Didn’t supergirl aways wear a skirt?
I’ll agree to the left one, but only if we make superman wear the same costume. And we go back to Cavill.
Ohoho, I think we can all agree on that, no matter the orientation.
Jesus Christ, she’s 40% thigh in that first one.
Somebody just wants to see Supergirl crush a watermelon with her legs.
I wouldn’t walk out of the theater if it happened.
FIFY
“crush the bad guys head like a watermelon with her legs”
I don’t understand the adolescent need for every female character to be fuckable.
Consider the absolute meltdown over the new God of War game. It’s to the point where some loser made an AI slop game where the character does laundry, gives birth, etc… because they’re so buttmad that every game isn’t Stellar Blade.
I’ve only ever known Supergirl to have a full suit like Kal-El, or a skirt with thigh-highs.
Don’t mistake Supergirl with her Project Cadmus clone; Powergirl, with huge tits, boob window, and completely bare legs.
Supergirl isn’t a manufactured object in the comics, so she doesn’t look like one.
yea, im getting way more Power Girl vibes with the first outfit (barring the colours)!
Basically. Turn the S logo into a cleavage window and it’s Powergirl.
There’s probably a good opportunity for a more detailed discussion on sexuality in media here.
Several things are true. One, I think most commenters agree the guy posting this is likely a sex-obsessed misogynist. Two, some people do get uncomfortable, or lose immersion in media, based on certain costume designs. Three, some people would like to see more sexualization/attractive characters in media for their own enjoyment, and in certain contexts that’s not always a harmful thing to ask for.
It’s also made trickier because for groups both for/against sexualization of various forms, they’re often shy about discussing it. It’s a subject that leads to fast accusations of censorship, prudishness, or misogynistic deviancy or gender hatred.
Still, I do think there’s better balances to achieve by allowing a bit more communication. Wonder if this makes sense as a YouTube video or just a more open-ended thread question starting with a poll.
I mean this is all tied up in the whole “art as a product” issue. My instincts with anything creative are always to let people create what they want, and let critics think and say anything about it. Whenever there’s interference in that process, I think we lose a lot of the point of the thing.
To make it more about policy, I think funding for the arts should be several orders of magnitude higher, and there should be no taste regulations placed on what kinds of subject matter can be funded (obviously no hate speech or anything illegal). That way there would surely be enough horny and tasteful art for everyone to feel however they want about it.
It’s not the first subject where I’ve heard that sentiment, the other big one being difficulty in video games. But it’s pretty disingenuous, since most great media authors I know seek some level of feedback on their creation, and adjust based on how people have perceived it because some part of their work isn’t quite coming across how they’d hope. Valve famously does oodles of QA testing on all their properties.
The question isn’t just between “Is providing attractive characters good/bad”. It can also be more nuanced, like “I want to make this character really attractive, but some people feel soured by the designs I’ve given where she has a bikini. Is there some way to design her that’s still really visually appealing, in a slightly sexual way, but also feels enjoyable to people who view her more as a role model?”
A great example of that nuance was in the “Tracer victory pose debacle” in Overwatch. Tracer had a victory pose that was just her, facing away, shoving her butt out. Someone commented that it felt off-kilter for her personality, and Blizzard ended up replacing it with another one. A censorship crowd wailed on the occasion, but when comparing the two poses, there’s a more reasonable take there; the ass-centric pose didn’t fit the character much, and the new one was both cute and still managed to show off her slender legs while also fitting the “pilot” theme. It also helps that media of that type has a lot of character designs on offer, so it might just be a matter of hitting more archetypes correctly, instead of everything leaning in the direction of “big booba no clotha”.
I definitely don’t want to open the topic of difficulty in games right now, enough ink has been spilled and hardly anybody ever changed their minds.
