It would be ridiculous, which I why I wasn't talking about feeling anxious about whether someone you find attractive will like you. Rather, I was referring to the internal conflict over whether finding someone attractive amounts to objectifying them- the instances where men blame themselves for finding a woman…

It's not about enjoying sexualised entertainment or not. The problem is the leering article. And your objectifying view of sexualised entertainment. There are no objects of desire in sexualised entertainment. They're are people, who may be desired. Being a person who is desired is great. Being an object which s…

You've only removed here agency because you are thinking in terms of how she is a victim of something terrible. Instead considering patriarchy in terms of how the actions of others affect her, you only approaching her as an object of oppression.

Which is of no relevance. The point here is about how other people treat her.

The problem is not being sexy or, per se, having sexuality represented. It is others thinking she is their sexual plaything, an object for them to leer at, to enjoy, at the expense of her agency. Her sexuality is beside the point. She could be a porn star any the given problem of sexism would still apply. Her…

The problem is you think that's an issue. She does not owe you any presentation of depths. If she wants to describe her multi-tiered partying routine, she can. You are advocating sexist bullshit because you are using whatever a woman talks about to excuse for sexist behaviour of the press.

The point is whether you particular care for knowing if someone is anything. Rather the question is whether you care enough to treat queer people with respect in the context of talking about their idenity.

No, it's not. A minority is just a smaller number. "Abnormal" is a normative judgement. People use when referring to someone considered outside the sort of state which makes up a catergoy, in this case humans. It's to say someone doesn't meet the nature they are expected to (and should be).

You are disputing its value though, for when someone tries to laud art for that reason, you act like they are not talking about art anymore. You outright stated that such a metric has no place in judging the quality of art.

Sorry for taking while to get back to you; I've been rather busy.

What do forms institutionalised sexism and bigotry take and what changes need to be made to address them? How does the capitalist system represent the upper class and what would the more inclusive organisation look like?

People aren't doing that. Rather, they are valuing art for how it is an expression of ideas, representation and experiences, which have a relationship to the social environment and politics.

I'd consider that part of my point. Is it any mystery as to why some people would give greater value to book for exploring particular representations and progressive themes? Progressive bona fides are part of a work. It's no more absurd than calling something quality for its characters, plot or world-building. The…

I think people are rightly concerned about "different" comics being dismissed because the break with a particular style or focus on a different set of ideas. Bitch Planet or Pretty Deadly, for example, are more or less presented n the style of a superhero comic, but their narrative interests lie elsewhere. They aren't…

Sandman is a distant series. It doesn't really throw you into the lives of characters for very long. In many ways, it sort of about what we know through and in stories, rather than the lived experience of anyone's (well, any mortal's at least) life. I mean is genius for doing this, it's almost like you are one of the…

Saga sort of has a "glamour." The extensive world and characters make it appear like it's a complex exploration of a world with lots of differing interests and strong phenomena, but's really just a straightforward space opera with likeable characters. On the surface, it appears much deeper than it actually is, and…

I've only read the first volume of Bitch Planet and Pretty Deadly, where an interest in something other than superheroes is sort of the point, so I can't really comment on how she fits with Captain Marvel.

It's pretty "ugly." I adjusted to it within a few pages, but it's always feels sort of prickly. Everything is sort of flat and drab, grey, brown and black almost everywhere, with colours that hardly differ in saturation. I don't mind it in a comic, but it's not something I'd be inclined to stick on the wall to look at.

Nope. "Sexualised depications," your definition seems to include any instance of lesbians where there is focus on sex, are actually important. People like to see representations of their sexuality. "Girl on girl action" is sort of important if we are giving lesbian sexuality a place in our values and society.

You are wrong. What you are doing here is almost the equivalent of the "noble savage" for lesbians, namely reducing them to paragons of virtue in representation, as if we had to say lesbians were always perfect and good to represent them well.