Superman & Batman 9: Supergirl's Thong

[badthingus]

I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.

Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

[Janus]

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

After his time on Kandor, Clark probably has a whole new view of female
wardrobe. Lois either respected "Kara's" decision, or didn't give a
rat's behind about the latest woman in Clark's life. I thought the same
thing when I saw it, but a) I had no Pre-PAD affection for Supergirl and
b) it's Loeb and Turner, it could be worse.

[badthingus]

Post by Janus

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

After his time on Kandor, Clark probably has a whole new view of female
wardrobe. Lois either respected "Kara's" decision, or didn't give a
rat's behind about the latest woman in Clark's life. I thought the same
thing when I saw it, but a) I had no Pre-PAD affection for Supergirl and
b) it's Loeb and Turner, it could be worse.

Maybe, but part of what makes Clark "Clark" is that he's a big stiff.
It would have been a better read had he expressed some reservations
about her clothing (it also would have been a better read for the
previous half year had they not turned Luthor into an insane drug
addict, but that's a discussion for another thread).

Also, isn't Kara also supposed to be his age or older? I couldn't be
bothered with translating their conversation at the end of #8, but the
posts on these boards said that she remembered him as a child. If so,
that's no way for a 33-year-old woman to be dressing.

[Bugbeaudaddy]

Post by badthingus
Also, isn't Kara also supposed to be his age or older? I couldn't be
bothered with translating their conversation at the end of #8, but the
posts on these boards said that she remembered him as a child. If so,
that's no way for a 33-year-old woman to be dressing.

Hey! Some of us LIKE our 33-year old hotties wearin' thongs!

Now you kids shut up while Gran'pa reads his funny books...

[Peter Bruells]

Post by badthingus
Also, isn't Kara also supposed to be his age or older? I couldn't be
bothered with translating their conversation at the end of #8, but the
posts on these boards said that she remembered him as a child. If so,
that's no way for a 33-year-old woman to be dressing.

She travelled at relativistic speed. Next...

[Patrick McClue]

Post by badthingus

Post by Janus

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

After his time on Kandor, Clark probably has a whole new view of female
wardrobe. Lois either respected "Kara's" decision, or didn't give a
rat's behind about the latest woman in Clark's life. I thought the same
thing when I saw it, but a) I had no Pre-PAD affection for Supergirl and
b) it's Loeb and Turner, it could be worse.

Maybe, but part of what makes Clark "Clark" is that he's a big stiff.
It would have been a better read had he expressed some reservations
about her clothing (it also would have been a better read for the
previous half year had they not turned Luthor into an insane drug
addict, but that's a discussion for another thread).
Also, isn't Kara also supposed to be his age or older? I couldn't be
bothered with translating their conversation at the end of #8, but the
posts on these boards said that she remembered him as a child. If so,
that's no way for a 33-year-old woman to be dressing.

Maybe she was in some kind of stasis during the trip and aged very slowly.
Do we know how old she was when her father put her in the rocket?

Patrick

[Brian Doyle]

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way.

I'm going to assume you don't mean that in a good way, either? ;-)

Post by badthingus
Not to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way.

It's not like Kara wouldn't be able to deal with anyone who did anything
inappropriate

Me, I rather liked Alan Moore's description of his Kara analog, Suprema as
being "Nancy Drew with thermonuclear capacity"

[G.Grattan]

Post by Brian Doyle
Me, I rather liked Alan Moore's description of his Kara analog, Suprema as
being "Nancy Drew with thermonuclear capacity"

With the exception of PAD's Supergirl-Linda Danvers and a very few
early Laurel Gand stories in v4 TMK Legion, Moore's Suprema is the only
post-Crisis Supergirl analogue who made me feel the writer had even
bothered to craft something of true interest, as opposed to merely a
marketing concept.

Of course, Moore's Radar/Krypto still gets the best, saddest, funniest
line of the whole run: "All the dogs I knew are dead now."

[CleV]

Post by G.Grattan

Post by Brian Doyle
Me, I rather liked Alan Moore's description of his Kara analog, Suprema as
being "Nancy Drew with thermonuclear capacity"

With the exception of PAD's Supergirl-Linda Danvers and a very few
early Laurel Gand stories in v4 TMK Legion, Moore's Suprema is the only
post-Crisis Supergirl analogue who made me feel the writer had even
bothered to craft something of true interest, as opposed to merely a
marketing concept.
Of course, Moore's Radar/Krypto still gets the best, saddest, funniest
line of the whole run: "All the dogs I knew are dead now."

But he made up for it by getting to know a lot of other dogs later in
the series :-))))

[arnold kim]

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

You know, I'm sure people said the same thing about the hot pants she wore
in the 70s...

Arnold Kim

[TheWrathOfKhan]

<<You know, I'm sure people said the same thing about the hot pants she wore
in the 70s...>>

Hot pants - lol. Brings back memories of Archie Bunker ranting and raving
about the evils of 70s fashions ...

Khan

[KET]

Post by arnold kim

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

You know, I'm sure people said the same thing about the hot pants she wore
in the 70s...
Arnold Kim

Well, they didn't have the internet back in the 70s. However,
considering that the 70s hot pants/puffy blouse combo DID signal the
start of the character's DECLINE in prominence, perhaps fans voted
with their wallets.


KET

[Dennis Kuhn]

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.

[snip]

Post by badthingus
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

Once in a while, artwork like this can bring the 15-year-old out in
me, but not this time. I agree with you completely. If the writer is
going to go out of his way to explain that Lois got the clothes, the
artist should have a clue that she should most likely be following
Clark's clothing strategy; draw as little attention as possible. I
figured that this was one of the other reasons no one recognized him
with "just a pair of glasses" on. Not to mention that Lois doesn't
dress like that (at least, not that I've noticed). Does the artist
think that Lois wants to live vicariously through Kara?

Not that I have a problem with sexy elements in a comic book. Hey, I
prefer the Benes artwork from the last issues of PAD's Supergirl to
the style in Batman/Superman right now. That closeup of Kara's face
in the last issue made it look like Lois bought mascara for her as
well... but didn't bother explaining to her when to stop applying it.
:)

Can't wait to see how the Amazonian storyline/artwork turns out next
issue. I don't imagine that Diana and her cohorts will be very
effective at teaching her how to blend in with "man's world." But
then, maybe they'll just teach her how to beat up other scantily-clad
women more effectively.

Dennis

[M-Wolverine]

Post by Dennis Kuhn

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.

[snip]

Post by badthingus
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

Once in a while, artwork like this can bring the 15-year-old out in
me, but not this time. I agree with you completely. If the writer is
going to go out of his way to explain that Lois got the clothes, the
artist should have a clue that she should most likely be following
Clark's clothing strategy; draw as little attention as possible. I
figured that this was one of the other reasons no one recognized him
with "just a pair of glasses" on. Not to mention that Lois doesn't
dress like that (at least, not that I've noticed). Does the artist
think that Lois wants to live vicariously through Kara?

My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

Post by Dennis Kuhn
Not that I have a problem with sexy elements in a comic book. Hey, I
prefer the Benes artwork from the last issues of PAD's Supergirl to
the style in Batman/Superman right now. That closeup of Kara's face
in the last issue made it look like Lois bought mascara for her as
well... but didn't bother explaining to her when to stop applying it.
:)
Can't wait to see how the Amazonian storyline/artwork turns out next
issue. I don't imagine that Diana and her cohorts will be very
effective at teaching her how to blend in with "man's world." But
then, maybe they'll just teach her how to beat up other scantily-clad
women more effectively.

Well, maybe they can teach her how to wear her thong so it doesn't
show...just like Diana does...

Chris C>

[Joe Bergeron]

Post by M-Wolverine
My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

[Brian Doyle]

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by M-Wolverine
My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

Whilst true, I would like to point out that there are probably newsgroups
out there devoted to such concepts, and I suggest we leave them there.....

[Hidalgo]

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by M-Wolverine
My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

She only invulnerable... doesn't mean she can't feel things. The razor
blades and ground glass wouldn't necessarily injure her, but I'd hardly
believe they were be comfortable, regardless of her level of
invulnerability.

Post by Joe Bergeron
--
Joe Bergeron
http://www.joebergeron.com

[Brian Doyle]

Post by Hidalgo

Post by Joe Bergeron
She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

She only invulnerable... doesn't mean she can't feel things. The razor
blades and ground glass wouldn't necessarily injure her, but I'd hardly
believe they were be comfortable, regardless of her level of
invulnerability.

Here we have the innate problem with invulnerability, it _should_ dull the
sense of touch completely but clearly it doesn't.

John Byrne probably looked into this more than most, first with Diamond Lil
of Omega Flight, and then in more detail with one of his Next Men
characters.

[Mike Ward]

Post by Brian Doyle

Post by Hidalgo

Post by Joe Bergeron
She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

She only invulnerable... doesn't mean she can't feel things. The
razor blades and ground glass wouldn't necessarily injure her, but
I'd hardly believe they were be comfortable, regardless of her level
of invulnerability.

Here we have the innate problem with invulnerability, it _should_ dull
the sense of touch completely but clearly it doesn't.

Why should it dull the sense of touch completely?

Mike

[Brian Doyle]

Post by Mike Ward

Post by Brian Doyle
Here we have the innate problem with invulnerability, it _should_ dull
the sense of touch completely but clearly it doesn't.

Why should it dull the sense of touch completely?

Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is invulnerable
to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause the nerve ends to
register any sesnation at all?

[Janus]

Post by Brian Doyle
Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is
invulnerable to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause the
nerve ends to register any sesnation at all?

Your logic is flawed. Invulnerability means the outer dermis of the skin
won't be broken/pierced. The nerve endings below the dermis can still
register signals. The choice of whether this doesn't happen in a
character remains with the writer/creator. However, it is not a
requirement of invulnerability.

Pressure and temperature are the most likely stimuli to register. You
feel hot without physical contact. You feel cold without a heat source.
Callouses increases resistance, but you can still feel through them. etc.
etc.

[Lilith]

Post by Janus

Post by Brian Doyle
Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is
invulnerable to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause the
nerve ends to register any sesnation at all?

