My experience has been that nerds usually desire MORE not less female involvement. I'm not sure where these fabled groups of male nerds who put up the "No girls allowed" signs up are, but I've yet to see any.
Tony Harris is a most recent example of how this attitude can be found. And while he's also a content generator, I think he definitely counts as a nerd.
I think that's because while they're definitely sexualized, they're not quite objectified. They aren't made into objects to be used for the woman's enjoyment, they're giving her the enjoyment on their own terms.
This is why the whole argument that men in comics/media in generally are just as sexualized and unrealistic as women are reeks of bullshit to me, really. This and the fact that men in media in general are also often empowering fantasies created for men too.
It's the artists who focus a dialogue shot on Mary Jane's breasts when you only ever see Spidey's face.
If you are referring to Superior Spider-Man, then I think a very important aside would be that there's such a thing as plot-relevant objectification and that in this particular case, it's almost tolerable if only because the story itself does not condone at all what Doctor Octopus is doing in that scene and you're supposed to be creeped out by it as well as think awfully of him.
When I look at nerd culture, I tend to see sexism not from the crowd but from the creators (excluding the random jerks you'll come across on Xbox Live or whatever).
I've found sexism and general bigotry on both sides, really. Admittedly, I've never experienced them firsthand (I'm mostly lucky in that I avoid most nerd hangouts, stints on TvT notwithstanding) but I've heard multiple accounts from female friends who are unable to go to comic book stores without being harassed, humilliated or just being treated poorly in general and such.
stop using the list buttons when you don't need them? lolclosey
also I don't care for the implication that "nerd hangout" = terrible place by default.
I don't think we're very sexist here, for instance.
HeaperHangouts is hardly your average nerd hangout.
I don't think nerd hangouts are awful places by default so much as internet nerd hangouts if only because the internet does encourage a lot of behavior that is normally unseemly.
I think they are. Take TV Tropes, Stormfront and most of the waifu and pokemon forums. They either objectify women online as a measure of getting online sex and praise, or outright hate them as a way of emulating their anger regarding the difficulties of dating.
I think the problem is that the backlash to certain ridiculous ads (y'all know the ones) got incredibly out of hand and suddenly every woman who was at all nerdy was some evil corporate agent trying to steal nerds' money and hearts.
This is of course untrue, but that's the kind of thing you can end up believing if all of your friends think exactly like you do and you're already rather sexist.
Which ads were these? I know I ought to remember them, but my memory is failing.
Doctor Who reference in Pokemon B2W2? Headcanon accepted.
From what I've seen, the "gamer girl" type, of whom always complains about misogyny from male nerds and geeks, always without fail recite a preamble of their "gamer cred" and what a huge geek they are. I mean how fucking insecure do you have to be to try to impress someone over something as stupid as video games and comic books
You don't need a license or a resume to enjoy any of that shit, and if anything trying to impress other people in this manner only serves to make you look like a bigger outsider.
I think the problem is that the backlash to certain ridiculous ads (y'all know the ones) got incredibly out of hand and suddenly every woman who was at all nerdy was some evil corporate agent trying to steal nerds' money and hearts.
This is of course untrue, but that's the kind of thing you can end up believing if all of your friends think exactly like you do and you're already rather sexist.
Which ads were these? I know I ought to remember them, but my memory is failing.
those dating ads that had a stereotypically "sexy gamer gurl" nibbling on the wire of an Xbox controller?
From what I've seen, the "gamer girl" type, of whom always complains about misogyny from male nerds and geeks, always without fail recite a preamble of their "gamer cred" and what a huge geek they are. I mean how fucking insecure do you have to be to try to impress someone over something as stupid as video games and comic books
You don't need a license or a resume to enjoy any of that shit, and if anything trying to impress other people in this manner only serves to make you look like a bigger outsider.
I don't think people actually do this though.
I mean I have literally never seen anyone do it, so idk maybe I'm just lucky or something.
I mean I have literally never seen anyone do it, so idk maybe I'm just lucky or something.
