This post looks at one of the oldest (yet found) female figurines that has recently been dug up in Stuttgart. More specifically, it looks at how the archeologists et al have deemed it an early example of porn.
The writer then goes on to pull apart this assertion and show how the men commenting on this don't seem to be able to a) get past their own views on what constitutes pornography and b) coem up with any other reasons as to why figurines of women may have been created.
Gender blind and religion blind then.
Go read it.
Showing posts with label porn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label porn. Show all posts
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Monday, September 08, 2008
the link between porn and comics, or not...
well porn and pop culture in general really. And it should go without saying that this is obviously just my thoughts and me trying to establish them and I'm not saying I've got the definitive answer..
(or maybe I am? A-ha! we shall see!)
This post is inspired by a comment left my James Meeley at one of my previous posts. In it James said:
"I prefer my super hero comics and my soft core porn kept separate.
I'm sorry, but I just can't let this comment pass.
If you equate anything Jim Balent did on his Catwoman run (including this alternate reality mini-series) to porn (soft or hardcore) Then THAT is a true "fail." An "epic fail," as I believe the lingo of that goes.
I've read Jim Balent's Catwoman stuff and I've seen porn (soft and hardcore). Anyone who can't see a difference between the two either isn't trying, doesn't know what real porn is, or is simply a smarmy and snarky jerk (which, in MY book, is the worst of the three possibilities).
If someone doesn't like Jim Balent's art, that's fine. You want to say it is overly exaggerated or totally unrealistic, I can dig that. If you say it personally offends you, well, I'm cool with that, too. But to compare it to porn, even if only to be a snarky jerk, is a fundamental lack of understanding what porn is and how this is very different from it: in short, epic fail!"
(text in bold is quoting a comment from Toriach)
That comment led me to thinking. I have compared comic art to porn in the past *cough* Greg Land *cough* and I would still draw parallels between certain art styles and porn. But as James points out there is a difference.
I should probably point out here that I do watch porn. I am not an avid connoisseur I don't watch a lot and there's a lot of truly vile stuff out there. There's also some good stuff. But this isn't going to be a post about the type of porn I like, or even whether porn is a good or bad thing. It's also not going to be a post about whether we should have sexy women in comics.
Right, onwards with the subject. A lot of comic artists feature what I view as overly sexed up, sexualised women that have been influenced by porn. For example, there's the Jim Balent art shown in my previous post, Ian Churchill, Greg Land, Michael Turner. Although Michael Turner gets kudos for not drawing Supergirl with massive bosoms. (Unfortunately this was then negated in my eyes by the extreme low rider jeans and the knicker string pulled up above her hips, I mean, really.)
Most women in comics are depicted sexy first and 'strong' (whatever that may mean) second. Most renderings of women are in a similar style - huge boobs, tiny waist, skin tight costume, high heels. Sexed up. Thongs are everywhere. Even Raven, who I don't view as being particularly sexual in herself, is shown wearing skin tight barely there clothes under the cloak. Women in comics are objectified and judged on their appearance. Men aren't. I'm not going to go into why this is, if you disagree with me you may be at the wrong blog...
It's the proliferation of the same type of women, the same type of sexy that bothers me. I recently read Ariel Levy's Female Chauvinist Pigs - Women and the rise of raunch culture. In it she talked about the pornification of pop culture. How images and themes from porn are surfacing in our everyday public lives, where 10, 15, 20 years ago they were very much separate*. Things like thongs, full muff waxes, lap dancing acceptability, pole dancing lessons, faux sex in music videos, porn star in training t-shirts, playboy bunny merchandise (belts, clothes and kids stationery), Borat mankinis (am I pushing it here?) etc.**(EDIT)
This leads to the situation where there is only one type of sexuality on display - and it's all about women faking it. If women are copying women in porn, or being encouraged to copy women in porn, then there's no real demonstration of female sexuality. because women in porn aren't really getting off on it. (OK some may be, but the vast majority aren't in porn cos they just can't get enough sex. It's a job). Women copying or being inspired by porn are pandering to a male vision of what our sexuality is like. They are not doing it for themselves, they are doing it for men. Now there's something quite fucked up in there, especially when you consider it's a male view of what women should look like or be like before/during/after sex/to be sexy.
