Comic Book Resources

Please, that is at least a two piece bathing suit.

I agree with Savre, it’s two pieces.
But i remember, when Loeb gave Wondy, that black 90tie leather biker outfit or the white make love, not war suit, she had and people, quickly agreed, that they wanted the bathing suit back.

I always thought of it more as an exercise leotard. It’s practical insofar as she’s bulletproof and it probably allows for excellent freedom of movement.

(Insofar as any superhero’s costume is. Really, Clark, your underwear on the outside?)

To be really sexually objectified, WW should be wearing a two piece bikini with a thong.

She’s remarkably tame compared to what women really wear as a bathing suit!

“Superman will always be objectified and not taken seriously as a fictional character until he stops wearing skintight underwear on the outside of his pants.”

Yawn. Next.

I seem to remember that Perez’s Wonder Woman outfit included a short skirt as well.

To be really sexually objectified, WW should be wearing a two piece bikini with a thong.

And some artists have pretty much rendered Wonder Woman’s costume that way.

Which I think sums up my feelings: I don’t think the costume is the problem so much as the need for artists to fill it out quite so much. And the fact that boys (of whatever age) make up 85% of the comic reading audience*.

At the same time, I will agree insofar as Diana Prince: Wonder Woman may well be one of the best runs of the character, ever, and that was all about abandoning the costume and the Amazon backstory. But I don’t think the character was treated any more seriously as a result of it.

* This statistic was completely pulled out of my ass, by the way. Though it certainly seems to add up with my anecdotal experience

Wonder Woman’s problem is not that she’s all about sex. The problem is that DC is in denial about the fact that she’s all about sex. Without all the weird kinky stuff that William Marston established for the character, she’s just the girl version of Superman, and that’s boring.

Wonder Woman will not be taken seriously until her personality has been solidified.

Who is she? Warrior Princess, Super-Strong girl scout, or the former cheerleader all grown up?

It’d also help if she had an original subgenre and any sort of consistency.

I agree with Michael above. Yawn.

You could write off the entire superhero genre on the basis of this comment.

Wonder Woman’s costume is no more ridiculous than any one else’s.

Where does the 1960′s Emma Peel-style Wonder Woman fit into this hypothesis?

//\Oo/\\

Is this an issue anywhere other than the comics bloggyverse and maybe some message boards? Has any sort of mainstream media outlet picked up on this? In short, does the world at large really care?

I’m not trying to belittle the issue, but this is something I’ve been legitimately curious about all week.

Namor and Herc have some pretty kinky outfits too. Both have been changed into more conservative outfits, but the fans keep demanding to see the flesh, and the return to their sexually objectified original outfits.

So yeah…*YAWN*

Agree with T. Hawkman has a very revealing outfit, but people aren’t dressing up like him on the cover of Playgirl.
I do not think that Wonder Woman is a boring female Superman without constant reference to bondage. She is an Amazon, she has ties to mythology, she is a diplomat, and she is a warrior, not just asuper hero.
Captain America used to have racist slogans on the cover of his book, but that was left in the past, so I don’t see why people insist on dated ideas like Wonder Woman’s weakness being men binding her.

Wonder Woman will never be taken seriously as a fictional character.

Period.

So just get used to it already – it’s been that way since before most, if not all, of us were born, and it ain’t ever going to change. EVER.

I’ve always felt this way about Wonder Woman’s costume and still do. Whenever she wears armour/skirts/capes/whatever over it, she generally looks much better and what I’d imagine an Amazon warrior princess would look like.

Yes, I spend a lot of time thinking about what an Amazon warrior princess would look like, but that doesn’t make me Robert Crumb.

Superhero costumes aren’t about practicality and realism. They’re a colorful if abstract expression of the characters when they are in their heroic forms (as opposed to their mortal forms or guises). As far WW being taken seriously she taken as seriously as any other superhero. Besides, I’ve often heard from women who grew up with the character that the outfit is one of the many reasons they like the character. Christ, feminists have even defended that costume.

To me this is just more anti-costume BS that comes from people just not understanding one of the genre’s basic troupes and you know, if you hate superhero costumes then fine, create “The Unobtrusive Adventures of Plainclothes Person” and make a great freakin comic. But Wonder Woman and Superman have costumes and not only are they parts of the characters who exist in a visual medium, they’re pretty damn cool.

To me this is just more anti-costume BS that comes from people

Or it could be more Anti-African Elephant BS. Or anti Culligan Water Heater BS. Or anti-topograhic map BS.

Since there’s equal evidence for ANY of those as there is for “anti costume.”

Absolutely none, either explicit or implied. In fact, since this is taken from a blog that’s about 50% superhero centric and, as far as I can remember, the idea of costumes has never come up, the anti-African elephant bias claims would make a little bit more sense.

So if you want to want to ignore what’s actually been said, mentally replace the actual text with, say “I HATE SUPERHERO COSTUMES SO MUCH”, and then rail against the imaginary version… Well, Anti-African Elephant would be a little more creative.

