitics, hail Eris, let chaos reign.
No, seriously. Fuck off and grow up.
>>82287197
wait do you not find thick busty women attractive any longer?
Trolling is a waste of time but I remember when 4chan first started our mindset was sort of that we were casually mocking people who cared. I mostly blame the /pol/ contigent for turning it into another place where people care too much.
>>82287354
No such thing.
I bet you think granny hair like pic related is not disgusting.
Okay, someone explain something to me - none of these Cho drawings are actually going on shelves except for the Cammy one.
They were drawn in his personal time and sold or commissioned. They're not "professional" work in the sense that they're not for mass market retail.
So what's the problem? That's like getting outraged at R34 artists. You're only seeing this stuff if you actively go looking for it.
"He draws things I don't like!" Isn't an excuse.
/co/ is stuffed to the brim with threads about shitty webcomics I hate, but we have the hide thread button for a reason.
>>82287371
I've never even played it.
The last videogame I even beat was..
Bayonetta.
>>82287397
The thread just kind of moved to a more general argument about sexualization in comics and moral mollycoddlers.
>>82287397
Cho's drawings are more of a reaction to a reaction being made about this topic so it's purposely meant to rile people up. Funny thing is, then he complains about people complaining about them. It's a literal circlejerk of pure autism on both sides.
>>82287417
Yeah, pretty much.
>>82286721
The fact that you can't spot obvious sarcasm confirms that you legitimately have autism.
>>82287417
That goes back to my point.
Just ignore it.
It doesn't affect you in any real way.
People got to learn this stuff, that's ridiculous.
>>82287397
I'm >>82287417
to be fair he's just responding to a fight they started. he was just innocently drawing softcore smut then they jumped on him. so he shit on them and they bitched so he never stopped.
>>82284701
I don't think you know what you're talking about, Anon. I think you should go read a book.
>>82287435
I probably should have just ignored this b8 thread sensibly. But I had a bad final last night per semester closing and am too upset to let this go.
Guess I just needed something stupid to take it off my mind.
>>>/NotyourpersonalBlog/In actuality, CO is so, safe and relaxed these days. I never really get into these arguments anymore, unless it's with obvious trolls or pants-on-head extremist. Feels weird.
>>82287391
>No such thing.
I'm sorry you have such shit taste, man.
Can't be helped.
>>82284816
I agree 100% with this Anon.
>>82287448
Hhe drew Spider-Gwen that way to shit on the same people who complained about the Manara cover? Obviously people complained, but then hilarity ensued when he started complaining about that and decided to draw even more similar pieces to rile them up even more.
>>82287374
No I do (most comic book women aren't even thick like Cho draws them, they're slender with big tits) but I also like a lot of different body types (chubby/fat, slender, curvy w/muscles, etc). It's also the fact that you will almost never see a woman who looks like an average superheroine.
It's the same for when artists draw hyper muscular males too. Unless you're Superman or the Hulk you don't need to be that massive and have the low of a body fat percentage. I like the way Alex Ross draws big guys instead of how Ed McGuiness draws big guys
Cho should just draw a fat, blue haired tranny in that pose next.
That'll confuse the hell out of them.
I love that they simultaneously are against body shaming but also recoil in disgust at anyone even slightly attractive.
>>82284977
Your point is silly as fuck. Black Widow is as much of a character as any of the other 'boys' in the movies. She's hot because thats comic book logic: every hero is a nice piece of ass. Captain America is buff, blonde and blue-eyed. Thor is a literal god. Black Widow is a textbook femme fatale. I think YOU have a problem with women and you're projecting very hard.
>>82287486
he drew it as a sketch
the update made no implication it was meant to make fun of those pissed about Manara. it was just
>went to ikea, made a sketch
>>82284659
>why do people get this angry about anything sexualized marketed to nerds?
Men it's marketed to MEN (in the eyes of idiots) so it's evil and bringing women down to the mud. You know, topless protests and such don't do anything like that because woman stronk then.
>>82286075
Because it's boring and non-funny. And it tries too hard to be meta. I don't like it. I don't like Deadpool either.Even though his movie is great.
>>82285590
>If it's clear someone is writing something to be fap material
Then don't read it, like I do.
I think you have a very serious problem with sex and sexualitu, Anon.
>>82287530
I mean yeah, this I agree with. Even fetish fuel characters like Black Widow get backstories and shit and are still people in their own right. It isn't like manga sometimes where characters are constrained to their own series, they can get spinoff titles and be put to use in a story at any time. I hardly think any female characters comic now exist 'just' to be fap fuel, obviously.
With other mediums it prob depends, but it's less about a character and how they are depicted. You can take a character as cute as squirrel girl and draw her Landian, or ugly as fug like in the Unbeatable Squirrel Girl.
But honestly I don't think it's like porno artists are really drawing and illustrating for comics anymore in that pinup-y sense, that sort of stigma doesn't exist like the old days.
>>82287569
This isn't a mystery to me. Maybe I'd just like to be warned a little before I get some raging meaty snusnu or porkchicks in a comic so I don't have to feel my pants tearing apart before I reach the end. But censorship is bad mmkay so I'd never ask any artist to change it or whatnot.
>>82286479
Stop posting this, Giorno looks like a faggot and Jojo is shit.
I liked it better when it was Terry on the edit.
Look Im tired of Cho's one trick joke. But damn, if the response is gonna be some neutered mangina thinking he's cool being condescending towards men who like this stuff, then Cho should keep at it.
