Artist Michael Lee Lunsford stresses that the goal of his redesign project is not to push some sort of moral code on to you. He says it’s an exercise in character design – do these superheroes feel the same to you even though their costumes are different?
I take Mike’s point… he’s not pushing a moral code on to me. That said; it’s hard not to take a lesson from this collection.
Fully dressed Supergirl
Fully dressed Powergirl
Fully dressed Wonder Woman
Fully dressed Black Canary
Fully dressed Zatanna
Fully dressed Elektra
Fully dressed Psylocke
Fully dressed Vampirella
Fellow geek? An easy way to keep up with the blog is to tune in on Facebook, Twitter or just scan for new picture finds at the site’s Pinterest collection.
While the pictures are good and the redesigns are good, I have to admit that fully clothing Vampirella removes all purpose from the character altogether. Also, what’s wrong with bare arms for god’s sake? Nobody feels the need to cover Wolverine’s exaggerated, almost fetishized biceps. Good thing it’s not the redesign companies would actually use.
Before you ask – I’m a woman and I like my comic book heroines half-dressed.
Fair points – makes me wonder what “the purpose” of Vampirella is though. To titillate? To be a horror hostess? I’m fairly certain the Vampirella above could seduce or slay whoever she wished.
With or without all the skin, yup.
More skin coverage equals better protection, including one’s arms. And give that the artist is trying to make a statement (look how cool these characters look, even with only their faces showing), it makes sense that he’d choose to cover their arms. I don’t think it’s an indication that he disapproves of arms being on display. :-)
Why not their necks and faces then? Clothes for comic book characters are purely aesthetic. Unless they are wearing super powered or magically imbued armor or apparel it’s all worthless when you are getting blasted by bolts of energy, sprayed with acid, skidding across concrete, or being generally assaulted in the way normal cloth can’t do anything but disintegrate.
I like a few of these a lot, particularly Vampirella and Zatanna, but most fail to find the balance between looking attractive and being sensibly dressed.
Because wearing a mask and cowl and stuff that covers your neck and face for protective reasons can be more of hindrance than help sometimes. Ask any actor who dressed up as Batman or any one who has worn soldier outfits. Its hard to hear, hard to move your head, and hard react when wearing those things. As for their clothes being aesthetic, that’s completely not true. Yes, there are things that can destroy most of their clothes, but particularly for the non Kryptonians, it still offers protection. Why do you think motorcycle drivers wear leather jackets. Its not to… Read more »
leather is also hard to move in, if you have ever worn a motorcycle jacket you would see that the range of motion is very limited.
Without knowing anything about Vampirella (apart from what she looks like), I like the “fully clothed” design. It nicely evokes the Victorian roots of vampire lore, and kind of reminds me of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen’s version of Mina Harker.
I don’t understand why Vampirella’s purpose is removed by being fully clothed. She has a mesmeric stare. She could wear whatever she wanted and would be able to have any effect on anybody she wanted.
It’s not her clothes that give her powers. It’s her super human abilities.
Because as a murderous vampire she rejects the status quo. Sexuality is and has always been an aspect of that. Think of the 60s.
If she rejected the status quo then she should be completely covered up with glasses, a sweatshirt, and flats. The status quo of a female vampire in to be as revealing as possible.
Her purpose isn’t to be barely dressed.
But I do see the connection to the 60s. That’s in character.
yeah I’m not sure what the poster meant by that. Anyone reading the current Vampirella comic knows she wears pants 90% of the time.
Are you kidding? Vampirella is the coolest one here! Spot-on :D
There is an actual reason for Supergirl and Power Girl’s costumes. They are powered by the sun, and the more exposed skin, the faster they heal and the stronger they are. While i get the whole “Lets not objectify woman,” angle and i love that Wonder Woman has armour, you have to applaud the logic behind the Kryptonian costumes. The real question is, why doesn’t Super Man show more skin?
riiiiiight, and superman/boy do not have big holes in their costumes exposing their chests because…?
… So you didn’t read the last sentence of the guy you’re responding to huh?
Y reed wen u cen jus kritisize n reespawnd lik a chiuld?
But seriously, don’t hold internet-posters to such a high standard. You’ll always be disappointed.
If that was true they would have exposed arms.
You could hand-wave the sun thing pretty easy by saying the costume is translucent to UV or to whatever specific frequencies they need.
You could even say the dark areas absorb solar energy and convert a large percentage of it to the precise frequencies they need. Thus increasing their overall solar/skin efficiency.
“There is an actual reason for Supergirl and Power Girl’s costumes.”
Sigh…
It’s actually the Wonder Woman outfit that is the only one I didn’t like, personally. The armoured chestplate design is great, but then I find myself wondering why you’d partner it with khakis – following the design through the leg, possibly with either an athletic legging, or even a fully-armoured outfit that almost turned her into and unmasked version of Iron Woman would surely give a better result.
Well, if comic book heroines looked like that, I might actually read some comics.
It’s a shame that you’d let something as superficial as what a woman chooses to wear stop you from reading very engaging and well crafted stories.
I’m going to take this as terrific sarcasm, because the stories are not very engaging and not very well crafted, most of the time.
Most of the time. My point is, I’m not going to miss a gem because I’m told I’m not supposed to like comic books because I’m a woman. I’m not going to miss a form of entertainment that I enjoy because I’m supposed to be too offended by a woman’s bare legs. Not all the comics I read have award winning stories. But they have fun stories. Stories that I want to wind down after a long day reading. I find it annoying to be told that the stories aren’t for me just because the art isn’t specifically directed at… Read more »
It’s almost like authors need to ATTRACT female readers by providing elements that are appealing to them, rather than projecting an attitude of “shut up, stop complaining, and take what you get, lowly women!”
