Not into comics, but I vote not guilty.
Posted on 07/15/2009 2:46:29 AM PDT by tlb
Last week, we learned about a man possessed of a bold and praiseworthy vision.
DC Comics editor Matt Idelson. The pronouncement he issued ...
"I never want to see Supergirl's panties again."
And with that, the character of Supergirl ... started wearing red shorts under her skirt.
1. The decision suggests that superhero comics may at long last stand ready to evolve beyond the adolescent objectification of the female form in which they have so gleefully wallowed for long decades; and
2. Supergirl flies, duh. She hovers over people's heads. In a skirt.
As the girl-wonder folks note, when Supergirl was reintroduced into continuity back in '04, she wore an outfit that might as well have been designed by a committee of pimps and 14-year-old boys, complete with a miniskirt that was somehow permanently stuck in Seven-Year-Itch mode.
It was little more than a thin bolt of blue fabric — the comic-book equivalent of those long white banners that forever fluttered in the air above Renaissance Italy to keep folk from glimpsing the full cherubim monty.
She was also drawn in a manner openly defiant of the physical laws of human anatomy: Girlfriend was basically an esophagus with hip bones.
But things have been looking up for her of late. In her current series...downplaying some of the vampy-trampy aspects she got saddled with upon her return.
Meanwhile, artist Igle has given her a real, physiologically plausible body, outfitted in a costume that is growing steadily less, in the artist's words, "hoochie."
We salute DC Comics editor Matt Idelson and his creative team, for their dedication to creating something that's proven maddeningly elusive, something we've needed for years: a Supergirl comic you can recommend to a teenage girl without feeling the least bit "To Catch a Predator" about it.
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
Perhaps some of us like Supergirl in panties. Can’t have us men enjoying something drawn to our tastes, can we? No! Feminists forbid it (even as they push loose sex and abortion as virtues)!
Not into comics, but I vote not guilty.
Glen Weldon’s disdain for Supergirl’s underwear sounds a little... gay, shall we say?
Oh, just make her fat and put her in spandex.
He does seem overly concerned about the female perspective on comics.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2008/10/i_blame_the_boobwindow_or_why.html
Don’t ask me why he’s so opposed to marketing to males, but he seems to have a grudge against scantily clad women in comics.
Is that the before or the asster version of the costume?
I am guess that is a before shot.
When the majority of readers of comic books turn female, then ask me if Supergirl should change her outfit.
when Supergirl was reintroduced into continuity back in '04, she wore an outfit that might as well have been designed by a committee of pimps and 14-year-old boysAlmost as if 14 year old boys are the *readers* of comic books. Go figure.
Comics priced themselves out of the kid market years ago. Its the college aged kids to 30somethings that read most of them anymore.
Probably because he had a daughter maybe?
Not-A-Ping!!!
B^)
Well, look at all the money comic books make from an almost exclusively male readership, and then think that the manufaturers could double that number if there was a similar female readership as well. It’s not about sexism or feminism, it’s about the possibility of making truckloads of money - who wouldn’t want to double their profits?
And, as a female comic book fan, I can back him up on that article. When you look at what girls are buying in your local comic book store, it’s almost always the Buffy/Angel comics or girl-oriented manga, where the girls’ bodies don’t ‘defy gravity and human physiology’ and the clothes they wear resemble, well, actual clothes instead of a cross between underwear and ‘ultimate wrestling’ costumes.
Hyzenthlay: “Well, look at all the money comic books make from an almost exclusively male readership, and then think that the manufaturers could double that number if there was a similar female readership as well.”
Yeah, but isn’t it the comic manufacturers’ business what they want to produce? So you think there should be more comics for women, and the women in comics should be drawn more anatomically correct. Good for you. Go out there and start publishing comics as you see fit.
You see, I’m kind of on the side of liberty here. I personally don’t read many comics any more, but I respect the right of comic publishers to publish what they want. The author of the article wants to tell the publishers how to run their business.
What’s the author’s beef? He can publish whatever he wants, can’t he? No, he’d rather tell other people they are wrong to publish comics with large-breasted women in skimpy comics. Some people apparently like large-breasted women in skimpy comics. What about THEIR right to buy and read what they want?
And, as several on this thread noted, including the author, manga is already available to suit their tastes. So buy manga. No, the author is apparently on a mission to make other comic publishers change to match the author’s vision of proper comics. That’s why I came in on the side of the panty-wearing version of Supergirl.
HamiltonJay: “Probably because he had a daughter maybe?”
So, he’s on a vendetta against scantily clad, large-breasted women in comics because he has a daughter. “Yeah, all you comic publishers. Get them women covered up, ‘cause I have a daughter.”
With rampant pornography on the internet and a culture that glorifies women as little more than pieces of meat, this guy is on a tear against Supergirl in panties. Geesh!
Hey, cover that up! There are people with daughters here!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.