Comicscape
27 Comments | Add a Comment

0


Comicscape - January 18, 2006

By: Kurt Amacker
Date: Wednesday, January 18, 2006

Sex has long been a controversial subject in popular comics. I've thought about how comic creators and publishers approach sex and women, in particular. Never a dull subject to be sure, I'll try to keep this week's COMICSCAPE as tasteful as possible and save all the boob jokes for the listings. For next week, send me your thoughts about the current state of sex in popular comics. Is there too much? Do you want more? Is this even worth discussing? E-mail me at comicscape@cinescape.com or at kurtamacker@yahoo.com. I'll run your letters next week, but please keep your letters tasteful.


Every Wednesday, images of tantalizing super-heroines clad in spandex and barely-there g-strings fill the shelves at our comic shops. I don't see a great mystery. Comic artists draw what they like (beautiful women), readers buy in kind, and the publishers notice and create more. In principle, I don't object on puritanical grounds. I don't avert my eyes upon seeing an issue of DAWN or SHEENA (far from it). However, I see a contradiction and a loaded idea that needs addressing.


Beautiful, ass-kicking women have jiggled and trounced their way through the criminal underworld since comics' inception. Publishers know that their young, mostly male readership likes a little sex with their violence and they've always obliged. And while one could construe powerful female characters as almost feministic, when combined with titillating art, an obvious conflict emerges. Those images contradict any pretense

WONDER WOMAN: DOWN TO EARTH

of equality when the subjects become sex objects. No comic creator should justify scantily-clad super-heroines with, "Well, she's a really strong woman." I doubt most comic creators see their female characters as feminist icons. They may like the characters for other reasons, and like most men, they like breasts. Again, they draw what they like. Yet, I know that superhero comics that double as soft-core porn repel some female readers. I'm not offended by those images, but I'm a guy. However, while I don't want comics to serve as feminist manifestos, the comic industry must realize that some comics' depiction of women repels potential readers by focusing more on boobies than on story. Ultimately, most female heroines don't depict "empowered, independent womyn" so much as male fantasies combining sex and violence. Personally, it only bothers me when it lowers superhero comics to juvenile wish-fulfillment instead of using them to address questions of morality, power and responsibility, and the like. I don't mean that DC should inspect every panel of WONDER WOMAN to remove any distracting cleavage, but there are a number of titles that traffic more in tits and ass than story.


Yes, a few sentences ago, I said that some superhero comics double as soft-core porn. Titillation defines pornography. I have no moral objections to pornography, but I refuse to say that a J. Scott Campbell drawing of Power Girl and her ample wonder twins makes a bold statement about motherhood and femininity (see, because her costume's, like, white). Campbell's drawing is meant to arouse, and, by God, it succeeds. Calling such a drawing pornography may, on its face, seem excessive or even insulting, but I don't consider it as such. I don't have a problem with porn and I don't fault anyone for creating it. But to suggest that the drawing does anything other than arouse and sell more issues of JLA: CLASSIFIED denies the obvious. And, before anyone asks, I don't deny the quality of Campbell's drawing, nor do I mean that all pornography, by definition, must lack artistic merit. I'm sure Alan Moore's LOST GIRLS will prove that in spades.


My problem with provocative illustrations comes not from any sort of moral outrage, but from the implications and contradictions on the part of mainstream publishers (except Vertigo). I honestly feel that the titillation factor can often distract from the story, and I really don't want to read a comic that just looks like an issue of MAXIM with a lame heroine-villain fight (I'm looking at you, Top Cow). Obviously, you can't stop anyone from lusting after Dawn or Magdalena, no matter how much clothing they wear. But, there's a line to cross. We can't properly call most superhero stories erotica. Most of them simply don't dwell on sex beyond passing references, jokes, or subplots. They rarely center a story on the subject in the way that BASIC INSTINCT or NINE WEEKS does. Therefore, in the average superhero story, I don't see the point of dwelling on cleavage. Ultimately, it reduces the story to an adolescent fantasy where not only do asses get kicked, but there are boobs, too (I didn't like BAYWATCH, either). Frankly, it distracts and it fails to acknowledge most comic readers' age -- 18 and older. If I want to spend all night watching LORD OF THE REAMS with a box of tissues, I will. I don't need Jim Lee's drawings of Vicki Vale in her underwear in ALL-STAR BATMAN AND ROBIN for my porn fix. For that matter, Greg Lamberson sent this letter about my review of that title from a couple of weeks ago. Greg writes, "I couldn't agree with you more about your recent comments on gratuitous T & A in superhero books. I only buy a few titles these days, but sometimes I pick up comics for my 12 year old nephew. I'm no prude, and I was disgusted a few months ago when I picked up a Spider-Man title for the kid and got at least 10 pages of Mary Jane Parker's enormous boobs."


