You agree that seeing a character in a sexual pose does not negate the characters other traits like assertiveness, competence, intelligence, and strength.
Right. Unless she's drawn in such a way that does negate her other character traits. Like the Micheal Turner cover and HfH cover. You seem to be arguing my point for me.
Oy. A single image can not negate all the other images. Remember when you kept using the word “only?” You put it in all caps and italicized it. Remember?
OK, if Power Girl were only, ONLY, only shown in poses that projected sexuality like that cover where she looks like she wants to suck cock, I’d agree that it was a sexist portrayal. However, that is one image of many. Within that comic, she is going to be the forceful leader of the JSA and undoubtedly kicking the ass of some bad guys. She isn’t even shown that lusty on all covers she appears on as the article you linked to demonstrates. This cover is an aberration.
You have changed your criteria from “if she is ONLY shown as the subject of sexual desire, it is sexist” to “if she is EVER shown as the subject of sexual desire, it is sexist.” Surely, Power Girl is not rolling up her sleeves and shifting her weight to one foot and smirking as she does on those covers in the linked article when she wants to seduce someone. And just as surely, it is not sexist to portray Power Girl as a sexual being.
It can not be true that if you ever show Power Girl looking like her primary emotion at the moment is lust that the image is sexist. Just as you don’t suddenly lose your personality when you act in a way that suggests that you want to get laid, so too can Power Girl still be viewed as an assertive, competent, and energetic character before, while, and after she is in a pose that suggests sexual desire.
Sexist and sexy are not the same thing. And I would think that a feminist would be happy that DC was promoting the idea that powerful women are sexy and are sexual beings, not just badasses who don't care about sex.
no subject
Right. Unless she's drawn in such a way that does negate her other character traits. Like the Micheal Turner cover and HfH cover. You seem to be arguing my point for me.
Oy. A single image can not negate all the other images. Remember when you kept using the word “only?” You put it in all caps and italicized it. Remember?
OK, if Power Girl were only, ONLY, only shown in poses that projected sexuality like that cover where she looks like she wants to suck cock, I’d agree that it was a sexist portrayal. However, that is one image of many. Within that comic, she is going to be the forceful leader of the JSA and undoubtedly kicking the ass of some bad guys. She isn’t even shown that lusty on all covers she appears on as the article you linked to demonstrates. This cover is an aberration.
You have changed your criteria from “if she is ONLY shown as the subject of sexual desire, it is sexist” to “if she is EVER shown as the subject of sexual desire, it is sexist.” Surely, Power Girl is not rolling up her sleeves and shifting her weight to one foot and smirking as she does on those covers in the linked article when she wants to seduce someone. And just as surely, it is not sexist to portray Power Girl as a sexual being.
It can not be true that if you ever show Power Girl looking like her primary emotion at the moment is lust that the image is sexist. Just as you don’t suddenly lose your personality when you act in a way that suggests that you want to get laid, so too can Power Girl still be viewed as an assertive, competent, and energetic character before, while, and after she is in a pose that suggests sexual desire.
Sexist and sexy are not the same thing. And I would think that a feminist would be happy that DC was promoting the idea that powerful women are sexy and are sexual beings, not just badasses who don't care about sex.