My name is Leigh and I love comic books, so much so that I’ve decided it’s the industry for me. I currently manage a comic book shop. It’s not rocket science, I’m not curing cancer, but between my growing responsibilities, and a colorful cast of customers and coworkers, things certainly aren’t boring.
Recently, I’ve been asked to help out with the monthly order form, which involves sitting in front of a computer screen for a number of hours, and discussing what’s selling, what isn’t, what should be given a chance, and what seems to be dead in the water.
The book of previews for the coming months always has at least preliminary cover art for the books, depicting what we can expect. This past week, while having our order form powwow, it seemed like every few pages my boss would take a look at a cover and say something to the extent of “Wow. That’s unfortunate!”
At which point I, from behind my computer, would demand a look, and sigh, resigned, as, yes, Wonder Woman and Power Girl are standing there, proudly, with their tiny heads, and enormous misshapen breasts.
In a blog entry I wrote elsewhere, I urged that we women shouldn’t let it get under our skin so much. That if we put up a stronger front, and grew a thicker skin, we could look past the gratuitous cheesecake to the stories that were being told.
I have come to realize that there is only so much a girl can take.
My boss suggested that I write a few hundred words on why these kinds of covers are terrible. It didn’t take long to gather my thoughts.
I already know that the major argument for these covers will be: “Sex sells!”
Sure, sex sells. When you’re pitching a hot new prime time teen soap, of course it sells.
But superhero adventure stories? Do they really? Is the cheesecake a necessity of the industry? Art is a huge part of this equation, and covers have to be eye-catching, but do they really have to be “hey, buddy, eyes up here!” eye-catching?
I’m voting no for a number of reasons.
Argument Number One is this: The people in charge should be putting more faith in the stories they’re telling than to feel the need for a cheesecake crutch.
Sure there are some dogs out there in comic book land; books that, while they sell (you’ll find a lot of readers will stick with a title in the hopes that it will get better, and the collectors are completists who don’t want holes in their collections), they aren’t any good. But this happens in every aspect of the entertainment industry. Editors and publishers of crime and mystery novels don’t sit back and say “Man, what a terrible book. Quick, put some boobs on the cover and maybe it’ll sell!”
And I know that there’s something to be said for someone who wants to draw large breasts, and doesn’t want to be artistically limited. I get that. Breasts are great, sure. But here comes Argument Number Two:
They look silly.
They do! They look so silly! And do you know why they look silly? Because very few comic book artists can draw oversized breasts through all that spandex and leather without making them look ridiculous and disproportionate. This is in the same vein as the fact that no one seems to be able to draw any sized penis through a superhero costume without making it look wildly outlandish.
So why emphasize that? Why attempt to make that a selling point of a comic centered on a heroine?
Apparently the comic book industry needs covers like Heroes for Hire #13 from 2007, where the main characters (all women), are chained up, overly large breasts hanging out, pouting lips on their too-tiny heads, being threatened with rape by a dripping tentacle monster.
This brings me to my last point. You knew this one was coming.
Women read these books too. Maybe we’re smaller in number than the men who read them, but we’re here, and there’s more of us every week. Look at the internet fandoms. Look up your favorite comic book characters on deviantart or tumblr. Women are posting about the comics they love. My first internet fandom was comic books and it was a fandom run mostly by women.
We read comics. And the majority of us aren’t interested in the boobtacularness of it all, let alone the implied tentacle rape of supposedly strong female characters (which isn’t the point of this whole excursion, but could very well take it over).
If we follow this train of thought, comics might even sell better among female readers if the lopsided, too-big-for-the-rest-of-the-body breasts are left in the past. More women might buy to read a good story, and look at great art, instead of buying into the stereotype that only drooling, pervy fanboys are into these books. A stereotype that is, in part, of the comic book industry’s own making; month after month, cover after cover.
{ 91 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Next Comments →
You know, I think one way they keep up the myth – and even convince many women – that we don’t enjoy looking at naked guys is by a really clever trick.
–They serve up myriad unusually great-looking naked women, and heterosexual males get very excited.
–They serve up a fairly random supply of naked men (Dennis Franz’ ass? Really?), and a few heterosexual females get very excited from time to time.
Clearly, WE are the pervy horndogs in this scenario, right? I mean, obviously Hollywood believes hetero men have lost the ability to pop a boner for anyone less amazing-looking than a supermodel. And yet WE have to sit through fat naked men and ugly naked men that would turn ANYONE completely off to sex and the human form, and yet some of us manage to go all drooly when they occasionally serve up a hot naked guy for us. Imagine if they served up nothing but super-gorgeous naked men for us. Would we ever get anything done again ever?
Now, I’m being facetious, but to make a point. You CANNOT conclude that women are less into looking at the naked gender of their choice than men when men are carefully protected from ever seeing a naked woman who’s less than astoundingly attractive, and we’re served up all sorts. The fact that ANY of us manage to behave just like men when we do get a naked hottie to look at suggests, if anything, that women are at LEAST as interested in ogling the opposite sex.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
ARGH! As much as I did laugh at that segment (and Bruce Timm’s Flaming C design), I just gotta say…et tu, Pierre Bernard? I used to love his Recliner of Rage segments where he’d rant about Robotech and such.
