Does Wonder Woman's Costume Undermine Her Portrayal As A Strong Female Character?

[Robo Ape]

Does Wonder Woman's costume undermine her portrayal as one of the DCU's strongest female characters?

Shouldn't she be wearing something a bit more practical, after all they changed Catwoman's costume to make it seem more practical & less glamour. WW has worn better costumes such as her armour, than her traditional look. So is it time foe a permanent change?

[carabas]

Does Wonder Woman's costume undermine her portrayal as one of the DCU's strongest female characters?I very much think so. I don't even think it is all that sexy. It looks silly. IMO it's just one of the worst superhero costumes ever.

So is it time foe a permanent change?absofragginglutely.

[empty_handed]

NOOOOO WAAAY!!!

IT’S ICONIC!!

Would you say the same to batmans costume?? or superman???...

NO cause the costume is just PERFECT!!..

:mad:

*sigh*

its not a costume.. ulike superman and batman... its a Ceremonial Battle Armor

[West Mantooth]

It does and it doesn't. I mean we are talking about a medium wear Bats and Supes still wear the "undies" yet Superman catches more heat for it than Bats. As a matter a fact, I've never seen people ask for Bats to lose the trunks.

I think it comes in tandum (Supes and Wondy) with certain fans hating there personalities along with their power levels. Both have almost unlimited power so it's easier to pick at stuff they find unrelatable. So they hate their costumes as well.

Now on the flipside, I've seen people try to explain Wondy's outfit in terms of Greek culture, but that's just being dishonest and lame. Wondy's costume is a product of the American culture she existed in. The 1940s. It's not a coincidence that her costume mirrors the appeal of the Miss America bathing suits of that era.

[empty_handed]

It does and it doesn't. I mean we are talking about a medium wear Bats and Supes still wear the "undies" yet Superman catches more heat for it than Bats. As a matter a fact, I've never seen people ask for Bats to lose the trunks.

I think it comes in tandum (Supes and Wondy) with certain fans hating there personalities along with their power levels. Both have almost unlimited power so it's easier to pick at stuff they find unrelatable. So they hate their costumes as well.

Now on the flipside, I've seen people try to explain Wondy's outfit in terms of Greek culture, but that's just being dishonest and lame. Wondy's costume is a product of the American culture she existed in. The 1940s. It's not a coincidence that her costume mirrors the appeal of the Miss America bathing suits of that era.


the costume was EXPLAINED... IONS AGO!...

*sigh* *sigh* *sigh* *sigh* *sigh* *sigh* *sigh* *sigh*

as i said its a Ceremonial Battle Armor… the colors of the American flag came from the sacrifice of Steve Trevor’s mother… her name was Diana… Wonder Woman was named after her…

She crash landed on Themyscira by accident (same way Steve did years after)… she stayed with the amazons and she died saving them…

She had the American flag with her.. the amazons in a way… wanted to honor her memory so they incorporated it in the armor…

The golden Eagle Crest… represent the Golden Eagle of the night Diana was born…

The stars represent Cassiopeia constellation… “W”

http://www.astro.washington.edu/larson/Astro101/LecturesFraknoi/graphics/cassiopeia.jpg

The Bracelets were formed from the remnants of Zeus's legendary Aegis shield

[West Mantooth]

Thanks. I know the origin.

The point is that you'll never see a costume like that in any Greek Literature.

The artist depiction resembles a bathing suit(i'm not talking about the braclets or the the eagle). Just the basic cut of the outfit. I've never seen armor(in any century/culture) that had an open back and no support on the shoulders. Conan doesn't wear jeans because it doesn't accurately reflect what a barbarian would wear. I can accept that fact that her costume looks that way because it's fantasy. Attempting to give it a rationale isn't going to help.

[PKIronMan]

My sig used to have a line that said "Yank list: Ms. Marvel" so I'm not always PC but DC at least does a half-decent job compared to Marvel. Ms. Marvel has a constant wedgie on top of her ridiculous costume with no significance whatsoever.

Is the primary readership of WW younger than the 18 - 49yo demographic that everyone always talks about at quarterly earnings reports? If not then anything more practical might reduce readership.

I can tell this might sting a little.

[juggling man]

Make the bustier more of a brass or gold chest plate and a brass warrior's skirt. Something more along the lines of what she wore at the end of Kingdom Come. Inspired by greek warrior gear.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e6/WWDonna.jpg/200px-WWDonna.jpg

[BnL]

I don't think the costume necessarily undermines her, because she's always been about power, including sexual power. She's the one in control. Though I DO think it would be interesting to explore, in the comics themselves, how her appearance might undermine her message with some of the general population.

I also think it would be beneficial to make the costume look a little bit more like classical armor, just for practicality's sake. Turn the panties into a warrior's skirt and give her a shoulder strap. It's still sexy, but now it better reflects her heritage.

As for Superman and Batman's costumes not changing, that's not entirely true. In all the Batman movies, going back to Burton's first film, they changed the costume to be all black, so it won't look cheesy on film. In Superman Returns, the colors in Superman's costume were muted for the same reason. Similar alterations should be expected for Wonder Woman, if she's ever adapted for the big screen.

[juggling man]

I also think it would be beneficial to make the costume look a little bit more like classical armor, just for practicality's sake. Turn the panties into a warrior's skirt and give her a shoulder strap. It's still sexy, but now it better reflects her heritage.

As for Superman and Batman's costumes not changing, that's not entirely true. In all the Batman movies, going back to Burton's first film, they changed the costume to be all black, so it won't look cheesy on film. In Superman Returns, the colors in Superman's costume were muted for the same reason. Similar alterations should be expected for Wonder Woman, if she's ever adapted for the big screen.

My thoughts.

[carabas]

NOOOOO WAAAY!!!

IT’S ICONIC!!ICONIC!! and good are not quiet the same.

the costume was EXPLAINED... IONS AGO!...
And it was an overly convoluted explanation which didn't even make a whole lot of sense.

But it doesn't matter as Gail is apparently in the progress of rectifying that situation.

[NeoStar9X]

NOOOOO WAAAY!!!

IT’S ICONIC!!

Would you say the same to batmans costume?? or superman???...

NO cause the costume is just PERFECT!!..

:mad:

*sigh*

its not a costume.. ulike superman and batman... its a Ceremonial Battle Armor

It may be iconic but it still looks silly and does undermine her. She can be written as being a strong character till the cows come home. It doesn't change that when you first look at her she is half naked (which doesn't make any kind of sense given that she isn't invulerable) and looks more like at anytime she can start stripping. I'm far from a prude but WW's look has always bothered me. When she's in her armor it works well, hell even the skirt look was better then the panty and halter top outfit she wears.

[Robo Ape]

It does and it doesn't. I mean we are talking about a medium wear Bats and Supes still wear the "undies" yet Superman catches more heat for it than Bats. As a matter a fact, I've never seen people ask for Bats to lose the trunks.

I think it comes in tandum (Supes and Wondy) with certain fans hating there personalities along with their power levels. Both have almost unlimited power so it's easier to pick at stuff they find unrelatable. So they hate their costumes as well.

Now on the flipside, I've seen people try to explain Wondy's outfit in terms of Greek culture, but that's just being dishonest and lame. Wondy's costume is a product of the American culture she existed in. The 1940s. It's not a coincidence that her costume mirrors the appeal of the Miss America bathing suits of that era.

I certainly think that that Superman's costume does look a little silly in this day & age. But Batman especially the way he tends to be portrayed now has the most practical look, with his body armour.

To be fair it's not just WW with a less than great costume, look at Black Canary's costume or Power Girl’s, though in PG’s case I think it’s way for the character too show off her invulnerability.

[Sean Walsh]

Thanks. I know the origin.

The point is that you'll never see a costume like that in any Greek Literature.

As far as guys who ran around and played sports, and even some warriors, costumes were basically non-existant back in those times.

Cripes, America nearly cracked in half when Janet Jackson's boob was exposed a few years ago - imagine the uproar if Wonder Woman just decided "eh, screw clothes and armor and costumes. Let's fight the Injustice Gang nekked!"

IMHO, the most important thing about WW's credibility is her character. The costume is superflouous - if she acts decent and like a hero, then that's what really matters. The T&A freaks obviously don't get her if all they can see is a lot of skin.

[Deus ex Chris]

Regardless of whether it undermines her, it's a silly design. The same goes for Batman and Superman. All three of them need updates.

[Your Imaginary Pal]

she's a strong female character, she can lift tanks.
her costume doen't stop her from doing that.

[NeoStar9X]

Still last time I check she isn't invulnerable. She should be all kinds of scared up by now with as much skin she shows.

[carabas]

she's a strong female character, she can lift tanks.
her costume doen't stop her from doing that.Being able to lift tanks with one hand is not quite enough to get comics fans to take you seriously.

[Sijo]

The only problem I have with WW's costume is when artists draw it more racy than it really is. Seriously, some modern depictions have her shorts look almost like a thong! :eek:

I don't mind that on, say, The White Queen, but Diana is supposed to be a little more respectable.

[Stanlos]

Does Wonder Woman's costume undermine her portrayal as one of the DCU's strongest female characters?

Shouldn't she be wearing something a bit more practical, after all they changed Catwoman's costume to make it seem more practical & less glamour. WW has worn better costumes such as her armour, than her traditional look. So is it time foe a permanent change?

The costume itself? No.

The depiction of the costume for sexual titilation? ABSOLUTELY.

You can see that the costume itself isn't a problem by popping one of the Season Two or Three WW DVDs into your laptop. Lynda's Wonder Woman was confident and regal and she WAS indeed SEXY but she wasn't TRYING TO BE sexy.

Which makes all the difference in the world.

Many comic artists try to make the costume as small and exploitative as possible for the purpose of sexualizing the character for consumption. AH! sometimes made her top so small you really could not even see the details of the costume. Supershrunk top with a cups paired with globes that are Double Z's do give the image of someone who is trying very hard to show off their body.

But when you DON'T draw the shorts as thongs with super high V cuts in the front; when you DON'T draw the top Pacheco V&V style or AH! training bra on Double D style it doesn't do such a thing.

Especially when you consider she is coming from somewhere that doesn't have the confused notions on sex and sexuality and women that our world's dominant cultures do. Early Native American culture is more like Amazon culture would be than ours is in that regard.

The issue isn't her costume at all it is the attitude of some of the observers and the professionals who create the images. Especially the latter because they are the "directors" providing both the garb and the "acting". Look at some of these images:

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/wonder-woman-1987/186-1.jpg

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/wonder-woman-1987/159-1.jpg

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/wonder-woman-1987/154-1.jpg

[Stanlos]

vs

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/wonder-woman-1987/60-1.jpg

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/wonder-woman-1987/59-1.jpg

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/wonder-woman-1987/25-1.jpg

Note the expressions, the body language and the real estate. Note what is being communicated. Which are first and primarily figures of action and which are first and foremost geared toward sex appeal and fantasy enticement. Even the micro costume could function outside the realm of sexism IF the figure is a figure of ACTION rather than posed/designed for titilation. How does this AH! image compare to the others? Do you notice any changes in tone? What is the idea being communicated:

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/wonder-woman-1987/192-1.jpg

Lastly, the idea that woman exists for the viewer's sexual fulfillment is a fundamental component. Many in fandom and the professional sphere have that notion. When you have a moment, take a gander at the JUSTICE mini's profile pages for Wonder Woman and compare them to those of Captain Marvel, Batman, and the fabled Superman. What do you notice?

[Stanlos]

Still last time I check she isn't invulnerable. She should be all kinds of scared up by now with as much skin she shows.

Well, that is because she is designed to be invincible yet human. Her invulnerability originally came from her Amazon training and her bracelets (mostly for projectiles and ray guns back then--training must have been how she could be at the bottom of the ocean and in space in her costume).

[Stanlos]

One more random comment on this. The Wonder Woman was designed with the notion of breaking the chains of Prudery which provided that women should be ashamed of and afraid of their bodies (female athleticism and healthy body image were taboo at the time). So the costume design is, I think, important. And again so long as the character's rendering are such that she owns her sexuality and it is not COMMODIFIED then all is well.

But that latter is a part with which fanboys and some creators have a very very difficult time. The Wonder Woman character is still very much ahead of its time because we still only reluctantly grant the feminine power without some sort of punitive side effect.

It is all very fascinating really.

And truly part of what made Rucka's run MOST compelling was when he brushed the surface of those ideas or confronted them head on.

[Stanlos]

Does Wonder Woman's costume undermine her portrayal as one of the DCU's strongest female characters?

Shouldn't she be wearing something a bit more practical, after all they changed Catwoman's costume to make it seem more practical & less glamour. WW has worn better costumes such as her armour, than her traditional look. So is it time foe a permanent change?

Being from a culture of Amazons, I think there is room aplenty to give us infinite alternate costumes for WW. I liked the alternative digs that Perez used and that Drew Johnson did. I think the design that Matthew Clark(?) did for Devastation would work as an alternate for the standard abbreviated WW armour (and its one that the professionals with certain tendencies would have a hard time getting wrong). That one consisted of a black body suit with cape and breast plate bearing Deva's standard.

[Stanlos]

Now on the flipside, I've seen people try to explain Wondy's outfit in terms of Greek culture, but that's just being dishonest and lame. Wondy's costume is a product of the American culture she existed in. The 1940s. It's not a coincidence that her costume mirrors the appeal of the Miss America bathing suits of that era.

As you say, it does and it doesn't. Those were nothing BUT glam and sexy. WW's visual design was meant to show her musculature as well (note how muscled HG Peter and that wonderful substitute that drew her leaping over the locomotive with a smile and a kid on her back whose name continues to escape me drew her in their work). Also note how different her body type was than the one used at the time for women.

The LACK of sexualization of Wonder Woman in those images was remarked on by author in

Of course, the most compelling argument for changing the costume permanently does have merit. And that is that the Feminism of yesteryear is NOT the Feminism of today or of tomorrow. As women are free to be athletic and are much more comfy with their bodies and the images thereof, maybe a body suit style is timely.

ESPECIALLY since a lot of the artist working today take EVERY OPPORTUNITY to commodify her sensuality every chance they get.

But again that is a people problem rather than the failure of the design as they aren't FOLLOWING the design.

[WorstThingUS]

Does Wonder Woman's costume undermine her portrayal as one of the DCU's strongest female characters?

Shouldn't she be wearing something a bit more practical, after all they changed Catwoman's costume to make it seem more practical & less glamour. WW has worn better costumes such as her armour, than her traditional look. So is it time foe a permanent change?

I could take the cheater's way and try to argue that The Sub Mariner or the men of 300 aren't any less intimidating in just trunks, but that's bulls**t. They're the exceptions to the rule and we all know WW is half-naked to please boys, period. But strangely, while I'm the first bemoan how women are depicted in comics, I am a little attached to the iconic nature of some costumes. I'd change Black Canary and virtually everyone else in a second, but oddly, WW I'm oddly attached to. I guess it's the exception that proves my own rule.

Thanks. I know the origin.

The point is that you'll never see a costume like that in any Greek Literature.

The artist depiction resembles a bathing suit(i'm not talking about the braclets or the the eagle). Just the basic cut of the outfit. I've never seen armor(in any century/culture) that had an open back and no support on the shoulders. Conan doesn't wear jeans because it doesn't accurately reflect what a barbarian would wear. I can accept that fact that her costume looks that way because it's fantasy. Attempting to give it a rationale isn't going to help.

THANK YOU! I'm so sick of those silly ass rationales for it. That said, it would be great if they did modify it so that it did look like Grecian armor. I mean, it's not like they wore pants. Darwyn Cooke made it an amored skirt which is the first step. No more of the hot pants or damn near panties men seem to draw.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Regardless of whether it undermines her, it's a silly design. The same goes for Batman and Superman. All three of them need updates.


I endorse this post.

[Pixie_Solanas]

Regardless of whether it undermines her, it's a silly design. The same goes for Batman and Superman. All three of them need updates.

Already done. Mid-90s.

Azrael's hideous crap armor.

Supes' electric blue speedskater attire.

Failed. Miserably.

Hell, they gave WW a mod pantsuit in the late 60s that bombed (and actually undercut the feminist ideal that WW promotes - the man wanted her covered up, so she covered up. Nothing empowering about that.). This debate is nothing new.

You can't beat the classics, frankly. Nothing they ever put on Batman, Superman, or even WW, will top their basic designs that's held fast for so long now. Whatever they come up with will stink of modernist revisionism, and will look dated in a few years. Guaranteed.

[Pixie_Solanas]

. No more of the hot pants or damn near panties men seem to draw.

Face it. The sight of a spandex clad ass in comics gives you the tinglies. S' ok. Why fight it?

[Deus ex Chris]

Already done. Mid-90s.

Azrael's hideous crap armor.

Supes' electric blue speedskater attire.

Failed. Miserably.

Hell, they gave WW a mod pantsuit in the late 60s that bombed (and actually undercut the feminist ideal that WW promotes - the man wanted her covered up, so she covered up. Nothing empowering about that.). This debate is nothing new.

You can't beat the classics, frankly. Nothing they ever put on Batman, Superman, or even WW, will top their basic designs that's held fast for so long now. Whatever they come up with will stink of modernist revisionism, and will look dated in a few years.

Guaranteed.
Well, you've guaranteed it, so that must be the end of it, right?

Or not.

The classics have looked dated and irrelevant for years. It's time for an update.

Also, just because poor design choices were made in the 90s doesn't mean all design choices are destined to be poor.

[Robo Ape]

Perhaps DC should exercise more control over how the various artists draw her costume after all she is one of the main DC characters, maybe that is the issue?

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Well, you've guaranteed it, so that must be the end of it, right?

Or not.

The classics have looked dated and irrelevant for years. It's time for an update.

Also, just because poor design choices were made in the 90s doesn't mean all design choices are destined to be poor.

In all fairness, there was a lot of suckage going on in the 90s.

The problem is people are too set in their ways.
Comics could use some shake ups every once and again.
Personaly, I have no prob with a woman walking into the UN council wearing a porn costume but the fact that she´s been wearing it for decades is no excuse for why it can´t be changed.

Pretty sure someone at some stage actually thought this was the pinnacle in cool male fashion.
http://camoes9a.no.sapo.pt/images/vasco_da_gama.jpg

Hopefuly, present comic fans will die out in a couple decades and with no new blood to succeed them, the little girls who grew up reading Cardcaptor Sakura can step up and claim the medium for their own and give their new heroines better choices in wardrobe.

<- knocks on wood

[WorstThingUS]

Face it. The sight of a spandex clad ass in comics gives you the tinglies. S' ok. Why fight it?

"Tinglies" and "creepies are not the same thing. Salma Hayek in...just about anything gives me the "tinglies."

[Pixie_Solanas]

Well, you've guaranteed it, so that must be the end of it, right?

Or not.

The classics have looked dated and irrelevant for years. It's time for an update.

Also, just because poor design choices were made in the 90s doesn't mean all design choices are destined to be poor.

You're missing one salient point. Those "poor design choices" in the 90s weren't poor at the time. Designers probably spent a lot of time and effort in making those redos. Hell, Azrael's Batman uni was straight out of the popular Image Comics playbook at the time. Unfortunately, as is mostly the case when "updating" or "refreshing" a costume, the redesign becomes locked into whatever's in vogue at that moment in time - and will look dated in a few years as current styles move and evolve.

Anyway, could WW use a uni refreshening? Sure.

Will it look good? Probably not. Outfitting her in some bulky Grecian armor does nothing for me either.

[Deus ex Chris]

You're missing one salient point. Those "poor design choices" in the 90s weren't poor at the time. Designers probably spent a lot of time and effort in making those redos. Hell, Azrael's Batman uni was straight out of the popular Image Comics playbook at the time.
I didn't miss it. They were poor design choices, which is why they lasted all of five minutes. Image Comics as it was then lasted for all of five minutes too.

Unfortunately, as is mostly the case when "updating" or "refreshing" a costume, the redesign becomes locked into whatever's in vogue at that moment in time - and will look dated in a few years as current styles move and evolve.
That depends on the designer. John Cassaday managed to create a costume for Cyclops that is both modern and classic. It's smart and simple and isn't tied to any blatant trends. Well, unless you consider drawing costumes as if they were made of actual fabric rather than looking painted on a trend.

Anyway, could WW use a uni refreshening? Sure.

Will it look good? Probably not. Outfitting her in some bulky Grecian armor does nothing for me either.
Again, it depends on the designer.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I´m sure there are a few artists who could create an innovative and sleek design based on ancient greek motifs.

I´m not sure greek armor would be my first choice, though.

Why would Wonder Woman need armor anyway?

She can take planet-busting punches from Superman.

[Deus ex Chris]

I don't want to see armor. I just want the star-spangled panties to go away--to be replaced by something else.

[Your Imaginary Pal]

I don't want to see armor. I just want the star-spangled panties to go away.
now that would be amazing
.--to be replaced by something else.

...and you lost me

[Deus ex Chris]

Ha ha. That last part wasn't there originally. I went in and edited because I knew somebody would go there.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I don't want to see armor. I just want the star-spangled panties to go away--to be replaced by something else.

My sentimenst exactly.

She´s not a US citizen, she´s a themysciran ex-princess/ex-ambassador from an island that was at odds with the US government at least a couple times.

Wearing that costume is akin to French president Nicolas Sarkozy drapping himself in the american flag to go address the UN council.

[Black Atom]

In my opinion, no. As others have said, it's iconic and, actually, recognized as a symbol of strength. When a woman puts on a Wonder Woman costume for Halloween, she understands it's an outfit that represents power. And that's a pretty powerful thing.

