Question: BLACK WIDOW-- regularly unzipped, sometimes heels?

[kelly_warrior_princess]

One can exist independent of another. You can have a world where there are dragons and elves and dwarves running around, but still question the practicality of a female wearing nothing but a chain mail bikini running into battle.

Sure you could: But why would you? Since realism has nothing to do with the medium why would we ascribe similiar concepts of realism to the clothing asthetic? Its a universe where the impossible happens, yet you draw the line at the practicality of foot wear? If this is a deal breaker for you, i suggest you seek professional help.

But with something like Secret Avengers, which is meant to be a darker and more grounded work, that's not supposed to depend upon cheesecake situations, then something like stiletto heels and a plunging neckline would be more out of place.

As someone else said: Thats not realism you want, its versimilitude. Why is she wearing impractical clothes? Because she is. An there is nothing wrong with that. If you can't accept the base premise that cool, but don't try to ruin it for all of us who can accept the base premise. There is no reason why she shouldn't be so attired out side of your inability to accept the base premise... Its just one of many genre conventions, just like unpowered flight, which falls apart under closer scrutiny.

Oh just FYI, there is nothing wrong with a little cheesecake.

[RDMacQ]

Sure you could: But why would you? Since realism has nothing to do with the medium why would we ascribe similiar concepts of realism to the clothing asthetic? Its a universe where the impossible happens, yet you draw the line at the practicality of foot wear? If this is a deal breaker for you, i suggest you seek professional help.

Because it helps sell the reality of the situation. We know that a dragon is impractical, but it's not supposed to "our" world so we can accept something like this doesn't exist. But unless the simple laws governing practical dress sense change from world to world, high heels are always going to seem like silly things to combat evil in.

And, again, I think it's a cheap shot to make fun of people's mental health if they point out that heels or other costume elements are an impracticality.

As someone else said: Thats not realism you want, its versimilitude. Why is she wearing impractical clothes? Because she is. An there is nothing wrong with that. If you can't accept the base premise that cool, but don't try to ruin it for all of us who can accept the base premise. There is no reason why she shouldn't be so attired out side of your inability to accept the base premise... Its just one of many genre conventions, just like unpowered flight, which falls apart under closer scrutiny.

Oh just FYI, there is nothing wrong with a little cheesecake.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. Hell, if you read my ENTIRE post I said that it DOES depend upon the situation. Secret Avengers IS meant to be a little more serious and not depend on the sexualization of the female leads. Something like Danger Girl doesn't have that same concern.

I don't understand why people are so threatened by this. If you just want cheesecake, read Hustler or Playboy. But if someone is trying to tell a serious story, sometimes cheesecake ruins the ability to take that story seriously.

[IronMagnus]

But if someone is trying to tell a serious story, sometimes cheesecake ruins the ability to take that story seriously.

Has anyone complained that Batman's cape ruined the seriousness of Batman Year One or The Dark Knight Returns? Which are far more "serious" (and acclaimed!) than Secret Avengers will ever be.

I can't imagine anyone saying so. And if they do say so, they're really missing the point of superhero comics.

[IronMagnus]

If you just want cheesecake, read Hustler or Playboy.

You mentioned cheap shots, but I think this is a cheap shot as well. And as you also mention being ok with Danger Girl's cheesecake, it makes no sense.

[carabas]

Has anyone complained that Batman's cape ruined the seriousness of Batman Year One or The Dark Knight Returns? Which are far more "serious" (and acclaimed!) than Secret Avengers will ever be.

I can't imagine anyone saying so. And if they do say so, they're really missing the point of superhero comics.

Batman's cape is hardly cheescake.

[Hrist]

I'm pretty sure you would never see Batman wearing heels. Again, capes on Batman lend aesthetic mood. They add a great, spooky visual, even if realistically no one would wear a cape. It plays into his urban legend feel, and the horror of Gotham. Heels don't add anything but sex appeal, really, and they take away from visual practicality, and the presentation of heroines as, well, fighters and athletes. In some cases— I talked about Zatanna, I think it could work for Emma Frost, too—*that might be a fair trade. But most of the time, when you are trying to make a heroine look like a tough no nonsense acrobatic fighter type, heels are not appropriate.

It's bad design, it's not even about practicality. (Except as a visual motif. It doesn't bother me that women and Thor run round without their hair tied back, but a short Maria Hill-esque haircut is a visual indicator of her personality, what she is about. Some heroes look more "practical" than others because it suits their personalities and the corner of the universe they inhabit.) I have no problem with premovie Hawkeye's ridiculous dick cape and bright purple masked get-up, but it would be bad on Black Widow, because she is supposed to a stealthy and not someone escaped from a circus.