>>82285329
HAHAHA, yes: there's literally nothing wrong with masturbation. Why are
>>82285421 and >>82285905
so ass-blasted? Are you the Masturbation Police? Do you want to control what people do in their own privacy?
It is my right to have fantasies and masturbate thinking about whoever or whatever I want. Fuck you, you damn fundamentalists! You'll make us all fucked up in the head with your prudeness.
>>82287616
Wew lad. I mean I agree with you, but no need to sperg over this.
>>82284659
god, Andrew Wheeler is obnoxious garbage. why is he so popular? he just comes off as an asshole
>>82284659
>Why is this such a moral outrage?
You tut-tut about dicks
You getta da clicks
But seriously, my top 5 comics right now are I Hate Fairyland, Prez, Omega Men, Empowered, and The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina. Four of them have female main characters, and the 5th is a team book with men and women. I didn't even notice the pattern for the first few months, they were just the books I've been enjoying the most. People like the Comics Alliance crowd will always be around to try and achieve relevance through low effort snark. You're just going to have to learn to deal.
I mean, Jesus, that opening sentence. "As you know, straight men are the most persecuted group in the world today." I've never seen a lazier attempt at satire. It's Stephen Colbert if you made him host his show moments after getting smashed in the brainpan with a shovel.
>>82285456
You are a fucking weirdo. You're the kind of person that being born in a muslim country, would turn into a fucking crazy AK-47 wielding fundamentalist. Go fix your shit, Anon. Sex is not the bane of our society.
>>82285610
No one has a problem with Kamala. She's original and fun. The problem is turning everyone gay/black. That's fucking silly.
>>82287659
This is 4chan, man.
We are here to talk shit about other people and eachother.Like this very thread
>>82285747
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. Go educate yourself.
Is it cool if a woman draws sexy females or are we still pretending those doesn't exist?
>>82285535
I'm tired of seeing men being depicted as buff problem-solvers. I'm skinny and weak and can't even fix my own life. What kind of expectations does that make women have? I'm no Superman.
Odds that the writer doesn't actually believe any of this crap he's writing and is just counting on rage clicks to get him to his next paycheck?
Seems to be the uniting factor between all these """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""journalists """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""".
Are there any comics sites that don't thrive on this high school level drama and actually write about interesting stuff? Sites where using adblock and Archive aren't mandatory?
>>82284814
Women definitely buy comics. I'm pretty sure like 40-50% of Journey Into Mystery's base was female during that Kid Loki saga.
>>82287691
Pretend they don't exist.
Y'know Bayonetta was designed by a woman? You wouldn't from the clickbloggers - they ignore that completely. Her original design even had to be TONED DOWN.
>>82285864
>both sides don't talk to each other
Except they fucking do. All the time and we're doing it right now.
>>82287625
I'm getting really scared of this prude-shit wave:
>the female form is evil!
>artists can't draw female butts.
>being sexy is offensive.
>your fantasies disgust me!
>you can't walk around in sexy clothes anymore!
I rally don't like where this is going. Sorry if I did sperg-out there, but that's me being completely honest.
>>82287780
trolls trolling trolls is the opposite of both sides talking to each other
I think this is the right place to say this.
I'm told by the artist and writer of Squirrel Girl that people don't like it because you can't fap to it.
And I'm so so so tempted to tweet them that I fap to it all the time, I hate it because it sucks.
>>82287824
These things come in cycles.
Watch what happens when these people start having children.
>>82287824
Smut is more numerous and easier to access than ever these days thanks to the grand and beautiful thing called the internet. People can and do openly admit to watching porn with little to no consequence. Somehow, mysteriously, the prude wave is mixed in with all of this, but I really don't expect it to triumph.
>>82287865
Dave Willis has children. Let that sink in.
>>82287575
The truth is: there's nothing wrong with being sexy. There's nothing wrong with being unsexy. Just like OP pointed out, there are plenty of material to go by. The problem is the prude people from very vocal websites that won't shut up about how wrong it is to enjoy the female form. Those people are idiots who'll validate all kinds of stupid. Like censorship and Donald Trump.
>>82287871
And odds are they'll grow up to be Bible-thumping, gay hating, far right Conservative Christians out of spite.
Willis is exactly like his parents, he just swapped the Bible for tumblr.
>>82287824
Don't forget the double standard
>do this with a woman? Misogyny! Sexism! Burn at the stake!
>do this with a man? No problem, male power fantasy
It's super funy the times we live in
>inb4 false equivalence
>People posting Willis
>Check Twitter
>Surprise surprise he mentioned the article
Like clockwork
>>82287855
Says you. Read the thread, man.Or girl, or blob. I don't want to trigger no-one.
>>82287930
Willis used to buy ads on 4chan. Of course he reads the board. He's probably posting in this thread given how shitty some of the arguments are how many strawmen are being used.
>>82287869
The problem is the reaction they caused, and the fact that it can be used to maneuver people.
>There are people online who wants to censor us! Vote for me! Make your country great again!
and the opposite:
>There are people trying to trigger us! Vote for me! Vote tumblr 2016!
And the actual problems of the world get swept under the rug. Fuck. That's a stupid world we live in, right?
>>82287889
It's like people got a mean to discuss things with the world, but never bothered to learn how to argue.
>>82287982
Arguments are too triggering.
Far easier to just yell and scream like an infant and drown out your opposition. That means you've won!
