Out of the Closet

[natty dread]

Soon, so very soon, I will present MY evidence - THREE pictures of not scantily clad comic book superheroines in normal positions.

why u trollin?

Oh, is it because you can't think of any legitimate counter-arguments, so you have to resort in trolling and nitpicking semantics and strawman arguments?

[AndyDufresne]

Soon, so very soon, I will present MY evidence - THREE pictures of not scantily clad comic book superheroines in normal positions.

TGD, I DEMAND you post your evidence as soon as it becomes available.

The world must see it.


--Andy, Radio Free Conquer Club

[natty dread]

haha, wouldn't it be funny if he couldn't even find those three pictures...

[thegreekdog]

Soon, so very soon, I will present MY evidence - THREE pictures of not scantily clad comic book superheroines in normal positions.

why u trollin?

Oh, is it because you can't think of any legitimate counter-arguments, so you have to resort in trolling and nitpicking semantics and strawman arguments?

I'm merely letting the group know that I will soon be providing more evidence than you've provided, thus winning this argument.

When I can't think of legitimate counter arguments I stop posting in a thread. Seriously. That's my M.O.

[natty dread]

Hm, so if I provide 4 pictures I'll win the argument, is that what you're saying?

[BigBallinStalin]

I think the data is insufficient in order for us to conclude either way.

[BigBallinStalin]

I suspect that heterosexual women enjoy muscles in a similar way that heterosexual men enjoy t&a.

The pictures you've posted here, while funny, certainly illustrate my point rather well. Are Power Woman and whatever-the-f*ck-bat-girl-rip-off less sexy because they are wearing skin-tight outfits? Are Superman and Batman any less muscular because they are wearing the "stripper outfits?"

Wtf are you even talking about? Are you seriously, in total honesty making the claim that male superheroes are portrayed as muscular because it looks attractive to women?

For that matter, I'm not a heterosexual woman so I can't say for certain, but as far as I can tell, most women I know don't really get turned on by huge, buffed mr-universe-type muscles.

When you look at superman or batman, "sexy" isn't the first thing that comes to mind. Their appearance is more designed to make them look strong, heroic, capable, etc. They have all the classic features of the superhero archetype: the square jaw, strong facial features, wide shoulders, tall, etc. Compare to female superheroes, who mostly look like they're on their way to perform in a bachelor party.

See, that just perfectly reflects the cultural narrative in which men are judged by their achievements, while women are judged by their looks. That's the problem here.

You just judged the male characters by their looks...

So?

Your observations don't fit the conclusion.

You list a bunch of physical traits, then say, AH-HA! Comics reflect the "cultural narrative" which says, "men are judged by achievements, women by looks." But all you listed were the looks of male characters and female characters (from earlier posts).

If you simply list each gender's physical traits, it doesn't follow that men are judged by achievements and women by their looks. How do you know? You don't. In order to know, you'd need feedback from the actual consumers and how they judge the superheros (which is what you lack).

And when you scale this up by declaring that it's a reflection of the cultural narrative, then you've really f'ed up your argument. There's hardly any support for your conclusion.


Both genders in comic books achieve many things, and both are judged by their achievements and looks to varying degrees depending on the individual. The women being scantily clad is a reflection of consumer preferences. If it's profitable, it signals to producers that enough consumers demand it. That's pretty much all you can say about it.

Why do these consumers demand it? ITT we don't know. You're just applying your interpretation across millions of individuals and then boldly assuming that your interpretation is exactly like everyone (or nearly everyone) else's.

You can't mind read all these consumers and then declare, ah, cultural narrative, misogyny, etc. If you can mind read, then I stand corrected.

[natty dread]

bluh bluh opportunity cost blah blah rational consumer bluh bluh supply and demand blah blah ron paul

Nice troll bbs, if you'd like to post something that is at least somewhat relevant to the subject at hand, I'm willing to listen

[thegreekdog]

It's Green Lantern.

[AndyDufresne]

It's Green Lantern.

Good for him. Green has always been a favorite color of mine. I still think Martian Manhunter would've been cooler, but he is less mainstream.


--Andy

[Neoteny]

Will his first boyfriend get fridged, you think?

[natty dread]

[AndyDufresne]

Nope. Maybe in your fantasy, Natty.

Real below:




--Andy

[jonesthecurl]

Wow. The original GL.
Maybe that's why he had no power against wood.

[Army of GOD]

good thing natty knows the 5 Ds of debating: dodge, dip, duck, dive and dodge.

[whitestazn88]

Um, I totally called that in the first page of the thread.

[AndyDufresne]

Um, I totally called that in the first page of the thread.

Your prize is in the mail. I think Green Lantern's creator signed some Green Lantern underwear.


--Andy

[natty dread]

good thing natty knows the 5 Ds of debating: dodge, dip, duck, dive and dodge.

... as opposed to posting pictures of ostriches, I suppose

[Neoteny]

Nope. Maybe in your fantasy, Natty.

Real below:




--Andy

So... is he a flaming homosexual, or in hell for his sins?

[AndyDufresne]

I guess you'll have to read the comic to find out!


--Andy

[Army of GOD]

I thought the Green Latern was black?

Wasn't there a controversy over this or something?

>mfw I'm too lazy to google

[BigBallinStalin]

bluh bluh opportunity cost blah blah rational consumer bluh bluh supply and demand blah blah ron paul

Nice troll bbs, if you'd like to post something that is at least somewhat relevant to the subject at hand, I'm willing to listen

Dude, you messed up your argument. You just list physical traits, and then conclude something that isn't upheld by your observations. If you don't wish to improve your argument, then that's fine.

[natty dread]

bluh bluh opportunity cost blah blah rational consumer bluh bluh supply and demand blah blah ron paul

Nice troll bbs, if you'd like to post something that is at least somewhat relevant to the subject at hand, I'm willing to listen

Dude, you messed up your argument. You just list physical traits, and then conclude something that isn't upheld by your observations. If you don't wish to improve your argument, then that's fine.

No, that's not what happened at all, but nice job trying to twist the argument into something it's not

Go on, keep saying stupid things if you want

[BigBallinStalin]

Have we reached the Point of Insufficient Data?

[jimboston]

Wow. The original GL.
Maybe that's why he had no power against wood.

Is it the original?

I only skimmed a few articles... it says Allen Scott... but then it seems to indicate that this is "Earth 2".

I thought they dropped the whole Earth 2 thing... and though they brought back the "multiverse" it seemed that the original Magic Based / Allen Scott GL was still on Earth One.

So this seems to be an alternative universe thing. Like one of their "Elseworlds" stories.

If so.. it's a giant cop-out.

... more reading... yup it's confirmed.

Elseworld = Alternate Universe = Cop Out

It's disingenuous at best, and false advertising at worst. To call an alternative universe character "one of our major characters" is just lame.

Though comics do this all the time when it comes to killing people. Marvel advertised for six months home one of the FF was going to die... and Johnny Storm "died" and was gone for about six months, only to come back in the nick of time to save the day. That's only the most recent "fake death". So this "fake gay" stuff is no worse than that.