I really only ever hear comic fans talking about how "silly" Diana's costume is and that's probably because we take comics too seriously in general.

[Deus ex Chris]

In my opinion, no. As others have said, it's iconic and, actually, recognized as a symbol of strength. When a woman puts on a Wonder Woman costume for Halloween, she understands it's an outfit that represents power. And that's a pretty powerful thing.

I really only ever hear comic fans talking about how "silly" Diana's costume is and that's probably because we take comics too seriously in general.
Well, then I guess you're not listening. Nobody wears a Wonder Woman costume because they see a symbol of strength. They wear it because it's campy and goofy and hilarious. It's a joke, which isn't necessarily bad. I just think it's a lame costume.

[Black Atom]

Well, then I guess you're not listening. Nobody wears a Wonder Woman costume because they see a symbol of strength. They wear it because it's campy and goofy and hilarious. It's a joke, which isn't necessarily bad. I just think it's a lame costume.

People dress up like pregnant nuns or tampons on Halloween to look hilarious, not Wonder Woman. In popular culture, Wonder Woman and her costume are symbols of female empowerment, not "silliness". You never hear anyone say "That chick's so goofy--she's a regular Wonder Woman!".

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Sorry, but I disagree.

Wonder Woman is not the synonim of female empowerment in pop culture.
She may be for a select few who know the character, but for average joe and jane, IMHO, she´s mostly a kinky sex symbol.

When she comes up in Joe Public´s conversations, it´s not about what she represents but about her cleavage and star spangled thong and the fact that she sleeps around with half the JLA..

[Kid Kyoto]

Didn't we just talk about the partiotic dominatrix suit?

Perez tried hard to replace it with something that a Greek warrior might actually wear and came up with some neat armor for her

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/3396/200/3396_2_00010.jpg

But it never took. For DC Wonder Woman is a T&A character, no matter what they might say in public.

[West Mantooth]

Perez was on the right track but got lost in the forest. He took the Greek influence too far. She has braclets that deflects projectiles, why a shield. The cape serves no purpose.And the helmet looks cumbersome and would probably get knocked off countless times. Beyond that. That's close to what I'd want.

[Spiffy]

Is it iconic?

Yes.

Does it undermine her a bit?

Still yes.

Should it be done away with?

Not quite. It should just be updated in some small ways. The basic look HAS to stay. The current creators love it, DC loves it. People identify with it and know her by it. But a few very small, very subtle alterations would make all of the difference.

A more reasonable bodice.

A more reasonable bottom half.

A slightly more "armorish" look. Even if her character isn't supposed to actually need armor most of the time, and may even be hampered by it, some small concessions can be made to tip the balance away from "Swimsuit".

The color scheme DOES have to stay, although the proportions can be changed a bit.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Perez was on the right track but got lost in the forest. He took the Greek influence too far. She has braclets that deflects projectiles, why a shield. The cape serves no purpose.And the helmet looks cumbersome and would probably get knocked off countless times. Beyond that. That's close to what I'd want.

Agreed.
Why do people immediately think "armor" when they think ancient Greece?
There were lots of famous folk, real or legend, walking about with no armor back in the day.
Socrates, Aristoteles, Perseus, Aphrodite, Pan, Poseidon, Medusa...

I´d rather see WW designers drink inspiration from this

http://www.bible-researcher.com/ancient2.jpg

than this:

http://www.sgibson.k12.in.us/gshs_new/ms_socstud/marathon_dwmpnl/hoplite%2065.jpg

That looks unbelievably unconfortable.
She can take punches from Superman.
What does she need armor for?

[juggling man]

Agreed.
Why do people immediately think "armor" when they think ancient Greece?


You have the question crooked. The question is: "Why do people think armor when they think Grecian warrior". Which is what WW is. A warrior. A warrior dammit! A WARRIOR!

[Eliseu Gouveia]

You have the question crooked. The question is: "Why do people think armor when they think Grecian warrior". Which is what WW is. A warrior. A warrior dammit! A WARRIOR!

Not any warrior, though.
She´s a warrior who can take punches from SUPERMAN and a pair of bracelets that can deflect ANYTHING.

We are talking about a woman who can mold steel with her own bare hands as if it was clay.

The armor is pretty much useless.

Edit: If you can´t live without the skintight spandex, then I think her costume should be closer to what a greek-roman wrestler would wear

http://www.modestowrestlingacademy.org/images/wrestling_greco_gal_l_04_greco_2.jpg

[juggling man]

Warriors wear warrior gear. The end.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Warriors wear warrior gear. The end.

But a smart warrior will avoid wearing a dated, useless 5,000 years old design warrior gear.

The end.

[BnL]

She's got a high enough degree of invulnerability that she doesn't need the full Grecian armor. The bodice she wears covers her torso, where most of the vital organs are kept. It's a relatively small bit of protection, but it's all she needs. Also, it's much less restrictive than the classical full armor, which is a must. 3,000 years of Amazonian combat ingenuity produced the ideal uniform for Diana. All it really needs is a Grecian skirt, in my opinion.

The end. :tongue:

[carabas]

Edit: If you can´t live without the skintight spandex, then I think her costume should be closer to what a greek-roman wrestler would wear

http://www.modestowrestlingacademy.org/images/wrestling_greco_gal_l_04_greco_2.jpgDidn't real Greek wrestlers go at it in the nude, covered in oil?

[Eliseu Gouveia]

She's got a high enough degree of invulnerability that she doesn't need the full Grecian armor. The bodice she wears covers her torso, where most of the vital organs are kept. It's a relatively small bit of protection, but it's all she needs. Also, it's much less restrictive than the classical full armor, which is a must. 3,000 years of Amazonian combat ingenuity produced the ideal uniform for Diana. All it really needs is a Grecian skirt, in my opinion.

The end. :tongue:

I honeslty hope you´re wrong.
Because if 3,000 years of evolution produced that bustier, then it speaks very little of amazon ingenuity.

What is Diana´s main form of combat?
Short range, melee.
It´s how we´ve seen her engages her enemy in battle for the last 50 years. She has limited long range capability, so her choice is usualy to close in and engage in HTH combat.

In HTH combat, a bustier is a terrible-TERRIBLE idea because of its vulnerability to "wardrobe malfunctions".
there IS a reason why so many women choose to wear this

http://www.running4womenstore.com/images/Action-Sport-Bra---White.jpg

over this

http://www.foxnews.com/images/261960/0_64_021207_polka_dot_bustier.jpg

when performing fast, dynamic and violent exercises at the gym.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Didn't real Greek wrestlers go at it in the nude, covered in oil?

3,000 years ago, yes.

It was a time when greek military also carried bronze shields to the battlefield too.
Hopefuly, they´ve stopped doing that nowadays.

[BnL]

I dunno, this (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/BnL/Wonderwomanrunning.gif) seems to be holding up miraculously well. :tongue:

But seriously, I have advocated for a shoulder strap as well, I just forgot to mention it in my last post.

[juggling man]

I dunno, this (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/BnL/Wonderwomanrunning.gif) seems to be holding up miraculously well. :tongue:

Wow, that just proves the point right there. Give the girl some real clothes dammit.

The point of this thread is does the outfit undermine her portrayal blah blah blah whatever. The answer is yes. No amount of contorting explanations for this stupid costume can fix that. Don't play dumb.

[NeoStar9X]

But a smart warrior will avoid wearing a dated, useless 5,000 years old design warrior gear.

The end.

A smart warrior wouldn't be going into battle in the same attire that he or she would wear to a pool party or the beach either. The End.

Still the arguments for why she might need armor is exactly the reason I feel why so many people feel she is or at least comes off as simply a female superman clone.

[Kage Kisaragi]

Not at all in my opinion. Her costume is no more scandalous as Supermans or Plastic Mans. Heck the Martian Manhunter bared the most skin of all I think.Then again I find all superhero costumes rather silly, and to me they are seem to scream sexual frustration but have the extra effect of making them stand out/more recognizable in the public eye. So in that since, WW outfit works.

[BnL]

Wow, that just proves the point right there. Give the girl some real clothes dammit.

The point of this thread is does the outfit undermine her portrayal blah blah blah whatever. The answer is yes. No amount of contorting explanations for this stupid costume can fix that. Don't play dumb.

Relax, I only posted that as a joke. As I've already said in this thread, I think her costume could use some alterations.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Wow, that just proves the point right there. Give the girl some real clothes dammit.

The point of this thread is does the outfit undermine her portrayal blah blah blah whatever. The answer is yes. No amount of contorting explanations for this stupid costume can fix that. Don't play dumb.


My sentiments exactly.

Now don´t get me wrong.
Anyone who knows me knows I´m so far from being a prude it´s not even funny.
I really don´t care whether she goes into the battlefield naked or wearing a burkha.

But morals oblige, so yeah, she wants to be taken seriously when she addresses the UN Security Council or tries to calm down a panicking mob, a porn costume slash swimsuit is probably not the best idea.

[juggling man]

Relax, I only posted that as a joke. As I've already said in this thread, I think her costume could use some alterations.

I didn't mean that about you. I just thought that gif was hilarious.

[WorstThingUS]

When she comes up in Joe Public´s conversations, it´s not about what she represents but about her cleavage and star spangled thong and the fact that she sleeps around with half the JLA..

Where did that come from!?! Since when has WW had a bad rep? Even in jokes it's usually same sex oriented like the bit on Robot Chicken.

[Deus ex Chris]

People dress up like pregnant nuns or tampons on Halloween to look hilarious, not Wonder Woman. In popular culture, Wonder Woman and her costume are symbols of female empowerment, not "silliness". You never hear anyone say "That chick's so goofy--she's a regular Wonder Woman!".
In popular culture, Wonder Woman is a symbol of camp. She should be a symbol of empowerment, but I think you'll generally find only feminists, lesbians, some gay men, and comic book fans really think of her that way. To everyone else, she's a joke.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Where did that come from!?! Since when has WW had a bad rep? Even in jokes it's usually same sex oriented like the bit on Robot Chicken.

I´m not gonna post risky material in a PG-13 forum.
You have the full power of the internet at your disposal, google it up.

http://www.etherlair.com/images/net/wwsupes.jpg

Yes, even the french take a bite at her sometimes.

[Black Atom]

Sorry, but I disagree.

Wonder Woman is not the synonim of female empowerment in pop culture.
She may be for a select few who know the character, but for average joe and jane, IMHO, she´s mostly a kinky sex symbol.

When she comes up in Joe Public´s conversations, it´s not about what she represents but about her cleavage and star spangled thong and the fact that she sleeps around with half the JLA..

That hasn't really been my experience (for one, the people I know who aren't into comics, the "Joe Publics" have no idea what the "JLA" is). On the other hand, I do hear people use Wonder Woman to describe women who seem strong or capable all the time. Occasionally, I've heard people call a tall or otherwise physically imposing girl "Wonder Woman". By contrast, I've never heard Wonder Woman used to describe a particularly slutty girl. Like, I've never heard anyone say "Oh yeah, Stacy gets around. She's totally the Wonder Woman of the class."

But let's not be completely anecdotal. After all, our personal experiences our hardly all-encompassing.

Heres an excerpt from the song "Give it to Me" by Nelly Furtado:

I'm the type of girl that'll look you dead in the eye (eye)
I'm real as it comes if you don't know why I'm fly-y-y-y-y
Seen ya try to switch it up, but girl you ain't that dope
I'm a wonder Woman, let me go get my rope

In the passage above, do you think Furtado compares herself to Wonder Woman to get across how kinky or slutty she is? Do you think people listening to the song would interpret it that way? Of course not. Her purpose, clearly, is to make the case that she's tough, confident and strong.

Here's an excerpt from the song "Wonder Woman" by Trey Songz:

The way you talkin girl you seem so invinceable
Its more than sexy girl the way that you take control
I wonder woman are you my kinda woman
With a back like that you fly like jets are you my wonder woman (are you)

He's certainly describing a sexy girl, but the main idea is that he's looking for a strong woman. That's just two examples of Wonder Woman in pop culture that jump to mind right away (discounting, obviously, both the TV show and the Justice League cartoon where she was portrayed as strong and capable).

[Black Atom]

In popular culture, Wonder Woman is a symbol of camp. She should be a symbol of empowerment, but I think you'll generally find only feminists, lesbians, some gay men, and comic book fans really think of her that way. To everyone else, she's a joke.

All superheroes are camp. Wonder Woman is no more a symbol of camp than Superman or Spider-Man. That doesn't preclude her being an icon of female empowerment, though.

Most people don't think of comics the way we do. They don't consider stuff like Diana addressing the UN or her titties popping out in a fight. The average person, understanding that Wonder Woman and the world she comes from is, in itself, inherently silly, can acknowledge that, in that context, she's still the most well-known and strong woman around. Comic fans are the only people who obsess over silliness like why there are stars on her panties and how practical her outfit is.

[Black Atom]

I´m not gonna post risky material in a PG-13 forum.
You have the full power of the internet at your disposal, google it up.

http://www.etherlair.com/images/net/wwsupes.jpg

Yes, even the french take a bite at her sometimes.

They're clearly mocking Superman as well. That's like taking an example of Wonder Woman from Mad Magazine or Family Guy, which makes fun of TONS of pop culture icons. It's parody. To use this example to infer that pop culture sees Diana as a joke, you have to also accept they think Superman's a joke.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

There certainly ARE many people who see Wonder Woman in a good light (including, apparently, Nelly Furtado and Trey Songz).
If we go through these boards (discounting the large mass of fan who can´t stand her/hate her) , I´m sure we could round up a few dozen more.

But for every one of them there is out there hundreds, thousand of people who don´t see her ina good light.

At best, they regard her as pure silly campyness.
At its worst, they see her as a kinky sex object.
Remember when Robert Downey Jr (or was it Hugh Grant?) was caught in a motel with cocaine and a Wonder Woman costume?

[Eliseu Gouveia]

They're clearly mocking Superman as well. That's like taking an example of Wonder Woman from Mad Magazine or Family Guy, which makes fun of TONS of pop culture icons. It's parody. To use this example to infer that pop culture sees Diana as a joke, you have to also accept they think Superman's a joke.

We could.

But then again we are discussing Wonder Woman´s prominently exposed buttocks (as seen in parody pic), not Superman´s.

[Black Atom]

There certainly ARE many people who see Wonder Woman in a good light (including, apparently, Nelly Furtado and Trey Songz).
If we go through these boards (discounting the large mass of fan who can´t stand her/hate her) , I´m sure we could round up a few dozen more.

The point is, you could not use Wonder Woman as metaphor for strength if, as you insist, she is recognized popularly as a joke or a slut.

But for every one of them there is out there hundreds, thousand of people who don´t see her ina good light.

I simply don't believe that's accurate.

At best, they regard her as pure silly campyness.
At its worst, they see her as a kinky sex object.
Remember when Robert Downey Jr (or was it Hugh Grant?) was caught in a motel with cocaine and a Wonder Woman costume?

Again, people who don't read comics see all superheroes as silly and camp. Still, within that context, most people still associate Wonder Woman with feminine empowerment. What one hooker wears isn't indicative of anything.

We could.

But then again we are discussing Wonder Woman´s prominently exposed buttocks (as seen in parody pic), not Superman´s.

It's one artist parodying Wonder Woman by sexualizing her. That has happened to every female character from Princess Leia to Snow White, which is indicative of another problem. It doesn't indicate, however, that the dominant perception of WW is as a slut.

[Deus ex Chris]

All superheroes are camp. Wonder Woman is no more a symbol of camp than Superman or Spider-Man. That doesn't preclude her being an icon of female empowerment, though.
I disagree. I think she is more a symbol of camp than Superman and Spider-Man. No, it doesn't preclude her from being an icon of female empowerment, but I just don't think that's how most people perceiver her. Most people just see the camp.

Most people don't think of comics the way we do.
You're right. They are generally dismissive of them as being silly and childish and thus something they wouldn't be interested in. The overly absurd costumes are a big part of that. All things considered, that's not really encouraging for the comic book industry.

They don't consider stuff like Diana addressing the UN or her titties popping out in a fight. The average person, understanding that Wonder Woman and the world she comes from is, in itself, inherently silly, can acknowledge that, in that context, she's still the most well-known and strong woman around.
But mostly they just don't care.

Comic fans are the only people who obsess over silliness like why there are stars on her panties and how practical her outfit is.
When did having an opinion become obsessing?

[Black Atom]

I disagree. I think she is more a symbol of camp than Superman and Spider-Man. No, it doesn't preclude her from being an icon of female empowerment, but I just don't think that's how most people perceiver her. Most people just see the camp.

Why do you think that's true? What trends have you seen to indicate that Diana is just a symbol of camp to most people?

You're right. They are generally dismissive of them as being silly and childish and thus something they wouldn't be interested in. The overly absurd costumes are a big part of that. All things considered, that's not really encouraging for the comic book industry.

Well, the other thing you have to acknowledge is that superheroes are more popular than ever right now. People may view them as camp fantasy, but they're also very willing to escape in it as well. And that's okay. That's actually how comics are meant to be interpreted. It's when we try to approach it with too much seriousness and apply too many real-world rules that many ideas from comics start to seem stupid. You can acknowledge something is a little absurd and still respect it.

But mostly they just don't care.

And they shouldn't. Because those things don't really matter. They're aspects of the mythology that're taken for granted when you pick up a comicbook. Wonder Woman's top stays up for the same reason Batman's cape doesn't accidentally cover his head with he drops from a roof. People take her outfit seriously for the same reason criminals actually fear a man in a Bat-suit rather than simply laughing at him. Those are conceits of the genre.

When did having an opinion become obsessing?

Don't get me wrong; I didn't mean to criticize you for having an opinion. I'm putting myself in that group as well. What I meant was, we spend a lot more time discussing stuff like that than anyone else would and when you analyze it that much it does being to seem silly. But I think you'd find the average person takes a lot of those elements for granted and actually has an easier time accepting them. I wonder if some of us aren't projecting our own perceptions of Wonder Woman onto people at large.

[WorstThingUS]

I´m not gonna post risky material in a PG-13 forum.
You have the full power of the internet at your disposal, google it up.

http://www.etherlair.com/images/net/wwsupes.jpg

Yes, even the french take a bite at her sometimes.

That's not a Wonder Woman parody as the Superman is obviously intended to be a caricature of someone known to the French (the president and his hottie wife, perhaps). And "joe public" makes jokes about her being half-naked and having large breasts, which is all a google search reveals: T&A drawings and photos. This "slut" superhero thing is your own imagination.

[Spiffy]

What trends have you seen to indicate that Diana is just a symbol of camp to most people?
That's an easy one--the fact that most people only know her from the Wonder Woman TV series--and there's usually little debate that the version presented there was pure camp. Even Batman doesn't suffer from that, since he's been used in so many other ways and places.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

The point is, you could not use Wonder Woman as metaphor for strength if, as you insist, she is recognized popularly as a joke or a slut.

It´s pure human nature.
Everybody´s different.
Some folk will look at her as a source of inspiration and others will see her as a joke or (worst case scenario) a sex fantasy.
Just like the NY knicks. ^_^


I simply don't believe that's accurate.

You don´t even need to think too hard.
Think of how many people in the world know Wonder Woman.
Now extact from that number those who regard her as a pillar of strenght and inspiration.
Now compare that group of fans with the entire human population.
Bear in mind that you must also take into account that middle east village where the sight of a woman in a swimsuit may generate gunfiire and beheadings.

Again, people who don't read comics see all superheroes as silly and camp. Still, within that context, most people still associate Wonder Woman with feminine empowerment. What one hooker wears isn't indicative of anything.

If only it was just one hooker....


It's one artist parodying Wonder Woman by sexualizing her. That has happened to every female character from Princess Leia to Snow White, which is indicative of another problem. It doesn't indicate, however, that the dominant perception of WW is as a slut.


Princess Leia and Snow White have the benefit of not walking around half naked.most of the time, so yeah, they weren´t as severely hit by the kinky sex fantasies as WW.

[Deus ex Chris]

Why do you think that's true? What trends have you seen to indicate that Diana is just a symbol of camp to most people?
Various pop culture references and the opinions of actual people. Lynda Carter has a lot to do with it. That series was pure camp, and that's what people remember.


Well, the other thing you have to acknowledge is that superheroes are more popular than ever right now. People may view them as camp fantasy, but they're also very willing to escape in it as well. And that's okay. That's actually how comics are meant to be interpreted. It's when we try to approach it with too much seriousness and apply too many real-world rules that many ideas from comics start to seem stupid. You can acknowledge something is a little absurd and still respect it. Superheroes are more popular than ever right now--superhero movies. Superhero comics--and comics in general--don't even approach the kind of popularity they once enjoyed. While we're on the subject, The Dark Knight is an example of making superheroes work without the camp--or at least with minimal, subverted camp. That's not an accident.


And they shouldn't. Because those things don't really matter. They're aspects of the mythology that're taken for granted when you pick up a comicbook. Wonder Woman's top stays up for the same reason Batman's cape doesn't accidentally cover his head with he drops from a roof. People take her outfit seriously for the same reason criminals actually fear a man in a Bat-suit rather than simply laughing at him. Those are conceits of the genre.Well, you completely missed my point. They don't care about comic books in general, and I'd argue that the conceits of the genre are a reason for that.


Don't get me wrong; I didn't mean to criticize you for having an opinion. I'm putting myself in that group as well. What I meant was, we spend a lot more time discussing stuff like that than anyone else would and when you analyze it that much it does being to seem silly.
I don't think it's silly to talk about it because what we're actually talking about is something larger. However, it would be silly to agonize over it.

But I think you'd find the average person takes a lot of those elements for granted and actually has an easier time accepting them.I disagree. I think you'll find that the average person sees these elements as reasons not to read comic books.