I am a female reader. I’m attracted to comic books based on the story. Women don’t need a hand out from any publisher trying to extend an olive branch by putting female characters in ridiculously over thought sacks of an outfit. I’ve never felt like I was being told to “take what I get”. And I don’t think comics books are lacking in appealing elements for females. I don’t care what my heroine wears. I care what she does and what she says.
Realistically, the primary reason all these superheroines have been depicted in revealing/skin tight clothing is because the comic book market is primarily driven by male readers and putting the women in skimpy clothing is a marketing ploy. Now, I like comic books, and that doesn’t stop me from reading them. But if putting them in skimpy clothing to attract male readers is OK, I don’t see why putting them in more realistic clothing in order to attract female readers isn’t equally OK. Comic books are visually driven – that’s why they’re comic books and not novels – so to self-righteously… Read more »
Absolutely! Everything in entertainment is marketing driven. I work in that industry. It’s my job to find out what demographic is going to like which things. How do we find an audience for this movie? etc etc. That does’t mean that as a female reader I have to be offended by what I see. In my daily life I see women wearing revealing clothing and it isn’t for marketing, it isn’t for men. And it’s okay. I think that it is absolutely okay for comic books to put women in everyday clothing. I think it’s okay for them to put… Read more »
To me the problem with this is that a lot of the outfits they put women in really aren’t practical – we’re supposed to believe that the character is smart and powerful when she’s wearing heels that would snap if you looked at them crosswise and a top her boobs would fall out of the second she turns upside-down. It’s like the chainmail bikini issue – it may be pretty but the person who wears it into battle is an idiot. If you want to be mobile and stealthy in an urban environment, you wear clothes that cover your skin.… Read more »
I never spoke to the anatomy of the characters. That’s not the issue I was discussing. Nor about the posing of women. If you want to be mobile and stealthy in an urban environment you don’t wear neon colours. As a superhero with super strength, why do they need to think so much about protection. If protection was a huge issue in comics EVERYBODY would be wearing some SERIOUS armour. But it’s not, so no one does. When I went scuba diving my wet suit was pretty skin tight and it kept me really warm. I don’t propose to know… Read more »
I think what you’re missing is how the prevalence of women portrayed as eye candy for men can put women off comics altogether. We’re not talking about isolated cases of a couple of characters here and there. We’re talking about an industry in which female characters in normal clothing are the exception, and ridiculous costumes and cheesecake poses are the norm.
There’s not a lot of normal clothing in comic books. No one would really wear any of the things that superheroes wear in their daily lives. It would be silly. You’d be branded as crazy. The only time normal clothes are presented are when characters are completely out of costume or if we’re referring to secondary characters. Do you really have that much of a problem with jumpsuits? It seems pretty ridiculous to me. Seems more like you have an issue with the way women in comics are posed. I have an issue with that too, I’m just not addressing… Read more »
But it is offensive to know that that is the image of women that men who read comic books are being fed.
Sure, it’s clear that a lot of women find those images offensive. Most of the dramaticallyover sexualized images can be offensive. There are plenty of inappropriate images out there that are far beyond inappropriate and I don’t feel it comnes close to what any of the above heroes wear. I don’t think a woman in a bathing suit is offensive. Psylock essentially wears a bathing suit. I don’t have a problem with that. Storm, though clothed from head to toe, is wearing a skin tight outfit. I’m fine with that as well. Men who read comics are also being fed… Read more »
Psylocke was costumed as she was not to show how powerful and strong she is, but purely to show her butt. I’m amazed that you don’t recognize that as problematic.
The way men act in female targeted romance stories is just as offensive to us men, yet we never complain about it. Go fight some actual female suppression and leave us alone with our entertainment.
Besides, you’re acting like men suddenly all think women should dress scantly from reading comics. Reality shows that it’s football players and the like that actually degrade women in real life and demand of them to wear skimpy things, not comic book nerds.
Rune, I’d been to a convention where a Vampirella cosplayer got more attention from the men in attendance than Gail Simone and Renee Witterstaetter combined. I don’t know what universe you’re in, but there is still a great deal of sexism in comics.
And guess what? Comics are not “your” entertainment. If you want the industry to survive, you’re going to have to share it with a female audience.
What about the females who like it as is?
How many of them are there?
Yeah, no one ever mentions how ridiculously romance novels portray men. Their shirts are always off or half off, and there’s no ‘average’ looking dudes… what’s up with that!?!
Oh right… those books contain fantasy material primarily for women, and it’s ok with me whatever fantasies they have, realistic or otherwise.
I’ve seen plenty of feminist critiques of of the sexism within traditional romance novels (including the stereotypical men and women on the front cover), including the newer resurgences of their ilk, Twilight and 50 Shades. Reading these novels increases traditional, sexist views in women who read them (there are even studies on this topic). But you’ve also go to realize that, as valid as those critiques are, there is a vital difference. Romance novels are basically porn. Comics (most comics) are not. Porn standards (as problematic as they often are) should not be the standards of general lit or comics… Read more »
Oh my god, you’re so right! How could I never have seen it before? How could I have thought that the wage gap, increasing restrictions on women’s bodies and access to basic healthcare, rampant rape and sexual harassment, domestic abuse, lack of representation in government, social enforcement of impossible beauty standards, and constant hypersexualization in all mainstream media were serious issues when the portrayal of men in romance novels makes some dudes feel weird??? How can I forgive myself for believing that actual prejudice perpetuated by deeply entrenched systems of oppression could compare with dudes feelings skeeved out by $5… Read more »
oh. So you are saying that with “the wage gap, increasing restrictions on women’s bodies and access to basic healthcare, rampant rape and sexual harassment, domestic abuse, lack of representation in government, social enforcement of impossible beauty standards, and constant hypersexualization in all mainstream media” we should … instead focus on comics, and how what people see in comic books dictates how they act/feel/etc in real life. Yeah. I’d say the time would be much better spent trying to fix the top problems rather than spending time being sarcastic to nobody important in a topic on what imaginary people wear….… Read more »
Hello, Frivalue, and welcome to Derailing 101! The topic of today’s class will be what I like to call “The Fallacy of the Greater Evil.” There are three major problems with your argument. 1) I DO spent my time working to fix some of those problems. We are – both individually and as a species – capable of devoting out attentions to more than one activity at a time. It’s untrue, not to mention kind of ridiculous, to suggest that I am INCAPABLE of caring about any of those other problems simply because I’ve spent an hour or two having… Read more »
Hello, Frivalue, and welcome to Derailing 101! The topic of today’s class will be what I like to call “The Fallacy of the Greater Evil.” There are three major problems with your argument. 1) I DO spent my time working to fix some of those problems. We are – both individually and as a species – capable of devoting out attentions to more than one activity at a time. It’s untrue, not to mention kind of ridiculous, to suggest that I am INCAPABLE of caring about any of those other problems simply because I’ve spent an hour or two having… Read more »
Oh c’mon. Rune didn’t say anything about all of those issues. By bringing this up this way, you’re attaching an awful lot to what some fictional characters are wearing.