I do want to point out that an ongoing conversation with your audience is an optional part of the creative process - and one you’d expect to see normalized when art is mainly treated as a product. My view is that the value of art is lessened when that’s taken for granted. It can be really interesting when a writer’s relationship with their readers causes a story to go someplace unexpected. But some creators are jealous of their vision, and couldn’t bear to take such candid feedback in the middle of their creative. It’s easy to see both sides of that coin, I just wish people could be free to make their choices without thinking too much about the coin.
Yeah, I’m fine with leaving the difficulty subject alone; as you said, it becomes pretty polarizing.
What you describe about a more individual, self-owned experience is often what makes novels/writing so compelling to people, since they generally come from one crazy mind, undoctored. Even then, you might be surprised how many different professional editing roles tend to go into a very refined book.
Movies and games tend to involve an order of magnitude more people, not all of them holding the title of “Game Designer” but all having a very important form of input to the end product, both for effort and for decisionmaking. If the studio’s lawyer takes a look at a virtual vending machine’s set of drinks and says “No, change those two, they run a risk of lawsuits from Pepsi”, is that “outside censorship”, or does the lawyer count as “part of the studio” because he’s at the same risk of publisher layoff as everyone else?
The hazy answers to that question, in my mind, are part of the reasons I don’t find the “Author vision, unfiltered” argument so compelling, especially as games involve larger studios. I think you’re right at least that it does create something more unique when a smaller, talented team is given reigns, eg Half-Life 2 or Expedition 33.
With big projects it’s definitely not a single person’s pure vision, but for me the important difference is between letting the creative be dictated by people’s ideas versus designing around what the suits think will sell (or avoid lawsuits, or other uninteresting choices). And for me it’s all about interesting choices - I could care less if something was done perfectly, if the idea itself is boring. What excites me about any art is always the thinking behind creative choices, which are a lot harder to spot when there’s a lot of ulterior motives affecting the creative. I keep circling around an apprehension that all art is the study of choice, and the choice to sell well is always the most boring of impulses.
This was a whole plot point of season one of The Boys in which Vought International forces Starlight to wear a skimpier costume (this after she was already sexually assaulted by The Deep).
Reality imitates art, I guess.
It’s nutpicking, to a degree. The odds of finding someone who wants to fuck the cartoons approaches 1.0 lightning fast on the internet. I’m less disgusted with the guy whining about an uninspiring upskirt shot (literally, why even shoot that frame? You could just not point the camera there!) I’m more disgusted with the AI Slop in the first panel, where they’ve replaced Kara Zor-El’s legs with the Hulk’s for some reason.
That guy’s stuff is always really on the nose. Watch ‘preacher’, his previous adapted-for-tv work. Its about American Christianity, conservative politics, and their conspiracies. Blunt, crass, pointlessly violent, politically kind of inchoate beyond the negative ‘this is all dumb Nazi shit’ but said amusingly ever so often. Eugenics Jesus was a pretty good gag about american myth and Nazi racial mythology.
I read the Preacher comic and… I gotta say, it falls off fast after the first couple of chapters. The mature-ish grotesquerie made to deliver context early on devolves into pure juvenille banging-my-action-figures-together by the end.
Eugenics Jesus was a pretty good gag about american myth and Nazi racial mythology.
I enjoyed “What if the Catholic Church tried to Hapsburg Family the Desposyni” as a concept. The execution was crass and fell flat. They could have had a legitimately interesting story arc introducing a severely disabled Jesus descendant capable of the odd miracle who the straight white male able-bodied main character could engage with. But it was more fun to make poop jokes and then splatter them in the punchline panel.
Only saw the tv, but the concept is almost exactly how the Nazis conceptualized the whole ‘master race’ thing,in addition to megahapsburg.
And the idea of breeding jesuses is pretty funny. But yes it did all kind of devolve to that.
And the idea of breeding jesuses is pretty funny.
It’s a great setup for a long running joke. One reason why Garth Ennis is so obnoxious. He loves to squander a good premise on a cheap punchline.
I mean, the boys was meant as biting social commentary so not sure where we are in the cart/horse equation here.