I've seen this plenty of times. The troubling aspect about it is this sort of thing perpetuates the whole insular "geek culture" thing. My opinion that interest in comic books or video games or legos doesn't warrant being labeled a "culture" aside, if someone's into that sort of thing then they just like that sort of thing. It's not a big deal.
I think that's because while they're definitely sexualized, they're not quite objectified. They aren't made into objects to be used for the woman's enjoyment, they're giving her the enjoyment on their own terms.
This, pretty much.
Also note that sexualized (to female) images of males tend to be disturbing to heterosexual males.
I thought we already went over that they are two different things? or two same things in different areas? Like, a batman romance novel would sell to both males with power fantasies and women with objectivying viewsets.
i thought the point Manly made was that the power relations in those novels are slightly different from in comic books?
The way i see it there's a big difference regardless, in that readers of romance novels aren't really a subculture in the same way that 'nerd culture' is, and certainly not one that bemoans the lack of participants of the opposite sex.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
One thing worth examining is how well the women in comics are portrayed/written.
A comic where the female super-heros are pretty much just there to be sexy is usually flagged as "poor writing" as far as I know.
Not to say women super-heros are underrepresented in comics. My buddy and I where discussing how Joss Whedon wanted to add a second female Avenger. In this case, Wasp, but then we wondered about Ant Man...
Similar problems arose with She-Hulk as they already had the Hulk.
DC comics also has this issue with Wonder Woman probably being the only really recognizable female Super Hero outside the fan base. Zartana isn't really attached to another Superhero, per se, but I doubt many non-comic fans recognize the name.
X-Men and its offshoots are probably the best example where this isn't as much of an issue (Point out how the comic is named X-MEN and I will cut you) with tons of female characters that are simply "mutants" and mostly not offshoots of other male characters.
From what I've seen, the "gamer girl" type, of whom always complains about misogyny from male nerds and geeks, always without fail recite a preamble of their "gamer cred" and what a huge geek they are. I mean how fucking insecure do you have to be to try to impress someone over something as stupid as video games and comic books
You don't need a license or a resume to enjoy any of that shit, and if anything trying to impress other people in this manner only serves to make you look like a bigger outsider.
(Now, I don't know what 100% has been discussed here already, but I'll state these points anyway.) Late response BUT, as someone who has interests that put me in the nerd category and is a female, the reason I've seen many women often detail their nerd/gamer cred is because their interests tend to get questioned by male nerds more often. There's the idea that women only pretend to be interested in nerd things to attract men. So, the fake geek girl (such as that meme that's been going around) makes the "real" nerd girls look bad and makes nerd men question the validity, skill and interest of all women.
While, I think there's some merit to this, I also hold the opinion that nerd culture tends to have a stick up its ass in general. You need to know x amount about a show/book/movie in order to be a "true fan" otherwise you're lying or a *shudder* "casual" fan and the scum of the earth. I've seen dudes call other dudes this, so it's not only females, though female "cred" may be called out for different reasons. And yes, I get that it's annoying if someone says their a huge fan, expert or really skilled at something and none of their claims are backed up. But, there's always this invisible bar of trueness that needs to be reached in order to show you're a genuine fan of something.
It's not so much to impress, but sort of defensiveness to prove that even though they're women they have the supposed credentials. I'm really not interested in getting into to fandom for various reason, I tend not to be around people who will badger me about how true a fan I am. Even then, I really don't care about showing what hardcore nerd I am and own up to not being a very good gamer (though I enjoy it as a pastime), don't know everything by x author, etc. On a tangent, 'nerd' culture as some kind of subculture is kinda weird to me. It's not really unified and mostly based on enjoyment and knowledge of something. Which....seems like a general, vague quality to me.
