Shining Knight is the best [Open Spoiler Within] character of all time

I’m laughing my ass off at the idea that this is stripper attire, or even particularly unusual or inappropriate for girls in Supergirl’s age group.

Even Power Girl’s costume, which shows part of her breasts (Gasp!) shows less skin than you’ll see on an average beach, let alone a strip club.

Black Canary? Wonder Woman? I’d look twice at any woman wearing their costumes on the street, but I certainly wouldn’t think it was inappropriate - just a little odd.

Zatanna…I’ve been to magic shows…I’ve seen female magicians and magician’s assistants wearing exactly her costume (the less super-heroey one).

On the other hand, eventually we get to Starfire, who does wear a costume, in the current comics, that would be better suited for a strip club than walking down the street. Its real sin, however, is being damned fugly. (The current version is a little more revealing than the one in the above link.)

Kory’s also unabashedly sexual. Is she a slut? Not at all, but she does acknowledge, and enjoy, her sexuality. I can’t fault that as a lesson, to be honest. She’s rather more…exhuberant about than I’d be comfortable seeing a younger girl expressing herself, but even so, I can’t say ‘Oh, they shouldn’t be portraying Kory like that, because girls will get the wrong idea!’, because there’s nothing wrong with Kory being the way she is (because she’s not a kid, and therefor there’s no creepy element to it) and if she’s the only influence a girl’s getting about her sexuality, then there’s something worse than how a comic book character acts going on. And the idea that Kory’s costume would put off female readers… Well, if DC decided to have Adam Hughs do the covers of Outsiders or Teen Titans, and he did a cheesecake shot of Kory every issue, then I could see it. Not the way she is used, though. And the same would hold if it was cheesecake shots of Wonder Girl, Jade, Speedy, or Raven, too, despite none of them wearing particularly revealing costumes.

Starfire’s costume bugs me doubly, because she, for a time, wore this little number, which, completely aside from being less revealing is also fairly attractive.

But they’re not walking down the street. They’re fighting crime/badguys/whatever. Even the invulnerable ones look silly doing it in those outfits. Superman has everything covered but his head, Batman, his chin. These Superheroines all seem to think that it’s more appropriate to combat evil while wearing a bathing suit. Or that the best thing to wear while you’re flying over everyone’s head is a miniskirt.

Excuse me while I pick myself up off the floor and stop laughing my ASS off.

Do you SERIOUSLY think that Superman or Batman look LESS ridiculous running around in their costumes than Supergirl or Peeg?

Sure they look a little silly. So do the boys. And I’d say that more of the girls wear costumes that, minus capes or masks (and any weapons), could be taken as street clothes than boys. (Supergirl, Stargirl, Hawkgirl, Grace Choi, some of Black Canary’s costumes, as opposed to…well, all I can think of is the current Mr Terriffic and original Flash. This is off the top of my head. And surprisingly JSA-heavy. If I decided to go through my collection I could no doubt find several other examples for both sexes.)

And skintight, contour-hugging spandex isn’t really any less ‘revealing’ than actual skin, on that note.

And what happened to ‘stripper outfits’, hmm?

shrug. They still look like stripper outfits. If I’m not saying that every post it doesn’t make it any less true.

Yeah, the boys look silly too. They just look less silly than the girls. There’s a difference between skintight spandex and spandex covering only the essentials.

Course, I’m also critical of the way they’re drawn. Note how Catwoman looks as plausible as a character like that gets in the first 25 issues of her current series. Then in issue 26 she’s back to looking like a stripper.

The fact that you’re failing to defend the statement speaks volumes about the veracity of it. Almost as much as the fact that I actually showed pictures of the characters in question to demonstrate it’s ridiculous on the face of it.

I’m not sure how I’m failing to defend my statement. All anyone has to do is look at what they’re wearing. No amount of rationalising by you will beat that.

You’re KIDDING, right?

You MUST be kidding.

