[ 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)]

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