I wonder if some of us aren't projecting our own perceptions of Wonder Woman onto people at large.Probably but one would assume we're also speaking from our own experiences.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

That's not a Wonder Woman parody as the Superman is obviously intended to be a caricature of someone known to the French (the president and his hottie wife, perhaps).

Yes, you´re right, it´s not a Wonder Woman parody.
A woman being carried like a piece of merchandise/trophy with her butt gloriosusly filling the center of the page is a great example of female empowerment.


And "joe public" makes jokes about her being half-naked and having large breasts, which is all a google search reveals: T&A drawings and photos.

Jokes about being half-naked: check!
Jokes about her large breasts: check!
T&A drawings: check!
Photos: check

Thank you for confirming what I had already said.




This "slut" superhero thing is your own imagination.


Please.

[Ryan Day]

It's not really the costume, but how it's drawn. Darwyn Cooke makes her look like a warrior. Ed Benes makes her look like a stripper.

[Shellhead]

It's not really the costume, but how it's drawn. Darwyn Cooke makes her look like a warrior. Ed Benes makes her look like a stripper.

In all fairness, Benes draws all female heroes like strippers. Some of them just happen to be wearing more clothes than others.

[WorstThingUS]

Yes, you´re right, it´s not a Wonder Woman parody.
A woman being carried like a piece of merchandise/trophy with her butt gloriosusly filling the center of the page is a great example of female empowerment.

Yes, but that problem is not specific to Wonder Woman, nor does her use in this case suggest "slut" as you insist. If anything, it reaffirms the idea in and out of comics that only Superman can be Wonder Woman's mate. And because we don't know who that guy is, we have no idea what the joke is or who she's supposed to represent. For all we know they're ripping on the guy for thinking he's some sort of Superman that can claim women like that, so the real "butt" of the joke is him. I don't know and neither do you.



Jokes about being half-naked: check!
Jokes about her large breasts: check!
T&A drawings: check!
Photos: check

Thank you for confirming what I had already said.

Yes, but that does not equal an interpretation of promiscuity. Dolly Parton has been nothing but boob jokes for 30 years, but no one sees her as a slut. The women regularly shown in Victoria's Secret ads are not viewed as slatterns. If anything it's the opposite. They're unobtainable. Goddess unavailable to the average man. See, unlike you, everyone does not think a depiction of a woman as sexually alluring means that woman is automatically a whore.

[Black Atom]

That's an easy one--the fact that most people only know her from the Wonder Woman TV series--and there's usually little debate that the version presented there was pure camp. Even Batman doesn't suffer from that, since he's been used in so many other ways and places.

There's an entire generation of people that've never seen that show but have seen cartoons like Justice League.

Also, the other assumption here is that camp=bad. Just because people acknowledge something as camp doesn't mean they can't, in turn, hold it up as a symbol of empowerment. Many people loved and embraced WW as an icon purely because of that show.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Yes, but that problem is not specific to Wonder Woman,

So, by your own words, she DOES have that problem, -despite not being the only one-.
Thank you.

nor does her use in this case suggest "slut" as you insist.

She is being carried like a piece of merchandise, like an object, like a trophy, with her butt front and center. If that is not a blatant objetification of her, then I don´t know what is.


If anything, it reaffirms the idea in and out of comics that only Superman can be Wonder Woman's mate.

No, it confirms the idea that she´s a piece of merchandise, an object, a trophy.

And because we don't know who that guy is, we have no idea what the joke is or who she's supposed to represent.

She is dressed like Wonder Woman, being carried away like a piece of meat with her butt front and center.
That alone should be enough to illustrate that whoever did that image didn´t have a big opinion of her.


For all we know they're ripping on the guy for thinking he's some sort of Superman that can claim women like that, so the real "butt" of the joke is him. I don't know and neither do you.


Clearly, the issue here completely escapes you.
It doesn´t matter who is the guy that is carrying that piece of meat with her butt exposed front and center.
It could be Chewbacca, it could be Indy, it could be Mickey Mouse.
The fact remains that someone dressed like Wonder Woman -and by association, Wonder woman herself- IS being carried like a piece of meat with her butt exposed front and center.




Yes, but that does not equal an interpretation of promiscuity. Dolly Parton has been nothing but boob jokes for 30 years, but no one sees her as a slut. The women regularly shown in Victoria's Secret ads are not viewed as slatterns. If anything it's the opposite. They're unobtainable. Goddess unavailable to the average man.


"goddesses".
LOL
They´re objects. Pieces of meat for guys to jerk off to.
Objectification at its finest..




See, unlike you, everyone does not think a depiction of a woman as sexually alluring means that woman is automatically a whore.


It´s the second time you try to make this personal.
Don´t make me report you to the moderators.

I do not see Wonder Woman as a slut.
I´ve been reading her book sicen the Perez reboot to know that she´s the exact opposite of a slut.
This line of argumentation is over.

[Black Atom]

It´s pure human nature.
Everybody´s different.
Some folk will look at her as a source of inspiration and others will see her as a joke or (worst case scenario) a sex fantasy.
Just like the NY knicks. ^_^

Sure, there's lot of variance among individuals, but there are also prevailing opinions. And I don't think that the prevailing opinion of Wonder Woman is that she's a slut.

You don´t even need to think too hard.
Think of how many people in the world know Wonder Woman.
Now extact from that number those who regard her as a pillar of strenght and inspiration.
Now compare that group of fans with the entire human population.
Bear in mind that you must also take into account that middle east village where the sight of a woman in a swimsuit may generate gunfiire and beheadings.

Empirically speaking, that analysis is rife with fallacy. How does one intend to accurately obtain any of those numbers? The two of us are going to have dramatically different ideas of how many people think of WW as an icon of power, for example.

If only it was just one hooker....

In your story it was one. I'm not sure what a hooker dressing up like WW is supposed to prove, anyhow.

Princess Leia and Snow White have the benefit of not walking around half naked.most of the time, so yeah, they weren´t as severely hit by the kinky sex fantasies as WW.

Men have sex fantasies about fictional women. If WW experiences that more than others, it's because she's one of the most well-known fictional women. You could cover her from head-to-toe and it wouldn't change a thing (right, Rogue?).

[Pixie_Solanas]

I didn't miss it. They were poor design choices, which is why they lasted all of five minutes. Image Comics as it was then lasted for all of five minutes too..

They may have been poor design choices in hindsight, but at that point in time, they were blazing hot. That was the milieu, the overexaggerated physiques, armor, and weaponry of the Image comics mainstays.
As much as we all hate to admit it now, that's what was in vogue and selling. And anyone who bought a mainstream comic during that time period was in on it (unless you were some crusty curmudgeon pining for the silver age, or some indie comic hipster who really shouldn't care about the mainstream anyway).


Hell, fashion overall hit a low point in the mid-90s. Terrible all around.

But anyway, i'm in agreement with you about her star-spangled panties.

[Black Atom]

Various pop culture references and the opinions of actual people. Lynda Carter has a lot to do with it. That series was pure camp, and that's what people remember.

But that didn't prevent people from holding Lynda Carter up as an icon of strength. Heck, Betty Boop became a symbol of sexual independence for many women. Just because something may have silly origins doesn't mean
it can't become a totem for something greater.

Superheroes are more popular than ever right now--superhero movies. Superhero comics--and comics in general--don't even approach the kind of popularity they once enjoyed. While we're on the subject, The Dark Knight is an example of making superheroes work without the camp--or at least with minimal, subverted camp. That's not an accident.

Actually, I'm quite a bit more partial to the Batman films WITH camp, namely the Burton ones (which were also quite successful, if you remember). With Batman you can get away with being much more serious, but he still falls into the same traps if you approach the material too seriously.

Still Wonder Woman (or Superman, for that matter) isn't Batman. I wouldn't approach them the same way as Batman.

Well, you completely missed my point. They don't care about comic books in general, and I'd argue that the conceits of the genre are a reason for that.

People seem pretty willing to accept a lot of those conventions in franchises like the hugely successful Spider-Man. Sin City, which had not only the thematic conventions of comics, but the conventions of the medium itself, was embraced by fans and critics.

Furthermore, it's comics like Shazam! and the Monster Society of Evil and All-Star Superman that completely revel in the absurdity of the genre that have had lots of critical acclaim and crossover appeal. It shows people are willing to accept those conceits.

I don't think it's silly to talk about it because what we're actually talking about is something larger. However, it would be silly to agonize over it.

I disagree. I think you'll find that the average person sees these elements as reasons not to read comic books.

I personally think there's a lot that contributes to why people don't read comics and that could be a conversation in itself.

Still, remember, we went through an era of trying to make comics gritty and real and downplay all of those "silly" conventions: it was called the 90s! Look how that panned out. Also, manga has caught on like wildfire with young people and many of the conventions in those books are far more absurd and bizarre than modern superhero comics.

Besides, if we accept your assertion as true, how far are you willing to go to tailor superhero comics to appeal to the public? If someone has that much of a problem with Wonder Woman's costume, there's infinitely MORE stuff you'd have to change to make the genre acceptable to them. Is it worth it?

[Your Imaginary Pal]

Besides, if we accept your assertion as true, how far are you willing to go to tailor superhero comics to appeal to the public? If someone has that much of a problem with Wonder Woman's costume, there's infinitely MORE stuff you'd have to change to make the genre acceptable to them. Is it worth it?

damned good question.
how much compramise are we willing to tolerate to appease people who aren't fans of the genre or specific charaters?

I mean changes with the times are expected, changing for people who aren't going to buy the books anyway serves no purpose. It'll be, "Look they changed her costume, but she's still in a kids book, so who cares? I'm not buying it."

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Sure, there's lot of variance among individuals, but there are also prevailing opinions. And I don't think that the prevailing opinion of Wonder Woman is that she's a slut.
I agree that the people who think she is a slut are probably not in the majority. But if you add them to the group that finds her silly and campy, then the number climbs astronomicaly in detriment of those who think highly of her.
The porn costume does her more harm than good.


Empirically speaking, that analysis is rife with fallacy. How does one intend to accurately obtain any of those numbers? The two of us are going to have dramatically different ideas of how many people think of WW as an icon of power, for example.

it´s not fallacy to assume that a great big chunk of people are culturaly programmed to reach for their AK-47s if they saw a woman walking around the middle of the street in a swimsuit.



In your story it was one. I'm not sure what a hooker dressing up like WW is supposed to prove, anyhow.


I think that episode is syntomatic of a larger can of worms.
The porn Industry would go berserk if she became public domain like Robin Hood or Scarlet Pimpernel..


Men have sex fantasies about fictional women. If WW experiences that more than others, it's because she's one of the most well-known fictional women. You could cover her from head-to-toe and it wouldn't change a thing (right, Rogue?)


You´re entitled to your opinion, of course.
But I do think that the swimsuit harms her chances of being taken more seriously - which is the subject of this thread-.

Xena was as much a tv icon as Linda Carter´s WW, but you don´t see as much objectifying breast jokes.

[jesse_custer]

Sure, there's lot of variance among individuals, but there are also prevailing opinions. And I don't think that the prevailing opinion of Wonder Woman is that she's a slut.

He's right. There is no evidence to suggest most people think Wonder Woman is a whore. Most people I know who don't care about comic books understand she stands for something greater. In fact, this is the first time I've heard anyone suggest she is perceived as less than that.

[WorstThingUS]

So, by your own words, she DOES have that problem, -despite not being the only one-.
Thank you.

Any woman they used would have been depicted the same way. Wonder Woman was obviously chosen because they used Superman to parody whomever they're parodying. Any female counterpart to a male character would have been used. It has nothing to do with Wonder Woman per se.

She is being carried like a piece of merchandise, like an object, like a trophy, with her butt front and center. If that is not a blatant objetification of her, then I don´t know what is.

....it confirms the idea that she´s a piece of merchandise, an object, a trophy.

She is dressed like Wonder Woman, being carried away like a piece of meat with her butt front and center.
That alone should be enough to illustrate that whoever did that image didn´t have a big opinion of her.

You're taking the illustration totally out of the context in which it's being used. They are making fun of a man in particular or did you not notice that's no "S" on his chest. You don't know what its meaning is and neither do I, so unless it's a comment on comic books, your use of it and interpretation of it are both incorrect.


Clearly, the issue here completely escapes you.
It doesn´t matter who is the guy that is carrying that piece of meat with her butt exposed front and center.
It could be Chewbacca, it could be Indy, it could be Mickey Mouse.
The fact remains that someone dressed like Wonder Woman -and by association, Wonder woman herself- IS being carried like a piece of meat with her butt exposed front and center.

Again, you don't know if that's meant to be her or to represent someone else. And if it had been Mickey Mouse with Minnie Mouse would that mean the world sees Minnie Mouse as a slut as you insist the world sees Wonder Woman? No. She is Mickey's female counterpart so of course you'd use her with him the same way Wonder Woman is seen as Superman's counterpart.


"goddesses".
LOL
They´re objects. Pieces of meat for guys to jerk off to.
Objectification at its finest..

To be sure, but they're not objectifying them as "sluts." If anything men tend objectify women who are anything but.

It´s the second time you try to make this personal.
Don´t make me report you to the moderators.

Oooh, somebody's gonna tell! Please do because it is you. You are the only person who thinks that because Wonder Woman is sexually objectified that she's seen as superhero slut

I do not see Wonder Woman as a slut.
I´ve been reading her book sicen the Perez reboot to know that she´s the exact opposite of a slut.
This line of argumentation is over.

But you think that the average person sees her as such and you're wrong and that's the point I'm trying to make. You can find T&A pictures of pretty much every female character ever, but that doesn't mean people think those characters are sluts. There was an entire episode of "friends" about how Princess Leia is a sexual fantasy for a generation of men, but that doesn't mean they see Leia as a whore.

[Pixie_Solanas]

I don't know, i've yet to see one hooker parading her goods out in a swimsuit. Perhaps i'm not looking hard enough?

[Eliseu Gouveia]

how far are you willing to go to tailor superhero comics to appeal to the public? If someone has that much of a problem with Wonder Woman's costume, there's infinitely MORE stuff you'd have to change to make the genre acceptable to them. Is it worth it?

I think that at this stage, TPTB should let people with common sense into the creative process.
They wouldn´t get into the book to appease the public, but to give the title a little .... what is the word I´m looking for... consistency?

Basic questions that everybody should have asked back in the day:
- She´s not american, she´s a foreigner and a themiscirian dignitary. So why is she wearing our flag? Either get rid of it or find a good explanation for her to wear it.

- She can survive punches from Superman. Why does she need armor or that awful greek helmet that excels at obstructing your field of vision?

Etc.

[BYC]

She's suppose to be a warrior, but look good while doing it. Greeks loved the natural body, and the beauty of the human body. Even modern women who wants a strong female role model wants a strong woman who can do it all AND look sexy.

The thing that bugs me the most is the American colors. I know it's suppose to show respect to the country that she has been sent to as an ambassador, but it does look weird.

For a warrior that's as powerful as Diana, a bathing suit style fits. It gives the opponent very little to grab onto for leverage and such. No clusmy skirts, sleeves, and capes to grab. By that reasoning, it also means Diana should have very very short hair since hair is something opponents can use to grab on. But nobody complains about that.

They should make her costume magical however, if it's not already. It gives additional protection, in addition to not tearing easily. Since the writers and Diana treat it as "armor" give it better "armor" reasonings.

[Pixie_Solanas]

I think that at this stage, TPTB should let people with common sense into the creative process.
They wouldn´t get into the book to appease the public, but to give the title a little .... what is the word I´m looking for... consistency?

Basic questions that everybody should have asked back in the day:
- She´s not american, she´s a foreigner and a themiscirian dignitary. So why is she wearing our flag? Either get rid of it or find a good explanation for her to wear it.

- She can survive punches from Superman. Why does she need armor or that awful greek helmet that excels at obstructing your field of vision?

Etc.

"people with common sense"? This is fast-veering into the "my way is the right way" fascist dogma we see in most totalitarian states.

[Black Atom]

I agree that the people who think she is a slut are probably not in the majority. But if you add them to the group that finds her silly and campy, then the number climbs astronomicaly in detriment of those who think highly of her.
The porn costume does her more harm than good.

Well, first off, I don't think there's anyone relevant that sees Wonder Woman and thinks, first thing, "wow, she's a slut" (I say "relevant" because there probably are radical fundamentalists out there thatm might think that, but who gives a !@#$ what they think?).

Sure, she's probably sexualized a lot but that's not an indicator that the prevailing perception of WW is that she's a slut (though it might be wishful thinking).

Also, as I've explained before, just because people may think WW is camp or silly doesn't mean they can't hold her up as a symbol. And people do.

it´s not fallacy to assume that a great big chunk of people are culturaly programmed to reach for their AK-47s if they saw a woman walking around the middle of the street in a swimsuit.

Maybe, but again, who cares about them? They aren't going to like the idea of an empowered female in general, no matter what she was wearing.

I think that episode is syntomatic of a larger can of worms.
The porn Industry would go berserk if she became public domain like Robin Hood or Scarlet Pimpernel..

It's a symptom of the fact that people have sexual fantasies about fictional characters. Nothing will prevent that. If you put Diana in a bulky Iron-Man-type armor, men are going to fantasize about what she looks like under it. Human nature, I'm afaid.

You´re entitled to your opinion, of course.
But I do think that the swimsuit harms her chances of being taken more seriously - which is the subject of this thread-.

It depends on what we're talking about. Within the DCU, Diana's taken pretty darn seriously. She's one of the world's most well-respected heroes.

In our world, she's probably taken as seriously as a fictional superhero deserves. She's quite iconic, which I think shows a lot.

Xena was as much a tv icon as Linda Carter´s WW, but you don´t see as much objectifying breast jokes.

Just lesbian jokes. This probably isn't the best example. Outside of it's core, Xena is remembered as sapphic wank show and a joke far more than WW is.

[Black Atom]

I think that at this stage, TPTB should let people with common sense into the creative process.
They wouldn´t get into the book to appease the public, but to give the title a little .... what is the word I´m looking for... consistency?

Basic questions that everybody should have asked back in the day:
- She´s not american, she´s a foreigner and a themiscirian dignitary. So why is she wearing our flag? Either get rid of it or find a good explanation for her to wear it.

This complaint I most sympathetic to, since it really doesn't make a lot of sense. Still, it's become a part of Diana's iconography. I'm not sure there is a great explanation and most really elaborate attempts (like Perez's) only made the situation worse in my opinion. It's one of those things you sorta have to roll with, like Kal-El's family name just happening to look like an English "S" (which I always that was kinda dumb).

- She can survive punches from Superman. Why does she need armor or that awful greek helmet that excels at obstructing your field of vision?

Agreed. I never really got why she'd need armor or weapons, really. I like BYC's idea of the costume being magical, which would account for why it wouldn't rip or fall off.

[frostedone]

Does anyone remember the Justice League episode "A Better World"? It had alternate versions of the JL called the Justice Lords. Wonder Woman's costume was much more practical. Here are some screenshots.

http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/8436/25md9.jpg

http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/9513/41ft6.jpg

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Any woman they used would have been depicted the same way. Wonder Woman was obviously chosen because they used Superman to parody whomever they're parodying..
Any female counterpart to a male character would have been used. .

Wonder Woman is not Superman´s counterpart.
Lois Lane is.
Point is, they wanted a piece of meat and they chose Wonder Woman for the role.
Which wouldn´t have happened if they saw her as the "pillar of inspiration" that you claim everybody does.





It has nothing to do with Wonder Woman per se.
It has everything to do with Wonder Woman when a representation of her is being carried like a piece of meat.

You can sit there saying that it´s not really Wonder Woman but it´s still her "icon" that is being being dragged by the mud. When RDJ dresses a hooker in a Wonder Woman costume, guess what, he is not having a sex fantasy about the hooker who´s wearing the costume, he´s fantacizing that he´s banging Wonder Woman.


You're taking the illustration totally out of the context in which it's being used. They are making fun of a man in particular or did you not notice that's no "S" on his chest. You don't know what its meaning is and neither do I, so unless it's a comment on comic books, your use of it and interpretation of it are both incorrect.

What "context" do you need?
A woman dressed as Wonder Woman is being carried like a trophy by the comicbook character Bigard who´s living his Superman power fantasy here


http://www.etherlair.com/images/net/wwsupes.jpg


and his safari hunter fantasy there:

http://www.etherlair.com/images/net/bigard2.jpg

Wonder Woman is nothing more here than a piece of meat there, period.


Again, you don't know if that's meant to be her or to represent someone else. And if it had been Mickey Mouse with Minnie Mouse would that mean the world sees Minnie Mouse as a slut as you insist the world sees Wonder Woman? No. She is Mickey's female counterpart so of course you'd use her with him the same way Wonder Woman is seen as Superman's counterpart.


Wonder Woman is not Superman´s counterpart. Lois Lane is.



To be sure, but they're not objectifying them as "sluts." If anything men tend objectify women who are anything but.

And where exactly did you gain this insight into the intimate fantasies of every man in the planet?


Oooh, somebody's gonna tell! Please do because it is you. You are the only person who thinks that because Wonder Woman is sexually objectified that she's seen as superhero slut

Do you even know what "sexually objectifying" means?


But you think that the average person sees her as such and you're wrong and that's the point I'm trying to make.

And you´re failing miserably at it.
The large majority of people who know Wonder Woman, know her from the Linda Carter show from which they remember two things; her silly wonder spin (campy) and her generously bouncing breasts (kinky).
These are the two things that stuck into their imagination: silly/campy (at best) and kinky sex fantasy (at worst).
You find remarks like those everywhere, from Jay Leno interviews to sitcoms, magazines, Pop culture in general.
Campy and kinky.
I´ve provided two answers for both.
You can cure "campy" with a good writer and "kinky" with a good artist/design.


