8

Okay, I’ve become rather irked by how much the boobs-n-butt pose is so harped on, as if it’s some hilarious, impossible thing. These were done on a whim, so I apologize for the small/crappy photos and sketchy outlines. Once I find my camera again, I’d like to take some shots that show the whole body and how this pose actually works.

These are all practical positions, and they were all relatively comfortable to do and stay in for a good period of time. Even though the boobs-n-butt pose looks a little funny, it’s entirely plausible and anatomically correct (although it can be taken too far). So, don’t be afraid to draw it. Hopefully these photos help a little with drawing such positions! 

EDIT: (again) Oh my, these notes. Well, I’m glad at least some people find these useful. Figured I’d add some drawings that show BOTH male and females in such positions. 

5

That’s it, i’m done. No more animations for a while. 

The scariest part is i thought this would look more grotesque, but the more frames i drew the more i realized i’ve seen every frame in a comic book, video game, anime or promo art (not even counting fanart) before. It’s almost too familiar to be grotesque, blugh.

If anyone wants to add more moves to her set go ahead. I suggest favorites such as the centaur woman butt bump, or the inexplicable crotch shot split kick :P

For my Gender and the Body class. 

This is my artistic reaction to the Starfire controversy. I was going to draw her teammates in her outfit- or them in her pose- but instead I drew her as a man. I call him. Manfire. To illustrate how stupid these poses are and how un-empowering they are. This goes with my paper titled:

The Issue that Melted the Internet: The Continued Objectification of Women in Comics

One of these days I will post it online. It is incredibly long but here is this. 

I have re-appropriated the background from the original comic book. 

2

AG: Hey…….. 
AG: Do you have any recollection at all of the last message I sent you 8efore I died? 
GT: i don’t even know who you are!!! 
AG: Yeah, I figured. Just as well. I made some pretty em8arrassing confessions to you. 
AG: I guess I’m getting what I asked for in a way. Even though it’s not what I pictured. 

Vriska Serket | Photos 

4

My coworkers think eschergirls is really amusing, i showed them this one today and much fun was had.
First is just a “seeing this from other side” draw over, which is super horrifying, then two different fixes from us of the original which are both equally if not more hot than the original? But way less broken?
Then the last one was just a natural progression my coworker made of where the original drawing must have been going :U

Breaking the Fourth Wall with Fanservice

In my last post about sexuality and the Hawkeye Initiative, I mentioned female character’s sexuality in-context and out-of-context. This out-of-context sexuality is no longer between the character and another character, or even the character and herself. It is between the character and you, the viewer. It lacks relevancy to the plot, and, at worst, distracts from the plot advancement.

Take a look at this image

image

This is exactly what I mean when I talk about breaking the fourth wall with fanservice.

Yes, her body is overly large, with disproportionate legs and a torso that could never swivel that way. But it doesn’t end there. Why is she posed the way she is? And what does this say about the reader-character relationship?

The two men are clearly oggling her. There’s no doubt about that. But let’s put this in perspective- literally. What are they looking at? Well, from where they’re sitting, not much.

(Here is a drawing done by knmajor to show this girl from the other side)

Her butt is pointed away from both of them. Her skirt is pointed downward. Neither of the are seeing an upskirt shot. Her breasts are also pointed directly away from them, facing us. And they certainly can’t see her face. So unless both of those guys are immensely turned on by a giant rack of side-rib, they’re actually not looking at much more than a backpack.

All of those things, face, boobs, butt, legs, they’re facing us. The viewer.

Why?

People who are not heterosexual males turned on by this sort of thing often state that these pictures make them uncomfortable. They certainly make me uncomfortable. When her assets are so firmly pointed directly towards me, we have broken the third-person perspective of the comic. We have gone from third-person to second-person.

The reader is now involuntarily involved in the story, because the character is now flirting with them. For some readers, this surely feels empowering. the sexy female character recognises your presence and now has a relationship with you. (and a sexual one at that! Deadpool may turn to the “camera” and snark sarcastically, but this is reader-character interaction of a whole other sort)

For other readers, though, this is uncomfortable. Like that creep who hits on you at the bus stop, this sudden relationship is unwanted. As a reader, I would much rather see a character I am attached to have a sexual relationship with another character in the world, in context, than to pose pin-up style for me.

Now we can finally go back to the whole “WHY GOD WHY?” of the spine-snapping poses designed to always show us both boobs and butt at the same time. It’s not just Escher-style girls for the sake of drawing messed up anatomy. It has a purpose. The purpose is to bring the viewer into a more second-person style readership, and in doing so, we break down the fourth wall.

As a reader and fan of comic books, I reject this idea of second-person style fanservice. I believe that it is a poor form of storytelling and does more harm to the plot and to the characters than good. I am in no way against characters expressing their sexuality in comics, but I do not want a creepy, voyeuristic perspective where I am an active participant being forced to have “the male gaze”. I want characters to interact with each other, not with me.

I know I posted this in my other post, but I feel the need to put it here as well. this is an example of sexuality in comics done right.

 This link is NSFW. It contains four detailed panels of hot elven lovemaking. You have been warned.

Quick summary: Bearclaw and Joyleaf have been um, “elf married” together for some 500-ish years. They hunt together. They live together. They have been in love with each other forever and a day. They are not strictly monogamous, as elves are somewhat polyamorous, but they do have primary spouses, and so are considered a couple.

In the second panel, we have what could be considered a boobs + butt pose. But the characters are invested in each other. They’re facing each other. They’re not posing for the reader, or aware that there is a “camera” on them. There is no voyeuristic quality to these images. What is displayed is the characters’ love and passion for each other. That, in my opinion, is what seperates plot-relevant sexuality from wall-breaking fanservice.