JZ: That's kind of why I didn't really stick around other nerds when I was in high school, myself. I wanted to know what it was they were doing and how I could join in, but hey, stupid me, I didn't know you couldn't just ask. Sitting and watching patiently while the cool kids do their thing and hoping they're magnanimous enough to invite you into your clique was something I was never good at doing, and the people who were more like "Sure, I'll actually talk to and tell you what's going on" instead of "you annoying twat, can't you see I'm busy?" were rather pointedly not nerds. (Student government and a few geeky kids that weren't really arrogant enough to be nerds, mostly.)
I thought we already went over that they are two different things? or two same things in different areas? Like, a batman romance novel would sell to both males with power fantasies and women with objectivying viewsets.
This is the last time I'm going to explain this. It's very simple, and I don't know why you're all treating it as a complicated issue.
This is a blatant sexual objectification of a woman.
This is a blatant sexual objectification of a man.
It does not matter that they are from two separate storytelling mediums. It does not matter that one is geared towards lonely housewives and the other is geared towards lonely nerds.
They are both fantasy.
They both sexually objectify either men or women.
They sexually objectify in order to appeal to a market.
To say that one is bad and one is okay, no matter how you rationalize it, is hypocrisy.
We never said that one is okay and the other is bad., just that one is bad and the other is worse.
Well if you're arguing against sexual objectification, that's fine, but to say that one is worse than the other is ridiculous. They're the exact same thing.
"It is a matter of grave importance that Fairy tales should be respected.... Whosoever alters them to suit his own opinions, whatever they are, is guilty, to our thinking, of an act of presumption, and appropriates to himself what does not belong to him." -- Charles Dickens
It's not so much to impress, but sort of defensiveness to prove that even though they're women they have the supposed credentials. I'm really not interested in getting into to fandom for various reason, I tend not to be around people who will badger me about how true a fan I am. Even then, I really don't care about showing what hardcore nerd I am and own up to not being a very good gamer (though I enjoy it as a pastime), don't know everything by x author, etc. On a tangent, 'nerd' culture as some kind of subculture is kinda weird to me. It's not really unified and mostly based on enjoyment and knowledge of something. Which....seems like a general, vague quality to me.
What's strange to me is how this discussion seems to treat "fandom" as a good thing that women aren't treated equally in. It seems to me that people dividing themselves up by which corporate product they like to play/watch/read and forming a hierarchy based on how much they know about the product is a rather bad thing.
Honestly, I think the "corporate product" thing is incidental; I'm sure there were fanboys long before the modern content oligopolies started. It's more a case of how much effort they're willing to put into it. Some people are just plain unhealthily obsessed, and that's the thing people should be watching out for.
Corporal Forsythe said: Kexruct said:We never said that one is okay and the other is bad., just that one is bad and the other is worse.
Well if you're arguing against sexual objectification, that's fine, but to say that one is worse than the other is ridiculous. They're the exact same thing.
But they aren't, though. They are marketed towards completely different audiences, the medium is different, and the characterization is different. Not only that, but you rarely see men complaining about being portrayed as musclebound shirtless giants.
They are marketed towards completely different audiences,
So what you're saying here is that the gender of the demographic it's being marketed to determines if it's sexual objectification or not. This is absolutely ridiculous.
Not only that, but you rarely see men complaining about being portrayed as musclebound shirtless giants.
And the fact that less men complain about Fabio's barechested, long-haired self on the cover of a roman novel has no fucking bearing on whether something is sexually objectified or not.
They are marketed towards completely different audiences,
So what you're saying here is that the gender of the demographic it's being marketed to determines if it's sexual objectification or not. This is absolutely ridiculous.
No, I wasn't talking about being marketed towards different genders. Romance novels are targeted at a very specific type of person, whereas comics are an entire medium that can be targeted towards anyone.
"It is a matter of grave importance that Fairy tales should be respected.... Whosoever alters them to suit his own opinions, whatever they are, is guilty, to our thinking, of an act of presumption, and appropriates to himself what does not belong to him." -- Charles Dickens
No, I wasn't talking about being marketed towards different genders. Romance novels are targeted at a very specific type of person, whereas comics are an entire medium that can be targeted towards anyone.