You can find T&A pictures of pretty much every female character ever, but that doesn't mean people think those characters are sluts. There was an entire episode of "friends" about how Princess Leia is a sexual fantasy for a generation of men, but that doesn't mean they see Leia as a whore.


Oh, please.
Who are you trying to fool?
You don´t even have to ask Joe Public, there´s plenty of people even among comicbook fans who think she´s already slept at least with both Superman and Bats.

"people with common sense"? This is fast-veering into the "my way is the right way" fascist dogma we see in most totalitarian states.

Only in your imagination.

[juggling man]

Holy crap you are way over-analyzing this! The costume needs tweaking. It's that simple.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Holy crap you are way over-analyzing this! The costume needs tweaking. It's that simple.

Yeah, but trying to explain that to people is the hard part.

We need new blood in comics, fresh minds who are open to experimentation and change.

[BYC]

Holy crap you are way over-analyzing this! The costume needs tweaking. It's that simple.
Some people believe it does, others do not. Therefore, it will not.

[rick]

Jesus this board is suffering from a whole lot of oversensitivity this month.

Is it the heat or what?

[Robo Ape]

That's an easy one--the fact that most people only know her from the Wonder Woman TV series--and there's usually little debate that the version presented there was pure camp. Even Batman doesn't suffer from that, since he's been used in so many other ways and places.

Thanks to her costume WW generally is seen as little more than a 'campy' character by joe public.

Mind you the TV show hardly helped in this area.

[Kage Kisaragi]

Yeah, but trying to explain that to people is the hard part.

We need new blood in comics, fresh minds who are open to experimentation and change.

The only reason I don't agree is because for all the "we need fresh minds who are acceptable to change." what you fail to mention or maybe you just didn't notice it, is that all the old minds have already accepted it. Diana like Batman and Superman are the last of a ancient dinosaur, the 50's/60's superhero type complete with silly outfits that make them standout whether it be sexually, silly or scary. Guess which one each of those three are?

Now compare it to the next generation of Wonder Women.

Donna Troy
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/402/78469-7795-donna-troy_large.jpg

Wonder Girl Casandra Sandsmark
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/402/77969-193593-cassie-sandsmark_super.jpg

Sure you could argue that when their time comes (never gonna happen) these two will dress exactly like Diana did when she was alive, but at that point it's about paying homage and therefore all arguments about sexism fail, and quite horribly because no matter what there would be a legit reason to shoulder that kind of humiliation.

[juggling man]

The only reason I don't agree is because for all the "we need fresh minds who are acceptable to change." what you fail to mention or maybe you just didn't notice it, is that all the old minds have already accepted it. Diana like Batman and Superman are the last of a ancient dinosaur, the 50's/60's superhero type complete with silly outfits that make them standout whether it be sexually, silly or scary. Guess which one each of those three are?

Now compare it to the next generation of Wonder Women.

Donna Troy
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/402/78469-7795-donna-troy_large.jpg

Wonder Girl Casandra Sandsmark
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/402/77969-193593-cassie-sandsmark_super.jpg

Sure you could argue that when their time comes (never gonna happen) these two will dress exactly like Diana did when she was alive, but at that point it's about paying homage and therefore all arguments about sexism fail, and quite horribly because no matter what there would be a legit reason to shoulder that kind of humiliation.

Uh, wait. What?

[Kage Kisaragi]

Uh, wait. What?

I take it you don't see the point?!

Basically it boils down to this. Diana is Diana, let her do her, because the next generation of strong female superheroes looking to take her place aren't being looked at as "obvious male sex fantasy material" based on their costumes at least not in the case of the two individuals I pointed out. Yet they exist in the comic books and both made their first appearances as homages to Wonder Woman, so in short they are the next generation of Wonder Woman/men who aren't wearing silly or overtly sexual costumes. So even if they do decide to take up the mantle of Wonder Woman someday there is really no real way someone can honestly label them as being objectified or any such thing because they are doing in respects to a mentor who is no longer with them. THERE IS A REASON.

That is the underlining argument on this thread isn't it, because thats what I got when I read the OP.

Just to reiterate, I don't think Diana's costume is anymore overtly sexual than Superman's or Martian Manhunters.

[WorstThingUS]

I take it you don't see the point?!

Basically it boils down to this. Diana is Diana, let her do her, because the next generation of strong female superheroes looking to take her place aren't being looked at as "obvious male sex fantasy material" based on their costumes at least not in the case of the two individuals I pointed out. Yet they exist in the comic books and both made their first appearances as homages to Wonder Woman, so in short they are the next generation of Wonder Woman/men who aren't wearing silly or overtly sexual costumes.

That is the underlining argument on this thread isn't it, because thats what I got when I read the OP.

I think you make a good point but the problem is the same pictures that show a degree of progress also indicate the lack of it with both Donna and Cassie essentially wearing tank tops. But some progress is better than none. And didn't Donna wear a more armoured form of WW's outfit when she took her place?

[Kage Kisaragi]

I think you make a good point but the problem is the same pictures that show a degree of progress also indicate the lack of it with both Donna and Cassie essentially wearing tank tops. But some progress is better than none. And didn't Donna wear a more armoured form of WW's outfit when she took her place?

she definitely did but I don't see the problem here. Why is either a tank top or a full body suit like Donna's a problem? How is that overtly sexual. I'm pretty sure its not 50 degrees in California which is where both of them seem to spend a lot of time. (This is based on whats currently going on in the books.) So wearing long sleeves and pants to a degree would strike me as kind of odd. Yeah it's all about progress and I think thats what's being looked over. Changing Diana now would then require us to start changing everyone else, not to mention people see Diana's outfit as iconic and its one of the first images that come to mind when you think of Wonder Woman.

[WorstThingUS]

she definitely did but I don't see the problem here. Why is either a tank top or a full body suit like Donna's a problem? How is that overtly sexual. I'm pretty sure its not 50 degrees in California which is where both of them seem to spend a lot of time. (This is based on whats currently going on in the books.) So wearing long sleeves and pants to a degree would strike me as kind of odd. Yeah it's all about progress and I think thats what's being looked over. Changing Diana now would then require us to start changing everyone else, not to mention people see Diana's outfit as iconic and its one of the first images that come to mind when you think of Wonder Woman.

There's no problem, per se, but that their costumes still demand a level of exposed flesh and sex appeal that male costumes do not. But like I said, small steps are better than no steps at all. I personally like what Diana wore when Atremis replaced her though in retrospect it was more revealing in its own way. I mean, she's wearing a bra with a jacket over it!

http://www.amazonarchives.com/Images/won99.JPG

[Black Atom]

As Kage pointed out, I think Diana's costume hearkens back to an era when costumes were just much more camp in general. I don't think it has anything to do with hypersexualizing Wonder Woman (in contrast, she's always seemed somewhat asexual) as much as it's indicative of the era in which she was created. Back then, even many male heroes, like the Golden Age Atom and Robin bared their legs. Donna started out in little more than a top tucked into a pair of bloomers (which is only a little less than what Aqualad wore).

Besides, Diana's costume is hardly super-sexual. Her arms and legs are exposed, which hardly seems egregious (I mean, look at this slut http://www.secsportsfan.com/images/lady-gymnast-grace-taylor.jpg

[Robo Ape]

she definitely did but I don't see the problem here. Why is either a tank top or a full body suit like Donna's a problem? How is that overtly sexual. I'm pretty sure its not 50 degrees in California which is where both of them seem to spend a lot of time. (This is based on whats currently going on in the books.) So wearing long sleeves and pants to a degree would strike me as kind of odd. Yeah it's all about progress and I think thats what's being looked over. Changing Diana now would then require us to start changing everyone else, not to mention people see Diana's outfit as iconic and its one of the first images that come to mind when you think of Wonder Woman.

It maybe regarded as iconic but that doesn't stop it undermining the character. An allegedly iconic costume does not defend it from appearing somewhat 'dubious' now? That seems to be a somewhat misleading defence.

At least in many ways their is more honesty in the costume of a character like Red Sonja where at least it's intend has always been more open & not obscured behind arguments of history or patriotism.

[Kage Kisaragi]

What about Black Canary, Zatanna, Starfire, these characters and others like them have gotten far more attention because of their appearance than Wonder Woman has. It's mostly because you can associate some kind of sexist profession with these girls. Black Canary's outfit is very reminiscent of a 1980's hooker, the leather jacket over skin tight corset or leotard with fish net stockings and black leather boots. Now there is no way to cover up her implied drawing pool. Zatanna rather than looking like a Magician looks more like a Magicians sexy assistant. However Diana does not look like a sexed up amazon, nor does she look like a sexed up Superman. Kara looks like a sexed up Superman/woman and as far as what Amazons looked like, practically every source of visual depiction of them has had them either topless with only a loin cloth, completely nude, or bra and panties. Thankfully Diana never went out any other form of those depictions.

[West Mantooth]

What about Black Canary, Zatanna, Starfire, these characters and others like them have gotten far more attention because of their appearance than Wonder Woman has. It's mostly because you can associate some kind of sexist profession with these girls. Black Canary's outfit is very reminiscent of a 1980's hooker, the leather jacket over skin tight corset or leotard with fish net stockings and black leather boots. Now there is no way to cover up her implied drawing pool. Zatanna rather than looking like a Magician looks more like a Magicians sexy assistant. However Diana does not look like a sexed up amazon, nor does she look like a sexed up Superman. Kara looks like a sexed up Superman/woman and as far as what Amazons looked like, practically every source of visual depiction of them has had them either topless with only a loin cloth, completely nude, or bra and panties. Thankfully Diana never went out any other form of those depictions.

But none of those characters are defined as the epitome of female empowerment. Martian Manhunter is an immigrant to America but he doesn't stand for Truth, Justice, and the American Way.

At the end of this vid. The woman is shown in a Wondy costume.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=171493&title=sexism

[Kage Kisaragi]

But none of those characters are defined as the epitome of female empowerment. Martian Manhunter is an immigrant to America but he doesn't stand for Truth, Justice, and the American Way.

At the end of this vid. The woman is shown in a Wondy costume.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=171493&title=sexism

The problem then isn't Wonder Woman, it's the people who compare women to Wonder Woman, and the Women who admittedly like her as the embodiment of female empowerment.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

We know that no superheroine is safe.
So why make life easy for the enforcers of Rule#34?

There´s many heroines out there who look badass, one glance at them and you know they mean business.

http://images.wikia.com/uncyclopedia/images/f/ff/Huntress2.gif
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/image/big_barda2.jpg
http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/bestselling-comics-2007/3454-1.jpg

Wonder Woman?
Sorry, but not so much...

[Kage Kisaragi]

all of which came after wonder woman, the one in the middle even admiring her.

[West Mantooth]

The problem then isn't Wonder Woman, it's the people who compare women to Wonder Woman, and the Women who admittedly like her as the embodiment of female empowerment.

You mean like her creator?

[Kage Kisaragi]

You mean like her creator?

Sorry I don't remember Marston ever saying to me or anyone else for that matter that, "Women regardless of time period are shameful sorry lot that should dress and act like my creation Wonder Woman." No sorry I fail to see your point here... and before you start quoting word for word someone else's interpretation on the man who created her I will remind you that no one else's interpretation on anyone else's ideas are any more factual than yours or my own.

[FreeFallin]

We know that no superheroine is safe.
So why make life easy for the enforcers of Rule#34?

There´s many heroines out there who look badass, one glance at them and you know they mean business.

http://images.wikia.com/uncyclopedia/images/f/ff/Huntress2.gif
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/image/big_barda2.jpg
http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/bestselling-comics-2007/3454-1.jpg

Wonder Woman?
Sorry, but not so much...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/WWMax.png

this doesn't show that wonderwoman means buisness

[Black Atom]

We know that no superheroine is safe.
So why make life easy for the enforcers of Rule#34?

There´s many heroines out there who look badass, one glance at them and you know they mean business.

[snipped images]

Wonder Woman?
Sorry, but not so much...

Diana has something greater than each of them: iconography. She's the world's premier superheroine and many women already hold her up as a symbol of feminine strength. Why change that for the sake of people (that I'm not convinced even exist, by the way) who are so narrowminded and prudish they think a woman who exposes her arms and legs is a slut?

[Eliseu Gouveia]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/WWMax.png

this doesn't show that wonderwoman means buisness

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/8126/wonderwomanye4.jpg

[West Mantooth]

Sorry I don't remember Marston ever saying to me or anyone else for that matter that, "Women regardless of time period are shameful sorry lot that should dress and act like my creation Wonder Woman." No sorry I fail to see your point here... and before you start quoting word for word someone else's interpretation on the man who created her I will remind you that no one else's interpretation on anyone else's ideas are any more factual than yours or my own.

Marston created Wonder Woman to challenge the perception of what women could do. The character was supposed to not only empower girls but make boys understand the valuable nature of woman outside of 1940s standards.

The fact that the character hasn't changed in apperance with the times has damaged that goal to some degree but that by no means retroactively changes the character's original intent.

[Kage Kisaragi]

Diana has something greater than each of them: iconography. She's the world's premier superheroine and many women already hold her up as a symbol of feminine strength. Why change that for the sake of people (that I'm not convinced even exist, by the way) who are so narrowminded and prudish they think a woman who exposes her arms and legs is a slut?

:tongue: Clearly they are all Amish.

[Kage Kisaragi]

picture

Yes, Bene's draws very sexually changed Women scenes. He doesn't do it for the feminist, he doesn't do it for the heterosexual women. I'm not convinced he even does it for pubescent teens. I think he does it because it sells.. and so long as he wants his job, he'll keep doing it until the demographic changes.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Diana has something greater than each of them: iconography. She's the world's premier superheroine and many women already hold her up as a symbol of feminine strength. Why change that for the sake of people (that I'm not convinced even exist, by the way) who are so narrowminded and prudish they think a woman who exposes her arms and legs is a slut?


Symbols are good, nothing against them.
but if it can be improved (as her uniform clearly does), then why are you so resistant to the mere idea that someone somewhere out there might have some very good ideas on how to give WW´s appearance that extra oomph she needs?

I hear the word classic thrown around here a lot.
Before Coca-Cola turned him into a jolly old man in bright red costume, classic Santa Claus just a fat guy in rags with a bag.
No design is set on stone,
Superman, Batman, Captain America... they´re works in progress, their changes evolving as the decades pass.

[Kage Kisaragi]

The fact that the character hasn't changed in apperance with the times has damaged that goal to some degree but that by no means retroactively changes the character's original intent.

Did it ever occur to you that maybe she hasn't changed (And she has changed, as far as her weaknesses and costumes go.) because shes actually succeeding? I mean you said it yourself. Women uses her as the image of their empowerment movement. Regardless of what shes wearing Women the people who I assume your trying to stick up for in this thread and those like you, have already over looked what you apparently find so offensive.

1.) Should Wonder Woman be a ugly woman who just happens to have all the powers she has now? Wouldn't that make her a better role model? I mean now the majority of that sex has a iconic figure who represents them even more better now.

2.) Should Wonder Woman give up her iconic image just because a few people are prudent?

3.) Is Wonder Woman a figure that embodies female empowerment because of her outfit, because of looks or because of her abilities and what she believes in?

I think people should answer these questions for themselves and figure out whats more important.

[FreeFallin]

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/8126/wonderwomanye4.jpg

ok cheap shot, but all of the other members of the league are in the same position. does batman not mean buisness becaus of that picture? in my picture she was one of the first heroes to break the no killing rule

[Black Atom]

You mean like her creator?

Wonder Woman, like Superman and most other heroes, were created to be metaphors or representations of something greater. Their colorful and camp costumes are merely conventions of the genre. In our world, walking around in any kind of skin tight suit would be considered improper or ridiculous--in the context of the world Wonder Woman was created in, where Hawkman went topless and Spectre wore a cape and a speedo, it was par for the course. While I'm sure Marston wanted to impart many ideas about feminine strength through Wonder Woman, I doubt he intended to perpetuate an idea that women should dress like Wonder Woman anymore than Bob Kane was trying to convince men to dress like Batman.

Furthermore, anyone with any sort of common sense is able to interpret Wonder Woman as a symbol and judge her in context of her origins rather than jump to the silly assumption that since her legs are exposed, she must be some kind of whore. Considering most people development an understanding of superheroes and by extension Wonder Woman as children, long before they develop the understanding of whores, I'm wondering why they'd bother making such a ridiculous assumption. It's as silly as saying people think Daisy Duck is a slut because she doesn't wear pants.

[Kage Kisaragi]

... come to think of it, in that picture. What was the problem again? Was it that Diana has big boobs or something? Cause for all the wise cracking that I'm sure people are making, her costume is still 100% intact, and seems to stay so more so than anyone else's. Either her costumeis nigh indestructible, or like Empowered it is self regenerating because she got whooped in the previous issue.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

ok cheap shot, but all of the other members of the league are in the same position. does batman not mean buisness becaus of that picture? in my picture she was one of the first heroes to break the no killing rule


Killing does show that a character is dead serious.

But I wish she didn´t have to go to such extremes to show that she means busines.
Wouldn´t it be great if she looked dead serious while just standing around drinking coffee?

Manhunter, Barda do Huntress.don´t need to break necks to show that.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

... come to think of it, in that picture. What was the problem again? Was it that Diana has big boobs or something? Cause for all the wise cracking that I'm sure people are making, her costume is still 100% intact, and seems to stay so more so than anyone else's. She apparently either her costume as is, and nigh indestructible, or like Empowered it is self regenerating because she got whooped in the previous issue.

There is also the slim chance that her costume doesn´t rip as much as the others due to the fact that there´s not much to rip. :biggrin:

[West Mantooth]

Did it ever occur to you that maybe she hasn't changed (And she has changed, as far as her weaknesses and costumes go.) because shes actually succeeding? I mean you said it yourself. Women uses her as the image of their empowerment movement. Regardless of what shes wearing Women the people who I assume your trying to stick up for in this thread and those like you, have already over looked what you apparently find so offensive.

1.) Should Wonder Woman be a ugly woman who just happens to have all the powers she has now? Wouldn't that make her a better role model? I mean now the majority of that sex has a iconic figure who represents them even more better now.

2.) Should Wonder Woman give up her iconic image just because a few people are prudent?

3.) Is Wonder Woman a figure that embodies female empowerment because of her outfit, because of looks or because of her abilities and what she believes in?

I think people should answer these questions for themselves and figure out whats more important.


As I said in my original post, the costume does and it doesn't. Superman's trunks are lame but the S symbol is universally understood as strength. Wondy's a female symbol of power, everyone understands that (we wouldn't have the thread unless they did), but I do wonder if the costume could be changed to get rid of that last bit of artist tendency to make her look like a big-breasted Amazon in a thong. Some kind of costume change that would further lessen the need to oversexualize the character.

If I were a woman buying comics for the first time, I certainly wouldn't want to read WW if she was beening drawn how Benes does.

[FreeFallin]

Killing does show that a character is dead serious.

But I wish she didn´t have to go to such extremes to show that she means busines.
Wouldn´t it be great if she looked dead serious while just standing around drinking coffee?

Manhunter, Barda do Huntress.don´t need to break necks to show that.

http://www.alexross.com/CP1326-Wonder-Woman-Mytholo.jpg

i think the trailer for the animated wonderwoman movie shows her as a serious warrior even in costume

[Kage Kisaragi]

Manhunter, Barda do Huntress.don´t need to break necks to show that.

http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/1494/85437-196636-huntress_large.jpg

I'm not 100% up to date on huntress, but the fact that she has outfits like this in her closet, (and im sure she still wears it every once and awhile when a man comes a courtin.) Makes me think that shes a little more free spirited than you're admitting. I don't think costumes make or break a heroes forcefulness or ability to be serious.

[Black Atom]

Symbols are good, nothing against them.
but if it can be improved (as her uniform clearly does), then why are you so resistant to the mere idea that someone somewhere out there might have some very good ideas on how to give WW´s appearance that extra oomph she needs?

I'm not sure we've established an agreement that WW's costume needs improvement or extra oomph, though. I'm not convinced that it does undermine WW as a symbol and it'd be a shame to sacrfice the iconography she's established (which is really rare) when it's not clear there'll be a benefit.
Besides, I'd be willing to bet that even if they did change WW's costume, it'd still be the classic one (probably drawn by Dick Giordano) people will still wear on T-shirts or lunch boxes.

I hear the word classic thrown around here a lot.
Before Coca-Cola turned him into a jolly old man in bright red costume, classic Santa Claus just a fat guy in rags with a bag.
No design is set on stone,
Superman, Batman, Captain America... they´re works in progress, their changes evolving as the decades pass.

Sure, the costume will evolve. It already has and I believe it will continue to. But I expect some core elements will remain the same.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I'm not sure we've established an agreement that WW's costume needs improvement or extra oomph, though. I'm not convinced that it does undermine WW as a symbol and it'd be a shame to sacrfice the iconography she's established (which is really rare) when it's not clear there'll be a benefit.
Besides, I'd be willing to bet that even if they did change WW's costume, it'd still be the classic one (probably drawn by Dick Giordano) people will still wear on T-shirts or lunch boxes.

I don´t agree with you on these so-called sacrifices.
I don´t think there´s any sacrifices involved at all.
Sure there will be a commotion, CNN will do a varieties cover story on the subject, a couple extremists (like you said, who listen to them anyway? ^_^) will threaten to drop the book and a few new faces will be curious to see what´s it all about.
But in the end, isn´t that what happens everytime?
Electric, Blue and Red Superman came and went when people realised they were a bad idea.
This is what´s so good in comics. You try new formulas. If If they work, you stick to them for a while.
they don´t work, you scrap them.
So, what´s so horrible about allowing someone to play with the design, see what she or he can do with it?
Are you so jaded toward contemporany artists that you have no faith there´s anyone out there who could beat Marton´s concept?



