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 →
Heck, they’re even star-crossed given that (I think) they were on different sides in the civil war story.
SunlessNick(Quote) (Reply)
Or perhaps “fuckdoll” would be an even more accurate term. I started to say “we’re expected to endure sex the way horses are expected to endure being ridden”, but then I remembered: at least we imagine horses enjoy some aspects of being ridden (the exercise, the challenge of competition).
God, horses are more human to the “lie back and think of England” squad than women. Fuck.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
So women don’t enjoy the competition? And here I’m paying for all these trophies…
The Other Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
LMAO, he traced Nash, Trips and Orton…Greg Land fucking STINKS!
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
Okay, now I’m picturing people have sex while an announcer says, “…..and, they’re off!” and starts narrating a horse race. It’s more disturbing than it sounds.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
There’s a very solid reading of Civil War as basically Tony and Steve’s bad break-up. And it’s hard to read Tony in “The Confession” as anything but a guilt-ridden, mourning lover.
I really dislike slash fanfiction for making changes to characters, but I find it nearly impossible to read canon Tony and Steve as anything but two people refusing to acknowledge that they are in love with each other.
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
No mention yet of girl-wonder.org? There are tons of interesting and horrifying links and forum threads at this site. Actual artists analyze how painful the simultaneous-tits-and-ass-exposure pose is, point out the million-and-one examples in Big Two comics in which the female characters were simply traced from porn magazines(?!), etc. There’s a common argument that “Men are objectified tooooo! The piles of muscles are for the female gaaaaaze!” that is deconstructed simply by drawing male characters in exactly the same poses and situations as female characters. It’s an eye-opener.
Jenny Islander(Quote) (Reply)
OMG you guys have to see this!
http://vito-excalibur.livejournal.com/114588.html
Cinnabar(Quote) (Reply)
That is one brilliant LJ post. I’m laughing, but at the same time fuming that comic book artists put shit like that out (in reverse to that post) for kids to learn how to draw superhero men and women. Seriously makes me want to kick them in the balls so hard that they’re out of even the Darwin Awards. (Darwin Awards, where the assumption is a person dies doing something so STUPID that they are taken out of the gene pool before adding to it)
Gategrrl(Quote) (Reply)
all they have to do is take themselves out of the gene pool. There are some people who have lost the ability to reproduce without dying who have won Darwin awards too. Mostly men, given that it’s easier to damage external sexual organs, but the occasional woman somehow manages.
Attackfish(Quote) (Reply)
I used to spend a lot of time at girl-wonder.org, and there are a number of great people there (especially Karen Healey and Rachel Edidin), but for an anti-bigotry site, the site moderators have some major blind spots when it comes to anti-religious bigotry*, complete with repeating the same sorts of ridiculous arguments that they tear down when used to defend other forms of bigotry.
*I’m not talking about the Persecuted Hegemon, where doing anything but giving primacy to someone’s beliefs is seen as persecution. I mean things like blaming all religion for any action carried out in the name of a religion.
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
ZOMFG DAT POST
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
*GIGGLEFIT*
Leigh(Quote) (Reply)
I hope someone finances the publication of a book exactly like that LJ post. I’d buy it, no question. And I don’t even draw. ^_^
Cinnabar(Quote) (Reply)
I laughed. A lot. My favorite part of this bizarro world is that Mystique is male-gendered. Thanks, artist person.
Rutee(Quote) (Reply)
If you want to read a comic book that doesn’t overly-sexualize female characters and treats them as actual people… may I suggest ‘THE 99′?
http://www.the99.org/
‘The 99′ is a comic book created by Dr Naif Al Mutawa, a Kuwaiti-born clinical psychologist who created a series based on Islamic archetypes, but the characters themselves are not expressly Muslim. The only possible exception to this is a character called Batina The Hidden, who wears a full-on burqa and looks like a VERY awesome Muslim ninja! She is one of five of the fifty female heroes who will appear in the series who will be covered.
Also; it should be known that recently DC Comics put out a JLA/THe 99 crossover series. You can see pics here. http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/gallery/2010/oct/24/the-99-comics-marvel Check out the first picture. Wonder Woman… is COVERED!
