Staples surely knows her readers by this point, and she surely knows they are OK with an image of dudes jerking off into someone's mouth on the face-screen of a television-headed, wounded robot prince in a smart jacket, and she likely wasn't thinking past them to say, comiXology or Apple, and what comiXology's or Apple's policies were regarding what sort of imagery can appear on the face-screens of computer-headed robot princes that appear in comics they deliver. The objections, particularly in the case of the breastfeeding, were pretty out of left field. In both instances, the objectionable - or is "objected to" a better way to put it? - content was clearly incidental, rather than a point of focus. Vaughan, Staples and Image Comics couldn't really ask for more coverage of the 12th issue of their book, just as all that talk of breastfeeding increased the already-impressive amount of conversation about a new project from talented creators like Staples and Vaughan all those many months ago.Īnd yet it's clearly not like the creators are courting controversy. In a sense, the "There's No Such Thing As Bad Publicity" sense, such discussion couldn't happen to a better comic book - because there aren't any, or aren't that many, better comic books than Saga. Remember when Dave Dorman got the vapors over the image of a mother breastfeeding her infant child on the cover of the first issue? What I found most interesting about this story is that it's at least the second time in Saga's 12-issue lifespan that someone objected to an image in the book, resulting in a great deal of online coverage and discussion of Saga. They might present some wider issues of some import well worth or attention and discussion, like a pop-couple double standard that still sees gay sex as somehow more shocking or daring than hetero sex (of which there has been plenty in Saga so far), the importance of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund as reassuring security blanket nervous retailers can take comfort in knowing is there for them, the importance of buying your comics in paper form from a brick-and-mortar shop rather than relying on an electronic, third-party vendor with different standards than both the creators and the readers, or that no matter what the Supreme Court justices might be discussing at the moment, it's always 1988 somewhere. In other words, and this should come as little surprise to any of you, the objectionable images in this comic book are no big deal. It's a tense, dramatic scene, with a heck of a cliffhanger ending, and plenty of opportunities for Staples to design and draw cool characters, from ones with large speaking parts like the author Robot questions, to that little seal guy at the top of this post.Īfter I finished reading it, I had to go back and look for images of gay sex, because I thought I recalled mention of at least two instances, but I had already forgotten one of them.
![robot gay porn comic robot gay porn comic](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hO3NByzAkco/UW9AOB-8waI/AAAAAAAAOt0/AeKhieivOPU/s1600/Saga+%252312+page+2+panel+1.jpg)
![robot gay porn comic robot gay porn comic](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51vslPu5jJL._SY346_.jpg)
He is the focus of the entire issue, as Vaughan reminds us that Robot has a very good, very personal reason for pursuing our heroes Alana, Marko and Hazel, and Prince Robot confronts the writer of the anti-war treatise disguised as a super-weird, trashy romance novel that helped bring the star-crossed lovers together in the first place.