| Posted: 21 August 2014 at 10:15am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Count me as one of the troglodytes. An all ages comic book should not have a "nude" shot. That costume is so unrealistically tight, imagine what the front looks like.
Personally, I think too many artists use their female art to express their porn fantasies. How many times have you come across art that you know was created just to be a "muff" shot? Or how many show the vaginal crack? Really?
I'm not against nudes or even extreme nudes. Back in the day Tim Vigil's Faust went to the extreme, but in the context of his story, it was ok. It was never meant to be an all-ages comic, not in the least.
I think comics can be sexy, but shouldn't be sexist. Even JB has drawn almost-nudes in comics but they never came across as pornographic poses. They were appropriate (IMO) for all ages.
On a side note: I always laugh when I see a photo on DeviantArt that is clearly pornographic (I think DA have since screened those extreme shots out) and folks post on how they love the lighting, or the pose, or the artistry or some other contrived reason - they are so full of BS because the photos are usually point and shoot and have zero artistry and are meant to be pornographic.
I also laugh at anyone who calls out folks as prudes simply because they do not approve of pornographic nudity. They always try to defend themselves as more open minded and that they appreciate the nude form more than I do because they love to see the inner labia, as if that makes them a better person. Less is more, but they don't understand that.
So anyway back to this shot. While it's not offensive in anyway, it clearly has it origins as a porn reference, and thats why it's attracting this much attention.
|
Topic Closed)
