Nicotine
There could be an important exchange during the incident, or a way one or both of the characters react. Maybe I was thinking too much about my story, but the movie "Lust, Caution" [en.wikipedia.org] comes to mind. There are a lot of sexual scenes in it between the two main characters, but there is a rape scene that is very pivotal to the story because of the way the characters react during it. It's hard to explain, but I think a rape scene can tell a lot if you're revealing something about the story or the characters involved in it.

JustNoPoint
When Nicotine mentioned important things during a rape scene I figured she meant something that later the audience would know as evidence for the detective to find. A certain injury during the struggle. A mouse grabbing a wrapper from the assailant. Something like that.

Why would you even assume that nothing important could happen during a rape scene? I mean, I could understand not wanting to sit through one, but there's still a wide variety of stuff that could happen, right...? (And I was thinking something along the line of "character reactions" as well. Then again, I've seen "Lust, Caution" ^_^)

The thing is, not all the times, but a lot of times I think that the author is using sex scenes and nudity as fanservice and nothing more, so it tends to drag the story and ends up being entirely pointless or poorly handled.

I don't mind sex scenes for the sake of it, but I do think that is better when they serve a purpose into the story.

Speaking only in my personal case, I have no plans to include explicit sex anytime soon. Not because I have a moral issue, but because I wouldn't know where to fit it on the current storylines that I have planed for Shaman Quest without it look kinda forced and out of nowhere.

About rape, I probably wouldn't ever use it as plot. Mostly because I don't think I could pull out a good story or handle being able to handle it properly. Hell, it irks me how some writers use it so lightly...

On one hand it would only appear in like 5 panels and could be taken out with zero consequence to the story, but on the other I want to challenge the "norm" of webcomics and break free of this certain stigma around it. I am still hesitant though...precisely because of this stigma.

This voices my own thoughts on the subject, regarding my own webcomic. I also had a semi-controversial (controversial to a total of 3-4 people, basically) "sex scene" which I added in while I was drawing the originally bland script.

My original motivation was "I want to do something more fun/fresh/innovative." Ofc, it then has to pass my "Does this help the story?" self-reflective litmus test. After I ruminated on the thumbnails, I concluded that it does, and then cheerfully went ahead to draw it.

It may be only a couple of ppl who saw the "controversy" in it, but boy were they passionate in their opinion. OMG, mlai denigrates women. OMG, mlai just destroyed his own characters/story/comic. You'd think if it was that severe, that everybody would agree I am stupid and those pages are trash. No, other readers of either gender are fine with the scene and can vocalize on how/why the scene contributed to the chapter/story/characters, sometimes better than I can.

And yet, in my other comic, a large man beats a defenseless girl very graphically, for I think 2-3 pages straight, until her nose is broken, her teeth are falling out, both her eyes are swollen shut, and she's basically unconscious and dying. Her skull is probably fractured. Literally. I **** you not. But there's no nudity. Guess what, zero complaints.

If it's a rape-like situation, OMG you just denigrated the woman. Why? She's the victim. Are you blaming the victim? Why would you lose your respect for the woman if she was the victim?

OMG you've shown the male character, the perpetrator, is cowardly scum. Hmm, so you couldn't figure that out 20 pages back when he's literally kissing the villain's boots (voluntarily) asking the villain to forgive him?

It's definitely an irrational, ingrained stigma. A reader with the stigma loses focus, and starts interpreting your story in an entirely different way. This cannot be stopped no matter how good you are, because a novel/comic is the interaction between the author and the reader, and what comes out of that synthesis is the actual story. You, the author, cannot dictate how the reader's mind will interpret what you have given him.

Abt_Nihil

JustNoPoint
When Nicotine mentioned important things during a rape scene I figured she meant something that later the audience would know as evidence for the detective to find. A certain injury during the struggle. A mouse grabbing a wrapper from the assailant. Something like that.

That's logical; I meant that as well.

