>Drawing women sexy is an automatic response to many artists. Done without thought. I was like that for many years until I recognized it
>If you choose to draw women sexy, that’s fine! Discussing alternatives and recognizing patterns should not threaten you.
>My intent is to help those who WANT to promote change in their work (which can be challenging). Not to shame those who choose otherwise.
>in order to de-sexify Power Girl you must make her gain weight
problematic
Its muscle you faggot. Power girl with no muscle makse zero sence. Like a skinny super man
at least they dont just add 20 kgs and call it a day
Gonna drop some Cho on this.
Stop trying to make women not sexy because your self consious of your own fat body you self absorbed cow
Why is this relevant or important and not just a pointless waste of everyone's time?
>makes a bait thread
>people fall for it
Congratulations you faggot, you accomplished being a successful cancer.
oh also I like the look of right more, just give her slightly bigger tits and hips and we're golden
it doesn't help that left isn't drawn that well in the first place, that ass/leg is very unflattering
The drawing on the right only make her hotter
I DEMAND HARDBODY WOMEN
Obviously, it was bait to pull you out of hiding.
I'm sure you're asked this a lot, but: Is it even possible to do that with soda cups?
Fuck it, POWER GIRL THREAD!!
Considering she has actual muscle mass, yeah. That design on the right is very similar to the Pal/Gray design. Just smaller boobs and a different style for the head.
I know there's likely gonna be a dogpile on this, but the left is a kind of look that should be used for specific kinds of characters rather than as a default, just like the right.
Ok
May as well fuck a dude
Right looks better.
Yea, it's cold though. Now the gif where it's shaking around like an earthquake, that takes skill.
IF THIS IS A MAN THEN I AM A MIGHTY FAGGOT
If it's what they want to do do they really need a guide?
Isn't it as simple as saying...that seems too sexy to me.
When does the one that does the same for men come out? I would like to see how they will tone down the abs, strong jaw, overly heroic and fake posing and no more spandex. You know, to promote equality.
do you cosplay?
A lot of comic artists are too stupid and horny and lazy to try.
Seriously, look what happened to Mary Jane in the late 80's/early 90's.
I would be gay for a day if this is a dude, top only.
sauce?
It's already out; we call it "every thread mocking Rob Liefeld and Jim Lee."
>You know, to promote equality.
There's different ways to do things.
She was a fucking supermodel she was supposed to be sexy you ass
...
What happened?
Also "try" goes against what OP is implying.
If they're too horny and lazy to try that's their choice.
Her name is Natasha Aughey. She has a vagina.
>I'm not pretty so everything else must be as ugly as me or uglier.
Interesting choice of comparison, assuming we're talking about a Kryptonian Power Girl.
Their strength doesn't come from their muscles. Their powers don't make them put on muscle mass. Their powers idealize their bodies. Thus Superman is ripped, and Power Girl is curvy. You can make the muscle argument for, say, Batwoman, but not for Power Girl.
Thus Power Girl should have the body seen on the left in the OP
The right-hand pose in OP, however, is the superior one, as it is more dignified and battle-ready.
...
>Natasha Aughey
idk she looks a little trappy.
>cosplaying as Wonder Woman
>Wonder Woman tattoo
>Wonder Woman shower curtains
Guys I think she's a Catwoman fangirl.
Nah that makes no sense.
Superman gets all beefy.
Peeg should get beefy too.
But attractively so.
I mean Sexual Dimorphism is a thing.
I know right. Count on a dyke to assume what men like and get it completely wrong.
I dressed up as Sailor Jupiter once.
>I mean Sexual Dimorphism is a thing.
It is, and you clearly don't know what it means.
>distinct difference in size or appearance between the sexes of an animal in addition to difference between the sexual organs themselves.
>distinct difference
>distinct difference
>distinct difference
Where could she be hiding a dick?
>She became a supermodel/actress to coincide with this.
Fixed that for you, user. She didn't become a model at all until the late 70's/early 80's and didn't become a big ass deal supermodel until the mid 80's.
Either way, that's no excuse for how artists ditched the iconic Romita design and made her look like a shitty generic hot woman.
No that was exactly my point.
She should be buff but like a woman would naturally get buff......and with titties.
Pics?
>tfw your gf is too shy to cosplay
>tfw your best female friend likes to cosplay, but only at cons and you never end up at the same cons
You chose poor wording, then. The figure of the woman in your webm would be acceptable for PG, though.
user...she's not real.
It's just a guy who's been keeping up this game for years.
>shitty generic hot woman
>hot woman
>shitty
Spotted the gay/jealous female hamplanet.
idk
I believe she's a woman but that picture does not help your case. It looks like she's tucking it upwards.
...
None of these are sexist.
bruh I don't care if she had a 14 inch pecker
Exactly what you posted. Most of the artists gave up on keeping her anywhere near on model and just drew whatever they thought was hot. The only thing that even reads "Mary Jane" in that pic is red hair.
The first one is objectifying and you know it.
>Generic
>Not shitty
Found the tasteless 12 year old with no standards.
Lets just flip this to full on cheesecake, who wants some Frazetta?
I don't think I've ever actually seen a published power girl drawn like the left.
The right actually is a lot closer to what I typically see.
They're using Power Girl as an example because anyone can understand that the left is wrong. It's more characters like Raven who get drawn like that.
Get back to your Häagen-Dazs, lardo.
It's an amalgamation of a bunch of things the artist doesn't like.
The showing off ass and tits pose, boobsocks on the costume, heels.
It's sexual, not degradation. If a man was dressed this way like the bottom and the woman was covered head to toe, it'd be sexual, not sexist.
Angry?
this guide can fuck off, first sentence already states that the artist doesn't think about what he or she is drawing.
Why is the first objectifying but you are okay with the last one? The woman is wearing the exact same outfit.
