I’m sure you’ve seen that picture, above, doing the rounds. Many people seem to think it makes some clever point about gender, SF & Fantasy art and so on. I don’t particularly think that it does. The aim is, apparently, to show the silliness of the first cover by changing the genders around to create some kind of ‘aha’ moment in the viewer but in that task I can’t see that it succeeds. The humour here is not the ‘aha, look how ridiculously women are treated in art’ but rather the ‘haha’ of the pantomime dame or the incompetent transvestite. Its not funny because its a transposition its funny because its a bunch of unfit men in feminine poses. Tellingly, the woman in the supposedly ‘masculine’ pose doesn’t look silly, which rather demonstrates how one-sided this all can be.
The cover on the left is clearly a call-back to James Bond, steeped in reference and film and literary history. An actual reversal has been done in James Bond and wasn’t ridiculous. That was a genuine like for like substitution and, tellingly, it’s a) not funny and b) beloved by many women.
Any point that might be trying to be made is lost because of the stupidity and, yet again, all you end up with is a circle-jerk of the already convinced talking about how clever and meaningful it is. There are discussions to be had on this topic, but cheap and nonsensical stunts like this (and the other cover poses) that fail to take into account gender dimorphism, athleticism, reference etc and fail to do a like-for-like change don’t add anything to it other than being a jumping-off point for discussion.
If I had the skills to do it it might be interesting to do a genuine like-for-like substitution of the same cover, (Tom Daley might make a good swimwear substitute rather than out-of-shape writers) but alas I don’t.
Grim's Tales 
Well said. This isn’t like for like, it’s a ludicrous parody that does nothing for the debate about using women as decorative adjuncts to men. In this picture, the men can afford to look ridiculous because, as a general principle worldwide, they can get up and walk away with no damage to their status. Women have to manage their status much more carefully and, even in the power suit, risk negativity. I appreciate the effort though, that should be applauded.
One thing that I want to point out, though. When you say that the woman in the masculine pose in the mock cover doesn’t look ridiculous, to me that actually highlights the issue even more so. And isn’t a jumping off point for discussion better than nothing at all? After all, here we are, taking part in the discussion. Just because something is ridiculous doesn’t mean it can’t have merit or results.
That’s just my two cents.
Yes, though possibly not in the way people want. Pointing out that men have less flexibility in dress/behaviour pulls attention away from the women that are typically the focus of these things. There’s plenty of avenues of discussion but the stunts tend to get the attention. Which I’ve given it too. Damn.