[ SECRET POST #3249 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3249 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 018 secrets from Secret Submission Post #464.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

DA. I'm actually kind of tired of fandom bringing up anatomy to argue against certain art ascetics because the point of style and design in art does not always come down to anatomy alone.

Like if we want to talk about the sexism of doing that to female characters and not the male ones, then sure, let's talk about that. But I don't think the solution is to tell artists to stop exaggerating and pushing shapes, especially when a lot of "correction" blogs I've seen actually end up making the poses stiff and boring (not to mention there are some people who aren't aware of what the human body can do/they themselves aren't that flexible so they assume others aren't.)

[(Anonymous)]

IA.

One of the corrections I really hate is the drawing of "realistic" waists. A lot of times, they completely eliminate the curves on female characters. Yes, female waists tend to be drawn much smaller than they are in real life, but a woman's waist still is usually smaller than her hips. Our torsos aren't completely shapeless.

Also, a lot of people really, really don't get how corsets work.

[(Anonymous)]

You can make exaggerated and interesting poses without drawing women like ridiculasly creepy sex dolls with giant boobs and cameltoes.
It can be done, I assure you.

[ketita]

Yeah, but on the other hand, it's amazing how many comics artists draw female characters in supposedly 'dynamic' poses which, once you correct the anatomy, are revealed to not be dynamic at all, just twisted.

I sometimes check out eschergirls, and while I agree that not all the corrections are really good, it's truly amazing how many comic books will have stolid dramatic male + helicopter waist female with boobs and butt everywhere.
To me that's already a sign of lack of creativity by the artist, especially when it's supposed to be a serious comic, or the artist doesn't seem to realize they're massively objectifying.

[(Anonymous)]

But as anon before was saying, cartoons are not going to have perfect anatomy and some of it WILL be very twisted. If we're going to start telling artists that they have to follow the rules of reality at all times, then we're setting very strict guidelines that I don't know I want to be a part of (I've always liked the fantasy of art myself.)

Critiquing someone's anatomy is fine if you can tell they made a mistake, but what if it was a conscious design choice?

But that's why I think it's okay to bring it up from a purely "it's sexist" perspective. There are ways of discussing this while still giving artists the ability to exaggerate. There are TONS of artists out there who exaggerate forms and break anatomy but their work never comes across as sexist, it's all about the type of symbols they use and how they draw a female form versus how they draw a male form. It's not all about their grasp of anatomy, that's only a very tiny piece of the puzzle.

[ketita]

I basically agree with you. I think I was getting at something a little different, which is where to me the sexism issue meets up with the question of anatomy critique.

For example, take the prevalence of the infamous boobs-and-butt pose. It's so ubiquitous, and appears in so many works across the age spectrum, including media for children and things which are probably not meant to be sexualized at all, that if I see an artist who draws a woman in a B&B post I am forced to question their ability. That pose often /does/ break anatomy, at least a little bit - so if an artist is simply replicating it without wondering, without even one brief moment of "wait...", without considering the audience and context of the work and asking if sexualization is appropriate - I think it DOES reflect badly on the artist.

I'm not talking about enforcing rules of reality. I have no problem with style. But blindly mimicking tired, sexualized female poses because that's what everybody does is not a 'style', it's laziness.

[(Anonymous)]

+10000

[sachiko_san]

You know what I've noticed about those "correction" blogs? The people redrawing the poses are beginners who themselves lack both the design and anatomical know-how to fix the original poses. One of the blogs even refuses to let anyone with more knowledge crit the redraws (I can't remember the name of it, but it is one of the more popular blogs).

Edit: it's eschergirls I was thinking of.

[(Anonymous)]

I've seen those as well and I think that's largely what I was thinking of with the stiff/boring drawings. The redraws never look any better then the original image.

Not to mention I personally don't like such strict conformity to realism, I like cartoony and exaggerated art. That doesn't mean I like sexist art, I just don't think the solution is to take away everything I enjoyed about an image for the sake of realism.

[sachiko_san]

IA. Anatomy is good and knowing your basics is a must, but then after a certain point, it's okay to start pushing your art to something more stylized and it's usually stressed to push your poses. That's partly why I like drawing females over males so much, it's much more fun to push their poses simply because they can be drawn rounder and curvier.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't know, I've never seen a male character bent in such a way that his ass, genitals, and chest are shown in the same shot. And I've certainly never seen a guy contorted in such a way that his exaggerated puffy testicles and penis don't press through his clothing like a sausage between two english muffins.

[ketita]

You see it sometimes in porn doujinshi, which it can be argued is an appropriate context for overt, crazy sexualization...

[(Anonymous)]

I know this is probably telling of what kind of stuff I'm into but uh...yeah, it's pretty easy to find that. Just look at any comics geared towards gay and bisexual men.

[(Anonymous)]

Whether the pose is technically physically possible is not really the point, in my mind. Just because you might be flexible enough to twist yourself into a certain pose doesn't mean you would, except to purposefully strike that pose. It's not how you woud hold your body while just standing around or while fighting. These kinds of compositions are not women caught in a candid moment but women intentionally posing for the viewer and I think it would help if everyone, including artists, were just honest with themselves that these drawings are meant to be titillating and objectifying first and foremost and not make up excuses. I can handle objectification just fine if people aren't trying to pretend that's not what they're doing.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

Oh yeah, definitely. The anatomy issue's more of a red herring in these types of discussion, so I hate when people try correcting stuff that's intentionally drawn that way. The discussion should focus more on the t&a shots being in places they don't fit or how prevalent it is than if it's breaking anatomy or not.

And people trying to hide behind, "no, it's actually supposed to empowering for busty bosom girl to walk around braless all the time," is frustrating too. Just be honest that you want to be titillated, that's all I need.