Abt_Nihil
Why would you even assume that nothing important could happen during a rape scene? I mean, I could understand not wanting to sit through one, but there's still a wide variety of stuff that could happen, right...? (And I was thinking something along the line of "character reactions" as well. Then again, I've seen "Lust, Caution" ^_^)

Haha, yes, this is what I was thinking, and you probably understand because you have seen that movie.

To me, "Lust, Caution" is the perfect example of how you could incorporate many sexual scenes and still have them *all* be important to the story. Sure, there was one scene that I thought could be a little shorter. But there is a meaning behind every one of them, that if you did cut them out you would lose a lot of info in the story.

mlai
It's definitely an irrational, ingrained stigma. A reader with the stigma loses focus, and starts interpreting your story in an entirely different way. This cannot be stopped no matter how good you are, because a novel/comic is the interaction between the author and the reader, and what comes out of that synthesis is the actual story. You, the author, cannot dictate how the reader's mind will interpret what you have given him.

Right, you can edit yourself all you want, but people will still take issue with *something* depending on who they are. It reminds me of Iris Murdoch's philosophy; people form answers to questions because of their lives and environments before they are even presented with a question to answer. If some people see something out of the ordinary or uncomfortable to them (nudity, sex, whatever), then they become impatient with the story and criticize the things that make them uncomfortable relentlessly. I think this is more annoying when it comes to webcomics because most webcomics are ongoing projects; you spend more time waiting for pages and for the story to develop! You won't get an instant answer to why something graphic occurred a lot of the time, but a lot of the times (as in my comic), the answer to or reaction to major events are revealed long after they happen.

Nico
You won't get an instant answer to why something graphic occurred a lot of the time, but a lot of the times (as in my comic), the answer to or reaction to major events are revealed long after they happen.

Ha ha, yes now I can use this excuse as well. Because after writing my previous post regarding the inflated reaction to my scene, I had a brainstorm and added new dialog to my script, which connects a much-later significant event to this scene in my script. It's as if I planned it all in advance!

Don't you love it when that happens?

Some of the previous posters have pretty much summed up my views on this. I do think that it's pretty silly that American pop culture takes such a nervous approach to the depiction of sex. It's pretty screwed up that a movie gets a PG-13 when it depicts a decapitation while another one gets threatened with an NC-17 on account of showing a woman's nipple.

I know this isn't exactly a novel viewpoint, but this likely stems from how much of this country was founded by Puritans. One of their core values was that our genitals were vile things and that we should be ashamed of everything we do with them. Remnants of this reverberate in our society to this day.

With that said, I don't put any nudity or sex in Air Raid Robertson. I don't think that I ever will. I just don't really see it as that kind of a webcomic. When I began drawing it I decided that I was going to avoid sex scenes, profanity, and extreme forms of violence. These things were present in most of my older comic book work and I was beginning to suspect that I wasn't capable of getting the attention of an audience without using boobs, dirty words, and gore as gimmicks.

I found myself pleased that Air Raid Robertson was able to attract some feedback without resorting to baser devices. And, because of this, I have kept it clear of such things. Whenever I get an itch to do a sex joke, however, I always have The Capital of Helsinki.

Skullbie
So my question is:
Why do I not see this in webcomics? With all the freedom the internet has most webcomics seem to be split on adult content, with those containing absolutely no nudity and then those who focus entirely on sex. There's really no limitations on the net unlike published works who have to worry about getting a spot on bookshelfs after being flagged MA.

Is it a no-no to include nudity or sex scenes? If so why?

The thing is with mainstream American culture... they are ok with violence ,but hate sex. Also Americans are very protective of their American youth. Children and pornography can't be together in anyway. So thus this is reflected in webcomics. It has to be completely one way or the other.


Yet despite all this, I have read webcomics that are not pornography yet have nudity. Two Moons have full frontal nudity. Monkey Pot has sex scenes (I'd have to check again for nudity).

Also my webcomics have nudity ,but no sex.