Sure, the costume will evolve. It already has and I believe it will continue to. But I expect some core elements will remain the same.

Thank you.

I guess that is as good as we´re gonna come in terms of a consensus, isn´t it? :)

[Eliseu Gouveia]

http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/1494/85437-196636-huntress_large.jpg

I'm not 100% up to date on huntress, but the fact that she has outfits like this in her closet, (and im sure she still wears it every once and awhile when a man comes a courtin.) Makes me think that shes a little more free spirited than you're admitting. I don't think costumes make or break a heroes forcefulness or ability to be serious.

Gah!
The pain, the pain...
Get that costume away from me!
Hate that design.
Let me live in my little fantasy world where she still wears this one. :tongue:

http://images.wikia.com/uncyclopedia/images/f/ff/Huntress2.gif

[juggling man]

Gah!
The pain, the pain...
Get that costume away from me!
Hate that design.
Let me live in my little fantasy world where she still wears this one. :tongue:

http://images.wikia.com/uncyclopedia/images/f/ff/Huntress2.gif

Read Huntress: Year One and Cry for Blood.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Yeah, I´ve been hearing a lot about that Huntress comic lately.

Alas, artists are poor, so I can´t afford one more title on my list for a while....

[2-4-5_Trioxin]

I dont think it does. Yeah she looks ok in it but its not as if its meant purely to show off her figure like oh say, powergirl.

Besides her costume makes her recognizeable, why change it? Besides its all in how she is presented, not what she wears. Hell alex ross always manages to use her normal outfit and make he look strong, sexy, powerfull, confident and all the other things any woman would want to be.

Cant say I recall many costume changes that actually worked aside from a small handfull most are just dumb ideas.

[SkinFromBone]

Make the bustier more of a brass or gold chest plate and a brass warrior's skirt. Something more along the lines of what she wore at the end of Kingdom Come. Inspired by greek warrior gear.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e6/WWDonna.jpg/200px-WWDonna.jpg

I think that's the best WW gear I've seen :cool:

[Kage Kisaragi]

I think that's the best WW gear I've seen :cool:

Except that's not Wonder Woman per say Diana, as it is to my knowledge One Year Later: Donna Troy when she assumed the Wonder Woman mantle in Diana absence.

[SkinFromBone]

Except that's not Wonder Woman per say Diana, as it is to my knowledge One Year Later: Donna Troy when she assumed the Wonder Woman mantle in Diana absence.

w/e it's still nice stuff ;o

[Kage Kisaragi]

w/e it's still nice stuff ;o

No doubt there, yet it harkons back to my other post that suggest the next generation of Wonder Women, will take their own stab at the mythos and do it up their own way.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I think that's the best WW gear I've seen :cool:



My only prob with that design is that it looks too busy.

When designing a character, artists should always keep in mind that famous mnemonic: K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple, Stupid).

Less is more.

[spidervenom]

yes. It seems that the coustume keeps getting shrinky dinky. god know's whats gonna happen when frank cho gets a hold.

[BYC]

yes. It seems that the coustume keeps getting shrinky dinky. god know's whats gonna happen when frank cho gets a hold.
Sales go up?

[spidervenom]

Sales go up?

yes, exactly.

[jackdaw53]

Is it regarded as something that can never be altered? To me it fails on a load of levels:-

Not that good looking... don't like the color mix. (Yes completely subjective.)

Can't imagine any sensible woman wearing it.

Old fashioned, redolent of the Silver Age (or before)

Does not make sense given range of things a super heroine does

Seriously, is it so iconic that it cannot be altered substantially?? What person wants to wear the same work clothes for 50 plus years... it just doesn't make sense at all sorts of levels.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Classic is just another word for "things we used to do when we didn´t know any better".

[Spiffy]

Geez. I go away for a bit and we've got "troll" accusations being tossed around. Jimminy Christmas.

None of this is much in the spirit of the once, and possibly future, goddess of truth, and ambassador of peace.

[Kage Kisaragi]

Seriously, is it so iconic that it cannot be altered substantially?? What person wants to wear the same work clothes for 50 plus years... it just doesn't make sense at all sorts of levels.

The thing you're missing is that it HAS CHANGED, significantly from her original attire, especially if you compare it to Batman's or Superman's original uniforms.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

So why are you opposed to further changes?

[Kage Kisaragi]

I'm not oppose to it changing furthere, I'm opposed to people wanting it to change because they feel it's sexist. If it's going to change, it should change because of a change in the character. If Diana feels like her current costume no longer matches her ideals/goals or no longer promotes the principles she stands for then let her change it. The types of changes made so far weren't made as a reflection of women feeling inferior to her, or overtly sexy, they were made to keep with artistically sharper designs of the time.Also look at the Wonder Woman comic, she isn't wearing a thong or anything shes wearing normal underwear, more so than most real life women wear regardless of where they are... I wish I could find the scan of Dodsons Wonder Woman when she arrived on the shore in her going back home arc.

Pants are not going to make her look any less silly as is. Star spangled tights are just as laughable as underpants.
I also if the costume changes to much then she ceases being Wonder Woman for those who knew her. Look what happen to Superman Red and Blue.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I agree that change just for the sake of appeasing people is not the way to go.
There will always be people who consider her silly or slut..

The changes should be made in a manner that:

a) it makes sense for the character

b) the character still remains recognizable (brand recognition)

c) keeps the character modern and sleek, from a design point of view,

[Black Atom]

I don´t agree with you on these so-called sacrifices.
I don´t think there´s any sacrifices involved at all.
Sure there will be a commotion, CNN will do a varieties cover story on the subject, a couple extremists (like you said, who listen to them anyway? ^_^) will threaten to drop the book and a few new faces will be curious to see what´s it all about.
But in the end, isn´t that what happens everytime?
Electric, Blue and Red Superman came and went when people realised they were a bad idea.
This is what´s so good in comics. You try new formulas. If If they work, you stick to them for a while.
they don´t work, you scrap them.
So, what´s so horrible about allowing someone to play with the design, see what she or he can do with it?
Are you so jaded toward contemporany artists that you have no faith there´s anyone out there who could beat Marton´s concept?

Not at all. I've seen many really great redesign concepts on WW (including yours) and even done some myself. But it's a bit like trying to redesign Mickey Mouse. As many different looks as he's had, in people's minds, they always revert back to the red shorts with the buttons. But I believe the costume will continue to evolve, little by little (it's a little different now than it was just 5 years ago) and I think that's the most natural way to go about making changes.

[Black Atom]

Yeah I would say dumb is what the costume communicates. It's like talking to someone in a business meeting while she chews gum and is wearing a spaghetti-strap top (as happened to me yesterday). It doesn't matter what her qualifications are, the non-verbal signals are all 'I'm a bimbo'.

That's because you're judging it in the context of the real-world. If you lived in world where the most powerful and revered man on earth wore red trunks outside of his pants and a dude in a batsuit actually frightened criminals, WW's costume would look just like another uniform.

Is it regarded as something that can never be altered? To me it fails on a load of levels:-

Not that good looking... don't like the color mix. (Yes completely subjective.)

Can't imagine any sensible woman wearing it.

Old fashioned, redolent of the Silver Age (or before)

Does not make sense given range of things a super heroine does

Seriously, is it so iconic that it cannot be altered substantially?? What person wants to wear the same work clothes for 50 plus years... it just doesn't make sense at all sorts of levels.

Again, you're judging it in the context of how a sensible woman from our reality would behave. WW comes from a fantasy world where everyone wears similar outfits.

The uninitiated seem to actually have an easier time seeing WW and the DCU for they are: fantasy. With certain fantasy rules.

[$5 Milkshake]

Yeah, I dont think it's overtly sexual, so I dont believe it undermines her character in that way. However, it's extremely friggin' stupid looking, which undermines her greatly.

[carabas]

That's because you're judging it in the context of the real-world. If you lived in world where the most powerful and revered man on earth wore red trunks outside of his pants and a dude in a batsuit actually frightened criminals, WW's costume would look just like another uniform.That is all good and well for the inhabitants of the DCU, but actual real people judge it by the context of their own universe. And Wonder Wonan's uniform is basically hookerwear.

When Batman and Superman get cotume updates, it is to improve on the design. When Wonder woman gets updated, it is to show even more skin.

[jackdaw53]

Black Atom. You're right its a fantasy, with rules... that maybe need revising? To me its the sort of costume that was fine back in the sixties/ seventies when comics were aimed at kids... or, of course, in a kids comics today.

But mainstream DC super hero comics today are gearing up to an increasing adult market. They are allegedly becoming more serious, challenging and "realistic". I hope that doesn't just mean increasingly graphic depictions of sex and violence (particularly the latter)... but also dealing with a wider range of topics, and casting away a few of the out-dated conventions.

I feel that in the DC world one of those out-moded conventions is that super heroes wear some really strange get-ups... WHILE every other character wears stuff that looks like completely normal attire. The characters are supposed to be intelligent... and free thinking... but rush up to wear "nonsense" uniforms.

Sure its a minor niggle. But when I started reading comics again a few years ago... its probably one reason why I gravitated towards Manhunter and Fallen Angel as two of the very few super hero comics I read. To me... they just looked more modern.

And now you're going to tell me I'm in a minority. And darn it... you're right again, so I'm going to find somebody else to argue with... er.. I mean "debate the finer points of comics".

[Black Atom]

That is all good and well for the inhabitants of the DCU, but actual real people judge it by the context of their own universe. And Wonder Wonan's uniform is basically hookerwear.

Only if they're brain damaged. Most people develop an understanding of WW and other superheroes as children, before they develop an understanding of hookers. That ability to pretend or suspend disbelief stays with them.

When Batman and Superman get cotume updates, it is to improve on the design. When Wonder woman gets updated, it is to show even more skin.

But that hasn't happened. The current costume designed by Terry Dodson isn't anymore revealing than the one Dick Giordano drew in the 70's. The big changes are the shape of the breast plate, the lengthening of the bracelets and that the boots don't have heels. If anything, it's become more practical.

[NeoStar9X]

Don't forget the increase in breast size and the constant need to showcase it along with other body parts. It's that, that points out the huge problems with the costume. Lets not act nieve here though. The costume has changed over the years. Even if one is just looking casually at it and has changed to show more and more skin (like I said you have to factor in the other things they've been doing with the costume). Smaller at times not to mention even tighter along with increased bust size, longer legs, etc and it doesn't paint a good picture for the character unless they are trying to purposefully sell softcore porn in the disguise of a superhero comic.

Still it doesn't seem to actually be helpful though since her sales are still constantly low compared other heroes. Readers and in this case young males and maybe even gay female readers, have the internet to get their porn fix. The need to get it through comic characters has long past. I don't see why artist continue to try and exploit this aspect though when it doesn't seem to be working anymore (WW's case anyway) and hasn't for years. You'd think they'd try something else when showing more and more skin and breast doesn't seem to have worked over time.

[Black Atom]

Black Atom. You're right its a fantasy, with rules... that maybe need revising? To me its the sort of costume that was fine back in the sixties/ seventies when comics were aimed at kids... or, of course, in a kids comics today.

But mainstream DC super hero comics today are gearing up to an increasing adult market. They are allegedly becoming more serious, challenging and "realistic". I hope that doesn't just mean increasingly graphic depictions of sex and violence (particularly the latter)... but also dealing with a wider range of topics, and casting away a few of the out-dated conventions.

I feel that in the DC world one of those out-moded conventions is that super heroes wear some really strange get-ups... WHILE every other character wears stuff that looks like completely normal attire. The characters are supposed to be intelligent... and free thinking... but rush up to wear "nonsense" uniforms.

Sure its a minor niggle. But when I started reading comics again a few years ago... its probably one reason why I gravitated towards Manhunter and Fallen Angel as two of the very few super hero comics I read. To me... they just looked more modern.

And now you're going to tell me I'm in a minority. And darn it... you're right again, so I'm going to find somebody else to argue with... er.. I mean "debate the finer points of comics".

Well, you make a very good point, actually. And one that could spark a whole other debate: how "real" should the world of superhero comics be?

Honestly? I don't know.

The closest to an answer I can come up with is that you have to judge it on a case-by-case basis. I think characters like Manhunter, as you mentioned, are better served interpreted with more realism, while a Superman story should probably involve a bit more fantasy. Batman's lucky because he can actually fit in both places (which is what makes him so bankable). Personally, I tend to think WW fits closer in Superman's end of the spectrum, which is fairly fantastic and whimsical.

Now, that's not to say you can't have serious subjects. I think a book like All-Star Superman shows you can embrace the fantasy and still have gravitas and it seems like the desired approach for some heroes.

If we remember the late 80's and early 90's, there already was an era in comics where creators tried to make superheroes real and practical. They put everyone in leather jackets and trench coats with tons of "pratical-looking" belts and pouches instead of colorful costumes and capes. It worked for some, but the majority are now looked back on as jokes.

In short, I think it's best to approach each character differently. A guy who likes Punisher may never like a character like Wonder Woman. And that's okay. The answer isn't to put Diana in fatigues and body armor, just as you wouldn't put a cape on Punisher so he appeals to a WW fan.

[Tanjint]

I like how she was depicted in Infinite Crisis. Same basic costume but with sword, cape, and slightly more armored adornments. It was regal, militaristic, bad-ass and still very beautiful. Beautiful came to mind before 'sexy' did in that depiction.

-T

[K-DoG7p7]

Long story short...

She shoud use the Jim Lee design at all times..
Only with the battleskirt..

[Tanjint]

isn't that the same one as the infinite crisis design?

-T

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I liked that design.
Only prob is the american flag motif.

Now of course I´m not against the american motif, as long as they provide a logical, decent explanation why she wears it since not only is she not american, but she´ was for the last two decades a themiscirian princess/ambassador.

If anything, she should wear the amazonian flag!

[Libaax]

I confess i never gave a thought about reading her comic because of her costume.

Its not only because of the costume being a bathing suit like many female heroes . Its the look of it. The coloring and everything ei the american flag motif.

It works for Captain America but a chick in that motif and in the way her costume looks is just......

If she had the armour plate,with the cape looking like the pic posted early pages of this. I would respect her more and become interested.

I dont really understand her role as important superhero.

If she was a character like Power Girl who isnt seen as the male Superman or like one of big 3 of DC like WW i wouldnt mind her costume.

She is a relic costume/look wise in my eyes.

I wish they redid superheroines like her to look more than just a male fantasy.

I want more heroines like Manhunter. A cool and practic look for a superhero. They dont all have to look like they are in a Victoria's Secret show.....

[carabas]

If anything, she should wear the amazonian flag!Gail seemingly is stealth-retconning that in as we speak, with the golden eagle seen on Themyscira, and the significance of the colours of the bracelet she gave to Nemesis.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Gail seemingly is stealth-retconning that in as we speak, with the golden eagle seen on Themyscira, and the significance of the colours of the bracelet she gave to Nemesis.

A few years ago, I got a possible explanation that would be SO sweet, but it was shot down right off the bat.
It was SO sweet because she would have a reason to wear the american flag AND at the same time establish the connection between Themyscira and the US.

Basicaly, here it is the gist of it again:

Wonder Woman is not wearing the american flag.
She´s actualy wearing the AMAZONIAN flag.

When the US kicked the UK out and declared independency, 200 years ago, there were amazons secretly on the Washington side.
When time came to design a flag for the new nation, these amazons felt so touched/inspired by this new nation they´ve cradled that they helped design it, based - you´ve guessed it! :) - in THEIR OWN flag. :biggrin:

[Kage Kisaragi]

I agree that change just for the sake of appeasing people is not the way to go.
There will always be people who consider her silly or slut..

The changes should be made in a manner that:

a) it makes sense for the character

b) the character still remains recognizable (brand recognition)

c) keeps the character modern and sleek, from a design point of view,

Okay if the design change is something along these lines I myself (not speaking for anyone else) would welcome them.

[berk]

Gail seemingly is stealth-retconning that in as we speak, with the golden eagle seen on Themyscira, and the significance of the colours of the bracelet she gave to Nemesis.It's a commendable effort, but I think that as long as the costume conjures up visual associations with American icongraphy, no retcon or in-story explanation of that association, no matter how inventive or plausible, is going to overcome the basic problem.

[Morrison]

It's a commendable effort, but I think that as long as the costume conjures up visual associations with American icongraphy, ...
Does it really? Red, white and blue are just colours, they don't represent America exclusively, the flags of the UK, France and the Netherlands are red, white and blue and the flags of Australia and New Zealand are red, white and blue and have stars on them, the eagle is used all over the world as a symbol for a lot of things etc.

When I see Wonder Woman's costume I see stars but not stripes and I definitely don't see the american flag. I know in realitiy the costume was based on it, but the resemblence is really not that big.
Just create a Themysciran flag thats red with a golden eagle in the top half and blue with twelve stars (representing the twelve Olympians) in the bottom half and *poof* the connection to the America is history. It's really not necessary to come up with a convoluted story of amazons helping to design the american flag or stuff like that.

[Robo Ape]

Except that's not Wonder Woman per say Diana, as it is to my knowledge One Year Later: Donna Troy when she assumed the Wonder Woman mantle in Diana absence.

It doesn't matter who it is, it's still a more sensible costume for the character.

By the way I should clarify my OP, I think the costume undermines the character not just because it might, be seen as sexist, but because it's a rather stupid costume to be blunt, far more so than Superman & that's saying something.

[Kid Kyoto]

The American flag thing doesn't bug me, the original explanation is as good as any, the Amazons saw the US as the best hope for freedom and send Wonder Woman to help in their hour of need.

Done.

Some people might not like the idea of a US-centered origin but that was the original plan. Basically she's supposed to be a superhero version of Columbia.

Columbia was the most popular anthropromophisation of the US until WWII when Uncle Sam replaced her. Columbia, like England's Britania was based on Athena.

Anyway, point being Wonder Woman was always seen as an American hero.

[FreeFallin]

Does anyone remember the Justice League episode "A Better World"? It had alternate versions of the JL called the Justice Lords. Wonder Woman's costume was much more practical. Here are some screenshots.

http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/8436/25md9.jpg

http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/9513/41ft6.jpg

seems like the best idea, just add diana's normal hair (the short makes her look like a butch lesbian)

[Kage Kisaragi]

because it's a rather stupid costume to be blunt, far more so than Superman & that's saying something.

No, thats your opinion. Which contrary to belief isn't the shared opinion of the entire world. Secondly why would Wonder Woman be excluded from having to wearing silly costumes? Everyone else has to do it. Why should she be put on a pedestals? Superman's costume is equally as silly as Wonder Woman's and its not just because of the outside red underwear. How many men do you see with S'curls, or wearing capes? This is of course not to mention the color scheme of his outfit.

Anyway, the reason I pointed out that that wasn't Diana Wonder Woman was because it harkoned back unto my original post that suggested that the costume will change along with the different characters that will take up the mantle of Wonder Woman.

[Libaax]

The American flag thing doesn't bug me, the original explanation is as good as any, the Amazons saw the US as the best hope for freedom and send Wonder Woman to help in their hour of need.

Done.

Some people might not like the idea of a US-centered origin but that was the original plan. Basically she's supposed to be a superhero version of Columbia.

Columbia was the most popular anthropromophisation of the US until WWII when Uncle Sam replaced her. Columbia, like England's Britania was based on Athena.

Anyway, point being Wonder Woman was always seen as an American hero.

The motif isnt an issue to me. The costume looks bad,the motif is just one part of it.

Captain America is one of my favorite heroes. His costume is very good. One of the best i have seen.

[Kage Kisaragi]

The motif isnt an issue to me. The costume looks bad,the motif is just one part of it.

Captain America is one of my favorite heroes. His costume is very good. One of the best i have seen.

Couple issues in this statement that need to be addressed. Two different companies, two different artist that worked on the costumes. Also as far as I'm concerned Cap looks just as silly as Wonder Woman. See I don't claim pants make a person look more sensible. It seems like every time someone rags on Wonder Woman's outfit, their first suggestion or action is to compare it to another pantsed superhero, or to suggest a outfit where she is wearings pants is better.

[Libaax]

Couple issues in this statement that need to be addressed. Two different companies, two different artist that worked on the costumes. Also as far as I'm concerned Cap looks just as silly as Wonder Woman. See I don't claim pants make a person look more sensible. It seems like every time someone rags on Wonder Woman's outfit, their first suggestion or action is to compare it to another pantsed superhero, or to suggest a outfit where she is wearings pants is better.

Who said pants makes a costume more sensible.

The worst part of Caps costume are the old school pants.

Supes,Batman wear undies but their costume look so good and modern compared to their old ones that you dont focus on below their waste.

It would be the same if the upper body part of her costume was a good one. If the symbol was better. Its the upper body of any costume that makes it sensible and make you forget the shorts or tight pants they are wearing. Unlike they are wearing tong,fishnet or something.....


I did say in my first post that if she looked like a warrior it would be better. With the armour,cape,the skirt like that pic in the early pages of the thread.

In other words like Xena looked sometimes in her tv show.

Her costume like many old female superheroes are relics from much more sexist times in the bizz. They should modernize her and others. It would make it very easy for female superheroes in her postion costume wise.....

