So comic artist Frank Cho is getting A TON of negative backlash today for drawing a parody cover of the now infamous Spider-Woman variant cover drawn by Milos Manara. What the fuck happened? Remember when art was art and people didn't always get offended?

File: 125 KB, 706x1080, 1428268025114.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Apr 6 16:51:38 2015 No.2044977 [Reply] [Original]

So comic artist Frank Cho is getting A TON of negative backlash today for drawing a parody cover of the now infamous Spider-Woman variant cover drawn by Milos Manara.

What the fuck happened? Remember when art was art and people didn't always get offended?

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 16:55:39 2015 No.2044980 >>2044977 Lol thats exactly the point. Now everyone knows cho chan.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 16:59:10 2015 No.2044984 File: 20 KB, 310x355, 1413335794322.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2044977 /pol/ is always right.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:05:10 2015 No.2044999 what ton of negative backlash? You being sensationalist again, op?

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:05:19 2015 No.2045000 >>2044977 We've already been over the fact that Spider-Man himself has already been in similar poses on covers. Why are people complaining again? My only complaint is that she doesn't have the mask and hood on. Would have made the image hotter.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:10:23 2015 No.2045006 >hire an erotica artist to illustrate your cover >SWEET MERCY, YOU CAN SEE HER BUTT! >PULL >FUCKING >EVERYTHING You guys seriously think this shit just accidentally happens every couple of months?

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:18:58 2015 No.2045013 ugh I dont think neck can bend this way

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:20:57 2015 No.2045015 Way better than the Manara version.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:28:39 2015 No.2045019 File: 53 KB, 243x500, neck-eyes_to_the_sky[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2045013 Eh, the Spidey's usually depicted as very flexible and anatomically unusual, I could see it happening.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:33:16 2015 No.2045021 >>2044977 You can't let casuals into ANYTHING, or they'll ruin it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:34:08 2015 No.2045022 File: 8 KB, 750x500, 1425966913838.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2045013 Not just for you anon, with flexibility things change. Not league of legends change they do that more more interesting dynamic gestures

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:34:37 2015 No.2045024 >>2045006 But they didn't pull it. They released the cover and it's now selling for $100 among collectors. DC were bitches and pulled the Joker variant for Batgirl #41 tho. The fucking pussies.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:38:56 2015 No.2045028 >>2045024 He was supposed to illustrate 2 more covers, one of which was for the female Thor. They pulled those.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:57:48 2015 No.2045053 >>2045028 That sounds like political face-saving. If Manara was appointed another cover, that cover would have been already drawn by the time the Spider-Woman controversy happened. The editorial industry works way in advance.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 17:59:14 2015 No.2045054 >>2045022 >Not league of legends change they do that more more interesting dynamic gestures what

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 18:02:26 2015 No.2045060 >>2045053 My whole point is that this is just marketing. They know tumblr will do their job for them.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 18:15:12 2015 No.2045079 >>2044977 On one hand, this is good PR. On the issue with the negative backlash, it's fucking bullshit. We can only blame Marvel for opening their doors to shite writers for this and the political clima.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 18:46:17 2015 No.2045102 >>2044977 Americans sow that shit, now they're going to reap it.

Anonymous Mon Apr 6 19:36:56 2015 No.2045158

>>2045015
ANYTHING is better than that cover. His colors and bad and the face on her was horrifying.
>>2045000
It's okay when males do it but females can't or they are sexualized.
>>2045079
>>2045024
>>2045021
It's sad, 5 years ago Marvel and DC never gave a care but the last year or two they've been bending to the will of sites like Twitter, Tumblr etc. The Spider-Woman comic I can see how maybe some idiots would be offeneded but the Joker one was perfected fine. It's the fucking Joker being his crazy self and not to mention him and Barbara have a history from Killing Joke.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 22:07:17 2015 No.2045318 File: 60 KB, 500x1124, 1425536741773.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 22:13:43 2015 No.2045326 >>2044977 if a Japanese person did this, no one would care

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 6 22:13:58 2015 No.2045327 >>2044977 internet backlash isn't real backlash, it's just the internet

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 00:55:02 2015 No.2045524 I'm confused. Why is this a big deal?

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 02:13:22 2015 No.2045596
File: 99 KB, 500x689, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>Just Because You Can, Doesn’t Mean You Should

>And before anyone tries to tell you that “it’s just a joke,” it would be helpful to remember that jokes can cause real hurt and real harm to marginalized communities, and that is absolutely something worth critiquing.

>this Spider-Gwen cover is tasteless, and reductive to the plight of the many women who still struggle to feel accepted in comics. And that’s pretty uncool.

http://www.themarysue.com/spider-gwen-sketch-cover/

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 02:15:15 2015 No.2045599 >>2045524 It isn't.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 02:22:13 2015 No.2045602 >>2045596 This fucking article is horrid.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 02:33:15 2015 No.2045609 >>2045596 A sketch Cho made himself for himself, again, not Marvel, is inappropriate for the audience? I'm blown away by this article.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 02:39:46 2015 No.2045613

>>2045596
Not really agreeing with the extreme reaction but this was dumb of Cho either way. Its humping a bad PR situation, and you're basically taunting a growing part of the comics fanbase. Lack of judgement there.

In either case, manbabies go here:
>>>/co/

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 02:52:24 2015 No.2045623 I wonder how things will be in like 10 years, because right now almost everything is considered offensive to someone.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 03:04:53 2015 No.2045629 >>2045596 > just because you can doesnt mean you should except yes you can any yes you should. Art is the very definition of freedom of expression you whiny fucking bitch. Not every woman in media is meant to represent ALL WOMEN EVER OMG. calm yo tits

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 03:05:20 2015 No.2045630 >>2045596 >marginalized communities women are marginalized now?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 03:20:59 2015 No.2045643 I don't see what the problem is, what am I missing?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 03:33:47 2015 No.2045649 >>2045596 >women >marginalized community Give me a fucking break. This shit needs to stop. When was the last time someone got lynched for being a chick? When was the last time that shit was socially acceptable? These bitches are full of it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 03:47:05 2015 No.2045658 File: 39 KB, 660x440, image02.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2045013 it aint exactly like the drawing but...

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:23:10 2015 No.2045673

The butthurt in this thread is palpable, nothing funnier than a bunch of manchildren angry that someone is criticizing their degeneracy.

>Remember when art was art and people didn't always get offended?
No I fucking don't, maybe you should open a history book you uncultured swine.

>>2045649
Ever heard of femicide? Please quit trying to be an edgelord.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:34:49 2015 No.2045675 >>2045673 GO HOME O H O M E

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:37:37 2015 No.2045677

>>2045673

why is it that every feminist ubiquitously resorts to using words like manchildren, virgin, small-penis, et cetera, whenever someone disagrees with them?

literally the only people who have a problem with sexy depictions of women in comics or whatever are fat chicks who feel insecure about their blubber. bet I'm responding to one right now.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:38:06 2015 No.2045678 >>2045673 Butthurt? we're not the ones whining about a drawing here

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:39:32 2015 No.2045680

>>2045673
>the butthurt in this thread

The only ones butthurt are the people offended by drawings of attractive women. Show me a study that correlates the depiction of sexy women in comics and vidya, and other media with the increase in rape and violence against women in western countries. Don't worry, I'll wait.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:40:58 2015 No.2045681 >>2045677 No, there are plenty of feminists and other women who share this sentiment who are under 35, normal weight and heterosexual (although this shouldn't be relevant but whatevs)

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:42:07 2015 No.2045682

>>2045596
>reductive to the plight of the many women who still struggle to feel accepted in comics.

so wait, women can't feel accepted in comics if comics have drawings of shapely women in tight costumes?

hey, morons. you're never going to feel accepted in a fandom if you can't join it without insisting that it change to suit you. just because you'd look like shit in a skin tight costume doesn't mean comics can't have them anymore.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:43:11 2015 No.2045683 >>2045673 That's just some fucking drawing, why can't you worry about something more relevant? Imagine if everyone was doing the same thing? Nothing could ever be done.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:44:38 2015 No.2045685 >>2045683 >Nothing could ever be done. Feminists don't want anything worth a damn done. They are content complaining about the most non-issue, meaningless shit because they have too much time on their hands.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:45:03 2015 No.2045686
File: 27 KB, 333x395, 1377819028046.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2045681
>normal weight

Yeah, I know what that's code for. Lol.

But tell me: aside from their own body image insecurity, what precisely is the objection that feminists have to drawings of sexy women?

