Re: [HOE] Urban Renewal cover [Shane, Hopler, et al]

["Poetic" <poetic@iprimus.com.au>]

> | i noticed no one complained about the scantily clad muscular males
> depicted
> | on covers e.g. rascals varmints and critters..just as much male flesh
> shown
> | there
>
> That's an abomination, virtually an animal.  Whole different ball o' wax.
>
> B. D. Flory

so if they put a set of horns on her head or a tail or gave her an animal
head her nudity would be fine?? that just seems riduculous. the "creature"
on RV&C is still obviously male and an objectification of male physique. No
one complains because the male body is acceptable while the female form is
not? i personally think in fantasy (yes that does include horror, westerns
and comic books) the human form both female and male is naturally going to
be emphasied and or enhanced- it is what is expected of "heroes". Would Cole
Ballad be anywhere near as cool if they had depicted him looking like an
accountant with shirt always on? the exposure of flesh adds to the graphics.
In the case of the UR cover the woman is depicted in such a way to add
impact to the situation...and lets not forget this is an adult themed world.
look at the dallas theater for example...sex is very much a part of the way
of the wasted west. People are trying to survive and to do that people rely
on the more animal instincts.

anyway sorry to rant but i just cant believe people find her position so
offensive,

Mashal Of Oz