Your logic is flawed. Invulnerability means the outer dermis of the skin
won't be broken/pierced. The nerve endings below the dermis can still
register signals. The choice of whether this doesn't happen in a
character remains with the writer/creator. However, it is not a
requirement of invulnerability.

Then if Superman feels something as simple as the pressure of his
clothes imagine the kind of pain that would result from, say, slamming
into the Earth from fifty miles up. Or hitting a steel wall with his
fist with all his strength. I'd think his nervous system would go
into overload and pretty much shut down his brain temporarily.

Post by Janus
Pressure and temperature are the most likely stimuli to register. You
feel hot without physical contact. You feel cold without a heat source.
Callouses increases resistance, but you can still feel through them. etc.
etc.

Lilith

[Doug Haxton]

Post by Lilith

Post by Janus
Your logic is flawed. Invulnerability means the outer dermis of the skin
won't be broken/pierced. The nerve endings below the dermis can still
register signals. The choice of whether this doesn't happen in a
character remains with the writer/creator. However, it is not a
requirement of invulnerability.

Then if Superman feels something as simple as the pressure of his
clothes imagine the kind of pain that would result from, say, slamming
into the Earth from fifty miles up. Or hitting a steel wall with his
fist with all his strength. I'd think his nervous system would go
into overload and pretty much shut down his brain temporarily.

I remember a scene from one of the Elliot S. Maggin Superman novels in
which Lois kisses Superman as hard she can in the hope that he'll be
able to feel it.

Doug

[Janus]

Post by Lilith
Then if Superman feels something as simple as the pressure of his
clothes imagine the kind of pain that would result from, say, slamming
into the Earth from fifty miles up. Or hitting a steel wall with his
fist with all his strength. I'd think his nervous system would go
into overload and pretty much shut down his brain temporarily.

True, but I think, like his other senses, it adjusts to fit the stimuli.
His hearing works on different frequencies, and his can be focused or
telescoped.

[Mike Ward]

Post by Lilith

Post by Janus

Post by Brian Doyle
Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is
invulnerable to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause
the nerve ends to register any sesnation at all?

Your logic is flawed. Invulnerability means the outer dermis of the
skin won't be broken/pierced. The nerve endings below the dermis can
still register signals. The choice of whether this doesn't happen in a
character remains with the writer/creator. However, it is not a
requirement of invulnerability.

Then if Superman feels something as simple as the pressure of his
clothes imagine the kind of pain that would result from, say, slamming
into the Earth from fifty miles up. Or hitting a steel wall with his
fist with all his strength. I'd think his nervous system would go
into overload and pretty much shut down his brain temporarily.

Why?

Mike

[Lilith]

Post by Lilith

Post by Janus

Post by Brian Doyle
Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is
invulnerable to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause
the nerve ends to register any sesnation at all?

Your logic is flawed. Invulnerability means the outer dermis of the
skin won't be broken/pierced. The nerve endings below the dermis can
still register signals. The choice of whether this doesn't happen in a
character remains with the writer/creator. However, it is not a
requirement of invulnerability.

Then if Superman feels something as simple as the pressure of his
clothes imagine the kind of pain that would result from, say, slamming
into the Earth from fifty miles up. Or hitting a steel wall with his
fist with all his strength. I'd think his nervous system would go
into overload and pretty much shut down his brain temporarily.

Why?

Because the intensity of pain has caused even the strongest of men to
crumble. If he can feel day to day stuff as any average human would
then anything greater in intensity has got to feel more intense by the
same degree. But, remember, his invulnerability is supposed to be a
force field now that extends just so far from his outer cells. By the
same virtue he can't even touch anything directly let alone feel it.

Mike

Lilith

[Mike Ward]

Post by Lilith

Post by Lilith

Post by Janus

Post by Brian Doyle
Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is
invulnerable to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause
the nerve ends to register any sesnation at all?

Your logic is flawed. Invulnerability means the outer dermis of the
skin won't be broken/pierced. The nerve endings below the dermis can
still register signals. The choice of whether this doesn't happen in a
character remains with the writer/creator. However, it is not a
requirement of invulnerability.

Then if Superman feels something as simple as the pressure of his
clothes imagine the kind of pain that would result from, say, slamming
into the Earth from fifty miles up. Or hitting a steel wall with his
fist with all his strength. I'd think his nervous system would go
into overload and pretty much shut down his brain temporarily.

Why?

Because the intensity of pain has caused even the strongest of men to
crumble.

And therefore Superman cannot feels mild sensations?!

Post by Lilith
If he can feel day to day stuff as any average human would
then anything greater in intensity has got to feel more intense by the
same degree.

No it doesn't have to do any such thing. The writers could have chosen to
write Superman that way, but they didn't, and there's no logical
inconsistancy with that decission.

Post by Lilith
But, remember, his invulnerability is supposed to be a
force field now that extends just so far from his outer cells. By the
same virtue he can't even touch anything directly let alone feel it.

Well, the force field idea was just plain stupid and I agree it should
prevent Superman from feeling anything by preventing his skin from coming
in contact with it.

But the force field doesn't work in a logical way. It allows his costume
to pass through it for instance, so superman should be able to feel his
costume since it actually does pass through to touch his skin. The logical
problem here is simply that there's no reason why bullets should be
repelled by the force field if the costume isn't. But this is another
issue.

The fact remains that invulnerablity and the ability to take a bullet
without felling pain should not imply that Superman cannot feel oridary
sensations.

Mike

[Lisa]

Post by Janus

Post by Brian Doyle
Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is
invulnerable to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause the
nerve ends to register any sesnation at all?

Your logic is flawed. Invulnerability means the outer dermis of the skin
won't be broken/pierced. The nerve endings below the dermis can still
register signals. The choice of whether this doesn't happen in a
character remains with the writer/creator. However, it is not a
requirement of invulnerability.
Pressure and temperature are the most likely stimuli to register. You
feel hot without physical contact. You feel cold without a heat source.
Callouses increases resistance, but you can still feel through them. etc.
etc.

So why doesn't being shot hurt like hell? Superman, I mean. And why
doesn't an explosion feel like he's being burnt up, even if he isn't
actually?

If Superman can register hot and cold and pressure, he should feel all
of that. The fact that he doesn't is just an inconsistency.

Lisa

[Janus]

Post by Lisa
So why doesn't being shot hurt like hell? Superman, I mean. And why
doesn't an explosion feel like he's being burnt up, even if he isn't
actually?
If Superman can register hot and cold and pressure, he should feel all
of that. The fact that he doesn't is just an inconsistency.

He might have a subconscious trigger that flips the threshold of the sense
of touch (mind over matter). Marvel's Gladiator, (a Superman derivative
imo), is reputed to be as strong (or weak) as he believes himself to be.

More likely Supes' tactile sense works like his sense of sight, and
hearing. They change to suit the stimuli, albeit voluntarily (well his
hearing works involuntarily sometimes).

[Mike Ward]

Post by Lisa

Post by Janus

Post by Brian Doyle
Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is
invulnerable to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause
the nerve ends to register any sesnation at all?

Your logic is flawed. Invulnerability means the outer dermis of the
skin won't be broken/pierced. The nerve endings below the dermis can
still register signals. The choice of whether this doesn't happen in
a character remains with the writer/creator. However, it is not a
requirement of invulnerability.
Pressure and temperature are the most likely stimuli to register. You
feel hot without physical contact. You feel cold without a heat
source. Callouses increases resistance, but you can still feel
through them. etc. etc.

So why doesn't being shot hurt like hell?

Because a) it doesn't hurt him and b) he has a different pain threshold
than ordinary poeple.

Mike

Post by Lisa
Superman, I mean. And why
doesn't an explosion feel like he's being burnt up, even if he isn't
actually?
If Superman can register hot and cold and pressure, he should feel all
of that. The fact that he doesn't is just an inconsistency.
Lisa

[Clell Harmon]

Post by Janus

Post by Brian Doyle
Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is
invulnerable to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause the
nerve ends to register any sesnation at all?

Your logic is flawed. Invulnerability means the outer dermis of the skin
won't be broken/pierced. The nerve endings below the dermis can still
register signals. The choice of whether this doesn't happen in a
character remains with the writer/creator. However, it is not a
requirement of invulnerability.

Ok, lets observe your logic in this. Your hand is NOT invulnerable.
Putting your hand in a flame hurts. Your hand is now invulnerable.
Putting your hand in the flame STILL hurts, but your hand doesn't burn.
How is this an advantage? If you are invulnerable and still 'feel'
everything then you are in agony pretty much constantly while doing
super stuff.

Post by Janus
Pressure and temperature are the most likely stimuli to register. You
feel hot without physical contact. You feel cold without a heat source.
Callouses increases resistance, but you can still feel through them. etc.
etc.

[Johanna Draper Carlson]

Post by Clell Harmon
Ok, lets observe your logic in this. Your hand is NOT invulnerable.
Putting your hand in a flame hurts. Your hand is now invulnerable.
Putting your hand in the flame STILL hurts, but your hand doesn't
burn. How is this an advantage? If you are invulnerable and still 'feel'
everything then you are in agony pretty much constantly while doing
super stuff.

The opposite version of this question always comes to me when reading
SLEEPER. The guy's power is supposed to be that he doesn't feel pain,
and he takes that pain and redirects it to others. The writer seems to
have assumed that invulnerability comes along with the power, because
the protagonist gears up for a fight by having someone else shoot him
(to store the pain).

I didn't realize this connection until later into the series. I think it
would have been nice to be clearer about it.

Course, that isn't the only way that Sleeper is like the anti-Superman.

[Janus]

Post by Clell Harmon
Ok, lets observe your logic in this. Your hand is NOT
invulnerable.
Putting your hand in a flame hurts. Your hand is now invulnerable.
Putting your hand in the flame STILL hurts, but your hand doesn't burn.
How is this an advantage? If you are invulnerable and still 'feel'
everything then you are in agony pretty much constantly while doing
super stuff.

Why does it have to be an advantage? Over at Marvel, Wolverine's healing
factor doesn't affect his sense of touch. Immortals, such as the
Highlanders, or Whedon's vampires all feel pain. Alot of people die from
shock if they experience severe pain, but there are also cases of extreme
pain thresholds. It would be interesting if Superman's invulnerability
didn't exempt him from pain. The Man of Steel enduring the same pain a
human would feel, definately more heroic. I'm not saying all invulnerable
characters can feel. As I said, it depends on the writer. However,
invulnerability doesn't necessitate a dullness of the senses.