They can be, but let's be honest: America basically uses comics for a single genre.
Fantasy is fantasy, Kexruct. Doesn't matter if one is from Krypton and the other one is with bare-chested pirates on the high seas.
I never said setting. I said characterization. Most women in comics, video games, etc. are often treated as vulnerable or as a stupid Strong Independent Woman Who Don't Need No ManTM stereotype.
And the fact that less men complain about Fabio's barechested, long-haired self on the cover of a roman novel has no fucking bearing on whether something is sexually objectified or not.
If there's no one has a problem with the objectification then it's not a problem.
No, I wasn't talking about being marketed towards different genders. Romance novels are targeted at a very specific type of person, whereas comics are an entire medium that can be targeted towards anyone.
Sorry, again you're wrong. Comics are a business. Businesses exist to make money. It order to make money, businesses have to have something that consumers want. In the entertainment medium, this is known as "appeal." And comic book producers, especially Marvel and DC, are very savvy to this and market their stuff accordingly. You can pretend all you want that they don't market directly to their largest demographic, which are males from ages 15-30, but they do.
No, I wasn't talking about being marketed towards different genders. Romance novels are targeted at a very specific type of person, whereas comics are an entire medium that can be targeted towards anyone.
They can be, but let's be honest: America basically uses comics for a single genre.
Even then, comics are a much bigger niche than romance novels, and tend to have more social acceptability.
No, I wasn't talking about being marketed towards different genders. Romance novels are targeted at a very specific type of person, whereas comics are an entire medium that can be targeted towards anyone.
Sorry, again you're wrong. Comics are a business. Businesses exist to make money. It order to make money, businesses have to have something that consumers want. In the entertainment medium, this is known as "appeal." And comic book producers, especially Marvel and DC, are very savvy to this and market their stuff accordingly. You can pretend all you want that they don't market directly to their largest demographic, which are males from ages 15-30, but they do.
I didn't say they are marketed towards everyone, just that they can be with little difficulty.
Even then, comics are a much bigger niche than romance novels, and tend to have more social acceptability.
hahahahahahahahahahaha no
Romance novels are by far and away a larger market than comics are and have been for decades
Comics don't even exist in supermarkets and supermarket aisles, but romance novels do. There's still a huge aftermarket for romance novels that comic cannot even hope to compare to.
No, I wasn't talking about being marketed towards different genders. Romance novels are targeted at a very specific type of person, whereas comics are an entire medium that can be targeted towards anyone.
They can be, but let's be honest: America basically uses comics for a single genre.
Even then, comics are a much bigger niche than romance novels, and tend to have more social acceptability.
"It is a matter of grave importance that Fairy tales should be respected.... Whosoever alters them to suit his own opinions, whatever they are, is guilty, to our thinking, of an act of presumption, and appropriates to himself what does not belong to him." -- Charles Dickens
And comic book producers, especially Marvel and DC, are very savvy to this and market their stuff accordingly. You can pretend all you want that they don't market directly to their largest demographic, which are males from ages 15-30, but they do.
I don't think Marvel and DC are very savvy at marketing. Comics have been absent from the mass market for decades. As far as I know, publishing doesn't lose money, but they're not even designed to profit from comics. Rather the comics are published to retain trademarks on intellectual property the parent companies can use at their convenience in the mass media.
Doctor Who reference in Pokemon B2W2? Headcanon accepted.
Kexruct I don't know how I can be any more clear about this, but here goes
1. There are complaints that women are being sexually objectified in a medium whose largest and target demographic are males.
2. These complaints are being voiced despite the fact that males are being sexually objectified in a medium whose largest and target demographic are females, and this medium is much larger and more ubiquitous.
This is hypocrisy, plain and simple. I don't know how to make this explanation any simpler, Kexruct. If you can't understand this, then I don't know what else to tell you.
No, I wasn't talking about being marketed towards different genders. Romance novels are targeted at a very specific type of person, whereas comics are an entire medium that can be targeted towards anyone.