I think people tend to blow this violence-sex double standard thing way out of proportion. Remember, TV and movie ratings are not value assessments. They're not saying that because you can show someone being shot on daytime television, but can't show boobies that boobies are worse than gun violence. It's based on what the audience is going to be able to process. Most kids by their early teen years have some rudimentary understanding of death and war and all that bad stuff, so showing it (in a sanitized fashion) is generally okay in a PG-13 movie (graphic gory stuff is still relegated to Restricted status). But they probably can't process too many graphically sexual or titillating images in a healthy manner at that age, and yes also their parents would be uncomfortable with it. But it's not the same as saying we find more virtue in murder than lovemaking.

Also, other than that obviously, I more or less agree with what's already been said here. You can't get away with too much sex in American mainstream comics and still be considered "mainstream." Even if you do put a lot of work into characters and story and stuff, people will just consider your work to be porn. It's probably something to do with our literary/art traditions here but I'm not a lit scholar. All I know is when I think of classical European art, there's lots of naked people but with American art... not so much.

Western classics are full of sexual themes. I remember The Canterbury Tales being pretty graphic in depictions of sexual escapades. Ofc, we needed our English teacher to decipher the language for us before we understood it.

But another thing that makes comics more sensitive than books, is that we are illustrated.

mlai
...But another thing that makes comics more sensitive than books, is that we are illustrated.

Hmmm, yunno that's probably a big part of why women's porn of choice ("romance" novels) is considered mainstream and openly displayed on book racks everywhere, while men's porn of choice is sold behind the counter and stowed away in dark corners. I guess somehow it's more vulgar if you show it than if you say it?

El Cid

mlai
...But another thing that makes comics more sensitive than books, is that we are illustrated.

Hmmm, yunno that's probably a big part of why women's porn of choice ("romance" novels) is considered mainstream and openly displayed on book racks everywhere, while men's porn of choice is sold behind the counter and stowed away in dark corners. I guess somehow it's more vulgar if you show it than if you say it?

Haha yeah, there's like a whole bookcase of harlequin novels in almost every barnes and nobles, and any thrift store with books has to have a section for them. (because there's so many). The covers can get pretty risque but there's never on nudity on them aside from a male butt. Most of them just have a bulky guy picking up a woman in a dress whose face you can't see. (i.e.; you!)

I wonder if this has something to do with younger males being more inclined to pick those magazines up as opposed to young girls?

mlai
Ha ha, yes now I can use this excuse as well. Because after writing my previous post regarding the inflated reaction to my scene, I had a brainstorm and added new dialog to my script, which connects a much-later significant event to this scene in my script. It's as if I planned it all in advance!

Don't you love it when that happens?

Haha, well, I think it's a good storytelling technique. I don't like to give everything away at once, I'd rather rip people away mid-explaination sometimes and pull everything together later.

El_Cid
But they probably can't process too many graphically sexual or titillating images in a healthy manner at that age, and yes also their parents would be uncomfortable with it.

I think you could make the same argument the other way though; I don't know if they can process people getting stabbed graphically or shot in the head at that age healthily either. I see what you're trying to say, but I don't agree with the reasoning.

El Cid

mlai
...But another thing that makes comics more sensitive than books, is that we are illustrated.

Hmmm, yunno that's probably a big part of why women's porn of choice ("romance" novels) is considered mainstream and openly displayed on book racks everywhere, while men's porn of choice is sold behind the counter and stowed away in dark corners. I guess somehow it's more vulgar if you show it than if you say it?

I agree with this; I think people just don't want to see such situations drawn out, but obviously, in comics they are.

About the romance novels, haha that's so true! I work in a library, and before we had a whole section just for those books. But about half a year ago, the library's head librarians decided that we would take the red "R" for "Romance" stickers off the books, then re-shelve them in the "general population" of books. So maybe that sort of sexual content is being more accepted.

Also, in high school, I read numerous books with sexual content for my English classes like "The Joy Luck Club" (rape) and "Equus" (zoophilia).

Nicotine
I think you could make the same argument the other way though; I don't know if they can process people getting stabbed graphically or shot in the head at that age healthily either. I see what you're trying to say, but I don't agree with the reasoning.

