Drawing the impossible? Fully dressed Superheroines

I’m not a fan of the Wonder Woman design, but the rest are pretty good.

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 that actually mean? That society (or biology as some would argue) is essentially beyond repair in these matters? That it’s not broken to begin with? That they might as well draw them showing lots of skin?
I think that is exactly the point of these drawings, and is in fact one of the opening sentences in this article; This isn’t about covering them up, it’s figuring out how you would cover them up, and how that changes perception – if at all.

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.

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.

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.

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 and total double standard. And yes, I say this AS A COMICS READER.

I’ll read Gail Simone’s Birds of Prey either way, but yes, when there’s unnecessary focus on Helena’s ass (which did happen in at least a couple of the volumes I own!), it’s annoying. It’s like the story is written to be accessible to everyone, but the artist assumed only straight males would be interested… and yes, that’s kind of insulting!

“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 be reality: We already have reality & its not sexy.

An lets not pretend this is something specific to male orientated media. Just look at all those forms of escapism specifically tailored to hetrosexual women & you’ll see exactly the same thing.

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 for simply saying something sexy, that’s code for the woman as a liberated hero,

but when a woman flirts too aggressively with a male, that’s code for the woman as an admirable and a role model, and if the man objects, that’s code that he’s a jerk or a loser — and if he ever defends himself, even just by pushing her away? he must definitely be a villain and will die gruesomely before the end of the tale for daring to turn down a woman’s invasion of his physical privacy!

You obviously have never read Japanese comics, then.

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 it’s far from unheard of.

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 down”, as testosterone levels decrease at that point. There are studies backing this up.)

Now, you might argue, in regards to asexual, “oh, but that is a minority”… so? So are East Asians, but you wouldn’t argue that East Asian men don’t exist, right? Being an outlier doesn’t mean you “don’t exist”. And yes, you used the words “don’t exist”, meaning you refuse to acknowledge that they even MIGHT exist, even rarely, at all.

By denying that such males exist, by denying that it can be “normal” for some people to not have terribly many sexual urges you are effectively stating that they aren’t “normal” and aren’t “male”. You are forcing all other men into a tiny little box of “sexual, very sexual, and visually-triggered sexual at that”. But not every man fits into that tiny box. But I guarantee you a large proportion of the men who don’t fit in that tiny box, feel oppressed by the constant refrain that only being “sexual” is normal, and that being “male” means “sexual”, and if they’re male and not particularly “sexual”, that there is something wrong with them. Hell, it’s arguable that their oppression is worse, because at least your assumption (that men have sexual urges, always) is halfway in line with what you feel society’s view is!

Your statement perfectly encapsulates why sexism is bad for BOTH sexes.

I was about to say the same thing. Now they are clothed far *more* than the men. Wonder Woman is wearing Dockers! And her head is too big. Psylocke and Elektra are closer to where it should be. Powergirl is third. I came here with the hopes of cheering these on, but if I wasn’t so stupidly busy I might give it an attempt myself.

Yes. Alas, men want women. Well, most of them. Who knew? And as for female comic readers: they are not the majority. But with the new comics movies have lured in a lot of girls, and so has the general “geek” culture that has been blossoming for some time now. I just don’t think it’s fair that women can have Fifty Shades and romance novels where men have the personalities of sponges and then they point fingers at comics that were largely geared towards teenaged boys.

But do you spend time berating women for reading them and calling them sexist losers — because that’s what comes the way of boys and men who want to read comics in which Wonder Woman isn’t wearing khakis.

And unfortunately, with the emergence of female readers, comics now kinda suck. Now there’s little awesomely-drawn panels of action in favor of boring emo panels for fictional characters who aren’t even 100% established – only changed and rebooted every other year for some topical news story and dumb Buffy/Joss Whedon-esque sarcasm dialogue every other line. Thanks for your contribution, women.

It makes sense for them to have muscles though. They have to be in shape in order to do what they do. It actually makes sense for them to have big muscles, maybe not as much as they do, but still.

And can you imagine doing martial arts in high heels? I’m also a martial artist, and when I read comics and watch movies and these women are running around and kicking ass in 5″ heels it just makes me laugh.

No. You are mistaking “sexual fantasy” for “power fantasy.” Many superheroines and their costumes are designed to titillate male readers – I think everyone can pretty much agree on that point. Male superheroes, however, are not designed to titillate female readers. I know many men find this hard to believe, but most women are NOT actually attracted to bulging, steroidal musclebeasts. Male superheroes are not designed to appeal to female readers, they are designed to appeal to MALE readers. Male superheroes are muscular and powerful because MEN want to BE muscular and powerful. Female superheroes are impossibly voluptuous and scantily-clad because MEN want to HAVE impossibly voluptuous and scantily-clad women.
Comics do exaggerate both men and women, but they are both exaggerated in ways that appeal, in general, to men and not to women.

Also, I wasn’t aware that Kzinhome imported human media, but just so you’re aware, here on planet Earth, women DO read comics. And they criticize the rampant sexism poisoning the comics industry because it is offensive and alienating (and, in the long term, poor business strategy), not because they have “statistically lower self esteem” (lol).

A+ on missing the point entirely. We’re all so proud of you.

Women may want to be attractive. But they DON’T want their attractiveness to be viewed as their only relevant trait, and they DON’T want to be reduced to sexual objects without depth or agency. Also, once again, the “beauty standard” portrayed in comics is a MALE fantasy, not a FEMALE fantasy. Cuz let me tell you, women may want to be thin and busty and long-legged, but the women in comics are taken so many miles beyond that ideal that (as someone else on this thread put it) it qualifies as body horror. Do you seriously fucking think that superheroines are drawn with pencil waists, watermelon tits, praying mantis legs and dressed in glorified thongs and pasties to appeal to WOMEN??

Women would LOVE to be idealized in comics. But they would like to be idealized in ways that appeal to THEM, not to men. They want to see female characters who are attractive and confident; who have interesting and complex motivations and believable personalities, who get their own independent storylines, who struggle, and fail, and succeed, and grow.

They do not want to see female characters who are little more than breathing sex toys who are only powerful because it makes them HAWTT!! and who are used only as love interests, motivations, and plot devices for the male superheroes.

So why don’t said females DRAW their own comics how they want instead of legislating demands on others’ creative talents. You do realize there’s a looooooot of time and discipline involved, right? It’s the same when I hear black folks complaining that white creators don’t focus enough on black characters – as if white creators have a secret insight into how black folks feel?

No one really has any right to tell someone else what they should create or how they should create it. I am very much for diversity — in all forms — in creative businesses. But I am very much against telling anyone who is doing the work that their creative vision needs to be changed to placate some demographic. If what’s being done is offensive in the extreme, then the artist should be replaced. “No, you draw it this way” is unacceptable.

You do get that you’re arguing against something I’m not really saying though, right? My point is that if artists are doing stuff they don’t really want to do, they will create bad art. If drawing Power Girl now and they hate doing it because of hole in all her tops, then they’re producing lousy stuff. Therefore, to my mind, the way to change what’s produced is to make sure everyone there is drawing something they can really sink their heart and soul into. I get that it’s a business. So what I’m saying is, however a company thinks they want their characters to look, they need to hire artists who naturally want to draw them that way, not try to twist arms — if quality is important.

You honestly think Wonder Woman in tights was only a sexualized object but Wonder Woman in khaki pants — casual Friday attire for God’s sake! — is on her way to self-actualization? Be serious.

Don’t waste my time dodging your own words.

You’re the one said: “They do not want to see female characters who are little more than breathing sex toys who are only powerful because it makes them HAWTT!! and who are used only as love interests, motivations, and plot devices for the male superheroes.”

Well, the only thing different here is the costumes, so it’s logical to assume that you think putting Wonder Woman in Dockers (I still can’t believe there are people who actually LIKE that one) is going to fix that problem, or at least be a big part of fixing it.

I think it’s ridiculous to suggest that Wonder Woman is typically treated as “little more than a breathing sex toy only powerful because it makes them HAWTT!! and who are used only as love interests, motivations, and plot devices for the male superheroes.”

I have two main problems with holding up these costumes as a solution to portrayal of women in comics. One, I just don’t like most of the costumes. I think they look frumpy and I think they look very much like someone was just trying to cover the characters up, instead of trying to create a true artistic statement. Which brings me to my second, and much larger, concern. If your solution to the portrayal of women is to tell the people who have been drawing and writing them the way you don’t like to do them a way you find less offensive, the result will be bad art, because that person will be following orders, rather than expressing their creative vision. If companies decide they want to change the way female comic heroes are portrayed, my sincere hope is that they bring in people who have a fully rendered vision of what that will mean, rather than trying to make some other artists and writers do things in which they do not believe.

I don’t think changes to these characters is the ultimate solution to anything. I felt like you were posting as if it would be. That’s why I made my comment.

I like the Elektra costume. I hate the Wonder Woman costume. I don’t know who said it first but no superheroine (or hero) should ever be seen in Dockers. I didn’t care for the rest of the costumes. They just look baggy and unsophisticated in my mind, for the most part. I’m not sure why Powergirl’s look seems popular. To me she looks like a pharmacist in a cape.