Because if you’re seriously saying that Supergirl, or Power Girl (or any but a handful of mainstream superheroines and villainesses) are wearing clothing that even comes CLOSE to a stripper’s working clothes, or show more skin than you’ll see visiting a beach, or going down a city street on a warm day, I have to ask why you haven’t left your home - or turned on a television set or opened a magazine - for the last 40 years.

I’ve provided pictures of the characters in question…and, hey, here’s a cover from Cosmo - a magazine aimed at women, just for comparison.

Cosmo Girl Supergirl

Cosmo Girl Power Girl

So…Who’s in the more revealing outfits? The superheroines or the models in the women’s magazine?

Retract the ‘stripper outfit’ joke of an argument, and try to salvage some semblance of sense for your case.

Just to head off the inevetable - I’m not claiming that Cosmo models wear ordinary clothes, just that women actually read magazines that show far more skin than any but the most revealing mainstream superheroine costumes - we’re talking Starfire and Phantom Lady levels.

I’m sorry, but are you even reading your own words? You’re comparing Superheroines to cover models.

You seem to be trying to have some sort of Picard/Kirk internet geekfight with me here, I’m not trying to argue anything.

I’m just pointing out the obvious.

By the way, my sisters first (and only) comment upon me showing her that pic of Powergirl you linked to: “Superheroines are too busy fighting crime to go out and get a bikini wax!”

I’m reading my own words - are you? Or even your own?

You’re claiming a stripper will wear this.

You’re claiming that an average woman would be turned away by this.

A crop-top and a short-ish skirt (or shorts) are something you’ll see on the street, or a sports field, not on a strip club stage.

The skirt might be a little longer, but the top might actually show some cleavage. Won’t have a cape, though.


http://www.marshassportswear.com/twirl_pages/crop_tank.html

Bare legs and a little bit of cleavage, you’ll find at any beach, or even on the street on a really warm day, and Peeg is completely covered compared to women on magazines that are aimed at women and bought in huge numbers by that demographic.

Your ‘obvious’ statement is factually incorrect, insulting to the intelligence of anyone you expect to buy it, and sexist in its supposed implications.

Your sister has a clever sense of humour. I applaud her.

The fact that you seem to think that it proves your point is almost as amusing as her comment itself.

Let’s play a game I like to call “Guess if it’s a superhero or a condom packet.”

Ready? Let’s begin.

Girl 1
Girl 2

I see your point. At least I think I do. Because the point you appear to be trying to make is ridiculously weak.

The fact that a condom manufacturer saw fit to include a picture of an attractive girl in a crop top on a condom packet doesn’t suddenly make crop tops slutty stripper wear.

Hell, by your logic the New England Patriots football team are strippers, because their logo is very similar to that used by Tojan condoms.

And, of course, that’s just the lack of internal logic of your own argument, not the fact that I’ve shown the sort of outfit Supergirl’s wearing - sometimes showing more skin! - in innocent everyday contexts.

Your arguments are getting weaker every time you make one.

Once again I wasn’t actually arguing in the first place. Youre the one trying to make it into an argument and I have better things to do. All I’m saying is that many superheroines wear ridiculously skimpy outfits that end up making them look more like strippers than superheros.

Male superheros usually wear silly outfits too, but they’re not ridiculously oversexualised.

The fact that real world examples you’re using are Cosmo covergirls and beachware sort of prove yourself wrong.

Oh, I see the light!

OF COURSE women are turned off by Cosmo.

OF COURSE bathing suits (and cheeleader uniforms, and dance costumes, and the crop-tops and shorts that every third female between the ages of 16 and 30 wear whenever the weather allows, and half a dozen other completely innocent outfits) are stripper outfits.

What a crock.

And, yes, you ARE arguing a point.

Or have you forgotten that you’ve made the following comments:

Neither one of these is ‘stating the obvious’. The first is stating an opinion, and supporting it with an incorrect supposedly factual statement. The second is stating an opinion and failing to support it at all.

