Yes, it's happened again... colour me unsurprised

[eumelia]

Hey, remember the Mary-Jane Fiasco?

Well, it started a few days ago here (contains images which are NSFW) at Pink Raygun.

I've since read many, many commentaries on this thanks to fangirls_attack and I really didn't know what to add myself.
As often happens when living in a time-zone far away from the hub, I kinda missed the initial brouhaha of the Wonder Woman Body Paint Job.

Let me first state that I don't think porn is inherently bad, just like I don't think the sex industry is inherently bad.
Let me tell you what I do think is bad:
Exploitation and Objectification.
Yes, friends it's same old, same old once again and still, still it won't get into people thick heads that Women, especially Super Heroine Women are not sexual objects.
They can and usually are sexy, but they are not sexual.

Why do feminist and in this case the feminist fangrrls have to re-iterate this point time and time again!
Is it really a novelty?
Is it really so difficult to understand that women's bodies are not fucking separate from their brains and personality!.

Oh and yes, I take offense to the fact that Wonder Woman, the female Super Heroine, one of the Big DC Three, has been reduced, by Playboy, into a body paint.
It in fact, infuriates me!

Comments

[dharma-slut.livejournal.com]

Oh, yeah, the Mary-Jane IS disgusting. But that's not because it objectifies the character, but because it does so in an improper context. An action figure shouldn't concentrate on the bimbo aspect of a character who should be far more diverse than that.

Exactly, and thank you-- yo0u've said it better than I could have. Sexy, bent-over Mary Jane would have been fine with me-- just not over the laundry basket.In fact, over the laundry basket would be fine, if it were clear that Peter Parker was coming up behind her. Bent over the laundry basket for thousands of slavering viewers- kinda disrespectful, I thought.

As for Wonder Woman? Well, her costume is damned easy to turn into body paint. It always was. Playboy is NOT the first to have done that.

Playboy deals with the female sexuality. Why shouldn't it portray the sexual aspect of said sexual fantasy, just as myriad fanfics and slashes do to oh-so-many totally surprised characters who were never supposed to be sexual objects to begin with?

In all fairness, our host here doesn't seem to be a slasher, at least as far as a quick look-through, anyway. But-- yeah. I could not deny anyone their own kinks. Nor would I ever, ever tell someone that they had n right to have a kink because it isn't mine, or because it's more radical than mine are. Not when almost everything I think is natural and normal is in fact illegal in at least half the States of this country!

Carolyn, sometimes-- take it from a fifty-year-old queer woman-- Object is just the thing. :p

And yes-- I would LOOOVE to see some big-muscles man in Batman bodypaint and a cape...