[West Mantooth]

Couple issues in this statement that need to be addressed. Two different companies, two different artist that worked on the costumes. Also as far as I'm concerned Cap looks just as silly as Wonder Woman. See I don't claim pants make a person look more sensible. It seems like every time someone rags on Wonder Woman's outfit, their first suggestion or action is to compare it to another pantsed superhero, or to suggest a outfit where she is wearings pants is better.

In the larger point, Cap's costume is corny but it fits in context of the character,imo. Cap is a man of the 1940s so his costume at worst represents a person holding onto that era.

But artist have changed to the point of adding special details to costumes (seams, boots w/ grips). I always wondered how Wonder Woman kept her golden lasso attached. It wasn't until recently that artist started drawing the little flap. That was the only movement I witnessed to giving the costume a non-bathing suit look.

[Robo Ape]

No, thats your opinion. Which contrary to belief isn't the shared opinion of the entire world. Secondly why would Wonder Woman be excluded from having to wearing silly costumes? Everyone else has to do it. Why should she be put on a pedestals? Superman's costume is equally as silly as Wonder Woman's and its not just because of the outside red underwear. How many men do you see with S'curls, or wearing capes? This is of course not to mention the color scheme of his outfit.

Anyway, the reason I pointed out that that wasn't Diana Wonder Woman was because it harkoned back unto my original post that suggested that the costume will change along with the different characters that will take up the mantle of Wonder Woman.

Where did I say it was anything other than my opinion? Don't start adding connotations to my post that were never originally there.

[pariah-1972]

All of DC's big characters are a fashion disasters.

Wonder Woman has had some subtle costume changes since her beginning, but when a character has a drastic costume change the Fanboys start bitching and complaining.

I personally prefer the Greco/Roman attire that Wonder-Girl wore on the first issue of the reboot.

And no amount of Perez's backtracking and explaining made much sense.

[MythicBrawn]

Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman could stand to change their costumes. Yes, I understand the costumes are "iconic" but that still doesn't mean they're not silly. Robin going back to undies on the outside makes no sense since he had left that look. He looks absolutely ridiculous to me. I know the origin of WW's costume but it seems highly impractical in combat situations.

[FreeFallin]

Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman could stand to change their costumes. Yes, I understand the costumes are "iconic" but that still doesn't mean they're not silly. Robin going back to undies on the outside makes no sense since he had left that look. He looks absolutely ridiculous to me. I know the origin of WW's costume but it seems highly impractical in combat situations.

true, batman's costume has changed color throughout his comic history, whats the difference if wonder woman's costume covers more of her to be more pracitical

[echopryme]

This whole arguement is borderline insane...


Look, ALL costumes look unrealistic and goofy. All of them. Possibly the only one that doesn't is Green Lantern's (but not the Golden Age one... that thing is just goofy), and that's because we know it's a uniform.

The funny thing is that when you put characters in what they would probably ACTUALLY wear in real life, everyone goes ballistic. And yes, I'm talking about Conner Kent and his Jeans and T-Shirt getup. That was, without doubt, the most realistic "costume" ever for a teenager. It works on Cassie too, and she looks mad hot in it still.


But look, they're not going to change it permanently. Ever. WW does mean alot to women out in the non-comics world. More than most people realize. And they don't seem to mind, so neither should we.

[NeoStar9X]

All of DC's big characters are a fashion disasters.

Wonder Woman has had some subtle costume changes since her beginning, but when a character has a drastic costume change the Fanboys start bitching and complaining.

I personally prefer the Greco/Roman attire that Wonder-Girl wore on the first issue of the reboot.

And no amount of Perez's backtracking and explaining made much sense.

It's at that point where DC needs to grow a set and say we are changing the costume and that's that. Fans can dislike it but they will not stop buying a title due to a simple costume change. They might dislike it but they'll get used to it over time. The point is for DC to actually follow through with a change. Of all changes they could make a cosmetic one is the most harmless.

Lets be honest here. As said a lot of costumes, especially female ones were made during a different time period and for specific reasons at the time. Changing it to something more practical and more worthy of the character and something that will allow potential readers (and I'll get back to this) is important.

Potential readers is a huge thing that is being overlooked. Lets be honest the comic readership community is shrinking and is going to continue to shrink until DC, Marvel, etc realize and accept they have to make drastic changes in how they sell things. One of the thing they can do is try their hardest to attract new readers and that is something WW needs. For as important as they try to make her, her sales don't reflect the status they give her and there is a reason for that. A reason that I don't think many people want to admit.

That reason being Wonder Women herself and how people in general see her (right or wrong isn't at issue here). The first thing in that line is her costume and they should be the first thing to be addressed. It's the first thing people see. Lets be honest here as well. Everyone judges someone on how they look or sound. Those opinions change of course but an initial impression goes a long way. For all the changes in the writing teams and artist they still have never addressed the issues surrounding the character herself. If they are then I simply don't see it or they are moving far to slow in regards to it.

[pariah-1972]

It's at that point where DC needs to grow a set and say we are changing the costume and that's that. Fans can dislike it but they will not stop buying a title due to a simple costume change. They might dislike it but they'll get used to it over time. The point is for DC to actually follow through with a change. Of all changes they could make a cosmetic one is the most harmless.

Lets be honest here. As said a lot of costumes, especially female ones were made during a different time period and for specific reasons at the time. Changing it to something more practical and more worthy of the character and something that will allow potential readers (and I'll get back to this) is important.

Potential readers is a huge thing that is being overlooked. Lets be honest the comic readership community is shrinking and is going to continue to shrink until DC, Marvel, etc realize and accept they have to make drastic changes in how they sell things. One of the thing they can do is try their hardest to attract new readers and that is something WW needs. For as important as they try to make her, her sales don't reflect the status they give her and there is a reason for that. A reason that I don't think many people want to admit.

That reason being Wonder Women herself and how people in general see her (right or wrong isn't at issue here). The first thing in that line is her costume and they should be the first thing to be addressed. It's the first thing people see. Lets be honest here as well. Everyone judges someone on how they look or sound. Those opinions change of course but an initial impression goes a long way. For all the changes in the writing teams and artist they still have never addressed the issues surrounding the character herself. If they are then I simply don't see it or they are moving far to slow in regards to it.DC has never ever been known to stick with controversial changes i mean they are currently in the process of bringing back everything that the first Crisis wiped out.

And the only reason they wiped it out in the first place was because people found it "too confusing" of course now they have 52 earths and most people need a map to figure it out.


Of course if they were really concerned about the feedback they would have done this a long time ago.

The big three in DC are so iconic that any major overhauls are seen as controversial and with the way they are losing readers to Marvel lately i don't see that changing.

I'm not saying that Marvel is any better but at least they pretend to not capitulate to fans when they do a costume change ( i'm thinking of Spider-mans costume changed mostly) i'm not sure how the fanbase is reacting to Captain America's
costume change but considering they got away with bringing back Bucky i'm sure they feel it's not a big deal especially since it was designed by Alex Ross.

[Black Atom]

Don't forget the increase in breast size and the constant need to showcase it along with other body parts. It's that, that points out the huge problems with the costume. Lets not act nieve here though. The costume has changed over the years. Even if one is just looking casually at it and has changed to show more and more skin (like I said you have to factor in the other things they've been doing with the costume). Smaller at times not to mention even tighter along with increased bust size, longer legs, etc and it doesn't paint a good picture for the character unless they are trying to purposefully sell softcore porn in the disguise of a superhero comic.

Still it doesn't seem to actually be helpful though since her sales are still constantly low compared other heroes. Readers and in this case young males and maybe even gay female readers, have the internet to get their porn fix. The need to get it through comic characters has long past. I don't see why artist continue to try and exploit this aspect though when it doesn't seem to be working anymore (WW's case anyway) and hasn't for years. You'd think they'd try something else when showing more and more skin and breast doesn't seem to have worked over time.

You're mistaking cause and correlation.

The costume itself hasn't gotten any more "sexualized" over the years. WW having bigger breasts now has nothing to do with her costume and everything to do with changes in how women are drawn in comics in general. Editorial guidelines are a lot less strict and, as a result, artists are a let less homogenous than they were even 20 years ago. That means a good girl artist like Dodson can draw Diana as more curvy/sexual than an artist might've in the 80s.

Regardless, that has nothing to do with how many people read comics. You could cover WW from head to toe and that wouldn't make a lick of difference to people who aren't, currently, going to comic shops and reading comicbooks.

[mattx110]

You're mistaking cause and correlation.

The costume itself hasn't gotten any more "sexualized" over the years. WW having bigger breasts now has nothing to do with her costume and everything to do with changes in how women are drawn in comics in general. Editorial guidelines are a lot less strict and, as a result, artists are a let less homogenous than they were even 20 years ago. That means a good girl artist like Dodson can draw Diana as more curvy/sexual than an artist might've in the 80s.

Regardless, that has nothing to do with how many people read comics. You could cover WW from head to toe and that wouldn't make a lick of difference to people who aren't, currently, going to comic shops and reading comicbooks.
Actually, I avoid titles that seem too much on the "look, breasts!" side of things. If there are more people like me who find it silly, or are too embarassed to be seen buying such obvious TnA then maybe sales would go up by a few thousand with a more practical costume.

[NeoStar9X]

Actually, I avoid titles that seem too much on the "look, breasts!" side of things. If there are more people like me who find it silly, or are too embarassed to be seen buying such obvious TnA then maybe sales would go up by a few thousand with a more practical costume.

This was what I was referring to. I'm not saying it would cause a turn around over night. However it's at least a start at addressing the issues Wonder Woman faces. One of the issues I feel is the first impression and that first impression is usually based upon what you first see on the cover. Which in turns relates directly to her costume.

I personally avoid TnA material myself. Not because I don't like it but because that's not what I'm looking for when I pick up a book, a manga, or even a comic. If I want that I'll go for the real deal and I most certainly won't be looking to a comic to provide it. I read books, comics, and manga for interesting stories and/or for kick ass characters either they be male or female. I'm not in the market to buy a wannabe pinup calendar is what I'm saying. Wrong or not that can be a the impression one might get. Comics already have a certain stigma to them and the way certain characters are showcased it doesn't make it better or make the medium more "mature". That's a huge issue I have with comics in general. Sex and ultra violence doesn't make something more mature or more adult. It can actually be counterproductive at times. Like said maybe making a person to embarrassed to pick up a title or cause a person to have a certain impression of something and take a pass on it without giving it a try, etc.

In terms of the costume, someone else mentioned it, I'd honestly prefer a more Xena: Warrior Princess (a character I really enjoyed and never missed an episode when the show was on) look. Which I think WW has had at times with the sword, cape, and armor (more of which I think should be added for the legs and arms. It would fit with her Amazon culture and make her look more impressive in combat. Didn't Donna Troy have a costume like that when the WW tile launched after Infinite Crisis?

[FreeFallin]

do we have any artists who would be willing to draw some sketches of potential WW costumes? my votes still for this costume
http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/8436/25md9.jpg

[NeoStar9X]

That is a good costume as well. A lot better then the swim suit.

[Monty_Cristo]

her invisible jet undermines her portrayal as a strong female character.

[Superboy-Prime]

the swim suit makes that costume look like shit.

the swimsuit is fine as it is, it works for the character. This is the problem with America as a society, dumbasses getting thier panties in a bunch because of a damn female character wearing a harmless swimsuit. WonderWoman can be a strong female character while at the same being very comfortable with her sexuality and the way she chooses to address it.

Leave the costume as it is,theres no problem with it.


Now someone close this retarded thread.

[Kage Kisaragi]

It's freaking adult Donna Troy's original outfit with a turtle neck added to it. How is that anymore original if not creative than just saying "Okay, we are retiring Diana and replacing her with Donna Troy permanently."

I'll say this again to make it super simple.
Bitching and whining about character costumes in the name of trying to sound holier than thou'art, or whatever crusade you want to rally behind does not make you a fan or a greater fan. In fact it does the exact opposite. Black Adam already tried to explain it a couple times and really the point he made was and should have been the very first thing everyone should have come up with and realized before any and all other opinions, facts or whatever came up.

She is a fictional superhero character that automatically disassociates her with anything remotely close to any of standards we impose upon our selves in our reality... ALL THINGS. Functionality, Design, Projected Perceptions, whatever it possibly is that could possibly make you or any other person not want to wear it regardless of anything else she has that you don't this should have made you stop close the response box and move on.

I'll go as far as to say that the people who are continuously moaning about this are the very same people who never got the Superhero genre to being with.

[Black Atom]

Actually, I avoid titles that seem too much on the "look, breasts!" side of things. If there are more people like me who find it silly, or are too embarassed to be seen buying such obvious TnA then maybe sales would go up by a few thousand with a more practical costume.

But people who don't buy comics aren't in comic shops to being with and therefore are never confronted with having to choose of a certain comic looks like a TnA book or not. So the idea that a less revealing costume would increase sales to people who don't read comics is a questionable one. Furthermore, WW, despite having a "revealing" costume (it's as "revealing" as a gymnast's leotard, after all) doesn't really come off as a TnA book.

As a general response to the argument that a more "sensible" costume would bolster sales or help people take Wonder Woman more seriously, I'll gather the various points I've made in the thread in this one post:

*To reiterate the last point, people who aren't reading comics don't go to comic shops so they probably wouldn't even be all that cognizant of something like a costume change for Wonder Woman. Sure, it might get a blurb in Entertainment Weekly, like the death of Cap did or Superman's own costume change which might generate a bump in sales, but will it create many more long-term fans. Well, those events didn't.

*Manga is wildly popular and gaining new readership all the time, yet many manga contain conventions that're just as bizarre or camp as many superhero books and many women that're much more scantily clad. Neither element seems to have alienated the ever-growing readership or undermined readers ability to take the subjects seriously. Check out the photo-parade at an event like Anime Expo and you'll see young girls cosplaying as superheroines with much less on than Diana. Maybe these factors aren't as much of an impedement to sales as they're being made out to be. Or at least, maybe there are other issues preventing superhero comics from reaching a larger audience.

*We already saw a big push toward realism and "practical" costumes in the 90s. Many heroes traded in bright spandex for leather jackets, trenchcoats, some kind of body armor and lots of belts and pockets. That era and its attempts to be edgy and releventis are now regarded by many as among the worst for comics and most of those redesigns have been duly discarded.

*Comics that embrace the more camp and fantastic side of superheroics actually seem to have more crossover appeal. Books like All Star Superman, Shazam! and the Monster Society of Evil and mainstays like Bone have had a lot of recognition in mainstream media and success in those markets. This would seem to indicate that there is a segment of the populace outside of normal comic readers that is accepting of those conventions we keep calling "silly". Maybe we're underestimating the willingness of the mainstream audience to suspend their disbelief for something like a superhero movie.

[Tanjint]

the swim suit makes that costume look like shit.

the swimsuit is fine as it is, it works for the character. This is the problem with America as a society, dumbasses getting thier panties in a bunch because of a damn female character wearing a harmless swimsuit. WonderWoman can be a strong female character while at the same being very comfortable with her sexuality and the way she chooses to address it.

Leave the costume as it is,theres no problem with it.


Now someone close this retarded thread.

i agree that america is whack for its prudishness but i can see the complaint when male heroes aren't exactly wearing nothing. bats and supes costumes may be skintight but they're damn near covered from head/neck to toe.

i basically agree with you, but i'm just playing devil's advocate.


-T

[Spiffy]

the swim suit makes that costume look like shit.

the swimsuit is fine as it is, it works for the character. This is the problem with America as a society, dumbasses getting thier panties in a bunch because of a damn female character wearing a harmless swimsuit. WonderWoman can be a strong female character while at the same being very comfortable with her sexuality and the way she chooses to address it.

Leave the costume as it is,theres no problem with it.


Now someone close this retarded thread.
Since I specifically said I did NOT object to the swimsuit because of how it portrayed her sexuality, that instead I always just felt it looked a bit silly, you are way off target--at least with the point of view of one particular American. I've even pointed out elsewhere that for it to be considered a "sexy" swimsuit, even with Diana's extraordinary build, this would have to be the 1950s, since the outfit doesn't even show her mid-section.

Sigh. Then again, if we didn't generalize, this wouldn't be the Internet, would it? But I don't really feel passionate enough about this to expend that much energy--I think it would be nice to update a few elements, but its hardly a deal killer for me.

And it's just my opinion. I certainly get the counter-objections that its so iconic that it overcomes whatever silly vibe a swimsuit might have.

[Superboy-Prime]

And it's just my opinion. I certainly get the counter-objections that its so iconic that it overcomes whatever silly vibe a swimsuit might have.


My post was just generalization it wasn't directed towards you.


Exactly.

[Superboy-Prime]

someone delete this please.

[Superboy-Prime]

And it's just my opinion. I certainly get the counter-objections that its so iconic that it overcomes whatever silly vibe a swimsuit might have.


delete this too.

[Robo Ape]

But people who don't buy comics aren't in comic shops to being with and therefore are never confronted with having to choose of a certain comic looks like a TnA book or not. So the idea that a less revealing costume would increase sales to people who don't read comics is a questionable one. Furthermore, WW, despite having a "revealing" costume (it's as "revealing" as a gymnast's leotard, after all) doesn't really come off as a TnA book.

As a general response to the argument that a more "sensible" costume would bolster sales or help people take Wonder Woman more seriously, I'll gather the various points I've made in the thread in this one post:

*To reiterate the last point, people who aren't reading comics don't go to comic shops so they probably wouldn't even be all that cognizant of something like a costume change for Wonder Woman. Sure, it might get a blurb in Entertainment Weekly, like the death of Cap did or Superman's own costume change which might generate a bump in sales, but will it create many more long-term fans. Well, those events didn't.

*Manga is wildly popular and gaining new readership all the time, yet many manga contain conventions that're just as bizarre or camp as many superhero books and many women that're much more scantily clad. Neither element seems to have alienated the ever-growing readership or undermined readers ability to take the subjects seriously. Check out the photo-parade at an event like Anime Expo and you'll see young girls cosplaying as superheroines with much less on than Diana. Maybe these factors aren't as much of an impedement to sales as they're being made out to be. Or at least, maybe there are other issues preventing superhero comics from reaching a larger audience.

*We already saw a big push toward realism and "practical" costumes in the 90s. Many heroes traded in bright spandex for leather jackets, trenchcoats, some kind of body armor and lots of belts and pockets. That era and its attempts to be edgy and releventis are now regarded by many as among the worst for comics and most of those redesigns have been duly discarded.

*Comics that embrace the more camp and fantastic side of superheroics actually seem to have more crossover appeal. Books like All Star Superman, Shazam! and the Monster Society of Evil and mainstays like Bone have had a lot of recognition in mainstream media and success in those markets. This would seem to indicate that there is a segment of the populace outside of normal comic readers that is accepting of those conventions we keep calling "silly". Maybe we're underestimating the willingness of the mainstream audience to suspend their disbelief for something like a superhero movie.

Can you produce any statistics to back up your statements here, for example comparative sales figures etc?

As it's all very easy to make sweeping statements like this but I like to see some facts to back up such statements.

I have never said my own views on this were anything other than that, you with this post seem to be claiming some greater insight on the industry. Therefore I am eager to hear what facts you used in order to come up with these conclusions.

[mattx110]

But people who don't buy comics aren't in comic shops to being with and therefore are never confronted with having to choose of a certain comic looks like a TnA book or not. So the idea that a less revealing costume would increase sales to people who don't read comics is a questionable one. Furthermore, WW, despite having a "revealing" costume (it's as "revealing" as a gymnast's leotard, after all) doesn't really come off as a TnA book.

As a general response to the argument that a more "sensible" costume would bolster sales or help people take Wonder Woman more seriously, I'll gather the various points I've made in the thread in this one post:

*To reiterate the last point, people who aren't reading comics don't go to comic shops so they probably wouldn't even be all that cognizant of something like a costume change for Wonder Woman. Sure, it might get a blurb in Entertainment Weekly, like the death of Cap did or Superman's own costume change which might generate a bump in sales, but will it create many more long-term fans. Well, those events didn't.

*Manga is wildly popular and gaining new readership all the time, yet many manga contain conventions that're just as bizarre or camp as many superhero books and many women that're much more scantily clad. Neither element seems to have alienated the ever-growing readership or undermined readers ability to take the subjects seriously. Check out the photo-parade at an event like Anime Expo and you'll see young girls cosplaying as superheroines with much less on than Diana. Maybe these factors aren't as much of an impedement to sales as they're being made out to be. Or at least, maybe there are other issues preventing superhero comics from reaching a larger audience.

*We already saw a big push toward realism and "practical" costumes in the 90s. Many heroes traded in bright spandex for leather jackets, trenchcoats, some kind of body armor and lots of belts and pockets. That era and its attempts to be edgy and releventis are now regarded by many as among the worst for comics and most of those redesigns have been duly discarded.

*Comics that embrace the more camp and fantastic side of superheroics actually seem to have more crossover appeal. Books like All Star Superman, Shazam! and the Monster Society of Evil and mainstays like Bone have had a lot of recognition in mainstream media and success in those markets. This would seem to indicate that there is a segment of the populace outside of normal comic readers that is accepting of those conventions we keep calling "silly". Maybe we're underestimating the willingness of the mainstream audience to suspend their disbelief for something like a superhero movie.
It could increase readership of the title, but yeah, probably not readership of comics.

[Stanlos]

I like how she was depicted in Infinite Crisis. Same basic costume but with sword, cape, and slightly more armored adornments. It was regal, militaristic, bad-ass and still very beautiful. Beautiful came to mind before 'sexy' did in that depiction.

-T

I think that was by Phil Jimenez. Artists like Phil, Perez, Drew Johnson, and the Dodsons approach the character's visual in a different way than some other artists.