[Peter Bruells]

Post by Clell Harmon
Ok, lets observe your logic in this. Your hand is NOT
invulnerable. Putting your hand in a flame hurts. Your hand is now
invulnerable. Putting your hand in the flame STILL hurts, but your
hand doesn't burn. How is this an advantage? If you are invulnerable
and still 'feel' everything then you are in agony pretty much
constantly while doing super stuff.

I don't think it can work with humand biology. But since he's
Kryptonian, he could very well have different receptors for different
reasond and "pain" would be in concep only.

Though it doesn't explain WW type invulnerability.

[Mike Ward]

Post by Brian Doyle

Post by Mike Ward

Post by Brian Doyle
Here we have the innate problem with invulnerability, it _should_
dull the sense of touch completely but clearly it doesn't.

Why should it dull the sense of touch completely?

Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is
invulnerable to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause the
nerve ends to register any sesnation at all?

Anything they come in contact with I would think. I don't see why being
invulnerable should cause nerves to stop sensing.

Mike

[Clell Harmon]

Post by Mike Ward

Post by Brian Doyle

Post by Mike Ward

Post by Brian Doyle
Here we have the innate problem with invulnerability, it _should_
dull the sense of touch completely but clearly it doesn't.

Why should it dull the sense of touch completely?

Because your sense of touch is triggered by physical contact being
registered by the nerves just under the skin. If your skin is
invulnerable to all impact and harm, then what can possibly cause the
nerve ends to register any sesnation at all?

Anything they come in contact with I would think. I don't see why being
invulnerable should cause nerves to stop sensing.

It might not, but you would pray that it would.

[Peter Henrikson]

Post by Brian Doyle

Post by Hidalgo

Post by Joe Bergeron
She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

She only invulnerable... doesn't mean she can't feel things. The razor
blades and ground glass wouldn't necessarily injure her, but I'd hardly
believe they were be comfortable, regardless of her level of
invulnerability.

Here we have the innate problem with invulnerability, it _should_ dull the
sense of touch completely but clearly it doesn't.
John Byrne probably looked into this more than most, first with Diamond Lil
of Omega Flight, and then in more detail with one of his Next Men
characters.

I'm not female but...

I'm invulnerable to sand. Can't hurt me a bit. But when I go to the beach
and it gets inside my suit, it's very uncomfortable..

Being female could only make it worse. :^)

[Joe Bergeron]

Post by Peter Henrikson
I'm invulnerable to sand. Can't hurt me a bit. But when I go to the beach
and it gets inside my suit, it's very uncomfortable..

Bah, you're not invulnerable to sand. Try a faceful of it in a strong
wind, or get someone to drag you over some with a speeding car.

[Joe Bergeron]

Post by Brian Doyle
Here we have the innate problem with invulnerability, it _should_ dull the
sense of touch completely but clearly it doesn't.

I think pain is mainly a sensation we feel when we experience real or
potential physical damage. Since the Superpeople are difficult to
injure, their brains could simply interpret the sensations of ground
glass or whatever as not being painful.

[Janus]

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by Brian Doyle
Here we have the innate problem with invulnerability, it _should_
dull the sense of touch completely but clearly it doesn't.

I think pain is mainly a sensation we feel when we experience real or
potential physical damage. Since the Superpeople are difficult to
injure, their brains could simply interpret the sensations of ground
glass or whatever as not being painful.

It could also be a subconscious response to visual info (mind over
matter). However maybe it *IS* dull. I haven't seen many invulnerable
heroes exhibit tactile sensitivity, unless they're getting beaned by a
thrown car. Scientifically, invulnerability has nothing to do with the
sense of touch. I liked how Busiek dealt with it in Secret Identity. All
that said, I doubt Turner (or Loeb ) would concern themselves with
rationale.

[JWMeritt]

An interesting discussion concerning invulnerability. Which brings to mind the
question 'What did Kal-el do with/need/use Captain America's near-invulnerable
shield for/do with that his skin wasn't better at?"


..........................................................................
..........................................
http://profiles.yahoo.com/jwmeritt and http://hometown.aol.com/jwmeritt/
James W. Meritt, CISSP, CISA

[The Babaloughesian]

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by M-Wolverine
My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

Hey, that's right. Normal human clothing for a Kryptonian should be like
wearing Kleenex, shouldn't it? Another reason why they should be careful
what they put her in. Something too tight, and she should be able to
inadvertently shred it. Except.. don't they also have a heightened sense of
touch to go along with those other heightened senses, or is it just sound
and sight that are amplified a millionfold?

[Patrick McClue]

Post by The Babaloughesian

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by M-Wolverine
My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

Hey, that's right. Normal human clothing for a Kryptonian should be like
wearing Kleenex, shouldn't it? Another reason why they should be careful
what they put her in. Something too tight, and she should be able to
inadvertently shred it. Except.. don't they also have a heightened sense of
touch to go along with those other heightened senses, or is it just sound
and sight that are amplified a millionfold?

The thong would be protected by her aura, but then, so would any other kind
of underwear.

Patrick

[Dennis Kuhn]

Post by The Babaloughesian

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by M-Wolverine
My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

Hey, that's right. Normal human clothing for a Kryptonian should be like
wearing Kleenex, shouldn't it? Another reason why they should be careful
what they put her in. Something too tight, and she should be able to
inadvertently shred it. Except.. don't they also have a heightened sense of
touch to go along with those other heightened senses, or is it just sound
and sight that are amplified a millionfold?

I always thought that they just had a broader range to their
limitations. Clark doesn't accidentally break an eggshell when making
breakfast because he knows how lightly to hold them. But when he
needs more than human-level strength for something he just has that
innate knowledge of his limits, and applies the correct power for the
situation.

For example, a high-end sports car is just as capable of going 15mph
as a little four-cylinder hatchback. The hatchback can only go 80mph
at it's top end, but the sports car can go up to 200mph. I figure
it's the same with Kryptonians on Earth. It's not so much that our
clothing feels like Kleenex, it's just not as durable as Kryptonian
cloth, which is more like Kevlar or something similar.

Same thing for the pain threshold. Kryptonians can feel a thumbtack
on their chair as they sit down, but their threshhold is so much wider
that they just don't feel the need to react as strongly as we would.

On the other hand, these conventions (that I have admittedly created
for myself, rather than gathered from actual comic sources) have been
blown away, usually by scenes played for their comic value. ("Oops!
Sorry, Lois. Guess I don't know my own strength!")

So, I imagine a pair of these razor blade and glass panties would be
like one of us putting on a pair of underwear made out of thick paper.
It wouldn't even chafe, but it would be a little distracting at
least. Like a penny in your shoe. Eventually, Kara would switch to
something more comfy, just to get rid of that distraction of sharp
objects pressing against her skin.

Dennis

[M-Wolverine]

Post by Dennis Kuhn

Post by The Babaloughesian

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by M-Wolverine
My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

Hey, that's right. Normal human clothing for a Kryptonian should be like
wearing Kleenex, shouldn't it? Another reason why they should be careful
what they put her in. Something too tight, and she should be able to
inadvertently shred it. Except.. don't they also have a heightened sense of
touch to go along with those other heightened senses, or is it just sound
and sight that are amplified a millionfold?

I always thought that they just had a broader range to their
limitations. Clark doesn't accidentally break an eggshell when making
breakfast because he knows how lightly to hold them. But when he
needs more than human-level strength for something he just has that
innate knowledge of his limits, and applies the correct power for the
situation.
For example, a high-end sports car is just as capable of going 15mph
as a little four-cylinder hatchback. The hatchback can only go 80mph
at it's top end, but the sports car can go up to 200mph. I figure
it's the same with Kryptonians on Earth. It's not so much that our
clothing feels like Kleenex, it's just not as durable as Kryptonian
cloth, which is more like Kevlar or something similar.
Same thing for the pain threshold. Kryptonians can feel a thumbtack
on their chair as they sit down, but their threshhold is so much wider
that they just don't feel the need to react as strongly as we would.
On the other hand, these conventions (that I have admittedly created
for myself, rather than gathered from actual comic sources) have been
blown away, usually by scenes played for their comic value. ("Oops!
Sorry, Lois. Guess I don't know my own strength!")
So, I imagine a pair of these razor blade and glass panties would be
like one of us putting on a pair of underwear made out of thick paper.
It wouldn't even chafe, but it would be a little distracting at
least. Like a penny in your shoe. Eventually, Kara would switch to
something more comfy, just to get rid of that distraction of sharp
objects pressing against her skin.
Dennis

Right...I wasn't saying she would be in great pain..just that it
wouldn't be comfortable. More like an asleep foot than stepping on a
nail. If you can have pleasurable feelings, you'd think there's be
irritation too. Or frankly, just feel weird to her. The clothes are
probably strange enough as is. Unless thongs are common Kryptowear, I
don't think it's normalizing anything, rather going the other
direction.

But, the debate on invulnerability is a long and contradictory one.

Chris C.

[Clell Harmon]

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by M-Wolverine
My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

She's invulnerable. She could be wearing panties lined with razor
blades and ground glass and still be comfortable.

Invulerable, yes. Also hypersensitive. Just because one is
invulerable doesn't mean they don't feel what they are wearing.

[Joe Bergeron]

Post by Clell Harmon
Invulerable, yes. Also hypersensitive. Just because one is
invulerable doesn't mean they don't feel what they are wearing.

If that hypersensitivity meant that they perceived small stimuli as
pain, you'd hear a lot of screaming every time Superman was engulfed in
flames or got clobbered by an artillery shell.

[Clell Harmon]

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by Clell Harmon
Invulerable, yes. Also hypersensitive. Just because one is
invulerable doesn't mean they don't feel what they are wearing.

If that hypersensitivity meant that they perceived small stimuli as
pain, you'd hear a lot of screaming every time Superman was engulfed in
flames or got clobbered by an artillery shell.