Don't say rape culture, because you're not going to fool anyone here.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:47:19 2015 No.2045687 File: 25 KB, 500x500, 1392065144682.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] pic related

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 04:56:30 2015 No.2045696

>>2045686
It's degrading and pornographic, you might as well ask hurr why are people opposed to overt racism in media, can you show any study that says making nigger jokes on TV leads to actual lynchings hurp durp so what's the problem what about muh free speech

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 05:00:43 2015 No.2045699 >>2045630 Only in countries where there are bigger fights to be fought than fucking COMIC BOOK COVERS.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 05:05:33 2015 No.2045701 >>2045696 It may be degrading for you, but unlike racism, men got a physiological need for sex, they would never stop sexualizing women either way.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 05:08:06 2015 No.2045702 >>2045701 >men got a physiological need for sex 1. lol 2. looking at a comic book cover is not sex 3. sex existed before comic book covers This is just pathetic

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 05:13:06 2015 No.2045707 Is sexualizing women inherently bad?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 05:18:14 2015 No.2045709 >>2045702 Can't you understand men like to see butts and tits? You don't need to be a marketing genius to understand that this cover would appeal to men.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 05:28:47 2015 No.2045711 >>2045707 Before that you have to answer what IS bad? Let me give you a hint. It's subjective.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 05:31:50 2015 No.2045714 >>2045711 Let me put this another way, is it bad to sexualize people, even though we are very sexual beings?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 05:33:03 2015 No.2045715 >>2045709 Capitalism is evil, this isn't news though

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 05:45:09 2015 No.2045718

>>2045715
>Captialism is evil

Not inherently. Capitalism is evil when people aren't legitimately interested in actual fair competition but would rather sabotage/poison the competition. Keeping the bottom at the bottom while making sure the top remain on top.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 05:56:09 2015 No.2045725 >>2045718 Capitalism as an idea doesn't work for all cases, and it is evil in the hands of individuals, because individuals value self over everyone. But this thread is saying capitalism is evil because it uses advertising, which is bumfuck retarded.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 06:06:03 2015 No.2045730

>>2045696
>It's degrading and pornographic

What tripe. Is it degrading and pornographic when Robert Pattinson shows his abs in a Twilight movie? Is it degrading and pornographic when women's romance novels have covers depicting bare-chested studs?

Why do you think you get to control what sorts of depictions of women men are allowed to see? Why do you think you get to control artists?

The truth is that this whole issue is about insecurity. ~60% of American women are overweight or obese, and they don't like getting reminded that men's idea of an ideal women doesn't look like them.

>you might as well ask hurr why are people opposed to overt racism in media, can you show any study that says making nigger jokes on TV leads to actual lynchings hurp durp

Hahaha. So a picture of a woman in tight clothing is tantamount to making nigger jokes on television? What a brave crusader for civil rights you must think yourself.

Jesus, the hypocrisy and delusion of you retards is off the hook.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 06:20:25 2015 No.2045735

>>2045730
The semiotics of male and female bodies are completely different because men and women aren't actually the same. Men are women are actually different groups in society. Quit making these dumbass comparisons and expecting that men and women are arbitrarily interchangeable and anything that applies to one must also apply to the other. Why would that be the case? Should it also apply to tigers, rainbows and apples?
>Why do you think you get to control artists?
Please stop being this fucking pathetic, it's actually laughable that retards keep bringing this up whenever they get criticized. MUH FREE SPEECH NOBODY CAN CRITICIZE ANYBODY, be more defensive please
>Hahaha. So a picture of a woman in tight clothing is tantamount to making nigger jokes on television?
Analogies aren't your strongest point, are they? You can neither use them appropriately, not understand them. It's pretty sad actually.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 06:21:04 2015 No.2045736

>>2045714
The question should be whether sexualization serves the story that is being told. I'm not a feminist, but commercial writing annoys the living hell out of me, because it isn't concerned with creating good stories, but appealing to demographics. I think that when people go out of their way to sexualize innocent characters in innocent stories because 'sex sells' something is wrong.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 06:29:16 2015 No.2045741 >>2045735 >didn't address a single point made in the post >nothing but deflections This is why you're a joke. You literally don't know how to debate or make a point. Go back to school, please.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 06:30:57 2015 No.2045743 >>2045741 >the irony

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 06:34:27 2015 No.2045746

>>2045696
Is it degrading for an artist to have their work compared with someonewho is better that they are? I understand why women don't like being reminded that they can't compete eith the ideal female, but that's really just an issue of their own vanity.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 06:35:45 2015 No.2045749 >>2045746 Sorry about thst, typing on a phone is hard.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 06:37:26 2015 No.2045750 >>2045746 So the ideal female is a highly sexualized one?

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 06:48:00 2015 No.2045753

>>2045750
>highly sexualized

The ideal female form is one that looks like it's in shape and healthy. Fictional women are merely stylized representations of that form and figure. And as an anon mentioned, most 60% of American women don't have that form because they are overweight, thus they hate the figure represented in fictional women because they don't have that figure nor do they have the drive to achieve it even though all that's needed half the time is a decent diet and cardio. In other words, they are lazy as fuck and refuse to eat healthy. But that applies to most Americans in general.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 07:02:11 2015 No.2045758

>>2045735

>Quit making these dumbass comparisons and expecting that men and women are arbitrarily interchangeable and anything that applies to one must also apply to the other. Why would that be the case? Should it also apply to tigers, rainbows and apples?

Talk about being bad at analogies. That is the most nonsensical justification for your hypocritical demands for special treatment of women that I've ever heard. It's ok for women to leer at men, but not vice versa because men and women's positions in society are as different as tigers and apples? Fucking yikes.

>MUH FREE SPEECH NOBODY CAN CRITICIZE ANYBODY

It's really creepy how common this disdain for free speech is among you social justice commissars. All I said was that artists should be allowed to draw women of any shape and state of dress that they like, and suddenly you're raving about how pathetic free speech is. Again, yikes.

You're a nut. I'm glad people like you are mostly confined to the more laughable corners of the Internet.

Sorry, but weirdos have been trying to control artists for a looong time, and your generation of fat, pink-haired dykes isn't gonna be the first to succeed.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 07:04:02 2015 No.2045761
File: 41 KB, 448x529, Michelangelos_David1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2045750
That's not what I meant. We are talking about aesthetics here. The most perfect aesthetics are the most appealing ones. The head and hands in pic related are ridiculously oversized. You think Michelangelo made them like that by mistake? Because he didn't know any better? No. He never aimed for realism, but for idealization. a healthy person should not feel like they have to measure up to the ideal of the perfect body, but a lot of morbidly obese ones feel bad about themselves when looking at it, because it makes them realize how far they have strayed from the ideal, and that they don't actually like the way they are. It forces them to be honest with themselves, which is not something they want.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 07:13:11 2015 No.2045768 >>2045761 I don't think people usualy have problem with the shape/fitness of the women, but the exaggeration that is done in a sexual way, within a story that is not erotic.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 07:19:28 2015 No.2045773

>>2045768
I'm also the guy who posted >>2045736

Like I said, it's annoying and does a disservice to the stories that are being told, but it's got nothing to do with soggy knees. It's just good old capitalist logic. As long as people buy what they want, and people want sexually exaggerated women in their entertainment, that's what's going to be made, whether it makes sense from a storytelling perspective or not.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 07:21:11 2015 No.2045774 >>2044977 Capitalism SJWs First World Problems nothing new

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 07:22:44 2015 No.2045775

>>2045753
>most 60% of American women don't have that form because they are overweight, thus they hate the figure represented in fictional women because they don't have that figure
You know not even actual athletic women, barring exceptions, can achieve that form of perfection, right? There's a good reason why celebrities and models are constantly photoshopped.

I have no issues with whatever but that reason is dumb.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 07:33:01 2015 No.2045782

>>2045775
>You know not even actual athletic women, barring exceptions, can achieve that form of perfection, right?

Are you inept or did you not read the word "stylized" in my original statement. They are fictional women. No shit they aren't going to represent reality 1 for 1.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 07:33:35 2015 No.2045783
File: 291 KB, 595x586, fat-1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2045750
>>2045696

I don't really understand this argument. do you know that everything considered "ideal" is unconsciously sexuality based ? everything is sex related, wether you like it or not. that's the reason why there isn't fatass girls on fashion magazines or stuff like that. actually, let's not even talk about "ideal". A woman in good shape is just a normal fucking woman. overweight is not a standard.

it's too bad sexuality which is the basis of life is regarded as such a taboo in a society, it only leads to more shady prostitution and social disparity than anything else when it really shouldn't. it's childish even.

now, if you think a back shot of a "spider" girl is sexual, then in what fucking position would you draw her in to show she's actually one ? that she's as flexible as a spider and still looking good ? it's already a good effort to not show her crotch, which would be considered even more sexual.

cho understands this, he knew he could ride this hate wave from some really concerned crazy women without actually doing anything wrong. and he does. good on him.

ITT: fatass/privilaged women

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 07:49:00 2015 No.2045789 >>2045775 Female superheroes in comics have way more realistic and achievable bodies than male superheroes in comics. Just saying.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 07:50:46 2015 No.2045790 >>2044977 >What the fuck happened? Remember when art was art and people didn't always get offended? >comics >art People have literally always been offended by art and paintings. For hundreds of years. It's nothing new.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:00:04 2015 No.2045795
File: 991 KB, 500x281, tumblr_m8blh4gkoq1rybc8yo1_500.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2045775
this proves you don't have a clue about what you're talking about. mildly athletic women are the closest at looking like that. actually, most do fucking look like that. why do you think there's so much body shots in women athletics ?

a woman shouldn't feel degraded when looked at and praised about her body, she should feel proud about it. it's too bad the only woman with that attitude are athletes or work with brazzers. and of course, they'll end up being called whores by women who can't even reach their assholes. the only thing that makes it shameful is today's society. it's nothing else.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:01:33 2015 No.2045796 >>2045761 he made them that way because the statue was originally going to be placed on the roof of the cathedral

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:22:02 2015 No.2045807 >>2045761 It has nothing to do with an ideal, you idiot. The head of the statue would shrink in perspective when looked at from below, so it was made bigger to compensate for that. Fucking idiot.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:31:39 2015 No.2045812

>>2045761
>>2045796
>>2045807
We don't really know which is the case.
>The proportions of some details are atypical of Michelangelo’s work. The figure has an unusually large head and imposing right hand.These enlargements may be due to the fact that the statue was originally intended to be placed on the cathedral roof line, so important parts of the sculpture had to be necessarily accentuated in order to be visible from below.
>Another interpretation about these larger details lead scholars to think that Michelangelo intentionally over-proportioned the head to underline the concentration and the right hand to symbolize the pondered action.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:38:01 2015 No.2045819

>durr why must the ideal be so sexualized
You're acting like the human body isn't sexy by nature. You can't sexualize the literally only thing people find feel sexual about.