>>82288018
It's because people like that kind of shit. When people get tired of infantile discussions and favor the more mature argument and stop clicking on those stupid bait-articles, we'll live in a better world.
Repeat after me: /co/mblr is real.
These are sad little people who existed on tumblr with their sad little backwards opinions and then eventually gravitated towards 4chan because of Hussie's gay little comic. You know which one I'm talking about. It's very gay. And not the good "let's teach you how to color coordinate" kind of gay.
Slowly but surely these sad little people started filling up here, because one idiot attracts another idiot which attracts another. They designate 4chan as a new place to have their fruity little tumblr club, disregarding just what 4chan is and just who 4channers are.
Now /co/ is hopelessly infected and the only hope is to excise the tumor itself - delete /co/ and wait a few years until the sad little pissbabies go somewhere else. There's a reason the only other board as bad as /co/ is /tv/ - a reason why this never happens on /a/.
Take a deep breath.
Remember these sad little people are intellectually stunted adults who don't have the emotional maturity to watch cartoons.
And repeat after me: /co/mblr is real.
>>82288193
only honest post itt
>>82284659
>why do people get this angry about anything sexualized marketed to nerds?
Let me tell you the cold hard truth: The only types of people who get mad about this DON'T MATTER. You can safely ignore them. They aren't going to affect your life. Just become some random e-feminist on Buzzfeed or Cracked or Kotaku flips their privileged shit over a comic book doesn't mean you have to spend your time changing your behavior to pacify them. You wasted hours or days of your life getting frustrated over the opinions of irrelevant people and throwing them into an echo chamber like this board to magnify their perceived importance. You spend more time talking about these non-pinions that the people who made them spent thinking about them. It's ok to stop now. Comic book geekdom isn't going to be destroyed. Neither is western culture.
>>82285948
Your mistake is thinking they were ever genuine in their support.
In truth, leftists do not beleive any of the ideas they aspouse, they only pander to gain control.
>>82288312
Reminder that Disney has banned all depictions of Leia in the slave outfit.
>>82287203
Do you not?
>>82288352
I think he means in the sense that they don't matter in that they won't be the next Hitler.
However, that doesn't mean we have to like cleaning up after the mess they make.
>>82288352
reminder that Disney can't stop you making a ten thousand page comic about Leia in her slave outfit
>>82284659
All the traps i know give zero fucks about what's drawn in comics. They tell me it's better to have fun and get laid. Fake outrage is fading.
>>82288450
That's true, but then we'll get an article about it like the one in the OP.
>>82284659
It's essentially stop liking what I don't like.
Sexy women are bad because it reminds me I'm not a sexy woman and will probably die alone. Gay pairings between traditionally heterosex characters and fanfic tier writing are good because I fap to this. What kind of man wouldn't like a dick? Besides, they're fictional characters after all.
Please give me a book where a strong, independent, but not dangerously attractive, in facrt - preferably butt-ugly gurrl with her gay bestie and obligatory black friend do fun and quirky things, just without any hint of trouble or difficult decisions. I can't fap to that edgy shit.
I want to that. Not because it's my power fantasy every bit as pathetic as anything else. I want that because I'm an Agent of Change, bringing my fellow downtrodden from under the boot of oppressors by reblogging gay fanfics on my tumblr.
I deserve recognition and appreciation for that.
Bitches be mad they ain't got hips like a Cho girl.
>>82284659
I feel like marketing for sexy is like insulting someone based on race.
Sure it's very effective, but it's also lazy, and it doesn't have any lasting effect.
How are we, as a culture, supposed to create something that has lasting value and meaning if the best we can come up with is what we can immediately see with our eyes.
>>82288193
>Remember these sad little people are intellectually stunted adults who don't have the emotional maturity to watch cartoons.
Hey, apparently the UK goverment has no adult that is emotionally mature enough to watch SU.
>>82288312
You are being very naive.
This >>82288352 is true, R. Mika butt slap was removed, if you look you'll find more shit those retards have ruined.
I think they are being very harmful to western culture and politics. This lunacy must be stopped. You can't stop people from enjoying things just because you don't like them. That's a horrible thing to do. Also, they actually persecuted people online and in the real world. There are plenty of SJW horror stories going around. Don't be naive, Anon.
>>82284977
I always wonder where the entire concept of "identifying" and "objectifying" with movie characters comes from anyways.
I never did anything like that at all. I never wantd to be or meet a superhero.
To me it seems like a commonly accepted headcanon that nobody wants to admit is complete fabrication, just to not look like a weirdo.
>>82288624
Yeah, me too. I never wanted to be any of those guys. I just want to enjoy good stories with them.
>>82288624
This. When I watch The Sweeney I don't want to be Jack Regan, but I fucking love him as a character. I'm not a white, middle aged British man, but I can enjoy watching him do stuff and get engaged. What the fuck is with this 'you have to identify with a character' thing? Isn't this just saying that certain people can only watch certain things? And that other certain people can't have that either?
>>82288859
and the other way around as well
>oh that guy is black that means people won't "identify" with him
>but sir, his character is motivated by personal struggles that aren't specific to race or gender
>no he doesn't have the exact same skin color as the 14-25 white male demographic, so they won't understand it.
it's like, I have read books about organic spaceships fucking in the rings of saturn, I think I can handle a protagonist that isn't literally "me".
>>82288312
People thinking that way in our grandparents time is how the Comic Code Authority got established in the first place.
