Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCT: 7-11 June 2010 (1681-1685)
stevelore:
--- Quote from: JackFaerie on 10 Jun 2010, 02:38 ---
--- Quote from: stevelore on 10 Jun 2010, 02:22 ---
Also, note that "in comparison to most webcomic cartoonists" doesn't address whether or not Jeph's focus on breasts is harmful perpetuation of patriarchal gender norms, but rather, avoids the issue entirely and points out that there are more heinous offenders. In one sense, it is better to try and reform the moderate offenders, since they are probably less likely to revel in the misogyny. In another sense, wrong is wrong, whether or not other people are worse. So, either way, I think my criticism stands.
--- End quote ---
I will respectfully disagree. I find QC to be one of the comics that objectifies women the least, AND presents a variety of body types and shapes. Most women in QC are modestly-to-moderately-sized, chest-wise (which is refreshing all in itself, lemme tell ya). The way it does talk about breasts, when it talks about them, strikes me as realistic and reflecting my own experiences among women. And it's mostly female characters (not always, but mostly) who talk about breasts.
--- Quote ---Lastly, I think that first comic you included is at least plausibly read as commentary on (rather than mere participation in) gender norms and the sexual-objectification of women.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, but that comic talks a LOT about Jamie's breasts and how great they are, and the art routinely draws the viewer's focus to them.
Is it having fun with the subject? Yeah. It's also quite reveling in looking at Jamie's breasts and presenting them to be looked at. But that's not always bad, and I think QC is even less objectionable on this front.
--- End quote ---
Given that context (the string of other comics you linked), you are probably right about that being more breast focused than Jeph.
On your first comment (to the effect that Jeph portrays a wider range of body types than usual), I have to disagree, there are basically two (maybe two and a half) body-types represented among women, the Dora/Hanners/Raven/Penelope body type, and the Marigold/Faye body type (the "and a half" is that I can see not quite putting penelope with Dora and Hanners). Anyway, the representation of various body types is a separate issue, and I wasn't meaning to rag on Jeph for the body types he chose to portray, but for the way in which the comic has started focusing on those choices.
JackFaerie:
--- Quote from: stevelore on 10 Jun 2010, 02:54 ---On your first comment (to the effect that Jeph portrays a wider range of body types than usual), I have to disagree, there are basically two (maybe two and a half) body-types represented among women, the Dora/Hanners/Raven/Penelope body type, and the Marigold/Faye body type (the "and a half" is that I can see not quite putting penelope with Dora and Hanners). Anyway, the representation of various body types is a separate issue, and I wasn't meaning to rag on Jeph for the body types he chose to portray, but for the way in which the comic has started focusing on those choices.
--- End quote ---
Really? Uh. I don't know what body type you are, but I very much disagree on putting several of those women into the same category.
1. Dora/Hanners: skinny straight-up-and-down, leggy, small-perky breasts.
2. Penelope: slender, most "normative-ideal" shape, with average breasts and hip width, very evenly proportioned.
3. Raven: voluptuous, with generous curves and some flesh on her.
4. Faye/Marigold: busty, but pear-shaped, with ample hips and thighs, heavier in weight.
5. Tai: boyish.
Plus the various background ladies, who (happily!) mostly have some kind of variation on a pear-shape, as most women in fact do. To me, as someone who HAS been insecure about my body, it is very nice to see the range of shapes represented. The only drawback is that we haven't had any fat characters.
To this, if anything, what we have is dearth of representation of men. We have... tall and skinny (Sven, Dale, Marten, Angus) and... tall and slightly-less-skinny (Steve). And maybe short-and-skinny.
And again, despite what some other people have to say, I think the boob talk has been pretty modest. And there has been talk of men's asses and pecs and I'm very very grateful to Jeph for the way he portrayed Sven, and that he did not shy away from sexyfying him on occasion. (I'd say Sven was far more often objectified in the comic throughout their relationship than Faye was.)
snubnose:
--- Quote from: stevelore on 10 Jun 2010, 02:54 ---On your first comment (to the effect that Jeph portrays a wider range of body types than usual), I have to disagree, there are basically two (maybe two and a half) body-types represented among women, the Dora/Hanners/Raven/Penelope body type, and the Marigold/Faye body type (the "and a half" is that I can see not quite putting penelope with Dora and Hanners). Anyway, the representation of various body types is a separate issue, and I wasn't meaning to rag on Jeph for the body types he chose to portray, but for the way in which the comic has started focusing on those choices.
