Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 51 of 51
  1. #46
    (formerly "Superman") JAK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    1,696

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    After the blowback from Batpenis? I think not!
    I'm gonna try really har... I mean try my best not to make a "Batpenis" joke ala Yakov Smirnoff's "Russia" jokes from the 90's after reading that sentence... LOL
    Hear my new CD "Love The World Away", available on iTunes, Google Music, Spotify, Shazam, and Amazon: https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B01N5XYV..._waESybX1C0RXK via @amazon
    www.jamiekelleymusic.com
    TV interview here: https://snjtoday.com/snj-today-hotline-jamie-kelley/

  2. #47
    Standing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,184

    Default

    I remember the first time when Batman went without trunks, when Kelley Jones was doing the series. I loved Jones artwork, but it seemed all wrong and rather obscene to have a Batman without trunks--as if he forgot to wear his pants. It's like the fetishistic nature of the super-heroes is turned up to the max when Bats and Supes wear these outfits that are best suited to a night at the BDSM club. The movies even moreso. Which is fine--super-heroes have always been into fetish outfits--but there's no pretense of anything but serving a puriant desire to see men in close-fitting leather, pvc, rubber and plastic. Don't try to convince me that you actually think these outfits are anymore conservative than the trunks that match the capes.
    celebrating 50 years of 4 beatles crossing a zebra

  3. #48
    A Wearied Madness Vakanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Kelly View Post
    I remember the first time when Batman went without trunks, when Kelley Jones was doing the series. I loved Jones artwork, but it seemed all wrong and rather obscene to have a Batman without trunks--as if he forgot to wear his pants. It's like the fetishistic nature of the super-heroes is turned up to the max when Bats and Supes wear these outfits that are best suited to a night at the BDSM club. The movies even moreso. Which is fine--super-heroes have always been into fetish outfits--but there's no pretense of anything but serving a puriant desire to see men in close-fitting leather, pvc, rubber and plastic. Don't try to convince me that you actually think these outfits are anymore conservative than the trunks that match the capes.
    Weird, I always thought the red and black underwear was the strange fetish statement. To each their own.

  4. #49
    Standing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    Weird, I always thought the red and black underwear was the strange fetish statement. To each their own.
    Why would you even think that's underwear? Who wears a belt with their underwear? That just seems reaching to me and nothing that's suggested in the actual comic book art. Yes the trunks are fetishistic--as is everything else about supersuits--but it's a diffent kind of fetish from wearing your Stanfield's over your pants. The only supersuits that don't seem too much like fetish fashion would be regular street clothes. But then you have long coats, broad brimmed hats, leather jackets, combat boots, with lots of buckles and seams, which can be viewed as fetish wear, too.

    There's nothing to be ashamed of about clothes as fetish. We all have those feelings. I'm just saying people should be honest and not try to shame other people into disliking something because it has a fetish association. Even if Superman wore pink panties, there's no reason that should be held up for ridicule. We should be forward thinking enough that none of this is derided and mocked.

    The thing with masks, boots, capes, trunks and gloves is that they hide the body parts. I soon realized as a kid the reason why Batman and Superman had to wear trunks was the same reason the nether regions of Swamp Thing were obscured by india ink. The characters needed to cover up; they weren't flashing. That's probably why it looks to me like Batman and Superman, without trunks, are flashing; because they were always covered up down there.

    As well, with the way comics are now coloured, it's like the suits are painted on--so it seems like the characters are revealing a lot more than they did in the old days, when art wasn't so excessively detailed and painted. They aren't leaving much to the imagination now.
    celebrating 50 years of 4 beatles crossing a zebra

  5. #50
    A Wearied Madness Vakanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Kelly View Post
    Why would you even think that's underwear?
    Really? People have said it looks like they're wearing colorful undies outside their pants for decades, long before I was even born. This can't be news to you...

  6. #51
    Fantastic Member RickWJ324's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by superduperman View Post
    If anything, they should ditch those stupid arm bands or whatever they are.
    Totally agree on that! The armbands just seem "stupid" for lack of a better word. What are they supposed to be? They aren't gauntlets (which he wouldn't need anyway) so what is the purpose of them?

    I kind of like the red piping on the bottom of the sleeves (on Supergirl's costume) and wouldn't be opposed to something like that on Superman's costume. The metal armbands however just don't do anything for the suit.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •