General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[CAHokie]

The fact that publishers, artists, writers, readers and collectors still want/produce this kind of stuff is a sad indictment of the industry.

 

If only they could produce some well-written stories then I could probably live with having well-endowed women being thrust at me from the pages of a comic book.

 

They're producing it because people are buying it, so it's more an indictment of the consumer. I said this many years ago on here but I think some people buy these books and ogle cosplayers at cons because it's an 'innocent' and under the radar way of getting their soft porn fix.

 

Ok, if we are going to psychoanalyze that somehow buying a J. Scott Campbell cover means you are trying to get your soft porn fix, then please analyze the mental issues of all the 30-50 year old men on here read comic books with men in tights trying to save the world.

[Ryan.]

It's escapism from the tragic dreariness and sameness of our everyday lives. The oversexualized stuff acts as unattainable fantasy. The interest in violence serves as a way of promoting awareness of danger. Surely there's a real reason behind why sex and violence is interesting to humans beyond us being "pathetic" or "sad".

 

Yes, but are comic books really the place for unattainable sexual fantasies? Isn't that what porn is for (and I include softcore, hardcore, men's magazines, the SI swimsuit special and everything inbetween in that)? I was under the impression that comics were supposed to be about great stories and art.

 

It's not ALL pathetic or sad - but I have to confess I'm totally nonplussed by the GFT stuff. I've never heard anyone talk about the stories and a lot of the covers are frankly ridiculous.

 

Sex Criminals contains hardcore and softcore porn, a completely unattainable sexual fantasy, and a great story and art. Now what?

 

For what it's worth, the most provocative cover I own is probably Rifleman 10. The Zenescope stuff does nothing for me but if people like it they aren't sad. Maybe they just like it.

 

That is a book specifically about sex. We are talking about the pervasiveness of female imagery throughout the industry as a whole.

 

I didn't say people were sad if they like Zenescope books. My only point is that comics should - in my opinion - be focussed on story and art rather than tits and .

 

Fair enough. And I agree actually. I just don't find the Society is Crumbling narrative to be very compelling. I think that narrative has been going on continuously for 6000 years and yet here we all are.

[Jeffro.]

It's escapism from the tragic dreariness and sameness of our everyday lives. The oversexualized stuff acts as unattainable fantasy. The interest in violence serves as a way of promoting awareness of danger. Surely there's a real reason behind why sex and violence is interesting to humans beyond us being "pathetic" or "sad".

 

Point taken. Perhaps, pathetic and sad were not the best choice of words. However, watching Michael Myers skewer people with a carving knife hardly promotes an "awareness of danger"

Perhaps if I ever found myself about to be skewered by Michael Myers with a craving knife it would be an invaluable help to me. However, in the real world, not so much

[Balham's Finest]

The fact that publishers, artists, writers, readers and collectors still want/produce this kind of stuff is a sad indictment of the industry.

 

If only they could produce some well-written stories then I could probably live with having well-endowed women being thrust at me from the pages of a comic book.

 

They're producing it because people are buying it, so it's more an indictment of the consumer. I said this many years ago on here but I think some people buy these books and ogle cosplayers at cons because it's an 'innocent' and under the radar way of getting their soft porn fix.

 

Ok, if we are going to psychoanalyze that somehow buying a J. Scott Campbell cover means you are trying to get your soft porn fix, then please analyze the mental issues of all the 30-50 year old men on here read comic books with men in tights trying to save the world.

 

If you're genuinely interested in the answer to that question, you might want to read Supergods (Grant Morrison).

[CAHokie]

So, dragon_ball_shane is now WHIZ_BANG_POW?

 

Brrrrrrr...

 

 

At least it's not WHIZ_BANG_POW_IS_AWESOME [/quote

 

I bet he changed it because no one is buying his junk in the sales thread. I warned him when he first got here that if he made a spectacle of himself and decided to be a seller no one would trust him. It goes without saying that we knew that was going to be his only reason for being on the boards in the first place.

[Balham's Finest]

It's escapism from the tragic dreariness and sameness of our everyday lives. The oversexualized stuff acts as unattainable fantasy. The interest in violence serves as a way of promoting awareness of danger. Surely there's a real reason behind why sex and violence is interesting to humans beyond us being "pathetic" or "sad".

 

Yes, but are comic books really the place for unattainable sexual fantasies? Isn't that what porn is for (and I include softcore, hardcore, men's magazines, the SI swimsuit special and everything inbetween in that)? I was under the impression that comics were supposed to be about great stories and art.