>b-nut tight costumes and sexy poses!
I can't rock spandex like Wolverine or the Flash, either. Deal with it and do squats.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:38:20 2015 No.2045820 >>2045812 Either way it has nothing to do with ideal body aesthetics. It's actually a trade-off. A composition. He traded ideal proportions for readability. Be it readability of form or readability of symbol.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:41:29 2015 No.2045823 >>2045820 >He traded ideal proportions for readability If it was done for perspective, he didn't trade anything, since it would have the ideal proportions to the observer.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:41:44 2015 No.2045824 File: 30 KB, 300x219, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2045687 Ill take the one on the left

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:42:43 2015 No.2045826 >>2045795 >a woman shouldn't feel degraded when looked at and praised about her body, she should feel proud about it. but surely women have the right to be angry when their bodies are "praised" in a degrading manner?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:44:27 2015 No.2045827 File: 103 KB, 454x454, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2045795 >dat gif Sweet lord almighty

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:46:50 2015 No.2045832 File: 156 KB, 1024x708, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2045826 >praised in a degrading manner

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:47:05 2015 No.2045833

>>2045613
It's actually a pretty funny idea as far as fanart goes.

> you're basically taunting a growing part of the comics fanbase.

He's taunting people who are professionally outraged on tumblr. None of them give a fuck about comics and even if they did, it's humor, it's satire, it's supposed to offend people for fuck's sake.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:50:03 2015 No.2045837 >>2045826 Sure, the day Spiderman looks at your ass and goes "Woo-hoo! Nice ass, lady!", you have the right to be as outraged as you want. Until then, don't get outraged on behalf of other women, especially not fictional ones.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:52:20 2015 No.2045838 File: 206 KB, 600x706, 474[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2045832 >oh baby, that body is too fine for voting >gurl, with a booty like that, you shouldn't leave the kitchen >toots, you're just too sexy for equal job opportunity

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:54:58 2015 No.2045841 >>2045832 I want to fuck that cat

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:57:48 2015 No.2045844 File: 129 KB, 378x640, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2045838 Who the fuck says that, black people? >damn shorty bring that ass over here fo I make them pancakes

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 08:59:28 2015 No.2045846 File: 354 KB, 1452x1936, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2045841 I fell asleep while fapping yesterday amd now I have this uncontrolable urge to fuck everything. I feel your girth bro

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 09:00:45 2015 No.2045847 >>2045844 >fat privilege is not being called too hot for basic human rights

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 09:04:35 2015 No.2045850 >>2045841 Um, fucking triggered, shotlord. I is catkin, and I am like sooo offended.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 09:14:15 2015 No.2045860 >>2045826 the thing is that there is no fucking reason to be angry. the only one that looks dumb in the end would be the person that doesn't know how to praise or talk to a woman.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 09:41:26 2015 No.2045870 File: 61 KB, 500x723, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2045847 "The ass was fat" See its not that hard anon

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 09:43:48 2015 No.2045873

>>2045850
I apologize for you being so offended, however if you would like to make a purchase on this pussy, I can assure you no more mysoggyknees on this project.

Whats that?

You dont by my stuff?
Thats too bad, Im going to continue making what im making because I can and will.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 13:19:43 2015 No.2046072 I'd like to point out that Cho's own website is called Apes and Babes. Why aren't men or feminists upset that he's joking around and calling men apes?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 13:31:28 2015 No.2046081 File: 57 KB, 570x336, era of social mafia.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2044977 welcome to social media era, where everyone try drag anyone they come across to the mud. Its like wild west but with fedora

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 14:53:37 2015 No.2046169

>>2044977
>Remember when art was art
art has always been art
>and people didn't always get offended?
you're offended right now, you big whiner.

speaking as someone who hated the original cover, i think this one is permissably funny, since it's obviously pointing out how inappropriately cheesecakey the original was. also this female is looking at the audience, she is participating in the joke and seems aware of her physical charms, instead of just being looked at.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 15:55:37 2015 No.2046222

>>2046081
Marvel and DC sort of dug their own grave by listening to these people and humoring them. You know why journalists stopped picking on Kamiya, Kojima, and Kamitani? Because they either shut them down, or ignore them. When you apologize, or pull your art you are validating them and they want more.

I think we are close to hitting the breaking point though. Tumblr has recently lit up due to SJW's and feminists attacking lewd art of Steven Universe and they are starting to see tha painfully blatant double standards these people have. I think people in general are getting tired of looking out for peoples "feelings".

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 15:56:51 2015 No.2046225 >>2044977 >Remember when art was art and people didn't always get offended? No. This was never the case.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 16:24:24 2015 No.2046276

>>2046222
One of the reason why the Japanese guys can just ignore those people is because they have their own core audience in Japan that doesn't care about this shit.

Western developers and artists don't have that luxury. These SJWs can ruin your career

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 16:28:21 2015 No.2046285

>>2046276
I haven't really seen it ruin any developer or artists career unless they let them. I have seen it ruin a few journalists careers who would have been better off starting their own sites. I honestly believe they have about as much power as you give them... I guess there was that one rare case that they got offended by rape jokes on that "molestia" blog, ran crying to hasbro, and hasbro contacted tumblr to shut it down, but really, like Xseed, just shooting them down or ignoring them tends to work.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 16:36:48 2015 No.2046294 >>2046276 >Western developers and artists don't have that luxury. These SJWs can ruin your career Examples being?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 16:45:17 2015 No.2046299 >>2046222 >Kamiya He's told people many times to shut the fuck up and grow up and worry about something more important. He gives zero fucks and no ever rarely talks about Baynetta anymore.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 16:48:45 2015 No.2046304
File: 55 KB, 600x752, cNoobsw.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2046294
Look what just happened just last week. While it's not ruining the game it's still bending down to SJW pressure. This joke was paid and written for by a backer and the joke had no impact on the story. It was just a tiny text most people found by mistake, it wasn't anyway major yet 1 person found it and everyone flipped shit.

http://www.reaxxion.com/7059/obsidian-caves-to-sjw-demands-by-removing-transphobic-joke-from-pillars-of-eternity

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 16:48:48 2015 No.2046305 >>2046299 He can be a jerk at times(I was blocked for asking his favorite Kamen Rider), but the way he deals with social media drama is dead on.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 16:57:24 2015 No.2046314

>>2046304
They actually had to check with the backer before removing the joke, again, it's another case of validating them and giving them power. Funny enough, right after they did the social justeec warriors began to pick apart the writing for more offensive content and are now on a crusade against the game having a quest that mentions children getting killed.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 17:04:52 2015 No.2046326 >>2046314 Exactly. You give them an inch they take a mile.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 17:14:13 2015 No.2046335 >>2046326 As I said, I think we are getting to the breaking point. I think some big name content creators are starting to notice that supporting this kind of thing only hurts them in the long run.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 17:14:42 2015 No.2046339 >>2044977 son, i bet you haven't even seen art and history in the same sentence before

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 17:54:11 2015 No.2046417

>>2045677

Don't be surprised, they contradict themselves constantly.

They'll complain about how the patriarchy has enforced unfair beauty ideals, but the moment you claim that they're unattractive they immediately have no issue with adhering to those beauty ideals. This doesn't go for women, but for men in the ideology too.

They'll mention how they're able to criticize problematic content, which is definitely fine, but then they become incredibly angry at anyone who dares disagrees with them. See: >>2045673

I'm a feminist myself, but the crowd behind the ideal isn't perfect. Some use the ideology as a platform to free themselves from criticism and constantly label other folks as: "regressive", [dum males lmaooo xD], or [right wing strawman].

>>2045696

Aside from the cover being posted privately. Even if it's offensive/problematic, there is nothing wrong with it.

13+ fiction isn't obligated to teach you morals, it's intended to present variety of themes (The Stantley Kubrick films, George Orwell novels, etc). Even mandatory school books like "The house of mango street" and "To Kill A Mockingbird had the subject matter of rape covered inside of it. Problematic content in literature doesn't deter teens from reading books, so why should comic book authors play it safe?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 17:58:16 2015 No.2046426 >>2044977 Remember when /ic/ was about your art, and not comic book covers and web comic drama? ...me either.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 17:58:44 2015 No.2046427

>>2046335
When you get how big companies operate, you'll realize that this isn't going to change because the problem is corporate identity. If companies just gave honest responses to this kind of bullshit they'd be fine, but since their decision making process is all about creating brands and preventing damage to them, meaning that in tricky situations they give whatever answer they think is going to hurt their image the least, they're succeptible to this kind of social pressure.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 18:06:43 2015 No.2046444

>>2046427
They were, but we are getting to the point where quite a bit of work and money is being thrown out in the name of social justice, and that, no matter what they do, these people will always demand more work be destroyed. Hell, there are some people actually arguing that they should change Gone Homo because it wasn't progressive enough.