Good portrayal of sexuality should further the story. This particular act of sex is what concieves their son, who goes on to become the main character of the story. (This comic is a prequel) It’s also special because elves are infertile, so while sex means very little to them, concieving a child means a lot.

And we as a reader are seeing sexuality from their eyes. They live long lives. They make sweet elf nookie in the woods. All good. They don’t do what they do for us, the reader. They do it because they’re elves and that’s what elves do. That’s sexuality in context.

2

So Nintendo decided to release alternative outfits for the Zero Suit Samus in new Smash Bros. Their official statement on it goes:

Thanks to the determination of her female designer, these Zero Suit outfits got completed in time. From the ending of Metroid: Zero Mission, here’s Samus in shorts!

You can use the same outfit variations in both the 3DS and Wii U versions.

"Thanks to the determination of her female designer", huh? What a bizzarely specific statement.
Reads more like “See, SEE? Women not only love skimpy outfits on female characters, they personally put them in games! She was DETERMINED to do it, even!”

I’m feeling like "a woman designed it, so it can not be detrimental to womankind in any way!" is some secret lost square in the Female Armor Rhetoric Bingo

As for anyone who’d gladly claim that those are canon costumes from her earlier games: YES, THEY ARE. You know what exactly they are in canon? LEISURE OUTFITS. Samus wears them after her mission is over. She’s supposed to chill in those shorts, not fight.

Just the same, Zero Suit is basically underwear to her armor and Zero Mission’s whole point was to play Samus at her most vulnerable.

Again, how does any costume other than power armor make sense in the context of brutal tournament that is Smash Bros games?

And no, I don’t take “this series is all about fanservice” for an answer.
The designers used up all the Pointless Fanservice Points when they gave her shoes so impossible they barely resemble stripper boots.

PS: Those heels look as idiotic as when they were first released.

PPS: Her anatomy and the poses she takes, especially in the first picture, are as much (if not more) broken as ever.

Guess the developers still like Samus promotion pics being a major candidate for an eschergirls post.

~Ozzie

I love when companies pretend that female developers have total autonomy over projects - it’s not like they answer to managers and executives who hired them to do a specific task.

It’s not like video games is an industry where employment is highly competitive or that employment in game is renown for being highly demanding at the best of times.

Surely it couldn’t be that these female designers were instructed by male managers and that the company expects their female employees to do this kind of work or find work elsewhere!

- wincenworks

6

Since having a good look through eschergirls and this blog I thought it’d be fun to have a go at doing a redraw of one of Hyung Tae Kim’s contortionist women. My subject for this is Rose from Magna Carta: The Phantom of Avalanche. I did a google and couldn’t actually find out what her role in the game was but from the look of her design I’m guessing she’s a fist-fighter though why she has big chunks of metal on her wrists and not her knuckles I may never know.

But anyway. My first port of call was tracing the original image so I could better see what was going on and wow she looks even weirder than I first thought. You can see in the light blue drawing how skewed her shoulders and hips/butt are and her left arm is just… idek. It looks like a snake wrapping its way around her torso.

In the first dark blue image I managed to salvage the legs because despite their odd attachment, they weren’t all that badly distorted albeit rather long and thin. I tried to keep it as close to the original pose as I could but greatly reduced the twist in her waist and neck to make it look like she isn’t trying to tie herself in knots. Got rid of the remaining structure lines in the next image and rotated slightly to better match the original composition.

Finally: clothing!! I felt the need to add colour so I could get rid of those awkward diamond holes in her suit and changed them to a plain white pattern. I also fixed the fabric so it didn’t look like she was wearing a weird suction suit and changed her gloves as I realised that, since she was resting her right wrist on her leg, the hand position was wrong for if she were wearing those metal cuffs so I settled for some knuckle dusters instead. I fixed her expression to something… less suggestive. Also I couldn’t be bothered with the shoes - so sue me.

This post about the Hawkeye Initiative really sums up a lot of half-thoughts I’d had about it and makes them coherent:

If the costumes/poses are ridiculous and impractical, they’re ridiculous and impractical regardless of what kind of body is placed in them. The idea that male bodies inhabiting those costumes/poses is somehow more ridiculous is pretty obviously more dependent on the transphobic idea of “men in dresses are funny! hur dur” than on the simple removal of our being “used to” women being placed in them.

Like, I do feel like I’m so immersed in images of women that sexualise and pose and glamourise our bodies that I won’t always be able to see them as unnatural or ridiculous. I can’t feel as incredulous about a lot of Eschergirls (WARNING: THERE ARE CREEPY AS FUCK PEDOPHILIAC IMAGES ON THEIR FRONT PAGE AT THE TIME OF POSTING) content as I want to, because I’m just so used to seeing that kind of shit. But I still think it’s a really useful tool for understanding what’s going on with the kind of gross objectification both tumblrs are criticising.

Looking through the Eschergirl’s archives for a long time gave me a much stronger sense for what objectification does. it is willing to contort women’s bodies beyond breaking point to show off what sees as sexual in them, and it will do that to the point of absurdity until it makes what was absurd so familiar it doesn’t even register. It puts a viewer’s momentary sexual gratification above the chance to show them something about the character it depicts - what they’re doing, their emotional state, how they dress at home or for work. They stare at the camera or close their eyes; they are on display, and the process of objectification makes sure they are posed without any kind of agency and logic. That’s one of the things I see most often in Eschergirls posts: what is she doing?

And, y’know what? I feel like that’s generally gonna be a really great starting point for a feminist analysis. Why’s she standing like that? Is anything about her telling a story, or not? Could the person who drew it tell you anything about this woman beyond what she looks like?

Text
Photo
Quote
Link
Chat
Audio
Video