Keep in mind though that you're talking about GRAPHIC depictions of these violent acts, which generally won't make it into a PG-13 film (unless it's in a fantastical setting). The stuff you described is more likely to end up in the Restricted bin.

And really, I'm not even sure that a lot of adults can healthily process the type of imagery in some of the more bloodthirsty R-rated nasties that have come out over the years. But there does come an age when you should be free to do harmful things to yourself, physically and mentally, if you choose to!

Gunwallace
Nudity is hard to do with Playmobil toys, so that limits me somewhat. ;-)

I suspect sprite comics have similar issues, and since they make up a large proportion of webcomics ... ?

There are graphic sprite comics you'd be surprised what you can do with a little judicious editing.

And I have seen sexually graphic Lego comics. I guess it depends on what you're capable of building. However, it's done for laughs. I can imagine a Lego fetish comic. I wouldn't put it past some people.

Then of course there's the huge world of action figure comics and they can get very graphic. There's plenty of porn and S&M and the like with action figures going back to an old story with Barbie and Ken in the first issues of Heavy Metal. Adding the missing bits is easily done with basic sculpting skills. People prove that on ebay from time to time by selling anatomically corrected Ken dolls.

I do buckets of nudity because that's the genre I work in. Graphic exploitation movies. I put in all those hours of work into creating those custom chests for the figures I show some women figures topless. I'm just showing off how I've customized the figures.

In the same vein there have been comic artists who after careers of doing traditional work did a bunch of nudity laden stories for more adult venues because they wanted to show off their anatomy skills. Drawing clothes is easy. Drawing and painting nude bodies is hard.

bravo1102
Drawing clothes is easy. Drawing and painting nude bodies is hard.

hah !
i cant draw clothes , always looks like a pile of rags . thats part of the reason i tend to draw a lot of nudity. the sexual stuff is just because im a perv

I also tend to put gratuitous nudity and sex in my comics.

I was using PW, having some success advertising and still earning a few dollars a day. But I couldn't find out how far I could go. Early this year they deleted my ad boxes and those of a few other sites, because of the mild adult content.

Well, they may not be the most profitable system, but almost nobody else will accept me, that is, that will not make me display tacky porno ads.

Unfortunately the hypocrisy of Paypal and ad networks makes me think and consider repeatedly how I want my next webcomic site to be.

Clothing is not easy; nudity is much easier. That's why superheroes are drawn with skintight spandex. Their only article of "clothing" are capes, which is a simple piece of fabric with only one or two tension points, like a simple curtain.

bravo1102
Drawing clothes is easy. Drawing and painting nude bodies is hard.

In what universe? o_O
Anything you draw a lot of gets easier than anything you don't draw a lot of, as a general rule, but most really good figure artists always start off with a nude body no matter what sort of clothes go on the end result.

Clothes are FAR and a away more inherently difficult than any nude body though- Bodies always have the same shapes, simply seen from different angles and folded into different configurations. Thie textures and colours stay the same too. Clothes change constantly depending on what the body does beneath and the fabrics and textures are something it can take a very long time to master.
There's a good reason all traditional superheros were basically just naked bodies with outfits painted on. -Sex sells, sure, but it's also a lot simpler than drawing proper clothes.
...
What Mlai said! He's Quicker.

inkdolls
I also tend to put gratuitous nudity and sex in my comics.

I was using PW, having some success advertising and still earning a few dollars a day. But I couldn't find out how far I could go. Early this year they deleted my ad boxes and those of a few other sites, because of the mild adult content.

Yup! That's what I've been saying. It limits your options commercially.

Just because I don't draw doesn't mean I can't.

I must be some sort of mutant because through all my years in art school and the rest I found clothed people so much easier to draw than nudes! Yes, that stupid shit that does photocomics has an art degree and won all kinds of awards back in the day and some stupid shit art teacher had him convinced he had talent.

Clothes can be broken down into basic shapes so much more easily than a nude figure. You can rough a dressed figure as seven or eight rectangles, just add the wrinkles and poof you're done! You can't do that with a nude.

