Originally posted by NemeBro
Or to explain it another way: "Since this superhero does not appeal to my notion of male beauty, it can't be a sexualized caricature".lol, what a joke.
Simmer down. The feminist argument is that super women are drawn as male sexual fantasies. The neckbeard counter argument is that 'male superheroes are sexualized as well so women have something to drool over as well!' This is a false equivalence because, on the whole, overdeveloped body builders are not the current standard of male beauty for the western world where most comics are sold. Thus, although both male characters and female characters are physically stylized, the type of distortion is absolutely not sexual in the same direction or to the same degree.
Yes, there are people for whom the comic book character is attractive. Hell, I could name at least two (gay, mostly porn) tumblrs featuring exclusively Comic characters. But to argue that there exists a set of people who finds that attractive is much different than to argue that the design is intended to entice or titilate. (MLP and the weirdly powerful effects of rule 34 show that things can be sexually appreciated even when not explicitly designed with sex appeal.)