I rip rock and gravel when I time travel

Let’s just start with the obvious. Guillem March is not a bad artist. While most of the work he produces is not to my liking, on a technical level is he’s quite competent and can product some lovely pages. But let’s also start with another obvious fact, Catwoman #0 displays a lack of key artistic skill - an understanding of basic skill of human anatomy.

It’s a fact that women’s bodies don’t work that way. The cover has already has art mocking it. But the cover’s lack of recognition of the basics of anatomy is not the problem.

And this isn’t just a problem of the cover being highly sexualized and exploitative, which it is and which March’s work is known for (although he seems to have other thoughts on that issue - mildy NSFW).

And it’s not just the problem of how men vs. women are portrayed in comics. This despite the concept of “boobs don’t work that way” or, the brokeback, or as in this case, “asses don’t work that way” is a familiar meme in comics to the point that more than a few websites have popped up to illustrate them. And despite that the discussion of the inequality of how male vs. female characters of portrayed in comics has happened many, many times.

And it can’t be the problem of “but comics are for men and men need the sexy to buy female led comics” argument. If so then how come Batgirl, Batwoman and Wonder Woman, without having wonky asses and unzipped tops, have been the best selling female led comics from DC for the last 9 months? And why do so many men also complain about covers like this?

And it can’t be the problem of “how do you show a sexy character without being sexy?” Catwoman is sexy. But she also has been drawn as sexy and with two buttocks of the same size for many decades. Catwoman being a sexy character isn’t the problem. So what is the problem?

Read More