I apologize for derailing the conversation with excessive sarcasm. My bad. I must have forgotten to take my anti-sass pills that morning.
I apologize for disrupting the discussion with excessive sarcasm. My bad. I must have forgotten to take my anti-sass pills that morning.
Objectification of women as entertainment for men is oppression (suppression is something else…). This is the same line I get from MRAs defending sex tourism and implying that male sexuality is naturally predatory and any critique of the harm it causes is oppressive to men. This should be offensive to decent men. Patriarchal ideas about men and women are harmful to both men and women. This definitely includes some popular types of romance novels, but not all women like those novels. Some of us prefer comics, see more worth keeping in comics and hero tales and would like those stories… Read more »
Sorry, but comic books aren’t just your entertainment.
You do care enough to oppose “overthought sacks of an outfit,” though.
I’m not going to refuse a story because the character is wearing a bag though. That’s the difference. And if you understood my comment it’s that I’m offended by the notion that as “a favour to women”, a female character can’t be fashionable or she can’t have skin showing. My comment is about being restricted to those kinds of things. As a woman, I should be able to wear what I want without any judgement passed. If someone if thinking that they need to please me as a woman by covering my heroes in many layers and making sure I’m… Read more »
Comics are the only books you really should judge by the cover; you know what you’re getting by what’s on the front. Hence, too many women are too insulted to read them, no matter how many *others* find the stories “very engaging & well crafted”
I don’t believe you know what you’re getting based off the cover. I’ve hated many covers but enjoyed the contents. And to look at a cover with a scantily clad women or a woman in a spandex suit and shrug it off as a terrible story is the same as looking at a beautiful woman and immediately judging her as stupid.
And the “others” who enjoy the stories are not exclusively male.
The heroine doesn’t choose to wear it. The male author chooses to put her in it. There’s a difference.
Obviously, no character in any form of fiction makes real choices. If that were the case, Wolverine would have a much different outfit. No Canadian lumberjack I know would be caught dead in that train wreck. In the real world, women chose to wear skin tight or revealing clothes every day. Suspending our disbelief, if the fictional world the heroines live in were real, it would be Betsy’s –choice- to wear that purple body suit. I’m not going to demonize all male artists for every over sexualized depiction of a character because that is grossly unfair. There are many female… Read more »
What I read:
“AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY IT’S OK IF WE PRETEND IT’S ALL AGENCY THE CULTURE HAS NO EFFECT ON ANYONE”
Right on, dude.
It seems like you missed her point. Sorry you can’t read hombre.
But they put wolverine in that outfit for men, too. It’s not like they dress him like that for the ladies, it’s to make you want to be that burly tough dude, to want to read his adventures and imagine it’s you. They hardly dress women so you can also imagine “conquering” them. It’s all for the men, so to be all like “they scantily dress, men, too!” it’s because they’re showing you all that testosterone you should envy.
I don’t know a single guy that looks at what Wolverine is *wearing* and says “I want to know more about him! I want to be him!” It’s Wolverines physique that does that, perhaps. But not his outfit. I never said that men in comic books are scantily clad. Ever. There are very few scantily clad men in comics. I have said that men in comics have skin tight outfits however. That’s just fact. Men might look at a female character and think of conquering them. Not all men. But sure, some might. There are also men that look at… Read more »
Rogue’s power set kind of requires her to be completely clothed, depending on whether or not she can control her powers. I’ve always wanted to be a superhero. But putting a superheroine in shoes I know would be painful to wear or a costume that I know is likely to ride up her butt or (especially in fantasy comics) in armor that I know would offer zero protection kind of wrecks the fantasy, taking it beyond reasonable suspension of disbelief.
Yeah that unrealistic armor really messes up the suspension of disbelief when it comes to people that can fly and have super powers. :P
Suspension of disbelief works for the fantastic elements in a story (if they are put together well). It doesn’t work for the realistic, everyday realities. It is especially important in a work with a lot of fantasy aspects to keep the everyday in order or the whole thing will unravel in the reader’s mind. Just because a work contains fantasy as a point of plot and character doesn’t mean nothing else has to make any sense!
I can only imagine what it’s like to fly or have superpowers, but I do know from experience that armor needs to protect the head and viscera- something it doesn’t do in books like Red Sonja. I know from experience that even walking- let alone fighting crime- in stiletto heels can be painful and unsafe. I know that it’s tough for female authority figures to be taken seriously even when we’re fully clothed- and it gets worse if we’re in a costume that has our butt hanging out.
