PPG sexy comic book cover

[Kheldarson]

So apparently there's a bit of an uproar in the comic book world, this time over the PowerPuff Girls.

http://www.themarysue.com/powerpuff-...ualized-cover/

Can I just say I'm tried of the over-sexualization of women in the comic book industry? Because, on the one hand, I kinda get the cover. It's rather badass and the girls look kind of cool. On the other, it's just another point in a long line of points that say females have to be sexy in order to be superheroes.

I will say that the facial design actually bugs me more than their costumes, but that may just be me.

[Parrothead]

They have noses. And fingers.



IMPOSTER PPG!!!!!!!

(but the faces are creepy, tbh)

[Andrew B]

Yeah, those faces are firmly in the Uncanny Valley. I don't like this cover.

[Gravekeeper]

Bonus: Artist is female, doesn't understand the problem and calls everyone idiots.

[siead_lietrathua]

yeah... the art is different. and creepy. but sexual? no. that image is in no way sexual, and especially NOT by comic book standards of sexual.
the comments kinda bug me though. or at least this prevailing idea that the idea of women using their sexuality as a show of strength or power is somehow bad.
for how many eons has women's sexuality been controlled by very strict societal pressures. the idea of a woman being powerful AND confident in her sexuality should be something feminists are behind. but lately it's like they're turning into a very prudish bunch when it comes to sex.

[Ladeeda]

My problem is that the poses look copied out of some random How to Draw book's chapter on dynamic poses. Not to mention the over-use of shine, and that the artist has included what looks like thigh high socks with soles [texture problem].

But IDW covers tend to be glorified fanart anyway. Though usually they get artists who can actually match the style of the source material.

[Jetfire]

In this case, from the article, IDW didn't pick the artist, CN did. It was on one of their promo books, which often are special cases.

The art itself, just looks wrong for PPG. Too much shine mainly I think, and the proportions seem too far off from what we've come to expect.

[Andara Bledin]

My issue is that they don't look like Blossom, Bubbles, and Buttercup. they look like a trio of girls with the right haircolor cosplaying the Powerpuff Girls. And not very well.

That said, I don't see what the fuss is about. Unless people are just that freaked out by seeing what are normally kids looking like teens.

[Gravekeeper]

I would venture that the problem is the skin tight latex fetish wear miniskirts, the creepy step ford wife mascara come hither looks and the upskirt shot. Even putting that aside, the art is just...kinda bad and the characters are devoid of any personality or characterization.

Even putting aside PPGZ, the internet is an *ocean* of vastly superior alternative artwork depicting PPG in different styles and ages. Her normal portfolio is almost exclusively dark, sexual and/or nudes with a small dash of tentacle porn for good measure. Why in the world did CN go to her for a cover in the first place?

She pretty much draws every woman with the same face, angle and "come fuck me" eyes.

Couple that with her reaction to this which is calling everyone that doesn't like her fetish wear PPG ignorant idiots and yeah, no sympathy from me. ;p

[Kheldarson]

I like Bleedman's PPG update.

Here's the setting with them just a few years older: http://ppg.snafu-comics.com/?comic_id=0

And you get shots of them as adults in this AU Dark setting: http://grim.snafu-comics.com/?comic_id=0

Specific shots from that: http://grim.snafu-comics.com/index.php?comic_id=170 and http://bleedman.deviantart.com/art/Family-328214550

As to the pic itself, beyond the fact that they look awful, I can see why people don't like it. Like I said in the OP, it is just one more blip in the line of girls having to be supermodels to be superheroes. Not nearly as bad as what happened to Starfire, but it still says that "this is the norm and we're not addressing it."

And to me, that's kind of bad.

And to top it off, it becomes another point that can be "blown off". I found the original link on a parenting website that caters to mothers specifically. So the main discussion has been on how this type of stuff targets girls and how it's advertised and what it does to beloved shows (Equestria Girls has become a point of contention ).

But on a comment I made about women being overly sexualized in the industry, I got a guy replying that:

Yep, god knows all of the men heroes are weak, thin and ugly. Sam and Dean on Supernatural? The Beast? Any male Vampire?! Thor??
Captain America? Dang it girls, the men look "hot" too so chill the heck out

That's where I see the bigger issue lying.

[Gravekeeper]

That's where I see the bigger issue lying.

I hate that counter "argument". Seeing as it ignores the fact that that sort of "sexualization" is not marketed to women, its marketed to men as a power fantasy. When both sides are marketed towards the male fantasy, you can't claim its equal because hey look, the guys are hawt too.

All you have to do is peruse the Hawkeye Initiative to see the problem. -.-

[s_stabeler]

the biggest issue I have is the comic is marketed to little girls. If this was a cover to a version of the PPG marketed to teens, I'd shrug my shoulders and consider it no different to the issues affecting female superheroes in general. (and be fair, you generally don't see genuinely ugly girls depicted in any form of media- it isn't just comic books) But marketed to little girls? yeah, it is a bit much, to be honest.

