<youtube=a9NIZOvfKpc>xaszatm said:...uh, isn't this an exact quote from Linkara's Tumblr? Like, exactly the same?saintdane05 said:![]()
You know, back when I was first learning about making comics, the books I read stated that any and all symbolism and full context related to what is happening needs to be given to the artist since the artist cannot read your friggin? mind. Unless you trust the artist to tell the story and it doesn?t matter how they do so in the particular context, YOU. INCLUDE. EVERYTHING.
So leaving out that little ?she?s breaking the 4th wall/satire? bits don?t really help if the contest-makers don?t know that.
Furthermore, I encourage people to NOT enter into this for a simple reason: it?s not a foot in the door to DC Comics. DC is not interested in a new artist. Why? Because if they were, they would have asked for a sample of a page that showed superheroes fighting, different uses of light, being able to tell a story without dialogue, and different moods in the panels. Because THAT is what you need for an artist.
Not someone who can draw Harley Quinn naked in a bathtub purportedly breaking the 4th wall.
At best what will happen to the winner of this contest is doing inking work, additional pencils, storyboarding, and maybe promotional artwork. This is not going to actually lead to a career making comics. Because DC is not interested in getting people into a career making comics. They are interested in publicity.
And they really, REALLY suck at that, if these last few days have shown anything.
Or you know.. The scene they imagine, involves her nude, not necessarily in a sexual way. And because it Is DC, and I tend not to associate any nudity with DC at all. Had they not mentioned nudity at all, and just 'bathing' or in the 'bathtub' artists wouldn't have went that direction at all.Maiev Shadowsong said:But you JUST said no one would bath or commit suicide clothed. You specifically make it clear you assume she is naked. The only reason they could mention it is if they specifically wish to see it, then. They want to see her naked. They don't want her in a bath killing herself. They want it clear she is naked and killing herself.Mysten said:But in this case, swings are a requirement. They want Harley to be nude in this scenario and have asked for as much. Their suit is typically one of if not the most iconic part of any comic hero/villain and in this case they specifically wish for it to be absent and that is totally okay.
It's disgusting and repugnant. Going out of your way to request you see nudity when someone is committing suicide. Utterly immature.
EDIT: said naked. Meant clothed. My bad!
Is it just me or are accusations of someone being a social justice warrior around twice as common as accusations of sexism or misogyny? Seriously, the phrase really ticks me off. It's basically grouping everyone that disagrees with you in one group and treating their views as something that they should be ashamed for having and dismisses all of them without actually addressing them.Desert Punk said:So, the social justice warriors are whining again because of a comic book character killing herself in a bathtub...
..Oh noes, the horror, for some reason...
Since when does society care about men committing suicide?Steve Dark said:There's a lot of outrage over this, and the main question I find myself asking is that if this had been the Joker instead, how different would it have been?
I'm sorry if I'm off topic a bit, and I'm also sorry if I get this totally wrong for being a comic noob who doesn't give a fuck about the jumbled continuity, but when did Harley Quinn become a strong female character? Hasn't she always functioned as a punching bag for the Joker?Karloff said:Draw Harley Quinn Naked, Killing Herself, To Win DC Artist Contest
...but the main thrust of the response was that a strong female character was being reduced to a sexualized nothing, and put in a situation that is, at best, unpleasant.
Permalink
I'm sorry but I don't buy that explanation. If you use a widely used term constantly to dismiss people's arguments with a flick of a hat, acting like using the term has netted you an automatic victory and kinda looks down on them, people are naturally going to be pissed when you use it. And no, that is not what's happening at all. Many people, myself included, see a lot of problems with the gaming industry and some trends in general. A lot of people, myself included, don't think they're bad per say, but the overwhelming leaning towards certain kind of trends gets frustrating and generic. But we can't criticize them without being reduced to "being offended for the sake of being offended so that they can seem progressive" That's a major part in why that term is so frustrating. A wide variety of views on different matters are thrown under one massive generalization combined with the people using it putting words in their mouths. It's frustrating in every sense of the word.Desert Punk said:Atleast I am not calling them white knights?erttheking said:Is it just me or are accusations of someone being a social justice warrior around twice as common as accusations of sexism or misogyny? Seriously, the phrase really ticks me off. It's basically grouping everyone that disagrees with you in one group and treating their views as something that they should be ashamed for having and dismisses all of them without actually addressing them.Desert Punk said:So, the social justice warriors are whining again because of a comic book character killing herself in a bathtub...
