Male vs female gaze rule

Women have differing tastes. Men on the other hand all like the same.

Just like many women don't like extreme muscley figures many men don't like extreme hourglass figures.

Not all women are the same. Not all men are the same either. Claiming otherwise is sexist in both cases.

I feel like your strawman missed the point. No one claimed all men or women are the same, and literally no one said "Women have differing tastes. Men on the other hand all like the same." (or even tried to make that point)...
- Did I misunderstand the post?
  
  The point seemed to be that sexualization of men and women is different because not all women like the typical sexualized ~~male~~ man (as per the example given). That being different implies that men do all like the typical sexualized woman. Which is wrong.
  
  (edit: just realized I did a reverse menandfemales)
what are you quoting? are there more images in this post and my client's just showing me the first one?
- It's not a real quote. It's the meaning I understood this post to imply.
  
  (My interpretation was already challenged by @Crozekiel below.)
Everyone is sexist and it's OK.

Permanently Deleted

Yeah, but this is about women in media, using men as an example.

If the male power fantasy is problematic, is not the topic of the comic. At least that is designed for men, but women don't get anything designed for them. That's the issue
Unpopular opinion in this thread, but I'm not convinced that women don't like guys who are in shape. It's not like Chris Hemsworth and Jason Mamoa are overly-muscled body builder types. I'm sure some women like femboys and dad-bods but that doesn't seem to be the majority

Imo an important point to add is that sexualized characters aren't inherently bad. It's only bad when all or nearly all characters are sexualized. I like media with hot dudes, chicks, and everyhting else, but if all characters from 1 group are sexualized, then it gets weird

There was an Oglaf comic where the aliens noticed that the lobsteroid males looked like lobsters, while the lobsteroid women looked like hot human females in a sexy lobster suit. Same for the bee people, the bear people, the tree people. All the females looked like sexy humans.

They concluded that they had to team up and kill all the humans.
- Aliens in an Oglaf comic?
Exactly. Every character depiction is intentional. Sexualizing a character is not inherently bad, but it's clear what the point is when it's done.

If you are only sexualizing one type of character, then you are showing bias towards viewers. When this becomes the norm for most art in a society, it says that type of character (and the people it represents) is primarily there for sexual gratification. And when you do that to women, you create a culture where women are objectified as sex objects and little else is given value. It's inherently reducing a major population into nothing more than the desires of the dominant. I.e. oppression, and specifically in this case: the patriarchy.

It’s only bad when all or nearly all characters are sexualized.

I wouldn't even go that far. If you look into porn or porn games you'll see nearly every character sexualized in different ways depending on the intended audience. Romance novels are an example as well. And when the point of the media is titillation and sexual gratification; that's both good and expected.
It's only bad when all or nearly all characters are sexualized

I will not tolerate trash talk of Golden Wind
- I guess I should add the caveat that if the point is that they're supposed to be sexualized, it's a different situation. I have no idea what the golden wind is, but I assume that's part of it.
Agree on your last sentence. I think one of the big problems is that women as a whole are disproportionately over sexualized and when they are sexualized, it tends to be a lot more blatant.

There absolutely are plenty of works of media where male and female characters are both sexualized. But there's also many where only the female characters are notably sexualized (or are so damn heavily sexualized that the sexualization of the male characters pales in comparison).
but if all characters from 1 group are sexualized, then it gets weird

The castanics from TERA would like a word with you.

A comic strip using false equivalence to allege false equivalence... 🤔

The irony is palpable.

Also: Compare Chris Hemsworth (who usually stars in movies made primarily for men) with Robert Pattinson (Twilight, among other movies that he's less ashamed of).

But, let's not pretend that the Schwarzeneggers and Hemsworths (and male-targeted comic books) don't fuck up male body image. Sure it's a power fantasy, but for most men it's not attainable (in part because a lot of (if not most) of these action movie stars take PEDs ... I mean I guess normal people can take PEDs, too, but they shouldn't, it's quite unhealthy). Especially if we consider how much modern western society promotes behaviors that make people obese.

Patriarchy and objectification harm everyone? Like, can you think of someone who says otherwise? The problem is that when someone says "This comic is not for me because it objectifies someone like me" is usually the only circumstance that others respond "it objectifies someone like me too!" Like yeah, you maybe should have thought of complaining about that, rather than using that rebuttal as an attempt to stop the conversation.

To go along with this comic we have to imagine that women are not attracted to fit men. And while it is true that some women like femboys or dadbods, that is not the majority. A significant number of straight women are attracted to guys with gym bods. If that's correct, then this wouldn't be a false equivalence since both genders are being sexualized unrealistically.

Instead of calling it a false equivalence, I think the point could be made more diplomatically by stating that two wrongs don't make a right.

Yeah. Very bad comic.

Remember men, even if it was written by men for men, it has to also appeal to women. You are not allowed a space, and your sexuality need to be shamed.

I don't know if you deliberately or accidentally missed the point. Sure, things can be made for men, but when everything's made for men that's a problem.
- There's also the fact that things being made for men is so normalized that nobody bats an eye if a video game or movie only has prominent male characters. Society often treats such works as if they were gender neutral. But if you create a work that's all women, society tends to treat it as "for women only", toxic masculinity often treats such works as a no-go for men, and many people are much more critical towards them.
  
  It doesn't even have to be as blatant as all characters being the same gender. In general, society tends to default to male dominated everything and can often even view being 50/50 as "women are taking over".
  
  Even on the internet, people tend to default to male pronouns. Or when giving a hypothetical, they tend to default to male characters.
  
  All these kinda things lead up to media that also skews for men.
Won't somebody think of the men.
- This but unironically