>>82288624
>>82288859
>>82288908
Yeah, I mean it's almost like other people can't have different opinions and views or something! I get what you're all trying to say but come on.
>>82286868
actually tampons were/are a universal market because people tend to use them to clog up bullet holes. as well as vaginas
>>82289007
Just saying the entire discussion is based on the assumption that everything we see in comics, or do in video games, is something we always would want to be or do in real life, when it's clearly completely different sets of logic, morality and basic common sense.
It assumes that when a character is sexy, I must like that character for being sexy and want to have sex with it. It's heaping assumptions upon assumptions.
>>82289093
Remember, it's progressive to assume men's motivations, and sexist for assuming women's motivations.
>>82284659
I think feminists have some legitimate gripes against that kind of thing. For years, comics were WAY over saturated with big-titted, tiny-waisted bimbos. The nineties in particular come to mind. It was a little bit too tasteless to be consider good, sexy fun.
Granted, things are getting much better and most of the time eye candy isn't gender exclusive. While there are still some latent sexism in mainstream comics, I think most of the people complaining about it are people who don't read comics. Whoever wrote that article, for instance, was over-analyzing a few drawings that were essentially done as jokes. If anyone looks at a frank cho drawing and feels victimized or objectified, I sincerely recommend they lighten up.
I for 1 am glad that sales are tanking...
>>82289294
Is pandering to a specific gender really sexist?
Cause I'm pretty sure thats not accurate.
>>82288859
>When I watch The Sweeney I don't want to be Jack Regan, but I fucking love him as a character.
You're alright, my son.I don't get it either.
>>82289093
>It assumes that when a character is sexy, I must like that character for being sexy and want to have sex with it
Not necessarily. There's a difference between a character being sexy and the visual cues unabashedly going out of its way to sexualize the character for the sake titillation. It's basically pandering even when the narrative doesn't call for it that people tend to have a problem. What people don't realize is that this is directed only at specific creators/products. Thing is, as mentioned before, companies like Marvel and DC purposely go out of their way to market themselves in such a way that they try to be inclusive and progressive. You can't just do what you like without expecting audience reception to give a shit about it especially when you're trying to put yourself out as such. There's a reason why SJWs don't even bother with stuff like porn, because it's not making excuses ortrying to fool anyone about what it's delivering.
>>82289409
>There's a reason why SJWs don't even bother with stuff like porn
The false rape allegations against James Deen smack of SJW entryism.
(Except that they were made by people already in the industry.)
>>82289333
Pandering to men is a good way to make women groan and roll their eyes at the very idea of superhero comics. Pandering isn't sexist, it's just kinda lame. Women getting triggered by hyper-sexualized superheroines are obviously over-reacting IMO.
But the systemic use of women as sexy props in comics is pretty sexist. Sexiness can be tasteful, and it can be done in a way that doesn't alienate potential female readers. Just look at Game of Thrones. Hot naked women as far as the eye can see, but females still love that shit.
>>82289333
What you have to account for is frequency. It's not so much that pandering is necessarily bad (unless we're talking about artistic/moral integrity then that's another matter entirely) rather it's the frequency of how pandering to one side can obviously be suffocating for the other. It's stupid when guys think SJWs are somehow "ruining" things when we literally have a shit ton of content catering to our tastes out there. Yeah a lot of them go way overboard with it, but the actual base argument has its grounds and it's something that I would hardly give people shit for given how much content already panders to me.
>>82289519
>But the systemic use of women as sexy props in comics is pretty sexist. Sexiness can be tasteful, and it can be done in a way that doesn't alienate potential female readers. Just look at Game of Thrones. Hot naked women as far as the eye can see, but females still love that shit.
This guy gets it.
>>82286772
Actually, some good content for cape nerds would be a book full of old school pandering with pages coated in lethal skin-permeable poison.
>>82289519
>Just look at Game of Thrones. Hot naked women as far as the eye can see, but females still love that shit.
But SJWs don't, and have been agitating for HBO to tone it down even harder than the fundies have.
Even the fundies recognize GoT is aimed at mature adults.
>>82289519
It's okay for a product to cater to one demographic at the expense of others. I'm not demanding romance novels intended for straight women cater to straight men as well.
>>82289519
Same reason why Bayonetta has a lot of female fans as well honestly.
>>82289545
I don't know, I've actually seen SJWs loving the ever living fuck out of that show.
>>82289545
If we listed everything SJW's complain about, we'll be here all day, anon
>>82284659
I've said for years that Andrew Wheeler is the stupidest comic journalist in existence. He just looks for things to be unhappy about. He's a gay guy who was mad that Northstar got married because "A BLOO BLOO YOU CAN'T TELL GOOD STORIES WITH SOMEONE WHO'S MARRIED".
Fuck yesterday he was bitching about the new Quasar being a straight, white woman and replacing a "queer" one, seemingly having no knowledge (despite being editor-in-chief of ComicsAlliance) that Phyla has been dead for 5 years and she's replacing Wendell Vaughn, a white guy.
He's a moron and nobody should take him, and by extension his site, seriously or pay it any mind.
>>82289526
But my point was that not everything needs to be for everyone.
Bitching and moaning that something isn't to your tastes is childish and frankly /v/ tier way of looking at the world.
Its surely more constructive to demand that more things be made, some of which are to your taste, rather than change something to fit what you want it to be.