But back to the point, I think that this specific type of sexuality is what is displayed in comics, most of the time. Not always. For example, Renato Guedes, Alex Ross, Ale Garza, Cliff Richards, Mike Grell, J G Jones.
As mentioned above, Greg Land apparently traces his women directly from porn. Does he trace the men too? I don't know. (Still at least his women are anatomically correct). Others just use the (intended or not) pornification of our public lives and a lot of comic art is linked to porn. Maybe not equaling porn, but there is a definite correlation.
As I said at the start, I watch porn, I like some of it. I don't however want it or it's derivation in my comics and magazines. I don't think our lives should be over sexualised, I don't think women should be displayed in terms only of their tits and ass, I think there's more to us than that and I think it demeans both the viewer and the viewed when we are reduced to our component body parts, or portrayed in terms of our fuckability. But if you use porn as your inspiration that's what you get. I repeat, that's fine, in porn, when it's sole purpose is to make you get off, but not so acceptable when you are meant to be telling a story about heroics.
In short, I think both James Meeley and Toriach have valid points. But I'm siding with the view that Jim Balent's art is influenced by porn, as is a lot of other comic art.
Have I explained myself adequately? Have I even said anything at all? I shall come back and check tomorrow.
*I don't know, I'm only 28, maybe I've got my assumptions about past decades completely wrong. Can older readers help me out with feedback?
**EDIT - something I forgot to include which might help my point. All those images of women lying beaten ont he ground, with arched backs and thrust hips, gravity defying boobs, strategically ripped clothing and pouty lips. Utterly sexualised and woudl generally seem more in place in a porn mag or as a porn still than at the end of a battle scene, because it makes no bleedin' sense in context.
(or maybe I am? A-ha! we shall see!)
This post is inspired by a comment left my James Meeley at one of my previous posts. In it James said:
"I prefer my super hero comics and my soft core porn kept separate.
I'm sorry, but I just can't let this comment pass.
If you equate anything Jim Balent did on his Catwoman run (including this alternate reality mini-series) to porn (soft or hardcore) Then THAT is a true "fail." An "epic fail," as I believe the lingo of that goes.
I've read Jim Balent's Catwoman stuff and I've seen porn (soft and hardcore). Anyone who can't see a difference between the two either isn't trying, doesn't know what real porn is, or is simply a smarmy and snarky jerk (which, in MY book, is the worst of the three possibilities).
If someone doesn't like Jim Balent's art, that's fine. You want to say it is overly exaggerated or totally unrealistic, I can dig that. If you say it personally offends you, well, I'm cool with that, too. But to compare it to porn, even if only to be a snarky jerk, is a fundamental lack of understanding what porn is and how this is very different from it: in short, epic fail!"
(text in bold is quoting a comment from Toriach)
That comment led me to thinking. I have compared comic art to porn in the past *cough* Greg Land *cough* and I would still draw parallels between certain art styles and porn. But as James points out there is a difference.
I should probably point out here that I do watch porn. I am not an avid connoisseur I don't watch a lot and there's a lot of truly vile stuff out there. There's also some good stuff. But this isn't going to be a post about the type of porn I like, or even whether porn is a good or bad thing. It's also not going to be a post about whether we should have sexy women in comics.
Right, onwards with the subject. A lot of comic artists feature what I view as overly sexed up, sexualised women that have been influenced by porn. For example, there's the Jim Balent art shown in my previous post, Ian Churchill, Greg Land, Michael Turner. Although Michael Turner gets kudos for not drawing Supergirl with massive bosoms. (Unfortunately this was then negated in my eyes by the extreme low rider jeans and the knicker string pulled up above her hips, I mean, really.)
Most women in comics are depicted sexy first and 'strong' (whatever that may mean) second. Most renderings of women are in a similar style - huge boobs, tiny waist, skin tight costume, high heels. Sexed up. Thongs are everywhere. Even Raven, who I don't view as being particularly sexual in herself, is shown wearing skin tight barely there clothes under the cloak. Women in comics are objectified and judged on their appearance. Men aren't. I'm not going to go into why this is, if you disagree with me you may be at the wrong blog...