If you want to argue strenuously for heels you are p much arguing that ladies in comics should be sexy first, before making their costumes visually representative of their concepts. They don't really add distinctive silhouettes, or heighten the mood, or display dynamism, or anything like that.

[IronMagnus]

I myself am not fighting the heel fight. I just find it puzzling that some say a little bit of cleavage will destroy all sense of seriousness in the Avengers, while books about a man dressed as a bat who fights a man dressed as a clown are treated as gritty and serious highlights of the medium.

[Hrist]

I myself am not fighting the heel fight. I just find it puzzling that some say a little bit of cleavage will destroy all sense of seriousness in the Avengers, while books about a man dressed as a bat who fights a man dressed as a clown are treated as gritty and serious highlights of the medium.

Again, it's because the man dressed as a bat and a clown work towards the purpose and concept of those characters, but cleavage and heels (usually) work against that purpose. For me it's not about suspension of disbelief, but bad design or bad priorities. It's pretty much impossible to argue suspension of disbelief, because that's a lot up to individual taste. (And some people dismiss the medium as a whole because they can't see bat dude vs clown as gritty and serious.)

[IronMagnus]

Again, it's because the man dressed as a bat and a clown work towards the purpose and concept of those characters, but cleavage and heels (usually) work against that purpose.

I don't see a display of cleavage working against the purpose and concept of the Black Widow. But you're right, individual tastes and all that.

(And some people dismiss the medium as a whole because they can't see bat dude vs clown as gritty and serious.)

And I hope you wouldn't want comics to change because of this.

[cottonmouth]

I'm pretty sure you would never see Batman wearing heels.

You don't say?

[Hrist]

I don't see a display of cleavage working against the purpose and concept of the Black Widow. But you're right, individual tastes and all that.

When she's in her costume, she's supposed to be stealthy, not attention grabbing sex appeal. Sure, she can be seductive, but that's her being fake. There's a difference between Natasha pretending to be a flirtatious secretary and Natasha being the Black Widow. Her in-uniform persona is very professional and businesslike, and the disconnect between her occasional fake flirtation act and what she's like when she walks into an Avengers meeting is pretty basic, but it's undercut if her costume is altered from its original design to add plunging cleavage. It's… sort of like Superman wearing glasses. Whereas, with Emma Frost, her in-uniform persona is one of sexual power and total control over it, so it makes sense her outfit would be more, and deliberately, revealing. Natasha's costume also needs to suggest mobility, whereas Emma's doesn't.

And I hope you wouldn't want comics to change because of this.

I am completely okay with Galactus having a funny hat. That doesn't mean every character should wear funny hats. Galactus's headgear would be pretty suspension-of-disbelief jarring if it were featuring in Daredevil, especially if someone like Lark or Maleev was drawing it during the Bendis/Brubaker gritty era. I wouldn't want to change either of those things. Just like I don't want to change classic superhero costumes to amp up the sexiness factor.

[carabas]

I myself am not fighting the heel fight. I just find it puzzling that some say a little bit of cleavage will destroy all sense of seriousness in the Avengers, while books about a man dressed as a bat who fights a man dressed as a clown are treated as gritty and serious highlights of the medium.

Usually, those debates are not exactly about "a little bit" of cleavage.

They're about this:

[Talisman]

Usually, those debates are not exactly about "a little bit" of cleavage.

They're about this:

[IronMagnus]

Usually, those debates are not exactly about "a little bit" of cleavage.

They're about this:

I'm a Power Girl fan. And that's just bad art. Post a pic of Power Girl drawn by the amazing Amanda Conner for an example of artistic perfection.

[IronMagnus]

When she's in her costume, she's supposed to be stealthy, not attention grabbing sex appeal. Sure, she can be seductive, but that's her being fake. There's a difference between Natasha pretending to be a flirtatious secretary and Natasha being the Black Widow. Her in-uniform persona is very professional and businesslike, and the disconnect between her occasional fake flirtation act and what she's like when she walks into an Avengers meeting is pretty basic, but it's undercut if her costume is altered from its original design to add plunging cleavage. It's… sort of like Superman wearing glasses. Whereas, with Emma Frost, her in-uniform persona is one of sexual power and total control over it, so it makes sense her outfit would be more, and deliberately, revealing. Natasha's costume also needs to suggest mobility, whereas Emma's doesn't.

I don't really see zipper placement as a significant change in a classic costume.