Female Redesigns

[薔薇語]

As to the Zartana outfit issue, I am with Tasha. While it doesn't bother me in the slightest to see her in heels and fishnets, it is a bit out of step with modern magicians. Just take a look at almost any modern male or female act. Most wear fancy business attire and rely more on a since of regal elegance than sexual appeal. Pretty much only the 'help' dresses to be flashy, seductive or otherwise eye catching. And Zartana isn't 'the magician's assistant'.

 

 

As a reference to the modern look, watch a Penn and Teller show called 'fool us'. Another popular female performer who does push the sexy angle is Magic Babe Ning. Even then, she does a lot of her act fully clothed (tight leather pants and all).

 

 

Foreign Orchid.

[Tasha]

Wow I can't even start to get my head around how Comic misrepresents what the Artist said. Ingvard said that he doesn't understand why women aren't more annoyed with the way comics depicted women. He wondered why that rage wasn't white hot and compared that rage with what the rioters in Fergeson might be feeling. He never said that women should riot or anything like that. He offered the designs to start discussions between fans hopefully with publishers watching, about how women are depicted in comics. He's not the first to do this, he won't be the last. I am not really even sure that I like any of the designs, but he does have the right to draw them and post them on his website(s). With the backlash one would think that he committed a crime by redesigning characters that are constantly being redesigned and rebuilt for each generation of reader.

 

This is the quote that every site that reposted his artwork put as the lead-in to the artwork.

 

"I love comics and superheroes as much as the next nerd, but the women’s costumes—sweet mother of Moses!—the COSTUMES. At the very least, highly impractical. And at worst, incredibly sexist. I mean, EXTREMELY so. Honestly, I don’t know why women haven’t been a lot more angry and vocal about this kind of thing over the years. Like “Ferguson riot” angry. Don’t get me wrong, I believe that expressing one’s sexuality is a natural, healthy thing, and certainly not something to be censured or shamed, but holly hammer of Thor, there’s a time and a place for everything!

That being said, I just had to take a shot at addressing the most obvious problems. Now, I am not by any means an experienced or accomplished character designer. I am not suggesting these costume re-designs are ideal, or even very good. My main goal was to at least TRY to approach the subject of female superheroes with the degree of logic, equality, and respect they—and their readers—deserve."

[Ragitsu]

"and the time and place is when WE say it is."

[Comic]

Wow I can't even start to get my head around how Comic misrepresents what the Artist said. Ingvard said that he doesn't understand why women aren't more annoyed with the way comics depicted women. He wondered why that rage wasn't white hot and compared that rage with what the rioters in Fergeson might be feeling. He never said that women should riot or anything like that. He offered the designs to start discussions between fans hopefully with publishers watching, about how women are depicted in comics. He's not the first to do this, he won't be the last. I am not really even sure that I like any of the designs, but he does have the right to draw them and post them on his website(s). With the backlash one would think that he committed a crime by redesigning characters that are constantly being redesigned and rebuilt for each generation of reader.

 

This is the quote that every site that reposted his artwork put as the lead-in to the artwork.

 

"I love comics and superheroes as much as the next nerd, but the women’s costumes—sweet mother of Moses!—the COSTUMES. At the very least, highly impractical. And at worst, incredibly sexist. I mean, EXTREMELY so. Honestly, I don’t know why women haven’t been a lot more angry and vocal about this kind of thing over the years. Like “Ferguson riot” angry. Don’t get me wrong, I believe that expressing one’s sexuality is a natural, healthy thing, and certainly not something to be censured or shamed, but holly hammer of Thor, there’s a time and a place for everything!

 

That being said, I just had to take a shot at addressing the most obvious problems. Now, I am not by any means an experienced or accomplished character designer. I am not suggesting these costume re-designs are ideal, or even very good. My main goal was to at least TRY to approach the subject of female superheroes with the degree of logic, equality, and respect they—and their readers—deserve."