[siead_lietrathua]

wait, so guys being sexy and strong looking is appealing to male power, but women looking sexy and strong is demeaning to women? i don't get it. as a women, i find the idea of women being able to be strong AND sexual AND smart to be empowering. then again, i also know that comics where the women are depicted as very sexual are MEANT FOR ADULTS!

like, seriously, that starfire article annoyed me. giving a kid the adult version of a comic and making them uncomfortable over their favorite character when designed for an adult audience is both ridiculous to do, and mean to the kid. a 7 year old should not be reading any and all comics on the market, some are just NOT for kids. hell the page on the comic he's using as an example, that he showed his daughter, is two characters talking about having sex! yet the parent just handed it to their 7 year old?
seriously, would you hand your kid a copy of Purgatori, Crossed, Night of the living dead? heck, should a 7 year old kid be reading the Avenger's Academy Arena games, which is basically a Battle Royale? or the darker, adult batman comics full of psychological issues and death?

i get people are concerned with kid's and their concepts of body image. but by the time they should be reading comics with that level of violent and sexual content, they should already have it hammered in their head from their parents the difference between fantasy and reality.

and, i'm sure many women can speak from experience on this one. it's far more damaging to hear our moms go one about all the flaws she hates in herself. the weight she needs to loose, the hair she hates, her skintone, she needs to hit the gym more, blah blah. and to look in the mirror and see those same flaws she is disparaging. it's far more damaging to hear parents say how you should change your hair/ clothes/ diet/ etc so you can be prettier. THAT shit screws up a kid more than any comic could.

seriously. by the time i began reading comics that would be considered adult (purgatori being one), i was already an obese preteen from the original PTSD weight i gained, and the yoyo diets my mother made me join her on. seeing depictions of female characters that were comfortable in their own skin, regardless of how different they were from other people, was a very empowering thing. that is the kind of stuff that helped me see that it's all about how you perceive yourself, not what others want you to be. sure, she was hot, and half naked most the time. but it was her preference to be herself, in all her demonic awesomeness, instead of hiding herself by disguising as just another human, that stuck with me more than what her costumes were like.


edit:

sidenote, classic starfire costume: http://s1.hubimg.com/u/8300328_f520.jpg
new starfire costume: http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/...-red_hood.jpeg
teen titans version: http://static4.wikia.nocookie.net/__...01-640-480.jpg

i think the kid woulda been uncomfortable with either the classic or new version of the adult-line starfire, considering the Teen titans design. because she's a damn SEVEN year old.

[Greenday]

Not nearly as bad as what happened to Starfire, but it still says that "this is the norm and we're not addressing it."

Something about that post bugs me. Seems too much like she was leading the kid and the answers don't seem natural for a 7 year old.

[Gravekeeper]

wait, so guys being sexy and strong looking is appealing to male power, but women looking sexy and strong is demeaning to women? i don't get it. as a women, i find the idea of women being able to be strong AND sexual AND smart to be empowering. then again, i also know that comics where the women are depicted as very sexual are MEANT FOR ADULTS!

No, you missed the point completely and stumbled into a false equivalency. The point again is that both sides of the coin are marketed to the male psyche. Whether or not you find it sexy is irrelevant to the creators. You're not the target market.

Male superheroes are depicted as an ideal power fantasy for the male ego.
Female superheroes are depicted as a sex object for said male ego.
Both are being created by men for men, not for you.

Male superheroes do not go out of their way to thrust out their ass and crotch at all times regardless of the situation.

Seriously, go look at the Hawkeye Initiative.

like, seriously, that starfire article annoyed me. giving a kid the adult version of a comic and making them uncomfortable over their favorite character when designed for an adult audience is both ridiculous to do, and mean to the kid.

Starfire's reboot was widely criticized for being essentially little more than a Real Doll. Her only purpose is tits now. That comic includes a scene of a 12 year old boy furiously snapping bikini voyeur shots of her to upload to the Internet.

She then wanders over to a male character and pretty much just goes "Hey, wanna fuck? No? Well I'll go fuck someone else" and that is the entire depth of her personality in the reboot.

Now, here's the same page with a male Starfire.

Understand the problem yet? -.-

When the comic industry tries to portray a strong female character, its still for men to wank over. Its not for women.

i think the kid woulda been uncomfortable with either the classic or new version of the adult-line starfire, considering the Teen titans design. because she's a damn SEVEN year old.

There's actually a joke shot in the Teen Titans show where they put her in the classic 80's costume much to her horror. -.-

But that's beside the point. The reboot is the anti-thesis of the original character. Teen Titans the show was geared to a younger audience, yes, but Starfire's personality is largely the same as the comic version and she goes through the same situations and major events.

The reboot changed her personality completely and turned her into a blow up doll. It was heavily criticized by adult fans of Starfire as well. This isn't one 7 year old girl, there was a big controversy over this. Starfire has always been eye candy, sure, but she had actual character traits and wasn't just a wandering sex doll that moved entirely in cheesecake porn poses.