I can only imagine what it’s like to fly or have superpowers, but I do know from experience that armor needs to protect the head and viscera- something it doesn’t do in books like Red Sonja. I know from experience that even walking- let alone fighting crime- in stiletto heels can be painful and unsafe. I know that it’s tough for female authority figures to be taken seriously even when we’re fully clothed- and it gets worse if we’re in a costume that has our butt hanging out.
Yeah, Rogue is fully clothed but she’s still wearing skin tight clothing and people -still- have a problem with that. If clothing affects your suspension of disbelief that heavily then comic books probably aren’t your genre. I mean, honestly, if that’s the way you look at comic books how can you get past the low functionality and common sense of Cyclops’s glasses and clothes that change colour and only grow in convenient places like the Hulk’s pants.
I write comics, and you’re telling me they aren’t my genre? That’s rich.
Guess what? Dressing female characters in embarrassing, impractical, or unsafe costumes is not an essential part of the comic book genre. In fact, it’s something comic books might be much better off without.
I write comics, and you’re telling me they aren’t my genre? That’s rich.
Guess what? Dressing female characters in embarrassing, impractical, or unsafe costumes is not an essential part of the comic book genre. In fact, it’s something comic books might be much better off without.
The point isn’t “no women can enjoy comics because of this” — it’s that “this is bad for the culture, here’s how we can fix it.” But there’s no reason we can’t still enjoy the stories, or why YOU shouldn’t. You’re allowed to like problematic things.
I never said that was the point. I have just commented on people who feel that a comics content can be judged by the clothing the heroes wear/ No where did I ever say that there’s no place for different interpretations on heroes. I never said that jeans and t-shirts, or for sweaters and running shoes aren’t welcomed. I never stated that these things wouldn’t be attractive. I do enjoy the stories. I’ve stated that many times. I’m not saying that as a woman I have universally been told I can’t. And I don’t need anyone’s (male or female) permission… Read more »
I don’t think this “fixes” it, though.
Hell yes, well said Lincoln.
As a female, I agree with you Lincoln.
Hate to rain on your parade, but the sexual objectification of male characters is by no stretch of anyone’s imagination equal to that of female characters. You’d have a point if male characters and female characters were treated equally. The reality is that they are not. As for why women choose to wear skintight clothing, female crime fighters in the real world most certainly do not unless they’re undercover as hookers.
Yes, its is. That the desirability of imaginary hypothetical men tends to sway less on how well their genitals are depicted (obviously, except for David Bowie in Labyrinth) and more on how wealthy, prestigious, and/or enigmatic they are doesn’t change the glorification. It only moves the goalposts. By the same ridiculous argument, men ought to decry how often men succeed in fantasy scenarios based solely on their machismo or wealth, and complain about how unfair a ideal that is to cast upon the frail egos of the men.
If you think that what turns a woman on is the fact that Batman is rich, you’ve got a lot more problems than thinking the way comic book women’s bodys are distorted and twisted to display their ginormous breasts and perfect asses simultaneously in their skin-tight half-costumes is okay.
You’re failing again to differentiate between power fantasy and sexual fantasy. The machismo and wealth of so many male superheroes is not to attract female readers at all, but to appeal to male readers who want to emulate Wolverine or Batman.
I never once spoke to the sexual objectification of men in comics. Never. I haven’t really spoken to sexual objectification at all so it’s quite unfair of you, and anyone else, to assume my standpoint on that situation. There are no superheroes in the real world. There are no cops, male or female, who wear spandex while walking their beat. Obviously. Women in the real world, do chose to wear them. That is fact. It’s in every day fashion. A woman can be fully clothed in a comic book and because too much leg is showing or because it’s skin… Read more »
I don’t know where your “real world” is, but where I live, most women wear jeans and tee shirts, or shorts if it’s hot. As for costumes, they’re a significant problem with how women are portrayed. Besides being woefully impractical for the job of crime fighting, most women in the real world might be embarrassed to go to work in as little clothing as superheroines are made to wear on their jobs.
I don’t know where your “real world” is, but where I live, most women wear jeans and tee shirts, or shorts if it’s hot. As for costumes, they’re a significant problem with how women are portrayed. Besides being woefully impractical for the job of crime fighting, most women in the real world might be embarrassed to go to work in as little clothing as superheroines are made to wear on their jobs.
The reality is that people draw and write their fantasies for themselves. If you want comics where the stories, characters and clothing appeal to your female fantasies, you pretty much need to get women writing and drawing the comics. You cannot try to tell men to stop creating their fantasies or to start creating female ones — nor should you — anymore than you should be telling women to create male fantasies. The issue is not that men are presenting their fantasies in the mainstream, it’s that there aren’t very many women getting the same opportunity.
Nope. But I can tell the muckety mucks that make the decisions up top why their sales are in decline and why they’re failing to grab new readers. And it’s perfectly within my rights to tell men to get with the 21st century and show female readers some respect.
Nope. But I can tell the muckety mucks that make the decisions up top why their sales are in decline and why they’re failing to grab new readers. And it’s perfectly within my rights to tell men to get with the 21st century and show female readers some respect.
PFFFTAHAHAAHA!! Wait, are you serious? Oh no.. you are aren’t you… So, if I were to make a female character, as a male, I would have to get some input from women before releasing her to the public, perhaps even put her through a few stress groups? Then I’d have to ask my fictional character what she wants to wear, so by the end of it all it isn’t even my character any more. Now on the other hand, if I’m a female and make a female character then that’s absolutely fine huh? Why don’t you look up the Skull… Read more »
No, you don’t have to do any of those things. Just don’t be surprised if women are offended when your female character is depicted running about daily in more revealing clothing than most of us would wear on the beach.
