Maddox? Is it 1998 already?
Anyway, yes, Spider-Man is occasionally depicted as having a butt. His butt is not blatantly sexualized though. In that cover, he's bent over because he's just wrapped a crap ton of baddies in web. It's an action shot. His butt is well-defined but so are all his muscles. His butt is not the focus of the cover, the butt-kicking he's doing is. Spider-Woman? She's on a building, crawling across a roof for no apparent reason. The only things to look at are her butt and her hair. She's not doing anything except sticking her ass up in the air.
Notice how Spidey's ass takes up very little of the frame, but SW's takes up basically the whole top half of the page? His butt is one small part of a dynamic and rich composition, while hers is front row and center.
Also, Spidey is clearly wearing actual clothes, while SW is clearly wearing body paint for a costume. Like, seriously, how is that supposed to be cloth? There's just no way.
It takes a bit of practice to be able to pick up on this stuff. You are not really meant to notice it outright. These are the tricks and techniques artists use to direct your eye and the messages and feelings you get from looking at their work. While both Spider-people have butts, Spidey's cover says "Hey Spider-Man sure is cool and actiony and kick-ass!" while Spider-Woman's is just "LOOK AT THIS BUTT WOW"
Also where the fuck did her nose go? Did the Vulture steal it?