I agree. This is only one of the aspects of Superman's invulnerablity
that the PTB have never seen fit to explain. He has how ever been shown
to be hypersensative AND invulerable. The two seem to be at odds, but
what do I know, I'm just a reader.

[Michael S. Schiffer]

Post by Clell Harmon
...
He has how ever
been shown to be hypersensative AND invulerable. The two seem
to be at odds, but what do I know, I'm just a reader.

It doesn't necessarily seem like a problem. Being able to feel
something as a sensation and feeling it as pain aren't inseparable.
Individual humans have different pain thresholds, and it's possible
in some cases to deaden pain without entirely numbing a region.

I can put my hand under water and distinguish between water that's 40
degrees Farenheit water that's 100, with neither registering as pain.
Superman could likewise put his hand in molten lead or liquid
nitrogen, and be able to feel that as an expanded range of coolness
or warmth, without it particularly registering as an unpleasant
sensation or limiting his ability to distinguish between warm water
and cold. (Just as he can see radio waves or gammas but can still
distinguish between red and orange in the visible spectrum.)

Mike

[Clell Harmon]

Post by Michael S. Schiffer

Post by Clell Harmon
...
He has how ever
been shown to be hypersensative AND invulerable. The two seem
to be at odds, but what do I know, I'm just a reader.

It doesn't necessarily seem like a problem. Being able to feel
something as a sensation and feeling it as pain aren't inseparable.
Individual humans have different pain thresholds, and it's possible
in some cases to deaden pain without entirely numbing a region.
I can put my hand under water and distinguish between water that's 40
degrees Farenheit water that's 100, with neither registering as pain.

Put your hand in 30 degree water, then into 100 degree water. You WILL
feel pain.

Post by Michael S. Schiffer
Superman could likewise put his hand in molten lead or liquid
nitrogen, and be able to feel that as an expanded range of coolness
or warmth, without it particularly registering as an unpleasant
sensation or limiting his ability to distinguish between warm water
and cold. (Just as he can see radio waves or gammas but can still
distinguish between red and orange in the visible spectrum.)
Mike

[Michael S. Schiffer]

Post by Clell Harmon

Post by Michael S. Schiffer

Post by Clell Harmon
...
He has how ever
been shown to be hypersensative AND invulerable. The two seem
to be at odds, but what do I know, I'm just a reader.

It doesn't necessarily seem like a problem. Being able to feel
something as a sensation and feeling it as pain aren't
inseparable. Individual humans have different pain thresholds,
and it's possible in some cases to deaden pain without entirely
numbing a region.
I can put my hand under water and distinguish between water
that's 40 degrees Farenheit water that's 100, with neither
registering as pain.

Put your hand in 30 degree water, then into 100 degree
water. You WILL
feel pain.

Even stipulating that (and assuming that you've salted the water so
that it's not a solid block at 30 degrees), that's a function of
our physiology, not a universal fact. The ability to distinguish
among a wide variety of states without any of them causing warning
signals is clearly physically possible (since we can design
instruments to do it-- thermometers, for example, which can
distinguish temperatures with far more precision over a far larger
range without damage or indications of damage). It's far easier to
imagine ways in which Kryptonian physiology could do that than,
say, X-ray vision or reactionless flight.

Mike

[Mike Ward]

Post by Clell Harmon

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by Clell Harmon
Invulerable, yes. Also hypersensitive. Just because one is
invulerable doesn't mean they don't feel what they are wearing.

If that hypersensitivity meant that they perceived small stimuli as
pain, you'd hear a lot of screaming every time Superman was engulfed
in flames or got clobbered by an artillery shell.

I agree. This is only one of the aspects of Superman's
invulnerablity
that the PTB have never seen fit to explain. He has how ever been
shown to be hypersensative AND invulerable. The two seem to be at
odds, but what do I know, I'm just a reader.

There not at odds. Certainly if Superman was both invulnerable and sensed
pain the same way real people do then there'd be a problem.

But it's clear from the stories that he does not sense pain the way we do.
It's equally clear that this is not the result of having an general
depressed sense of touch.

I don't understand why so many people find this to be logically flawed.

Superman flying by shear force of will is logically flawed, Superman being
almost completely indestructible is logically flawed. Superman having
senses that are not like those of real people is about the only aspect of
his powers that isn't logically flawed.

Mike

[Clell Harmon]

Post by Mike Ward

Post by Clell Harmon

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by Clell Harmon
Invulerable, yes. Also hypersensitive. Just because one is
invulerable doesn't mean they don't feel what they are wearing.

If that hypersensitivity meant that they perceived small stimuli as
pain, you'd hear a lot of screaming every time Superman was engulfed
in flames or got clobbered by an artillery shell.

I agree. This is only one of the aspects of Superman's
invulnerablity
that the PTB have never seen fit to explain. He has how ever been
shown to be hypersensative AND invulerable. The two seem to be at
odds, but what do I know, I'm just a reader.

There not at odds. Certainly if Superman was both invulnerable and sensed
pain the same way real people do then there'd be a problem.

He certainly seemed to feel pain the same way real people do on the
various times that he has become depowered, unless you are of the
position that the times when he is solar energized his physiology
actually changes to something else, while displaying absolutely no
difference in outward appearance.

Post by Mike Ward
But it's clear from the stories that he does not sense pain the way we do.
It's equally clear that this is not the result of having an general
depressed sense of touch.

Excepting for when he is depowered, of course...

Post by Mike Ward
I don't understand why so many people find this to be logically flawed.
Superman flying by shear force of will is logically flawed, Superman being
almost completely indestructible is logically flawed. Superman having
senses that are not like those of real people is about the only aspect of
his powers that isn't logically flawed.
Mike

[Mike Ward]

Post by Clell Harmon

Post by Mike Ward

Post by Clell Harmon

Post by Joe Bergeron

Post by Clell Harmon
Invulerable, yes. Also hypersensitive. Just because one is
invulerable doesn't mean they don't feel what they are wearing.

If that hypersensitivity meant that they perceived small stimuli as
pain, you'd hear a lot of screaming every time Superman was engulfed
in flames or got clobbered by an artillery shell.

I agree. This is only one of the aspects of Superman's
invulnerablity
that the PTB have never seen fit to explain. He has how ever been
shown to be hypersensative AND invulerable. The two seem to be at
odds, but what do I know, I'm just a reader.

There not at odds. Certainly if Superman was both invulnerable and
sensed pain the same way real people do then there'd be a problem.

He certainly seemed to feel pain the same way real people do on the
various times that he has become depowered, unless you are of the
position that the times when he is solar energized his physiology
actually changes to something else, while displaying absolutely no
difference in outward appearance.

Of course his physiology changes. If it didn't he'd still be superstrong,
able to fly, and practicly invulnerable.

Mike

Post by Clell Harmon

Post by Mike Ward
But it's clear from the stories that he does not sense pain the way
we do. It's equally clear that this is not the result of having an
general depressed sense of touch.

Excepting for when he is depowered, of course...

Post by Mike Ward
I don't understand why so many people find this to be logically flawed.
Superman flying by shear force of will is logically flawed, Superman
being almost completely indestructible is logically flawed. Superman
having senses that are not like those of real people is about the
only aspect of his powers that isn't logically flawed.
Mike

[Nathan Sanders]

Post by Clell Harmon
He certainly seemed to feel pain the same way real people do on the
various times that he has become depowered, unless you are of the

His invulnerability is gone when he's depowered, so why would that
even be relevant?

Post by Clell Harmon
position that the times when he is solar energized his physiology
actually changes to something else, while displaying absolutely no
difference in outward appearance.

Something is causing his eyes to stop radiating various types of
electromagnetic waves, and his ears to suddenly stop picking up high
frequency and low intensity sound waves. And pre-Crisis, his cells
would no longer be affected by kryptonite radiation.

If that doesn't count as a "change in physiology"...

Nathan

[Johnny Storm]

Post by M-Wolverine

Post by Dennis Kuhn

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.

[snip]

Post by badthingus
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

Once in a while, artwork like this can bring the 15-year-old out in
me, but not this time. I agree with you completely. If the writer is
going to go out of his way to explain that Lois got the clothes, the
artist should have a clue that she should most likely be following
Clark's clothing strategy; draw as little attention as possible. I
figured that this was one of the other reasons no one recognized him
with "just a pair of glasses" on. Not to mention that Lois doesn't
dress like that (at least, not that I've noticed). Does the artist
think that Lois wants to live vicariously through Kara?

My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

Unfortunately, I also know women: 2 sisters, 2 female roommates, and a close
female friend.
They all wear thongs, and they all swear it's really more comfortable than
traditional? underwear.
So maybe you just happened to run into a group of women who don't care for
it.
Now, if you want to take uncomfortable, let's take about the g-string.
To quote Jeff Foxworthy, "Just a string running up your butt?"

Johnny Storm

[Peter Bruells]

Post by Johnny Storm
Unfortunately, I also know women: 2 sisters, 2 female roommates, and a
close female friend. They all wear thongs, and they all swear it's
really more comfortable than traditional? underwear. So maybe you
just happened to run into a group of women who don't care for it.
Now, if you want to take uncomfortable, let's take about the g-string.
To quote Jeff Foxworthy, "Just a string running up your butt?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thong_underwear


In prior usage, this style of clothing was usually called a "
g-string", .... , which was in use at least as far back as the late
1800s.

....

By the mid-1990s, the design had made its way to most of the Western
World, and thong underwear became popular. As of 2003, thong underwear
is one of the fastest selling styles among women and is also gaining
some popularity among men. One advantage attributed to the wearing of
thong underwear is that no visible panty line can be seen even under a
thin, light-colored, or skin-tight garment. The main drawback to thong
underwear is that the fabric must be pulled directly between one's
buttocks, which many people find unattractive and/or uncomfortable,
but which others actually enjoy.