 

It's not ALL pathetic or sad - but I have to confess I'm totally nonplussed by the GFT stuff. I've never heard anyone talk about the stories and a lot of the covers are frankly ridiculous.

 

Sex Criminals contains hardcore and softcore porn, a completely unattainable sexual fantasy, and a great story and art. Now what?

 

For what it's worth, the most provocative cover I own is probably Rifleman 10. The Zenescope stuff does nothing for me but if people like it they aren't sad. Maybe they just like it.

 

That is a book specifically about sex. We are talking about the pervasiveness of female imagery throughout the industry as a whole.

 

I didn't say people were sad if they like Zenescope books. My only point is that comics should - in my opinion - be focussed on story and art rather than tits and .

 

Fair enough. And I agree actually. I just don't find the Society is Crumbling narrative to be very compelling. I think that narrative has been going on continuously for 6000 years and yet here we all are.

 

We're on the same page I think. I am not saying that there is no place at all for sex and violence as commodities (to a point, obviously).

[CAHokie]

The fact that publishers, artists, writers, readers and collectors still want/produce this kind of stuff is a sad indictment of the industry.

 

If only they could produce some well-written stories then I could probably live with having well-endowed women being thrust at me from the pages of a comic book.

 

They're producing it because people are buying it, so it's more an indictment of the consumer. I said this many years ago on here but I think some people buy these books and ogle cosplayers at cons because it's an 'innocent' and under the radar way of getting their soft porn fix.

 

Ok, if we are going to psychoanalyze that somehow buying a J. Scott Campbell cover means you are trying to get your soft porn fix, then please analyze the mental issues of all the 30-50 year old men on here read comic books with men in tights trying to save the world.

 

If you're genuinely interested in the answer to that question, you might want to read Supergods (Grant Morrison).

 

I was speaking rhetorically. I completely agree about the covers that are nothing short of being straight porn but if we are going to generalize people we should really look at this hobby as a whole. You know, the whole throwing stones in a glass house analogy. Most people assume comic book readers are little nerds that have no life and sit in a basement all day trying to live out a fantasy since they have boring lives. In reality you have collectors that do or have fought in wars overseas, are police or firemen and live pretty eventful lives already proving that judgement wrong.

[Balham's Finest]

The fact that publishers, artists, writers, readers and collectors still want/produce this kind of stuff is a sad indictment of the industry.

 

If only they could produce some well-written stories then I could probably live with having well-endowed women being thrust at me from the pages of a comic book.

 

They're producing it because people are buying it, so it's more an indictment of the consumer. I said this many years ago on here but I think some people buy these books and ogle cosplayers at cons because it's an 'innocent' and under the radar way of getting their soft porn fix.

 

Ok, if we are going to psychoanalyze that somehow buying a J. Scott Campbell cover means you are trying to get your soft porn fix, then please analyze the mental issues of all the 30-50 year old men on here read comic books with men in tights trying to save the world.

 

If you're genuinely interested in the answer to that question, you might want to read Supergods (Grant Morrison).

 

I was speaking rhetorically. I completely agree about the covers that are nothing short of being straight porn but if we are going to generalize people we should really look at this hobby as a whole. You know, the whole throwing stones in a glass house analogy. Most people assume comic book readers are little nerds that have no life and sit in a basement all day trying to live out a fantasy since they have boring lives. In reality you have collectors that do or have fought in wars overseas, are police or firemen and live pretty eventful lives already proving that judgement wrong.

 

I don't think anyone is making the argument that people buy GFT covers or JSC ones because they live boring lives though. Plenty of very interesting people read comics, as you say. And everybody likes to fantasise to a greater or lesser extent (about many different things, for that matter).

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but to me, comics - like all fiction - are about escapism. Power fantasies of superheroes and whatever else are totally consistent with that. Sexual ones (and again, I'm including the whole spectrum of "sexual" when I say that) aren't - primarily because there are other, purpose-built, avenues for that kind of thing.

 

That's the only point I'm trying to make. And that's why I at boob pockets. To me, that's nothing to do with what comics should be about. Others have a totally different view, and that's great - I'm not trying to impose mine on anyone.

[CAHokie]

The fact that publishers, artists, writers, readers and collectors still want/produce this kind of stuff is a sad indictment of the industry.

 

If only they could produce some well-written stories then I could probably live with having well-endowed women being thrust at me from the pages of a comic book.

 

They're producing it because people are buying it, so it's more an indictment of the consumer. I said this many years ago on here but I think some people buy these books and ogle cosplayers at cons because it's an 'innocent' and under the radar way of getting their soft porn fix.

