
also, I don't think the outcry against the spiderwoman cover was because it was unrealistic. There's a roll call of unrealistic comic artwork, both of male and female bodies.
( , Thu 4 Sep 2014, 23:01, Reply)

the point is, Spiderwoman is "presenting" her arse, whereas Spiderman is clambering round the surface. And while Campbell did give Spidey some arse crack, Spiderwoman's is just that much more disturbing.
The weird broken neck over to one side and impossibly bent arm are lesser problems.

( , Thu 4 Sep 2014, 23:02, Reply)

if the woman was in that same position.... well, lets just say I've seen that video
( , Thu 4 Sep 2014, 23:07, Reply)

something that your drawing doesn't show, which looks more and more like he's humping a massive balloon
( , Thu 4 Sep 2014, 23:09, Reply)

it may seem innocent saying 'spiderman is clambering round the surface' as if no gay comic artists have ever existed
but then so is spiderwoman. She is clambering off the side of that wall, one leg still hanging. She can't slither across the floor like snake woman (trademarked).
( , Thu 4 Sep 2014, 23:12, Reply)

it clearly wouldn't be innocent.
( , Thu 4 Sep 2014, 23:26, Reply)

and restarted by renaissance painters
there's no secret that muscular men in art history appealed to gay men
( , Thu 4 Sep 2014, 23:36, Reply)

I suppose that naked/scantily-clad women in art history appealed to straight men as well. That makes sense.
Wow, who knew art was so complicated?
( , Thu 4 Sep 2014, 23:43, Reply)

have I been misinformed?
( , Fri 5 Sep 2014, 0:00, Reply)

( , Thu 4 Sep 2014, 23:13, Reply)

it is hard to stop it happening. And imagine it was a super-prolapse.
I already get bored of wiping as it is.
( , Thu 4 Sep 2014, 23:15, Reply)

Spider woman has her further back leg still off the building. So she's actually quite flat from shoulders to pooper.
( , Fri 5 Sep 2014, 3:57, Reply)