>>149106505
It's not even porn, it's "older superhero comics". Even as far back as the 70s, the default standard of sexiness, how women were drawn, the costumes, poses, etc, set the bar at a level of default expectations that even when modern comics try, they just can't reach. So you get stuff like this where a casual will look at it, and think it's exactly the same as comic book cheesecake used to be, and ask why fans aren't satisfied, when it's just soulless and hollow compared with the way things were. They're just going through the motions and acting like that's enough, but they're not really allowed to go all-in because if they actually did something super sexy, they'd have an army of Karens getting mad at them and demanding it be cancelled.
The amount of modern DC and Marvel artists who seem to be gay or women means there's a lot of them who just inherently wouldn't know how to get it right anyway, they're more comfortable drawing sexualized men, and editorial seem to be pushing all the artists in that direction. This guy
>>149107683 is right about how male characters are drawn in comics now, specifically in a way meant to appeal to fujos, and the traditional male audience for superhero comics finds it creepy and weird to see Superman, Batman and everyone else with faces that look like gay teens.
