Comment on 📡📡📡
TwistedTurtle@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Sex is too important to be cordoned off to just porn.
Not saying this guy in particular is right, but I hate this attitude that “porn exists so we shouldn’t have sex, or nudity, or anything horny in other art forms”. We shouldn’t treat people like creeps just because they like/want horny art. Personally, I’d love to see more horniness and sexuality in our art.
Personally, I find the current cinema trend of “everyone is beautiful, but no one is horny” far creepier than the rampant sexualization in old 80s movies.
Afaict, nobody is making the argument that you’re refuting.
There is art that is elevated by being horny and art that is made worse by it. Being horny doesn’t fit this character, and isn’t relevant to the story being told, so it seems like a bad fit. Being a bad fit, the only people this would benefit are creeps who want upskirt shots of whoever, and I don’t think that’s a demographic to cater to at the sacrifice of the more vulnerable demographics that this film is targeting.
The cut of the leotard is way too much. But a leotard still makes fine sense for a super hero who’s doing athletic acrobatics.
If anything the cape is the stupidest part of the outfit.
porn in america is hyper-aggressive and focused on penetration. there’s no eroticism to it. it’s crass and disgusting.
there’s something to putting on a 90s skinemax film wand seeing hot milfs wearing sexy, satin nighties tenderly riding men on a real bed in a real bedroom, instead of watching giant, unearthly cocks penetrating gaping vaginas in extreme close-up.
what a boneheaded take out of the OP.
there’s a HUGE difference between what porn is selling and what turns you on.
porn in america is hyper-aggressive and focused on penetration. there’s no eroticism to it. it’s crass and disgusting.
Truuue.
what a boneheaded take out of the OP.
Well, the guy they’re talking to is almost certainly a Sargon of Akkad-lite who is upset that feminism is ruining his disney movies. I would tell him to go watch porn too, but that’s because I like zingers.
That’s one of the things I didn’t like about gal gadisreal’s version of Wonder woman. Her whole costume is half a step above a bikini with how skimpy it is.
Err…this is Wonder Woman you’re discussing, right? A skimpy costume is completely on-brand for the original.
Hey now - bikinis arent sexual. Only the male gaze makes them so
All modern swim ware is basically inherently sexual. Its literally the point of the …
We literally went from modest swim wear which went sexual to speedos and bikinis because explicitly they ARE sexual.
Hell even the modern one piece and swim trunks the less sexual options are still designed to be sexual.
Its not the male gaze. Bikinis objectively speaking are by design intended to be and are sexual.
Half the fucking point of wearing a skimpy swimwear to the beach is to show off your body. Its half the fun for heaven sake!
Herr_S_aus_H@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
Maybe don’t sexualize the character that, at least in part, is aimed at teenage girls.
TwistedTurtle@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
See, that’s an example of a much better argument than “porn exists, stop being a creep”.
MJKee9@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I think you are mischaracterizing the assumption of the original “creep” as an “argument” and are misplacing the intents of the original response. The point of the post and the reason for calling the guy a creep (I say guy because we’re definitely dealing with a male here) is because he wants a movie that is not designed to be pornography to have elements that would be better placed in a pornographic movie. You are inserting a degree of kink shaming into the post that doesn’t actually exist. Watching pornography and having a healthy attitude about sex is different from wanting to sexualize a story that is not trying to be sexual. That is creepy.
TwistedTurtle@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Again, I’m not defending this particular guy - I’m criticizing his dad’s response, which is an attitude that’s prevelant today, especially amongst the youth. A lot of people hate on sex/nudity of any form in mainstream art, and their argument is generally “just go watch porn you creeps”.
Maybe Supergirl specifically shouldn’t be sexualized (even though she’s sexualized in most of the source material I remember), but if so, let’s come up with a better reason than “a containment genre exists for sex, and if you want to see it escape that box then you’re a degenerate!”.
blarghly@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Using “male” as a noun to describe a person is dehumanizing
whereitsat@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
the actress is probably 35, who cares who the character is aimed at. it’s normal for men to see an attractive woman and be like ‘wow she’s attractive.’
you’re pathologizing normal thinking and probably feeling incredibly satisfied with your lame response because you used the word ‘teenage’ and nobody would dare to cross swords.
grow up.
whereitsat@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
why is her outfit ‘sexualizing’ anyway?
even if her outfit didn’t suggest ‘panties’ it’d still be sexy because it accentuates her form.
blarghly@lemmy.world 1 month ago
So we aren’t allowed to sexualize Orlando Bloom anymore, then?
Katana314@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Keep talking if you’ve ever taken offense to the way Orlando Bloom has been depicted, or been made uncomfortable by his depiction. Otherwise, I’d say let it go.
modus@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Unless you your thing is teenage girls. Then it’s ok. /s