Female superheros. It's not the pants

[Werewolf]

Here's a well written essay on the pants issue. The classic costumes were not the issue. Putting pants on them doesn't make them less sexualized. Wonder Woman's classic uniform was not "****ty." The problems were actually from the the way the characters were posed and depicted.

It's not the pants.

DC Women Kicking *** - It's not the pants

On the media calling Wonder Woman's classic outfit ****ty.

DC Women Kicking *** - I am done with people saying stripper or prostitute when discussing Wonder Woman's costume

[boynightwing]

agreed, the pants are not the problem. Good articles (or blogs) both.

[Werewolf]

agreed, the pants are not the problem.

Yep, Catwoman has been wearing pants a long time now. Didn't stop stuff like this.

DC Women Kicking *** - Greg Horn: Portraits of DC Women

Submissive sexualized pose with her breasts exposed and butt in ther air. But she is wearing pants so to DC it's fine.

[boynightwing]

Yikes! Both those pictures are embarrassing. I have no problem with sexy pin ups etc. I've drawn a few in my time...but those are over the top in a bad way. In the Power Girl one, the very next page could easily be her handing the drill instructor his backside in carry out bag. The Catwoman picture has no hope at all.

I've been writing and drawing my own characters for some time and I'll soon be ready with a website and printed comics etc. My main characters are both female. I wanted to create a hero or two that girls could look up to. Someone who has the same problems and issues as them but with an element of sci-fi and fantasy to them. I would so angry if someone drew either of my girls in poses like that...

[kingdom warrior]

those two drawings should have never gotten pass the pencil stage they're degrading and look like softcore porn......

[johnnystorm]

Yeah, this whole thing strikes me as ridiculous, and an excuse for Jim Lee to overlay his particular style onto the DC characters.

Give Wonder Woman pants? Take away Zatanna's fishnets? Get rid of Supergirl's skirt?

And then turn Harley Quinn from a cutie in a full leotard into a pole-dancer in a corset? Wha?

[The Toyroom]

Greg Horn is a hack IMO who cribs from every porn mag he gets his hands on...Even those Catwoman and Power Girl pics are obviously from the same source material...

[Steeler80]

Greg Horn is a hack IMO who cribs from every porn mag he gets his hands on...Even those Catwoman and Power Girl pics are obviously from the same source material...

That charge has been leveled at Horn a lot of times. Deservedly so.

[ctc]

>And remember no matter how silly Wonder Woman’s costume is, it’s still not this:

HAW! SOOOOO true!

Don C.

[thunderbolt]

DC took away the fishnets? That's it, I'm done.

[ctc]

>Yikes! Both those pictures are embarrassing.

Yeah, but they're both covers, and DC has a long history of misleading, shock covers. ("Boobs" are the new "gorilla?") I bet they have little bearing on the actual story. Besides, nobody complained about all the times poor ol' Aquaman was shown trussed up and helpless during the 60's. (Or, as the one article hilighted; the disturbingness of Namor's posing pouch.)

Don C.

[johnmiic]

While I would debate the logic of Cat Woman lying down at the top of a sky-scraper to undress or being fed milk on the floor by Batman, I can't get too worked up over many of these images. Adam Hughes used to take flack for the way he portrayed women in comics, (even tho his work falls under the heading "good-girl art"), and his defense was these are comic books and it goes with the territory. On the whole comics are very much fantasy and that translates to reality bending, ultra-sexy men and women. The publishers are requesting more salacious artwork for the covers because the covers can hook readers = sales.

The author of the blog likes the 1st Black Canary Image but not the second? That's nitpicking. Or maybe she favors Hughes over the other artist. I'll bet the second image is not anatomically correct but since Black Canary's crotch lies mostly in shadow - big deal.



The first shot is OK but the second one isn't? Much ado about nothing. If anything, in the first image Power Girl's breasts should be hanging lower due to their weight and the angle she is flying at. The second shot is very obviously just a pose and not a motivated action shot but so what?

[samurainoir]

those two drawings should have never gotten pass the pencil stage they're degrading and look like softcore porn......

KEN LANDGRAF- Sexy GOTHIC VAMPIRE BABE in Graveyard | eBay

Everyone's got ta' put food on the table right?

[ctc]

>The author of the blog likes the 1st Black Canary Image but not the second? That's nitpicking.

WEIRD nitpicking. I can’t see a difference in terms of exploitation.

>If anything, in the first image Power Girl's breasts should be hanging lower due to their weight and the angle she is flying at.

....they’re fake. Wait.... did I just spoil one of the big reveals from the “52" event?

>The second shot is very obviously just a pose and not a motivated action shot but so what?

True, and when you think of it; in the first one, not only am I staring down her top but CO-INKEY-DINKELLY her cape has blown aside so’s I can stare at her bottom too. Maybe the author’s afraid of boobs for some reason? (Obviously a bottle baby.)

It’s a complex topic, since we’ve been brought up almost hypersensitive to the idea of exploitative images of women; especially in comics. In a weird way it occasionally becomes a new type of discrimination wherein any woman with large breasts is automatically ASSUMED to be a bimbette. Unrealistic body image, inappropriate scanty outfits, objectification and exploitation.... and yet nobody complains about Conan. You wanna talk about inappropriate exploitative costumes? Dude runs around the snow in nothing but boots and furry underwear! But we’re not brought up with the idea that the MALE form can be exploited. Not currently; the jury’s still in on the whole “bigorexia” thing.

I had a weird encounter with this concept way back in my University days. I used to associate with a pack of HARDCORE Feminists: not the equal rights type, the “men are evil” type. One day they were flipping through one of my sketchbooks, which had pics of almost a hundred of my characters. Early on they ran into one who has a similar build and skimpier outfit to the second Powergirl pic; which of course resulted on some derision. Afterwards they went back to the book. At the end, I asked which character was their favourite; and it ended up being the one I got chided for. (In a nutshell; I suspect it’s the same as why Conan is cool: they satisfy all the necessary gender stereotypes for “attractive” and “desirable” while still coming across as powerful and in control.)

So yeah, the issue is pretty complex. As for the kinky covers, they aren’t a big deal to me personally. Covers are SUPPOSED to be extreme: you’ve got like, 2 seconds to pique the viewers’ interests. Sure, boobs are a cheat; but according to Julie Schwarts, so were gorillas. I DO have a problem when the interiors are nothing but poses (thank you AGAIN, 1990's) because it disrupts good narrative flow. A good comic can tell it’s story entirely visually, which is difficult when everyone is flexing or arcing in every panel.

This sort of strangeness came up on Jeff’s website recently. (For the curious: Pseudo Comments - When did nipples become evil? ) I’ve never been able to figure out why boobs can be PG; but as soon as you so much as SUGGEST a nipple (often, even on MALE characters) you cross over into “mature readers” territory. THAT one I can’t figure out.

Don C.

[samurainoir]