 

It's as if we're looking at two different quotes, though we read the exact same words.

 

Lord Ingvard wasn't writing in the mainstream media, or speaking to a polite crowd at some bookstore; the audience was the Internet, and on the Internet, incendiary words turn to flames in a microsecond.

 

I stand by the accusation that this represents a call to, or threat of, violence against artists, given its context. It sure as heck can't be seen as a call to reasoned discourse or inclusivity.

 

It's not, very "Can't we all get together?" .. by saying "..TRY to approach the subject of female superheroes with the degree of logic, equality, and respect they—and their readers—deserve,"  Lord Ingvard was saying "TRY to approach the subject of female superheroes with the degree of  MY logic, MY level of equality, and MY level respect they—and their readers—deserve as I tell them it."

 

Sure, the intentions seem wonderful. They seem great. But that conversation, it already started. It started years before the earliest comic book art. It happened during the production and sale of Wonder Woman, and of every comic book since, with portrayals of characters as diverse as Aunt May through Harley Quinn. It's not a new conversation, and Lord Ingvard acting as if it had never happened is either disingenuous or deceptive. The discussion has already started. Publishers are keenly aware of it.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexism_in_comics is not a perfect treatment of the subject, rife with strong opinion (as this topic is bound to become)

and occasional lapses in objectivity (and with good reason -- actual sexism off the page at every level in comics is shameful, and ought be talked about and done something -- nonviolent -- effective about), but it goes a long way to balancing Lord Ingvard's naive new discovery of the topic on the page by presenting actual facts and history.

 

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/humanrights/2015/02/02/comics-and-human-rights-a-change-is-gonna-come-women-in-the-superhero-genre/ is far better, I think, a treatment of the topic.

 

"Traditionally, men in comics have been physically idealized, aspirational and empowered: a fantasy of what boys could become. Women in superhero comics are the other side of that fantasy. While men occupy the position of the ideal subject, women are not only idealized, but sexualized and objectified. If male characters are representative of what readers would like to be, the female characters are who they would like to be with; or, commonly, what they would like to possess. If the men possess extraordinary agency, women are receptors for that agency, waiting to be acted upon. Every difference between the traditional expressions of gender is heightened and refined. The relationships between superheroes operate within a fantasy space, following rules and conventions that accentuate the privilege of male characters and make their entitlement seem natural and inevitable." - Kate Leth

 

Now, not a single one of those important actual issues is touched by de-idealizing the images of women, which is _ALL_ Lord Ingvald did by redrawing them in prison overalls with prison haircuts. Well, not all. We also see surgical nips and tucks of the offending anatomies, too. Which Gail Simone also talks about, under the general topic of fridging. And if you don't think she's white hot, Ferguson-style riot, mad about it, you haven't read her work.

 

Are the two sides of the artist's pen connected?

 

Clearly, but in ways Lord Ingvard's heavy hammer of coveralls and cut hair don't capture. As many female hands pick up pencils and draw as male, at age five; yet one in a dozen get their works published, ever, in the mainstream while Indie's and web comics are at par. That's overtly sexist on hard numbers.

 

Nor are comic books alone among the fields of visual arts with the same historical and obvious biases. But when in history we see someone saying about art galleries what Lord Ingvard says about comic books -- I don't know why you're not so angry about it you haven't rioted, here's how those should look, and shame on the artists for doing otherwise -- we've seen terrible results that also do no good for balancing sexism, merely replacing it with oppression.

 

If Lord Ingvard (and I don't know nor do I think it matters if Lord Ingvard is male or female) had wanted an inclusive discussion that moved the needle on this long ongoing dialogue, then maybe not going the whole get madder route -- like there isn't enough righteous outrage every time we talk about it in the wider world or here -- and maybe asking what people believe is logic, is equality, and is respect instead of imposing it might have worked better. Maybe reading some of the works of some of the women (and men) in the field who have written about this before over the decades and acknowledging how long a road the discussion has traveled before?