“when your female character is depicted running about daily in more revealing clothing than most of us would wear on the beach.” my ass, have you seen what women commonly wear on the beach now of days? So because my character would wear something skin tight or “revealing” by your standards it’s something that is frowned upon because I’m a guy designing it? So tell me, what if it’s a woman desigining, as I said above, in the case of Skull Girls or Bayonetta? Is that still sexist or is it empowered? I honestly wouldn’t mind if some dumb bitches… Read more »
If you can’t make a seductive female character without making her mostly naked, that smacks a bit like laziness with regard to depicting more subtle mannerisms and personality.
So it wouldn’t be logical for a seductive, more promiscuous to wear more provocative things? You’re right, I don’t understand how to depict characters at all! What is wrong with me!? I’m not saying that they always would, but when that is a big part of the character wouldn’t it make sense for that to be their main attire? I think so.
Before you write women characters you should really learn more about women as humans instead of stereotypes. For example, many women who wear provocative clothing are not seductive or promiscuous (and those aren’t the same thing anyway- you can be one without being the other). Many women who are seductive and/or promiscuous do not wear provocative clothing. There is not as much correlation there as stereotypes would lead you to believe. Dressing a certain way isn’t just about attracting sexual/romantic partners. There are also many social and psychological factors to consider, as well as personal taste and practicality.
Really now, so I’m guessing a shy female character would dress provocatively then? I mean, perhaps if she had selfesteem issues and wanted to be liked for the wrong reasons,perhaps she just wanted to be noticed, but other then that, if she was to be a shy, withdrawn character who wanted to be left alone she would more than likely dress very “modestly” or as normally as possible so as to blend in and be forgotten. There are numerous factors that might go into her personality or character, but you pick the strongest and design a character around that, or… Read more »
Seductive is not the same as “more promiscuous.” A woman can be fully clothed and still be flirtatious, still smile at the guy across the room, perhaps, if she’s so bold, grant a come-hither wink, etc.,. And seductiveness never in the real world is the number one defining trait of any real woman.
your right, wonder womans job is to be a slut, how dare she wear clothes! It only makes sense if she was a stripper, but she isn’t, she is a super hero. You’re a pig
I don’t see anything wrong with her costume. It looks like super hero attire. It’s interesting, unique, colorful. What’s wrong with it? Does it make her a slut because it’s a tad revealing(but pretty on par to the skin tight suits male heroes wear)? Because it doesn’t fit your definition of what you find acceptable? Well I’d say that makes you more against women than you’re making me out to be.
I don’t think you even read his post.
“feminazi”. . . .haven’t heard that one in a while. . . oh right, that’s because that’s a stereotype used as a derailment and can only force people to never take you seriously ever again. . .
Way to address the points above there! You sure taught me!
Too bad it’s also a very real group of people. Just sayin’
It was the use of the word “retard” that did it for me.
Dickerson, ever heard of doing research? Good creators engage in quite a bit of it to make sure a story or character is believable.
Dickerson, ever heard of doing research? Good creators engage in quite a bit of it to make sure a story or character is believable.
While I understand the importance of pointing this out, I would like to note that it can go both ways- “The male author is making them all dress “modestly”, they’re not choosing that for themselves.” There’s a difference between “the author made them do this” as the supreme reason and “this action fits the character” like with anything done in a novel or book.. Although, trying to apply logic to “Does this clothing choice fit the character?” can be extremely problematic due to how it can boil down to stereotyping and unfair dichotomies for who should do what. “Does she… Read more »
The difference is that Lincoln is looking at the situation without comment on the gender of the artist. If a woman chose to put her character in a similar outfit to Psylocke what would you say then?
There are a whole number of reasons why women may draw women like that. Maybe she has no say regarding the character design, as is often the case with for hire work. Maybe because she’s trying too hard to prove her work can appeal to men. Maybe because she’s bought into the idea that women in comics have to look a certain way. Maybe because she doesn’t care about raising the bar for how women are portrayed. Yes, there are plenty of misogynistic women out and about. There were a lot of women who didn’t want the right to vote,… Read more »
How about because she wants to? Because that’s how she envisions the character? I find a lot of your ideas about why women would do this sexist.
Pointing out the fact that sexism exists and that women must find ways to live in a world where it does is not sexist. Also, sexism is mainly a structural force. It’s not just about (or even mainly about) individual men oppressing individual women. It’s about men and women being socialized into an oppressive patriarchal system and most of them participating in/reinforcing that system, often without being consciously aware they are doing it. Women are very capable of perpetuating sexism and even more so of internalizing the male gaze. Happens every day.
I like to see my heroines wearing sexy clothing. I used to draw amateur comics and most of my female characters worn that type of stuff. I’m a woman. I think it’s sexist to assume I must have some underlying reason for doing this.
I note that none of the reasons you listed included the possibility that a female artist may genuinely like ‘that kind’ of costume and feel that it is appropriate for her character. In your scenario, the only reason a woman might design a costume like that is because she is unenlightened or misogynistic. I’m sorry, but that just seems like some pretty unenlightened reasoning. It’s pretty much a declaration that if that artist does not hold the same opinion as you that they are sexist.
A woman who draws women in a costume or footwear she knows would be painful does not show a high regard for other women.
Or she has different aesthetic sensibilities than you do. Your logic suggests that any woman who chooses aesthetic value over comfort holds herself and all women in low regard, and that’s ridiculous. For as long as there has been fashion, people have been wearing clothing, costumes, footwear, etc, that aren’t comfortable or are downright painful. Men and Women both. If a particular aesthetic doesn’t appeal to you that’s fine, don’t wear it. What’s not fine is judging someone’s character based on their personal aesthetic choices. Shaming people isn’t okay.
