Comments on: Sex and Death at Comic-Con http://blog.newsarama.com/2009/08/04/sex-and-death-at-comic-con/ The Blog@ Team and prominent comics personalities share what’s on their minds. Sat, 25 May 2013 03:49:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 By: Attlee Dunbar http://blog.newsarama.com/2009/08/04/sex-and-death-at-comic-con/comment-page-1/#comment-805147 Attlee Dunbar Wed, 10 Apr 2013 03:02:06 +0000 http://blog.newsarama.com/?p=12379#comment-805147 watch the newet movie scarymovie5 here: watch the newet movie scarymovie5 here:

]]> By: Doyle Lancelot http://blog.newsarama.com/2009/08/04/sex-and-death-at-comic-con/comment-page-1/#comment-805102 Doyle Lancelot Wed, 10 Apr 2013 02:25:21 +0000 http://blog.newsarama.com/?p=12379#comment-805102 hi,there hi,there

]]> By: Kyle Garret http://blog.newsarama.com/2009/08/04/sex-and-death-at-comic-con/comment-page-1/#comment-469026 Kyle Garret Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:17:43 +0000 http://blog.newsarama.com/?p=12379#comment-469026 Sarah, I really enjoy your blog entries. I think you raise a lot of issues that many comic book readers generally gloss over. But sometimes I think you try to use other sources as launching pads for discussions that don't actually have connections to said other source. This is what I mean: "I would say that what he’s critiquing here is not the sexualization of violence–anyone who’s seen Kill Bill or, well, any action movie, could tell you that sex and violence go hand in hand–but the way women are almost always cast as the victims of that violence." Which is perfectly fine, as far as your view of what the original article is saying, but then you say this: "Goldberg juxtaposes women wielding chainsaws (presumably, the blood they are covered in would be someone else’s) with women covered in (fake) wounds here without question, where in fact they’re two very different things, and I would go even further and say that it does matter whether the women covered in wounds are zombies or simply victims." That basically undermines what you open with. In other words, it goes against the idea that Goldberg is discussing women as victims. If that were the case, he wouldn't be doing what you say he does (juxtaposing the two). That said, I think YOUR thoughts are much more interesting than HIS. I suppose it's the nature of Blog@ that you need to reference an outside source to begin a discussion, but I think those outside sources tend to water down what you're saying -- and I really like what you're saying. OH! You're my new favorite blogger fyi Sarah, I really enjoy your blog entries. I think you raise a lot of issues that many comic book readers generally gloss over. But sometimes I think you try to use other sources as launching pads for discussions that don’t actually have connections to said other source.
This is what I mean:
“I would say that what he’s critiquing here is not the sexualization of violence–anyone who’s seen Kill Bill or, well, any action movie, could tell you that sex and violence go hand in hand–but the way women are almost always cast as the victims of that violence.”
Which is perfectly fine, as far as your view of what the original article is saying, but then you say this:
“Goldberg juxtaposes women wielding chainsaws (presumably, the blood they are covered in would be someone else’s) with women covered in (fake) wounds here without question, where in fact they’re two very different things, and I would go even further and say that it does matter whether the women covered in wounds are zombies or simply victims.”
That basically undermines what you open with. In other words, it goes against the idea that Goldberg is discussing women as victims. If that were the case, he wouldn’t be doing what you say he does (juxtaposing the two).
That said, I think YOUR thoughts are much more interesting than HIS. I suppose it’s the nature of Blog@ that you need to reference an outside source to begin a discussion, but I think those outside sources tend to water down what you’re saying — and I really like what you’re saying.
OH! You’re my new favorite blogger fyi