It's the proliferation of the same type of women, the same type of sexy that bothers me. I recently read Ariel Levy's Female Chauvinist Pigs - Women and the rise of raunch culture. In it she talked about the pornification of pop culture. How images and themes from porn are surfacing in our everyday public lives, where 10, 15, 20 years ago they were very much separate*. Things like thongs, full muff waxes, lap dancing acceptability, pole dancing lessons, faux sex in music videos, porn star in training t-shirts, playboy bunny merchandise (belts, clothes and kids stationery), Borat mankinis (am I pushing it here?) etc.**(EDIT)
This leads to the situation where there is only one type of sexuality on display - and it's all about women faking it. If women are copying women in porn, or being encouraged to copy women in porn, then there's no real demonstration of female sexuality. because women in porn aren't really getting off on it. (OK some may be, but the vast majority aren't in porn cos they just can't get enough sex. It's a job). Women copying or being inspired by porn are pandering to a male vision of what our sexuality is like. They are not doing it for themselves, they are doing it for men. Now there's something quite fucked up in there, especially when you consider it's a male view of what women should look like or be like before/during/after sex/to be sexy.
But back to the point, I think that this specific type of sexuality is what is displayed in comics, most of the time. Not always. For example, Renato Guedes, Alex Ross, Ale Garza, Cliff Richards, Mike Grell, J G Jones.
As mentioned above, Greg Land apparently traces his women directly from porn. Does he trace the men too? I don't know. (Still at least his women are anatomically correct). Others just use the (intended or not) pornification of our public lives and a lot of comic art is linked to porn. Maybe not equaling porn, but there is a definite correlation.
As I said at the start, I watch porn, I like some of it. I don't however want it or it's derivation in my comics and magazines. I don't think our lives should be over sexualised, I don't think women should be displayed in terms only of their tits and ass, I think there's more to us than that and I think it demeans both the viewer and the viewed when we are reduced to our component body parts, or portrayed in terms of our fuckability. But if you use porn as your inspiration that's what you get. I repeat, that's fine, in porn, when it's sole purpose is to make you get off, but not so acceptable when you are meant to be telling a story about heroics.
In short, I think both James Meeley and Toriach have valid points. But I'm siding with the view that Jim Balent's art is influenced by porn, as is a lot of other comic art.
Have I explained myself adequately? Have I even said anything at all? I shall come back and check tomorrow.
*I don't know, I'm only 28, maybe I've got my assumptions about past decades completely wrong. Can older readers help me out with feedback?
**EDIT - something I forgot to include which might help my point. All those images of women lying beaten ont he ground, with arched backs and thrust hips, gravity defying boobs, strategically ripped clothing and pouty lips. Utterly sexualised and woudl generally seem more in place in a porn mag or as a porn still than at the end of a battle scene, because it makes no bleedin' sense in context.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Nightwing... (spoilers)
I've been hideously busy lately hence the lack of posts. I'm still hideously busy but today I've given myself a day off to just relax and do what I want, instead of what I should do. Hence lots of Nightwing reading and some blogging. I'm looking forward to getting my life back.
So, I am reading my way through the Nightwing series now and I must say it's pretty enjoyable. Far more so than I expected, and has a lot less problems than the Flash run did. Which means less indignation for me, hurrah! This will be another long post, interspersed with pictures.
Firstly, Greg Land did a run on this title and I was very surprised to notice a complete lack of pornface. Obviously I've been doing the guy a disservice before as he appears to be able to draw women in normal looking poses. Whether he's traced them or not I can't tell, and the art isn't particularly stand out, merely average, but still better than I expected. I'm considering giving him kudos for not constantly drawing pornface but then I realise it's a sad state of affairs to congratulate someone on not drawing porn in a non porn comic.
Tells you a lot about the state of American superhero comics doesn't it? *sigh*
Good aspect number 2: There's this new hero on the scene called Tarantula, she's a lady superhero. Her and Nightwing met then she tries to lose him. Of course, Grayson has been trained by the world's greatest detective so works out she's hiding under a ledge. Like a spider. Do you see what they've done there?