However, in a dangerous profession such as crime-fighting, aesthetics should take a back seat to function when the two don’t go together. Beautiful and practical can go very nicely together. However, neither describes the way too many female characters are drawn. I can shame artists who draw crime fighters while displaying flagrant ignorance of what crime fighters generally prefer wearing. It shows bad research. Furthermore, and this is the bigger problem, it makes it difficult for female readers to identify with superheroines. For one thing, a woman who lacks invulnerability but wears a costume that makes her more vulnerable to… Read more »
It’s really a shame that you have to assume that a woman must be being controlled by a man to draw that way. A down right shame. You’re insulting many female artists by accusing them of being misogynistic just because they like the look of a spandexed super hero. I never made any comment to how women are posed in comics. The only comment I made about it, is that I have issues with it. I’m only ever speaking to the costumes.
Or maybe she just likes them that way and the message that they send to her is different from the one you receive. Or do you allow for that possibility at all?
That it n combatdoesn’t make sense and it doesn’t protect her at all and has no logic for being something anyone would wear i
We’re talking about superheores. The “logic” of having protection based costumes is a little absurd. Gymnasts and atheletes wear what some comic book characters wear all the time.
Actually a good many of the comic book artists today are, in fact WOMEN! Look Up Ula Mos, Jenivieve Broomall, Nei Ruffino just to name a few. Frankly I have NO problem with the outfits in most comics.
The comic and gaming industry take female actionstars seriously. Hollywood never did!
Very true, but there are some characters that suit the style much more than this. I think a nice mix is the best approach. It’s rare that going 100% with anything is the best course of action.
Against her non-existent will no less!
What’s that? I can’t hear you over Psylocke’s buttcrack.
That’s odd, where did you find these engaging stories? I stopped reading super hero comics because it was just more of the same, characters never learned or changed for the better, and loads of pointless angst and melodrama. Also there was never any real satisfying resolutions to any of the story arcs I was reading. Also, I really hated some of the artwork–weird anatomy, weirder costume physics, and bizarre and uncomfortable poses that occasionally qualified as “body horror.”
Powers, Invincible, and Astro City are some examples of wonderfully engaging stories with super heroes. I usually prefer comics without super heroes though. I view the Marvel/DC universes similar to long running soap operas. Sure, they’re not always great stories, but that doesn’t stop them from being fun for a lot of people.
Atomic Robo is really excellent for light-hearted sci-fi adventure, too.
For an example of a well-made Marvel or DC story, try the Superman graphic novel Red Son. It explores what would have happened if Superman’s rocket fell to Earth just hours later than it did in the “real” DC universe and he landed in the Soviet Union.
I’ve found them in a few series. If you don’t like the stories then that’s cool. Comics just aren’t your genre, that’s no big deal. I don’t judge anyone on what they chose to spend there time reading. There is resolution in some cases but I don’t need that in every story I read, but that’s me. I also don’t like all comic book art. Some styles just aren’t for me. That’s cool too. I’d like to make clear that I never made comment on any of the poses or anatomy of characters in my comments because I’m not raising… Read more »
Women are made into sexual objects in comics, even the heroines. This alienates a lot of women from reading comics because they are being told that this is not for them; that these comics are for men’s eyes, and so are they.
Hmm, seems to me like you’re lumping in costumes with body poses and anatomy choices. Something I didn’t do because I am only speaking about the costumes as this is what the article was about. For you to assume my position on those issues is very unfair. Wearing spandex doesn’t make a woman a sexual object. I do think there is some art and some costume choice that go a little too far. I’ve said that already. But if you look at just the costumes. There are a ton that are really not as bad as they are made out… Read more »
You are not recognizing embarrassing or impractical superheroine costumes for what they are- part of a larger problem with how women are portrayed in comics.
Maybe you should stop feeling so alienated. Maybe judging something as “for men’s eyes” is making the issue worse.
Why is your opinion of comic books influenced by how women dress? >.>
There are some fully clothed heroines like the bats: Batwoman and Batgirl for instance. Some of the X-Women too but I agree it’s a fraction compared to the men.
Leaving aside the work itself, the moral lesson suggested by the article is just silly. Sure, characters like Psylocke could arguably stand some more clothes, and Vampi is supposed to be more porn than character. For the rest, though, male heroes wear just as little, to the outrage of precisely no one.
The opening line of the post and the point made by the artist is that there’s not supposed to be a moral lesson here. I think the moral debate is inevitable and one of the reasons why the post happened (but also to see whether these characters could retain their iconic appearance in a radically different costume) but it’s important to underline the “No Moral Lesson” disclaimer.
Thing is, though the artist doesn’t want to come across as a nanny, the no moral lesson disclaimer doesn’t really fly. It’s clearly an exercise at de-sexifying female superheroes which in and of itself is fine, but at least own it.
I mean, if its just an attempt to find out of characters remain iconic in different costumes, why not also draw a set of male superheroes wearing bandanas??
How is it “de-sexifying” when I find the outfits here of Supergirl, Powergirl, and Zatana exceptionally sexy? Wonder Woman I’m much less enamoured with, but that comes down to design decisions more than it is about what is “exposed”.
Strong, independent women are sexy in their own right; keep the lingerie for the bedroom.
I think there’s a difference between de-sexifying and de-titillating.
Personally, how “sexy” a woman is doesn’t depend on how much she is(n’t) wearing. “Sexy” is more of an attitude and can be incredibly subjective. I’d also argue style can enhance what is sexy, even when there’s more clothing. (For example, I think that drawing of Zatanna is pretty damn sexy.
Titillation, on the other hand, is entirely about the state of undress, and I would argue takes less effort than being “sexy.”
Maybe the point is to make the characters more practical and relatable, not less sexy? I agree with Craig: These outfits are actually sexier to me!
There are male heroes who wear just as little (although the reason is generally different–the Hulk is not sexy) and there are female heroes who wear more.
What’s the tendency, though? It’s not the individual that means anything, it’s the trends.