>>82284701
>potential marketing audience
People talk about this "potential audience" but no matter what they do to appeal to Tumblr, feminists, or women in general it doesn't work because for the most part THEY DO NOT READ COMICS. They don't care about comics, they care about movies. Appealing to them does nothing because they don't buy anything in any significant number, no matter what you do, to affect sales to any large degree. The reality is that the people who read (and will likely loyally read) comics don't care about that at all.
Instead constantly pandering to a mythical demographic that doesn't read comics and changing the comics to accommodate them, whether it's "women" or movie goers, does nothing but turn off the loyal readers. You're shooting yourself in the foot for no gain.
>>82289580
I guess I view comics as more of an art from than a product. I hold them to a higher standard than romance novels. Any comic writer or artist worth a damn shouldn't have to worry about catering to anyone.
>>82289731
*Art Form
>>82289731
Comics in general, sure. Superhero comics though? That's genre fiction, like romance, crime, horror, sci-fi, fantasy, and so on.
>>82287463
not him, but you like Failure. That's the worst taste.
>>82289706
>loyal readers
>implying
More often than not, I've actually seen more SJWs reading up on their shit while supposed "loyal readers" are more likely to be nostalgia-ridden that are barely up to date with recent stuff. You'd be surprised how many retards out there actually claim to be fans but barely ever read comics at all.
>>82285106
>Live and let live don't apply here buddy. Slavery, Leeches and Snake Oil were a thing once but I don't have to agree with them.
Literally no one gets hurt by sexy pictures.
>>82289832
There are so many fantastic, imaginative stories that have been told through the superhero genre. There are immensity talented writers and artists who have devoted their careers to the subject. Most people on this board have read superhero stories that made them weep. I don't see superhero comics as schlock, it can be genuinely powerful and thrilling as any other medium.
>>82289648
This.
The CA staff isn't real big on doing research. But hey; they're not journalists, they're bloggers. Bloggers don't have standards. Why care about standards when the website gets add revenue regardless of quality.
The exception was Chris Sims, but they ran him off.
>>82285456
The whole "sexiness belongs in porn" argument has always come across as well, the word's abused here, but autistic.
Why have jokes in a story when stand-up comedy exists? Why have music in a story when albums exist?
Arousal is a valid emotion, and there's no need for it to be confined purely to pornography.
>>82284977
lol buddy you sure your sex issues aren't leaking into this noble defense of women here?
give her a slap seriously.
>>82287592
If you feel the need to be warned about something slightly sexy you may have a problem.
>>82288450
Yeah but a SWJ sure can dox you so you'll lose your job!
>>82288492
Basically this. They target comics and young adult entertainment because its EASY, its a target that isn't, y'know, beer commercials.
>>82288312
Western culture's okay but comic book geekdom's been under siege for a decade man. These are people who hate the marginal group they've attached themselves to and want them all to "leave".
>>82288312
All the media censoring itself to appeal to them says otherwise.
>>82285106
So your issues with your own sexuality and your failed vampire comics.
Way to reinforce the stereotype.
>>82285106
>Why are you more justified in getting mad from your fan-service being taken away then me having it exist at all?
Because the existence of sexy comics can be ignored if you don't like them. People who like sexy comics can't ignore the problem of them being taken away.
>>82289294
>>82289519
>>82289526
Go the fuck away you feminist landwhales. Liefeld drew anatomically incorrect males too but somehow that's funny but when it happens to wymins, it's a tragedy and really serious.
Go fuck yourself with a rake, you walking, talking, frigid pieces of shit.
>>82289731
What about comic creators who simply like writing and drawing super sexy females? What about them?
Why can't super heroes be super sexy? I also find it ridiculously condescending how you think you can talk for all females. Most females are not feminists, you know.
There are female comic readers who enjoy sexy female characters and find them admirable, empowering or just a plain nice fantasy to escape into because in case you hadn't noticed, a lot of women like to feel sexy and desired or at least dream about it.
Womenfolk are not collectively asexual nor are the collectively offended or hurt by the depiction of fictional bombshells.
You are a crazy person.
>>82284977
>females can't be female because thats sexist
>females have to be just like men with a vagina
feminsim is the most misogynistic ideology out there
>>82290129
>Western culture's okay
I fucking wish.
>>82284977
>Look, even when THOR or HULK are shirtless, they're still powerful figures. They're the main characters, and you want to BE them and watch them fight and win and identify with them as the heroes.
>When fucking Blackwidow is swinging her latex ass and bootyshaking you want to nut her and give her a slap.
>>82284659
Andrew Wheeler will never ever be happy until every character in fiction has taken a dick in their ass at least once.
>>82290667
>implying that people don't make fun of all those drawings of wymins
Are you literally pants on head retarded? There's a reason why that stupid Hawkeye movement even exists.
>>82290667
Careful not to cut yourself with that edge.
>>82290667
>Liefeld drew anatomically incorrect males too but somehow that's funny
People still give him a lot of shit for that though, so I don't know what you're talking about.
>>82290759
>Why can't super heroes be super sexy? I also find it ridiculously condescending how you think you can talk for all females. Most females are not feminists, you know.
I literally never said any of this? You must think you're responding to somebody else, because earlier in this thread I said that it's okay for there to be sexy depictions of women.
I don't appreciate being called a crazy person by a raving lunatic.
>>82290667
>Go fuck yourself with a rake, you walking, talking, frigid pieces of shit.Nah
>>82291108
So what's the problem with black widow's latex clad ass if it's okay to be sexy?
