Goblins XVIII: Being yourself can be dangerous

[Kantaki]

Is it weird that Plush is giving me real "furry" vibes? Somehow in a comic full of goblins, half snakes, and people with magical colorful body modifications his design still looks weirdly artificial and out of place.

So it's not just me?

Well, to be fair, his body should be made from rock, gargoyles being living statues, so it might be intended?

[Willie the Duck]

Is it weird that Plush is giving me real "furry" vibes? Somehow in a comic full of goblins, half snakes, and people with magical colorful body modifications his design still looks weirdly artificial and out of place.

Well, that literally is the point of this little sub-arc (thus far a few panels long) -- Plush is supposed to be made out of a granite-like body, but instead is made of 'repulsive' skin and muscle and bone. He's supposed to look 'off.' That said, I think I get what you mean, except it's also happening to Ears in the last panel with them together -- the art subtly shifted towards... 'manga romance story' (?) lines and colors. I guess I'd have to see some of the other goblins in that purple-to-red room to see if I think they also have that slight change or if it is simply the background that feels different.

[Anteros]

Well, it's less that it looks odd in a "this is an artificial creature and looks off" way and more of a "this is my Sonic the Hedgehog erotic fan fiction character slapped into the Goblins universe"

Then again...given that this whole character basically exists due to Ellipsis exploring her sexuality and inserting it into the comic....that's kinda exactly what it is.

[Cygnia]

Or, now that they're flesh & blood, Plush can now be even more horrifically tortured and abused like the rest of the cast...

[Vinyadan]

Yep, it's due to many things: looking at panel 7, AFAIK he's the only character have his first appearance naked (with the exception of Kliks and nude females in erotic hallucinations; even K'seliss had a blanket), the eyes are tender (he's feeling vulnerable), and the way he's apparently holding his arms behind his tighs makes it look like he's offering his unprotected body in spite of his vulnerability.

In particular, his eyes remind me of a comic strip I once saw about how Batman would look, if he really were meant to appeal to women, with the male character finally saying that he was uncomfortable with the image.

[Willie the Duck]

In particular, his eyes remind me of a comic strip I once saw about how Batman would look, if he really were meant to appeal to women, with the male character finally saying that he was uncomfortable with the image.

That would be Shortpacked.

I remember when it came out. Caused something of a stir.

[Fyraltari]

Yep, it's due to many things: looking at panel 7, AFAIK he's the only character have his first appearance naked (with the exception of Kliks and nude females in erotic hallucinations; even K'seliss had a blanket), the eyes are tender (he's feeling vulnerable), and the way he's apparently holding his arms behind his tighs makes it look like he's offering his unprotected body in spite of his vulnerability.

In particular, his eyes remind me of a comic strip I once saw about how Batman would look, if he really were meant to appeal to women, with the male character finally saying that he was uncomfortable with the image.

I might use that page in other online discussions.

As thanks, and in case you don't already know it:

Spoiler: Here is what happens when you swap Batman and Catwoman around

Show

[Anteros]

I'm not sure "comic books are targeted towards teenage boys" is the groundbreaking revelation that it's being made out to be by the internet. Lots of different forms of media have different target audiences. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

Catwoman is a terrible character though, and I wish the trope she represents would die off. You could slap her mannerisms on just about anybody and it would look unnatural. Imagine Captain Marvel, Wonder Woman, or any stoic female character acting like that. It's just as jarring.

[Anonymouswizard]

I'm not sure "comic books are targeted towards teenage boys" is the groundbreaking revelation that it's being made out to be by the internet. Lots of different forms of media have different target audiences. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

The thing is, that statement isn't really that true. It's true for the big mainstream names, but at least today there's comic books aimed at everybody, I'm fairly certain early comics had a broader audience, and comics aimed at adult men have had specific branding to decades. That's not even getting into non-US comics, the UK has a strong tradition of humour comics aimed at somewhat younger children (although sadly I think all except The Beano have died).

Even then you can aim things at teenage boys without the sexualisation issues. Fullmetal Alchemist pretty much nails it despite so many characters having idealised physiques (although it was written and drawn by a woman).

[Fyraltari]

I'm not sure "comic books are targeted towards teenage boys" is the groundbreaking revelation that it's being made out to be by the internet. Lots of different forms of media have different target audiences. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

Demographics do not excuse fetishization or any other bad qualities.