 

Maybe not restarting us all at square one, and setting us back to the 1950's?

 

Maybe starting us at the Hawkeye Project at least? http://io9.com/10-stupid-arguments-people-use-to-defend-comic-book-sex-1636381824 shows that this isn't the first time the same stupid things have been said (many of them sound just similar enough to things I've said to make me cringe) on one side or the other of the discussion, and it exactly hits Lord Ingvard's objections with humor, balance and insight.

 

As suggestions, some of Lord Ingvard's drawings aren't so different from some of the drawings already out there.. by the publishers themselves, who very obviously have been listening long before Lord Ingvard heard of the issue. Tarring all their work with the same brush fails to recognize the distinctions that have mattered, and the changes that have been made.

 

And it's just as authoritarian a tyranny as the boys' club ever saw, the way Lord Ingvard did it.

[Christopher R Taylor]

I've never met a female comic book fan in real life yet who thought the women should change their outfits any more than the guys should.  I mean, Colossus's costume was suspenders and shorts for decades.

 

What people idealize and image their ultimate example of is very subjective.  Some think of Superman, others Wolverine, still others Batman, etc.  Same thing with women; some want hawt and stacked, some want smart, some want athletic, etc.

 

I don't mind changing costumes etc.  I mind doing it to check off boxes for a select group of easily offended groups.  Do it for story and design, not to appease some people.

[TheQuestionMan]

Provocative Clothing. Living in Vancouver, B.C. I travel to work on the bus every morning. I wear a uniform to work. Make my fashion choices limited.

 

The women around me wear every style imaginable. Now I have no right to judge a person by what they wear, but they should have no right to jiudge me on how I silently react to what they are wearing.

 

Far too many people wear clothing that is so tight a Gynecologist would not even have to ask them to disrobe.

 

I trained in Martial Arts, served as an Light Infantry Man, and have been involved in a few physical dust ups in my time.

 

IMOHO, tight clothing is beneficial in a fight and preferable in extreme environments.

 

As for skin tight costumes, I always thought that was a result if lazy artists.

 

QM

[Greywind]

As for skin tight costumes, I always thought that was a result if lazy artists.

 

 

If you watch any animated movies, particularly those that are hand-drawn, the characters with the more intricate clothing (requiring more time/effort to render) tend to end up dead.

[Tasha]

while I am not sure that I LIKE the redesigns. There are some styles in there that I do recognize on younger women that I have seen. The Zatanna looks like something that I have seen on the street. Some of the others look similar to some of the redesigns that we are starting to see in some books. The coloring IS drab, it makes the Leather X-men costumes from the first two movies look colorful. I guess I LIKE to see other artists try to draw characters with different looks. See how the artist interprets the characters personality/personna though the costume. He probably misses the mark on more than one of those.

He doesn't work for Marvel or DC, so his designs have zero chance of being adopted by either company. He's just using his his free speech right to draw characters in different clothes. Not much different from what many others have done.

Again I don't understand the hatred that this particular artist has generated. Perhaps people are more mad that he pointed out that women really have a good reason to be annoyed with comics and how women are treated by comic writers and artists. I think there's a fear that change will bring things that they don't like. It is interesting how the author's comments keep being taken out of context with the whole post, to paint him as an extremist. Also it's kind of a stretch to say that he suddenly discovered this issue. From his comments both on his website and in those two paragraphs it sounds like something he has thought about for quite a while. He concieved of the redesigns to continue a conversation that the comics industry is currently exploring. He never says that it's his way or the highway or that people should rise up and trash the big publishers. Just here's my redesigns, lets talk about them.

[massey]

High heels and revealing costumes don't make as much sense on hand to hand fighters, unless they have superpowers.  Wonder Woman and Supergirl can wear whatever they want.  Wonder Woman is magical and can fly.  I don't think high heels are going to be an impediment to her.  I don't think they will harm Zatanna either.  Most of the time she defeats villains with a simple magical spell.  She isn't punching and kicking or anything like that.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Skin tight is used in comics because it looks good, bottom line.  Guys with ripped muscles bulging out of their tights look powerful.