I don't object to Mrs. Parker's ample rack and I think disgust is an overreaction. However, I understand Greg's problem, somewhat. When a non-mature readers title focuses on cheesecake shots, someone's inevitably going to get pissed. It would really help everyone out if Marvel and DC would scuttle the excessive boobies in their mainstream titles and, in turn, offer some sort of (hopefully tasteful) adult line or publish those titles within their mature readers imprints. Then again, Marvel rates their titles, and there is the Marvel Age line for anyone concerned about content. But, if they want to create stories with sex and nudity, do it and quit toeing the line. Go all the way. I don't like tease shots, so I don't look at the Victoria's Secret catalog, and people like Greg want to know to expect . Adult readers that want erotica can buy it, and those buying for their children can know that their offspring won't be tempted by Mary Jane's natural gifts. I know the rack behind the counter is already overflowing with porn comics, but most of them suck (in every way conceivable). I'd really like an adult comic from one of the major publishers that deals with sexuality in a frank and tasteful manner.


I make this suggestion, of course, understanding the attitude of most Americans -- that sexuality and nudity pose a greater threat to our children than violence. Personally, I don't have a problem with frank depictions of sex and nudity if the story calls for it. For that matter, I don't have a problem violence and gore. But, I find the disparity between common attitudes about sex and violence troubling. Dark Horse found itself embroiled in a bit of controversy recently over nudity. In CONAN AND THE DEMONS OF KHITAI #3, the letters page featured a small picture of the cover of the upcoming CONAN #24. Artist Tony Harris submitted a nude variant of the cover to editor Scott Allie, both knowing full well that the image wouldn't run as such. However, Dark Horse ran the preview image at the end of DEMONS OF KHITAI in all its naked glory, with every intention of printing a tamer version of the actual cover (girl in bikini). Some retailers complained, and Dark Horse responded by reprinting the issue, allowing retailers to exchange their original issues. CONAN #24 will still ship with the bikini cover, but of course, a limited run of 4,000 nude variants will ship via special order (and by God, I ordered mine). Keep in mind that CONAN usually features graphic violence -- heads and other appendages severed, and the like. I don't blame retailers for complaining. Anyone from the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund can assure you that while simple nudity doesn't break the law, a retailer can still be arrested for accidentally selling as much to a minor and then endure an ordeal, guilty or not However, I can't understand why some people find graphic violence acceptable, but oppose sex and nudity. It's like everyone's comfortable with watching the end of life, but not the beginning. Not only that, but as the Internet opened the floodgates of free pornography a few years ago, any kid that wants to see naked boobies (or more) can just go online. Censoring CONAN won't save America's children from the onslaught of sin and impurity available from other media outlets. My entire argument about needing a separate erotica imprint only works in a country uncomfortable with artistic depictions of sex and nudity.


I realize there's more to say about this issue, and I want to hear your thoughts. Should mainstream comics leave sex alone entirely? Is it time to grow up and address the issue directly, prudes be damned? Let me know.


New This Week
By Al Brown and Kurt Amacker DARK HORSE

Berserk Vol 10 TP (MR) $13.95
Kurt: My love for you is ticking clock -- BERSERKER!

Blade Of The Immortal #109 (MR) $2.99

Conan #24 (MR) $2.99
Al: Note that this issue has a nude variant cover, which will ship shrink-wrapped in black plastic. The important thing about this is that it's the first time ever - no, seriously, ever - that a comic book has shipped a variant cover for a good reason. Hooray Dark Horse! Also, incidentally, this series is quite good.
Kurt: Al keeps hoping for that Runaways nude variant. I keep telling him it won't happen, but the little guy's just gotta dream.

Penny Arcade Vol 1 Attack Of The Bacon Robots TP $12.95
Kurt: All right, no matter how good or bad this comic is, it officially has the Greatest Title Ever. I have spoken.

Samurai Executioner Vol 8 TP (MR) $9.95

Star Wars Republic #82 $2.99
Kurt: Were I Al, I'd probably say something like "Look for U.S.A.: Dictatorship next year from the Bush Administration!" But, thankfully, I'm not. I'll leave the left-wing Kool-Aid drinking crazy stuff to him.

DC COMICS

Action Comics #835 $2.50

All Star Superman #2 $2.99
Al: I think this has been a bit over-praised, probably just because people keep comparing it to the utterly inane All Star Batman and Robin, but it's still really, really good. Turns out someone knows how to make a Superman who isn't boring as hell!
Kurt: Grant Morrison is like the David Lynch of comic books.