When exactly?
I'd think Psylocke would be more the go to.
And even then I can only eally think back to Jim Lee once or twice.
But WHY Superman is ripped, and Power Girl isn't? Are you trying to imply that Kryptonian DNA has some concept of beauty that it tries to impose on Kryptonian bodies in presence of yellow sun radiation?
That their DNA is sentient and likes boobs? Because if so, that's the most retarded retcon I've heard since the rapist Doctor Light brainwashing. And that one was pretty dumb.
If anything, their appearance comes either from
a) being of perfect health - if so, Power Girl should be definitely muscular and of average weight (definitely not skinny!) with medium-
sized boobs (low fat!) because that's the optimal look for health of a person - basically she should look like an Olympic athlete;
b) their looks come from their lifestyle - Superman and Power Girl regularly lift cars and lampposts and throw people at walls and stuff, which is probably enough to give workout and tone muscles even to people with super strength (remember the scene from Incredibles where Mr Incredible works out using train cars? Yeah). I assume a Kryptonian on earth who WOULDN'T fight all the time would be exactly as scrawny as a regular person, but would still have superstrength etc, but it wouldn't change their bodies.
And since Peej is a superhero who does physical feats all the time, she should be ripped.
...
>"I like it when women are sexy in multiple ways instead of drawn exactly the same."
>"Y-You're FAT!!!"
Riveting argument, Jimmy.
Because the guy is also sexualized.
What's the matter? You have nothing to objectify?
>My intent is to help those who WANT to promote change in their work (which can be challenging). Not to shame those who choose otherwise
Cho doesn't want to change, so chapter closed. No need to be butthurt about it.
>everyone must be sexual or everyone must be non sexual
HAH. Everyone laugh at the retard.
Then the answer should be, "Yes." But you've tipped your hand. It has to do with you being pissed men are enjoying themselves more than an actual problem.
Bloated hamplanet alert. Keep being angry over sexual themes, it's funny.
>No combination/answer for a scantily clad man and fully armored woman.
Gee.
The only problem I see with the right is the nose and eyes. Nose shape looks completely different from what is on the left and the eyes must be a little lower. Otherwise I'd prefer the right girl. She has nice body.
That or Kryptonians have different physiology based on sex. Y'know like people.
So she should be beefy but she has more natural fat to keep on and work with unlike a dude.
Sexist: discriminating based on sex.
The first drawing discriminates based on sex, stripping one character, but fully clothing another.
Ergo, it discriminates based on sex, ergo it's sexist, and picture title was "Is it sexist?"
Everything is correct, you're a retard, QED.
So being objectified isn't a bad thing. It's only bad when it happens to one group? How does that work?
...
Jim Lee is a pretty good example, yes.
Perez was a bit more tasteful, but the artists these kinds of posts are talking about are contemporaries to Jim and Rob or kids who grew up idolizing/copying them.
I dunno if sexist is the word I'd put on the first one, but it certainly still is kinda dumb if there's no clear reason behind having the two characters or genders look so different. I assume the chart is supposed to be representing default body types for background characters and general characters and not presenting two specific character designs.
The body is fine, the face looks like an orc if you pretend the hair isn't there. They purposely mad the face look masculine because female = male now. The left face is a bit too sensual with the open mouth, and I'm sure if you closed it, it'd look fine on the body to the right.
see:
Todd McFarlane was the one who first had MJ adopt a Cindy Crawford look, since MJ was an in-demand model at the time
There is no context my friend, so your words mean nothing. Second, it's sexual, not sexist. If she feels empowered with being scantily clad, who is a hamplanet like you to say otherwise? The truth is, it's sexual, not sexist. Just like a man being scantily clad and the woman being clothed. Just because you're disgusted by the human body doesn't mean everyone else is.
Because Clark got his body before his power started to developed, he life most of his life doing farm work. And on the opposite coin you have flashpoint superman, who is scrawny and spent living in a lab doing nothing.
But what you posted isn't neceassarily an exampl of OP.
No butts boobs pose,
No individual titty socks.
Is there even heels?
>It's only bad when it happens to one group? How does that work?
They are not treated equally and that's the root of evil? Because equality is important, don't you think?
You're saying some people can't be sexual when others aren't, and that's preposterous. Get out of the club Jimmy, you're off your rocker.
>They are not treated equally and that's the root of evil? Because equality is important, don't you think?
What if they're not equal?
jesus what is with these women, all they want is control. These people should get over themselves and realise nothing is stopping them from making their own comics and shouldn't try to stop others from making theirs.
This.
>EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE EQUAL BECAUSE EQUAL OUTCOME IS THE WAY THE WORLD NEEDS TO BE
Pathetic.
Oh I'm aware, and Romita drifted over the years as well, but it's still really shitty. Peter's design changes subtly over decades, but once MJ was Peter's spouse, oh shit, better be lazy and draw her like what *I* find hot instead of considering her design! It's fucking awful.
Cho's art is boring. He's like an inferior Benes.
But if you are fine with the last picture, it means that objectification isn't a bad thing. Since if that were the case the last picture should have been the very worst of all, since it happens to more people.
Either objectification (of fictional characters, mind you) is a bad thing and that last picture the worst form to combat it, or objectification isn't that bad after all and all pictures are fine.
That one user too dumb to read.
It's sexist to have crazy tall Amazons embarrass manlets?
>No butts boobs pose
I'll grant you that I didn't pull up an incidental panel like that. It is about as close as you can get without breaking the spine, though.
>No individual titty socks.
Nigga are you blind?
>Is there even heels?
Yeah.
For those of you with autism, are you happy now?
>Yes for the guy scantily clad and woman in armor.
>Missing the point literally this hard.
Like hell it is. Men don't care. Women shouldn't either.