 

Incidentally, I don't get the feeling anyone "hates" the artist.  Just that people are not enthused with his designs for a variety of reasons and suspect his motivations to be more white knighty and driven by checking off special interest boxes than a desire for better costumes.  Maybe that's unfair but it sure seems that way.

[Christopher]

Would that be the spandex CG suit?

 

Iron Man's suit in the movies moves more like fabric than metal. In the latest comics, it's nanothreads packed into his bones, or some such.

 

What can be done in comic books, as works of speculative fiction including magic and advanced technology, and psionics and miracles and mutations is beyond what we have done yet in our world, by the very nature of speculative fiction.

 

So fishnet armor is a work of imagination, not an impracticality.

 

Amazon tube top armor is a creative statement, not fan service. Well, okay, it's both. So what? As if the red briefs over spandex on Kal El isn't? And what about Leonidas in 300? Is he impractical, or not a warrior?

 

If we can accept a Tony Stark in nanofibrous assemblage as Iron Man, why not armor forged by Hephaestus himself that works at least as well?

 

The long hair thing is situational. Go ahead, reach out your hand, and open your fingers, to grasp the queue of a samurai.

 

It'll make counting easier for you. You'll only be able to get up to five afterwards, but did you really know what to do with ten before, if you're dumb enough to match bare flesh against sharp steel?

 

In real street fights, it's seldom what a person's wearing or their haircut that makes the difference. They aren't even in the top ten. And Black Canary is primarily a street-level super.

What they CGI'ed on was the whole damn armor suit.

The stuff he put in his bones was only the undergarment of the armor. The actually armor still was a seperate piece (a suitecase once again). Actually where to put the undergarment had been the issue before he choose the nanotech&hollow bone structure solution.

 

The samurai wore a helmet. AND short hair so that even without helmet you could not grab it.

 

In a real fight you use everything that can get you an advantage. People that only look for the weapon get put off balance by a foot, elbow strike or other move. Long hair falling in your face would just limit your vision and give the enemy more openings to put you off balance.

 

There's no way their hair is all 'combat inefficient' in the same way: Wonder Woman's headwear can severe the arm of a giant; her curls are in no peril of hair pulling. I know I've seen women MMA competitors with hair as long as or longer than many if not most comic book portrayal of female superheroes. These objections seem to me to be holdovers of unschooled prejudice and mythology of martial nonsense: if you're worried about someone grabbing and pulling hair in battle, then all those extra hand holds you're giving them with bulky jackets and armor and belts and waistbands is a dozen times worse.

Might be because hair pulling is not allowed: "Illegal blows were listed as groin strikes, head butting, biting, eye gouging, hair pulling, striking an opponent with an elbow while the opponent is on the mat, kidney strikes, and striking the back of the head with closed fist." - Wikipedia.

Please show us some images of how those long haired female MMA fighters look during matches. Until you do, I asume they proof our point of practicaly more then your point of it being a myth.

 

Or better yet, please don't bring arguments that a short look on Wikipedia can turn into dust. Better yet, look on wikipedia yourself before you post about a thematic. I found it helps a lot with avoiding embarassing mistakes like these.

.

Practicality is only a concern in a fictional universe if you want it to be. All these arguments of "it must be practical" are about as hollow as Casper.

You asume the authors have a real choice in the matter. Few things are as far from the truth. An Artist is only as successfull as how he reacts to his audience.

 

The trend is going towards more realistc superheroes.

Marvel has the advantage of more sensible costume choices already. They were a bit more founded in reality to begin with.

Even recent DC animated movies go away from the impracticalities of the past. Just look at Wonder Woman in Justice League: War and "The throne of atlantis".

[massey]

What they CGI'ed on was the whole damn armor suit.

The stuff he put in his bones was only the undergarment of the armor. The actually armor still was a seperate piece (a suitecase once again). Actually where to put the undergarment had been the issue before he choose the nanotech&hollow bone structure solution.

 

The samurai wore a helmet. AND short hair so that even without helmet you could not grab it.

 

In a real fight you use everything that can get you an advantage. People that only look for the weapon get put off balance by a foot, elbow strike or other move. Long hair falling in your face would just limit your vision and give the enemy more openings to put you off balance.

 

 

1) Superheroes aren't just about combat.

2) Superheroes have built-in advantages (super-powers) that make the need to optimize themselves for combat less pressing.

3) Superheroes engage in non-traditional styles of combat against non-traditional enemies.

 

 

For example, the Scarlet Witch presumably has some training in the martial arts.  I'm sure she can beat up a common street thug with her hands.  However her real strength lies in her hex power, and her knowledge of magic.  If she is fighting an opponent in the comics, she will almost always be using her hex power.  Her martial arts skills are not enough for her to defeat anybody she's likely to face in super-powered combat.  As a result, dressing like a warrior is really not important to her.

 

Example #2:  Supergirl would spend a relatively small amount of her super-heroing time fighting.  Most of the time, she'll be saving people from burning buildings, stopping giant asteroids, rescuing people from floods, etc.  When she does enter combat, most of the villains she will face will be far, far less powerful than she is.  Raw combat ability is already in Supergirl's favor 1000%.  Having loose flowing hair and wearing what is effectively a cheerleader outfit doesn't matter when you can juggle an aircraft carrier, and your opponent can barely rip apart a tank.  You might only fight an opponent of equal ability maybe three or four times in your career (or before the next continuity reboot).  There's very little incentive to dress in combat tactical gear all the time.

 

I can see how Black Canary or Huntress would want to dress in a fist-fighting-friendly costume.  But for most characters it's not nearly as necessary as some people think it is.

[Comic]

Seriously, you think a helmet gives less of a handhold than long hair?

 

You're calling Pics Or It Didn't Happen on some of the most famous people in MMA?

 

Comics are not instruction manuals, how to guides, or compilations of images of real world people and situations.

 

They are story books.

 

Speaking of, the television story books about the blind swordsman, Zatoichi, depicted long-haired samurai much of the time, almost never with helmets. Sure, it's not a completely realistic depiction of how real life in feudal Japan actually went, but it's the creative framework for samurai storytelling that has gone over four decades without anyone complaining about its haircuts.

 

On the whole, I will rely on the Zatoichi creative team as a guideline for samurai fictional haircuts over someone who is telling me about real fights, perhaps not aware that I worked as a doorman for five years and have seen more than a few real fights.

 

Sure, hair pulling can happen, and hair can get in the way, but nothing compared to grabbing jackets (despite what the Batgirl artists say about her new jacket being 'practical'), belts, waistbands, shirt fronts, vests, buckles, and in the case of the extremely rare idiots who get into fights with hats, helmets or face-coverings of some sort, headwear is almost always a bad idea in a one-on-one confrontation where opponents have the time to seek openings and look for advantages. Hair is on the list of openings, sure, but it's way down near the bottom, far below eye gouging and throat punching.

 

And if you're going to grab the hair of Black Canary, who can shatter bones with her voice rather than punch her in the throat, you've made a poor judgment call. For all we know, she's wearing extensions anyway, which in a fight can just come out in the attacker's hand, wasting their time.

 

And again, how is Tony Stark's armor that can transform from a suitcase by changing shape and flying through the air to mesh with his nanosuit supposed to convince us that real world armor is more like comic book creative armor?

 

Let's try to remember what the point is: comic book art is art, not reality; it depicts creative ideas, not the world as it is. Lord Ingvald's approach, in contrast to the usual art even Lord Ingvald produces, is wildly self-limiting to what is possible in the real world, if one is limited to prison wardrobe.