Batgirl #72 $2.50
Al: Hey...wanna see a whole lot of Batgirl? Well, here ya go. Some dude with a cartoon icon of his own bare ass started a "fanboy drawings of Batgirl" meme last week, and now every single person who's ever been on the Internet, including your grandmother, has chimed in.
Kurt: Just tell me which ones are naked so I don't have to look through all of them.

Batman Gotham Knights #73 $2.50

Birds Of Prey #90 $2.50
Al: The solit for this issue announces that things get "super-deadly". Here's what I say: I have had enough of people tacking "super" on to things. It was kinda funny, like, a year ago when it started; now it's time for a new Retro Slang Term. I vote for "gidgy".
Kurt: This series is gidgy-phat, yo. I don't even know what that means.

Ex Machina #17 (MR) $2.99
Firestorm #21 $2.50

Flash #230 $2.50

Flash Rogue War TP $17.99
Kurt: So, do the Flash and Rogue fight or something? Will there be boobs? I hope so, sugah. Really, I have no idea what this is about.

Green Lantern #7 (RES) $2.99

Hellblazer #216 (MR) $2.75

Infinite Crisis #4 (of 7) $3.99
Al: This issue: everyone gets even more pissed off at each other, leading Green Arrow to yell "I'm taking my toys and going home!" and Batman being put in the "Time Out" corner. Next: who wants a spanking from Mr. Fantastic-Hair Superman?
Kurt: Al does, and he'll pay good money for it.

JSA Classified #7 $2.50

Justice #2 Second Ptg (of 12) $3.50

Kikaider Code 02 Vol 2 (MR) $9.99

Land Of The Blindfolded Vol 6 $9.99
Al: Ow! Who moved the coffee table?
Kurt: It was me! I also put Saran wrap on your toilet seat!

Legion Of Super Heroes #13 $2.99

Losers #31 (MR) $2.99
Al: The penultimate issue! So if you've been on the fence about picking up this book...too late.

Lucifer #70 (MR) $2.75

Mad Classics #5 $4.99

Mad Magazine #462 $3.99

Manhunter #18 $2.50

Nightwing #116 $2.50

Planetary #24 $2.99
Kurt: Have you ever read a book where the writer is determined that no single reader will ever understand the story? Here it is. Seriously, I like Warren Ellis and this series, but I think I'm rereading from the beginning.

Robotech Prelude To The Shadow Chronicles #5 (of 5) $3.50

Secret Files Series 2 Bruce Wayne Batman Af PI
Al: Okay, I finally figured it out: PI means "Please Inquire". So I guess your store gets to charge however much they want for it. Finally I have cracked the villainous "PI" code! Hooray me!
Kurt: I no longer have a purpose.

Secret Files Series 2 Clark Kent Superman Af PI

Secret Files Series 2 Inner Case PI

Secret Files Series 2 Martian Manhunter Af PI

Secret Files Series 2 Master Case PI

Secret Files Series 2 Red Hood Joker Af PI
Kurt: Al, why did you list all these f--king toys!?

Seimaden Vol 3 $9.99

Seven Soldiers Mister Miracle #3 (of 4) $2.99

Sgt Rock The Prophecy #1 (of 6) $2.99
Al: It's a Kubert family reunion and the resurrection of Sgt. Rock at the same time! You gotta check it out! It'd be interesting if they'd set it in Iraq, instead of 1943, but I guess that probably woulda just been too controversial.
Kurt: Then we would've had to read another 8,000 "Bush sucks!" threads over at Newsarama.

Showcase Presents Green Arrow Vol 1 TP $16.99

Teen Titans Outsiders Insiders TP $9.99
Kurt: This just makes me think about someone wearing their underwear outside their clothes.

Tenjho Tenge Vol 5 $9.99

Testament #2 (MR) $2.99
Al: The first issue of this was really interesting. It's probably gonna offend hardcore religious types, and it might offend hardcore atheists as well at some point - tough to say exactly how religious it's getting - but for those of you who are more interested in reading good stories than you are in getting offended, it's worth checking out. Great art (even if the lead guy looks like a chick) and a neat scifi / allegory of that creepy old Bible story where Abraham almost sacrificed his kid because God told him to. Also, boobies.
Kurt: But, does the story call for them?

IMAGE

Desene Sketches & Scribbles HC $29.99

Freshmen #5 (of 6) $2.99
Al: After getting off to a fairly strong start - the dude who talked to plants was legitimately funny - this mostly-comedy mini about college students who gain ridiculous powers is sorta losing its luster for me.