Claiming that you’re not arguing a point does not remove the onus of proving supposedly factual points, or supporting opinions.

So. Again. Are you going to retract your claim, or are you going to back it up with something other than counter-factual opinions, and claims that you’re not arguing anything?

If you do the former, good on you. If the latter, I’ll be happy to continue this discussion. If you take option #3 - continue claiming you’re making factual comments, and refusing to back them up at all, then I’m done with you. Dishonesty reflects badly on you.

Cosmo covergirls aren’t fighting crime.

They’re far more likely to be found in a strip club than on a crime fighter.

Your link doesn’t support your point, I’m afraid.

It supports the completely non-contraversial fact that female readers don’t read American comics very often. If I’ve given the impression that I’m denying that fact, I apologise for my lack of clarity.

Unfortunately, it makes no claims as to why this is. The only ‘why’ it addresses at all is why there are fewer females in the industry than you’d expect - the statistic you quoted is not the point of the article, it’s a data point leading to a discussion of whether there is discrimination against females in the industry.

I’ll see if I can dig up some actual stats on the matter (I’m not promising anything…my google fu is weak.), but from my experience, a bigger reason for the disparity than the fact that some female comic characters - mostly from companies like Image, or other lesser companies - are sexist stereotypes with their T&A played up for all they’re worth; is the general perception that comics - particularly superhero comics, but all comics save manga - are a boys only club - a perception that a lot of fans and store owners have, and act on, which makes it worse, because a lot of potential female fans who (in general, rightly) dismiss the ‘boys’ club’ and decide to give American comics a try, will walk right into it.

Yes, the other does play a part. I’ve never denied it, and again apologise if I haven’t been clear on that point. But the fact that characters like…well, almost every female character created by Rob Liefeld, for instance, are offensive sexist stereotypes, to play to sexist fanboy fantasies, other characters like, say, Adam Warren’s version of the Dirty Pair, are ‘offensive sexist stereotypes’ for purposes of humour (not at the expense of women, but at the expense of the stereotypes) and parody (although someone casually glancing at a DP could be forgiven for missing this aspect of it) and other characters, such as Starfire, could be mistaken for OSSs by someone who happened to judge the book by it’s cover… This fact doesn’t mean that any other female character who isn’t covered chin to toes is an OSS, nor does it mean an average woman who walks into a GOOD comic store (like the one I go to) and won’t be made to feel unwelcome by a creepy owner and patrons, will perceive them as such. And here, we see again, that the ‘no girls allowed’ attitude of a certain part of the fandom plays a huge role in the problem.

Nor, to address the point Kyle’s made that you believe to be irrelevant, does this make them bad role-models for young female readers who happen to read the books.

A potential female reader who saw, say, Genie on a cover may quite understandably (and correctly) pass it by as sexist crap (or, she may know that other, better portrayed, female characters also suffer from bad costumes and cheesecake covers, and give it a chance. The poor girl would be disappointed, in this case, however, since this IS Liefeld.), but it doesn’t follow that she would feel the same way about Supergirl.

This is true, in the real world.

But in the real world, so would be Batman’s costume. There’s a non-zero chance of any of the outfits in question showing up in either context, but the chances are rather better in a strip club.

The point I’m attempting to make is two-fold.

  1. In the real world, they’re also far less likely to be found in a strip club than out.

and

  1. We’re not talking about the real world. We’re talking about a world where ridiculous and impractical costumes, the only real rationality behind which is that they look good, are the norm for both sexes.

A vanishingly small (But non-zero) number of superheroines from the big two, and a slightly larger number from the smaller companies, dress like strippers. A vanishingly small number of male heroes also do.

More wear outfits that could be seen on the streets any time the weather allows. The same, again, applies to a smaller number of male characters.

Still others wear outfits you’d expect to see on a beach. Yes, a few of the boys, too.