[薔薇語]

Supergirl is in a league far at the top of DC characters. She would have no need for not benefit from the armored outfit. Her opponents could bust through it all with a mere flick of a wrist. It is also less inspiring to the masses if she appears to 'need' armor against even the mundane.

 

But her long hair, cape, and 'loose open bits' are a whole other issue. Darkseide could make use of that beautiful blonde handlebar on her head. Thowing her from side to side with ease. Yeah, she out matches all us norma but we aren't the threats that she ia dressing to stop.

 

Foreign Orchid.

[薔薇語]

Also, as someone who likes the shift from the wildly makebelieve to the tacitly believable, I don't mind seeing most of the characters (male & female) get redesigned. The Nolan Batmans being an example of the style choices I like.

 

Foreign Orchid.

[Netzilla]

 

Might be because hair pulling is not allowed: "Illegal blows were listed as groin strikes, head butting, biting, eye gouging, hair pulling, striking an opponent with an elbow while the opponent is on the mat, kidney strikes, and striking the back of the head with closed fist." - Wikipedia.

 

 

In fact, back in the day when hair-pulling was allowed, you saw hair being grabbed almost every time it was available.  Typically it was used to hold the head in place to make it easier to hit with the other arm (it's hard to bob and weave after someone's grabbed your hair).  It was also used against grapplers in order to make it harder for them to change positions or slip out of a hold. 

 

Yes, jackets, belts, buckles and the like can also be used as good hand-holds (years of Judo and Aikido make me well aware of this), but grabbing these don't immobilize your head in the same way as a hair grab.  An immobilized head is far more dangerous (though there are techniques with grabbing a jacket collar to yank it up over someone's head and immobilize it and obscure vision).  Also, a loose jacket can be shrugged out of.  It's a lot harder to do that with hair.  So, arguing that long hair is irrelevant or (worse yet) practical in a fight doesn't fly. 

 

Arguing that long hair looks cool is a completely different issue.  Since comics are a visual medium and Rule of Cool has primacy, having long hear for ascetic reasons is fairly valid.  I just find the arguments that long hair isn't a detriment in a fight to be a little silly.

 

 

Please show us some images of how those long haired female MMA fighters look during matches. Until you do, I asume they proof our point of practicaly more then your point of it being a myth.

 

 

 

These days long-haired fighters tend to bind their hair up pretty tight.  Cornrows seem to be a popular choice for this as they keep the hair back, don't come loose easily and would be harder to grip (if hair pulling were allowed).

[Christopher R Taylor]

Darkseide could make use of that beautiful blonde handlebar on her head. Thowing her from side to side with ease. 

 

 

Meh, he could do that with her arm, too.  Or her cape, for that matter.

[massey]

Supergirl probably only fights Darkseid once or twice in her career. At least between reboots. She isn't going to dress in preparation for that. Depending on the incarnation, she may also be faster and stronger than him. For a Kryptonian, the danger from Darkseid comes from his Omega Beams, not his fists.

[massey]

And Supergirl is not, in any way, an MMA fighter. She's a teenage girl with incredibly high stats. She's not going to dress, think, or act like an MMA fighter.

[Comic]

So can we list the comic book characters with long hair who might actually be disadvantaged by it in a fight in some meaningful way?

 

Black Canary - moderate length hair, voice that will make someone regret trying to grab her, even if they can overcome her DC-fu top rank martial artistry?

 

Lobo - Long hair, about par with a Kryptonian in physical abilities. Sure, he's not a female. But we're talking about haircuts.

 

Batgirl - that's a wig. Pull it, it comes loose in your hand.

 

Wonder Woman - Vorpal Tiara.

 

Medusa - her hair's alive, and likely stronger than you.

 

SpiderGwen - moderately long hair, but somehow I think you'd regret it. Grab the hood instead. If you can get past her Gwen Sense.

 

Bethany from Next Men - hair quite long, also razor sharp. Grabbing her hair costs you fingers.