The difference doesn't appear to be that great. Though I don't need
to see the art in question to know that Turner sexualizes it. :)

[Janus]

Post by Peter Bruells

Post by Johnny Storm
Unfortunately, I also know women: 2 sisters, 2 female roommates, and a
close female friend. They all wear thongs, and they all swear it's
really more comfortable than traditional? underwear. So maybe you
just happened to run into a group of women who don't care for it.
Now, if you want to take uncomfortable, let's take about the g-string.
To quote Jeff Foxworthy, "Just a string running up your butt?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thong_underwear
In prior usage, this style of clothing was usually called a "
g-string", .... , which was in use at least as far back as the late
1800s.
The difference doesn't appear to be that great. Though I don't need
to see the art in question to know that Turner sexualizes it. :)

The difference, while not great, does influence the comfort of the woman.
G-Strings are more likely to be uncomfortable than thongs. Most swimsuits
are thongs, while g-strings are more sensous and private. Turner didn't
sexualize it. His art showed the waistband high on the hip, which is how
many young women wear it.

PS. To: Johnny Storm - Any particular reason you started your statement
"Unfortunately, I also know women"?

[Johnny Storm]

I started the my statement "Unfortunately", because I was going to
contradict M-Wolverine's post about how no women he knows wears thongs.
I just didn't want to come off as trolling.
'Sides, when there is only one bathroom, and you live with a female, it's
also unfortunate as well.
That's why whenever I plan on living with a female, I also want to have two
bathrooms in the apartment/house.

Johnny Storm

Post by Janus

Post by Peter Bruells

Post by Johnny Storm
Unfortunately, I also know women: 2 sisters, 2 female roommates, and a
close female friend. They all wear thongs, and they all swear it's
really more comfortable than traditional? underwear. So maybe you
just happened to run into a group of women who don't care for it.
Now, if you want to take uncomfortable, let's take about the g-string.
To quote Jeff Foxworthy, "Just a string running up your butt?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thong_underwear
In prior usage, this style of clothing was usually called a "
g-string", .... , which was in use at least as far back as the late
1800s.
The difference doesn't appear to be that great. Though I don't need
to see the art in question to know that Turner sexualizes it. :)

The difference, while not great, does influence the comfort of the woman.
G-Strings are more likely to be uncomfortable than thongs. Most swimsuits
are thongs, while g-strings are more sensous and private. Turner didn't
sexualize it. His art showed the waistband high on the hip, which is how
many young women wear it.
PS. To: Johnny Storm - Any particular reason you started your statement
"Unfortunately, I also know women"?
--
" I've come to think of him as one of those people you can override with a
touch. Skin on skin contact puts him immediately into f*ck or fight mode,
and either way, if you're the one touching him, your hands are gonna be
full!"

[M-Wolverine]

Post by Johnny Storm
I started the my statement "Unfortunately", because I was going to
contradict M-Wolverine's post about how no women he knows wears thongs.

I didn't say I didn't know any who wear them. I know lots. I just
don't know any who think they're MORE comfortable.

Post by Johnny Storm
I just didn't want to come off as trolling.

Eh...I didn't think you were trolling. Just giving off an opposing
female view on things...since we can't seem to get any FEMALES to
comment on wearing thongs.

You might not want to top post though. Doesn't really bother me, but
it does some.

Chris C.

Post by Johnny Storm
'Sides, when there is only one bathroom, and you live with a female, it's
also unfortunate as well.
That's why whenever I plan on living with a female, I also want to have two
bathrooms in the apartment/house.
Johnny Storm

Post by Janus

Post by Peter Bruells

Post by Johnny Storm
Unfortunately, I also know women: 2 sisters, 2 female roommates, and a
close female friend. They all wear thongs, and they all swear it's
really more comfortable than traditional? underwear. So maybe you
just happened to run into a group of women who don't care for it.
Now, if you want to take uncomfortable, let's take about the g-string.
To quote Jeff Foxworthy, "Just a string running up your butt?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thong_underwear
In prior usage, this style of clothing was usually called a "
g-string", .... , which was in use at least as far back as the late
1800s.
The difference doesn't appear to be that great. Though I don't need
to see the art in question to know that Turner sexualizes it. :)

The difference, while not great, does influence the comfort of the woman.
G-Strings are more likely to be uncomfortable than thongs. Most swimsuits
are thongs, while g-strings are more sensous and private. Turner didn't
sexualize it. His art showed the waistband high on the hip, which is how
many young women wear it.
PS. To: Johnny Storm - Any particular reason you started your statement
"Unfortunately, I also know women"?
--
" I've come to think of him as one of those people you can override with a
touch. Skin on skin contact puts him immediately into f*ck or fight mode,
and either way, if you're the one touching him, your hands are gonna be
full!"

[Johnny Storm]

Post by M-Wolverine

Post by Johnny Storm
I started the my statement "Unfortunately", because I was going to
contradict M-Wolverine's post about how no women he knows wears thongs.

I didn't say I didn't know any who wear them. I know lots. I just
don't know any who think they're MORE comfortable.

Post by Johnny Storm
I just didn't want to come off as trolling.

Eh...I didn't think you were trolling. Just giving off an opposing
female view on things...since we can't seem to get any FEMALES to
comment on wearing thongs.
You might not want to top post though. Doesn't really bother me, but
it does some.
Chris C.

Post by Johnny Storm
'Sides, when there is only one bathroom, and you live with a female, it's
also unfortunate as well.
That's why whenever I plan on living with a female, I also want to have two
bathrooms in the apartment/house.
Johnny Storm

Post by Janus

Post by Peter Bruells

Post by Johnny Storm
Unfortunately, I also know women: 2 sisters, 2 female roommates, and a
close female friend. They all wear thongs, and they all swear it's
really more comfortable than traditional? underwear. So maybe you
just happened to run into a group of women who don't care for it.
Now, if you want to take uncomfortable, let's take about the g-string.
To quote Jeff Foxworthy, "Just a string running up your butt?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thong_underwear
In prior usage, this style of clothing was usually called a "
g-string", .... , which was in use at least as far back as the late
1800s.
The difference doesn't appear to be that great. Though I don't need
to see the art in question to know that Turner sexualizes it. :)

The difference, while not great, does influence the comfort of the woman.
G-Strings are more likely to be uncomfortable than thongs. Most swimsuits
are thongs, while g-strings are more sensous and private. Turner didn't
sexualize it. His art showed the waistband high on the hip, which is how
many young women wear it.
PS. To: Johnny Storm - Any particular reason you started your statement
"Unfortunately, I also know women"?
--
" I've come to think of him as one of those people you can override with a
touch. Skin on skin contact puts him immediately into f*ck or fight mode,
and either way, if you're the one touching him, your hands are gonna be
full!"

The reason why I top post is because sometimes it's really hard for me on my
newsreader to read new posts that are intermixed into the old posts. Also, I
have scrolling all the way down to the bottom of old posts to read a new
post that's only one line long.
But thank you for the warning.


Johnny

[Michael S. Schiffer]

Post by Johnny Storm
...
The reason why I top post is because sometimes it's really hard
for me on my newsreader to read new posts that are intermixed
into the old posts. Also, I have scrolling all the way down to
the bottom of old posts to read a new post that's only one line
long.

Generally, the custom is to snip material that's not relevant to
the response (and not to do one-line posts, as a rule). An
advantage of the traditional Usenet style (snip, leave enough for
context, place responses immediately after what they're responding
to) is that they work much better when the reader hasn't seen (or
can't remember) the post to which something is responding. Since
Usenet is an asynchronous medium, a response can arrive at a given
news server before the message it's responding to. (Or messages
can never arrive at a given server at all.) When this happens, the
reader is either likely to be confused or is in the position of
having to read backwards, as in the example:

***
Top-posting

Post by Johnny Storm
What style of posting tends to annoy many Usenet readers?

***

:-) In any case, any consistent style is preferable to randomly
combining the two (which makes any responses after the first more
difficult to read), and Usenet-style quoting has been in use here
for decades. (Counting predecessor groups rec.arts.comics and
net.comics as "here".)

Mike

[Lilith]

Post by M-Wolverine
Eh...I didn't think you were trolling. Just giving off an opposing
female view on things...since we can't seem to get any FEMALES to
comment on wearing thongs.

I haven't said anything because I'm simply beyond the age of wanting
to wear a thong. I was too old when they first hit the scene. :-)

Lilith

[Johanna Draper Carlson]

Just giving off an opposing female view on things...since we can't
seem to get any FEMALES to comment on wearing thongs.

Speaking from experience, it wouldn't matter. A while back we had a
similar discussion, and I gave my opinion, and other guys said "but my
friends/wife/girlfriend thinks the opposite". So it worked out pretty
much as it is now.

The thong bothered me a lot because of the cultural aspects (why would
Lois buy an alien girl that?), not the comfort.

[M-Wolverine]

Post by Janus

Post by Peter Bruells

Post by Johnny Storm
Unfortunately, I also know women: 2 sisters, 2 female roommates, and a
close female friend. They all wear thongs, and they all swear it's
really more comfortable than traditional? underwear. So maybe you
just happened to run into a group of women who don't care for it.
Now, if you want to take uncomfortable, let's take about the g-string.
To quote Jeff Foxworthy, "Just a string running up your butt?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thong_underwear
In prior usage, this style of clothing was usually called a "
g-string", .... , which was in use at least as far back as the late
1800s.
The difference doesn't appear to be that great. Though I don't need
to see the art in question to know that Turner sexualizes it. :)

The difference, while not great, does influence the comfort of the woman.
G-Strings are more likely to be uncomfortable than thongs. Most swimsuits
are thongs, while g-strings are more sensous and private. Turner didn't
sexualize it. His art showed the waistband high on the hip, which is how
many young women wear it.

While I think G-strings of the past would've counted as Thongs today,
I think the difference likes in the "string"...thongs are usually
straps in the back, while a g-string really can be nothing more than a
string.

Chris C.

[M-Wolverine]

Post by Dennis Kuhn

Post by M-Wolverine

Post by Dennis Kuhn

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.

[snip]

Post by M-Wolverine

Post by Dennis Kuhn

Post by badthingus
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

Once in a while, artwork like this can bring the 15-year-old out in
me, but not this time. I agree with you completely. If the writer is
going to go out of his way to explain that Lois got the clothes, the
artist should have a clue that she should most likely be following
Clark's clothing strategy; draw as little attention as possible. I
figured that this was one of the other reasons no one recognized him
with "just a pair of glasses" on. Not to mention that Lois doesn't
dress like that (at least, not that I've noticed). Does the artist
think that Lois wants to live vicariously through Kara?