Why is the word porn censored?
Because we normalized self-censorship to make it more palatable to everyone. Which is stupid.
Its called algospeak and it’s one of the most retarded fucking things ever.
Its the first time I’ve ever thought that the children are infact doomed and retarded.
‘Everyone’ being violent prudes who worship at rge altars of Comstock and McCarthy.
People who work in industries like porn, people whose existence is often censored, and people who identify/sympathize with obscenity because their existence is regarded as obscenity do not count. Fuck them. They’re all trash.
Make it more palatable to advertisers
Fuck advertisers.
F*ck self-censorship.
Irony doesn’t make it better. Every self-censor is trying to use irony.
It absolutely does, and not every s¹lf-c¹nsorship is doing that.
¹the devil’s letter
Because most of the people on Lemmy are refugees from reddit and nowadays on reddit, if you are not a porn focused sub then they require you to censor every damn thing or face getting banned from that particular subreddit, getting banned from several subreddits depending on who’s modding and how many subs they are modding and how fucking stupid their bots happen to be, or getting banned from the entire site by the admins on their particular whim for that day/week.
Lemmy is not Reddit.
Someone else already answered the why. What I think the best reaction is when you see this kind of bullshit censorship is just down vote it.
I mean, I’m as much of a gooner as the next guy but if you don’t think the one on the right is hot that’s a you problem.
yeah, the left one looks terrible
Holy moly, this comment section.
Good job for defeating my very low expectations, Lemmy.
It’s not even a horny thing, but the one on the left is just too distracting. I’d be staring at it the whole time just trying to figure out why Supergirl made that choice.
Her thighs would always be cold. Any major combat movement is going to make her bits show. It looks like she literally cut her shorts into that shape.
Like… I like attractive women too, but come on, guys. There’s no way in hell she’d wear her costume like that. I’d just be annoyed by it the whole time.
She wouldn’t care about the cold, she can survive without discomfort in the vacuum of space or in a house fire.
I mean, realistically her and Superman’s clothes should rip off within milliseconds of them doing 99% of the things they end up doing.
I’m half remembering a scene from I think one of the justice league movies where they explain that Superman’s invulnerability field extends like a millimeter from his skin, mostly protecting his clothes. Something about his powers being based around a telekinetic field projection that, for example, lets him hold entire buildings by a single corner without them crumbling into bricks.
And I’d watch that. It would be much more fun to watch. It would be a good scene. It would highlight the whole ‘world of cardboard’ thing, and be kinda hot, and set up dramatic or comedic payoffs later.
You don’t even have to do anything nsfw to play with the concept. Burning the pants off one leg or superman’s shirt would get the point across if they wanted to. They do not.
Same. I’m a gooner. But I like building into the fantasy. I like the role play starting with “Ooh, I’m a tough mage overestimating herself, here I go in this dungeon” - but starting that mage out in nothing but a thong pulls me out.
Write situations where it makes sense to briefly see someone in their underwear, I won’t deny being satisfied. But you’d have to write. People still need regular clothes
Any major combat movement is going to make her bits show.
She is an alien, so maybe she doesn’t have bits like humans.
Any major combat movement is going to make her bits show.
Hence distracting the villains and gaining tactical advantage!
Would her thighs not be cold with the one on the right??
i like it when my pornography creeps up in non-porn places, but that’s because my crippling addiction to porn has made porn boring
recently i even jerked off to a rubik’s cube because it was the least porn thing i could think of
that slutty-ass cube
Hehe, ass-cube
Those are some nice ass-cubes.
porn addiction is just a symptom of serotonin deficiency
Who is Sarah and where are the videos of her toning her body
No, not that kind of toning. Sara’s toning the fish in the sea.
Ah, atoning for her fins.
serotonin defiiciency
Meh.
Your brain just reflects life.
A porn addiction more likely means you’re lacking rewarding activities in your life and/or you’re avoiding thinking about by jerking it.