>>82291049
Right, because all they did was laugh about the Manara cover. They totally didn't start a witch hunt. What a great sense of humor these SJW cunts have.
>>82291102
>People still give him a lot of shit for that though
Yeah. They make fun of him for it because it's funny.
>>82289651
> everything needs to be for everyone.
true, but I'd also argue that not everything needs to be made for SOMEONE. The best stories are often the ones where the authors cared more about telling a compelling story rather than pandering to a group that may or may not buy your work. From a creative standpoint, having a target audience is a good way to limit yourself.
>>82291108
>I literally never said any of this?
Are you asking us? Type like an adult.
>>82285270
>If you sell sex in "Sucker Punch" where the whole point of the movie is they're hot and you want to fuck them and blahblah it gets dumb. You can sell sex without selling a sex fantasy. And you can write female characters without them being catored towards men. Just as you can ruin them by drawing them like Greg Land-ian porn stars.
It's a movie for men. It is made the way it is because of it's intended target audience.
Yeah it's a piece of shit because Snyder is a hack, but it does what it sets out to do.
If you think this is wrong and unacceptable, I urge you to look at the way men are portrayed in every chick flick in existence: two or more dreamy men fighting over a regular, unassuming woman that the intended audience is supposed to identify with. Or the whole genre of cheap dramas where men are monsters and women are innocent victims, also for them to identify with.
>>82291241
But again, surely the response isn't "Don't make this thing" its "Make this thing as well".
>>82284659
>But still this guy is outraged because there exists somewhere, somehow, something sexy that nerds are enjoying, even if it's literally nothing more than a handful of fanart covers + one street fighter comic that will sell (maybe) 3,000 copies.
It's the old conservative soccer mom logic. Something somewhere is "evil" and "sinful", and must be replaced with good wholesome family entertainment. Just now it's college aged liberals taking up the rallying call, with words like "toxic" and "problematic", and must be replaced with good wholesome progressive entertainment.
>>82291108
>I literally never said any of this?
I recognize that style of typing.
>>82291140
Yo, dude, it wasn't me that said that. I have no problem with ANYONE's ass. Please learn how to use this website.
>>82289651
>rather than change something to fit what you want it to be
But they are communists at heart. They view entertainment simply as propaganda. That's why they can't accept peaceful coexistence. They want to change everything to fit their worldview.
They are not interested in creating stuff for new markets, all they really want to do is what they deny the most. They want to take away all the stuff we enjoy.
>>82291242
>>82291286
chill senpai, let me live
>>82291297
Radical.
>>82291344
No, please die.
>>82291196
>witch hunt
I also didn't hear anything about Manara being burnt to death so I guess you're just bullshitting me.
>>82291388
Nah
>>82291403
They did demand the cover be pulled.
>>82289992
BUT
MUH
FEELINGS
>>82291403
>SJWs say they are LITERALLY RAPED by things that trigger them
>takes "witch hunt" literally
Literally kill yourself.
>>82291448
Yeah, and? He shouldn't have bent over and taken it like a bitch. At least Cho knows what's up.
>>82289323
Will we ever get the real Ms Marvel back?
>>82291505
Stop victim shaming you bigot.
>>82291497
>demands understanding of figurative speech
>Literally kill yourself
Make up your mind damn it.
>>82291403
>refuge in autism
>>82291552
You can't fathom somebody wishing for your untimely death in earnest?
>>82291544
Aw did I hurt your feelings? Manara was a faggot who couldn't even stand up for yourself. Frank Cho is actually fucking badass for sticking it to those SJW retards.
>>82289731
>art should only ever cater to ME
>>82291595
Oh, so your that idiot that likes to pretend SJWs are not a threat?
You're even dumber than the fanatics.
Either side of these arguments are so ridiculous because both sides cherry pick the worst of either side and strawman to apply it to the entire side. These discussions on /co/ just devolve into "sjw's do this and that" circlejerks, which is pretty much what this thread was set up to be. What's the point in the actual discussion if you're going to argue people instead of actual issues.
>>82291562
>indecisive cunt knows all about autism
Of course, it all makes sense now
>>82291592
I can, very easily. Getting someone that triggered is especially entertaining.
>>82287729
You joke, but it's funny how in some stories, in trying to fix character dynamics between male and female characters, with the female being hypercompetent and the male being a bumbling idiot, the male character still ends up being more interesting and relatable.
>>82291645
There is no actual discussion to be had. Artists should be free to draw what and how they want, asses in thongs and all.
>>82291645
>le "both sides are bad" face
Hi "normal guy"
>>82291595
>Manara was a faggot who couldn't even stand up for yourself.
Manara isn't a native English speaker. He was caught off gaurd by the bizarre reaction to the cover, seeing as how he's done much lewder shit over the years without repercussion. Call it culture shock. He simply didn't want to create more of a controversy since it's out of his element. He just wants to draw hot chicks. Like some kind of Spanish.
Being American, Cho has a better idea what he's dealing with. And he's clearly good at poking the beehive.
>>82289614
>I've actually seen SJWs loving the ever living fuck out of [game of thrones]
why do you think they're demanding changes to it?
sjws believe anything they like that doesn't pander to them and only them has to be screamed about until it does
just look at the screaming about CW's shitty show The 100 where they killed >1< lesbian character whose actress was already leaving the show. their outrage hashtag was even #imwith[nameofactresswhoiforgot].
they aren't happy with anything less than a feminist boot stomping on the patriarchy's face forever, which is why they love season 4 arrow
>>82291625
>that strawman
Makes it easier to argue huh?
