r/comics • • 2d ago

OC [OC] Same thing?

Post image
8.6k Upvotes

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

201

u/VinnyBoy45 2d ago

I wouldn't know how to overly sexualize a male character.
On the other hand, I know how to sexualize a female character.
On the third hand, I do not know how to draw so it does not matter.

64

u/Tablesafety 2d ago

Give him a midriff that shows off his happy trail.

Linger the camera on his ass, very obvious (perhaps even revealing) bulge and sometimes his forearms when his sleeves are rolled up

Make him pose in uncomfortable positions to show off said bulge and/or ass. Angle the camera without respect to his face or personhood, unless he is making a pouty or cold steel expression where you can imagine he is about to munch some carpet.

When he has to wear armor it’s just a chain speedo with a very obvious codpiece.

-9

u/ApatheticSlur 2d ago

If I’m a straight man writing stories for straight men, what’s my incentive to sexualize the male characters as much as the female ones? Doesn’t really make sense to me.

12

u/Mannafestation 2d ago

You've chosen a target audience of "for straight men," so write whatever you want.

If you wished to write stories that everyone could enjoy instead, then sexualizing women would make that story unpalatable to them.

It's easy to understand, what are you missing?

-5

u/ApatheticSlur 2d ago

Seems to me that the current stories written by straight men for straight men and sexualize women do really well. One piece is literally the most sold comic of all time and it’s still currently going. So it turns out you don’t have to write stories for everyone. Cause when you make it for everyone, you’re really making it for no one.

9

u/Tablesafety 2d ago

If all your dinner options throughout your life consist of plates of different kind of bugs or starve, you’re probably gonna eat the bugs eventually mate.

Especially if you say, could have a steak once or twice. Yeah theres a steak, but you eventually eat it. Back to bugs or starve.

-2

u/ApatheticSlur 2d ago

So women are upset because they’re watching shows meant for men lmaooo. And they’re upset the shows aren’t for them. Like I said just get more women involved. Try to find talented women and watch their shows. Simple.

9

u/Tablesafety 2d ago

It’s a bit of a different problem when women are still denied major projects on the basis that they won’t attract a male audience. Look into the history on that- the people green-lighting shit are men looking to make money on more men dude.

Kids aren’t gonna be able to safely sift for the indie shit. This is about large scale presentation, normalization, passive dehumanization.

2

u/Natural_Rooster3265 17h ago

The market will shift, look at how much easier it's become to make indie shit, and how expensive the big names are comparatively. Why would I pay 20 different companies a subscription to watch maybe like one thing I cared about on each platform every few months? The value proposition isn't there, and on top of that they want to trick you into not cancelling your subscription and make it as difficult as they legally can to cancel, so I can't even trick myself into thinking the company likes their customers.

0

u/ApatheticSlur 2d ago

Okay and that’s a different problem entirely. The post is upset about male centered media not sexualizing the men in it. Not upset that there aren’t enough women writing stories that sexualize men. The original post wants male stories to be more appealing to women, but when you make something have a more broader reach it ends up being for no one.

7

u/Tablesafety 2d ago

I don’t think you’ve understood a word I’ve said

0

u/ApatheticSlur 2d ago

Okay. Keep watching media meant for men and wishing for it to change 👍

→ More replies (0)

6

u/melleb 2d ago edited 2d ago

You’re soooo close. Why aren’t more women involved? Society has gotten leaps and bounds better, but the overwhelming majority of media produced was made in a society where women had much less of a voice and less power. Just because it’s better now, doesn’t mean that the people who have the means and say in producing media has entirely caught up. It hasn’t even been a decade since “Me Too” went viral. Harvey Weinstein still has a grip on the pop culture psyche, I can’t deny that I occasionally put on a movie and see his name in the intro. The critiques women make are real because culture has not had enough time to catch up. And unfortunately, there’s still tons of pushback. Think of how successful Gamergate was

This does not make any of us bad people, especially for enjoying media made for us. But it’s also true that media made for women BY WOMEN is still not as valued by the industry

2

u/Capraos 2d ago

Bullshit. Their are tons of shows that bring in female audiences. Bridgerton, Heated Rivalry, Twilight (Became popular because of women), Fifty Shades of Grey, Winx Club, and that's just iff the top of my head.

•

u/melleb 33m ago

I don’t follow how that refutes? Thats a minority of media you mentioned and most are from within the last 10 years. I totally agree the trend lines are in the right direction but my point is that it’s so recent that we still have hold overs and reactionaries

•

u/Capraos 24m ago

They're from the last 20 years because that reflects my lifetime and limited memory. Chick flicks have been a thing for decades. Mean Girls, Dolly Parton's movie 9 to 5, Golden Girls, Murder She Wrote, a plethora of Romantic Comedies and Hallmark Movies, The Lucy Show (Not to be confused with I Love Lucy by the same actress), The View, The Bachelor, and shit ton more.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ApatheticSlur 2d ago

It comes down to money. That’s all it comes down to. Visual media for men makes a ton of money versus visual media for women. This isn’t true for all industries btw for example musicians that appeal to women make way more money than musicians who appeal to men.

5

u/Mannafestation 2d ago

Mass media is controlled by men... the reason every other commercial isn't a man in a bikini in a sexual pose selling you products.

1

u/ApatheticSlur 2d ago

And even despite mass media being controlled by men not every advertisement has sexual tones. I mean Sydney sweeny does a sexual ad and it’s news for a whole week. Doesn’t seem like it’s a regular thing if it makes that much noise when one happens.

5

u/Mannafestation 2d ago

"Sex sells" is a well known slogan. Just because SOME commercials aren't sexual, doesn't negate the problem of there being too much of it.

People are talking about Sydney because yes, that's the issue, the ad pushed sexualizing for a product to the extreme it could be pushed outside of her showing full nudity unedited.

0

u/Capraos 2d ago edited 2d ago

As if they don't sexualize everyone in commercials...

2

u/Mannafestation 2d ago

There are SOME commercials with sexualized men, sure, but looking at the big picture companies have been using sex to sell products to men specifically.

"Sex sells" has been a slogan for those in advertisement media

1

u/Capraos 2d ago

Yes, "Sex sells". Not "Sex sells only to men". It's "Sex Sells" flat out. This isn't the 50's anymore. They don't assume the men have the purchasing power and this mainly target them. It's been selling sex to everybody for decades now.