Besides, like Anonymouswizard said, comic books aren't just for teenage boys and, I would add, should not be.

[Anteros]

Comic books in general don't have to be targeted towards teenage boys, but the ones that you're complaining about? Are.

As far as "fetishization" or whatever....plenty of people would argue that there's nothing inherently wrong or unhealthy about sex or sexually provocative characters. If you don't enjoy those things....well you've already pointed out that there are plenty of other options.

[Anonymouswizard]

Comic books in general don't have to be targeted towards teenage boys, but the ones that you're complaining about? Are.

As far as "fetishization" or whatever....plenty of people would argue that there's nothing inherently wrong or unhealthy about sex or sexually provocative characters. If you don't enjoy those things....well you've already pointed out that there are plenty of other options.

Mainstream US comic books have a distinct tendency to have highly sexualised women but not men (because the men are a power fantasy and the women are a sex fantasy).

But you're right, there's nothing wrong or unhealthy with sex or sexual characters. But a person or work can have an unhealthy attitude towards it. This doesn't have to be sexually provocative characters, it can also be things like promoting 'you're not a man if you don't have sex' or glorifying the idea of '**** and forget'.

And yes, you could probably write multiple essays on the Bond films and problematic attitudes towards sex.

I struggle with this myself, I keep bouncing back and forth between the main character in a book I'm trying to write being asexual or pan, and when pan how to write her having what's essentially a one night stand without straying anywhere near fetishisation or being too graphic for a story aimed at 14 year olds (mostly by accident, the MC's a transwoman* in her mid 20s).

Nobody's saying that sexualisation of characters needs to be completely removed, but there's a somewhat sexist undercurrent.

It's all in the intent and presentation. I remember seeing a children's film with nonsexualised breasts, The Adventures of Adele Blanc-Sec (I believe it's based on a French comic). The main character has a bath and her chest is visible in some shots because they realistically would be, but it's not erotic. It's just a lady who's naked because she's climbed into a tub of water with the intent to relax and wash.

* Oh and that's another entire can of worms. I'm working on including elements that make it as clear as possible without having an awkward 'she's trans okay' moment.

[Dragonus45]

Mainstream US comic books have a distinct tendency to have highly sexualised women but not men (because the men are a power fantasy and the women are a sex fantasy).

Men in comic books are, and pretty much always have been, wildly sexualized. It just presents differently. Clothes make the man ETC...

[Anteros]

Men in comic books are, and pretty much always have been, wildly sexualized. It just presents differently. Clothes make the man ETC...

Plus anyone who's ever read a Spider-man book could tell you that he spends most of his time basically naked with his legs spread and his butt in the air.

There was actually a bit of an uproar a while back where some artists had their female characters striking the same poses as Spidey as an homage, and the internet acted predictably.

[Vinyadan]

That one was especially funny, given that the author was Milo Manara, probably the greatest living author of erotic comics, and a recognized author of art comics, to boot. What can I say? Marvel sure knows its target audience and how to manufacture outrage for free publicity.

[The Glyphstone]

And there's always the Hawkeye Initiative tumblr, redrawing Clint in the often contorted poses and postures that heroines get.

[Anonymouswizard]

And there's always the Hawkeye Initiative tumblr, redrawing Clint in the often contorted poses and postures that heroines get.

*One Google later*

That's both hilarious and entirely accurate.


As for the 'men are sexualised too' thing, eeeeeh. Nowhere near as much as the women, and the sexualisation is not the point. It's more about power than titillation, and while those can go hand in hand they don't have to. The same physique and power that says 'Christian Grey is coming to **** you' can, and often is, used to say 'Christian Grey is strong, isn't that cool'.

If Goblins is going to use Plush to sexualise the male physique I have no issue with it. Big Ears clearly likes what he sees.


Also serious question. Is there a major superhero who regularly gets as much focus on his sexy bum as superheroines do?

[Fyraltari]

Mainstream US comic books have a distinct tendency to have highly sexualised women but not men (because the men are a power fantasy and the women are a sex fantasy).

But you're right, there's nothing wrong or unhealthy with sex or sexual characters. But a person or work can have an unhealthy attitude towards it. This doesn't have to be sexually provocative characters, it can also be things like promoting 'you're not a man if you don't have sex' or glorifying the idea of '**** and forget'.