>that projection
So you know what it means to be dumber than fanatics, thanks for letting me know you're just a triggered SJW retard that sucks Manara's dick. Frank Cho laughs at your idiocy while raking all the money from Manara's tears.
>>82291690
Look, it's the same dumb ad hominems I'm talking about.
>>82291666
>Getting someone that triggered is especially entertaining.
What an achievement on your part. You truly are the best. Whatever happens you win.
>>82291746
I'm glad to hear that you know your place as my little bitch.
>>82291690
You can hate idiots on both sides without falling for the Golden Mean. You don't have to agree with one side on everything.
>>82289294
>comics were WAY over saturated with big-titted, tiny-waisted bimbos.
they sold back then, iirc
>>82291610
That's the opposite of what I said. Good art doesn't cater to anyone. Only hacks and sellouts worry about what the audience wants. In the words of the great reverend Alan Moore: "It’s not the job of the artist to give the audience what the audience wants. If the audience knew what they needed, then they wouldn’t be the audience. They would be the artists. It is the job of artists to give the audience what they need."
>>82291714
>a triggered SJW retard that sucks Manara's dick
You are not making any sense. You are just spouting completely contradictory nonsense. You're not even communicating anymore. You are just talking gibberish like a crazy person.
>>82291645
How's the view from up on top of that pedestal you made for yourself?
>>82288499
Knowing them, they've got bigger ones.
>>82291787
>In the words of the great reverend Alan Moore
Stopped reading there. Holy shit bullet dodged.
>>82291684
But the discussion isn't as black and white as "they should" or "they shouldnt". I don't even think the issue was straight up censorship. I mean, you can be pro choice without liking abortion.
>>82286132
Nothing is wrong with that image.
Who doesn't want to marry a woman who can cook?
>>82291796
How's the view down there with my dick shoved in your throat?
>>82291840
>I don't even think the issue was straight up censorship.
Yes it was. Do your homework before you try to be a whiteknight or whatever the fuck you think you're doing.
>>82288312
>The only types of people who get mad about this DON'T MATTER.
until they start changing the entire industry to cater to them
which they have, and are
my favorite is when they replace actually practical spandex with practicool costumes that would be absolute shit for superheroing
>>82291775
Og yeah, totally, your infinite badassness makes my boipucci quiver, you big bad fuckstud.
>>82291855
It's just like my japanese animes, senpai.
>>82291873
>Do your homework
>doesn't even know what I'm doing
And kindly fuck off then
>>82291782
True. I wouldn't want things to go back in that direction tho. Too many ripped dudes with one shoulder pad.
>>82291796
Oops I'm sorry for trying to inject rationality into the discussion. Please, continue raging at sjw bogeymen
>>82291796
Making a point that doesn't stick to established "team" lines isn't him claiming to be on a pedestal.
>>82291882
>Og yeah
Oops sorry you lost me there. I don't speak caveman.
>>82291902
Anything is better than the practicool eye cancer that is popular right now.
>>82284659
>white knight
Who am I whiteknighting?
>>82291903
You're not a better person for pointing out the stupidity in a debate. No matter how much you want to feel superior.
>>82291908
And look at this guy defending you. What the absolute fuck. Get a life, dude.
>>82287855
within the first 100 posts or so, the tumblrguy wasn't obviously trolling until he started denying the content of OP.
it's possible that he was trolling all along, but it's EQUALLY possible that he was arguing sincerely and shifted into trolling as a failure mode when the argument wasn't going as well as he would have liked
I guess it's up to you whether you consider OP to have been trolling? he seems to have been pretty sincere to me
>>82291826
>Oh, better ignore this, I'm sure one of the most renowned names in the comics industry has nothing to add.
I didn't know they made people this retarded
>>82291927
Oh my, how witty you are.
>>82285203
The original line up also was modified to be the Adventure Team later on in the '70s when the public turned against real life military wars like Korea and Vietnam. Those same uniforms became Man of Action, Land Adventurer, Sea Adventurer, and Air Adventurer. They would add a Adventure Team Commander and an African American in a tan uniform simply know as the (Black) Adventurer
>>82291947
But you're the one claiming I'm trying to be superior, not me.
>>82287603
fuck you Giorno is fabulous.
Look at this faggot >>82291936
You can just imagine how he waited all his life just to post this picture in the most appropriate moment. His entire life literally amounting this one little moment of glory where he truly believes that he gets to have an actual say, all while thinking to himself "Oh man, I really made difference. I may have actually broken a sweat there."
Truly the missing link between ape and mongoloid.
>this whole thread
>i dont like it so ill take it away from you as it hurts my emotions.
>getting triggered over sexualized women that are 2d and not real.
>shunning sexuality. the entire purpose of the human race is created from
world war 3 when
>>82287691
it is but i'm getting tired of this being the only refuge / defense for sexiness in comics
i'd like us to get past this neovictorian prudery and say it's allowed to have sexy women in things because men like that and it's okay to do things men like, just for no other reason than that men like it
this thread kind of indicates that a lot of the people who are bitching about this topic are themselves porn addicts who are deep into all kinds of depraved shit, which desu should have been the obvious assumption all along
>>82291930
...ANYTHING?
>>82291971
Oh hush now, I didn't think you'd actually fall for it.
>>82291936
Wow cool picture man you really got me
>>82292013
Go home Hitler, you're drunk.