Their image isn't being hurt nearly as much as these people are making out. Hell, journalists have being trying desperately to tarnish Nintendos reputation for years and people still don't give a fuck. Sales are coming back from a lot of the comics and just about all their progressive gimmicks have dropped considerably in terms of sales aside from Ms. Marvel. As I said, I think it's coming to an end. I could be wrong, but the whole "gender" and "sexuality" climate seems to be fading, much like the Christian mom thing before, and the evironmetalist one before it. These people got what they wanted but, much like predicted, still weren't happy and still didn't support the things they said they did and as a result many of the people who did have now stopped. Even that religious freedom bill in Indy is showing them just how little their kicking and screaming online really matters.

Now I just wonder what the next horrible thing will be.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 18:24:05 2015 No.2046469

>>2044977
>Remember when art was art and people didn't always get offended?
Art has always offended people. There are literal movements that are dedicated to offending people, what the fuck are you going on about? We're all petty bitches who like to get attention.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 18:36:41 2015 No.2046480
File: 292 KB, 1233x1067, 1428437999872.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Robbie Rodriguez is the artist who designed Spider-Gwen.

I don't think I've ever seen a more overblown response. I don't see anything wrong with the OP cover which was private and NOT a Marvel cover. Also, he does know people are drawing legit porn of her, right? This upsets him more than the porn, futa, being raped by monsters etc etc.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 18:42:41 2015 No.2046484

>>2044977

My theory on why there's so much fucking backlash over this shit isn't so much as feminists needing shit to be offended about as much as it is there isn't any good comics targeted at the female audience.

Thanks to all the popular movie franchises, tv series, and cartoons there's more of an interest in comics around the board but DC and Marvel haven't figured out what the new demographics are looking for. So you're getting an underserved audience complaining that they;re underserved but can't quite put their finger on why, and now you have professional complainers go "muh objectification" and the masses go "eh, i guess we can go with that."

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 19:00:50 2015 No.2046501 >>2046304 Oh, that reminds me of Hother "Whoresbane" Umber.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 19:06:46 2015 No.2046505 >>2046480 How old is this guy? He's acting like a child.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 19:33:41 2015 No.2046527 >>2046480 Seriously, are people going insane or something? This cover is tame even for fucking 60s pinup standards. Just what on earth is going on?

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 19:37:45 2015 No.2046530

>>2046505
He's saying what the people complaining want to hear, which is how his employer expects him to act. When you work for someone you don't just sell your skill but your persona as well. That's part of the reason why popular artists get better deals: a big part of their value lies in their use as a mouthpiece. That's just capitalism bruh.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 19:38:59 2015 No.2046532 >>2046527 I'm almost convinced it's all an inside joke, and all these guys are laughing while fueling the internet drama.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 19:46:53 2015 No.2046537 >>2046527 They're jumping on in hopes that they get some benefit out of being "the better man", whatever the fuck that means.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 19:47:03 2015 No.2046538 >>2046530 Cho has worked for Marvel for YEARS, Robbie is new.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 19:53:15 2015 No.2046543 >>2046480 What a goddamn baby. I'd be ecstatic if people were drawing porn of my characters.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 19:55:42 2015 No.2046547

>>2046530
But if this pose is where Marvel and DC draws the line, then literally 99% of any of their covers and comic book pages featuring a female superhero should be condemned for the same reasons.

I mean, this pose is really fucking tame. If you showed this to an 80 year old catholic nun, a redneck deep-south republican and a stereotypical soccermom, even they wouldn't be offended by it, it's that fucking tame.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 19:58:26 2015 No.2046548 >>2046543 It's not even porn. It's not even NSFW. That's the crazy thing. It's a satirical sketch that is making fun of the retarded outrage that already happened many months ago over the same pose when Manara originally drew it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 20:18:19 2015 No.2046558 >>2045643 The artist reproduced another cover that offended a small vocal minority that has political correctness above freedom of speech and common sense.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 20:30:09 2015 No.2046569 >>2045643 Maddox covered the whole thing well and why it's ridiculous: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CB6TiRJNI-Q

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 20:45:12 2015 No.2046585 >>2044977 >... and people didn't always get offended? lolnope

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 20:48:24 2015 No.2046590 >people suddenly care about comics NORMIES NORMIEEEEEEEEEEEEEES

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 20:51:22 2015 No.2046593 >>2046569 Holy shit, Maddox is still around?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 20:51:53 2015 No.2046594 >>2046569 Holy shit. That guy's still around!?!?1/1

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 20:55:30 2015 No.2046597 >>2046569 Holy shit; he's still around?????

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 21:01:10 2015 No.2046600

>>2044977
Imagine if these landwhales cared about actual violence and degradation towards women. Honor killings? Sex trafficking? Sharia law? Rape used by militants to keep a population in check in west africa? Whatever but COMIC BOOKS AND VIDEO GAMES?! HASHTAGS! RAPE! RAAAPE!

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 21:02:35 2015 No.2046601 >>2046593 >>2046594 >>2046597 yiss.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 21:05:50 2015 No.2046609

>>2046600

i agree with you, but i see a misconception i need to clear up, there's no "specific" or documented sharia law, they're different for every country. the west has the most humanistic version of sharia law, some developing countries enforce an inhumane variant of it

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 21:07:36 2015 No.2046610 >>2046600 >I care about all the woman all over the world but only if they are from my country

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 21:25:57 2015 No.2046632 ITT: not art. not critique

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 21:28:25 2015 No.2046636 >>2046632 What the fuck do you think that is in the OP pic, fagface?

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 21:39:34 2015 No.2046657
File: 235 KB, 1236x949, 1387443515174.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

> Remember when art was art and people didn't always get offended?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics_Code_Authority

This shit is not new. The only difference is that young libtards are the ones bitching these days and not bored out of their asses christian moms.
Also: No one had balls to oppose fundamentalists back then while SJWs are almost universally (and vocally on top of that) hated by all hobbyists who are not an SJWs themselves.

Anonymous Tue Apr 7 22:07:05 2015 No.2046682
File: 830 KB, 1988x3056, 1428458383742.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2045596
>Spider-Gwen book is clearly aimed at a teen audience, meant to entice new, younger female readers to Marvel comics. Plus, Gwen herself is a teenager.
>Plus, Gwen herself is a teenager.

She's 21 years old. They are making shit up now or they don't even read the comics.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 22:19:40 2015 No.2046693 its a joke, parody and comedy asnwers to no one. furthermore it isnt even a for profit work, there's plently of completely serious, completely tasteless spider gwen porn online Im sure. My politically correct response is marysue can eat a dick.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 7 23:44:39 2015 No.2046792 >>2045709 Women like to see butts and tits too.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 00:32:42 2015 No.2046842 >>2046792 Gross.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 01:25:29 2015 No.2046904 >>2046682 as an aside, that art looks really terrible

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 01:44:41 2015 No.2046929 >>2046904 That art is drawn by >>2046480

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 01:46:54 2015 No.2046932 >>2046682 Jesus Christ, is that the art by Robbie Rodriguez, who got all butthurt that Frank Cho was drawing suggestive fanart of the spidergirl character? What an incredibly shit artist.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 01:53:20 2015 No.2046936 File: 103 KB, 640x640, 10990577_443536509145292_912189729_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2046932 Yes it is, he can be a damn good artist when he's not stylizing like he does for Spider-Gwen.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 01:58:11 2015 No.2046938
File: 122 KB, 600x776, Edge_of_Spider-Verse_2_Preview_4-600x776.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2046936
It's funny, sometimes the comic will look good like this page while a lot of times it look like a mess like >>2046682

It's bizarre and he's all over the place.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 02:14:03 2015 No.2046958

>>2044977
We need to form a collective/group "artists against political bullshit"

Gamergate did it, the Scifi nerds did it, now its our time.

I say we make comic covers of male superheroes telling female superheroes shit like "you're a girl, your opinion doesn't matter"

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 02:21:48 2015 No.2046970 >>2046958 speaking of the cho, is his book online for download? the drawing beutiful women one.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 02:23:06 2015 No.2046972 File: 997 KB, 1244x1812, 15_014.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2046958 Can we get asanagi to join?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 02:24:29 2015 No.2046973 >>2046970 yes

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 02:27:30 2015 No.2046974 >>2046973 link pls

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 02:31:32 2015 No.2046979 >>2046974 jk

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 03:40:12 2015 No.2047020 File: 32 KB, 582x726, e635h3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Glad to see some people in the comic industry putting their foot down.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 03:49:42 2015 No.2047024

>>2046480
What the actual fuck. He didn't create Gwen Stacey. She's just another fucking boring alternate version of Spider-Man, of the thousands that have been to now. I mean he didn't even create the alter ego! She's completely recycled!

