-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
"Ms. Marvel" writer takes issue with New Yorker snarky piece on Marvel's "A-Force"
- Thread starter Dalek
- Start date
- Status
Show don't tell is exactly what she should have done herself. Again, what's pervy about Age of Ultron? How can we address that point if she doesn't even explain it? That all the ladies look like pornstars is also just a mere statement which seems to miss how barely any of them show real skin.
You wonder why no one addresses her points, but her points are mostly just observations where basically all you can refute is "nope, they don't look like pornstars to me"
There's an counter-argument by the writer of the comic that very clearly explains why she's wrong.
I don't need to explain why when the author did it already and I agree with her defense.
And we've shown off the "pervy" costumes multiple times now...
Pai Pai Master
Banned
Are you familiar with the characters that she is listing? To say that Medusa and She-Hulk's powers are their allure, that they lack force or power is completely wrong. She's basically admitting she hasn't read She-Hulk in the last 10 years.
One is incredibly strong and is constantly challenging the double standards of her male-dominated superhero world, and an established and skilled professional. The other is the queen of her people who is constantly having to take charge of her family and citizens in light of her often-absent husband.
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
I'm one of what I assume to be a minority who reads comics and The New Yorker, and its safe to say the worlds do not mix.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Yet another excellent show.
Coriolanus
Banned
Onus of proof aint on them, fam.
That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence and allathat. BOOM #hitchenism
For Dude Abides, so he will stop complaining about this thread lacking a direct response (even though Wilson already responded and many in the thread have responded) I will go through the article and address specific points.
She is referencing both A-Force and Age of Ultron here, by the way. If you look at the cover of A-Force (provided elsewhere in the thread) you'll see that there are a few character who could be categorized as "porn stars" on the cover but the front and center hero, She-Hulk", is standing in a way that is completely a-typical of most porn stars and female superheroes. Her costume wouldn't be out of place at a 1940s beach party and her arms are crossed over her breasts, covering them for the most part and showing an defensive, perhaps even aggressive, stance. There is not a hit of her ass which, as we know, is the most popular way to draw female superheroes.
All of the other characters featured on the cover have similar attributes. While they aren't all covering their breasts with crossed arms, none of them are twisted in impossible ways in order to show both ass and breast as you would typically expect.
To address the characters in Age of Ultron. Both Black Widow and Scarlet Witch are rather modestly dressed with Black Widow wearing a cat suit you'd expect to see Tom Cruise in al la Mission Impossible and Scarlet Witch looking like the star of a 90s supernatural soap-opera. Neither are showing a particularly large amount of skin and while both are in excellent shape, that isn't a feature exclusive to porn stars.
So her first paragraph ends in a bit of a conundrum. She claims every woman in Age of Ultron and the A-Force look like porn stars, when clearly, they don't.
Hmm....
This is slightly tangential but she shows a deep misunderstanding of Ex Machina in this paragraph. If you want a breakdown of how wrong she is here, look up Film Hulk Critic's amazing write up of Ex Machina. It will further cement Dr. Lepore as a genre snob.
Here she betrays her true feelings on genre and Comic Books. She thinks that the women in A-Force and Age of Ultron are simply big-breasted versions of the male superheroes they might share a name or backstory with. The "experts" are young boys. The implication is that if you are a fan, or even an expert, on comics then you must either be a 10 year old boy, or have the mentality of one. She knowingly makes this implication in order to insult fans and further degrade the medium. Clearly these comic books have their apogee in being read by pre-pubescent boys, she is saying.
Below she delves into some spoilers from Age of Ultron, read on with care.
Clearly she wasn't invested in the movie in any way. The reason for the name Vision is given explicitly as well as thematically. She can't even pay attention enough to a breezy popcorn flick to get explicit themes yet she is attempting to burn the entire comics industry for lack of effort?
There is then a long and tedious conversation between Dr. Lepore and her 10 year old experts which is really just a set up for this line:
It's important to remember that she is getting her expertise from a couple of 10-year olds who have a vague understanding themselves of all the heroes in question. There is no person on this earth who could explain to Dr. Lepore the connections and nuances of all the heroes in question over a plate of waffles on a Saturday morning, as she expected from her "experts". Slavern would have a hard time doing it over a weekend, much less over a light brunch.
Yet the basis of her judgement of both A-Force and Age of Ultron is a casual and disinterested viewing of the movie, and an equally casual and disinterested reading of the 1st issue of A-Force and an inspection of it's cover.
