i enjoy how they didnt over sexualize their prince costumes. like esp with jasmine. she couldve totally been in aladdin’s vest, but nope. fully clothed. thanks.
end the movie poster pose enabling the audience a view of both the female characters chest and derriere while any male characters get to face the camera and be all action-y.
is it time for frank cho and milo manara to die or what
That’s basically a naked woman I’m YELLING
What a pervert. What the FUCK does he not know how clothes work? What the hypothetical fuck is she wearing then if we can see all that?
It’s like how bath towels in comics miraculously wrap completely around breasts. Or how even when injured and dead on the ground women in comics have to be twisted into “sexy” poses. Or how women in comics walk like they’re in high heels even barefoot.
It’s the only way men know how to draw women, because to them female characters are only there to be sexy. They only think of “women” as exploitative costumes and camera angles, high heels and titillation. Sex objects to ogle, plot objects to further male heroes’ narratives and drama, not heroes to cheer for.
I’m sorry, I was labouring under the impression that this was the crowd that thought women should wear what they want..?
And that applies to fictional women who are depicted by men how? You can’t apply agency in the plot to something metatextual when it comes to fictional characters.
Come on, let’s not pretend this is a male exclusive thing.
We’re going to have this argument are we? Not to mention you’re deviating from the original point that attributing agency to fictional characters’ clothing is asinine.
What you have here are images of power, and do you really believe these characters are designed with titillating heterosexual women and bisexual and homosexual men in mind? Because I don’t think you do.
This is why the Hawkeye Initiative exists. Take common female poses in comics, put a man in the role, and see how “empowering” and “strong” it actually looks:
Also:
He got the painting for fighting against ‘censorship.’ Note that they handed him a gross design of a female being objectified, because at the end of the day, that is all they really want, to be allowed to objectify women. They don’t care about censorship in general it is about their ability to sexualise and degrade women without consequence.
You can see her butthole for chrissakes
I think the best imagery I’ve seen to explain the difference between what men think male objectification is vs what women actually want to see is the Hugh Jackman magazine covers.
Hugh Jackman on a men’s magazine. He’s shirtless and buff and angry. He’s imposing and aggressive. This is a male power fantasy, it’s what men want to be and aspire to - intense masculinity.
Hugh Jackman on a women’s magazine. He looks like a dad. He looks like he’s going to bake me a quiche and sit and watch Game of Thrones with me. He looks like he gives really good hugs.
Men think women want big hulking naked men in loin cloths which is why they always quote He-Man as male objectification - without realizing that He Man is naked and buff in a loin cloth because MEN WANT HIM TO BE. More women would be happy to see him in a pink apron cutting vegetables and singing off-key to 70s rock.
Men want objects. Women want PEOPLE.
This is the first time I have EVER seen this false equivalence articulated so well. Thank you.
@angstymelon
I feel like people who claim the “female gaze” is the same as female objectification and the male gaze are, in very liberal fashion, speaking as if the two phenomena existed in a void. There’s at least two major aspects being ignored:
- first, muscular male nakedness is socially coded as a symbol of power beloning to subject and it takes effort to untie it from this imagery; viceversa slim, curvy female bodies are socially coded as vulnerable and exploitable and it takes effort to untie them from this imagery. It’s possible to represent a naked or semi-naked female body as powerful, and buff male nakedness as vulnerable, but I can only think of very rare occasions when I’ve seen an artist do it. As already noted, almost all male bodies, even when displayed from sexy angles, are still connoted with power. Nakedness, tight clothes, and sexy poses are not neutral, they’re rife with prior social significations;
- second, female objectification exists in a wider context of systemic oppression. While male bodies may be occasionally displayed so as to focus on sexualized parts of the body, or so as to sexualize parts of their body, this sexualization still exists withing a context where fictional men at large are the sole or primary detentors of agency, real-life men at large are granted more agency, speech rights, and definition power than women, and men both real and fictional are still at large considered as the neutral and universal, i.e. as the Human. Even a vulnerable sexualized male body will usually belong to a character who retains his humanity, and who exists in a universe of male characters and real-life men with the aforementioned priviledges.
Moreover, when a man’s body is diplayed as sexual, unless the traditional imagery is subverted so that the image conveys a sense of vulnerability or open submission,
his sexualization is directly tied to the power he exudes and
viceversa. His sexual prowess, as sugested by his naked powerfulness, is
socially rewarded. Patriarchal societies literally venerate the penis as a symbol of power.
Fictional women, on the other hand, are still disproportionately wrote into a story with the sole or primary purpose of being sexually enticing and/or available, they’re made to defer sexually to men, often have less agency, are often casted in the role of silent supporters, damsels in distress, and rewards for male heroes. They are often primarily objects and then, if at all, people - and this happens to them in real life too, where objectification has been used to maintain power over them and where among the many other discriminations women face, they’re still subject to various forms of violence, from microaggressions to severe physical, emotional and sexual violence, because way too many men expect to have a right to their bodies.
Occasional hyperfocus on body parts for the purpose of aesthetic and sexual pleasure is not bad per se - it’s the frequency of it and the place it occupies for women within a patriarchal system that make female objectification a problematic issue.