My problem with it, as many a female has told me, the thong isn't the
most comfortable thing in the world necessarily, and it hardly seems
like earthen "training" underwear to me. You'd think they'd want her
to be comfortable, rather than worry about some alien "panty line"
concept.

Unfortunately, I also know women: 2 sisters, 2 female roommates, and a close
female friend.
They all wear thongs, and they all swear it's really more comfortable than
traditional? underwear.

We need women in this thread. I can't see how they can be MORE
comfortable (soft material covering your ass vs. something yanking on
your butt). More pleasing to the eye, more stylish or sexy...sure.
Comfortable?

Chris C.

Can't believe we're talking about this...

[Peter Henrikson]

"M-Wolverine" <***@umich.edu> wrote in message news:***@posting.google.com...>I can't see how they
can be MORE

Post by M-Wolverine
comfortable (soft material covering your ass vs. something yanking on
your butt). More pleasing to the eye, more stylish or sexy...sure.
Comfortable?
Chris C.
Can't believe we're talking about this...

I don't wear thong underwear but, as a person getting older a developing
different aches and pains (arthritis, neuropathic pain from diabetes,etc.),
I find that chronic pain (let alone irritation) can be gotten used to and
even forgotten about. (Sharp, quick pain is a different matter. I still hate
shots.)

So I would think that a mere discomfort from thong underwear would go away
as soon as you focused your mind on something else. In a day or two you'd
never notice it again.

[Peter Henrikson]

Another thought,

After reading this thread, I had to go back and find out what people were
talking about. (I didn't even notice it on the first reading). The panel
that I think is the source of this thread shows Clark looking sidelong to
Kara and commenting "Well, you certainly have the SHOPPING part of being an
Earth girl down". My first reading was that he meant she shopped a lot but,
she only had one fairly small bag, so could this could be read as Clark's
veiled conserative comment on her _choice_ of clothing? (So much for Lois
buying the underwear.) Looking at the picture again also, it seems that
Clark is making an intentional effort not to look at her thong.

Pete

[Donna Cassidy]

Post by M-Wolverine
We need women in this thread.

Oakie doak. Not quite what I imagined my first post to the newsgroup would
be, but nevermind...

Post by M-Wolverine
I can't see how they can be MORE
comfortable (soft material covering your ass vs. something yanking on
your butt). More pleasing to the eye, more stylish or sexy...sure.
Comfortable?

Yup, comfortable. A good, well fitting thong shouldn't yank on anything,
it'll just sit there. First couple of times you wear one it might feel a bit
strange, but you soon get used to it.
Go on, go buy yourself some :oD
Oh, and to whoever brought up the idea of razor blade and ground glass
knickers, thanks, that a concept I didn't even want to dream of *cringe*
Donna

[Joe Bergeron]

Post by Donna Cassidy
Oh, and to whoever brought up the idea of razor blade and ground glass
knickers, thanks, that a concept I didn't even want to dream of *cringe*

Errr...you're welcome... :-(

[David Henry]

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

I know the exact panel you're talking about -- and I read that issue a few
weeks ago.

It was a turnoff to me, too. It's one thing to be "contemporary," but I felt
it was unecessary in this case. It didn't strike me as sleazy, just tacky.
We're talking Supergirl here, not Fever (from Doom Patrol).

Dave

[Johnny Storm]

Post by David Henry

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

I know the exact panel you're talking about -- and I read that issue a few
weeks ago.
It was a turnoff to me, too. It's one thing to be "contemporary," but I felt
it was unecessary in this case. It didn't strike me as sleazy, just tacky.
We're talking Supergirl here, not Fever (from Doom Patrol).
Dave

No offense, but I'm a college campus, and you can't see a girl bend over or
sitting down without seeing her thong. (Though, that usually is a good
thing. . . .)
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.
(Wanna see something scary? Watch a really, really big girl bend over. They
even have really big thongs now. . . .)
I bet you could do a survey right now among females from age 20 to 27, and
almost everyone one of them has at least 2 thongs.
And that's not even taking into consideration the fact that tv makes it seem
even more normal to always wear thongs.
I don't think it's tacky, or was even that unusual until I ran into this
thread. (Had to read the issue again just to see if it really happened. That
is a unusually high riding thong, though, I will give you that.)
Maybe it's different if you're not of the same age as the people usually
wearing the thongs.


Johnny Storm

[Daibhid Ceannaideach]

Post by Johnny Storm
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.

Um...

Post by Johnny Storm
Maybe it's different if you're not of the same age as the people usually
wearing the thongs.

Like, f'rinstance, Lois...

[Johnny Storm]

You have to give Lois a break.
It's not like she's even met the girl yet.
She probably had someone help her get clothes for her too, or at least offer
suggestions to what was in fashion for young people.
All in all, all I'm saying is that in the end, Kara looked dressed like
close to everyone I know on a nice summer day.


Johnny Storm

Post by Daibhid Ceannaideach

Post by Johnny Storm
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.

Um...

Post by Johnny Storm
Maybe it's different if you're not of the same age as the people usually
wearing the thongs.

Like, f'rinstance, Lois...
--
Dave
The Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/sesoc
Fans are great. Fandom is weird.
-Terry Pratchett

[M-Wolverine]

Post by Daibhid Ceannaideach

Post by Johnny Storm
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.

Um...

Post by Johnny Storm
Maybe it's different if you're not of the same age as the people usually
wearing the thongs.

Like, f'rinstance, Lois...

That's just it..."cartoon" supergirl, who's been culturalized more,
and knows what's "in" in society might want one...this Kara would have
no reason to want one, and I don't see Lois picking one for her.

And definitely not Clark.

Chris C.

[badthingus]

Post by Johnny Storm

Post by David Henry

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

I know the exact panel you're talking about -- and I read that issue a few
weeks ago.
It was a turnoff to me, too. It's one thing to be "contemporary," but I

felt

Post by David Henry
it was unecessary in this case. It didn't strike me as sleazy, just tacky.
We're talking Supergirl here, not Fever (from Doom Patrol).
Dave

No offense, but I'm a college campus, and you can't see a girl bend over or
sitting down without seeing her thong. (Though, that usually is a good
thing. . . .)
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.
(Wanna see something scary? Watch a really, really big girl bend over. They
even have really big thongs now. . . .)
I bet you could do a survey right now among females from age 20 to 27, and
almost everyone one of them has at least 2 thongs.
And that's not even taking into consideration the fact that tv makes it seem
even more normal to always wear thongs.
I don't think it's tacky, or was even that unusual until I ran into this
thread. (Had to read the issue again just to see if it really happened. That
is a unusually high riding thong, though, I will give you that.)
Maybe it's different if you're not of the same age as the people usually
wearing the thongs.

No, I see them all the time myself (and I'm old enough to remember
when it was daring). But I'm also so old that I'm disturbed to see
them on little Kara Zor-El. It's like seeing Clark Kent in a baggy
jeans. I like those in Superman family to be nice and conservative.
Now if Black Canary or Catwoman was wearing them, I wouldn't blink.

[Michael S. Schiffer]

Post by badthingus
...
No, I see them all the time myself (and I'm old enough to
remember when it was daring). But I'm also so old that I'm
disturbed to see them on little Kara Zor-El. It's like seeing
Clark Kent in a baggy jeans. I like those in Superman family to
be nice and conservative.
...

Since the Kara Zor-El of my formative years was the one in the hot
pants and low neckline, my expectations are a little different. I
haven't seen the current outfit, so I can't judge it, but
"conservative" isn't something I associate with Kara's style. (Even
her first costume was, I think, pushing the normal 50's range with
its tight top, bare legs and short skirt, and in the early 70s she
was experimenting with thigh-high boots and strategic cutouts. See,
e.g., <http://superman.ws/supergirl/costumes/>.)

Mike

[CleV]

On 29 Apr 2004 20:04:18 GMT, "Michael S. Schiffer"

Post by Michael S. Schiffer

Post by badthingus
...
No, I see them all the time myself (and I'm old enough to
remember when it was daring). But I'm also so old that I'm
disturbed to see them on little Kara Zor-El. It's like seeing
Clark Kent in a baggy jeans. I like those in Superman family to
be nice and conservative.
...

Since the Kara Zor-El of my formative years was the one in the hot
pants and low neckline, my expectations are a little different. I
haven't seen the current outfit, so I can't judge it, but
"conservative" isn't something I associate with Kara's style. (Even
her first costume was, I think, pushing the normal 50's range with
its tight top, bare legs and short skirt, and in the early 70s she
was experimenting with thigh-high boots and strategic cutouts. See,
e.g., <http://superman.ws/supergirl/costumes/>.)

The one with the cut-outs is SO Cockrum!

[Patrick McClue]

Post by CleV
On 29 Apr 2004 20:04:18 GMT, "Michael S. Schiffer"

Post by Michael S. Schiffer

Post by badthingus
...
No, I see them all the time myself (and I'm old enough to
remember when it was daring). But I'm also so old that I'm
disturbed to see them on little Kara Zor-El. It's like seeing
Clark Kent in a baggy jeans. I like those in Superman family to
be nice and conservative.
...

Since the Kara Zor-El of my formative years was the one in the hot
pants and low neckline, my expectations are a little different. I
haven't seen the current outfit, so I can't judge it, but
"conservative" isn't something I associate with Kara's style. (Even
her first costume was, I think, pushing the normal 50's range with
its tight top, bare legs and short skirt, and in the early 70s she
was experimenting with thigh-high boots and strategic cutouts. See,
e.g., <http://superman.ws/supergirl/costumes/>.)

The one with the cut-outs is SO Cockrum!

:-) Yeah. Change the colors and the cape and you will be pretty close to
Storm's first costume. Is this costume the one Kara got from Diana's
boutique?

Patrick

[Edward McArdle]

Another thought - the reason given that young women should not wear sexy
clothing is that they lay themselves open to sexual harassment.

This is not a problem for Supergirl.

[badthingus]

Post by Michael S. Schiffer

Post by badthingus
...
No, I see them all the time myself (and I'm old enough to
remember when it was daring). But I'm also so old that I'm
disturbed to see them on little Kara Zor-El. It's like seeing
Clark Kent in a baggy jeans. I like those in Superman family to
be nice and conservative.
...