Here's the page:
She slapped him, hurrah! There's not enough of that going on. On a bad note, this woman has grown up in Bludhaven, she knows what it's like. And yet leaves her torso exposed. Shouldn't she be wearing Kevlar? Or something protective? Oh no, exposing flesh is more important than a coherent framework.
Now I think I mentioned before about how the Pied Piper's gayness wasn't really talked about in the Flash comic. They've done a lot better in Nightwing. Basically Dick gets partnered with a new guy who keeps getting beat up in the locker room by a bunch of homophobic policeman. Dick steps in, because y'know he's a hero and protects the innocent etc.
One of the muggers says 'What, are you Grayson, his boyfriend?'. There's a pause and Dick responds 'What if I am?'. We're meant to think that shows how wonderful Dick is, he's not a bigot and he doesn't care about what people think. A knight in shining armour for his abused colleague. I think that this is a very heterocentric way of viewing things. And this is dealt with on the next page!
If you can't read the text the dialogue is as follows:
Grayson: I'm going to file a report with Amy [the boss] OK? The problem's theirs not yours. And I'm here for you, you don't have to deal with this alone..
Gannon: No, you know what? As long as they're hitting me, the problem's mine. And I'm not alone, though that's got nothing to do with your smug little moment of PC bravado back there. save your speeches for your girlfriend Grayson. The only thing I need you to do for me is make sure I don't get shot in the back between 8 and 6.
Fucking score. It's really rare to see that point of view put across. To reinforce that gay people don't need to be saved by straight people, that we're not alone and we're not angsty. And in a later issue we go to Gannon's house and see his fella. And it's explicit they are in a relationship, it's not using hints!
Last point. This big guy called Roland Desmond thinks Nightwing caused his mother to have a heart attack and die. So he sets out to destroy everyone Dick knows. He blows up his apartment block, kills all the residents bar 2. He has Dick's circus set on fire, injuring and killing many. He blows up his partner's house intending t kill the whole family, he goes after Babs (who Dick obviously tries to save despite the fact Barbara is more than capable of holding her own. Pfft. Male heroes).
When Dick and Tarantula catches up to Roland he realises Roland will kill everyone he knows, everyone he saves, everyone he smiles at, shakes hands with etc. So Dick makes the choice to let Tarantula shoot him. Predictably this sends him into a meltdown as he's crossed the line. Then something weird goes on with the story. Tarantula takes Dick onto the roof to make their getaway:
Well blow me but that don't half look like they're having sex. Which is a fucking weird plot twist for a start. Now bear in mind that Dick is ranting and raving at this point and really isn't in his right mind..definitely not in terms of consenting to sex anyhow..which makes me think that isn't a sex scene, it's a rape scene.
So, I am reading my way through the Nightwing series now and I must say it's pretty enjoyable. Far more so than I expected, and has a lot less problems than the Flash run did. Which means less indignation for me, hurrah! This will be another long post, interspersed with pictures.
Firstly, Greg Land did a run on this title and I was very surprised to notice a complete lack of pornface. Obviously I've been doing the guy a disservice before as he appears to be able to draw women in normal looking poses. Whether he's traced them or not I can't tell, and the art isn't particularly stand out, merely average, but still better than I expected. I'm considering giving him kudos for not constantly drawing pornface but then I realise it's a sad state of affairs to congratulate someone on not drawing porn in a non porn comic.
Tells you a lot about the state of American superhero comics doesn't it? *sigh*
Good aspect number 2: There's this new hero on the scene called Tarantula, she's a lady superhero. Her and Nightwing met then she tries to lose him. Of course, Grayson has been trained by the world's greatest detective so works out she's hiding under a ledge. Like a spider. Do you see what they've done there?
Here's the page:
She slapped him, hurrah! There's not enough of that going on. On a bad note, this woman has grown up in Bludhaven, she knows what it's like. And yet leaves her torso exposed. Shouldn't she be wearing Kevlar? Or something protective? Oh no, exposing flesh is more important than a coherent framework.
Now I think I mentioned before about how the Pied Piper's gayness wasn't really talked about in the Flash comic. They've done a lot better in Nightwing. Basically Dick gets partnered with a new guy who keeps getting beat up in the locker room by a bunch of homophobic policeman. Dick steps in, because y'know he's a hero and protects the innocent etc.