Girls #9 (MR) $2.99
Al: This, however, is actually getting better as it gets weirder. Luna Brothers are the real deal, man.

Iron Ghost #5 (of 6) $2.99

Kabuki Vol 5 Metamorphosis TP (new Prtg) $24.99

Noble Causes #16 $3.50

Rex Mundi #16 $2.99

Vice #4 $2.99

Walking Dead #25 (MR) $2.99

MARVEL

Avengers Above And Beyond TP $24.99

Daredevil Vs Punisher TP $15.99

Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man #4 $2.99

Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man Wieringo Var #4 $2.99

Generation M #3 (of 5) $2.99
Al: Last month when I said I totally loved this...I meant to say I totally love Son of M. This I'm sorta on the fence about. Sorry about that.

Incredible Hulk #91 $2.99
Al: Apparently this issue "catapults" Hulk into Planet Hulk, 2006's marketing event where Hulk turns into Alien Conan or something. The event itself sounds like fun, but I suspect nothing terribly important will happen right now.

Iron Man The Inevitable #2 (of 6) $2.99

Marvel Adventures Flip Magazine #8 $3.99

Marvel Heroes Flip Magazine #8 $3.99

Marvel Knights 4 #26 $2.99

Marvel Knights Spider-Man #22 $2.99
Al: The conclusion of "The Other"! Possibly featuring the debut of that breathtakingly lame red-and-gold costume. Let's celebrate by not buying it!
Kurt: This is one celebration I can get on board with.

Marvel Knights Spider-Man Wieringo Var #22 $2.99

Marvel Masterworks Incredible Hulk Vol 3 2nd ED HC $49.99

Marvel Masterworks Incredible Hulk Vol 3 HC Var ED $54.99

New Mangaverse #1 (of 5) $2.99
Al: I didn't realize this did well enough the first time around to warrant a New version. Okay, though, whatever.

Punisher Vs Bullseye #3 (of 5) $2.99

Runaways #12 $2.99
Al: The conclusion of the NYC arc, featuring the Avengers (I'm sick of calling them the New Avengers! It's been like two years already!) and Cloak and Dagger. (Hey...have you noticed they've slowly been de-sluttifying Dagger's costume? That's weak, man. The costume was awesome the way it was.)
Kurt: But, does it distract?

Sentinel Squad One #1 (of 5) $2.99
Al: My prediction: out of a number of Decimation minis, some of which are pretty damn skippable, this will be the most irrelevant. Written by John Layman of Gambit and Fantastic Four: House of M; drawn by the overrated Aaron Lopresti of Excalibur v2. Boo.

Spider-Girl Vol 5 Endgame Digest TP $7.99

Spider-Woman Origin #2 (of 5) $2.99
Kurt: By this issue, she grows from an A cup to a nice, healthy C. Stay tuned!

Uncanny X-Men #468 $2.50

Weapon X Days Of Future Now TP $13.99
Kurt: Do they write these titles so I can make fun of them?

X-Factor 2nd Ptg Var #1 $2.99

X-Men Kitty Pryde Shadow & Flame TP $14.99

X-statix Presents Dead Girl #1 (of 5) $2.99
Al: Yeah! Dead Girl! I'd get this no matter what the plot was, because Peter Milligan's X-Statix was friggin' gidgy, but check the plot out: Dead Girl (and some other dead people) have to stop a "posse of Marvel's deadest villains!" Hopefully including Turner D. Century.
Kurt: All right, "gidgy" dies with this column. Never again shall we utter it.

Questions? Comments? Let us know what you think at comicscape@cinescape.com.



Related Products
Comments/Responses
1 2 3 > >>
• Jan 18, 2006, 08:55am •
Kurt, how exactly would one "revert" ones eyes? One might "avert" ones eyes. Is Cinescape hiring editors? Kidding aside, I liked this column.
.
Educate the world one word at a time.

raider171 • Jan 18, 2006, 09:14am •
Can anyone tell me which issue of JLA: Classified has the infamous J. Scott Campbell "Power Girl" cover? I've heard it talked about on this site many times, yet I can't find a single image of it on the web anywhere. Can anyone post a link to where I can find it? I'd like to see what all the fuss is about. Thanks!

• Jan 18, 2006, 11:14am •
Raider: http://www.ruppsworld.com/ProdImages/JSAClassifiedCv1_big.jpg

I'm here to help, my friend.

To weigh in on Kurt's topic, which is an excellent one worthy of further discussion: I like boobies.