Lordy.

But I should have probably given all of the context, (Which I completely agree with, by the way.)

I’ve been reading, here and there, a lot of the reactions (some predictable, some not so) to the whole Playboy cover thing. And for the record, sure, it’s in questionable taste- but not for Playboy, who has painted superhero logos (altered, as is the Wondy cover if you look closely) on women before. I think that it’s intended in a cutesy, jokey kind of way and not in a mean-spirited fashion. But many don’t see it like that.

Here’s the thing, to me, and I feel like I’m whacking the hornet’s nest with a stick when I say this-

Wonder Woman will always be objectified and not taken seriously as a fictional character until she stops wearing what is in effect a glorified one piece bathing suit.

It is a costume design that practically begs to be depicted in cheesecake/good girl art type poses, as Adam Hughes will attest. The only way she could show more skin is if she is naked, or wearing a two-piece or thong, which she may as well be. Besides that, for me anyway, there’s always been a disconnect for me when I see her in the pages of JLA or the infrequent instances when I pick up her own comic and I ponder just how unrealistic and awkward it looks for this Princess of Themyscira (sp?), this noble, valiant warrior woman, clad in that one-piece, standing in a room full of fully clothed men and women, sometimes in all sorts of weather (yeah, I know, godlike powers, temperatures probably don’t effect her). Obviously, I’m in the minority here, but even when drawn by the best in the biz such as Bolland, Thompson, Mahnke or Hughes, that costume has always appeared impractical and sometimes even downright silly.

And let me get this in: I know that they’ve tried to give her different outfits- the 90′s black two piece jacket spandex biker shorts thing (which I thought looked OK except for the crop top), the 60′s Diana Prince- Wonder Woman days- but nobody liked them, or if they did like these looks, the corporate trademark-perpetuating interests stepped in and said “Cease and desist- Wonder Woman is known for her star spangled swimsuit, and we can’t have people getting confused.” I hope nobody thinks that the 70′s Wonder Woman TV show was memorable for Lynda Carter’s acting ability…nope, it was the statuesque Carter tricked out in a red, white and blue leather corset.

Sure- Wondy should be a feminist icon and inspiration, not to mention the same for young girls growing up who can look to the character as a strong, proud, self-sufficient female role model, and as far as I can tell, in most cases, the various creators have taken pains to see that she’s depicted in that fashion.

But the damned one-piece clashes with this depiction on at least a visual level, and I’m sure in others as well.

Of course, I can only speak for myself, and this is how I see the situation. Many, many other people, who love the character a lot more than I, obviously don’t have this problem. It’s just my unsolicited two cents’ worth, make of it what thou will.

if you hate superhero costumes then fine

Strawman needs a brain.

The answer to your questions, Bill D., is “No.”

Wonder Woman will always be objectified and not taken seriously as a fictional character until she stops wearing what is in effect a glorified one piece bathing suit.

You can say something approximating this about Batman. I don’t see how anyone agreeing with this hasn’t waived his or her right to complain about the Joel Schumacher Batman.

Wonder Woman will always be objectified and not taken seriously as a fictional character until she stops wearing what is in effect a glorified one piece bathing suit.

And those of you complaining about One More Day? You aren’t entitled to complain either.

Come on, guys. We all know that much of WW’s appeal is wondering how she feels about all those males around her trying not to look at her breasts or her naked back and suggestive clothing.

Her costume is not a standard female superhero suit by any measure; it’s an embarrassing yet tintilating outfit designed to remind people that she’s female and desirable.

There _are_ male versions of the same idea, most notably (as mentioned) Namor. One could mention Iceman and others, but they are not supposed to be the eye candy that Namor and WW are meant to be.

…it’s an embarrassing yet tintilating outfit designed to remind people that she’s female and desirable.

There _are_ male versions of the same idea…

I remember Dr Fredric Wertham’s example was Batman and Robin.

Personally, I hate Culligan Water Heaters. With a passion.

Yeah, and Indian elephants have always been superior to their African counterparts.

i don’t take any of the dc universe seriously as fictional characters except for batman and superman…

just kidding

the wonder woman bathing suit crack is a logical argument, but not exactly a water tight one…we take female beach volleyball players seriously as athletes, don’t we?

Or it could be more Anti-African Elephant BS. Or anti Culligan Water Heater BS. Or anti-topograhic map BS.

Since there’s equal evidence for ANY of those as there is for “anti costume.”

I don’t agree with the “anti-costume” assessment, but to compare it to the irrelevancy of “anti-African Elephant BS,” “anti-Culligan Water Heater BS,” or “anti-topograhic map BS” is detached from reality, because not only is Wonder Woman not nude (and therefore costumed), but no African elephant, water heater, or topographical map is constantly available to her beck-and-call — which is completely compatible with “anti-African elephant,” “anti-water heater,” or “anti-topographical map BS.”

I’m glad you agreeing WW walking around in a bathing suit means she invites portrayal of her sexual availability aren’t disagreeing Batman and Robin walking around in fetish gear means they invite portrayals their gay. I guess I’ve been naive all this thinking of them as straight.