As Pai Pai Master and many others have explained above me, singling out She-Hulk was a terrible mistake for her and exemplary of her shallow research. She has targeted She-Hulk because of the name and what she saw on the A-Force cover without knowing that Jennifer Walters is one of the best written women in comics today.
There is large tangent that tries to relate Marston's work with Petty on the "Petty Girls" to current comic book heroines that falls flat. She makes no connection from these pin-up girls with vague biographies and current heroes like She-Hulk and Medusa... instead she wants the reader to just accept at face value that the girls Petty painted and Marston wrote are analogs to each other. However the comics she's attempting to denigrate have decades of weighty cannon behind most characters whose current writers have to handle carefully when attempting anything new.
She claims it's not possible to create a reasonable female comic-book superhero when, earlier in the article, she mentioned on by name. Ms. Marvel is everything she is likely wanting from comics and yet here, she has stated that it's not possible. Why mention Wilson's Marvel if you aren't even going to find out what the character is about beyond "she's a lady muslim". Shockingly disappointing. At least she admits later in the paragraph that they share a level of ridiculousness with their male counterparts, but then belies that point by saying heroes like She-Hulk and Medusa and The Enchantress lack real power beyond their bodies. A judgement she has made by reading ONE comic book, watching ONE movie, and talking to two 10 year-old boys for a few hours.
Dr. Jill Lepore is a force to be reckoned with when it comes to feminist literature and critique... however she needs to accept that there is a complexity to comic books beyond that of a power fantasy for 10 y/o boys. It would be interesting to read her thoughts after she had done more than an afternoon of talking to her son.
Dr. Lepore said:
She is referencing both A-Force and Age of Ultron here, by the way. If you look at the cover of A-Force (provided elsewhere in the thread) you'll see that there are a few character who could be categorized as "porn stars" on the cover but the front and center hero, She-Hulk", is standing in a way that is completely a-typical of most porn stars and female superheroes. Her costume wouldn't be out of place at a 1940s beach party and her arms are crossed over her breasts, covering them for the most part and showing an defensive, perhaps even aggressive, stance. There is not a hit of her ass which, as we know, is the most popular way to draw female superheroes.
All of the other characters featured on the cover have similar attributes. While they aren't all covering their breasts with crossed arms, none of them are twisted in impossible ways in order to show both ass and breast as you would typically expect.
To address the characters in Age of Ultron. Both Black Widow and Scarlet Witch are rather modestly dressed with Black Widow wearing a cat suit you'd expect to see Tom Cruise in al la Mission Impossible and Scarlet Witch looking like the star of a 90s supernatural soap-opera. Neither are showing a particularly large amount of skin and while both are in excellent shape, that isn't a feature exclusive to porn stars.
So her first paragraph ends in a bit of a conundrum. She claims every woman in Age of Ultron and the A-Force look like porn stars, when clearly, they don't.
Hmm....
Dr. Lepore said:
This is slightly tangential but she shows a deep misunderstanding of Ex Machina in this paragraph. If you want a breakdown of how wrong she is here, look up Film Hulk Critic's amazing write up of Ex Machina. It will further cement Dr. Lepore as a genre snob.
Dr. Lepore said:
Here she betrays her true feelings on genre and Comic Books. She thinks that the women in A-Force and Age of Ultron are simply big-breasted versions of the male superheroes they might share a name or backstory with. The "experts" are young boys. The implication is that if you are a fan, or even an expert, on comics then you must either be a 10 year old boy, or have the mentality of one. She knowingly makes this implication in order to insult fans and further degrade the medium. Clearly these comic books have their apogee in being read by pre-pubescent boys, she is saying.
Below she delves into some spoilers from Age of Ultron, read on with care.
Dr. Lepore said:
Clearly she wasn't invested in the movie in any way. The reason for the name Vision is given explicitly as well as thematically. She can't even pay attention enough to a breezy popcorn flick to get explicit themes yet she is attempting to burn the entire comics industry for lack of effort?
There is then a long and tedious conversation between Dr. Lepore and her 10 year old experts which is really just a set up for this line:
Dr. Lepore said:
It's important to remember that she is getting her expertise from a couple of 10-year olds who have a vague understanding themselves of all the heroes in question. There is no person on this earth who could explain to Dr. Lepore the connections and nuances of all the heroes in question over a plate of waffles on a Saturday morning, as she expected from her "experts". Slavern would have a hard time doing it over a weekend, much less over a light brunch.