One of the muggers says 'What, are you Grayson, his boyfriend?'. There's a pause and Dick responds 'What if I am?'. We're meant to think that shows how wonderful Dick is, he's not a bigot and he doesn't care about what people think. A knight in shining armour for his abused colleague. I think that this is a very heterocentric way of viewing things. And this is dealt with on the next page!
If you can't read the text the dialogue is as follows:
Grayson: I'm going to file a report with Amy [the boss] OK? The problem's theirs not yours. And I'm here for you, you don't have to deal with this alone..
Gannon: No, you know what? As long as they're hitting me, the problem's mine. And I'm not alone, though that's got nothing to do with your smug little moment of PC bravado back there. save your speeches for your girlfriend Grayson. The only thing I need you to do for me is make sure I don't get shot in the back between 8 and 6.
Fucking score. It's really rare to see that point of view put across. To reinforce that gay people don't need to be saved by straight people, that we're not alone and we're not angsty. And in a later issue we go to Gannon's house and see his fella. And it's explicit they are in a relationship, it's not using hints!
Last point. This big guy called Roland Desmond thinks Nightwing caused his mother to have a heart attack and die. So he sets out to destroy everyone Dick knows. He blows up his apartment block, kills all the residents bar 2. He has Dick's circus set on fire, injuring and killing many. He blows up his partner's house intending t kill the whole family, he goes after Babs (who Dick obviously tries to save despite the fact Barbara is more than capable of holding her own. Pfft. Male heroes).
When Dick and Tarantula catches up to Roland he realises Roland will kill everyone he knows, everyone he saves, everyone he smiles at, shakes hands with etc. So Dick makes the choice to let Tarantula shoot him. Predictably this sends him into a meltdown as he's crossed the line. Then something weird goes on with the story. Tarantula takes Dick onto the roof to make their getaway:
Well blow me but that don't half look like they're having sex. Which is a fucking weird plot twist for a start. Now bear in mind that Dick is ranting and raving at this point and really isn't in his right mind..definitely not in terms of consenting to sex anyhow..which makes me think that isn't a sex scene, it's a rape scene.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Hands, porn, lesbians, libraries, voodoo and lip reading
So, I finished reading Young Justice. As people may have noticed I think it's rather good. But there's always a but, right? Take Empress - cool costume, cool power, cool character background etc etc. I feel that making the sole black chick's power a voodoo one is, how shall we say it, racial stereotyping? And then on top of that she gets naked to cast a spell? Jesus. I call that racist. Probably not racist through maliciousness, more racist through lack of imagination and thought, but still racist.
My other problem with the run is the deaf girl Arrowette makes friends with on the way to the games. I'm fully supportive of including more (any?) deaf people in comics and literature but i think it should be handled well. It should not be inferred that deaf people are experts on lip reading. Only about 30% of all words are formed on the lips, the rest are formed with the tongue and throat. So, it's impossible to lip read 100% of all speech. It really would be nice to see communication issues reflected accurately.
Given Peter David's inclusion of a couple of deaf characters in Supergirl and Young Justice
I wonder if he suddenly came in contact with deaf people at some point, maybe a member of his family or a friend went deaf suddenly? It reminds me of Judd Winick bringing in HIV positive characters. Which again I fully support. Comics can provide a good forum to educate people about illnesses/disability/social issues so bring it on. Just do it right. Please? Do your research first.
(And on another note, I really hate Cassandra Cain's ability to read body movement like a language - it doesn't make sense! People growing up without speech and without hearing don't communicate as she did. It's a stupid plot device.)
On to Buffy issue 12. So she slept with Satsu. Big deal. This doesn't make her gay, or even bi. This simply means she slept with a chick. Some of the blogs I've read that have looked appear to be getting hung up on whether this makes Buffy gay or bi. I say, does it matter? It's just sex. And I don't think you can draw parallels between Buffy's previous unconventional relationships and sleeping with a girl. So Angel and Spike were dead vampires. They're still hot male dead vampires. That's quite different from women. I'm quite offended that some people think women and dead male vampires have something in common.