*Ahem* Though we’re a minority, there are some of us who find the Hulk VERY sexy.
If you say so…
It’s still not a sexualized depiction.
There should be a drinking game – take a shot any time someone makes the male/female false equivalency in a discussion about how much female comic book characters wear.
I think that the drawings work well. I think that the brown and relaxed look of Wonder Woman’s pants could use a redux – maybe even her boots. She just looks ‘frumpy’ and I don’t like super heroes looking ‘frumpy’. I, however, do not go with the idea of ‘more protection’ as people such as powergirl don’t need it and the others I don’t believe are wearing ballistic cloth armor. I could be wrong though. My thought about scantily clad women of action was using their sexuality a bit as a weapon/defense. Have someone take a second or two to… Read more »
Why does this apply only to females when it is equally true of males?
It is not equally true of males: The psychological and societal reactions towards scantily clad men is completely different, and not likely to be used to any advantage.
Oh? If the only point and purpose is to distract for a few seconds, you think an exposed male body wouldn’t do that? Sure, it wouldn’t distract with the thought of “bow chicka bow wow” but it would DISTRACT, and that’s the core argument, isn’t it? So why not have some assless chaps on a guy, if you think distraction works so much better than punching?
“So why not have some assless chaps on a guy, if you think distraction works so much better than punching?”
I love you.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
I’ll grant you that the reactions are different, but I’ll dispute that they couldn’t be used to any combat advantage. Making a villain flinch away from the perfectly sculpted crotch piece protecting and visibly outlining one’s package could be just as useful as getting them to turn their head to an outfit that that screams “just barely not nude woman here”.
Guys recoil from another guy’s genitalia a lot faster than they turn towards a naked woman.
Females are sexual beings too, and I would probably be distracted if Batman came at me wearing a nice pair of boxer briefs. <.< Women fawn all over Superman and Spiderman when they're in costume already.
Yeah, that’s because the viewer is assumed to be male and heterosexual.
But these heroes would not be targeting the VIEWERS with this, they’d be targeting the VILLAINS. Who may turn out to look like they were designed by the same people, but from the characters’ perspective should be expected to reflect the diversity of the world around them.
Historiclly speaking, there have actually been those who went into war/battle naked, to intimidate their opponents. I bet many would not only do a double-take the first time they saw that, but also feel uneasy to various degrees at the mere audacity of fighting naked: Are they so confident of their skills that they don’t need armour? Perhaps they really are that good? Many men might also hesitate due to their imagination putting them in that same situation, with the resulting fears/worries. The reason why enemies would hesitate might differ, but generally there is such a taboo in our wester… Read more »
I honest believe Power Girl and Supergirl would be fine with wearing those kinds of things, mostly because the ones above will be LESS LIKELY of being destroyed in a fight. Yes, their bodies are invulnerable, but their uniforms are not. They get ripped and torn all the time, depending on the writer and end up exposing too much. I could easily see them wearing it for the sake of not wanting to end up naked too quickly. As for women using their bodies as weapons, that might be true for some heroes, but not these ones. Supergirl and Power… Read more »
great…now make me a sandwich
I wish someone could and would—if you were made into a sandwich, you’d be more use to the world than you are currently.
If you aren’t old enough to know how to even make a sandwich, then you should not be on the Internet, little boy. Log off your mommy’s account NOW!
what the f? I’m a straight guy and I’d actually PREFER if they would be drawn like this? there must be something awfully wrong with me?
Nothing wrong with you at all!
There’s actually a thing (it has some official name but I can’t remember) that peaks attraction for males. It’s basically “more is less.” Scanty clothes, while appealing, aren’t as attractive to the average male because it leaves nothing to the imagination, while clothes that show less skin are more appealing because the male uses his imagination, and it even gives a sense of mystery. “What’s under her clothes? Hmmm…”
Basically, in a nutshell.
If any of that makes sense.
Nudity is less attractive than juuuuust barely covering up.
I’m not a fan of the Wonder Woman design, but the rest are pretty good.
I’m a girl-thing, and I didn’t like the Wonder Woman one, either. Something about the pants were weird. Everything else was playful and sexier than the originals. Good work!
Yeah, her pants didn’t work. Wrong color. Khakis don’t go with the rest of the uniform.
I think the wonder woman pants look like business attire, bad-guy skull crackin business!
I agree, the pants weren’t quite right. I found myself thinking she ought to have armor there, like she does around her chest, waist and wrists (those bracers).
True. On the other hand, the new 52 Wonder Woman is fully dressed anyway.
Ditto, Allen. The khaki looks weird and out of place. Black would be the least distracting thing there, imo.
I dont think you are getting the point here, these wasnt´made to be appeling/attractive to men.
This was made just beacuse superwomens are always depicted as sexobjects. This was made to show that it doesnt have to be that way,
Isn’t that exactly the point, though? I understand that these weren’t specifically designed in order to titillate the average young male – but the above demonstrates that even these still do, perhaps even moreso for many. ( Now, granted, they’re all still with a certain build, ample bosoms, and everything else a young male might find appealing besides showing skin, but then the artist would have to consider whether A cup ‘plus size’ superheroines would still have the same non-sexual draw to the character. ) So if drawing them this way doesn’t really change the hubba-hubba effect, then what does… Read more »
they’re superheroes. they have amazing bodies and are dressed to show them off because part of each and every one of these characters is a superhuman physique — same thing with superheroes, or do the average guys really look like Batman and Superman and run around in tights that show off every single bulging muscle? if the mere existence and visibility of a drawing of a superheroine in tights or a short skirt with a curvaceous figure is sexist, or if it means I automatically offend women because I prefer to see comics drawn that way, then I’m just destined… Read more »
I think maybe one difference is that Batman and Superman get to wear tights, and sometimes female superheroes don’t get to wear tights. If it’s attractive for a male superhero to be covered from neck to toes, why is a different standard applied to female superheroes? That’s more how I read it.