And FWIW the whole serotonin theory of depression is demonstrably bunk.
we’re saying the same thing: understimulated reward centre. and i never mentioned depression.
The implication of the way you said it is that there an underlying chemical/biological cause that could be addressed with a chemical/biological solution; I don’t think the arrow of causality points in that direction.
“the implication of the way you said it” is gold, i’m stealing that
And just two days ago someone responded to my comment with, “No offense, but were you on drugs when you wrote that?”
i mean that’s also applicable
I’ve been looking into this and your advice seems very sound
Today I learned and now I will be googling
Nothing wrong with mixing it up a little
Underrated cube pun
Your p*rnography*, you f*cking p*rvert.
C*nsorship is my kink.
🤤 redact this ****
****** to **** until *** *******
Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that.
Say goodbye to these!
Me too fella!
Rubik’s cubes tease so much. All I want to do is click it in all the right places. But that smooth little box edges me for days never letting me cum to completion.
I have yet to finish, been gooning the cube for decades. When I finally slide that last square into place, I’m going to bust so fucking hard.
Sex is too important to be left to porn.
Not saying this guy in particular is right, but I hate this attitude that “porn exists so we shouldn’t have sex, or nudity, or anything horny in other art forms”. We shouldn’t treat people like creeps just because they want more horny in mainstream art.
I find the current cinema trend of “everyone is beautiful, but no one is horny” far creepier than the rampant sexualization in old 80s movies.
Afaict, nobody is making the argument that you’re refuting.
There is art that is elevated by being horny and art that is made worse by it. Being horny doesn’t fit this character, and isn’t relevant to the story being told, so it seems like a bad fit. Being a bad fit, the only people this would benefit are creeps who want upskirt shots of whoever, and I don’t think that’s a demographic to cater to at the sacrifice of the more vulnerable demographics that this film is targeting.
The cut of the leotard is way too much. But a leotard still makes fine sense for a super hero who’s doing athletic acrobatics.
If anything the cape is the stupidest part of the outfit.
Maybe don’t sexualize the character that, at least in part, is aimed at teenage girls.
Unless your thing is teenage girls. Then it’s ok. /s
See, that’s an example of a much better argument than “porn exists, stop being a creep”.
The point of the post and the reason for calling the guy a creep (I say guy because we’re definitely dealing with a male here) is because he wants a movie that is not designed to be pornography to have elements that would be better placed in a pornographic movie. You are inserting a degree of kink shaming into the post that doesn’t actually exist. Watching pornography and having a healthy attitude about sex is different from wanting to sexualize a story that is not trying to be sexual. That is creepy.
Edit: deleted unnecessary sentence
Again, I’m not defending this particular guy - I’m criticizing the response, which is an attitude that’s prevelant today, especially amongst the youth. A lot of people hate on sex/nudity of any form in mainstream art, and their argument is generally “just go watch porn you creeps”.
Maybe Supergirl specifically shouldn’t be sexualized (even though she’s sexualized in most of the source material I remember), but if so, let’s come up with a better reason than “a containment genre exists for sex, and if you want to see it escape that box then you’re a degenerate!”.
Not arguing with you, but you misunderstand the point of the post. A guy that would get so mad that he would refuse to use a ticket he already has purchased (which is almost certainly a fictional scenario) because he can’t see the crotch of the protagonist is a creep… The reference to porn in the response hammers the point home because it is a movie that you can watch that will definitely contain visible crotches. It’s not commentary on the presence of sex in movies or that it should be limited to pornography, but a specific comment about that one person who seems to be taking a moral stand over not being able to see more of the protagonist’s crotch. You keep trying to say the post is a broader comment on sex in movies. That assumption is not supported by the post. I only responded because you seem well intentioned, but are maybe drawing upon a personal event that is not applicable to the post itself.
we’re definitely dealing with a male here
Using “male” as a noun to describe a person is dehumanizing
The actual fuck? No it’s not. Get your stupid ass off the Internet for 5 fucking mins.