Since the Kara Zor-El of my formative years was the one in the hot
pants and low neckline, my expectations are a little different. I
haven't seen the current outfit, so I can't judge it, but
"conservative" isn't something I associate with Kara's style. (Even
her first costume was, I think, pushing the normal 50's range with
its tight top, bare legs and short skirt, and in the early 70s she
was experimenting with thigh-high boots and strategic cutouts. See,
e.g., <http://superman.ws/supergirl/costumes/>.)
Mike

In other words, they've always dressed her for shit. Thanks for
helping me remove the rose colored glasses.

[Michael S. Schiffer]

Post by badthingus

Post by Michael S. Schiffer

Post by badthingus
...
No, I see them all the time myself (and I'm old enough to
remember when it was daring). But I'm also so old that I'm
disturbed to see them on little Kara Zor-El. It's like
seeing Clark Kent in a baggy jeans. I like those in Superman
family to be nice and conservative.
...

Since the Kara Zor-El of my formative years was the one in the
hot pants and low neckline, my expectations are a little
different. I haven't seen the current outfit, so I can't judge
it, but "conservative" isn't something I associate with Kara's
style. (Even her first costume was, I think, pushing the
normal 50's range with its tight top, bare legs and short
skirt, and in the early 70s she was experimenting with
thigh-high boots and strategic cutouts. See, e.g.,
<http://superman.ws/supergirl/costumes/>.)

In other words, they've always dressed her for shit. Thanks for
helping me remove the rose colored glasses.

Or, alternatively, women's fashions generally fluctuate to a
greater extent than men's, and Supergirl has generally varied her
costume accordingly. It's not as if either Super-costume is modest
by everyday standards. (Superman's outfit may not show any skin,
but even most men approaching his physique don't generally dress in
anything that form-fitting.) Superman's costume comes off as
conservative because he's worn it (with minor variations) since
1938, not because it's conservative relative to what people
actually wear on a day-to-day basis.

That said, I personally feel nostalgic for the older costumes, and
would be just as happy to see a character in one of the classic
looks. But that would be a deliberately retro decision, not really
in keeping with the way the pre-Crisis Kara's style evolved.

(Alan Moore, unsurprisingly, had some fun with the contrast between
his Supergirl pastiche Suprema's personality and her costume
choices.)

Mike

[Brad]

Post by Michael S. Schiffer
(Alan Moore, unsurprisingly, had some fun with the contrast between
his Supergirl pastiche Suprema's personality and her costume
choices.)

That's a couple of references to Suprema in this current discussion.

I've never purchased many issues of Supreme but I would have - I think -
scanned most of them over the past decade or two in the various comic
shops, yet I don't remember very many - less than a handful? - which had
Suprema.

If there was a regular run on Suprema could someone give me an idea
of the comics/issues in which she appeared? Or references to material
on same?

Thanks,


Brad

P.S. I also think the art in Superman/Batman #9 is distinctly unattractive -
Kara's eyes, particularly, looks like she's a rabbit staring into headlights -
and agree that she could have been drawn a lot better. But I'm old fashioned -
or nostalgic - too.

[CleV]

Post by Brad

Post by Michael S. Schiffer
(Alan Moore, unsurprisingly, had some fun with the contrast between
his Supergirl pastiche Suprema's personality and her costume
choices.)

That's a couple of references to Suprema in this current discussion.
I've never purchased many issues of Supreme but I would have - I think -
scanned most of them over the past decade or two in the various comic
shops, yet I don't remember very many - less than a handful? - which had
Suprema.
If there was a regular run on Suprema could someone give me an idea
of the comics/issues in which she appeared? Or references to material
on same?

IIRC, Suprema appeared in almost every issue of Supreme after her
introduction. Additionally, she was a member of Alan Moore's version
of Youngblood which ended after two issues (beause of disagreements
with Liefeld? problems with Awesome?) and the third issue was
published as Awesome Adventures.

Gah, I miss Alan Moore's Supremeverse.

[Michael S. Schiffer]

Post by CleV
...

Post by Brad
If there was a regular run on Suprema could someone give me an
idea of the comics/issues in which she appeared? Or references
to material on same?

IIRC, Suprema appeared in almost every issue of Supreme after
her introduction. Additionally, she was a member of Alan
Moore's version of Youngblood which ended after two issues
(beause of disagreements with Liefeld? problems with Awesome?)
and the third issue was published as Awesome Adventures.

Also in "Judgment Day", which introduced the revamped Youngblood. As
Youngblood was getting organized, Suprema and Doc Rocket did a fair
amount of sniping at each other over, among other things, their
costume choices. ("Suprema, you know, when you fly, people can see
up your skirt." "Well, your... *bosoms*... bounce when you run!")

Mike

[M-Wolverine]

Post by Michael S. Schiffer

Post by badthingus

Post by Michael S. Schiffer

Post by badthingus
...
No, I see them all the time myself (and I'm old enough to
remember when it was daring). But I'm also so old that I'm
disturbed to see them on little Kara Zor-El. It's like
seeing Clark Kent in a baggy jeans. I like those in Superman
family to be nice and conservative.
...

Since the Kara Zor-El of my formative years was the one in the
hot pants and low neckline, my expectations are a little
different. I haven't seen the current outfit, so I can't judge
it, but "conservative" isn't something I associate with Kara's
style. (Even her first costume was, I think, pushing the
normal 50's range with its tight top, bare legs and short
skirt, and in the early 70s she was experimenting with
thigh-high boots and strategic cutouts. See, e.g.,
<http://superman.ws/supergirl/costumes/>.)

In other words, they've always dressed her for shit. Thanks for
helping me remove the rose colored glasses.

Or, alternatively, women's fashions generally fluctuate to a
greater extent than men's, and Supergirl has generally varied her
costume accordingly. It's not as if either Super-costume is modest
by everyday standards. (Superman's outfit may not show any skin,
but even most men approaching his physique don't generally dress in
anything that form-fitting.) Superman's costume comes off as
conservative because he's worn it (with minor variations) since
1938, not because it's conservative relative to what people
actually wear on a day-to-day basis.
That said, I personally feel nostalgic for the older costumes, and
would be just as happy to see a character in one of the classic
looks. But that would be a deliberately retro decision, not really
in keeping with the way the pre-Crisis Kara's style evolved.

Looking at the page...you can't beat the original...

Chris C.

[Hidalgo]

Post by badthingus

Post by Michael S. Schiffer

Post by badthingus
...
No, I see them all the time myself (and I'm old enough to
remember when it was daring). But I'm also so old that I'm
disturbed to see them on little Kara Zor-El. It's like seeing
Clark Kent in a baggy jeans. I like those in Superman family to
be nice and conservative.
...

Since the Kara Zor-El of my formative years was the one in the hot
pants and low neckline, my expectations are a little different. I
haven't seen the current outfit, so I can't judge it, but
"conservative" isn't something I associate with Kara's style. (Even
her first costume was, I think, pushing the normal 50's range with
its tight top, bare legs and short skirt, and in the early 70s she
was experimenting with thigh-high boots and strategic cutouts. See,
e.g., <http://superman.ws/supergirl/costumes/>.)
Mike

In other words, they've always dressed her for shit. Thanks for
helping me remove the rose colored glasses.

In my humble opinion, the best ever Supergirl costume as in "Elseworld's
Finest".

[David Henry]

Post by badthingus

Post by Johnny Storm

Post by David Henry

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way.

Not

Post by badthingus

Post by Johnny Storm

Post by David Henry

Post by badthingus
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

I know the exact panel you're talking about -- and I read that issue a few
weeks ago.
It was a turnoff to me, too. It's one thing to be "contemporary," but I

felt

Post by David Henry
it was unecessary in this case. It didn't strike me as sleazy, just tacky.
We're talking Supergirl here, not Fever (from Doom Patrol).
Dave

No offense, but I'm a college campus, and you can't see a girl bend over or
sitting down without seeing her thong. (Though, that usually is a good
thing. . . .)
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.
(Wanna see something scary? Watch a really, really big girl bend over. They
even have really big thongs now. . . .)
I bet you could do a survey right now among females from age 20 to 27, and
almost everyone one of them has at least 2 thongs.
And that's not even taking into consideration the fact that tv makes it seem
even more normal to always wear thongs.
I don't think it's tacky, or was even that unusual until I ran into this
thread. (Had to read the issue again just to see if it really happened. That
is a unusually high riding thong, though, I will give you that.)
Maybe it's different if you're not of the same age as the people usually
wearing the thongs.

No, I see them all the time myself (and I'm old enough to remember
when it was daring). But I'm also so old that I'm disturbed to see
them on little Kara Zor-El. It's like seeing Clark Kent in a baggy
jeans. I like those in Superman family to be nice and conservative.
Now if Black Canary or Catwoman was wearing them, I wouldn't blink.

That's the point I was trying to make. Supergirl is part of DC's royal
family, so to speak. I would see the Supers dressing more conservatively, as
you put it.

Dave

[Hidalgo]

Post by Johnny Storm

Post by David Henry

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

I know the exact panel you're talking about -- and I read that issue a few
weeks ago.
It was a turnoff to me, too. It's one thing to be "contemporary," but I

felt

Post by David Henry
it was unecessary in this case. It didn't strike me as sleazy, just tacky.
We're talking Supergirl here, not Fever (from Doom Patrol).
Dave

No offense, but I'm a college campus, and you can't see a girl bend over or
sitting down without seeing her thong. (Though, that usually is a good
thing. . . .)
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.

Sorry to say, you're right.

Post by Johnny Storm
(Wanna see something scary? Watch a really, really big girl bend over. They
even have really big thongs now. . . .)
I bet you could do a survey right now among females from age 20 to 27, and
almost everyone one of them has at least 2 thongs.

The really scary thing is women twice that age probably do too....