You can download ‘The 99′ origins issue for free on The 99 website.
Red(Quote) (Reply)
I’ve seen the animation preview for the 99, and it was horrible. So you’re saying it’s a comic series, not a tv series?
The Other Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
It’s a comic series with a shitty TV series.
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
The animated series is based off a comic series.
Could the animation be better? Yes, but let’s be honest… the comic creators likely weren’t getting many offers for an animated series (probably due in part to prejudice against anything even remotely Islamic) and this one was probably one of the very few they got. It also probably offered (and I’m guessing) greater creative control over the animated series content than other offers likely would have.
Let’s wait to pass judgment until the show premiers on ‘The Hub’ in January.
Red(Quote) (Reply)
Well, the whole “shitty” thing is me putting words in TOP’s mouth…I watched a teaser trailer for the show and thought it was just okay.
BTW, I kinda…HHHATE Wonder Woman’s new outfit…it looks like bad 90′s design aesthetic to me (like if Rogue’s outfit back in the day actually sucked instead of rocked), but at least she doesn’t have Liefield-esque pouches everywhere (and no torso)!
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
In any case, I’m eager to see the animated series. Even if the animation is sub-par, if the story is good, I’ll be a regular viewer.
I’m not too crazy about it, ether, to be honest. I mean, SURELY they could have done a better job than that!
Red(Quote) (Reply)
Well, possibly it’s not so bad in comparison, but I generally find a lot of what I see on TV not animated to my liking. That’s why I couldn’t stand even one episode of Archer despite people telling me how good it was.
The Other Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
Reading the origins issue, it looks promising. And the project will doubtlessly benefit from Fabian Nicieza’s involvement. From the sounds of it, the title will hopefully look at how the world would actually change with superheroes in it (a concept that drives my own unpublished work), rather than yet another world where Reed Richards is Useless.
Regarding WW’s new costume – I dislike for the same reasons as other have expressed (it looks very mid-90′s. I’d prefer a more armored costume that retained her traditional color scheme while maintaining a very Hellenic look (such as a blue pteruges with silver stars on each strap instead of Wonder-briefs/Wonder-thong).
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
So, by ‘sex sells’, we mean ‘the exploitation of women sells’?
OK, even if I did have a really thick skin, I’m not sure I could swallow that one.
Chai Latte(Quote) (Reply)
I remember reading an atrocious LJ comment in that “Wizard Teaches You How To Draw Women All Shitty” post where someone said something along the lines of:
“COMIC BOOKZ ARE ABOUT BEING BIG AND MUSCULAR AWSUM SUPAR HEROEZ AND THE HOT BITCHES YOU GET TO BANG ‘CUZ OF IT
IT’S GUD COZ COMIC BOOK REEDERS ARE SHY AROUND WOMEN SO IT MAKES THEM FEEL BETTAR”
*head-desk*
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
“at naked men and ugly naked men that would turn ANYONE completely off to sex and the human form,”
I totally agree with your overall point (and of course ugly or fat women are considered much more hilarious or disgusting than equally ugly or fat men) but the body-shaming here is not cool, nor is it cool to make people who are attracted to people who are not conventionally attractive feel like freaks.
meerkat(Quote) (Reply)
It was facetious. Did you miss the part of the comment in which I stated “I’m being facetious?”
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
I mean, seriously, even if you’re only considering a male audience, and you’re trying to sell sex….
Wonder Woman of the 1940s did *just fine* at getting that audience without drawing ludicrously unrealistic bodies or doing bizarrely sexualized poses. (The cliched 1940s comic book faces for women are another matter, but anyway.)
“They look silly” indeed. A lot of modern comics art is just *terrible*.
Nathanael(Quote) (Reply)
Jennifer Kesler,
British TV is SO different. They seem happy to show both men and women of all body types naked.
Nathanael(Quote) (Reply)
Nathanael,
And that’s part of why I hardly watch anything but British TV anymore. It’s more egalitarian in a lot of ways.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
← Previous Comments
Next Comments →