The comments section is pretty civil thus far, but this stuck out to me:
“Funnier than the other skit where I felt he was taking the piss out of superheroes, which is not cool”
So slagging off superheroes all together is NOT COOL but making comic book fans/artists look like creepy serial-killer pervs is a-okay? *sigh* Whatever…
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
I don’t see how sex could possibly sell, at least not anymore. Maybe back in the 50′s that was true, when teens couldn’t find porn easily, and they’d have to rely on other things like comic books to see breasts. But now it’s so easy for anyone to find porn that adding random sexual content into everything- like giant cartoonish superhero breasts- just seems pointless.
Charlie(Quote) (Reply)
which is why I think sexual content aimed at girls and women, like Twilight does sell better. It’s harder to find commercially produced sexual content for heterosexual girls. The same kinds of women are displayed sexually in similar ways constantly, they just sort of become invisible. Since these images are everywhere, they stop being titillating.
Attackfish(Quote) (Reply)
So what we actually need a more topless Tony covers for Iron Man.
Charles RB(Quote) (Reply)
Along this line, romance novels frequently have sexualized men on covers and have for quite a long time. The headless half-naked man is somewhat of a joke around romance reader circles.
Nonny(Quote) (Reply)
http://ilovecharts.tumblr.com/post/2338135760/by-the-way-i-know-i-am-late-to-the-party-but-i-am
This seems appropriate. (Well, inappropriate, but relevant!)
The Other Anne(Quote) (Reply)
YES. Thank for this article!
And here is why I can’t just overlook things like ridiculous body shapes, fighting/running in stiletto heels, etc: It jars me out of story. When I should be paying attention to the dramatic whatever-is-going-on, I am instead wondering if the girl has back pains or if anyone actually finds this SEXY instead of just vaguely disturbing, wondering how the hell she managees to jump and run in stilettos, or why her skin isn’t all torn up from sliding across the pavement in the bikini she calls an outfit.
It is a huge, huge slap in the face that I, as a woman, was never considered as part of the audience. Because I, as a woman, naturally wonder what the female characters are thinking/feeling, which means when I see a girl in a chainmail bikini, instead of going ‘HAWT’, I am going ‘Isn’t that uncomfortable…?’
And then, bam, my disbelief just became too big to be suspended. And people wonder why girls (on average) aren’t into comics/videogames/action movies… -eyeroll-
Raeka(Quote) (Reply)
Of course, one of the biggest-selling and best critically-regarded comics of the year featuring a female character was Batwoman: Elegy (the original story ran in Detective Comics). Batwoman is sexy without a doubt – but she’s covered up, wears big stompy boots, and all that long flowing hair is a distraction in the shape of a wig. The art displays her body, but shows her strength, determination and various other qualities rather than just “sexy”. In particular, she’s never posing for the reader in that weird twisted-around position that shows both tits and ass somehow.
lilacsigil(Quote) (Reply)
Having seen some images for that, I can also confirm that it is also infinitely hilarious. There is one of Wolverine in a Speedo using his claws to hold three hot dogs up to his sexyface “O” mouth. I just. Don’t even.
Gena(Quote) (Reply)
Yeah, there was a bit of a to-do about such depictions, among other things. Check it out!!
Which reminds me, I need to re-find this comic book beefcakes website I saw a while ago, it was hysterical, especially in the context of the “NO GIRLS ALLOWED” attitude of the comic-reading community today.
Gena(Quote) (Reply)
Joe Quesada makes me want to punch him in the teeth. Really. GAH.
I wish he hadn’t felt the need to take over NYX and X-23 and curbstomp what could have been two phenomenal series into mangled mediocre crap. That was when I knew I was done with him.
Gena(Quote) (Reply)
Ah, the infamous Rob Liefeld Moebius strip from Hell. His art style is pretty much why I didn’t read comics as a child, and is probably what Greg Land is doing to this generation of nerdy girls. DRAMATIC SIGH.
Gena(Quote) (Reply)
Closely related to this is the idea that straight men are all attracted to the same look (which Jennifer dissected here: http://thehathorlegacy.com/if-male-actors-had-to-be-as-blandly-perfect-as-female-ones/ ).
Really, when the porn industry has a much wider array of women’s looks than Hollywood, that should be a sign that it isn’t the “market” that’s driving the decisions.
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
There was also a male full-frontal… featuring Ghost Rider (a skeleton wreathed in hellfire).
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
Note that Quesada specifically held of introducing X-23 into the Marvel Universe (she was created for one of the cartoons) until he got the chance to write her into it… as a teenaged prostitute.
I can’t go to comic conventions because there is a very real danger that I would punch Joe Quesada in the face. It would be the first time I have struck someone since I was 12, but I would probably do it.
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
And play up the Tony Stark/Steve Rogers subtext. Marvel needs at least one happy couple.