Its a bit presumptuous to assume it’s a “male” who wants to oggle lady bits and not a “female” wanting to oggle lady bits.
But male and female are perfectly fine words for a topic who’s context boils down to what sex you prefer to oggle
Eh, I will admit I tend to notice poor takes from people who refer to half the population as “females” routinely.
It’s accurate, in the same way “a bag of flesh” is accurate. But it’s also strictly “othering” for many phrases where you could just be talking about all people, or use the simpler “women” or “men”. Besides, it’d be perfectly fair to knock a lesbian for being excessively horny to the point she wants Supergirl to look sexually exposed in a fight.
I will apologize for nitpicking words, though. It can get grating.
So we aren’t allowed to sexualize Orlando Bloom anymore, then?
Keep talking if you’ve ever taken offense to the way Orlando Bloom has been depicted, or been made uncomfortable by his depiction. Otherwise, I’d say let it go.
why is her outfit ‘sexualizing’ anyway?
even if her outfit didn’t suggest ‘panties’ it’d still be sexy because it accentuates her form.
the actress is probably 35, who cares who the character is aimed at. it’s normal for men to see an attractive woman and be like ‘wow she’s attractive.’
you’re pathologizing normal thinking and probably feeling incredibly satisfied with your lame response because you used the word ‘teenage’ and nobody would dare to cross swords.
grow up.
That’s one of the things I didn’t like about gal gadisreal’s version of Wonder woman. Her whole costume is half a step above a bikini with how skimpy it is.
Err…this is Wonder Woman you’re discussing, right? A skimpy costume is completely on-brand for the original.
Hey now - bikinis arent sexual. Only the male gaze makes them so
All modern swim ware is basically inherently sexual. Its literally the point of the …
We literally went from modest swim wear which went sexual to speedos and bikinis because explicitly they ARE sexual.
Hell even the modern one piece and swim trunks the less sexual options are still designed to be sexual.
Its not the male gaze. Bikinis objectively speaking are by design intended to be and are sexual.
Half the fucking point of wearing a skimpy swimwear to the beach is to show off your body. Its half the fun for heaven sake!
porn in america is hyper-aggressive and focused on penetration. there’s no eroticism to it. it’s crass and disgusting.
there’s something to putting on a 90s skinemax film and seeing hot milfs wearing sexy, satin nighties tenderly riding men on a real bed in a real bedroom, instead of watching giant, unearthly cocks penetrating gaping vaginas in extreme close-up.
what a boneheaded take out of the OP.
there’s a HUGE difference between what porn is selling and what turns you on.
Has it occured to you that a supergirl movie is not a vehicle designed to “turn you on” whereas the pornophraphy industry explicitly caters to sexual desires.
Also who gives a fuck how shit american porn is, we have the internet
porn in america is hyper-aggressive and focused on penetration. there’s no eroticism to it. it’s crass and disgusting.
Truuue.
what a boneheaded take out of the OP.
Well, the guy they’re talking to is almost certainly a Sargon of Akkad-lite who is upset that feminism is ruining his disney movies. I would tell him to go watch porn too, but that’s because I like zingers.
If the left outfit is better for doing super stuff then Superman needs to wear a speedo.
Strictly speaking he does wear one. Most superheros do… Some just wear tights under it lol
he does, with long johns on underneath.
maybe one of the elephant trunk undies.
What we want: henry cavill in the exact outfit on the left
What we got: henry cavill in the normal superman outfit
Not pictured: an AI rendering of the above, because do we really need to spend resources on that?
May I have Henry Cavilll in the outfit on right too?
“Yes, we must acceleray the atmospheric cooking of the planet to make an uncanny valley rendition of a meme we have already clearly explained with words that maybe a dozen people will see and exhale out their nose breifly at” - too many people, for some reason
I know a dozen fanfic artists who have already drawn it or similar imagery for free