They can be, but let's be honest: America basically uses comics for a single genre.
Even then, comics are a much bigger niche than romance novels, and tend to have more social acceptability.
in Europe maybe.
What what?
Also Justice,
Both Batgirl/Oracle and Batwoman are popular DC super-heroes.
Do you, or anyone you know, have a problem with the portrayal of males in romance novels?
Nope, none whatsoever. So there's no reason whatsoever that there should be a double standard set in place, because after all isn't progressivism all about egalitarianism?
No, I wasn't talking about being marketed towards different genders. Romance novels are targeted at a very specific type of person, whereas comics are an entire medium that can be targeted towards anyone.
They can be, but let's be honest: America basically uses comics for a single genre.
Even then, comics are a much bigger niche than romance novels, and tend to have more social acceptability.
in Europe maybe.
What what?
Also Justice,
Both Batgirl/Oracle and Batwoman are popular DC super-heroes.
Comics are far and away more popular in continental Europe than the United States. I have no idea how popular they are in Great Britain.
Granted, European Comics are not usually superhero comics.
also Batwoman is not very popular. I don't think most people even know that Batgirl and Batwoman aren't the same character.
Do you, or anyone you know, have a problem with the portrayal of males in romance novels?
Nope, none whatsoever. So there's no reason whatsoever that there should be a double standard set in place, because after all isn't progressivism all about egalitarianism?
I agree, but just for the sake of continuing this argument in a semi-intuitive manner, can we just drop this aspect for now unless someone has a real problem with it?
Do you, or anyone you know, have a problem with the portrayal of males in romance novels?
Nope, none whatsoever. So there's no reason whatsoever that there should be a double standard set in place, because after all isn't progressivism all about egalitarianism?
I agree, but just for the sake of continuing this argument in a semi-intuitive manner, can we just drop this aspect for now unless someone has a real problem with it?
Nope. Double standards are wrong, no matter how you attempt to rationalize them.
Comments
stop using the list buttons when you don't need them? lolclosey
also I don't care for the implication that "nerd hangout" = terrible place by default.
I don't think we're very sexist here, for instance.
I shouldn't try to make points when I'm sleepeh
later gators.
☭
B̤̺͍̰͕̺̠̕u҉̖͙̝̮͕̲ͅm̟̼̦̠̹̙p͡s̹͖ ̻T́h̗̫͈̙̩r̮e̴̩̺̖̠̭̜ͅa̛̪̟͍̣͎͖̺d͉̦͠s͕̞͚̲͍ ̲̬̹̤Y̻̤̱o̭͠u̥͉̥̜͡ ̴̥̪D̳̲̳̤o̴͙̘͓̤̟̗͇n̰̗̞̼̳͙͖͢'҉͖t̳͓̣͍̗̰ ͉W̝̳͓̼͜a̗͉̳͖̘̮n͕ͅt͚̟͚ ̸̺T̜̖̖̺͎̱ͅo̭̪̰̼̥̜ ̼͍̟̝R̝̹̮̭ͅͅe̡̗͇a͍̘̤͉͘d̼̜ 
⚢
I don't think people actually do this though.
I mean I have literally never seen anyone do it, so idk maybe I'm just lucky or something.
See I see the second thing a lot but not so much the first.
Maybe I'm just hanging out with the wrong people. Or right people as the case may be.
they're not quite objectified. They aren't made into objects to be used
for the woman's enjoyment, they're giving her the enjoyment on their
own terms.
This, pretty much.