[carabas]

But people who don't buy comics aren't in comic shops to being with and therefore are never confronted with having to choose of a certain comic looks like a TnA book or not.People who don't buy comics don't matter, since after extensive efforts by both Marvel and DC, it seems pretty clear that they never will unles there are changes made to the American comics industry that are far more drastic than changing Wonder Woman's wardrobe.
New readers refers not to people wh o don't read comcs, but to comics readers who don't read wonder Woman (as in the vast majority of them).

So the idea that a less revealing costume would increase sales to people who don't read comics is a questionable one. Furthermore, WW, despite having a "revealing" costume (it's as "revealing" as a gymnast's leotard, after all) doesn't really come off as a TnA book.People do tend to judge a book by its cover.

*To reiterate the last point, people who aren't reading comics don't go to comic shops so they probably wouldn't even be all that cognizant of something like a costume change for Wonder Woman. Sure, it might get a blurb in Entertainment Weekly, like the death of Cap did or Superman's own costume change which might generate a bump in sales, but will it create many more long-term fans. Well, those events didn't.Captain americ's book is going up in sales figures.

*We already saw a big push toward realism and "practical" costumes in the 90s. Many heroes traded in bright spandex for leather jackets, trenchcoats, some kind of body armor and lots of belts and pockets. That era and its attempts to be edgy and releventis are now regarded by many as among the worst for comics and most of those redesigns have been duly discarded.I severely doubt that we saw a big push toward realism and "practical" costumes in the 90s. 1001 pouches and really really big guns do not a realistic and practical costume make. Superheroines' costumes most certainly did exact the opposite.


*Comics that embrace the more camp and fantastic side of superheroics actually seem to have more crossover appeal. Books like All Star Superman, Shazam! and the Monster Society of Evil and mainstays like Bone have had a lot of recognition in mainstream media and success in those markets. This would seem to indicate that there is a segment of the populace outside of normal comic readers that is accepting of those conventions we keep calling "silly". Maybe we're underestimating the willingness of the mainstream audience to suspend their disbelief for something like a superhero movie.
I think the true meaniong of this is that stand-alone stories are far more appreciated by non-comics readers than infinitely continuing series. Unles you are prepared to call Watchmen, Sandman, Sin City, Preacher... silly and campy.

[Black Atom]

Can you produce any statistics to back up your statements here, for example comparative sales figures etc?

As it's all very easy to make sweeping statements like this but I like to see some facts to back up such statements.

I have never said my own views on this were anything other than that, you with this post seem to be claiming some greater insight on the industry. Therefore I am eager to hear what facts you used in order to come up with these conclusions.

I'm not claiming any great insight. I'm putting forth possible conclusions based on information that is commonly known/accepted enough to be taken for granted. Let me know which point(s), specifically, you hold in contention and I will provide the evidence.

[Black Atom]

It could increase readership of the title, but yeah, probably not readership of comics.

That a costume change would increase readership even for that comic is, itself, just speculation. The largest impedement to WW selling better is probably, unfortunately, that the lead is female. The title itself is still usually the best-selling superhero book with a female lead (it has been supplanted recently by Ms. Marvel by a small margin, but she's not wearing dramatically more than WW).

[Black Atom]

People who don't buy comics don't matter, since after extensive efforts by both Marvel and DC, it seems pretty clear that they never will unles there are changes made to the American comics industry that are far more drastic than changing Wonder Woman's wardrobe.
New readers refers not to people wh o don't read comcs, but to comics readers who don't read wonder Woman (as in the vast majority of them).

But there are lots of books people aren't reading. In fact, Flash, Legion of Superheroes and Robin all sell worse than Wonder Woman. How would you fix those?

People do tend to judge a book by its cover.

Perhaps, but that's not all people judge. The single most important aspect in superhero comics is probably the character involved. Then, naturally, there's the actual quality of the book and popularity of the creative team to consider.

Captain americ's book is going up in sales figures.

It's also happens to be a really good book that's highly acclaimed.

I severely doubt that we saw a big push toward realism and "practical" costumes in the 90s. 1001 pouches and really really big guns do not a realistic and practical costume make. Superheroines' costumes most certainly did exact the opposite.

Fair point.

I think the true meaniong of this is that stand-alone stories are far more appreciated by non-comics readers than infinitely continuing series. Unles you are prepared to call Watchmen, Sandman, Sin City, Preacher... siily and campy.

That doesn't disprove the other point, though, which is that people don't reject themes that are somewhat camp out of hand as long as it's offered in a well-written and cohesive story.

And that's the problem with the assertion that WW's costume is why she isn't taken more seriously: it's full of unproven assumptions.

Assumption 1) Wonder Woman doesn't sell better and this is because potential readers don't take her seriously. That's unproven and ignores a ton of other possible factors, such as quality of the book and personal taste. As mentioned, many books sell worse--is it because heroes like Nightwing aren't taken seriously?

We can't have a discussion about WW not being taken seriously because of her costume until we first prove she's not taken seriously to begin with.

[carabas]

But there are lots of books people aren't reading. In fact, Flash, Legion of Superheroes and Robin all sell worse than Wonder Woman. How would you fix those?



[QUOTE]Perhaps, but that's not all people judge. The single most important aspect in superhero comics is probably the character involved. Then, naturally, there's the actual quality of the book and popularity of the creative team to consider.The continued success of Jeph Loeb suggests that cool artwork and hype trump any amount of character. But that's besides the point.

But there are a lot of people who will judge a book by its cover and its art style. I stayed away from Gail Simone's Birds Of Prey for almost two years because it looked like some of the worst tripe to ever come out of early Image, before caving in and getting the trades.

It's also happens to be a really good book that's highly acclaimed.Unfair. If sales go up, it's because it's a good book. If they don't, it's because multi-media marketing doesn't help one jot?

That doesn't disprove the other point, though, which is that people don't reject themes that are somewhat camp out of hand as long as it's offered in a well-written and cohesive story.That's what I said, I think? Self-contained camp okeydokey. Ongoing-to-infinity camp, not so much?

And that's the problem with the assertion that WW's costume is why she isn't taken more seriously: it's full of unproven assumptions.These aren't really practically provable. Your assertion that the costume is fine as it is is not exactly backed up by any hard evidence either.

Assumption 1) Wonder Woman doesn't sell better and this is because potential readers don't take her seriously. That's unproven and ignores a ton of other possible factors, such as quality of the book and personal taste. As mentioned, many books sell worse--is it because heroes like Nightwing aren't taken seriously?Nightwing is a secundairy Batman book. Wonder Woman is supposed to be DC's third most important book.


We can't have a discussion about WW not being taken seriously because of her costume until we first prove she's not taken seriously to begin with.Oh, she's not. Outside of a few ten thousand diehard fans, she very much is not. She is considered high camp... Camp and taken serious are pretty mutually exclusive.

[pariah-1972]

I think if they got rid of the swimsuit bottom and changed it to roman gladiator skirt all would be good.

[Black Atom]

The continued success of Jeph Loeb suggests that cool artwork and hype trump any amount of character. But that's besides the point.

I actually rather literally meant the character involved, i.e. the star of the book. In superhero comics, all else being equal, certain characters simply generate more interest or have a greater entrenched fanbase than others, which guarantees their success.

But you make a good point about Loeb. I think he's found success in writing stories that are accessable. A new reader can pick up a Loeb story and jump right in without any prior knowledge of the characters involved (in a Loeb story, it usually pays to know as little as possible going in). I'd say accessability is huge part of bringing in new readers. To make a book like Wonder Woman more popular, maybe steps could be taken to make the stories themselves more accessible?

But there are a lot of people who will judge a book by its cover and its art style. I stayed away from Gail Simone's Birds Of Prey for almost two years because it looked like some of the worst tripe to ever come out of early Image, before caving in and getting the trades.

But there were many more people who bought the book because it was praised or because of the characters or because Gail Simone wrote them
or myriad other reasons regardless of the cover. Many more people never had any problems with the covers to begin with.

Unfair. If sales go up, it's because it's a good book. If they don't, it's because multi-media marketing doesn't help one jot?

It's not that. We're just trying to isolate all the factors that lead to the success of a comicbook. Surely Cap's death did help promote the book but we can't overlook the fact that it's highly acclaimed and stars a popular/well-known character when trying to account for the fact that it continues to sell well. Mainly, there's no reason to expect such a high-profile event to have the same prolonged effect on a Wonder Woman title if those other factors (i.e. positive critical reception) aren't there.

That's what I said, I think? Self-contained camp okeydokey. Ongoing-to-infinity camp, not so much?

The camp part isn't relevant, though. It shows people respond better to accessible, self-contained stories period. Camp or not.

These aren't really practically provable. Your assertion that the costume is fine as it is is not exactly backed up by any hard evidence either.

The question posed by the thread-starter is "Does WW's costume undermine her portrayal as a strong female character."

It's hard to be conclusive without polling a huge number of people, but the best we can manage is to provide examples that people 1) don't take the character seriously to begin with and that 2) the cause is the costume.

Aside from the individual opinions presented, I haven't seen any examples that favor either of these conclusions. OTOH, I've provided examples that disprove the first conclusion.

Nightwing is a secundairy Batman book. Wonder Woman is supposed to be DC's third most important book.

Where Wonder Woman stands thematically has nothing to do with how well her book sells. Batman outsells Superman, for instance. Also, just because the book doesn't sell as well as you think it should doesn't indicate potential readers don't take the main character seriously. Most likely, there are several other factors to be considered.

Oh, she's not. Outside of a few ten thousand diehard fans, she very much is not. She is considered high camp... Camp and taken serious are pretty mutually exclusive.

Not necessarily. I've provided examples that show the opposite.

[Robo Ape]

I'm not claiming any great insight. I'm putting forth possible conclusions based on information that is commonly known/accepted enough to be taken for granted. Let me know which point(s), specifically, you hold in contention and I will provide the evidence.

All of it. For example their are plenty of people who go into comic shops for other reasons, say to buy a DVD, an action figure or whatever. What's to stop such people happening to spot a comic & deciding to buy after all I bet their is a lot of casual or impulse purchasers out there. Such readers I would not classify as your standard comics collector or fan. They might decide because the character has a new look that they will give the title a try where previously they may have ignored it.

[storm_willing_slave]

Does Wonder Woman's costume undermine her portrayal as one of the DCU's strongest female characters?

Shouldn't she be wearing something a bit more practical, after all they changed Catwoman's costume to make it seem more practical & less glamour. WW has worn better costumes such as her armour, than her traditional look. So is it time foe a permanent change?
Maybe she wears it as a distraction for capturing criminals? I know I wouldn't be able to put up a good fight if she was trying to arrest me.:redface:

Still Wonder Woman costume is nothing more but her butt and boobs hanging out. Same as Powergirl. Even though I gave up on JLA of late, I still appreciate the insane amount of buttshots and cleavages on display.

[West Mantooth]

A few observations.

1. I assume most of the people responding in this thread are males.

2. How the hell did this conversation go so many pages!!!:biggrin:

3. The costume itself maybe a symptom of a larger question surrounding the character in general among comic fans.

-Wonder Woman as a property isn't handled very well in general. No animated series. She hasn't even guest starred in any of DC's animated series or in Smallville.

-Wonder Woman's stories themselves revolve around ideas most comic fans don't care about. I.e Mythology and creatures. She doesn't really patrol a city like Superman nor does she have the rogue gallery to compete with Batman (or heck in Flash)

4. So in conclusion, the actual answer to the thread is actually a larger question of whether Wonder Woman is the symbol of female empowerment more for what she did rather than what she is in today's society.

[Robo Ape]

A few observations.

1. I assume most of the people responding in this thread are males.

2. How the hell did this conversation go so many pages!!!:biggrin:

3. The costume itself maybe a symptom of a larger question surrounding the character in general among comic fans.

-Wonder Woman as a property isn't handled very well in general. No animated series. She hasn't even guest starred in any of DC's animated series or in Smallville.

-Wonder Woman's stories themselves revolve around ideas most comic fans don't care about. I.e Mythology and creatures. She doesn't really patrol a city like Superman nor does she have the rogue gallery to compete with Batman (or heck in Flash)

4. So in conclusion, the actual answer to the thread is actually a larger question of whether Wonder Woman is the symbol of female empowerment more for what she did rather than what she is in today's society.

Well their is an animated movie on the way. But I agree the character hasn't been handled well of late.

[Spiffy]

That a costume change would increase readership even for that comic is, itself, just speculation. The largest impedement to WW selling better is probably, unfortunately, that the lead is female. The title itself is still usually the best-selling superhero book with a female lead (it has been supplanted recently by Ms. Marvel by a small margin, but she's not wearing dramatically more than WW).
It's funny, but for some reason I've actually been assuming that title might be held by Betty and/or Veronica. But a little googling seems to indicate that you are right--Wonder Woman seems to do about twice the Archie girls typical reported numbers.

[pariah-1972]

To be honest i don't think her costume impedes her portrayal as a strong female since when she got a costume change in the 60's Gloria Steinem was so upset she wrote a column about it.

And i know lots of women who look up to her and have never complained about her costume, probably cause they know most super-hero costumes are slightly ridiculous anyways.

[vitruvian]

It's funny, but for some reason I've actually been assuming that title might be held by Betty and/or Veronica. But a little googling seems to indicate that you are right--Wonder Woman seems to do about twice the Archie girls typical reported numbers.

Wouldn't matter if she didn't. Are Betty and/or Veronica superheroes now? The claim was 'best-selling superhero book with a female lead', after all.

[DeadXMan]

what you want the bell bottom jump suit back?

[Black Atom]

All of it. For example their are plenty of people who go into comic shops for other reasons, say to buy a DVD, an action figure or whatever. What's to stop such people happening to spot a comic & deciding to buy after all I bet their is a lot of casual or impulse purchasers out there. Such readers I would not classify as your standard comics collector or fan. They might decide because the character has a new look that they will give the title a try where previously they may have ignored it.

I don't rule out the possibility of that ever happening, but will it happen often enough to significantly impact the readership of the book? Are there better steps that could be taken to impact the readership of the book?

[Wonder Woman.]

So.... Ive read through the last couple of pages.... whats the conclusion?

[DeadXMan]

that the national association of gals is undermining WW using her greatest assists to undermine the plots of evil men.:evilangry:

take it away Ulla

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k77R04pi1Y

[kalorama]

To the traditional comic book audience, her costume isn't a problem. But the traditional comic book audience consists primarily of young males with hormone issues or old(er) males with some degree of arrested development issues. They have no problem at all with women fighting crime and alien invasions with their stuff hangin' out. Pretty much everyone else (rightly) finds it rather silly, which is one of the reasons why the character has failed to establish the kind of noncomics pop culture presence that Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man enjoy.

So why doesn't DC change it?

Because if they did, the already low numbers of (straight) male comic fans who pay any attention at all to Wonder Woman would ignore her, because for many of them her sexualized facade is the only reason they pay attention to her to begin with.

[Chiroptera]

I love the costume. The only thing I'd accept as a change would be turning the bottom into a gladiator kilt.
Gail Simone's said she loves the suit and it won't be changing at all as long as she's writing the book, so I'm happy and all I have to say is "To bad" to those who don't like Diana's costume. :tongue:


Though I do have a question? Why is it that when the idea of Superman's costume being changed, or Batman's or any of the other classics comes up the thread only goes 4 or 5 pages at most, but Wonder woman costume discussions always turn into these long drawn out pointless arguments that go on for page after page?

[Xybernauts]

Does Wonder Woman's costume undermine her portrayal as one of the DCU's strongest female characters?

Shouldn't she be wearing something a bit more practical, after all they changed Catwoman's costume to make it seem more practical & less glamour. WW has worn better costumes such as her armour, than her traditional look. So is it time foe a permanent change?

I think it would be a big mistake to change her costume. I'm sure it's been said already, but her costume is a classic. It's perfect for her. Just because a woman is sexual doesn't mean she isn't strong. Look at Starbuck from Battlestar Galactica. She doesn't dress sexy, but she does sleep around alot, yet it doesn't seem to undermine her character.

Now the uniform the waitresses wear at hooters restaurant undermines woman. The only way Wonder Woman's costume would undermine her character is if it made her personally uncomfortable as a character, but she seems fine with it. Wonder Woman's costume shows that just because your a strong woman doesn't mean you can't be any less feminine. I think Batgirl's, Batwoman's and Supergirl's costumes undermine them. but not because their costume is sexual. It's because it shows a lack of independence on their part. They fail to establish their own identities and instead piggyback off of the identities of their male counter parts. Supergirl's counterpart Powergirl is a good example of a female character who stands on her own two feet. Of course Supergirl's costume looks better then Powergirl's though.

To the traditional comic book audience, her costume isn't a problem. But the traditional comic book audience consists primarily of young males with hormone issues or old(er) males with some degree of arrested development issues. They have no problem at all with women fighting crime and alien invasions with their stuff hangin' out. Pretty much everyone else (rightly) finds it rather silly, which is one of the reasons why the character has failed to establish the kind of noncomics pop culture presence that Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man enjoy.

So why doesn't DC change it?

Because if they did, the already low numbers of (straight) male comic fans who pay any attention at all to Wonder Woman would ignore her, because for many of them her sexualized facade is the only reason they pay attention to her to begin with.

For a person posting on a comic book forum, you really seem to have disdain for superheroes. :confused: I disagree with what you said. Your idea works under the premise that Wonder Woman's costume is somehow more sexualized then say the average superhero. The truth is when you put it into perspective, all superheroes in general are sexualized. All of the male characters, have costumes that show off their muscular physique, just as the female characters like Wonder Woman have costumes that show off their figure. The only real difference between Wonder Woman and other male counterparts is she shows a little more skin. But that only makes her comparable to say... PlasticMan and look how bad he looks. Kinda like a 70's reject.:biggrin:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_GVUpFsG-_aA/SQndBWPQzsI/AAAAAAAAGRE/bHVwTGLPScg/s400/Brave+and+bold+plastic+man.jpg

In truth I think the only reason you don't see more male characters showing as much skin as Wonder Woman is because it would make them look ridiculous. Kind of like how Robin used to look.

The only reason that Batman and Superman's "pop culture presence" is stronger then Wonder Woman's is because DC have made so many live action Batman and Superman based movies and TV shows. I mean how many shows and movies has DC made for Wonder Woman? One show back in the 70's and no movies. It has less to do with the fans and more to do with how DC chooses to invest their resources. I think it's a mistake that DC hasn't made some type of live action TV show or movie for WW in recent years.

[kalorama]

For a person posting on a comic book forum, you really seem to have disdain for superheroes.

Nope. Not even close. Nice try, though. I simply don't hold the genre up in any kind of position of reverence in which any kind of change is considered blasphemous or heretical. I simply take it for what it is, a form of printed fiction that exists purely for entertainment, which makes it subject to flaws and mistakes and open to criticism.

I disagree with what you said. Your idea works under the premise that Wonder Woman's costume is somehow more sexualized then say the average superhero.

If the "average superhero" is Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, Captain American, or any of the others who don't fight crime in a bustier and French cut panties, then that premise is right on the money.

The truth is when you put it into perspective, all superheroes in general are sexualized.

Yes, and if you put it further into perspective, the greater truth is that pretty much all female superheros--by virtue of the fact that most comics are written and drawn by males for males--are sexualized to a much greater and more explicit degree than male heroes.

All of the male characters, have costumes that show off their muscular physique, just as the female characters like Wonder Woman have costumes that show off their figure. The only real difference between Wonder Woman and other male counterparts is she shows a little more skin. But that only makes her comparable to say... PlasticMan and look how bad he looks. Kinda like a 70's reject.

The fact that you used as an example a character who was so obviously intended to be a humorous satire does much more for my case than it does yours.

In truth I think the only reason you don't see more male characters showing as much skin as Wonder Woman is because it would make them look ridiculous.

And with that you make my point for me. Having men fight crime in a wife-beater, a pair of speedos, and combat boots (and nothing else) would look silly. Having women do it in the equivalent undergarments looks just as silly. The only reason you don't think so, really, is because (and I'm assuming here) you're a guy who reads comics.

The only reason that Batman and Superman's "pop culture presence" is stronger then Wonder Woman's is because DC have made so many live action Batman and Superman based movies and TV shows.

And the reason that is the case is because it's easier to sell Batman and Superman to the noncomics reading public than Wonder Woman, and a large part of the reason for that is her costume and the image it projects to noncomics fans.


I mean how many shows and movies has DC made for Wonder Woman? One show back in the 70's and no movies. It has less to do with the fans and more to do with how DC chooses to invest their resources.

Like any other for-profit corporation, DC/Warners "invests their resources" where they think they'll be most likely to turn a profit. The fact that they haven't invested in Wonder Woman to the same degree as the others is because they think less of her potential for mass commercial profit. And, again, a large part of that is because the character is a tough sell to people who don't read comics.

[DeadXMan]

I really dought DC will do anythig to WW again

in the 70's they removed her powers and put in a white jumpsuit.

Not until Coke changed it formula has a company stired up a bee hive of hate mail; and mostley from women.

They saw the change as degarding and demanded to put her back the way she was

Bathing suit and all.

to quote WW from JL

"AND WHAT"S WRONG WITH THE WAY I DRESS?!!"

Flash: you want to answer that?
GL: not without a full charge....

[Xybernauts]

Nope. Not even close. Nice try, though. I simply don't hold the genre up in any kind of position of reverence in which any kind of change is considered blasphemous or heretical. I simply take it for what it is, a form of printed fiction that exists purely for entertainment, which makes it subject to flaws and mistakes and open to criticism.

I didn't mean because you are being critical of comics. I've done my fair share of criticism as do most comic book fans. I mean because of how you word your opinions.