--- End quote ---
Err what ?
None of these people have the same kind of body.
Hanners is more slim and has less boobs than even Dora.
Tai is smaller than anybody else, including Hanners, also quite thin, but has average boobage unless she hides them intentionally.
Raven is nowhere near Dora at all. She's really busty.
Faye is chubby and busty.
Marigold is not as chubby as Faye, but apparently has more boobs.
Theres also other people like Cosette who are simply average on all accounts.
stevelore:
--- Quote from: tomart on 10 Jun 2010, 02:45 ---... prudish, censorship mentality [...] shut down online freedoms too.
[...] But if you can't enjoy creative expression without trying to censor it, JUST STOP. GO AWAY.
By "reform" do you mean "intimidate"? [...]
--- End quote ---
There are a lot of problems with what you said. Briefly they are:
1) One is permitted to disagree with and comment on an artist's choices in forums for discussing that art. It is not necessary for everyone to simply applaud every decision made in its entirety.You are confusing criticism with censorship.
2) I was not motivated by prudery, but by concern over the representation of gender norms. Support for my not being a crazy prude is that I was also lobbying for _more_ focus on alternative sexuality, which does not often go hand in hand with the sort of prudishness you've accused me of.
3) I was not suggesting that too many characters in the strip had large breasts, and that jeph should extract all breasts from the comic, but that the dialogue and humor in the comic should not focus on women's bodies as sexual objects to the extent that it does.
4) You confuse criticism and complaint with censorship.
5) You confuse voicing an opinion with an attempt at "intimidation".
6) You confusedly think that anything anyone posts on an online forum could have a serious impact on "internet freedoms".
I am not able to censor Jeph's work, nor was I indicating that I should be in a position to censor Jeph's work. Censorship would involve unilateral control over what Jeph is permitted to post on the internet. I have no control over what he puts on the internet. I do have opinions, and I can attempt to influence him by making my case. This, of course, is how people interact when attempting to change things they dislike about the world through civilized means. The most sensible place to express my opinions about Jeph's work is on the forums devoted to his work (perhaps in a sub-forum that is titled "Questionable Content Discussion" whose topic is the specific comics I wished to comment on).
Intimidation would require some sort of implicit (or explicit) threat. But I made no threats (implicit or explicit). I didn't even suggest that I would badmouth the strip or try and get other people not to read it, let alone levy any threat of any sort. Consequently, I was not assaulting freedom on the internet, but instead, participating in a free exchange of opinion about some art that has been presented to the public via the internet. I was taking advantage of the freedom we all have to voice our opinions about this work. Since the forums are Jeph's, he actually has the authority to restrict what can be said here, so if he were opposed to people criticizing the gender dynamics in his art, he could actually institute a policy to forbid such discussions, but he hasn't.
Ultimately, the saddest part of your post is the degree to which you feel threatened, intimidated, frightened and "censored" by someone pointing out that there might be something wrong with overdoing the focus on women as objects of sexual interest.
HiFranc:
steve,
I take it you're a long time reader? Without spending hours on an archive trawl I can't comment whether, statistically speaking, there has been a rise in the number of mentions. I wasn't thinking about boob references but, now they've been raised, I can remember phrases such as "these Georgia peaches" and "right in the nipple". I think it would take a little more time to see if the number of mentions is significant and, if it is above the background level, whether it'll be sustained.
Bear in mind that some references may be made in the forum and that may give a worse impression than is true. Also bear in mind that, for the moment, Marigold is someone who pins her self-worth on how others perceive her (especially how attractive she is) so it may be a side-effect of that.
Jack,
steve maybe right in there being a trend. I don't know and, to tell the truth, I think it's too early to say. However, people change and webcomics change over time so it may be something to watch out for.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version