Are we over Spider-Woman’s butt now?

Spider Woman Art

About larch

I am a cucumber in a fruit bowl.
Image | This entry was posted in Comics, Rants and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Are we over Spider-Woman’s butt now?

  1. Pingback: Remember Spider-Butt-Gate? | Suitably Bored

  2. larch says:

    So because her butt is in the air it makes the image sexual in nature? Is that not a gain leap in assumption making? So how does that make her look sexual? She makes no eye contact or facial expressions that would indicate sexual suggestiveness. Sexuality is more than just having your ass sticking out, it is a look a smile a glance an attitude. None of which is present in the image. If we want to argue like that then every woman on all fours with their butt sticking out is a “sexual thing” Spider-Woman has been drawn this way for years:

    Problem is the Social Injustice Pitchfork Brigade only selectively take up issue with these types of covers when they feel like it and ignore everything else when it suits them. And I am pretty sure the 3D render shows that her spine is not “contorted” contrary to popular comments on the web. So her pose is not physically impossible.

  3. xmenxpert says:

    No, they DON’T draw men that way. Look at Spider-Man, and look at Spider-Woman. See if you can spot the differences. Spider-Man’s butt is low relative to his body, Spider-Woman’s butt is raised way into the air. Spider-Man’s but has cloth between the cheeks, squaring it off. Spider-Woman has spraypaint on her heart-shaped ass, accentuating the shape of her ass for no good reason. Additionally, her pose actually is contorted – her spine is bent downwards in an odd way. It would be more natural for her torso to be more aligned with her ass.

    Spider-Man’s pose is meant to make him look a little unsettling. Spider-Woman’s pose is meant to make her look sexy, and more important, to make her look sexual. They’re not at all equivalent.

Comments are closed.