To the traditional comic book audience, her costume isn't a problem. But the traditional comic book audience consists primarily of young males with hormone issues or old(er) males with some degree of arrested development issues. They have no problem at all with women fighting crime and alien invasions with their stuff hangin' out. Pretty much everyone else (rightly) finds it rather silly, which is one of the reasons why the character has failed to establish the kind of noncomics pop culture presence that Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man enjoy.


Your comments seem a little mean spirited. I'm sure there's some truth, but at the same time you're stereotyping comic books fans in a way that's derogatory.

Because if they did, the already low numbers of (straight) male comic fans who pay any attention at all to Wonder Woman would ignore her, because for many of them her sexualized facade is the only reason they pay attention to her to begin with.

I don't think that's the case. She's an interesting enough character. I think that our interest in the character has more to do with her position in the DC hierarchy, then it does with how she's drawn. I mean, clearly DC comics uses sex appeal to sell their comics as do numerous other mass media outlet's, but I don't think that is derogatory in anyway. Maybe if she was written as some ditsy bimbo who only appears in sex scenes, maybe what you said might be true, but she isn't. She is a very capable woman whose one of the best at what she does.


If the "average superhero" is Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, Captain American, or any of the others who don't fight crime in a bustier and French cut panties, then that premise is right on the money.

Yes, and if you put it further into perspective, the greater truth is that pretty much all female superheros--by virtue of the fact that most comics are written and drawn by males for males--are sexualized to a much greater and more explicit degree than male heroes.


So how should WW look? Can you give an example of a female superhero who isn't derogatory? How is being sexy derogatory? I mean men don't wear bustier and french cut pants. If female heroes are more sexualized then male heroes, it's probably because the writers at DC aren't gay. I think it would be great if more women got into comics. If I'm not mistaken the few that do draw the characters the same way the men do. How would you even define an overly sexualized male? No one's saying the characters aren't sexualized, but why is it a bad thing? Doesn't writers like Victoria Steel do the same thing to men. It doesn't bother me. I hope I don't come across as aggressive, I don't mean to be. I'm really asking. Trying to understand where you're coming from. It's possible you're right and I'm just desensitized from seeing WW drawn the way she has been for the last few decades, but I don't see it. Help me understand where you're coming from. I'm really interested.

And with that you make my point for me. Having men fight crime in a wife-beater, a pair of speedos, and combat boots (and nothing else) would look silly. Having women do it in the equivalent undergarments looks just as silly. The only reason you don't think so, really, is because (and I'm assuming here) you're a guy who reads comics.

Because running around in a costume that makes you look like a bat isn't silly? Yes, a costume that looks like female undergarments looks silly. But alot of male heroes also wear costumes that look like undergarments and there also considered silly, but it's not derogatory. That's the point. Yes, you can have a character that "fight crime in a wife-beater, a pair of speedos, and combat boots (and nothing else)" but to pull it off it'd have too look cool. Wonder Woman looks cool and that's why her costume is accepted.

Like any other for-profit corporation, DC/Warners "invests their resources" where they think they'll be most likely to turn a profit. The fact that they haven't invested in Wonder Woman to the same degree as the others is because they think less of her potential for mass commercial profit. And, again, a large part of that is because the character is a tough sell to people who don't read comics.

You don't think the idea of a guy who wears a Bat costume in order to scare people as a means to fight crime is a tough sell?

[Xybernauts]

Here's an idea, they could create a male character who wears a costume like one of those guys from the movie 300.

http://i1.iofferphoto.com/img/item/269/353/71/300Movie.jpg

I hate the movie 300, but I have to admit the costumes were really cool. They wear less then WW does and yet they still look cool. A perfect example of how a superhero can look cool in a pair of speedos. :biggrin: Well call hom Wonder Man or how about Mighty Man.

[Calybos]

Travis Morgan, the Warlord.

http://www.fanzing.com/images/imgszero/warlord.jpg

[kalorama]

Look, it's quite simple. Pretty much all superhero costumes look silly to people who don't read comics, and rightfully so. So bringing up Batman proves nothing, because it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Also, I never said or implied that being sexy was derogatory. Nor did I say that I personally thought her costume needed to be changed or that I, personally, had a problem with it. I read comics and understand that it goes with the territory.

But that has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

I was specifically addressing the question of how she comes off to noncomics readers. And I still maintain that to people who don't read comics Wonder Woman's costume comes off like bad fetish gear and hurts any attempts to "legitimize" her in a noncomics marketplace. None of the things you said in response to my post really addressed that point, which I think I made pretty clearly. Like a lot of fans, your viewpoint comes from an insider's perspective that seems unable to look outside your own ingrained biases and see that the rest of the world doesn't think/see it the way we do.

[carabas]

Heh. I DO read superhero comics, and Wonder Woman is one of my favourite characters, and I still think her 'costume' is a horrible, horrible mix of an inapropriate to the character American flag, dreadful camp, and hopelesly outdated design.

I can't even begin to imagine how lay people see her.

[celticguy]

I don't mind sex appeal aspects of her costume but the american flag aspect of it has become outdated. I know they try to retcon it but it just seems stupid.

I have more of an issue with a non powered hero running around without at least some protection than an amazon. But I would not be against changing it.

[pariah-1972]

A lot of women look up to her and i've never heard any of them comment on her costume.,

so i don't think it really undermines her character all that much.

[kalorama]

I have more of an issue with a non powered hero running around without at least some protection than an amazon.

Ditto that. WW, She-Hulk, Power Girl etc., can be rationalized to a degree, but there's no good reason for Black Canary to be be fighting gun, knife, sword, shuriken, and crossbow wielding gangsters and assassins wearing a leather bustier and fisnets.

[theNighteye]

Ditto that. WW, She-Hulk, Power Girl etc., can be rationalized to a degree, but there's no good reason for Black Canary to be be fighting gun, knife, sword, shuriken, and crossbow wielding gangsters and assassins wearing a leather bustier and fisnets.

I used to be kind of annoyed when i used to see Batgirl's costume compared to the other heroines costumes. But later on I realized that she needs all that for protection. Unlike other heroes she does not have any powers and now that i think about it, it doesn't make sense that powerless heroines run around with almost no clothes on. Its ok for the ones with super strength cuz they don't need extra protecting. But as for skimpy costumes in general i think its ok cuz they have warrior bodies and they should show it off. Its something that emphasizes their strength as women. They might even use their features as distractions so maybe it works to their advantage. A good example would be powergirl.

http://comicbookwallpapers.weebly.com/uploads/5/3/0/1/530174/4941941_orig.jpg

[Xybernauts]

Look, it's quite simple. Pretty much all superhero costumes look silly to people who don't read comics, and rightfully so. So bringing up Batman proves nothing, because it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Also, I never said or implied that being sexy was derogatory. Nor did I say that I personally thought her costume needed to be changed or that I, personally, had a problem with it. I read comics and understand that it goes with the territory.

But that has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

I was specifically addressing the question of how she comes off to noncomics readers. And I still maintain that to people who don't read comics Wonder Woman's costume comes off like bad fetish gear and hurts any attempts to "legitimize" her in a noncomics marketplace. None of the things you said in response to my post really addressed that point, which I think I made pretty clearly. Like a lot of fans, your viewpoint comes from an insider's perspective that seems unable to look outside your own ingrained biases and see that the rest of the world doesn't think/see it the way we do.

I think I did answer your question. You said Wonder Woman isn't taken seriously because of her costume. As an example you said that her appearance is the reason they haven't made it into movies or TV like Superman and Batman. You said her appearance is just too ridiculous for people outside the comic book world to accept. I rebutted by saying Batman's costume is also ridiculous from a non-comic book readers perspective, and yet despite his ridiculous appearance he IS accepted by non-comic book readers and comic book fans alike (with a few exceptions I imagine). But he is successful enough, Dark Knight being an example. My point is regardless of why you think it looks ridiculous, whether it be because it looks like undergarments or because it looks like a bat costume, a person with a ridiculous costume can do well in main stream blockbuster movie franchise if the movie is done well. The discussion at hand is "Does Wonder Woman's Costume Undermine Her Portrayal As A Strong Female Character? (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?p=7877389#post7877389) " My point is her costume, from the stand point of the movies, is not hurting her or to put it another way, it isn't derogatory so it doesn't undermine her. You yourself said it isn't derogatory so I imagine you must agree. So yes I think I did answer the question at hand.

I even addressed your point about whether a man wearing speedos could be taken seriously if the concept were reversed and applied to a male character. The Hulk is another example of a male character who wears practically nothing. As I pointed out wearing undergarments can be pulled off by a male or a female if it looks cool.

Even if we address the question of "how she comes off to noncomics readers." You point out that "Wonder Woman's costume comes off like bad fetish gear and hurts any attempts to "legitimize" her in a noncomics marketplace. " My previous comments concerning Batman addressed that point. Of course technically that is a comic book marketplace. But then again why would you try to legitimize her any where else? That wouldn't make sense. Of course, if you saw a woman running around in "fetish gear" like Wonder Woman's trying to fighting crime, in real life you would assume the woman is crazy. I see that obviously, but the point of her character is to exist in the comic book world not the real world so the point is moot. I'm sure there is a class of people out there who can't stand even the idea of comic books. And so yes that group of people might find it very difficult to suspend their disbelief long enough to accept WW's costume and character. But as Batman and Superman movies have pointed out enough people in the public are willing to suspend their sense of disbelief long enough to accept a character in a ridiculous costume if they fit into a medium that is well written and directed well.

Heh. I DO read superhero comics, and Wonder Woman is one of my favourite characters, and I still think her 'costume' is a horrible, horrible mix of an inapropriate to the character American flag, dreadful camp, and hopelesly outdated design.

I can't even begin to imagine how lay people see her.

I don't see anything wrong with the American flag type appearance. I understand that technically it doesn't make sense because there is nothing in WW that directly addresses why she wears the flag, but that doesn't mean a reason can't be written in and become canon. Adapt the world of WW to accommodate WW, don't alter a perfect character to fit the world.

Batman used to wear a seemingly cloth costume. What did they do, they re-adapted the character by saying it's a Kevlar armor. The costume looks basically the same, but somehow they were able to reweave the world to fit the costume, not the costume to fit the world.

A better example is Superman. His costume also looks like an American flag. The costume never used to make sense because they never really explained why his costume looked like a flag. In the Superman movie his people wore all black. It didn't make sense that his costume looked like it was paying homage to US, unless of course he was really paying homage to the US. But for some reason the idea that he was simply paying homage to the US didn't seem to fit. What did they do? In Superman: Birthright they said that all Kryptonians wore such vivid colors and that the colors of his house, The House of El just happened to be blue and red and that Superman modeled his costume based on Kryptonian dress.

They need to re-adapt the world of WW to accommodate WW, not the other way around. Besides WW doesn't need armor because she has magic on her side.

[Pixie_Solanas]

Ditto that. WW, She-Hulk, Power Girl etc., can be rationalized to a degree, but there's no good reason for Black Canary to be be fighting gun, knife, sword, shuriken, and crossbow wielding gangsters and assassins wearing a leather bustier and fisnets.

It's a comic book character. That's good reason enough.

Seriously, a shrieking heroine that can pierce metal with her voice, but god help us, how can she go into battle wearing fishnets and leather? Hell, the fishnets and leather are probably the most believable thing about BC.

Now who the hell resurrected this ridiculous thread?

[DeadXMan]

Here's an idea, they could create a male character who wears a costume like one of those guys from the movie 300.

http://i1.iofferphoto.com/img/item/269/353/71/300Movie.jpg



hercules, Ka-Zar, hulk,warlord, conan.

[carabas]

A better example is Superman. His costume also looks like an American flag. The costume never used to make sense because they never really explained why his costume looked like a flag.It does not. He misses 1/3rd of the colour sheme, and he has got zero of the design elements (stars and stripes). He simply wears a red, yellow and blue costume.

Meanwhile, WW has got red, white and blue, stars, stripes, and a golden eagle to booth. Only thing they left out was a top hat.

[kalorama]

I think I did answer your question.

What question? I didn't ask any questions.

[kalorama]

It's a comic book character. That's good reason enough.

It would be if not for the fact that for years DC has bent over backwards making sure we know that Batman, Robin, Nightwing, Green Arrow, and all of the other gangster and ninja fighting vigilantes are wearing bullet resistant, fire-retardant flexible body armor, while Balck Canary wears ... stockings. Makes her look like a bit of a twit.

[kalorama]

I think I did answer your question. You said Wonder Woman isn't taken seriously because of her costume. As an example you said that her appearance is the reason they haven't made it into movies or TV like Superman and Batman. You said her appearance is just too ridiculous for people outside the comic book world to accept.

That's not really what I said, but you don't seem that concerned with responding to what I said so I won't bother correcting it. Let's move on.

I rebutted by saying Batman's costume is also ridiculous from a non-comic book readers perspective, and yet despite his ridiculous appearance he IS accepted by non-comic book readers and comic book fans alike (with a few exceptions I imagine). But he is successful enough, Dark Knight being an example.

It's an example of how they adapted the costume into a form that makes (relative) sense within the framework of the movie. The actual, skin-tight, underwear on the outside Batman costume from the comics would look ridiculous on the big screen, just as it did on the small screen when Adam West wore it. And the actual Wonder Woman costume from the comics would look doubly ridiculous. Which is why one of the first public statements made by Whedon when he signed on to the now-aborted WW movie project was to say that there would be "no star spangled panties" in the movie.

My point is regardless of why you think it looks ridiculous, whether it be because it looks like undergarments or because it looks like a bat costume, a person with a ridiculous costume can do well in main stream blockbuster movie franchise if the movie is done well.

Except the "person" to whom you refer is Batman. Or Superman. Or Spider-Man. The fact remains, Wonder Woman has not come anywhere near a live action portrayal since the Carter show was canceled, so you "examples" do nothing to support the position that Wonder Woman's costume would be accepted in a mainstream live action portrayal as anything other than a joke.

The discussion at hand is "Does Wonder Woman's Costume Undermine Her Portrayal As A Strong Female Character? (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?p=7877389#post7877389) " My point is her costume, from the stand point of the movies, is not hurting her or to put it another way, it isn't derogatory so it doesn't undermine her.

Except your point has no substance because there are no, have been no, and don't look to be any Wonder Woman movies with which to test it.

You yourself said it isn't derogatory so I imagine you must agree.

I must do no such thing. (This one I'll correct.) I never said that. I never even hinted that. What I said was "It doesn't bother me." Not remotely the same thing. (Which is not to say I do think it's derogatory. I really have no position on that point. It's pretty much irrelevant to my argument. )


So yes I think I did answer the question at hand.
You may have answered the question posed by the thread title, but your answers did not actually address the points I made. And, again, I never actually asked you a question.

I even addressed your point about whether a man wearing speedos could be taken seriously if the concept were reversed and applied to a male character. The Hulk is another example of a male character who wears practically nothing. As I pointed out wearing undergarments can be pulled off by a male or a female if it looks cool.

Again, your example has no relevance to the topic. The Hulk is a monster who wears tattered clothes. There's a logic behind his dress. There's no logic behind a woman raised on a secret island thousands of miles from known civilization, populated entirely by women who've never had contact with the outside world (most of them having never even seen a man with their own eyes) wearing male-fantasy fetish lingerie/armor emboldened with the national symbols of a county she's never been to and knows nothing about.

Even if we address the question of "how she comes off to noncomics readers." You point out that "[COLOR=black]Wonder Woman's costume comes off like bad fetish gear and hurts any attempts to "legitimize" her in a noncomics marketplace. " My previous comments concerning Batman addressed that point.

No, they didn't (as I've again demonstrated).

Of course technically that is a comic book marketplace. But then again why would you try to legitimize her any where else?

To get people who don't read comics to go see a Wonder Woman movie (should one ever be made). Again, that's the whole point of what I've been talking about the entire time.

That wouldn't make sense. Of course, if you saw a woman running around in "fetish gear" like Wonder Woman's trying to fighting crime, in real life you would assume the woman is crazy. I see that obviously, but the point of her character is to exist in the comic book world not the real world so the point is moot.

Yes, that is a moot point. So much so, I have no idea why you brought it up.

I'm sure there is a class of people out there who can't stand even the idea of comic books. And so yes that group of people might find it very difficult to suspend their disbelief long enough to accept WW's costume and character.

Which, gain, would make it a little difficult to sell them on a WW movie, wouldn't it?

But as Batman and Superman movies have pointed out enough people in the public are willing to suspend their sense of disbelief long enough to accept a character in a ridiculous costume if they fit into a medium that is well written and directed well.

And, again, your examples are specific to those characters who have a long-established track record of mainstream audience success. WW has no such track record, and the fact that DC/Warners' hasn't made a serious effort to establish one in the past 30 years since the cancellation of the Cater TV show speaks very directly to their confidence in the character's ability to attract an audience and turn a profit. Because it they really thought there was money to be made off her, they would have been busy making it, the same way they have with Batman and Superman.

[Xybernauts]

As much as I'd like to rebut everything you just said, I believe the communication gap between the two of us would make any effort to explain why I don't agree pointless.

I do want to say this. You seem to be saying the costume is responsible for why they haven't made a movie or show for WW. You fail to realize that many of DC heroes have never had a movie or even a tv show in the case of some heroes. The majority of DC heroes haven't made it to the big screen. Green Lantern is a perfect example. These characters costumes are nothing like WW's and yet they haven't made it to the big screen. My point is there's nothing that suggests that her costume is the reason why WW has emerged into mass media.

The reason a movie has little to do with her costume and more to do with difficulties writing a script.


"Besides [Wonder Woman's] great origin story, there's nothing from the comics that felt right 100 percent, no iconic canon story that must be told. Batman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman) has it made — he's got the greatest rogues gallery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Batman_Family_enemies) ever, he's got Gotham City (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_City). The Bat writes himself. With Wonder Woman, you're writing from whole cloth, but trying to make it feel like you didn't. To make it feel like it's existed for 60 years, even though you're making it up as you go along. But who she, and what the movie, is about, thematically, has never been a problem for me. But the steps along the way, it could be so easy for them to feel wrong. I won't settle. She wouldn't let me settle."— Joss Whedon in November 2006, explaining the delay in developing a proper script.[27 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonder_Woman#cite_note-26)

I did point out other examples other then the Hulk. So did DeadXMan.

hercules, Ka-Zar, hulk,warlord, conan.

But what if they changed WW's costume to look more like this...

http://hallofheroes.free.fr/Images/UltimateDC/wonderwoman.jpg

Would that be more tolerable? It seems to remain loyal to WW's original costume while evading the flag look.

One other thing. It could be possible the flag look WW adapts had to do with her relationship with Steve Trevor and her role as ambassador of "man's world" . Maybe she wasn't paying homage to her own people, but instead was trying to use the costume as a way to identify with people outside of Amazonian society.

[pariah-1972]

As much as I'd like to rebut everything you just said, I believe the communication gap between the two of us would make any effort to explain why I don't agree pointless.

I do want to say this. You seem to be saying the costume is responsible for why they haven't made a movie or show for WW. You fail to realize that many of DC heroes have never had a movie or even a tv show in the case of some heroes. The majority of DC heroes haven't made it to the big screen. Green Lantern is a perfect example. These characters costumes are nothing like WW's and yet they haven't made it to the big screen. My point is there's nothing that suggests that her costume is the reason why WW has emerged into mass media.

The reason a movie has little to do with her costume and more to do with difficulties writing a script.




I did point out other examples other then the Hulk. So did DeadXMan.



But what if they changed WW's costume to look more like this...

http://hallofheroes.free.fr/Images/UltimateDC/wonderwoman.jpg

Would that be more tolerable? It seems to remain loyal to WW's original costume while evading the flag look.

One other thing. It could be possible the flag look WW adapts had to do with her relationship with Steve Rogers and her role as ambassador of "man's world" . Maybe she wasn't paying homage to her own people, but instead was trying to use the costume as a way to identify with people outside of Amazonian society.Umm it's steve trevor not steve rogers .. steve rogers is captain america which is owned by Marvel..

And i in the Perez Reboot it was his mom that the costume was a tribute too or something like that.

[Xybernauts]

Umm it's steve trevor not steve rogers .. steve rogers is captain america which is owned by Marvel..

And i in the Perez Reboot it was his mom that the costume was a tribute too or something like that.
Sorry for the mix up.

[pariah-1972]

Sorry for the mix up.Eh i make screw ups all the time so i guess i can forgive you even if it was a pretty big blunder:tongue:

[Death by Mime]

Me personally, I hate Wonder Woman's costume because it actively contradicts her character. Superman's all primary colors, a strongman with a cape. Cartoonishly and awe-inspiringly powerful. Approachable, friendly. Batman's got a fairly standard superhero bodysuit as a base, okay, but he really works the cowl and cape, creature of the night, criminals are a cowardly yadayada.

But Wonder Woman's this Amazon warrior princess, ambassador of an enlightened all-female society, and she's in a tiara and a star-spangled one-piece. She looks like Miss America, swimsuit portion of the competition. Someone out of a beauty pageant, those superficial celebrations of femininity. How is anyone supposed to take her seriously as a feminist Amazon warrior when she's dressed like she should be walking down the runway and holding a smile for the judges? How can she be an ambassador trying to bring peace to Patriarch's World when she's more reminiscent of a beauty pageant contestant talking about 'world peace'? It's not just that it looks silly, it's that it looks silly in a way that precisely undermines what she's supposed to be about.

And there's no compelling explanation why on earth Wonder Woman would decide to dress up to look like Miss America. I can accept the historical/political reasons for the incorporation of the American motif, but when the cut of the outfit just happens to be a one-piece swimsuit as well, that's just too much for me.