..Oh noes, the horror, for some reason...
The reason it probobly annoys people so much is because it strikes too close to home, I am sure the people whining up a storm about this KNOW that their complaints are silly and pointless, but they are just being offended for the sake of being offended or so that they can seem progressive.
And why would I take their views seriously? There is nothing there to address, it is a person commiting suicide in a bathtub. OH NOES SHE IS NUDES! is not something that needs to be addressed.
Ok, lemme ask you this... why isn't it Joker?Steve Dark said:There's a lot of outrage over this, and the main question I find myself asking is that if this had been the Joker instead, how different would it have been?
I've found that certain cultures have quite a bit of difficulty separating nudity and sexuality. Not too sure why but it's not that uncommon to find people who can't seem to separate them. On the other hand, comics have often sexualized female characters which could lead people to the assumption that DC wanted the character to be depicted that way.Father Time said:So why should we be outraged again? It's not even canon and it's a fictional person.
"The sexualisation of suicide is something I will not be putting effort into"
Newsflash: Not all nudity is sexual and sometimes nudity is appropriate given the context, like say for example a bath.
Seriously show that description to a nudist and ask them to find anything sexual about it. They'll either go for the chicken bikini or give you a disturbing stare like you get off on people killing themselves.
Aside from an overtly popular character, the response will be. "So what"Rebel_Raven said:Ok, lemme ask you this... why isn't it Joker?Steve Dark said:There's a lot of outrage over this, and the main question I find myself asking is that if this had been the Joker instead, how different would it have been?
For all of the "I wonder what sort of outrage it'd be if it were a guy!" questions, the fact we have to wonder is sort of telling.
Lets see DC do something like this for a guy as remotely popular as Harley Quinn, and we'll find out.
Like the trend where the Escapist puts in a deliberately baiting headline LESBIAN marriage too tough for Batwoman and the Social Justice Warriors immediately jump in without considering "Wait. What has DC's attitude on marriage been?" or even "I wonder if I should actually put some thought into the subject beyond just reacting to The Escapist's deliberately incendiary headlines"?erttheking said:but the overwhelming leaning towards certain kind of trends gets frustrating and generic.
I haven't seen this sort of thing happen for a guy so I can't rightfully say what will happen.SinisterDeath said:Aside from an overtly popular character, the response will be. "So what"Rebel_Raven said:Ok, lemme ask you this... why isn't it Joker?Steve Dark said:There's a lot of outrage over this, and the main question I find myself asking is that if this had been the Joker instead, how different would it have been?
For all of the "I wonder what sort of outrage it'd be if it were a guy!" questions, the fact we have to wonder is sort of telling.
Lets see DC do something like this for a guy as remotely popular as Harley Quinn, and we'll find out.
or "what a weak asshole".
The entire outrage over this, is entirely sexist.
You can't show a naked female committing suicide, because that's sexualizing the fragility of the female psyche.
You can do the same thing for a male character, but its not going to have anywhere near the same reaction. Its going to have the opposite reaction. Why? Because society expects men to be strong physically, mentally, be heroes, with super human will power. And suicide is the same as being a coward.
So, Show a picture of batman, killing himself, while naked in a bathtub. (note, in this sense you can also say you were sexualizing it to. But apparently a naked man isn't sexualized, but any naked female is automatically sexualized.. what?).
The context is seen as completely different, even if every things the same, but gender.