Steve Ditko must be rolling in his grave (or retirement home, not sure)

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 04:21:46 2015 No.2047043 >>2047024 Ditko is alive but hasn't been seen in years. The man is a recluse.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 04:25:36 2015 No.2047044

>>2045613
>and you're basically taunting a growing part of the comics fanbase.
Tumblr is a "growing part of the comics fanbase" the same way numetal was "a growing part of the music industry".

It's just faggots bandwaggoning on what's "in" right now, as soon as the justice leage movie is done nerds and their shit will be social suicide and no one will care again.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 04:29:29 2015 No.2047049

>>2045613
You know how many people on Tumblr honestly buy let alone read comics? Most Tumblr fans either like the movies and pretend to read comics OR they like certain characters by design or a single panel they saw a picture of them in. They will reblog a picture of say Storm and say "She my favorite" but they read jackshit about her.

Also see >>2046682 the people complaining about Cho's cover are calling Gwen a teen when she's at least 21.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 04:33:00 2015 No.2047052

>>2045677
>Why do women attack people's sexuality when confronted?
Because they value themselves and other in factors of sexual desirability. It's also why they fucking hate sexual and aesthetic release being avaliable to men, it devalues their own sexual desirability.

>INB4 Anon that's bullshit
Show me a woman who's obviously successful in her sexual life who still spouts this sex-negative bullshit as anything but snide remarks to save face when interviewed.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 04:33:26 2015 No.2047053 >>2046970 I'm still confused as to why he put a horrible woman on the cover. He clearly can draw beautiful ones but he had to go and put a stereotypical 40 something years old American housewife on the cover of that book.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 04:38:56 2015 No.2047056 >>2047053 Thats the best kind of woman

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 04:43:46 2015 No.2047058 >>2045735 >Please stop being this fucking pathetic No U!

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 04:47:45 2015 No.2047060

>>2045750
Yes?
The ideal animal is the one that can produce the greater number of most healthy offspring.
>But muh brains/science/feelings/metaphysicalbullshit
Being beautiful in regards to fertility doesn't negate any sort of academic, artistic or spiritual beauty. The people who think it does aren't "beautiful inside", they're just jealous and bitter of people who most commonly happen to be beautiful inside and out.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 04:53:17 2015 No.2047063 >>2047060 Where the fuck did this thread detail into this?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 04:53:23 2015 No.2047064 >>2045775 Stylization is the bread and butter of heroic graphic narrative. It's not artists' fault that the average woman, if stylized, would look like Baymax.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 05:00:26 2015 No.2047067 >>2046081 >Its like wild west but with fedora Nigga in the wild west you behaved yourself unless you liked the flavor of lead.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 05:08:44 2015 No.2047073

>>2046427
Capital>Image and companies are starting to realize a mid-term overhaul is cheaper than constantly pulling campaigns and products because of soggy knees and hurt feelins.

People are so fucking stupid a type change on your logo resets your public image to the public. Look at Monsanto.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 05:12:11 2015 No.2047075 >>2046538 Cho is jobbing for Robbie. Everyone knows Cho could beat his ass and then draw a picture of himself sitting on Robbie's broken body while Spider-Gwen sucks his cock.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 06:06:34 2015 No.2047103 >>2046480 >my kids I had something about Ditko and being a cuck, but I lost it.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:05:07 2015 No.2047129
File: 569 KB, 695x900, 882cbbe7c6fc9910f68f871cb52e5ecd-d8mh1fe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2046792
>Women like to see butts and tits too.

If only popular female artists who draw sexy women all the time would finally speak up and tell these SJWs to shut the fuck up. The narrative they are trying to push that these evil, misogynist, perverted male artists are trying to make female comic book fans uncomfortable is so fucking ridiculous.

Just look at any random image in Sakimichan's gallery and it's way more sexualized than that cover Manara and Cho did.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:09:01 2015 No.2047131 >>2045326 They would, the difference is that the creator and their studio/publisher wouldn't back down.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:11:54 2015 No.2047134

>>2047129
Womyn can draw other womyn in sexy poses and it's empowering. It's only when a male artist does it that it becomes offensive and bad. If a womyn said that doing sexy poses is ok, then she would be a champion of empowerment and it would only goes to show how open minded womyn are when compared to bigoted and perverted men.
Nothing anyone would say will have any effect on the SJWs, it's a cancer, it can't be stopped until it will hopefully implode, collapse on itself.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:12:42 2015 No.2047135 >>2046792 No body cares about lesbians/bisexuals.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:13:00 2015 No.2047136 >>2045775 Have you ever met a mildly athletic woman?

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:14:36 2015 No.2047138

>>2047131
Japanese artists are used to a doujin market where even the most innocent characters, even when they are underaged children, are used in the most depraved and disgusting fetish porn imaginable No japanese artist in their right mind would complain about a SFW fanart of their character in a somewhat sexy, suggestive pose.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:16:12 2015 No.2047139
File: 64 KB, 1024x576, replacement limerick.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2046304
>>2046314
>>2046326
>>2046335
As much as I hate them backing down, let's not forget that the replacement limerick is now directly making fun of those very SJWs getting offended.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:18:19 2015 No.2047141 >>2047134 SJWs are very cannibalistic. They have no problem turning on other women. I remember Sakimichan once was at the center of a small tumblr shitstorm because of a Korra fanart she did where Korra's skin wasn't dark enough for tumblr.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:32:29 2015 No.2047146 >>2047020 I like Frank Cho and I wouldn't put him up with those fine artist. Not because he's inferior, it's just apples and oranges. Can we stop deifying artists just because they're on "our side", it's a fucking sketch.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:42:26 2015 No.2047155 >>2047129 >If only popular female artists who draw sexy women all the time would finally speak up and tell these SJWs to shut the fuck up. Then they simply whine about internalized muhsoggyknees.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:47:43 2015 No.2047157 >>2047103 Please don't cuck Ditko he's had a hard enough life after Stan Lee stole the characters for himself and told everyone he created them.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:50:32 2015 No.2047159 >>2047141 Not dark enough? What kind of fucking problem is this is a world filled with bullshit, murder, rape etc. Not dark enough?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 07:52:03 2015 No.2047160 >>2047159 Holy shit, you're retarded.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 08:06:07 2015 No.2047168 >>2047160 I might be mistaken, but I think he was being cheeky.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 08:13:10 2015 No.2047169 File: 7 KB, 259x194, 252545345.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2044977 >art was art and people didn't always get offended

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 11:19:20 2015 No.2047290 >>2047157 Ditko's the bull, though.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 14:00:06 2015 No.2047407 [DELETED]

File: 268 KB, 694x1080, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>Wow. What a crazy couple of days it has been. My parody cover sketch of Spider-Gwen aping the infamous Manara Spider-Woman pose sent some of the hypersensitive people in a tizzy.

>To be honest, I was amused and surprised by the uproar since it was, in my opinion, over nothing. It’s essentially a small group of angry and humorless people ranting against my DRAWING of a pretty woman. It’s utter nonsense. This world would be a better and a happier place if some people just grow a sense of humor and relax.

>Now, I’m getting bombarded by various bloggers asking for an interview addressing this “scandal”. Instead of me wasting my breath and precious time over this non-issue replying to all the interviewers, I’ve drawn another cover sketch in response which will, hopefully, answer all the questions.

>Enjoy, everyone.

>– –

BASED FUCKING CHO
>FRANK CHO

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 14:02:09 2015 No.2047409
File: 268 KB, 694x1080, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>Wow. What a crazy couple of days it has been. My parody cover sketch of Spider-Gwen aping the infamous Manara Spider-Woman pose sent some of the hypersensitive people in a tizzy.

>To be honest, I was amused and surprised by the uproar since it was, in my opinion, over nothing. It’s essentially a small group of angry and humorless people ranting against my DRAWING of a pretty woman. It’s utter nonsense. This world would be a better and a happier place if some people just grow a sense of humor and relax.

>Now, I’m getting bombarded by various bloggers asking for an interview addressing this “scandal”. Instead of me wasting my breath and precious time over this non-issue replying to all the interviewers, I’ve drawn another cover sketch in response which will, hopefully, answer all the questions.

>Enjoy, everyone.

>– –
>FRANK CHO

BASED FUCKING CHO

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 14:04:02 2015 No.2047411 >>2047409 AYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY LMAO BTFO

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 14:06:10 2015 No.2047412 >>2047409 Hah, this is an amazing response to all the butthurt. I hope this becomes a thing and other artists start drawing random female characters in this pose.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 14:08:00 2015 No.2047415 >>2047043 Ditko might as well be dead with how far Stan Lee buried the knife in his back.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 14:13:15 2015 No.2047421

>>2047415
Seriously. Lee did the same to Kirby, Kirby and Ditko were the real creative minds and created most of the characters by themselves. Stan knew how to stand out and market himself which is why he's so popular now and most people ask who Ditko is or Kirby.
>>2047409
YES YES YEEEEESSSSS

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 14:21:18 2015 No.2047427 >>2047409 Wow finally someone who knows he's dealing with angry children throwing a tantrum.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 14:39:23 2015 No.2047446

>>2047052
I think you've pretty much nailed this, at least when it comes to how female teens and twenty-somethings perceive their own self-worth. Once you grow up a little you finally get that it's fantasy, and only non-adults (muh soggy knees and 3DPD types), male or female, believe flesh-and-blood humans do or should hold each other to exaggerated, heavily stylized standards of beauty. And this is coming from an insecure fatty.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 15:38:16 2015 No.2047509 >>2047409 This isn't even funny even a little. It's rude, disgusting and he's just rattling the cages and asking for trouble. Any respect I may have had for him is gone.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 15:42:21 2015 No.2047516

>>2044977
This cover art is great. It's both sexy and sarcastic. It knows exactly what it's doing, and the joke's on you if it actually upsets you. It is not meant to be taken seriously. It makes fun of both sexism, and people up in arms about sexism, or any kind of sexuality in art that they disapprove of.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 15:47:29 2015 No.2047522

>>2046484
The problem is the real nerd girl demo is much smaller than the ammount of people bitching in tumblr and women have this weird shit where they need to act like a monolithic entity for some fuckstupid reason.