A handful wear costumes more suited to fashion show runways than anywhere else at all. I…can’t think of any male characters who fit in this group.

Most characters of both sexes wear outfits that will only exist in superhero comics. Some of those are revealing to differing extents (for both sexes), some aren’t.

A potential female reader, if put off by the fact that what Supergirl or Power Girl, or Black Canary, or Mary Marvel, or whichever superheroine wears is a really odd choice for fighting crime, would more than likely have the same reaction to Superman, or Green Lantern, or Batman, or Green Arrow. Conversely, a female reader who’s not put off by Superman wouldn’t likely have a problem with Supergirl. I’ll grant that some potential female readers will have the disproportionate response against the less extreme female costumes, but they are, in my experience, a minority. The costumes are all silly, and inappropriate for crime fighting. But they’re part of the genre, and most potential female readers accept or reject it for both sexes.

Another point that I’m not sure why I (or another poster) haven’t addressed before. The OP claims to be speaking of female comic characters, period. But this thread has, thus far, been restricted to superheroines - DC especially.

Once you leave the realm of superheroics (which, although a dominant genre, as far as sales go, is way behind in sheer number of titles available), the concept that potential female readers would be put off by the sexist portrayals of the female becomes even weaker - although, granted, it still doesn’t fade to complete ridiculousness.

I’ve never claimed, although I’ll grant I can’t entirely fault the perception that I have, that there are no badly portrayed female characters in comics. There are. And even characters generally portrayed well have occasionally been handled badly. My claim is just that the majority of the characters from the biggest companies don’t fit into that group, and Ystin isn’t better, in that respect, than most.

Ystin has the potential to be handled badly, just like Power Girl. Just like Power Girl can be portrayed as a bimbo good for nothing but her tits, Ystin can be used in a way that supports the idea that a woman cannot be strong without becoming a man in all but anatomy. Hell, even Genie has the potential to be handled WELL with the right creative team behind her. (I’m not holding my breath, mind, and said team will most likely give her a new costume, but the potential exists.)

And, now that the frustration has been alleviated, I apologise for the rather high levels of sarcasm in some of my earlier posts - although the points I was trying to make still stand, and thank you for taking my advice to heart, even if I wasn’t giving it in the most tactful way.

My whole point, and the pictures back me up far more than any lengthy posts by you will accomplish, is that even for superheros in a fictional universe superheroines are ridiculously oversexualised.

They’re wearing outfits that look like they were picked for sex appeal first, and looks/symbolism far second. Not only that but where the men are all muscled like Mr Universe competitors, they almost all have the bodies of supermodels with implants.

If you want to go beyond superheroines, I was enjoying Queen and Country where the lead was a fairly realistic female spy, who looked and acted the part. Then they changed artists, and BAM, she looked like a barbie doll and she was going into situations wearing a net shirt over a black bra.

You’re wrong in claiming that you said “Most girls don’t like comics”. What you actually said certainly was a blanket statement made without qualifiers

from post #22

You did not say ‘If more girls liked comics’. You simply said “girls”.

Again, you have added qualifiers not found in your original statements.

SilentGoldfish

I see croptops on the streets of Philadelphia fairly often. Many women of Generation X seem to like them. Manufacturers have responded by making croptops featuring logos from Thundercats, GI Joe, He Man, Strawberry Shortcake, Rainbow Brite and other cartoons of our youth.

Re Starfire

I mentioned this to a friend and she (That’s right. I said she. Her apartment is strewn with comic books and action figures.) said that she thought it was because Tamaranian society had different views on nudity. When she said that, I remembered a scene of her tearful father welcoming Kori home. He’s wearing a crown, jeweled bracelets, sandals, a cape, and a kilt that doesn’t reach his knees. More research is needed, but preliminary finidngs indicate that most Tamaranians show a lot of skin and that they do not consider this improper or sexual.