]]> By: Kyle Garret http://blog.newsarama.com/2009/08/04/sex-and-death-at-comic-con/comment-page-1/#comment-468992 Kyle Garret Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:14:05 +0000 http://blog.newsarama.com/?p=12379#comment-468992 Sarah, I really enjoy your blog entries. I think you raise a lot of issues that many comic book readers generally gloss over. But sometimes I think you try to use other sources as launching pads for discussions that don't actually have connections to said other source. This is what I mean: "I would say that what he’s critiquing here is not the sexualization of violence–anyone who’s seen Kill Bill or, well, any action movie, could tell you that sex and violence go hand in hand–but the way women are almost always cast as the victims of that violence." Which is perfectly fine, as far as your view of what the original article is saying, but then you say this: "Goldberg juxtaposes women wielding chainsaws (presumably, the blood they are covered in would be someone else’s) with women covered in (fake) wounds here without question, where in fact they’re two very different things, and I would go even further and say that it does matter whether the women covered in wounds are zombies or simply victims." That basically undermines what you open with. In other words, it goes against the idea that Goldberg is discussing women as victims. If that were the case, he wouldn't be doing what you say he does (juxtaposing the two). That said, I think YOUR thoughts are much more interesting than HIS. I suppose it's the nature of Blog@ that you need to reference an outside source to begin a discussion, but I think those outside sources tend to water down what you're saying -- and I really like what you're saying. Sarah, I really enjoy your blog entries. I think you raise a lot of issues that many comic book readers generally gloss over. But sometimes I think you try to use other sources as launching pads for discussions that don’t actually have connections to said other source.
This is what I mean:
“I would say that what he’s critiquing here is not the sexualization of violence–anyone who’s seen Kill Bill or, well, any action movie, could tell you that sex and violence go hand in hand–but the way women are almost always cast as the victims of that violence.”
Which is perfectly fine, as far as your view of what the original article is saying, but then you say this:
“Goldberg juxtaposes women wielding chainsaws (presumably, the blood they are covered in would be someone else’s) with women covered in (fake) wounds here without question, where in fact they’re two very different things, and I would go even further and say that it does matter whether the women covered in wounds are zombies or simply victims.”
That basically undermines what you open with. In other words, it goes against the idea that Goldberg is discussing women as victims. If that were the case, he wouldn’t be doing what you say he does (juxtaposing the two).
That said, I think YOUR thoughts are much more interesting than HIS. I suppose it’s the nature of Blog@ that you need to reference an outside source to begin a discussion, but I think those outside sources tend to water down what you’re saying — and I really like what you’re saying.

]]> By: Canuck http://blog.newsarama.com/2009/08/04/sex-and-death-at-comic-con/comment-page-1/#comment-468953 Canuck Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:50:44 +0000 http://blog.newsarama.com/?p=12379#comment-468953 Pictures? Pictures?

]]> By: Matthew M http://blog.newsarama.com/2009/08/04/sex-and-death-at-comic-con/comment-page-1/#comment-468945 Matthew M Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:57:26 +0000 http://blog.newsarama.com/?p=12379#comment-468945 "I’m no prude per se, but..." TRANSLATION: "I am a prude, and..." “I’m no prude per se, but…”

TRANSLATION: “I am a prude, and…”

]]> By: EvolutionAngel http://blog.newsarama.com/2009/08/04/sex-and-death-at-comic-con/comment-page-1/#comment-468940 EvolutionAngel Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:07:28 +0000 http://blog.newsarama.com/?p=12379#comment-468940 I agree with the differences between zombie/vampire flicks and "torture porn" ones. (Although I do site the end of Hostel 2 as a slight rebuttal of gender roles, which actually is an extreme metaphor for feminism). The fact is that I don't think that anyone in that booth really took to mind the consideration of zombie women vs. women as victims. I think it was simply a "we need our booth babes to stand out." And it was a slasher film booth I mean really don't expect that much thought going into anything :/ I agree with the differences between zombie/vampire flicks and “torture porn” ones. (Although I do site the end of Hostel 2 as a slight rebuttal of gender roles, which actually is an extreme metaphor for feminism). The fact is that I don’t think that anyone in that booth really took to mind the consideration of zombie women vs. women as victims. I think it was simply a “we need our booth babes to stand out.” And it was a slasher film booth I mean really don’t expect that much thought going into anything :/

]]>