[M.O.R]

Post by Johnny Storm

Post by David Henry

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

I know the exact panel you're talking about -- and I read that issue a few
weeks ago.
It was a turnoff to me, too. It's one thing to be "contemporary," but I

felt

Post by David Henry
it was unecessary in this case. It didn't strike me as sleazy, just tacky.
We're talking Supergirl here, not Fever (from Doom Patrol).
Dave

No offense, but I'm a college campus, and you can't see a girl bend over or
sitting down without seeing her thong. (Though, that usually is a good
thing. . . .)
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.
(Wanna see something scary? Watch a really, really big girl bend over. They
even have really big thongs now. . . .)
I bet you could do a survey right now among females from age 20 to 27, and
almost everyone one of them has at least 2 thongs.
And that's not even taking into consideration the fact that tv makes it seem
even more normal to always wear thongs.
I don't think it's tacky, or was even that unusual until I ran into this
thread. (Had to read the issue again just to see if it really happened. That
is a unusually high riding thong, though, I will give you that.)
Maybe it's different if you're not of the same age as the people usually
wearing the thongs.

Actually, (and rather disgustingly, I might add) I heard on a radio station
talkshow, that girls as young as 12 ( that's not a typo) are wearing thongs.
Ewww, I know.

MOR

[Edward McArdle]

Post by Johnny Storm
No offense, but I'm a college campus, and you can't see a girl bend over or
sitting down without seeing her thong. (Though, that usually is a good
thing. . . .)
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.
(Wanna see something scary? Watch a really, really big girl bend over. They
even have really big thongs now. . . .)
I bet you could do a survey right now among females from age 20 to 27, and
almost everyone one of them has at least 2 thongs.
And that's not even taking into consideration the fact that tv makes it seem
even more normal to always wear thongs.
I don't think it's tacky, or was even that unusual until I ran into this
thread. (Had to read the issue again just to see if it really happened. That
is a unusually high riding thong, though, I will give you that.)
Maybe it's different if you're not of the same age as the people usually
wearing the thongs.
Johnny Storm

Talking of fashions, all the younger girls are wearing the tops which
don't reach their shorts or jeans. Do they realise that this fashion
makes *nearly everyone* look fat??

[Janus]

Post by Edward McArdle
Talking of fashions, all the younger girls are wearing the tops which
don't reach their shorts or jeans. Do they realise that this fashion
makes *nearly everyone* look fat??

I wish they would. Suprisingly, most girls have good abs (no fat folds),
even when thier waist/hips/butt are all ...uhm...plump.

[M-Wolverine]

Post by Edward McArdle

Post by Johnny Storm
No offense, but I'm a college campus, and you can't see a girl bend over or
sitting down without seeing her thong. (Though, that usually is a good
thing. . . .)
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.
(Wanna see something scary? Watch a really, really big girl bend over. They
even have really big thongs now. . . .)
I bet you could do a survey right now among females from age 20 to 27, and
almost everyone one of them has at least 2 thongs.
And that's not even taking into consideration the fact that tv makes it seem
even more normal to always wear thongs.
I don't think it's tacky, or was even that unusual until I ran into this
thread. (Had to read the issue again just to see if it really happened. That
is a unusually high riding thong, though, I will give you that.)
Maybe it's different if you're not of the same age as the people usually
wearing the thongs.
Johnny Storm

Talking of fashions, all the younger girls are wearing the tops which
don't reach their shorts or jeans. Do they realise that this fashion
makes *nearly everyone* look fat??

You're haning around the wrong young girls...

Uh,...nevermind...

Chris C. ;)

[M-Wolverine]

Post by Edward McArdle

Post by Johnny Storm
No offense, but I'm a college campus, and you can't see a girl bend over or
sitting down without seeing her thong. (Though, that usually is a good
thing. . . .)
It isn't even really contemporary, it's just a fact of life now.
(Wanna see something scary? Watch a really, really big girl bend over. They
even have really big thongs now. . . .)
I bet you could do a survey right now among females from age 20 to 27, and
almost everyone one of them has at least 2 thongs.
And that's not even taking into consideration the fact that tv makes it seem
even more normal to always wear thongs.
I don't think it's tacky, or was even that unusual until I ran into this
thread. (Had to read the issue again just to see if it really happened. That
is a unusually high riding thong, though, I will give you that.)
Maybe it's different if you're not of the same age as the people usually
wearing the thongs.
Johnny Storm

Talking of fashions, all the younger girls are wearing the tops which
don't reach their shorts or jeans. Do they realise that this fashion
makes *nearly everyone* look fat??

You're hanging around the wrong young girls...

Uh,...nevermind...

Chris C. ;)

[arnold kim]

Post by David Henry

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

I know the exact panel you're talking about -- and I read that issue a few
weeks ago.
It was a turnoff to me, too. It's one thing to be "contemporary," but I felt
it was unecessary in this case. It didn't strike me as sleazy, just tacky.
We're talking Supergirl here, not Fever (from Doom Patrol).

Kara Zor-El's costumes from the 70s onward had always been fairly sexy and
revealing, though. Supergirl as eye candy is far from a new concept. Not
sure why anyone's getting up in arms about this, since she's just dressing
exactly like other girls her age.

Tacky? Tacky's the headband she wore in the early 80s. Yeah, yeah, in
honor of Krypton and everything, but damn it, she looked like she stepped
out of a Go-Go's concert.

Arnold Kim

[M-Wolverine]

Post by arnold kim

Post by David Henry

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way. Not
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

I know the exact panel you're talking about -- and I read that issue a few
weeks ago.
It was a turnoff to me, too. It's one thing to be "contemporary," but I

felt

Post by David Henry
it was unecessary in this case. It didn't strike me as sleazy, just tacky.
We're talking Supergirl here, not Fever (from Doom Patrol).

Kara Zor-El's costumes from the 70s onward had always been fairly sexy and
revealing, though. Supergirl as eye candy is far from a new concept. Not
sure why anyone's getting up in arms about this, since she's just dressing
exactly like other girls her age.

I don't think most people are complaining about the scandal of it, so
to speak, but the fact that she's Kryptonian, and probably had Lois
buy her clothes. Once she becomes a more earthling-like teen, I don't
think anyone would bat an eye...

Chris C.

And sorry if there's a double post above...I tried to fix a typo
before it sent, but I don't think it worked...

[arnold kim]

Post by M-Wolverine

Post by arnold kim

Post by David Henry

Post by badthingus
I know it's because I'm a sad, old geek, but seeing Kara Zor-El
dressing like Britney Spears with the low-slung jeans and the
undoubtedly thong underwear showing just rubbed me the wrong way.

Not

Post by M-Wolverine

Post by arnold kim

Post by David Henry

Post by badthingus
to mention we're told that Lois actually bought the clothes for her.
Would Lois actually encourage Clark's fresh-off-the-boat cousin to
dress that way. Did she see the other young girls dress that way and
decide to emulate them. And I can't imagine Clark wouldn't do
everything possible to stop her.
Sigh. I'm sure if I were 15 I'd love it, but I'm not so I don't.

I know the exact panel you're talking about -- and I read that issue a few
weeks ago.
It was a turnoff to me, too. It's one thing to be "contemporary," but I

felt

Post by David Henry
it was unecessary in this case. It didn't strike me as sleazy, just tacky.
We're talking Supergirl here, not Fever (from Doom Patrol).

Kara Zor-El's costumes from the 70s onward had always been fairly sexy and
revealing, though. Supergirl as eye candy is far from a new concept.

Not

Post by M-Wolverine

Post by arnold kim
sure why anyone's getting up in arms about this, since she's just dressing
exactly like other girls her age.

I don't think most people are complaining about the scandal of it, so
to speak, but the fact that she's Kryptonian, and probably had Lois
buy her clothes. Once she becomes a more earthling-like teen, I don't
think anyone would bat an eye...

One of my main problems with the issue is that she's already become a more
earthling-like teen _very_ quickly. Not the fact that she became fluent in
English in less than a month, but the fact that she's picked up on human
teenage behavioral cues so easily. Maybe this is why I didn't have a
problem with the thong- she already seemed like such an Americanized
teenager already that the thong never really stood out (Well, maybe in a
good way...:)).

Arnold Kim

[Dennis Kuhn]

Post by arnold kim
Kara Zor-El's costumes from the 70s onward had always been fairly sexy and
revealing, though. Supergirl as eye candy is far from a new concept. Not
sure why anyone's getting up in arms about this, since she's just dressing
exactly like other girls her age.
Tacky? Tacky's the headband she wore in the early 80s. Yeah, yeah, in
honor of Krypton and everything, but damn it, she looked like she stepped
out of a Go-Go's concert.

I can't speak for the rest of the participants in the thread, but my
basic problem with it is that this particular example doesn't make
sense. The writer included dialogue explaining that Lois had picked
out the clothing, and said clothing was much sexier than Lois can be
perceived to have chosen.

By the time Supergirl got to the point of hot pants and V-neck
cleavage, she'd been on Earth for several years, even decades. By
that time, yes, she can logically pick her own clothes and change her
costume to suit a whim because she's been on the planet for years.

The very first Supergirl costume was a contemporary adaptation of
Superman's. While the skirt may seem a bit short in hindsight (erm,
so to speak), I don't know that it got the same reaction that the
current Batman/Superman outfit elicited.

In the new issue of Wizard magazine, I saw a bit of text implying that
the artist currently working on Batman/Superman is apparently
semi-famous for his fondness for drawing sexy women. In my opinion,
the artist went with his personal tastes rather than the script when
it came to choosing her thong-style clothing.

As far as artists famous for drawing sexy women goes... call me
old-fashioned, but I prefer Adam Hughes to this guy's style. :)

Dennis

[Michael S. Schiffer]

Post by Dennis Kuhn
...
I can't speak for the rest of the participants in the thread,
but my basic problem with it is that this particular example
doesn't make sense. The writer included dialogue explaining
that Lois had picked out the clothing, and said clothing was
much sexier than Lois can be perceived to have chosen.

Well, I still haven't seen it, so I can't really comment. However,
if it's anything like what she's shown as wearing on the cover of
S/B #12 (<http://shorterlink.com/?DX7S43>) then I grant that it
seems more than a bit extreme.

(And anyway, orange cloaks with claws hanging from them are *so*
over, and Lois should know that. :-) )

Mike

[Glenn Simpson]

What does she thing? Does she thing well?

Is it more of a pop thong or a rap thong or what?