 

Ok, if we are going to psychoanalyze that somehow buying a J. Scott Campbell cover means you are trying to get your soft porn fix, then please analyze the mental issues of all the 30-50 year old men on here read comic books with men in tights trying to save the world.

 

If you're genuinely interested in the answer to that question, you might want to read Supergods (Grant Morrison).

 

I was speaking rhetorically. I completely agree about the covers that are nothing short of being straight porn but if we are going to generalize people we should really look at this hobby as a whole. You know, the whole throwing stones in a glass house analogy. Most people assume comic book readers are little nerds that have no life and sit in a basement all day trying to live out a fantasy since they have boring lives. In reality you have collectors that do or have fought in wars overseas, are police or firemen and live pretty eventful lives already proving that judgement wrong.

 

I don't think anyone is making the argument that people buy GFT covers or JSC ones because they live boring lives though. Plenty of very interesting people read comics, as you say. And everybody likes to fantasise to a greater or lesser extent (about many different things, for that matter).

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but to me, comics - like all fiction - are about escapism. Power fantasies of superheroes and whatever else are totally consistent with that. Sexual ones (and again, I'm including the whole spectrum of "sexual" when I say that) aren't - primarily because there are other, purpose-built, avenues for that kind of thing.

 

That's the only point I'm trying to make. And that's why I at boob pockets. To me, that's nothing to do with what comics should be about. Others have a totally different view, and that's great - I'm not trying to impose mine on anyone.

 

(thumbs u

 

Oh and at boob pockets! That is actually pretty funny.

[skypinkblu]

I have no interest in those extremely suggestive covers so I can understand you not liking them. How do you feel about the way artists like Campbell, Tyndall, Horn and McTeigue draw popular female characters? They are obviously well endowed but not (usually) in provocative poses. I will admit that I like those covers, and judging by the way they sell so do a lot of others.

 

I know this question wasn't directed at me, but here's my pet peeve with the types of cover you're talking about: boob pockets.

 

What I mean by that is that female characters are typically drawn wearing costumes that are skintight over the whole of their boobs - costumes that would only actually look like that if they had made to measure built-in pockets for boobs to be tucked in.

 

You never see clothes that look like that in real life, because they don't exist. Certainly the female characters in the movies don't appear like that. It's basically just an excuse to draw naked women and pretend they have clothes on.

 

Now for the record, I'm not disgusted or outraged or anything else over these covers. If people want to publish them and buy them, then fine by me. But it does make me a bit every time I see them. Here's a random example of what I'm talking about. What do you think these outfits would look like on the hanger?

 

 

My bet is, non of the artists are busty females who have tried running without a bra.

 

What does GFT mean?

[Balham's Finest]

Grimm Fairy Tales

[CAHokie]

Well, I would say there are plenty of women artists like Dawn McTeigue, that draw females very well endowed and is very pretty herself.

[CAHokie]

Grimm Fairy Tales

 

I tried to read some of those one time and couldn't make it halfway through. They have to sell simply because of the covers because I see no other redeeming quality in them.

[skypinkblu]

Well, I would say there are plenty of women artists like Dawn McTeigue, that draw females very well endowed and is very pretty herself.

 

I bet she wears a sports bra when she runs or a supportive bra when she walks.

 

It has nothing to do with being pretty, it has to do with being uncomfortable.

 

and thanks Baltham:)

[CAHokie]

True enough on that! I would imagine that the Black Cat would have many accidental "spills" if she was real and trying to fight and jump around in those outfits. She wouldn't make it one minute.

 

Oh and just to be clear. I actually agree with what you guys are saying and totally respect and genuinely interested in a woman's point of view on this topic. My only point is that everyone who likes JSC is not necessarily a sexual deviant.

[jsilverjanet]

True enough on that! I would imagine that the Black Cat would have many accidental "spills" if she was real and trying to fight and jump around in those outfits. She wouldn't make it one minute.

 

Oh and just to be clear. I actually agree with what you guys are saying and totally respect and genuinely interested in a woman's point of view on this topic. My only point is that everyone who likes JSC is not necessarily a sexual deviant.

 

Whatever perv

 

[CAHokie]

[Comicopolis]

Grimm Fairy Tales

 

I tried to read some of those one time and couldn't make it halfway through. They have to sell simply because of the covers because I see no other redeeming quality in them.

 

I think that Sharon was just pretending not to know what GFT is.

 

[Comicopolis]

 

That is a curious drawing. Then again he is called Woody.

[MetalPSI]

Anyways...

 

Who has cool comics to talk about?