You know how much detail has to be done into a nude figure? How much blending and smoothing of contours? Drawing a figure in Renaissance plate armor is easier for me. I can do full Napoleonic uniform and equipment easier than a naked guy and that's after thousands of hours of studio work drawing people and studying anatomy.

So don't jump down my throat because I can do something you know it alls can't.

Maybe things are a little different in classic oil painting classes, but this is a comic book forum, and we're all talking about comic book art.

And in serial illustration format, nude is easier than clothes. That's not an opinion. That is a fact held industry-wide.

You can talk about your classical training all you want, but maybe you should post up some of your paintings before you talk about all the awards you've won.

I actually found myself agreeing with bravo1102. I'm certainly not saying I'm getting either "right" - naked persons and clothed persons -, or that I'm particularly great at anatomy. But I do find clothed people easier to draw. The folds and the way the clothes look is based mostly on coincidence (that is, a lot of variables having to do with the environment a person is in, and the way the person has just moved before you "take the picture" - but none of which can easily be traced back from that one picture, and thus be scrutinized for their accuracy), while anatomy isn't. Anatomy errors are far easier to spot than errors in depicting clothing.

Ozoneocean is certainly right - you have to sort of draw a nude person before drawing the clothes over them. But of course I don't bother drawing the complete nude person, once I know they're going to end up with clothes over them - it will rather just be the basic shapes of the body. I find I have more leeway in the latter case.

I find myself redrawing pictures of naked people a lot. Not so much in the case of pictures of clothed people.

bravo1102
So don't jump down my throat because I can do something you know it alls can't.

I'm not a know it all here Bravo, I'm not jumping down your throat and I can draw any fabric draping any body in any position you care to name. I am a classically trained artist with two decades experience in the field and many years in art school and university. I only speak from knowledge gained from first hand experience :)

Drawing and painting armour (plate) is much the same and even a little easy than drawing nudes because the shapes are even more rigid and constant. I love doing armour.

Yes, getting a generalised look of fabric and giving it a generalised look and form related to the body underneath it isn't too hard because you can fudge things very easily. It can be a wonderful way to hide problems you're having with a pose or angle too...
But, if you want to be more accurate things get very much more tricky. Properly reflecting the shape of a posed or angled body beneath different styles of garment can be a real challenge, sometimes impossible to do from imagination due to the unpredictability of the shapes that that particular garment will form, depending on what that garment is.
Additionally the textures of different fabrics are very individual and complex in the way they work with things like light and most especially how they drape and pull when loose, tight, stretched or compressed- Leather, Velvet, velveteen, canvas, twill, tweed, satin, suede, PVC, denim- none of these work the same. Even the way they hold water, sweat, dirt, dust etc. All very different.
That's why it's often easier to pretend everything is made of cotton or Lycra etc.

I have an easier time drawing clothed people than nudes, because I've done it more. Not that I draw with any type of detailed realism. I kinda know general shapes and proportions thanks to my cloudy memory of tenth grade art. I'm classically trained -- in biology. (I taught anatomy once. I can name human bones and muscles, but drawing them is beyond my scope of knowledge.)

Of course, no one at my artistic level has any business trying to draw a sex scene. (Although I fear I've seen such horrific attempts.) Just putting in a completely unqualified POV. I generally have an easier time drawing things I draw a lot, regardless of difficulty level.

Drawing clothing can be difficult. Getting all those folds and creases is a lot tougher than one would initially think. I own a peacoat that is roughly comparable to what my main character wears and I occasionally pose in front of a mirror when I'm not sure about something. It helps when you aren't certain about how the fabric of a coat will crease if a character bends their arm a certain way.

The previous posters are correct in their assertion of superhero costumes. Those guys are essentially tinted naked people with the genitals airbrushed away. I remember being really weirded out by the cover image for Marvel's recent Strange Tales anthology and not knowing why.

And then, it suddenly hit me. "That guy is drawing superhero costumes in a manner that implies that they are made out of some kind of textile! Wow, nobody ever does that!"

