You're right that the compilers of WFA are two self-proclaimed feminists. They are also human. There's just two of them, they can't read the entire internet every day. ;) If you haven't been submitting your own links, then I don't think it's fair to say that "the WFA experience" might be biased because your voice is missing. And if the majority of WFA skews feminist, that might very well be because the majority of the blogosphere skews feminist. Which again, wouldn't neccessarily be a bias on the part of the compilers. They link to who's talking. If more feminists than not are talking (and/or submitting links), then that's what gets linked. And while it's not a perfect system, it's still the best damn gauge that we have for "what people think" about, say the Heroes for Hire cover. If somebody has written something about the cover, it gets linked on WFA. That's how we guage public opinion. Other than that, what can we look to? Mind-reading?
Once a child does understand tentacle porn (whether it's though a single exposure, repeated viewings, or however), what further harm could the cover do
Repeated exposure = culmulative harm. That's basic psychology. It's not about "understanding" what tentacle porn is. It's about exposure to the messages that it sends, over and over again. I think now might be the time to direct you to the link (http://www.apa.org/pi/wpo/sexualization.html) that Scott has had so much trouble reading, as well as to the link (and the links listed on the link) that shilohmm posted higher on this page.
and if a child does not understand tentacle porn, what harm could the cover do?
That child is still going to see her heroes stripped of their heroism and dignity, half-naked and chained and cringing in terror, while fluid oozes on the bare breasts of the woman who looks like she's about to burst into tears. That? That's a punch in the gut. And kids are going to get the sexualization behind the image, even if they've never seen tentacle porn before. I've been there. My friends, comic book readers who grew up with me, have all been there. I grew up watching Amara from the New Mutants chained to a lab table and screaming with her breasts mostly exposed on the cover of my favorite comic book; and there have been countless other images too, but that's the one that's always freshest in my mind. Even at the tender age of eight years old I understood that my favorite character was being offered up as wank material for skeevy old men; and I understood that it wasn't just that she was young and hot that made that image exciting, it was the idea of imminent sexualized violence. Do you know what kind of a message that sent to me? Do you know what kind of message that sends to young girls? What kind of message that sends to young men?! To quote one of the aforementioned ladies behind WFA, "It's like someone handed you an S&M novel starring you as the sub." *
* Quoted vaguely from memory, because the newsarama blog is down right now. But that was the bit that struck me the most. Anyway, the link should be here: http://blog.newsarama.com/2007/06/15/just-past-the-horizon-on-reflection/
Plus, the links mentioned above apply here as well, if you really must ask what the harm is.
no subject
Once a child does understand tentacle porn (whether it's though a single exposure, repeated viewings, or however), what further harm could the cover do
Repeated exposure = culmulative harm. That's basic psychology. It's not about "understanding" what tentacle porn is. It's about exposure to the messages that it sends, over and over again. I think now might be the time to direct you to the link (http://www.apa.org/pi/wpo/sexualization.html) that Scott has had so much trouble reading, as well as to the link (and the links listed on the link) that
and if a child does not understand tentacle porn, what harm could the cover do?
That child is still going to see her heroes stripped of their heroism and dignity, half-naked and chained and cringing in terror, while fluid oozes on the bare breasts of the woman who looks like she's about to burst into tears. That? That's a punch in the gut. And kids are going to get the sexualization behind the image, even if they've never seen tentacle porn before. I've been there. My friends, comic book readers who grew up with me, have all been there. I grew up watching Amara from the New Mutants chained to a lab table and screaming with her breasts mostly exposed on the cover of my favorite comic book; and there have been countless other images too, but that's the one that's always freshest in my mind. Even at the tender age of eight years old I understood that my favorite character was being offered up as wank material for skeevy old men; and I understood that it wasn't just that she was young and hot that made that image exciting, it was the idea of imminent sexualized violence. Do you know what kind of a message that sent to me? Do you know what kind of message that sends to young girls? What kind of message that sends to young men?! To quote one of the aforementioned ladies behind WFA, "It's like someone handed you an S&M novel starring you as the sub." *
* Quoted vaguely from memory, because the newsarama blog is down right now. But that was the bit that struck me the most. Anyway, the link should be here: http://blog.newsarama.com/2007/06/15/just-past-the-horizon-on-reflection/
Plus, the links mentioned above apply here as well, if you really must ask what the harm is.