Yet the basis of her judgement of both A-Force and Age of Ultron is a casual and disinterested viewing of the movie, and an equally casual and disinterested reading of the 1st issue of A-Force and an inspection of it's cover.
Dr. Lepore said:
As Pai Pai Master and many others have explained above me, singling out She-Hulk was a terrible mistake for her and exemplary of her shallow research. She has targeted She-Hulk because of the name and what she saw on the A-Force cover without knowing that Jennifer Walters is one of the best written women in comics today.
There is large tangent that tries to relate Marston's work with Petty on the "Petty Girls" to current comic book heroines that falls flat. She makes no connection from these pin-up girls with vague biographies and current heroes like She-Hulk and Medusa... instead she wants the reader to just accept at face value that the girls Petty painted and Marston wrote are analogs to each other. However the comics she's attempting to denigrate have decades of weighty cannon behind most characters whose current writers have to handle carefully when attempting anything new.
Dr. Lepore said:
She claims it's not possible to create a reasonable female comic-book superhero when, earlier in the article, she mentioned on by name. Ms. Marvel is everything she is likely wanting from comics and yet here, she has stated that it's not possible. Why mention Wilson's Marvel if you aren't even going to find out what the character is about beyond "she's a lady muslim". Shockingly disappointing. At least she admits later in the paragraph that they share a level of ridiculousness with their male counterparts, but then belies that point by saying heroes like She-Hulk and Medusa and The Enchantress lack real power beyond their bodies. A judgement she has made by reading ONE comic book, watching ONE movie, and talking to two 10 year-old boys for a few hours.
Dr. Jill Lepore is a force to be reckoned with when it comes to feminist literature and critique... however she needs to accept that there is a complexity to comic books beyond that of a power fantasy for 10 y/o boys. It would be interesting to read her thoughts after she had done more than an afternoon of talking to her son.
wait what?
We found Dr. Lepore's GAF account.
Sibersk Esto
Banned
the fuck?
Check his post history. I'm pretty sure genre fiction killed his family and forced him into exile.
So basically the only thing you do on GAF is troll superhero threads?
You know how people are talking about criticism stemming from ignorance? Well...
Pai Pai Master
Banned
Thanks Marrec. I have trouble putting much effort retorting to such poorly I researched crap but you got the main points well-addressed.
It essentially comes down to this - why the fuck should anyone listen to someone who can't be bothered to read the content she's trying to criticize and finger wag at? She passively watched Ultron barely paying attention to the themes and events, then got a crash course on the last 50+ years of character history by a couple of 10 year olds, looked at the pictures in an upcoming A-Force issue, then proceeded to pass judgment on an entire industry and medium.
There are books, artists and publishers out there that are certainly worth taking to task, but she's simply latching onto a big easy target in Marvel and applying a less-than-basic knowledge of everything involved to her writing. Her argument has no merit if she hasn't actually read She-Hulk or Inhumans or any of the other characters she's attempting (and failing) to analyze.
I'm sure Lepore has done good work writing about women's issues before but she shouldn't touch Marvel Comics until she's done some actual reading because she doesn't know what she's talking about and doesn't appear to have any interest in doing the research. It doesn't make us reductive or dismissive if we don't want to bother spelling out why she's wrong, when she doesn't seem to care to put in that effort to understand from her end.
It essentially comes down to this - why the fuck should anyone listen to someone who can't be bothered to read the content she's trying to criticize and finger wag at? She passively watched Ultron barely paying attention to the themes and events, then got a crash course on the last 50+ years of character history by a couple of 10 year olds, looked at the pictures in an upcoming A-Force issue, then proceeded to pass judgment on an entire industry and medium.
There are books, artists and publishers out there that are certainly worth taking to task, but she's simply latching onto a big easy target in Marvel and applying a less-than-basic knowledge of everything involved to her writing. Her argument has no merit if she hasn't actually read She-Hulk or Inhumans or any of the other characters she's attempting (and failing) to analyze.
I'm sure Lepore has done good work writing about women's issues before but she shouldn't touch Marvel Comics until she's done some actual reading because she doesn't know what she's talking about and doesn't appear to have any interest in doing the research. It doesn't make us reductive or dismissive if we don't want to bother spelling out why she's wrong, when she doesn't seem to care to put in that effort to understand from her end.