I was then reminded of Frank Miller complaining about how drawing superhero books had left him ill-prepared for doing other genres. He said something along the lines of "An artist can spend their entire career doing superhero comics without ever having to draw a proper pair of pants!"

My characters are completely naked at all times. I only draw their little bits when it's integral to the stupid joke i've written.

A lot of great discussion here!

The choice of depicting sex or nudity is entirely cultural and a decision to either go with or against one's cultural upbringing. The thing is, English is the language of business and as the most powerful English-speaking business nation, I think American ratings tend to be applied.

The decision to show nudity and sex depends on one's storytelling style. A story that tends to be very blunt and direct is more appropriate for nudity and sex scenes. A story that uses more symbolism or use of context is probably better suited for implied scenes. Let's not forget that things can get far spicier or horrifying the more we apply our imaginations.

For example, for an attractive character that usually dresses very conservatively, suddenly flashing just a bit more flesh -- no genitalia, just a more revealing outfit -- can provide more titillation than a character who's naked half the time and wears little the other half. Sure, the latter character provides more fan service but the former has more impact. It's the same where a comic that regularly showcases blood and gore vs. one that rarely depicts graphic violence.

Other elements that one should consider before depicting sexual content:
* What is your career path? Would a comic with questionable content according to who you will be working with hurt you? Are you going to be working in the same culture forever?
* Keep in mind that just about everything can be tied down to its source. Anything you publish will be out there for keeps. Would you be comfortable having people know you did that comic 20 years from now?
* WHY do you want to include sexual content? Is it important to the story (and if it's romantic, the answer could very well be "yes")? Is it an artist statement (where nudity and sex is fine but violence and swearing isn't)? If it's just to grab attention or a marketing tool consider the limitations that will also apply.
* Exactly how much do you know about sex? If you're not experienced, implying sex and letting people's imagination take over might work out better. There's a whole section in TV Tropes about "You Fail Sex-Ed Forever"...

Just realized I didn't actually answer for Super Temps, and in an old review someone questioned why I had scantly clad characters yet censored the swearing.

First, there are two ways to approach a super-hero parody. Either put inappropriate figures in the same costumes, or put attractive figures in and make jokes about how terrible the costumes are. I went for the latter because the whole basis of the comic required a cute lead. And also Super Temps parodies more than just super-hero conventions, which is why Jackie is quite qualified to be a super, yet officially is just a sidekick.

Second, implied swearing is just funnier than actual swearing. I can get really creative if I want to.

As far as actually depicting sex and nudity goes, Super Temps is read by a wide range of audiences and the majority are in the U.S.A. so nudity is always straight out. I associate myself directly with Super Temps as well, so again -- for career reasons, I can make it racy but nothing that couldn't be shown on early evening TV.

I also think sex itself is pretty funny though... there's lots and lots and lots of things that can go WRONG during sex, and like the swearing, merely implying it is more creative and more entertaining than explicitly stating it... and I can still show it to people without worry, because I can always imply they're just being dirty when they take a statement the wrong way. So there may be implied sexual gags in Super Temps, but nothing ever graphic or blunt.

I rather leave the sex scenes up to the reader's imagination....
I would draw them embracing then turn out the lights then next would be sunrise lol.

I find it funny that I'm doing A rated comics with nudity and sex when my sister and parents are under the incorrect impression that I'm a prude.
I'm all for tasteful sexual content in stories. By tasteful I mean NOT SHOVED INTO MY EYES EVERY FIVE MINUTES WITHOUT A LOGICAL REASON. I just don't like it being used when it doesn't progress anything. I'm fed up with it. I'm not repulsed or aroused. It bores me to RAGE!
Might have something to do with my probable asexuality, though.
As for nudity, it annoys me that it's usually geared towards sex.
When is your average person usually naked? When they're changing clothes or cleaning themselves. Not everybody is nude during sex, either.
Nudity is just the character not wearing as many if not any clothes. Simple as that.