This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
@ Feminism
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Snake387
But it's not really the same thing. Female heroes with skimpy clothing and huge busts are appealing to males as a sexual icon, but male heroes with huge muscles and lots of weapons are also appealing to males, not sexually, but as a masculine ideal. They don't portray those male heroes that way as fanservice to women, but as badasses to appeal to men.
Imagine watching a gritty police drama, where all the male characters wore suits and ties, and all the female characters wore Daisy Duke shorts and buttoned shirts with the bottom half undone and tied in a knot under their $%^&. That's the equivalent of what comic books do.
So if women don't find people with a suit and tie appealing, nor someone with their shirt off, chest bare and who has a six pack, what exactly do they like? I mean, the comics have found something that all men, generally speaking, like (girls in skimpy outfits). Now, they've also tried this with women, and if women don't like men in a suit and tie, or with their shirt ripped off, what else can they do exactly? And men with their shirt off is the equivalent to women in skimpy outfits, right? And if men with six packs are masculine idols then that's an added bonus.
So, essentially, these comic book designers aren't as anti-women as you think, it's just men don't really find men with their shirt off offensive while women find girls in skimpy outfits offending. This is the comic book designers fault how? The only real problem is men taking all the main parts and women generally being sex objects, or their as wives or girlfriends.
Post by
Gone
Found by whom? Feminists? Couch psychology? Longitudinal research? Harmful to the individual or the median? How harmful is too harmful? At what point intervention ethically required?
Why are these never the starting point? Because it seem like people (feminists) who argue this positions care less about actual science/ethics and more about men not enjoying "sexy" women being portrayed. Because apparently it's harmful to be a straight male.
You're mistaking extremist feminism with real feminism. The primary goal of actual feminism is equality, where as you seem to be associating it with the psycho extremists who perpetuate an over-exaggerated image of the patriarchy to justify their pathological need to have a cause. I promised certain people around here I wouldn't use the word "feminazi" anymore, but you get the idea. It's this group of people that, while a minority, are also the loudest and most obnoxious people in their movement, and therefor tend to be the ones that those unfamiliar with the movement associate with everyone involved. Kind of like non-religious people that think all Christians are like the WBC.
On a different note, who is to say that somebody needs to seek the approval of mainstream psychology or any other authority before fighting for a cause? If somebody deems something harmful, whether it's realistically true or not, then they have the right to fight against it, within certain boundaries. If other people agree with them, then they have the right to fight too, and that's how a cause gets started. Sometimes things go to far, but you can't put sanctions on the entire movement based on the actions of a few.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.