The problem then becomes that people like Dude Abides and others who respect her work and the New Yorker's work in general will just ASSUME that everything she's said in the article is correct, further isolating an already isolated and polarized culture. Sure, super-hero movies are big ticket right now, but that's only because they're easy popcorn flicks to make in a vacuum of traditional action movies. The nerds will come regardless, and the rest come because of flashy CGI and hot men/women.
Dr. Lepore does one thing really well with this article, and that's to show us that genre culture and the mediums it forms around are still misunderstood and looked down on by most everyone else.
Palette Swap
Member
These threads are always funnier when you remember people joined GAF because they were interested enough in video games.
Dude Abides
Banned
You realize she read the comic, right? Did you even read the piece or are you just trolling?
Wilson just got mad that someone outside the comics club dared to criticize it. And did a very long version of "it's not as bad as it has been in other comics!!!" that you do as well. I guess she also called Lepore names as well. Not much of a defense.
You understand she's criticizing the way they're drawn right? That they're all the same? That she doesn't need to read about how many trucks she-hulk can lift or that time she totally told off her boss or whatever to criticize that?
Every single person on the cover has pointy double-Ds. I believe that is what Lepore stated explicitly.
The fact that they aren't quite as ridiculous looking as the ones where they're bending over or showing their ass or whatever is kind of the point. Even when they try not to be complete cheesecake, they still fail.
I think that's the fundamental problem comic fans don't understand. You're familiar with a world where the porny factor is generally at a 10, so you think it's progress when it's dialed back to an 8. For people not invested in the value of comics, that's not much of a difference.
Tom Cruise in a skintight leather catsuit? What?
She does not in fact claim that.
Again with the clairvoyance. Do you really think she thinks comic book readers read the New Yorker and she set out to insult them?
Why should she be invested in a breezy popcorn flick? What is wrong with forgetting why his name is Vision? I don't remember either. Age of Ultron isn't Shakespeare, as much as people would apparently like to pretend otherwise.
The rest of your lengthy response to be missing the point of this piece. It's not some scholarly piece of the hermeneutics of Catwoman's tits that you think it has to be. She's pointing out that no matter how much Wilson or Whedon claim to be trying to make better female superhoes, genre convention still apparently demands that they look like pin-up girls from the 50s. And, that a fair number of them are apparently distaff riffs on a male hero.
Jessica still has the lame pre-Spiderverse costume.
No, he hates everything.
On Star Wars:
On the Mortal Kombat movie:
On Tarantino:
Game of Thrones:
Deadwood:
Holy shit it goes on forever.
She read it. Doesn't mean one has to respect her opinions.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
She seems to have "read" A-Force in the same manner that she "watched" Age of Ultron, entirely glossing over a character's origin and something as simple as how he got his name.
But she's not just criticizing the art, she is calling out these characters as being things they're not. Lacking power or force, stating that their sexuality or allure is their only power. That is factually wrong and it doesn't matter if she read A-Force 5 times, you can't talk about She-Hulk with any merit if you haven't even read her book. She's reducing these characters to nothing more than their looks, which doesn't help her argument at all. She latches onto She-Hulk in order to criticize that Marvel women are just their male counterparts with big tits - she even brings up Ms. Marvel without realizing that, according to her argument, Carol or Khamala are nothing more than Mar-Vehl with tits.
That is sad
Damn. Manu blowin up that post history.
Someone please enlighten me. I thought a main stable of the feminist movement was to show that women were more than objects and beings of value through action just like any other human.
Why is it such that the first paragraph she judges the female characters solely on appearance and degenerates another sub-culture by saying "you look like X".
As far as I can see on that cover (except for maybe snow bird, hellcant and guardian) every female hero on that cover has gone through some significant hard ships and seen some shit. Why the mistake of literally judging books and females by their covers, if you're such a proponent for feminist change (in attitude and all).
Am I missing something?
Someone please enlighten me. I thought a main stable of the feminist movement was to show that women were more than objects and beings of value through action just like any other human.
Why is it such that the first paragraph she judges the female characters solely on appearance and degenerates another sub-culture by saying "you look like X".
As far as I can see on that cover (except for maybe snow bird, hellcant and guardian) every female hero on that cover has gone through some significant hard ships and seen some shit. Why the mistake of literally judging books and females by their covers, if you're such a proponent for feminist change (in attitude and all).
Am I missing something?
It really is. I'm not even mad, just feel sorry for the dude.
fucking lmao. people like this are a mystery to me.