I should add that fro Buffy to be gay or bi she'd have to actually crush on women. I doubt she has a proper hard on for Satsu, I think she needed comfort and closeness and orgasms. You don't have to fancy someone to sleep with them.
And the rest of the comic? Awesome. This series is getting better and better each issue. But Willow flying really pisses me off for some reason. I'm picky and don't think anyone in the Buffyverse should be able to fly. It just doesn't seem to fit.
And I also just read the whole Genshiken series. I liked. One of the more notable parts of it was the abundance of porn for women they' showed. And showed it as part of everyday life for the characters, it wasn't anything to be ashamed of. It was read the same way the men read their porn, it was discussed openly, and recommended to friends and it was normalised.
By extensions this normalises female sexuality and realises women do have sex drives and desires and fantasies. Compare that to Western attitudes towards porn and women and I see that Genshiken deals with this in an incredibly mature and praiseworthy way. It's a relief to see women reading and buying porn without shame, without being subject to ridicule or name calling. Bring it on.
Superman 674
Their new house. Want want want! Check out that library space. *drools*
Serenity 1
Hurrah for the explosions and the guns! Boo in a big way for the cover. That's an Adam Hughes cover? What, did he draw it blindfolded? Look at the hands! And Mal's neck, and Zoe's very very forced grin - she looks like somethings pinning her cheeks back.
My other problem with the run is the deaf girl Arrowette makes friends with on the way to the games. I'm fully supportive of including more (any?) deaf people in comics and literature but i think it should be handled well. It should not be inferred that deaf people are experts on lip reading. Only about 30% of all words are formed on the lips, the rest are formed with the tongue and throat. So, it's impossible to lip read 100% of all speech. It really would be nice to see communication issues reflected accurately.
Given Peter David's inclusion of a couple of deaf characters in Supergirl and Young Justice
I wonder if he suddenly came in contact with deaf people at some point, maybe a member of his family or a friend went deaf suddenly? It reminds me of Judd Winick bringing in HIV positive characters. Which again I fully support. Comics can provide a good forum to educate people about illnesses/disability/social issues so bring it on. Just do it right. Please? Do your research first.
(And on another note, I really hate Cassandra Cain's ability to read body movement like a language - it doesn't make sense! People growing up without speech and without hearing don't communicate as she did. It's a stupid plot device.)
On to Buffy issue 12. So she slept with Satsu. Big deal. This doesn't make her gay, or even bi. This simply means she slept with a chick. Some of the blogs I've read that have looked appear to be getting hung up on whether this makes Buffy gay or bi. I say, does it matter? It's just sex. And I don't think you can draw parallels between Buffy's previous unconventional relationships and sleeping with a girl. So Angel and Spike were dead vampires. They're still hot male dead vampires. That's quite different from women. I'm quite offended that some people think women and dead male vampires have something in common.
I should add that fro Buffy to be gay or bi she'd have to actually crush on women. I doubt she has a proper hard on for Satsu, I think she needed comfort and closeness and orgasms. You don't have to fancy someone to sleep with them.
And the rest of the comic? Awesome. This series is getting better and better each issue. But Willow flying really pisses me off for some reason. I'm picky and don't think anyone in the Buffyverse should be able to fly. It just doesn't seem to fit.
And I also just read the whole Genshiken series. I liked. One of the more notable parts of it was the abundance of porn for women they' showed. And showed it as part of everyday life for the characters, it wasn't anything to be ashamed of. It was read the same way the men read their porn, it was discussed openly, and recommended to friends and it was normalised.
By extensions this normalises female sexuality and realises women do have sex drives and desires and fantasies. Compare that to Western attitudes towards porn and women and I see that Genshiken deals with this in an incredibly mature and praiseworthy way. It's a relief to see women reading and buying porn without shame, without being subject to ridicule or name calling. Bring it on.
Superman 674
Their new house. Want want want! Check out that library space. *drools*
Serenity 1
Hurrah for the explosions and the guns! Boo in a big way for the cover. That's an Adam Hughes cover? What, did he draw it blindfolded? Look at the hands! And Mal's neck, and Zoe's very very forced grin - she looks like somethings pinning her cheeks back.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)