Grills already got a nice bunch of comics in Miss Marvel, Batgirl, Gotham Academy, Harley Queen, Spider-Gwen, Jem & the Holograms and a massive ammount of indies.
Hell women are Zenescope's main demo, yes Zenescope, the ones with the b-horror comics and cheesecake covers of fairy tale girls vaguely ressembling Disney properties.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 15:47:38 2015 No.2047524

>>2047509

Why are you so bitch made? Why are millennials such fucking losers? It's the only reason why this SJW shit is getting so out of hand. Our generation is ass and filled with adults with the minds of children. Grow a backbone and stop getting offended over attractive fictional women look attractive. This "controversy" deserves to be mocked because it is absurd.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 15:52:49 2015 No.2047532 >>2047129 Well >>2047134 >>2047155 Both of these are true, SJWs work by silencing dissent. You stop being a human bean if you disagree with them, they disregard all your opinions and rewrite them to fit the blob.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 15:55:24 2015 No.2047535 >>2047146 He's not saying Cho is as good as Picasso, he's saying if you're gonna ban Cho for drawing mildly sexual pretty women you have to ban most art ever.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 15:59:42 2015 No.2047539
File: 224 KB, 540x720, tumblr_nm8v83WTjU1rpoqipo1_540.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2047412
Back in the day when someone said something stupid about your art being offensive you made an even more offensive one.
I'm glad some artists hold the old traditions dear.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 16:00:52 2015 No.2047541 >>2047509 Underage b&

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 16:19:46 2015 No.2047560 >>2047539 That's hilarious. Were any jimmies rustled by this version?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 17:36:55 2015 No.2047617 >>2045775 Models and actresses aren't exactly healthy people. Go to any casual gym and you'll see plenty of gwens.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:07:00 2015 No.2047642

>>2047129
I know that implying that NONE of women who draw titties and shit are actually enjoying it would be beyond retarded but using a person like Sakimichan as an example seems like strawgrasping to me. Bitch would fill her gallery with logs of shit falling out of animal asses if it would promise to bring her the same money catering to trashy wannabenerds who repost her shit on 9gags and facebooks does.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:10:35 2015 No.2047643 >>2047642 I guarantee you a lot of the shit she actually draws she doesn't even like/care for, just does it to please her consumers. I agree with you, Sakimi is too much of a sell-out to use as an example for that.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:13:49 2015 No.2047648 >>2047643 >>2047642 With all that in mind, I'll still mention that I would do exact same thing for this amount of money. It still wouldn't turn me into a great example of an artist who draws what he truly enjoys.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:16:03 2015 No.2047650 >>2047642 >>2047643 >projecting this hard It's not like there was a point where she just switched to what she draws for money, retards. This is what she was doing from the start, and she was showered in cash for it.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:26:32 2015 No.2047662

>>2047650
>projecting
What?

And I never said she did whatever you're implying, just saying that I'm sure she has sold out a bit and started making fan art of franchises she wouldn't have made otherwise because of her consumer base. And possibly the softcore porn and (male-orientated) fanservice thing like the other Anon has mentioned.

>This is what she was doing from the start
Nope, she actually did original works way back then, posted some fan art, and realized 'hey, I sure get a lot more attention with this than my previous works!'

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:31:29 2015 No.2047666

>>2047650
Well, it means that:
1. She has great social skills and/or is great at pushing her work
2. She was smart/lucky enough to find her niche and good enough to secure it

But in the end of the day she IS just drawing generic fanart of pupolar characters for fandoms she obviously does not belong to.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:34:29 2015 No.2047668 File: 51 KB, 431x609, sE53Xng.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2047421 >Kirby and Ditko were the real creative minds

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:36:50 2015 No.2047672 [DELETED]

>>2047509

It's a bold response, but it's good since those folks relentlessly bully artists who don't accept their opinion. It's the folks who act like:

>"Guys, I'm not trying to censor artists, I'm trying to make them open-minded about issues. What? You won't agree with me or accept my opinion? You're a regressive [insert right wing strawman]!"

There's nothing wrong with being offended, there's something wrong with attacking the character of an artist because they draw attractive women. Live and let live bruv. People aren't always going to make the content that I like, I don't launch crusades or e-witchhunts because of it.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:47:08 2015 No.2047682 >>2047509 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9hbWxIc-v8 I think Franku expresses it best in response to your grump.

Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:49:54 2015 No.2047684

>>2047509

It's a bold response, but it's good since those folks relentlessly bully artists who don't accept their opinion. It's the folks who act like:

>"Guys, I'm not trying to censor artists, I'm trying to make them open-minded about issues. What? You won't agree with me or accept my opinion? You're a immature regressive [insert right wing strawman]!"

There's nothing wrong with being offended, there's something wrong with attacking the character of an artist because they draw attractive women. Live and let live. People aren't always going to make the content that I like, I don't launch crusades or e-witchhunts because of it. It's a waste of time for him to write a wall of text for something so simple to interpret. He isn't obligated to write a lengthy well-thought response to poorly-researched articles or a haphazard knee-jerk reaction on twitter.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 18:50:37 2015 No.2047686 >>2047509 implying you are not a bait, poor him, he's not gonna be able to sleep at night because of you. he probably gained more respect than he lost with that anyway. >that joker isn't very good though

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 20:46:12 2015 No.2047778 >>2045812 real talk, david is proportioned weird because he's a boy, most people see the statue as a grown ass imposing man.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 8 22:51:21 2015 No.2047888 >>2047668 Do you even know what you're talking about kid?

Anonymous Thu Apr 9 11:14:11 2015 No.2048326

>>2047535
> Not because he's inferior, it's just apples and oranges.

I wasn't even making THAT comparison. It's just people giving him brownie points because he's on their side. It's the same cheesecake he's always done.

>It does kick the shit out of Manara's original though.

Anonymous Thu Apr 9 20:12:27 2015 No.2048823
File: 139 KB, 415x887, 1428622767469.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2046480
Here is what Robbi the artist of Spider-Gwen had to say in length.

He comes across as a giant fucking faggot and a whining little child. I hope other artists call him out on this shit.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 9 21:14:06 2015 No.2048886 >>2048823 What the fuck is wrong with this guy?

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 9 21:51:15 2015 No.2048920 >>2048886 I'm sure he knows what talking points he needs to dish out to get the girls/SJW on his side publicising his shit - girls are oppressed - feelings matter - censorship is not censorship when we feel like it -boys stink -girls are intellectual

Anonymous Thu Apr 9 22:02:30 2015 No.2048931

>>2048823
he does seem like a bit of a dick but he makes a good point. there are lots of new people reading comics and they're normalfags so the industry should make sure it isn't turning them off by sticking to (what the internet tells me) is a constitutional obligation to sell smut.

Anonymous Thu Apr 9 22:21:11 2015 No.2048956

>>2048931
Okay but again the cover that got him pissed was a PRIVATE cover which the artist just drew for fun. It's not like he sold it for thousands of readers.

Also, there is sex, cleavage, swear words, shirtless men etc etc all over TV and no one bats an eye.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 9 22:23:21 2015 No.2048962 >>2048931 His point is shit, he's just embarrassed by his job and believes that grown ups can't deal with boobs.

>>	Anonymous Thu Apr 9 22:52:13 2015 No.2048997 >>2046444 Why did you put environmentalists on that list?

Anonymous Thu Apr 9 23:03:13 2015 No.2049007

>>2048956
Exactly. The guy's a delusional fuck, and if anything insulting to women by proposing that they can't handle a sexualized, idealized female form. Not only does it show his puritan views on sexuality, but it also blatantly ignores the sexualized and idealized male and female form that's widespread in practically every form of media out there.

Bunch of hypocritical cunts and spineless white knights getting their panties in a bunch over what wasn't controversial in the first place, and over the parody of said "controversy".

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 00:15:43 2015 No.2049051 >>2048997 Don't you remember when "green products" was the go-to excuse to make product packaging more expensive?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 00:48:57 2015 No.2049064 >>2046682 I can't believe they're publishing a comic that looks like this, it's like the modern equivalent of shitty nineties art.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 01:57:02 2015 No.2049130 >>2049064 It's aimed at teens, do you think teens really care at webcomic tier art?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 09:44:44 2015 No.2049394 File: 21 KB, 372x260, ௵.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] When exactly did the people calling themselves liberals and progressive start becoming the most puritan, authoritarian and pro-censorship people there are? It's fucking mind-boggling.

