Not sure how much longer this thread is going to last but if I'm going to keep reading, which I will because I'm interested in TSA dissection and your opinions all contribute to that immensely, I need to post something from an old TSA forumer, Mats, who brought up these points about questionable Bakker covers (ironically in the TSA related art thread, which I don't think gets plowed through at any time from the beginning).
That's fair enough. I suppose my concern is mainly that if Bakker-fans as a community can't even agree that something as overtly juvenile and sexist as that cover is, in fact, juvenile and sexist, then how can we properly engage with the alleged sexism in Bakker's works?
Fine. Rules:
-Don't depict women in stupid poses that emphasizes their sexuality to the detriment of everything else (fuck you, comics).
-Don't angle the shot in ways that blatantly pander to the male gaze.
-Don't white-wash. Ever.
-Don't excuse any of this shit by appealing to moral relativity just because you happen to like the cover in question.
-If you listen to a Finnish metal band, and it's not Reverend Bizarre, enjoy dying alone.
Oh, and if you ever shoot a docu and the cover of said docu is a tantalizing shot of some aboriginal leathery side-boob-action, I'd hazard most people would find that quite disturbing! :p
EDIT: I had a few things to respond to specifically but I think I'll wait it out.
To highlight what I've read;
two images (Callan)
appeals towards 'sexual attraction' make invalid (Meyna)
further, appeals towards sexual attraction negate 'female gamers' (Sci)
history & cosplay - the appeal towards sexual attraction is a reflection of (history) and embodied by (cosplay) a percentage of females (Callan)
claims opposite - females embracing and reproducing the appeal to sexual attraction don't do so to support the general depiction and the depiction is not rendered for females (Sci)
what distinguishes these qualifying categories/we don't know the demographic intentions (Callan)
description by social mechanism (good stuff, tickles my imagination)/contention: females embracing and reproducing the appeal to sexual attraction do so because it is both the expectation of the player population (male gamers comprising huge percentages) and because (we) society really believe the second image to be
more powerful as we're conditioned so (Meyna)
However - in thoughts to your question, Meyna:
The question, really, is: why, in our culture, must depictions of female combatants (superheroes, mages, warriors, whatever) be sexualized in order for them to be the most popular/profitable?
- appeals towards sexual attraction work a percentage of the time.
- the existing consumer base is majority male.
- the possible consumer influx due to appeal to female (whom may or may not already view the masculine characters depicted as appealing towards sexual attraction) is not great enough to consider their market population.
- the loss of existing female costumer base is acceptable when compared to the sustained population over time.
- the fallout from concerned advocates is too easily appeased.