…they’re gay. I guess I’ve been naive all this time thinking of them as straight.

Wonder Woman will always be objectified and not taken seriously as a fictional character until she stops wearing what is in effect a glorified one piece bathing suit.

To me this is just more anti-costume BS that comes from people…

So if you want to want to ignore what’s actually been said, mentally replace the actual text with, say “I HATE SUPERHERO COSTUMES SO MUCH”, and then rail against the imaginary version… Well, Anti-African Elephant would be a little more creative.

Again, I don’t agree with the anti-costume assessment (because no one agreeing with Johny has denied Batman and Robin run around in fetish gear), but the relationship between what was said and Daiyongo’s interpretation of what’s been said is 1:1. The same is not true for “anti-African elephant,” “anti-water heater,” or “anti-topographical map BS.” Look at the quote this post is based on.

Lordy.

But I should have probably given all of the context…

Daiyongo went by everyone’s reaction to the portion of the post you cited. Again, the relationship between what was said and Daiyongo interpretation of what’s been said is 1:1.

“Is this an issue anywhere other than the comics bloggyverse and maybe some message boards? Has any sort of mainstream media outlet picked up on this? In short, does the world at large really care?

I’m not trying to belittle the issue, but this is something I’ve been legitimately curious about all week.”

Well, Bill D, there was a short review just this week of Jodi Piccoult’s WW Graphic novel in one of London’s freebie evening newspapers which have a HUGE readership. The writer used about half of the short review quoting Jodi’s opinion that a one-piece strapless bustier wasn’t very practical female superhero gear.

So that’s two mainstream writers for a start.

I think the costume lets her down too.

Daiyongo went by everyone’s reaction to the portion of the post you cited. Again, the relationship between what was said and Daiyongo interpretation of what’s been said is 1:1.

Where did ANYONE say anything “anti costume?” in this post?

For both men and women, most every artisst starts off drawing the nude form. The underwear-on-the-outside looks is really just drawing a line across the wrists and neck, and telling the colorist that everything else is costume. Hence why superhero movies really have a hard time designing a costume that resembles a skintight outfit yet doesn’t look patently ridiculous.

X-Men eschewed the indiviudal outfits for tailored-jacket uniforms. The Superman Returns costume was famous so expensive and fragile that they needed a new one every few days. Daredevil’s was posisbly the best, but man, it must have colelcted sweat, and stunk. Let’s not start on the Batman nipples.

If they ever make a Wonder Woman movie, hopefully someone will design a flag-colored outfit that looks more like clothes and less like a bathing suit.

I agree with Michael above. Yawn.

You could write off the entire superhero genre on the basis of this comment.

Wonder Woman’s costume is no more ridiculous than any one else’s.

You misunderstand. The criticism is not of the costume, but of the context and meaning attached to a character that wears THAT costume. It’s not about calling WW’s cotume ridiculous. It’s about saying that it’s ridiculous to attach serious ideology to a character that wears that costume.

We’re not talking about sexualized superheroes. We’re talking about a specific character that has been appropriated as a symbol of feminism, after being sexualized in the first place.

And you could write off the entire superhero genre on a lot less than that comment.

Anectodally, I keep an eye on regular entertainment, comic book and US news in google news and yahoo news, and the only place I’ve seen mention of this is on CSBG. I don’t think there’s been anything on CBR.

IMO, I think the mainstream media sees this as a non-controversial retread of the same old arguments of sex & WW made above. Tempest in a blogo-teacup-sphere.

Wonder Woman will always be objectified and not taken seriously as a fictional character until she stops wearing what is in effect a glorified one piece bathing suit.

To me this is just more anti-costume BS that comes from people…

Where did ANYONE say anything “anti costume?” in this post?

Daiyongo didn’t cite “anti costume” as a quote. He was qualifying Johnny calling WW’s costume “a glorified one piece bathing suit” as anti-costume. If Fredrick Wertham called Batman and Robin’s costumes fetish-gear, would you still have a problem with Daiyongo calling him anti-costume, or are you sheltering a double-standard?

I don’t disagree Wonder Woman wears a glorified bathing suite, and I don’t disagree Batman and Robin wear fetish-gear, so I don’t consider any of this anti-costume. But I’m not having any hardship understanding what Daiyongo is referring to. What is the hardship?

To be honest, to me the costume is so iconic that I barely notice how revealing it is unless artists purposefully ‘good girl’ Wonder Woman. It’s just how Wonder Woman looks. Not to say that they couldn’t do wonders by putting her back in armor.

One thing that distorts the issue is that there probably isn’t another female superhero that Playboy could have used which would have been recognizable, or put the body paint to good use.

Sue Storm? That’d be boring – it’d probably be the movie uniform, so it’d just be neck-to-toes blue.

Lara Croft is kinda passé now, and the bodypaint-instead-of-spandex thing rears its head again.

So, it falls on Wonder Woman.