Anonymous Fri Apr 10 10:24:54 2015 No.2049419
File: 302 KB, 499x478, ratqueens.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2049130
Young adults*

And yes.

>>2049064
I don't think it's that bad. 90's art was certainly worse. If you compare it to something like pic related though, yeah, it looks like garbage.

Anonymous Fri Apr 10 10:27:05 2015 No.2049420

>>2048931
And yet normalfags, both men and women, seemingly love the same sexualized stereotypes when they watch capeshit movies. Or have I missed the official statement where Chris Hemsworth is never to be seen shirtless in Thor / Avengers and Black Widow changed her skin-tight leather outfit for something more "practical" and less form-fitting?

The assumption that only perverted manchildren like sexualized stuff couldn't be further from the truth. The hardcore fans are the ones who care the most about the story and the characters. The fanservice is there for the normalfags. Not the other way around.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 10:27:33 2015 No.2049423 File: 98 KB, 533x471, 1408887701333.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2049419 >female >giving the finger

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 10:39:10 2015 No.2049427 >>2047409 >I’ve drawn another cover sketch in response based/10

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 10:47:07 2015 No.2049434 >>2049419 >young adult >GUH MUM ITS NOT A PHASE ITS THE REAL ME

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 10:48:42 2015 No.2049435 >>2047136 The fucker thinks models and actresses are athletic.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 10:53:54 2015 No.2049443 >>2049434 i think young adult is like 10 to 12 year olds, maybe up to 14 at a stretch. i don't think 15 year olds are still reading like animorphs and shit like that.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 11:01:15 2015 No.2049449 >>2047409 the joker sucks

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 11:03:27 2015 No.2049451 >>2049443 young adult is defined as 12-18, google is your friend.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 11:06:02 2015 No.2049452 >>2049451 well then there are some dumbass 13-18 year olds around i guess.

Anonymous Fri Apr 10 11:08:46 2015 No.2049455

>>2049443
What? Young Adult is a defined demographic and means 15-17 year olds. In japan, it's called seinen and can cover pretty dark and disturbing material. But even in the west, some of the more popular YA literature for example are the Hunger Games books, which aren't aimed at 10-12 year olds whatsoever.

Anonymous Fri Apr 10 11:14:11 2015 No.2049460

>>2049455
>In japan, it's called seinen and can cover pretty dark and disturbing material.
Please stop talking about what you do not know. Seinen is not the Japanese version of "young adult". It was originally conceived as a target demographic spanning males from 20 to 30 year olds, and nowadays has become a broad term defined more by content than target demographic. Its target is certainly not "15-17 year olds".

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 11:24:19 2015 No.2049467 >>2049460 >In Japanese, the word 'seinen' literally means "youth" Of course seinen manga are also aimed at adults you fucking moron, but the original meaning is something that can be read by young adults and not children.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 11:31:55 2015 No.2049474 File: 68 KB, 670x503, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2049394 About 2013 when people said "its okay to be gay"

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 11:33:14 2015 No.2049475 >>2047539 >>2047560 Otto ghetto couldnt give less of a fuck than Cho. I love em both

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 11:48:38 2015 No.2049484 File: 94 KB, 450x951, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2049435 King me

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 11:59:07 2015 No.2049490 File: 80 KB, 652x394, whaafuckingbaby.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] where are the japanese group forced doujins of spidergwen when you need them

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 12:06:53 2015 No.2049492 >>2049490 >your

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 12:23:22 2015 No.2049499 >>2049484 Muh dick

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 12:30:41 2015 No.2049505 >>2049484 I want to rub my balls on her head.

Anonymous Fri Apr 10 12:37:01 2015 No.2049510

>>2049467
>Of course seinen manga are also aimed at adults
Seinen manga are not "also" aimed at adults, they are aimed at adults.
>But the original meaning is something that can be read by young adults and not children.
That is not the original meaning. Since you know Japanese, you can just read the jp wikipedia article that says exactly what I said in my previous post.
>かつては主に20代~30代の男性を対象としていた
It literally says that originally it was intended for people in their twenties and thirties. The meaning of the word seinen itself can refer to people up to their thirties anyways. In case you don't believe me:
>若さを強調する場合には30代にもいう
So yeah, your point about young adult = seinen is just wrong, stop spreading misinformation.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 12:46:14 2015 No.2049513 File: 111 KB, 450x951, red lines mate.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2049484 Pot belly and no muscle definition, she looks like a retired boxer. Baldness and all.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 12:47:47 2015 No.2049516 >>2049510 You're confusing japanese manhood with western manhood. You can also fuck 12 year old girls in some rural parts of japan legally.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 12:48:43 2015 No.2049519 >>2049513 but would you still fuck it?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 12:55:47 2015 No.2049522 >>2049513 Show me your 10/10

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 13:17:24 2015 No.2049527 File: 207 KB, 608x900, 1406476518800.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2049522 I don't have any pictures of my 10/10. Pic related when she's not fat and kendall from casting couch before the horrible boob job score a 9 though.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 13:40:45 2015 No.2049541 File: 122 KB, 1139x491, 1428536913654.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] freedom is problematic you cis scum

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 13:44:49 2015 No.2049546 >>2049541 >problematic that word triggers me

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 13:47:56 2015 No.2049549 File: 204 KB, 842x595, 1427552202816.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2049546 people being triggered by me triggers me more. so like, fuck you??

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 13:51:43 2015 No.2049552 >>2049549 >hygene

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 14:40:13 2015 No.2049590 File: 126 KB, 640x640, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2049513 Check, Move your king

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 14:42:13 2015 No.2049592 File: 46 KB, 489x700, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2049499 >>2049505 >>2049519 >>2049522 Sauce is: Amber Rose

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 15:10:54 2015 No.2049619 >>2049549 I was thinking along similar lines, if I see another fucking trigger warning I might have a stroke. Why are we supposed to just suffer in silence? I demand some sort of a trigger warning warning.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 15:14:18 2015 No.2049623 >>2049590 >>2049592 she got cancer?

Anonymous Fri Apr 10 15:29:20 2015 No.2049645

>>2048823

So tl;dr:

>The industry cannot be taken seriously because people like boobs&guns! and liking boobs is wrong!

>I'm embarrassed to be working in comics because I cannot stand the fact that people like what I don't like! muh tainted medium!

>People who like things that I don't like are fucking up the industry! I can't stand to share the industry with people who draw things I don't approve of! Growing up means you have to draw what I tell you!

>STOP LIKING WHAT I DONT LIKE! THIS ISNT UP FOR DEBATE OR DISCUSSION!

Anonymous Fri Apr 10 16:09:04 2015 No.2049712

>>2047409
This isn't really related to the topic, but why do so many western artists draw characters who look like they're very poor actors posing, while the dialogue and interaction between the characters don't really match what the scene is trying to portray?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 16:11:05 2015 No.2049715 >>2049490 /ic/ should have a thread dedicated to drawing porn of her. At the end, it should all be spammed to his twitter account.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 16:39:24 2015 No.2049753 >>2049623 dunno.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 16:41:15 2015 No.2049757 >>2049712 Western artists rely on too many references and not the gestural interaction between characters. Every pose is static, because it is. you dont see normal people do half the poses that they draw in the books.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 16:41:19 2015 No.2049758 >>2047668 Big head.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 17:52:33 2015 No.2049849 >>2047409 >joker's head tilted precisely at camera plane, which happens to be looking down this might be accurate in some case, but it looks forced as fuck. is this cho guy aleguedly a pro?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 18:11:58 2015 No.2049871 >>2049849 it was a stylistic choice that is seen in many older western comics

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 19:52:11 2015 No.2049943 >>2047409 He seems like a decent fellow. I would stroke my dick gently across his slanty eyed face.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 20:19:27 2015 No.2049966 >>2044977 It's definitely supposed to be playful but i can see why some people would be... offended? I'm not but I can see why this would annoy some women, but offend?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 10 21:02:19 2015 No.2050003 >>2049966 Try to make sense next time.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 11 18:21:14 2015 No.2050846 >>2049715 I'd be down with that.

Anonymous Sun Apr 12 08:12:46 2015 No.2051445

>>2047409
that's not really what a parody is tho, like that new cover is one because it's actually makin fun of somethin, but the original spider gwen cover he did is more or less jus an homage. but then again, what more can you expect from a dude who hopes to expand his audience by pokin ant hills instead of creatin stand out work, stay losin, frank cho

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 12 08:24:27 2015 No.2051452 >>2051445 the kids got spunk, I like that. Stay salty you jealous bitch.

