JLA: Cry for Supergirl
I had a really busy Wednesday and Thursday, so I was late reading my comics this week. But I did want to mention this:
From left to right: Hero! Hero! Hero! Hero! Boobs!
Aw man! Surely DC is not doing this. Not after they have worked so hard and earned my praise for the last year or two for their complete turn-around of the Supergirl charcacter. She is no longer DC’s teenage blow-up doll, but instead a complex, strong hero who is far more than a pair of boobs in a halter top.
So any excitement that I had that this promo image implies that Supergirl is going to be a member of the Justice League is overshadowed by the fact that the only women on the page is an isolated pair of boobs. I hate when a woman’s head is cut off in an ad or promo image, and it happens all the time. Nevermind the fact that it looks like the four male heroes in the picture are just staring at Supergirl’s rack.
Boooooo, DC. Boooooooo.
boo indeed! Does that letter really say something about Didio wanting to go with a cover of Gorillas fighting, but there were to many good ones to chose from so they went with this. That is sooo weird. What would be the context of this image and who’s point of view is this from? How does one draw a layout and go, “I got it! I’ll put Supergirl away from everyone else and just off screen so we only see her boobs.” I have too much to say and am analyzing too much about this so I’m gonna cut it here.
I think they intend for the emphasis to be on the ‘S’ logo and then the fact this is a female…”ohhh…Supergirl(?) is in JL???”. Maybe not the best way but maybe it’s not Supergirl…haven’t been following comics for a while so I have no clue…
Maybe it’s just Supergirl’s boobs that are joining the JLA.
Maybe the shocking surprise is that those boobs belong to Superman!
Hal! Quit looking! Remember, she’s 17!
“Keep pure thoughts, chum”
To be fair, it appears that Green Arrow is actually checking out her exposed midriff.
Every time they do something like this, I just have to shake my head and sigh. Clearly it’s not like this image went from concept sketch to approval without anyone realizing it’s egregiously sexist. I’d much have preferred to see the fightin’ gorillas cover — that is much more what I want out of comic books than sexualized drawings of underage girls.
I think you could maybe “get away with the chest” because of the emblem (maybe), but their cover is blown when she’s, ya’ know, practically naked below the under-wire.
to be fair, after a horrible accident, supergirl’s face had become another boob.
Under-wire? No, no, no, she’s Kryptonian…Eath’s lighter gravity makes such nonsense unnecessary!! Supergirl is commando up there…plus, that expalins how Powergirl can walk upright…
This is just embarrassing for everyone involved.
This sucks for many reasons, the worst being that I’m kinda looking forward to this series, certainly moreso than the actual current JLA book. Unfortunately, if this is what they’re leading off with, it doesn’t give me a lot of hope. Also, “Cry For Justice” sounds like either a TV Movie of the Week starring Meredith Baxter-Birney, or a Warrant album.
This IS a tad on the blatant side. JUST a tad.
So who does this version of the JLA end up fighting, To Catch A Predator’s Chris Hansen? Jeez.
Also, is that the Freddy Freeman version of Captain Marvel? Gah. It only gets worse.
Really what I saw was Hero! Hero! Hero! Hero! Ultimate heroic symbol.
But if you saw only the boobs behind the symbol, and infact consider the boob to be more important than, and devaluing of the heroic symbol…
Well, that cant really be helped, can it.
So if it were on the front of a thong with a massively tumescent penis underneath…
No, sorry, that’s not the point. The point is, well, that the classic chest-shot works differently when you use it for Supergirl rather than Superman.
Ag, I would say more but I’ve been thinking about it too long and now it’s time for work.
Ok, seriously, who greenlights this kind of comic cover?
Other than someone like Mike who’s so clueless he’s standing in the conservatory holding a lead pipe wondering what all the shouting is about.
Ah, Insults, I stand defeated.
Oh And Johnathan, If the icons were located on the crotch and all you cared about was the proximity to the knob, then… well I guess that’s your call, If you’re more into cock than the heroic symbol Good for you (likewise if you went ‘boobies yum’ to the above then I’d be glad your getting your jollies, but I’m not sure that was the point of the cropping), but if you think the proximity to the knob sullies the icon, then, well it would be reasonable to assume you’d have some deep seated problems with the male gentialia, yes? Likewise here “They’re showing the icon and it has boobs underneath it. EW”
You see what I’m getting at.
And you’re, right thats not the point, The fact is the Icon on a girl cant be allowed to be the focus. If i was into hyperbole, I’d say this was almost like saying if you have boobs you cant uphold the icon in the same whay because you have BOOBS underneath it.” but Im not, so I wont.
But in terms of the icon, what exactly WOULD you have done? Is it that you wouldn’t have done the ‘cropping to focus on the icon’ thing because supergirl has boobs and therfore cant have the icon without the boobs being an issue? is this a whole superhero cliche forbidden to girls because of the anatomy? does that mean that girls should have the icon somewhere else? somewhere less associaed with sex (ignoring the point that huge bulging pecks are also links pretty closley with sex, atleast with me and most of the people I hang around with)
Ok, so the icon somewhere less linked with sex… Tummy? ah, no, navel is a sex organ apparently now (according to some of the wank on this issue) Legs? butt? Face? … sex sex and sex. Armpit? sex to some. Ok, so the Icon can be on the arms, hands and feet, Ah, no on that last one aswell I guess. otherwise people are going to assume the focus is on the sex rather than the icon.
Im kinda tired, but you get what Im sayng here, right? If im making no sence I might try a summary tomorrow. Right now I need sleep.
I was actually thinking about this today – why complain if you don’t have an alternative, right? – and I reckon that if you took that same picture and moved Supergirl about three feet away from us, maybe looking toward the fourth wall, she would still be the focus of attention. Or keep her cropped but change her placement – heck, there’s a shield on the cape. Either way: vast improvement.
Anyway, the point I was flailing about for this morning was that the headless torso has a whole set of historical connotations when it’s a woman that it wouldn’t as a man. Boobies under the shield aren’t a problem so much as the fact that boobies under the shield = Supergirl = a whole new can of worms. The penis thing was a joke, as it didn’t really reflect on your original comment. Sorry if my early-morningness obscured that.
I’d say there are better ways of emphasizing the logo, Mike. Like maybe Supergirl could have a head with which she, too, could look at her giant rac-….symbol. Blatant boobery, I say.
Most comic book guys are megageeks who can’t get a date and this surprises you?