![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
trinityvixenETA: Oh God. The phrase, "But, yeah, fanboy homophobia is the gift that keeps on giving, isn't it? It's not your father's gay panic, that's for sure," is so awesome. Because apparently MJ can't show off her panties hard enough just by wearing them outside her pants, but draw a superhero with a PENIS and you have got problems. Hilarious. Personally, I'm just waiting for comics to acknowledge or at least address whatever FABULOUS support that superheroines are using to get their tits so perky. Are those built into the suits or what?
After my last post, I was thinking about what we could do with future tributes to comic characters and their infallibly sexy bods that would be less objectionable than what was done to Mary-Jane. Mostly? I'd just like to see a coy, sexy statuette of a character celebrate her own enjoyment of herself and her body independently of the male gaze.
And having it actually be sexy as opposed to a grotesque adorned with items associated with sex would be a big step. You know how you could make a sexy statuette of Mary-Jane that still related her to Spider-Man (in case the people shelling out $100-200 for the statue somehow didn't know)? Have it just be her, relaxing, smiling, being happy and maybe, I dunno, wearing a button-up shirt with her chest exposed so you could see she was wearing the Spidey suit underneath. I've generally heard/found that guys really do find women wearing their clothing pretty damned hot. Plus, you'd have the pizzaz and audacity of Mary-Jane--having lifted what is obviously a pretty important piece of clothing from her spouse--right on display. It conveys a much more lively sense of humor and engagement on the part of the character being viewed such that, while, yes, you can ogle her tits and spend as much time as you like running fingers over her bum, the enjoyment of the character as sexy is side-by-side with the character as person, with all the thoughts, humor, and attitude thereof (as opposed to the pornified crap they churned out with this last one).
And then? I'd like to request a whole line of statues of heroes in the hero pose with their masks off. Because that shit is hot, too.
After my last post, I was thinking about what we could do with future tributes to comic characters and their infallibly sexy bods that would be less objectionable than what was done to Mary-Jane. Mostly? I'd just like to see a coy, sexy statuette of a character celebrate her own enjoyment of herself and her body independently of the male gaze.
And having it actually be sexy as opposed to a grotesque adorned with items associated with sex would be a big step. You know how you could make a sexy statuette of Mary-Jane that still related her to Spider-Man (in case the people shelling out $100-200 for the statue somehow didn't know)? Have it just be her, relaxing, smiling, being happy and maybe, I dunno, wearing a button-up shirt with her chest exposed so you could see she was wearing the Spidey suit underneath. I've generally heard/found that guys really do find women wearing their clothing pretty damned hot. Plus, you'd have the pizzaz and audacity of Mary-Jane--having lifted what is obviously a pretty important piece of clothing from her spouse--right on display. It conveys a much more lively sense of humor and engagement on the part of the character being viewed such that, while, yes, you can ogle her tits and spend as much time as you like running fingers over her bum, the enjoyment of the character as sexy is side-by-side with the character as person, with all the thoughts, humor, and attitude thereof (as opposed to the pornified crap they churned out with this last one).
And then? I'd like to request a whole line of statues of heroes in the hero pose with their masks off. Because that shit is hot, too.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-05-16 04:05 am (UTC)