Simply Sarah
Member
Honestly, I'm not super impressed by either piece. I think Dr. Lepore makes some valid points, such as on the general body type of superhero women (especially those that aren't rather recent creations). The problem is that I feel she significantly hurts her ability to get those valid points across by getting into areas she doesn't seem well versed in. I feel one of these is In regards to the female versions of male superheros concept. Well yes, that happens, but that's actually increasingly rare these days and most superhero women with that sort of an origin have becoming rather distinct characters these days. Stuff with questionable origins can still grow beyond those.
In regards to Ms. Wilson, I feel she's right that some of what Dr. Lepore talks about really should have been avoided due to a lack of research and understanding. That said, she's too snarky and dismissive of Dr. Lepore as a whole. Ms. Wilson is right that the way women are portrayed in comics has improved, but that's not a valid defense against arguments that it can improve even more.
I'm not even sure the two of them disagree on that much here rather. I think they're just both coming from different places and experiences resulting in talking through each other (and anyone else not coming from a similar places).
In regards to Ms. Wilson, I feel she's right that some of what Dr. Lepore talks about really should have been avoided due to a lack of research and understanding. That said, she's too snarky and dismissive of Dr. Lepore as a whole. Ms. Wilson is right that the way women are portrayed in comics has improved, but that's not a valid defense against arguments that it can improve even more.
I'm not even sure the two of them disagree on that much here rather. I think they're just both coming from different places and experiences resulting in talking through each other (and anyone else not coming from a similar places).
Yeah but the speculator market fucked those numbers. Folks thought they were going to be able to retire with hookers by selling those chronium covers
Aren't numbers now still lower than or equal to pre-speculator boom numbers?
Though digital comics probably has a lot to do with that.
People are celebrating someone dismissing a critic's argument by claiming it's handed down from an ivory tower?
It's an old and tired argument: Only those in the trenches possess insight! And then, for good measure: [Insert critic here] offers no solutions!
It's good Marvel's taking an active stance with its female characters. But part of this new policy is a very active grab at publicity, and its creators shouldn't be persnickety when not all of the attention is fawning.
It's an old and tired argument: Only those in the trenches possess insight! And then, for good measure: [Insert critic here] offers no solutions!
It's good Marvel's taking an active stance with its female characters. But part of this new policy is a very active grab at publicity, and its creators shouldn't be persnickety when not all of the attention is fawning.
Nah, comics are not sold in places they were during those times. You use to be able to run to the grocery or drug store and buy comics. Now you have to have to go to a comicbook shop, and those are rarer then hen's teeth.
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
Depends. For a monthly book the highest I've seen is around 100,000 but that's usually for your high profile books with a popular creative team like Batman. The rest is usually selling a little more than 50,000 or less. Not counting new #1's which can go higher due to everyone jumping on and collectors wanting to profit if they can on it and also not counting digital since places like comixology don't release any numbers.
Barnes and Noble and Toys R Us sell comic books but there mostly DC and Archie titles and their selections isn't as extensive as a comic shop.
BKatastrophe
Member
Yo frreal tho, my girls are busy I guess.my lady Kitty Pryde isn't either, but she's in two of her own books during Secret Wars so I guess I can't complain.
Yeah, Medusa is only about that allure.
A+++ posting right here
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I don't agree with the main gist of what Lepore wrote, but I think there are some salient points buried deep down in there coated in a mound of exaggeration. To quote another poster here:
I do agree with this. Just scanning the A-Force cover, it's not particularly great. I'm not being sex negative here, I think it's good to have role models and characters that encourage women to have sex and be sexual on their own terms, but I do feel the designs on the cover are pretty homogeneous in terms of the portrayed bodies and also there are just blatantly objectifying features going on that I don't think are sex positive.
In terms of body examples, what I mean is that for male superheroes, you have everything going from lithe and wiry to roided as fuck. Obviously, they're all beyond perfectly crafted physiques, which is fine given they're superheroes, but there's a little more recognition of the fact that there are lots of different ways physiques can be perfected. Wolverine is muscular as fuck and so is the Hulk and so is Spiderman, but one is short and stout, another huge and roided, and the third relatively lean and wirey. There is far, far less variety in female superheroes. They're all around the same height, and the same build, and all have larger breasts than normal, and all have even pretty similar facial structures. The degree of variety is severely lacking, and I think the reason for that is that the current height and build and breast size and facial structure is one that appeals to the average man.