I think it comes down to framing and characterisation. Are the readers supposed to ogle or relate to the characters? How much of a personality do they have beyond "the sexy one"?

There's nothing wrong with playing up the sexiness of a character from time to time, but it shouldn't be the main thing about them, and it's better to do that with characters of different genders rather than just always the women. And as always the execution matters more than the "on-paper".

I struggle with this myself, I keep bouncing back and forth between the main character in a book I'm trying to write being asexual or pan, and when pan how to write her having what's essentially a one night stand without straying anywhere near fetishisation or being too graphic for a story aimed at 14 year olds (mostly by accident, the MC's a transwoman* in her mid 20s).

Obviously can't give practical advice without reading the text and that would break forum rules, but I figure it's important to stay close to your protagonist's point of view and emotions: what she feels, physically yes, but mostly emotionnally, hesitation (if any) giving way to desire, excitement and finally pleasure. External point of views often end up feeling voyeurish while internals feel more relatable and empowering.

It's all in the intent and presentation. I remember seeing a children's film with nonsexualised breasts, The Adventures of Adele Blanc-Sec (I believe it's based on a French comic).

It is and it's quite a trip. Pteeodactyles, Neanderthals, opera-singers-dressed-as-demons and Adèle doesn't care for this nonsense. The woman just wants to go home, smoke and drink booze. Was the movie intended for children? I don't remember, and the comic certainly wasn't. (Not because of anything sexual, but it's a moody, somewhat cerebral comic, it's clearly aimed at adults).

The main character has a bath and her chest is visible in some shots because they realistically would be, but it's not erotic. It's just a lady who's naked because she's climbed into a tub of water with the intent to relax and wash.

There's nothing quite like rewatching Kirikou as an adult and realising this beautifully animated movie you last saw at age seven is full of bare-chested women* and you didn't care, because you were a little child.

Men in comic books are, and pretty much always have been, wildly sexualized. It just presents differently. Clothes make the man ETC...

They're (mostly) not sexualized. They're generally presented as something thenreaders should aspire to be, not lust after. This is especially obvious in American superhero comics, but is also generally true everywhere else.


*It is based on a West-African legend and set in precolonial West-Africa, different standards of clothing.

Edit:

Also serious question. Is there a major superhero who regularly gets as much focus on his sexy bum as superheroines do?

From what I heard, DC's own Nightwing at least comes close.

[Anonymouswizard]

IIt is and it's quite a trip. Pteeodactyles, Neanderthals, opera-singers-dressed-as-demons and Adèle doesn't care for this nonsense. The woman just wants to go home, smoke and drink booze. Was the movie intended for children? I don't remember, and the comic certainly wasn't. (Not because of anything sexual, but it's a moody, somewhat cerebral comic, it's clearly aimed at adults).

I don't know, it's at least rated as suitable for them. It's been years since I saw it, but I certainly think it had nothing problematic in it.

I'll definitely see if I can dig out the original comic

[Cygnia]

Seconding Nightwing

[Vinyadan]

I think a certain sexualisation of male superheroes is also typical of movies. Their audience is meant to be much larger than that of the comics, so you have to please the ladies with naked Wolverine Jackman springing out of a pool, or various abs shots.

[Traab]

I love the difference body language makes. Both male and female heroes are dressed identically. As in they are nude models wearing body paint in a way that suggests a costume. Thats literally what the majority of the "spandex" set are. Totally naked, barring maybe a belt or something. Gotta have pouches to hold misc after all. And despite ednas fervent objections, often they have capes. Everything else? Body paint on naked ken and barbie dolls.

[Radar]

I love the difference body language makes. Both male and female heroes are dressed identically. As in they are nude models wearing body paint in a way that suggests a costume. Thats literally what the majority of the "spandex" set are. Totally naked, barring maybe a belt or something. Gotta have pouches to hold misc after all. And despite ednas fervent objections, often they have capes. Everything else? Body paint on naked ken and barbie dolls.

I guess this was all to make the superheroes easy (and by extension cheap) to draw. Spandex is as simple as it gets - no wrinkles or any distinct features that you would need to think about so after drawing a rough silhouette you are already done. Capes seem to go against it, but they are the easiest way to convey motion or add some dramatic flair to a given pose. Also, since the cape is only loosely attached to the wearer, you can draw it without thinking much about a given pose the character makes.