Also note that sexualized (to female) images of males tend to be disturbing to heterosexual males.
http://www.shortpacked.com/2011/comic/book-13/05-the-death-of-snkrs/falseequivalence/
☭
B̤̺͍̰͕̺̠̕u҉̖͙̝̮͕̲ͅm̟̼̦̠̹̙p͡s̹͖ ̻T́h̗̫͈̙̩r̮e̴̩̺̖̠̭̜ͅa̛̪̟͍̣͎͖̺d͉̦͠s͕̞͚̲͍ ̲̬̹̤Y̻̤̱o̭͠u̥͉̥̜͡ ̴̥̪D̳̲̳̤o̴͙̘͓̤̟̗͇n̰̗̞̼̳͙͖͢'҉͖t̳͓̣͍̗̰ ͉W̝̳͓̼͜a̗͉̳͖̘̮n͕ͅt͚̟͚ ̸̺T̜̖̖̺͎̱ͅo̭̪̰̼̥̜ ̼͍̟̝R̝̹̮̭ͅͅe̡̗͇a͍̘̤͉͘d̼̜ 
⚢
The way i see it there's a big difference regardless, in that readers of romance novels aren't really a subculture in the same way that 'nerd culture' is, and certainly not one that bemoans the lack of participants of the opposite sex.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
One thing worth examining is how well the women in comics are portrayed/written.
A comic where the female super-heros are pretty much just there to be sexy is usually flagged as "poor writing" as far as I know.
Not to say women super-heros are underrepresented in comics. My buddy and I where discussing how Joss Whedon wanted to add a second female Avenger. In this case, Wasp, but then we wondered about Ant Man...
Similar problems arose with She-Hulk as they already had the Hulk.
DC comics also has this issue with Wonder Woman probably being the only really recognizable female Super Hero outside the fan base. Zartana isn't really attached to another Superhero, per se, but I doubt many non-comic fans recognize the name.
X-Men and its offshoots are probably the best example where this isn't as much of an issue (Point out how the comic is named X-MEN and I will cut you) with tons of female characters that are simply "mutants" and mostly not offshoots of other male characters.
While, I think there's some merit to this, I also hold the opinion that nerd culture tends to have a stick up its ass in general. You need to know x amount about a show/book/movie in order to be a "true fan" otherwise you're lying or a *shudder* "casual" fan and the scum of the earth. I've seen dudes call other dudes this, so it's not only females, though female "cred" may be called out for different reasons. And yes, I get that it's annoying if someone says their a huge fan, expert or really skilled at something and none of their claims are backed up. But, there's always this invisible bar of trueness that needs to be reached in order to show you're a genuine fan of something.
It's not so much to impress, but sort of defensiveness to prove that even though they're women they have the supposed credentials. I'm really not interested in getting into to fandom for various reason, I tend not to be around people who will badger me about how true a fan I am. Even then, I really don't care about showing what hardcore nerd I am and own up to not being a very good gamer (though I enjoy it as a pastime), don't know everything by x author, etc. On a tangent, 'nerd' culture as some kind of subculture is kinda weird to me. It's not really unified and mostly based on enjoyment and knowledge of something. Which....seems like a general, vague quality to me.
Well if you're arguing against sexual objectification, that's fine, but to say that one is worse than the other is ridiculous. They're the exact same thing.
But they aren't, though. They are marketed towards completely different audiences, the medium is different, and the characterization is different. Not only that, but you rarely see men complaining about being portrayed as musclebound shirtless giants.
Kexruct said: and the characterization is different.
Fantasy is fantasy, Kexruct. Doesn't matter if one is from Krypton and the other one is with bare-chested pirates on the high seas.
I never said setting. I said characterization. Most women in comics, video games, etc. are often treated as vulnerable or as a stupid Strong Independent Woman Who Don't Need No ManTM stereotype. If there's no one has a problem with the objectification then it's not a problem.
Also Justice,
Both Batgirl/Oracle and Batwoman are popular DC super-heroes.
Comics are far and away more popular in continental Europe than the United States. I have no idea how popular they are in Great Britain.
Granted, European Comics are not usually superhero comics.
also Batwoman is not very popular. I don't think most people even know that Batgirl and Batwoman aren't the same character.
I do, if only because I think it encourages traditional gender roles.portrayal of men in romance novels: bad for many of the same reasons
I don't understand what's not being understood.