>>82292020
Fuck yeah, I'd take that over hellcat or squirrel girl drawn by literal tumblrinas any day.
>>82292019
>which desu should have been the obvious assumption all along
>desu
What?
>>82292019
>it's allowed to have sexy women in things because men like that and it's okay to do things men like, just for no other reason than that men like it
Literally where were you in the last couple of centuries
>>82292038
Bite the big one, junior.
>>82292094
But you already did!
>>82292019
>who are bitching about this topic are themselves porn addicts who are deep into all kinds of depraved shitFuck you got me
>>82291962
Go fap to your fish rape stories m8.
>>82292150
>a literal "No You" reply
And so it ends
>>82292148
You first motherfucker. You sound so eager for it, I'm willing to give you first dibs.
>>82284886
>I always wondered why Barbies aren't marketed towards boys
Your wish was granted last year..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TULVRlpsNWo
>>82292238
>a literal "No You" reply
But you already did!
>>82289996
Wait, is Sims not part of CA anymore? Did they boot him over his almost decade old "harassment" of Valerie D'Orazio when she threw a fit because he was writing for Marvel?
>>82292322
Wow it's no wonder you couldn't decide about this earlier. You really didn't know what "literally" means.
>>82292376
You're mistaking me for another poster. I literally never said this?
LEARN how to use this website.
>>82292059
nicenein
>>82287191
funny how when willis presents a straight woman saying what "she" likes in men, he has her describe a look mainly popular among homosexual men
not just funny, in fact - funny and 100% coincidental, and not saying anything about the author at all
>>82292443
>i-it wasn't me I swear!
Doesn't matter, pussy-whipped all look the same to me.
>>82292490
Eh, it's not it's not THAT funny
>>82292496
What are you even talking about? I've been arguing against SJWs the whole thread.
You whip your own pussy, turbofaggot.
>>82292548
>arguing against SJWs the whole thread
>doesn't realize all the falseflagging in this thread while wasting time arguing "the whole thread"
Didn't realize that faggotry could reach such heights.
>>82292607
You're one to talk about wasting time.
Why are you so angry anyway?
>>82292632
Nah
>>82292744
That's no way to answer a question.
What's the problem, cat's got your tongue?
>>82292810
Nah, I was just wondering how long your post was going to be compared to the other times when I was falseflagging you and a bunch of other anons.
>>82292810
>What's the problem, cat's got your tongue?
>got your tongue
>on the fucking computer
Seriously that's the best you have for me?
>>82292885
Can you say something other then "nah"?
Do you think you're being cool when you type "nah"?
>>82292910
anon should've replied with "cat's got your mouse?"
>>82292910
Yes, for you.
>>82284659
>In their rush to show that they like, totally don't care, they fumble over themselves to create articles to show how much they don't care and give attention to it more than if they truly just didn't care
>>82292810
>Can you say something other then "nah"?
I think you have a pretty bad reading comprehension especially since seem to have missed the rest of the post that followed after I said "nah".
>Do you think you're being cool when you type "nah"?
Nah, but it's pretty funny how much a three-letter response is triggering you though.
>>82292949
Surely you jest
>>82292947
You're right. If he did, I would have been pretty confused.
>>82292975
Why are you even wasting your time with little old me?
>>82292975
Oh shut up! You couldn't even answer me correctly!
>>82293074
That's right, you tell him.
>>82293045
Because being a waste of my time is all that you deserve.
>>82293074
You sure showed him.
>>82293111
You're time must not be very valuable than.
>>82293164
He sure did.
>>82293074
>shut up!
Seriously? Underage please leave.
>>82293177
>Because being a waste of my time is all that you deserve.
>must not be very valuable than.
Did you just? Oh okay, I'll save you from the embarrassment.
>>82293253
Yes, you really should leave and stop replying to your own posts.
>>82293308
I so totally just did you faggy faggot. Please come and save me.
>>82293353
>so totally
>faggy faggot
Good god you really do need saving from that one.
>>82293322
>s-samefag!
Life would be easier if we could all blame our butthurt on one thing huh?
>>82293430
Cry about it.
>>82293472
Oh don't worry, I already am. I'm crying over how your parents didn't want you but couldn't pay for a proper abortion.
>>82293540
Come on, baby, cry for me more.
>>82293581
Waaaahhhhh waahhh! Why didn't anon's parents love him for the faggot he is?! Whyyyyy?! Faggots deserve to be loved too!
>>82293540
Come on, gimme those tears.
>>82293540
Oh man that salt. Just let me lap them all up.
>>82293652
It's okay if you want to suck my dick, you know. I'd totally let you.
>>82293689
Nah, I'm not a raging homosexual like you. I'm sure you'd love that though, you know, a man's mouth all over your dick.
>>82293733
Nah, you're not a man, boy.
>>82293823
Sorry, I think you have me confused for the little boys you love raping in your spare time.
>>82293884
You've got some sick fantasies.
>>82292313
still alienating the "not a fag" demographic
>>82293927
Not as bad as yours. I mean shit man, you wanted me to suck your dick after I was already trash-talking you. That's some sick masochistic tendencies you've got there, and towards an anon you just met online. Don't be a fucking slut anon, it could save your life.
>>82293986
I'd let you. Wasn't asking for it. That was all you.
>>82294011
>I'd let you
I don't deal with sluts anon. I'm not one for the desperate types.
>>82284659
best version so far