[Vinyadan]

I think it was a mix of many things, like showing how unique the hero was in a world that wore mostly ties. Plus they can be easily concealed beneath normal clothes, and they give a nice feeling of freedom when the hero sheds his clothes to become ____man. I'm not sure that drawing an almost nude man is easier than drawing clothed one, however, but it's true that some old comics I have seen had some problem conveying creases, sometimes reducing them to black spurts of ink.

[Gez]

It's all in the intent and presentation. I remember seeing a children's film with nonsexualised breasts, The Adventures of Adele Blanc-Sec (I believe it's based on a French comic). The main character has a bath and her chest is visible in some shots because they realistically would be, but it's not erotic. It's just a lady who's naked because she's climbed into a tub of water with the intent to relax and wash.

Breasts are a lot less sexualized in French culture than in Anglo-Saxon culture. This is changing {Scrubbed} but traditionally nipples are not considered in French art to be something horrible that children should never be exposed to.

So in French comics you're quite likely to see naked breasts in a non-sexual context. In an American comic, if naked breasts are visible, then it's necessarily a sexualized scene in an adult-only comic...

[Fyraltari]

Breasts are a lot less sexualized in French culture than in Anglo-Saxon culture. This is changing due to American cultural imperialism, forcefully exporting its cultural values through Hollywood and Netflix and Youtube; but traditionally nipples are not considered in French art to be something horrible that children should never be exposed to.

So in French comics you're quite likely to see naked breasts in a non-sexual context. In an American comic, if naked breasts are visible, then it's necessarily a sexualized scene in an adult-only comic...

I remember laughing my ass off when I learned that the American translation of Sillage turned the white stripe on the protagonist's chest black to serve as a convenient censor box.

With that said, we shouldn't give the impression that breasts (and women) were not sexualized in European comics, they definitely were and are.

[Anonymouswizard]

Breasts are a lot less sexualized in French culture than in Anglo-Saxon culture. This is changing due to American cultural imperialism, forcefully exporting its cultural values through Hollywood and Netflix and Youtube; but traditionally nipples are not considered in French art to be something horrible that children should never be exposed to.

So in French comics you're quite likely to see naked breasts in a non-sexual context. In an American comic, if naked breasts are visible, then it's necessarily a sexualized scene in an adult-only comic...

They're also less sexualised in the UK than the US, probably because every time we're not fighting France we're having amorous relations with them. Occasionally we do both at once!

But yeah, the film was shown uncut here but censored for the US. What's inherently sexual varies around the world.

Now if only the French would stop flashing their ankles, we can't be having with that kind of filth!

[Gez]

With that said, we shouldn't give the impression that breasts (and women) were not sexualized in European comics, they definitely were and are.

I did say "less" rather than "not at all".

[Daywalker1983]

I find it funny that in a Comic written by a trans woman a gay Character in a ersatzbody enters the World through a roughly vagina shaped opening and complains about squishiness to his future love interest. Layers above Layers, just like an ogre.

[Vinyadan]

I find it funny that in a Comic written by a trans woman a gay Character in a ersatzbody enters the World through a roughly vagina shaped opening and complains about squishiness to his future love interest. Layers above Layers, just like an ogre.

To me, the most striking of these cases is that Kin, the rape victim, undergoes the complete destruction of her lower body and then gains a new, indestructible one. There are three possible aspects I can see: a new, uncontaminated body as a way to solve the feeling of disgust, dirtiness, and contamination often reported by victims; the fact that Kin was partly based on the author's mother, a rape and kidnap victim, and now has an invulnerable lower body; and then bottom surgery.

Another one with possibly autobiographical undertones is the campfire scene with Forgath and Idle talking to each other by the campfire, early in the morning, while Bowst is away. https://www.goblinscomic.com/comic/11142015-2
Remember the odd part where Idle and Bowst have daily sex and Forgath gets told about it, but Bowst also has to hurt (actually, kill) Idle daily? Danielle was in a previous (reportedly unhappy) marriage. She left Canada, then came back with her husband, and invited a bunch of friend on a camping trip; among those friends was, you guessed it, our webcomic artist, who by then had spent years secretly in love with her. They woke up before the others, and had a chat by the campfire, which was their first time alone together. https://www.goblinscomic.com/blog/she-said-yes So Bowst could be a version of Danielle's ex husband. (although it's interesting that Ward also might have feelings for her)