But those are matters of fashion preference. The bigger issue here is who does the drawing, why and how. I didn’t say current artists should be above reproach. I said if studios have a problem with them along these lines, they need to be replaced, rather than told to draw something they don’t believe in, or else they will produce bad art. What needs to happen is an influx of people with plans for good female characters, and some of them need to be women.

but are not males brought to the same heights? do you not see men with biceps the size of tree trunks, with pecs the size of platters? once again, it goes both ways. also, the idea that you can declare what is a male fantasy or not completely destroys the structure of a debate. we can’t honestly discuss things if you get to write all of the rules.

furthermore, I don’t know how many comic books you have actually read, but there are plenty of female characters, bot unrealistically beautiful and not, who have complex characters, motives, and personalities. the fact that you can’t see past the sexualisation to the underlying material speaks volumes.

Sorry, males are the majority of comic book readers. Sure, there are females that read them too, but the comic book industry makes most of its money from males, so from a business standpoint, it makes sense for them to cater to a male mindset’s wants so that they can keep making money. And it is sad that you really view the female characters in comics as useless other than giving male readers a cheap thrill… Yeah, their hero costumes might not be ideal for the business they’re in, but that’s focusing on how the character looks, and not how they act. They are not viewed as “sex toys” because of how they apparently dress (there are some exceptions to that, which is shameful, but the majority are powerful women who don’t need no man). I personally feel that they are plenty powerful and respectable as well. There has been a significant decrease in using female heroes as a plot device when it comes to “oh no, go rescue them!” as they can handle themselves. As characters, they are treated as valuable members of the team no matter how they dress. They might be attractive, but that is DEFINITELY not their only relevant trait. They are useful in a fight against the baddies, as well as able to make smart decisions as it pertains to missions. How they’re dressed shouldn’t really matter as long as they are written as being as useful as the male characters to the onward plot of the comic. As love interests, it only makes sense that those kinds of relationships might develop as people work closely together over a period of time, so don’t make such an issue over that particular piece.

Can I, like, subscribe to you on twitter or something? You are saying absolutely everything I say, all alone and by myself, elsewhere. I love you!
But part of me says “give it up,” because the men are always going to be too stupid to get it. They’ve made it clear they don’t understand being sexualized–they’ve never felt uncomfortable and objectified when someone whistled at them, or stared at their asses or grabbed at them like they’re property. They’ve never seen that uncomfortable hunger in someone else’s eyes and understood that while sex is awesome, being seen as a sex-object is not. Until they grow some boobs and find themselves around some hungry boob-nommers, they’ll never understand. Female sexuality rocks, but that’s not all we are. We are so much more! Men are known for not being compassionate because they can’t get into other people’s shoes and skins. “I’ve never felt objectified about sex when I’m half-naked, so why would you?” Because, bucko, you didn’t grow up in a culture that sells your body everywhere. So there’s a huge part of me that is deeply cynical about a man’s ability ever to understand what it’s like to be a woman. After all, the gender that predominantly draws penises in graffitti probably doesn’t care enough to understand.

(cue sensitive man replying “Oh, I understand, are they mean to you? Awww…may I get in your pants now?”)

On the other hand, maybe little by little as more women continue to pursue their artistic dreams, we can take over the comic book culture for something better. Maybe we will win in the end. Because, yannow, maybe the logic of, “we send our male soldiers into battle armored, shouldn’t our superheroines maybe not be fighting half-naked” will finally kick in. Batman wears a full-body armor suit. Why are we all naked? Are we gonna flash the bad guys to death? Or do we just enjoy being ogled during battle? Because come on, you know if you head into a battle dressed like that they’lll be cracking jokes and slapping ass all over the place. There’s a certain amount of practicality that I think will eventually kick in. “Hey, look, we just discovered armor! Superheroine mortality rates plummet!”
Shit, right? That’ll be the day.

Aaaaaaaactually, if your scope of comics was actually about comics and not the MainStream Corporate-Comics then you’d find a whole massive horde of indie comics out there that depict women more naturally. Strangers in paradise anyone? They just don’t survive or get in the limelight because of… gasp.. THE DUMB AUDIENCE.

“The problem is girls don’t actually read comics….” You just invalidated your entire argument with this statement. “Girls”, that is to say women of all ages very much DO read comics. We also write them and draw them.

I am not attacked to overly muscled men (like the photo you posted). However, on a complete different line of thought, the women’s outfits are also impractical. “I’m going to go fight a bad guy… what to wear, what to wear? Oh, how about my matching metal underwear set, four-inch heels and a cape. Perfect.” Because the bad guy never aims for the arms, legs or stomach.

Sexuality in and of itself is not sexist, and doesn’t need to be villified. People or fictional people showing some skin or wearing tight clothes is not inherently immature or problematic. Nor does including sexuality as part of the mix make it the only part, or objectify. Finding someone sexy does not mean you disrespect them.

The original designs are a lot better than these in my opinion. Long live ART.