(EDIT: I actually really liked that spread of She-Hulk with bodybuilders someone posted earlier, that was great for this very reason - it challenges norms of what a perfected female body is.)
The second is that there are features that definitely clash with their design. If you have tight, gripping latex, it still doesn't cling to your underboob - that's just now how the material works. They're not actually wearing latex at all, a more accurate comparison is to say they just have clothes 'painted on'. Now, this might also be true for male superheroes, but the distinction between 'painted on' and 'latex' is more blurred for male superheroes. You can argue one way or the other, because the male body doesn't really have any areas like underboob that wouldn't be revealed by latex but would be revealed with paint. I think because of the history of comics, people are more likely to assume that the default for male is latex - particularly because of the film portrayal where this is usually the literal truth - and thus the female equivalent looks like a direct attempt to just display some underboob for the lads.
I think that the A-Force cover is an improvement on some of the earlier comic eras in terms of portrayal of women, but there's still some way to go.
I do agree with this. Just scanning the A-Force cover, it's not particularly great. I'm not being sex negative here, I think it's good to have role models and characters that encourage women to have sex and be sexual on their own terms, but I do feel the designs on the cover are pretty homogeneous in terms of the portrayed bodies and also there are just blatantly objectifying features going on that I don't think are sex positive.
In terms of body examples, what I mean is that for male superheroes, you have everything going from lithe and wiry to roided as fuck. Obviously, they're all beyond perfectly crafted physiques, which is fine given they're superheroes, but there's a little more recognition of the fact that there are lots of different ways physiques can be perfected. Wolverine is muscular as fuck and so is the Hulk and so is Spiderman, but one is short and stout, another huge and roided, and the third relatively lean and wirey. There is far, far less variety in female superheroes. They're all around the same height, and the same build, and all have larger breasts than normal, and all have even pretty similar facial structures. The degree of variety is severely lacking, and I think the reason for that is that the current height and build and breast size and facial structure is one that appeals to the average man.
(EDIT: I actually really liked that spread of She-Hulk with bodybuilders someone posted earlier, that was great for this very reason - it challenges norms of what a perfected female body is.)
The second is that there are features that definitely clash with their design. If you have tight, gripping latex, it still doesn't cling to your underboob - that's just now how the material works. They're not actually wearing latex at all, a more accurate comparison is to say they just have clothes 'painted on'. Now, this might also be true for male superheroes, but the distinction between 'painted on' and 'latex' is more blurred for male superheroes. You can argue one way or the other, because the male body doesn't really have any areas like underboob that wouldn't be revealed by latex but would be revealed with paint. I think because of the history of comics, people are more likely to assume that the default for male is latex - particularly because of the film portrayal where this is usually the literal truth - and thus the female equivalent looks like a direct attempt to just display some underboob for the lads.
I think that the A-Force cover is an improvement on some of the earlier comic eras in terms of portrayal of women, but there's still some way to go.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
Don't bother posting examples - all I need to see is that pervy pornstar costume to write her off entirely as a character
Amazing as it sounds, that was all on the first page of his post history.
Straight outta my favorite porn!
I know right? Just brushing off Nico like that. I wonder if they even realise that shes not the female version of some other superhero.
There's always Solid Snake
Also still no explanation in what universe black widow and scarlet witch are pervy dressed.
PaulExcellent
Member
Oh my God. I need that so bad.While true, that's not a problem exclusive to women. But yeah, there is a very large lack of heavies or super heavies in Marvel. The fact that She-Hulk is considered to be the bodytype equivalent of the juggernaut is sort of crazy.
But then, you make a cover like this and people get vocal about how much they hate it.
People were SUPER fucking pissed about this spread.
Is there a place where I can get this?
BrightLightLava
Unconfirmed Member
poor kid :/
I'm still trying to rack my brain around the "pornstar" comment. Is this the kind of person that thinks exposed shoulders on a woman suggests sexual promiscuity or something?
If he/she's coming here just to shit on everything for no good reason, then... naw. Naw, son.
I think it's a combination of the style of dress AND the body type. In a vacuum these types of idealized bodies paired with a promiscuous style of dress can be harmful to progress but these characters can't be taken in a vacuum because most of them have decades of history and those that don't, like Wilson's Marvel and Spider Gwen are trope defying in almost every way. Lepore either chose to ignore these distinctions or she's simply unaware of them.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked