ozoneocean
Actually the attitude you express demeans women more than any other: it says they they are inferior and must be treated like children, protected and cosseted from real life because they're fragile and unable to take it. Not one inch of their naked flesh should ever be shown because their entire sex is lessened in value each time…

People should try examining that idea and explode it for what it is: Overprotective patriarchal, control. Keep the womyns covered, unseen and feeling dirty about their bodies! :P

Not healthy. ;)

I sort of agree and disagree–the patriarchy is a problem, but I don't think pointing out the way this comic objectifies women inherently means someone is implying that women are inferior. Similarly, if someone's around you talking up a bunch of racist junk, arguing with them doesn't mean you're racist for “assuming racial minorities can't defend themselves.” I know a guy who considers himself a feminist and tells his girlfriend not to use the word “bitch” to refer to other women, and I think that's taking it a bit far.

I don't think women need me to defend them, but I also don't think they'd object to me saying something when I'm uncomfortable with how they're portrayed in this or that. It's how I was raised. Happy medium, kind of thing.

As much as I hate to use South Park as a piece of evidence, there's a scene in their Paris Hilton episode where teenage girls are having “slut kits” of clothing and sex-related items sold to them and Paris Hilton's made into a role model. One character objects and says they're letting themselves be objectified, and is immediately berated for being sexist. “If a man wants to have sex, it's cool, but if a woman wants to have sex it's ‘WRONNNGGGG’” they say, as teenage girls rub their buttocks against his groin and beg him to buy them things. He relents.

So all I'm saying is there's a key distinction between women who are proud of their bodies and their sexuality and women who think it's the only thing that makes them valuable. Because that IS demeaning, and does hurt people, and I've seen it do so.

Besides, as long as we have posts like this:

kyupol
'demeaning women' is overrated. If a comic supposedly does that (IMO, the above comic has nothing demeaning. In fact it portrays women as beautiful and capable creatures) there is a big big fuss.

What about demeaning men? Wheres the big fuss about that?

Gender equality? Anyone?

Feminists would have to be silly to refuse any help ;)

For Kyupol

yes and that is wrong.

For the original question
There's nothing wrong with nudity just as there is nothing wrong with violence when done with taste

For ozoneocean

there's nothing wrong with someone realizing “hey I'm hot and I'll show the world it.” In fact it has been done well in the Spirit reboot with the P'Gell issue.

But here's part of the problem



and more fiction


it's just gets incredibly silly and excessive.

interesting note…more of a horror or spoof of the topic
Read Jonah Hex vol 2 issue 26

There's always a middle ground, anything can be taken too far though. It's important that we don't either become part of the extremes or find ourselves only reacting against extremes.

ie: An image of a vagina or naked breast does not inherently demean anyone, but there is a context to be considered.

exactly why are we even debating?

I'm not saying everything should be prudish but doesn't mean it should be used to the excess degree. That's my main point. But I don't any women that would let a strange man(cept a doctor) grope or even walk in front of them naked.

Really it has nothing to do with the nudity but how it is portrayed.

We're debating as to the degree. :)

i hate nudity
it's just a crutch for weak story telling.

even those that just do partial nudities or “butt shots”.
weak authors use those to keep the audience coming back.

subcultured
i hate nudity
it's just a crutch for weak story telling.

even those that just do partial nudities or “butt shots”.
weak authors use those to keep the audience coming back.

I love it.

I love to see it in a comic ^_^

It has nothing to do with weak or strong authorship, rather it's what the author likes to look at themselves and often what an audience likes to see as well.

A weak author would be one who bowed to pressure of some kind and changed their work accordingly. -in this case that'd be to remove the exposed boobs ;)
-But in other cases it could lead to someone showing MORE nudity…

The thing is, the author should stay true to their own vision and not be turned by the foolish preconceptions and underdeveloped, overprotective sensibilities of others. :)

it really depends on the creator himself and whether the audience will enjoy it. I think the guy knows what is his audience…also I wonder if there was even an actual letter and maybe this whole thing was just faked so he can get more visitors…conspiracy! Answer the Question Montoyaa! Answer that Question!

You know, I have a lot of words and passion about this, but it all boiled down to one thing.

It's fiction. Nothing more. No weight in the real world. It shouldn't have any weight in the real world, and dragging it into the real world in any sense, positive or negative, only makes you look like a fuckwit. In the real world.

FoxmanZEO
You know, I have a lot of words and passion about this, but it all boiled down to one thing.

It's fiction. Nothing more. No weight in the real world. It shouldn't have any weight in the real world, and dragging it into the real world in any sense, positive or negative, only makes you look like a fuckwit. In the real world.

Fortunately, this is the internet!

I was born nekkid, I'll die nekkid.

That is all.

I don't care one way or another, frankly. Which is not to say I don't have an opinion on the matter, just it seems one of many meaningless things in life to be concerned of. I look at a work of a master like Frazetta and say deal with it. Being restrained under a veritable million pointless ‘oh god please don’t offend me or my sensibilities' taboos is no way to go through life. It's bad because you say its bad or its appropriate because you say it is. Does the problem physically hurt someone or damage things beyond perception? Does it kill someone? No.

The universe does not care.
Or wear pants.

Nudity, violence, obscene language and explicit sex … none of them are strictly necessary in a comic (or any other story-telling medium) but they've always been there and, as a part of life, they will continue to be so for as long as people continue to tell stories.

I work on the basis that I use them as little as possible, but that's not because I don't want to offend prudes and potential hate-mail scribblers. It's because I want them to have more of an impact when I do. When I think it's right to show nudity or have characters speak in expletives, I do.

I know many people in some parts of the US (and elsewhere) do have a low tolerance threshhold for nudity, so - to avoid offending people unnecessarily - I preface my comic The Spires (which has a fair bit of nudity in it) with a warning about the content. If people read on after that, it's their choice. It seems to me you've done much the same thing by categorising your comic as “Mature” and so I really don't think you can be held responsible for the reaction of someone who chose to read on, notwithstanding. It's your story so keep telling it the way you want to.

The fact that this thread exists = Society is stupid.

No animals wear clothes. How are humans any different? The only real uses clothing has is protection and expression. It protects us from extreme temperature and allows us to express ourselves via our appearence. But if it's not cold? And if someone would rather express themselves via nudity? Then they should be allowed to not wear anything.

Clothing as a means of covering our bodies because it is somehow “Evil” to be naked? Fucking retarded. Yet again, another reason why humans should go extinct to give chameleons a chance to evolve.

kyupol

America a police state? lololololololz

As for the sexism, yes, both genders are portrayed negatively, and it's bad in both cases. Unfortunately, the government goes overboard with trying to protect minorities, and ends up screwing over the majority.

I, personally, advocate an umbrella “No discrimination” law, that simply says that if someone thinks they're being discriminated agains in any way, they can take the offending party to court for it.

Wow, I leave for a couple hours and come back in the morning to find this. What a great debate. :D

Seriously though, I think I can agree with a lot of the points brought up here from both sides. I just want to quickly throw my two cents in.

I think Ozone makes a brilliant point about female nudity for some reason being more sacred than male nudity. I also think TH89 has a point with his post about, well, the flip side of the argument.

I personally think there is nothing wrong with any nudity under the right context. I mean, if you're so hard up that sight of a nipple drives you mad, then you have some issues. Nudity in and of itself does not constitute porn. But when nudity is used as a form of titillation, then it becomes exploitative. Again, I don't necessarily see anything wrong with that, but it's not the sort of thing that anyone should defend as art.

Of course, this is merely the opinion of one male among a population of many.

As a woman, I enjoy your comic.
I enjoy and encourage BOTH nudity and pornography.
I love seeing a woman in skimpy clothes bearing what she naturally has.
Seriously. It's like covering up David with that leaf.
Some people have way too much time on their hands to be offended.
People have the RIGHT(they forget about this) NOT to read what they don't want to read.
People have the RIGHT NOT to see what they don't want to see.
If you're clicking through the channels and land yourself in the Pulp Fiction rape scene, you don't write an angry letter to Tarantino. You freaking change the channel.

crazyninny
I was born nekkid, I'll die nekkid.

That is all.

You will. They take off the memorial clothes before they bury you.

Lord Shplane
The fact that this thread exists = Society is stupid.

No animals wear clothes. How are humans any different? The only real uses clothing has is protection and expression. It protects us from extreme temperature and allows us to express ourselves via our appearence. But if it's not cold? And if someone would rather express themselves via nudity? Then they should be allowed to not wear anything.

Thank you, for providing us with the the elementary school theory of “Animals do it, so it's okay!”. Animals also shit on the street and pee on things to denote ownership. I don't think it's a good idea to set your moral compass based on what you see on Animal Planet.

Yay for Shplane and Mecha! :)

Man, I'd be naked around my house, on a hot day… if I didn't mind having my bare bum sitting on the furniture lol!

Actually, drawing characters naked, or semi-naked is more fun and much nicer than doing clothes: you get to show the beautiful shape of the body. Why do you think almost all superheroes wear their silly tight costumes? It was a way to draw them easily, and attractively, essentially stark naked, with only some lines to denote where various items of “clothing” start and stop and where the patterns are supposed to be.

Largominus2004
In a scene, one of the characters, Bianka, takes a nasty blow from a sword and her armor is destroyed on her right arm and chest. Being this is set in a fantasy world and back when underwear wasn't a way of life, Bianka's breast falls out.

Sounds like the line Madonna delivers in A League of Their Own:

“What if at a key moment in the game my, my uniform bursts open and, uh, oops!, my bosoms come flying out?”

Yeah, if I read your comic and that happened, I'd be turned off by what I would perceive as exploitation of nudity.

Someone
Is nudity a bad thing?

it depends on who is Nude!

YIKESSS!



I have always believed that the unseen is more allureing than the seen.

the Mystery of the female form is much more Intriguing when there is the right clothing on.

For my art work…I set the nudity bar at Maxim Magazine levels.

They have it down to a science.

TnTComic
I'd be turned off by what I would perceive as exploitation of nudity.

So what's the problem if he does “exploit” nudity? It's just one of the many aspects of hos comic art there to show… Like the fighting, the swords, the monsters… Why is the nudity part somehow wrong and even deserving of the phrase “exploitation”? The other aspects I mentioned are equally "Exploited' but that'd pass without comment…

I'm not posting this to critique you at all man, it's just that this idea that using female nudity in art is somehow a problem is at the root of things.

I'm still amazed that nudity is not as accepted at violence. Gun a blazing, body parts exploding, but nudity is for sickophants. I do mean to apply some good sense, I'm not talking pornogoraphy. AND most nudity/topless shots in entertainment rarely compliment the material, it's just there. For instance, anything that is publicly displayed by Michaelangelo is a beautiful thing in my opinion.

albone
I'm still amazed that nudity is not as accepted at violence. Gun a blazing, body parts exploding, but nudity is for sickophants. I do mean to apply some good sense, I'm not talking pornogoraphy. AND most nudity/topless shots in entertainment rarely compliment the material, it's just there. For instance, anything that is publicly displayed by Michaelangelo is a beautiful thing in my opinion.

So what's wrong with pornography? It seems as though most of you here are saying that nudity is fine, but then quickly saying that pornography isn't so as to not seem like a horny pervert, despite the fact that sex is just as natural as nudity.

Me, I couldn't care less if they're naked, clothed, or attempting to perform everyday tasks while buggering each other. BUT, it has to serve the story, gratuitous nudity annoys me because it seems so crowbarred in.

I mean, in the first few pages of the comic here, the shaman is groping a young woman. This, to me, speaks volumes for his character. That's the sort of thing I like to see.

albone
I'm still amazed that nudity is not as accepted at violence. Gun a blazing, body parts exploding, but nudity is for sickophants. I do mean to apply some good sense, I'm not talking pornography. AND most nudity/topless shots in entertainment rarely compliment the material, it's just there. For instance, anything that is publicly displayed by Michaelangelo is a beautiful thing in my opinion.

Agreed!

As an female comic artist, I tend to draw the female form a lot. and at times you will find that some of my female characters gets clothes ripped off in her battles, etc… although most of the time it's not the key focus.

And also as a female, I do not get offended at female nudity. Especially if it's in an situation where she would be naturally nude. like changing in a locker room, for instance. When you have a scene like that, how the hell do you expect her to change clothes WITHOUT getting naked? Sure, you could always skip that scene and just say that she changed her clothes there. But… what if something important went on in there such as some vital information going on between women?

The only way I would get offended was if the said female was in a bad situation where she was being treated like an animal and forced into non-consensual sex. now that would be way more demeaning to a woman than any nudity could ever be!

It's all about the Context!

Aurora Moon
The only way I would get offended was if the said female was in a bad situation where she was being treated like an animal and forced into non-consensual sex. now that would be way more demeaning to a woman than any nudity could ever be!

It's all about the Context!

So we're not allowed to use rape as story element?

Those are not differing contexts, getting changed and being raped are two entirely different situations.

Never said that you couldn't use rape as an story element… just that I would get offended by rape. ;)

Custard Trout

Aurora Moon
The only way I would get offended was if the said female was in a bad situation where she was being treated like an animal and forced into non-consensual sex. now that would be way more demeaning to a woman than any nudity could ever be!

It's all about the Context!

So we're not allowed to use rape as story element?

Those are not differing contexts, getting changed and being raped are two entirely different situations.

(Going rather off-topic here…) What irks me about this: if it's a guy raping another guy…oh that's not bad, that's HOT! But a guy raping a girl? That's offensive and wrong and the author shouldn't be allowed to draw comics. =/

I don't get it. How can there be a ‘good’ rape? lol!

Aurora Moon
Never said that you couldn't use rape as an story element… just that I would get offended by rape. ;)

So, you don't get offended by rape, but you also do? What?

SarahN
(Going rather off-topic here…) What irks me about this: if it's a guy raping another guy…oh that's not bad, that's HOT! But a guy raping a girl? That's offensive and wrong and the author shouldn't be allowed to draw comics. =/

I don't get it. How can there be a ‘good’ rape?

Good rape would be girl on girl. So hot they're also on fire.

Serious: I've never heard anyone say that, did that really happen?

||
||
|| <—— What my faith in humanity would be doing if it could get any lower.
||
||
\/

ozoneocean

TnTComic
I'd be turned off by what I would perceive as exploitation of nudity.

So what's the problem if he does “exploit” nudity? It's just one of the many aspects of hos comic art there to show… Like the fighting, the swords, the monsters… Why is the nudity part somehow wrong and even deserving of the phrase “exploitation”? The other aspects I mentioned are equally "Exploited' but that'd pass without comment…

I'm not posting this to critique you at all man, it's just that this idea that using female nudity in art is somehow a problem is at the root of things.

Take the example that was given. A battle takes place and all of a sudden there's boobies. It seems to be pandering to the folks that get off on nudity in webcomics. Sure, it was passed off as some sort of logical conclusion, that the armor would pop off and boobies would result, but that's another one of those things that gets my goat. Why would female characters wear sexy armor? And what you said about form-fitting superhero designs… same thing. Why does every damn female comic book hero have to wear lingerie as a uniform? Its obvious: to get the allowance of teenage sexually repressed fans.

I don't have a problem with sex or nudity. I have a problem when they show up without good reason. That's exploitation. Imagine Back to the Future with a sex scene and you'll understand my perspective.

This is all moot, really. You know darn well that there are comics out there that exploit the sexually repressed American teen in the webcomic audience. The same way there are webcomics that exploit fetishes, such as furry comics. I'm not on a crusade, saying that all sex and nudity is bad. I'm saying I have zero respect for comics that use sex and nudity as a hook. To me they're like gamer strips, cashing in on the obsession of teenage boys in lieu of coming up with creative content.

Aurora Moon
As an female comic artist, I tend to draw the female form a lot. and at times you will find that some of my female characters gets clothes ripped off in her battles, etc… although most of the time it's not the key focus.

You ever draw a man's armor ripped away, exposing an unnecessary cock?

Aurora Moon
And also as a female, I do not get offended at female nudity. Especially if it's in an situation where she would be naturally nude. like changing in a locker room, for instance. When you have a scene like that, how the hell do you expect her to change clothes WITHOUT getting naked?

This is what I'm talking about… non-exploitive. Logical. Natural. Not inserted for the sake of getting some tit shots on the web page.

SarahN

Custard Trout

Aurora Moon
The only way I would get offended was if the said female was in a bad situation where she was being treated like an animal and forced into non-consensual sex. now that would be way more demeaning to a woman than any nudity could ever be!

It's all about the Context!

So we're not allowed to use rape as story element?

Those are not differing contexts, getting changed and being raped are two entirely different situations.

(Going rather off-topic here…) What irks me about this: if it's a guy raping another guy…oh that's not bad, that's HOT! But a guy raping a girl? That's offensive and wrong and the author shouldn't be allowed to draw comics. =/

I don't get it. How can there be a ‘good’ rape? lol!

yeah, that irks me too as well. I don't like rape at all, whenever it be “homosexual”, “lesbian” or even “straight”.
I think if somebody's into man-on-man or whatever, it should at least be consental.

I can understand if rape was used as a part of the storytelling. You know, to gain the sympathy of readers for a certain character. Or to get them to hate the villain.
But it disturbs me greatly when the rape scene is much longer than it should be, and made in such a way to be actually “Romaticized”. If you know what I mean.

Like all those stupid stories where the person being raped starts to actually enjoy it in the middle of the rape. WTF?
It's like they're saying: “Even though it's rape, it's okay because the victim is enjoying this! Even though this woman/man/whatever said no at the start, her/his inner slut was serectly craving the cock. All it took was a little roughening up and some forced entry to get him/her to enjoy it!!”
THAT's what gets me offended.

It just makes me sick. Sex should be enjoyable and special for BOTH people, even if they're fictional characters. Sex should be all about Love, period…. just call me sappy. :P