Anonymous Sun Apr 12 08:30:02 2015 No.2051457

>>2047684
nobody here seems to understand that the spider-gwen team have almost no control over the variant covers at all. mahvel jus hires like however many artists they want an are like "here, draw a spider-gwen cover". robbi obviously has strong feelings about spider-gwen seein as he cocreated her an you kno, like most comic makers, has a vision of what type of story he wants to tell an how it unfolds. it's not that frank cho drew a suggestive spider-gwen, it's that frank cho drew it for an official cover that represents somethin robbi an co was trynna avoid doin with this specific work. it's a shitty situation for the industry to be in but there's generally a gentlemen's agreement between people hired on to do covers not to be a cockbite the way frank cho is.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 12 08:34:08 2015 No.2051460 >>2051452 nah, if i was gonna be jealous of someone, it'd be mike mignola, goddamn gorgeous draftswork, i wish he drew more ;-;

Anonymous Sun Apr 12 08:43:04 2015 No.2051469

>>2051460

I wasn't being srs bruh, Cho's skills aren't the best, but he is standing up for a noble cause and he deserves our support for that. At least, from an outside perspective I can tell he has a sense of humour and doesn't take himself too seriously. Unlike Robbi who just comes across as a whiny tool.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 12 08:47:47 2015 No.2051477 File: 41 KB, 720x480, i hate stabler's fuckin eyebrows.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2051469 what noble cause, pissin off the creative team he was hired to draw a cover for? an you're callin robbi a tool? okay

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 12 08:50:31 2015 No.2051479 >>2051477 Really? Robbi basically wrote an essay expressing his butt frustration over a fucking comic book cover, yeah he's a tool that takes himself too seriously.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 12 08:57:49 2015 No.2051481 File: 57 KB, 403x302, i hate them so much.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2051479 couple hundreds words ain't an essay unless you're still in highschool m8, that's like 10-15 minutes worth a writtin for grownups with fully formed thoughts

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 12 09:00:34 2015 No.2051485 >>2051481 Alrighty, good luck with your artistic endeavours brother.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 12 09:05:47 2015 No.2051488 File: 38 KB, 286x176, you jus wanna like stab his eyebrows.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2051485 an you yourself

Anonymous Sun Apr 12 09:07:28 2015 No.2051490

>>2045783
No you fucking retard.
Ideal is not sexually defined.
Sexy is defined by ideal because evolution made you want the healthy, trong and ideal sex partner so your children will be better. This is evolution based desire.

Because those apes that weren't picky about how to screw were inferior and degenerated.

Someone weak, ill, ugly, or fat is geneticly inferior and your brain knows that so you fat them repulsive because they are unfit for procreating.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 12 09:13:15 2015 No.2051500 >>2051490 by that theory wouldn't someone fat have access to bountiful resources an therefor be desirable because of said resources?

Anonymous Sun Apr 12 09:23:25 2015 No.2051507

>>2051500
Yes, both guys arguing are extremely retarded. Sexiness is obviously based on culture and society, that's why landwhales were considered the best thousands of years ago, chubby-fat was sexy centuries ago and skinny is sexy now. Maybe in the future anorexic will be the new sexy. Or amputees. Or whatever. Culture supersedes even basic instincts. That's why people commit suicide, or illogical (evolution-wise) actions in general.

Anonymous Sun Apr 12 09:23:37 2015 No.2051510
File: 94 KB, 453x747, fat.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2051500
Yes, a couple of hundred years ago maybe.
Even then people were 'chubby' at best, think Rubenesque type of bitches.

This guy was so unfathomably fat to most people more than 100 years ago that he was freakshow material.

Nowadays being overweight is simply a sign of laziness and gluttony.

Anonymous Sun Apr 12 09:24:06 2015 No.2051511

>>2051500
How would a fat caveman get any food? he's supposed to chase his prey down. or to at least clinb a fucking tree for fruits. It's not like they could get rich and buy themselves hamburgers.

Ancient japs were considering fat men to be cool because they had very poor foord resources and your fatness would mean you're VERY rich.

Ancient greeks and romans hated fat more than anything else because they loved sexy and mighty, not weak lazy and ugly.
In Sparta a cook could be exuted for cooking tasty stuff, tasty food was a crime because it leads to the oposite of sexy and powerful.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 12 09:33:19 2015 No.2051514 File: 151 KB, 983x1323, frank-cho-liberty-meadows-020.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Reminder that Liberty Meadows is the best comic strip since Calvin & Hobbes and that no one gives a shit about Spider-Gwen.

Anonymous Sun Apr 12 13:18:39 2015 No.2051769

>>2049712
>look like they're very poor actors posing,

Because that's what they're drawing. Western art since the Renaissance has relied a lot on staged posing. Models can't hold off-balance poses, or stay in midair.

They also can't hyper-flex, which the body can sustain for only fractions of a second when in motion. This is why you get a bunch of idiots saying "this pose is impossible!", while people with animation backgrounds go in the opposite direction and "push the gesture."

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 13 19:07:19 2015 No.2053462 File: 204 KB, 800x1220, 1428912384734.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Even female comic artists like AWitt are sick of this shit. http://witta.deviantart.com/art/SpiderGwen-Wreckingball-526540803

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 13 19:18:25 2015 No.2053471 File: 445 KB, 700x1049, roa_page_9_by_witta-d4je92u.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2053462 Man, she draws some cute dudes. I want to draw like this.

Anonymous Mon Apr 13 19:29:47 2015 No.2053481

>>2051500

Fatness was sexy for that exactly reason a few centuries ago, as was pale skin (as tanned skin was seen as a mark of a laborer). What fat bitches don't understand is it was a phase and the logic has nothing to do with today's society where calory dense food is cheaper and easier to eat than nutritious food.

Anonymous Mon Apr 13 19:49:14 2015 No.2053508

>>2051490
>ideal
>inferior
>degenerated
Evolution isn't directional. There are no universally good traits, only traits that are useful in a certain environment.
Whatever genetic ideal you're thinking of, it's mostly a mess of ancient, obsolete mechanisms repurposed to tasks completely unrelated to what they originally developed to do.

The ability to store a shitton of calories as subcutaneous fat used to be useful back when starvation was a real threat to the human race.
Since then, we've invented farming and started living in cities, making it something of a liability.
That doesn't mean that people genetically liable to become fat have better or worse genes. They're just genes optimized towards a different environment.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 13 20:31:12 2015 No.2053535 File: 60 KB, 720x744, Ashley-Marie-Witter.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2053471 And she's a fucking cute as a button in person.

Anonymous Mon Apr 13 20:46:54 2015 No.2053548
File: 42 KB, 640x417, med_1409377643_00025.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2053462

>Even female comic artists like AWitt are sick of this shit.

It's funny: you'd think reading this shit that it's mostly women complaining about sexy drawings, but that doesn't seem to be the case. It seems to be mostly chubby dudes who are doing the complaining.

The outrage over sexy drawings of female characters seems to come primarily from these chubby whiteknights like *nods respectfully* guy (pic related) and, to a lesser extent, fat women who feel insecure about depictions of female beauty that don't look like them.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 13 20:49:22 2015 No.2053552 >>2053535 I wish I was just as good and cute of an artist as her. At least the skill part is possible, I guess.

Anonymous Mon Apr 13 20:49:57 2015 No.2053553

>>2053535

See, of course she isn't insulted by sexy drawings of spiderwomen, because she doesn't feel threatened by them.

Only ugly people get upset about sexy drawings. Ugly women because they feel insecure, and ugly men because they think they can get chicks by towing the feminist party line.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 13 20:53:39 2015 No.2053558 >>2053548 >too lazy to finish spelling AND This is what irks me. The death of an language starts small.

Anonymous Mon Apr 13 21:30:43 2015 No.2053583

>>2053508
Lol you sound fat. Obesity is undesirable. Anyone who is genetically liable to become fat has objectively worse genes than someone who is not. Obesity scores poorly on any rubric you set it to, except for the one or two that you mentioned that have absolutely no use in any civilization for the last few thousand years. It's like saying " oh there's nothin wrong with being a mouth breathing fucking retard, after all it came in handy back in the days where smarter people were burned alive for fear of being witches!"

Anonymous Tue Apr 14 10:39:20 2015 No.2054109

>>2053583
>Lol you sound fat.
I am.
>Obesity is undesirable.
It is.
>objectively worse genes
No, you retard.

There is no such thing as "objectively worse genes". Biological traits are only good or bad in a certain environment. Saying that genetic tendency towards obesity is "bad" because it's useless in an environment where food is abundant is like saying that having white skin is bad because of the thinning of the ozone layer in the last few decades. Yes, it's less useful in an environment with more ultraviolet radiation, but there's nothing objective about that environment.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 14 11:39:38 2015 No.2054141 >>2054109 A short hand for 'only useful in certain very specific conditions' is also known as 'bad'.

Anonymous Tue Apr 14 16:42:49 2015 No.2054473

>>2054109
Not him, but fat-to-mustle ratio is tied to testosterone levels, so a man genetically predisposed to higher body fat percentage is an inferior male specimen. Same goes for women. Your actual fat is determined (disregarding activity) by your caloric intake, but a man with higher test will have more of that intake used for building and maintaining muscle, thus being less fat.

There is literally no environment or set of circumstance where low test is anything but bad.

Anonymous Wed Apr 15 14:33:31 2015 No.2055467

>>2054473
That's pseudoscience, even if it wasn't a genetic predisposition towards gaining weight like a slow metabolism actually makes it easier to pack on muscle.
For example, mohamad ali was genetically inclined towards being fat as is his daughter who appreciates it much less.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 15 19:46:45 2015 No.2055759 >>2055467 >testosterone determining fat-to-muscle ratio >pseudoscience >durr metabolism kill yourself and read a book

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/ic/ - Artwork/Critique