I know i’m a little late to this party, but i saw this comment & i thought i’d take a second to reply to it.
The overwhelming majority of female characters do in fact dress in full length costumes.
Yes, you can certainly point to a few outliers who don’t, such as Emma Frost & Psclocke, but by that same standard i can point to classic Namor & Dr Manhattan (who is literally naked for 90% of his appearances).
False equivalence. Most male characters are not drawn dressed as skimpily or in such hypersexualized poses as female characters are. Even when superheroes are drawn in civvies, the men are for the most part dressed normally, the women shown in outfits that leave little to the imagination.
go back and re-read my post until you actually comprehend what I said.
I comprehend perfectly. I just think you’re making lame excuses, and I’m not buying ’em.
You’re an idiot and you should give your computers to the local YMCA.
The main difference between the idealized physiques of male and female superheroes is quite simple: Males are drawn as the men male readers would like to *be*; females are drawn as the women male readers would like to *be with*. They’re both idealized from a male perspective.
Nonsense. Not all male readers desire to be heavily muscled.
So what you’re saying is, you don’t want comics to be for BOTH sexes, just yours. ‘Cause I’ve noticed male characters aren’t exactly shown in the same kind of sexual poses that female ones are, even if you completely ignore the costuming. Nor are you as likely to see Superman’s buttcrack (or, heck, butt at all) as you are to see, say, Huntress or Black Canary’s or Wonder Woman’s. Why is it cool for YOU to get fan service, while gay men and straight women don’t? It’s not the sexiness of the female characters that bothers me; it’s the complete… Read more »
“It’s not the sexiness of the female characters that bothers me; it’s the complete and total double standard.” Agreed~ And, from a writing standpoint it strains the internal consistency, which makes for a bad experience as a reader and weak writing. If a male hero is head-to-toe in protective armor, it stands to reason that said females of similar powersets and concerns should. If the deal is the character eschews armor or protection for one reason or another, it should apply across the board. The deal with Emma Frost was always that she used her sexuality as another weapon, another… Read more »
“But other characters with as much to worry about as Frost, esp males, are head to toe in said body armor. What gives?” No they aren’t. Take Martian Manhunter for example: Guy wears speedo’s with suspenders. Or Dr Manhattan who is literally naked. Yes you can point to examples & say “see this exists” & you’d be right, it does exist. However you can’t point to it & say “this is the rule,” because what you are pointing to is actually in the extreme minority. So here it is: Its escapism, its meant to be sexy, its not trying to… Read more »
They always conveniently forget Yaoi manga.
Forget Yaoi manga, you can do this in the mainstream: Pick up a romance novel, or practically any womens magazine.
There is plenty of fan service for women and gays in Japanese comics.
Zatanna looks like the annoying middle manager from my office job in that get-up.
It’s a social point. I find my husband highly attractive, but he doesn’t do anything special for me to see him as such.
If you don’t think men are ever depicted as sex objects in comic books, you need to read almost any issue in which Nightwing is around women. That male superhero ends up naked or nearly naked more often than any ten female superheroes in comic books! And you should notice that in comic books — and films and television, for that matter — when a man flirts too aggressively with a female, that’s code for the man as a supervillain or a jerk, and if she beats him up by kneeing him in the groin and then breaking his arm… Read more »
Again, you are talking about a common juvenile male fantasy. Female fantasies are largely ignored in comics.
You obviously have never read Japanese comics, then.
Actually, I have. Some are pretty good, but there are a lot that vigorously reinforce gender stereotypes, too, particularly in shojou manga. And how do those skimpy schoolgirl outfits appeal to feminine fantasies?
I’m bi and I feel that way with guys aswell as with girls. =]
“The average male” prefers more scantily-clad females. Males who prefer women to be more fully clothed are the exception, not the rule. But that makes you exceptional, which is good.
Also, there’s an element of classiness that is probably appealing. I find it so.
Not really. A tasteful miniskirt may be more appealing than one that shows nearly everything but I think I can safely speak for nearly all straight men and say that we still prefer the mini to the full length. And any dress of any length at all to a pair of baggy, shapeless pants.
Male sexual attraction begins with what we see. It doesn’t end there but that is where it ALWAYS starts.
A full-length shirt doesn’t show off your legs though… But what about a tasteful mini skirt compared to tight jeans or leggings? Baggy, shapeless pants look bad on everyone, except for maybe extremely fat people, but then only because the alternative is worse. And no, I wouldn’t say that’s ALWAYS where it starts, but it’s definitely that way for the vast majority. There are men (and women) who are demi-sexual, which means that unless they’re in love with a person they don’t feel sexual attraction towards him or her. So yes, it works a bit backwards compared to most, but… Read more »
Yes, that’s always where it starts. Warm feelings — love, closeness, however you classify them — add depth to sexual attraction. But the initial spark, for men, is always visual. There is no such thing as a demi-sexual man, as you describe, although I have no doubt that there are men who play that role because we are constantly told as men today that many aspects of our normal sexuality (note: normal sexuality does not include raping people) are oppressive and wrong. So of course there are guys who want to pretend they aren’t there hoping they’ll gain more acceptance… Read more »
So you’re assuming asexual men don’t exist? Because you aren’t one!? Wow… that’s… pretty sexist actually. Against your own sex, no less! You’ve basically stated there that you don’t think somebody is a male (or certainly not “normal”, to use your own word), if they don’t tend to feel sexual urges. In reality, somewhere around 1% of the population of BOTH sexes is some variant of self-identified asexual, and that’s not even considering those who self-identify as ACTUALLY “demi-sexual” and/or as having low libido (note: it is actually NORMAL for many men, for libido to go down after you’ve “settled… Read more »