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
Don’t forget Land’s favored habit of tracing porn. That’s not a joke: there are entire Internet groups devoted to locating the specific pornographic images that Land has traced.
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
DRAMATIC SIGH right back at you! I had been collecting X-Men since 1987, right through the Liefeld era, through the chromium covers and the giant crossovers, but when they put Greg Land on the title I stopped. That’s how much I hate his traced pornography art and the utter disrespect for comics readers by putting him on anything that is meant to tell a story.
lilacsigil(Quote) (Reply)
I could even cope with that, if he bothered to put the same face on the same female character. Here’s a sample of his faces (safe for work) – sadly the link to the much larger version of this porn-tracing post went to the much-mourned Scans Daily on LJ and is gone.
lilacsigil(Quote) (Reply)
Where’s my ‘Like’ button when I need it most?
Dom Camus(Quote) (Reply)
I remember scouring the ol’ comic book shop in my pre-pubescent youth, it was mostly filled with Liefield and Liefield-knockoff art and I’d retch and think to myself “YEECHH! Why does anyone like comic books, they’re so gross and ugly to look at!!” then I started reading the Sailor Moon manga in Smile magazine and never looked back (at least for a while).
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
For the sake of equality, they need to go further.
Finbarr Ryan(Quote) (Reply)
OH That Frank Miller spoof MADE MY MORNING!
I was so pissy about the cover he did for that book that was just a close up on Wonder Woman’s ass. Thank you!
Leigh(Quote) (Reply)
Rob Liefeld’s art gives me mental hives.
And here’s a perfectly good example why: http://grotesqueanatomy.blogspot.com/2004/05/now-thats-grotesque-anatomy.html
Leigh(Quote) (Reply)
Liefeld is the perfect example that popularity does not equal quality – because his art is horrible. Actually, quantifiably horrible.
The Other Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
Haha, yeah, I’ve seen that. Very apt.
Ugh that fanboy who compared Miller’s picture of WW ass to Supes showing his “S” chest, just UUGH.
Context and presentation mean nothing to these people!
That’s why above, I said it’s not ONLY a numbers games, not only a tit-for-tat (ha). Because I’ve seen some defensive male geeks then try to nitpick comics to death to “prove” that males are just as objectified in comics. “Well, in panel 6 of page 24, Wolvie’s biceps are bulging and practically filling a panel HA! Equality!!”
Um, NO.
JT(Quote) (Reply)
A male feminist that I follow named Figleaf notes that women could be considered the “no-sex” class, as sex in the popular imagination is supposed to be *done to* women by men. I found his formulation enlightening:
“1. It is simultaneously inconceivable and intolerable for a woman to *have* sexual desire.
2. It is simultaneously inconceivable and intolerable for a man to *be* sexually desired.
At least in contemporary western society every gender-related ill derives from some combination of items #1 and #2.”
Sharon Burdick(Quote) (Reply)
You’re not alone on that. I mean, I can’t stand tracing to begin with, but REALLY? You’ve made a Google-porn-collage and called it a day?? And this is a person’s gainful employment.
Gena(Quote) (Reply)
Yeah. Much as I’ve given up the childhood dream of working for Disney because of all of their problems (I believe they also don’t allow animators to unionize and demand better working conditions, on top of everything else), I know I can’t work for Joe Quesada. I just can’t. And now that Marvel’s a Disney subsidiary, I can recognize that all my fan work will remain fan work, because I’m never going to work for them, even on contract, and I’m totally okay with that. *shrugs*
I have so many issues with comic X-23, I no longer hold any interest in the character. I know she’s on an X-team right now, but I can’t bring myself to care.
X-Men:Evolution X-23 ws a badass. She looked about 12 years old, was physically covered up, and freely expressed her pent-up rage and anguish. She looked like her mother, and was colored distinctly darker than the “default” white characters. She had agency. She attacked the X-Mansion and took out all the X-Men she came across, in order to find Wolverine, who she blamed for making her life a living hell– all while being pursued by S.H.I.E.L.D. The next time we see her in-show, X-23 is taking on all of H.Y.D.R.A. By herself.
Comics X-23 is damn near catatonic, barely speaks even when spoken to, doesn’t leave her pimp until she is literally swept up into and dragged along with other characters’ storylines, and is stereotypically ultra-pale waiflike tarted-up “goth” (my goth friends don’t dress like that, hence the airquotes). The characterization carried over into the latest cartoon, Wolverine and the X-Men, where Laura has no lines, even when, in an alternate future, there are six she-Wolverine clones. Six. All indistinguishable from one another, none of whom speak.
SO. FREAKING. DONE.
(Not to mention, I just dislike frivolous Wolverine-centric retcons generally, so the “bone-claws plated in adamantium” backstory was never my favorite; naturally, that was carried over to X-23, despite making no sense that the mutation would express itself so differently for her, a clone of Logan, than it does for Logan. Also, from what I’ve seen, other characters treat X-23 like shit for BEING a clone, and I’m like, “Didn’t we address this with Spider-Man? More than once??” Whatever. /mini-rant)
Gena(Quote) (Reply)
← Previous Comments
Next Comments →