No, but series that are just about boobies get real boring real fast. Like, I love Birds of Prey because Gail Simone is a friggin awesome writer and it's a great series. The fact that there are hot chicks in fishnets involved is a nice bonus.

Similarly, Fathom bores the living crap out of me and WildSiderz actually makes me want to punch old ladies. They've got plenty of boob appeal, but the stories suck so bad that it doesn't matter.

But hell, comics got me through puberty man. I spent many hours ogling Jean Grey, and I think it's perfectly healthy and has nothing to do with the fact that I'm marrying a woman with enormous breasts. I see no problem with the current system, which is to try to write good comic books, and try to get a couple hot chicks in each team. The girls can check out Captain American's package if they want.

• Jan 18, 2006, 11:49am •
"The girls can check out Captain American's package if they want."

True, but they don't continually put Cap in skimpy outfits with some "come hither" look while in a ridiculous "please *F* me" pose.

• Jan 18, 2006, 11:50am •
Also, they don't try to give Cap a *giant* package like, say, Power Girl's, um, amplifications...

• Jan 18, 2006, 12:28pm •
Well, thanks for putting the image of Captain America reclining on a bearskin rug with a "Please f*ck me" pose in my head. Good lord, that could take hours to wash out.

They do put both men and women in skintight outfits. And at least 10% of all heroes wear or have worn a loincloth at some point, especially if Rob Leifeld got his hands on 'em. I'm not saying men are objectified to the degree women are - that would be insane - just that they all wear tight clothes and their underwear on the outside.

• Jan 18, 2006, 12:36pm •
I don't deny the skin-tightness. But they don't do skimpy or low cut outfits for the guys anywhere near as often as for the gals. Batman switches costumes to a pair of Daisy Dukes? Not gonna happen.

Oh, and THANKS A LOT for reminding me of Rob Liefeld's art. Now we both have wretched images burned into our skulls!

• Jan 18, 2006, 01:00pm •
I once gave a speech in one of college classes about comics. The speech basically outlined many of the different types of books available (mainstream, indie, manga etc) and types of storytelling available. During the course of the speech I handed out samples of various books. One of the very first questions I got back from my mostly non-comic book reading audience was:

“Why do all the women have huge breasts?”

Needless to say I gave the standard most artists are men most readers are men draw your own conclusions answer.

I bring this up because it became a major point of the discussion after my speech. I was trying to explain that comics are more than just adolescent reading material but the images in most mainstream comics cut against that argument. No matter how good the writing on ‘Birds of Prey’ might be a lot of people won’t see past the T&A on the cover and skip the book.

I suppose this all goes back the overall image of comics with the general public. Despite overwhelming data showing that the majority of comic readers these days are adults, the general public still sees them as the domain of teenage boys.

I don’t know what the solution is. Maybe the mainstream doing a cleaner job of dividing their titles between ‘adult’ and mainstream lines.


• Jan 18, 2006, 01:01pm •
The hypocrisy surrounding the ‘protect the children from smut’ movement is extremely annoying. I would really love to find out how many members of congress snuck a peek at their dad’s, their best friend dad’s or their uncle’s Playboys when they were twelve or so. I’d lay odds it would be pretty much all of them. And gee, look how they turned out (ok maybe not the best examples).

The plain truth of the matter is that as sex and violence have supposedly increased in mainstream publications the overall levels of violence in society has declined steadily for the past 30 years pretty much across the board. Check the FBI statistics on violent crime. America is becoming a less, not more violent, nation. Granted you would never know this watching the news which takes any crime involving attractive white people and blows it clear out of proportion. Making it seem like there are pedophiles, kidnappers and murders on every street corner.

I’m not denying parents concern. I respect that many parents have a desire to screen what their children see from the mainstream media. And I’m not denying that in our all pervasive media world that is getting increasingly difficult. But it seems a lot parents have forgotten what they were like as kids. How many fathers snuck a look at Playboy growing up? How many of them can honestly say the first time they saw a naked woman was on their wedding night?

The key is not what a child sees but the context it is seen. Most child psychologists will tell you the primary influence on a child’s behavior is: 1 family, 2 friends, 3 social environment (school, church etc) and a distance fourth is media. Media’s greatest influence comes when the other three break down.


raider171 • Jan 18, 2006, 01:02pm •
Thanks for the help ALBROWN. Honestly I think that cover is kinda tame compared to some other stuff I've seen. But still, nice.

By the way, has anyone seen a shot of that Conan cover mentioned above sans the bikini? I wonder if that one has made it onto the web.

And let's not mention Rob Liefeld anymore—I'm starting to get nauseas. ;)

1 2 3 > >>
Login to post a comment!