 

Thor, Loki, any Asgardian - long to very long hair. Odinson's not called "Goldilocks" for nothing. Don't see their hair hampering them much at all. Oh, hey, a lot of men among that lot. And they fight pretty often.

 

Kitty Pryde - long hair.. Intangible.

 

Phoenix - long hair in most incarnations.. half the power in the Universe.

 

Scarlet Witch - long hair.. powerful enough to wish away 99% of all mutants on a whim.. thereby invoking the Phoenix to restore balance.

 

Daisy Johnson - long hair.. trained in combat by Shield's most lethal agents, and can drop a mountain by looking at it the wrong way. You'd be better off going after Black Canary.

 

She Hulk(s) - long hair, the harder you pull, the stronger she gets.

 

Short haircuts in comic books do not represent pragmatism. They represent repression, done Lord Ingvald's way.

 

And yes, it's true, if in the real world you happen to have an opponent by the head, using their hair to improve your grip is a lot cleaner and less likely to see the charges raised to aggravated battery than using their ears, nose, eye sockets or mouth for the same purpose by digging your fingers in and pushing harder. But then, it only takes a normal men's medium haircut worth of hair, or even a moderately trimmed beard or mustache, to achieve such a grip. On the whole, I'd rather offer a hank of hair than tempt a street fighter to try harder.

 

Comic books are not instruction manuals.

 

What people by and large think of as 'realism' in every generation is laughed at as naive at best by future generations that wise up once they see past the vanities of the prior generation.

 

Lord Ingvald's "practical" designs?

 

Nowhere close.

[wcw43921]

Doesn't Black Canary wear a wig as well?  Or did they change that a retcon or two ago?

[Christopher R Taylor]

Black Lightning used to have a mask with a built-in activist fro, I always thought that was cool.

[Netzilla]

And Supergirl is not, in any way, an MMA fighter. She's a teenage girl with incredibly high stats. She's not going to dress, think, or act like an MMA fighter.

Comic's the one who brought up female mma fighters with long hair, implying that it's not much more of a detriment in real life than in the comics. Christopher was pointing out why they can get away with it (the rules prevent hair grabbing) and I was further pointing out that long hair was a disadvantage when the rules did allow hair pulling. The existence of other hand holds does not negate nor mitigate the dissadvantages of long hair in a fight. Heck, even if no one grabs it, it obscures your own vision if it's left or becomes loose.

 

I don't think either one of us suggested that any superhero, let alone Supergirl specifically, should resemble an mma fighter. In fact I, myself, pointed out that Rule of Cool has primacy of consideration in the comics. So I don't think you need to worry about an mma-isation of Supergirl.

[Netzilla]

So can we list the comic book characters with long hair who might actually be disadvantaged by it in a fight in some meaningful way?

 

 

 

Has anyone here actually argued that no comic book character should ever have long hair? I think the argument has been that hair kept short or tied up is a reasonable choice for any character. Such characters can make that choice, in character, for practical reasons and it's just as valid (personally I think moreso) as Power Girl basing her costume choice on how much it will distract make opponents.

 

 

And yes, it's true, if in the real world you happen to have an opponent by the head, using their hair to improve your grip is a lot cleaner and less likely to see the charges raised to aggravated battery than using their ears, nose, eye sockets or mouth for the same purpose by digging your fingers in and pushing harder. But then, it only takes a normal men's medium haircut worth of hair, or even a moderately trimmed beard or mustache, to achieve such a grip. On the whole, I'd rather offer a hank of hair than tempt a street fighter to try harder.

 

Do you have any idea how hard it is to dig fingers into eyes, nostrils or grab the ear of an aware and resisting opponent? It's considerably harder than grabbing a handful of moderately long hair because eyes, ears and noses are significantly smaller targets that are easier to defend. Punching someone in the eye or nose can be fairly hard, never mind getting a good grip on one.

[Greywind]

Black Lightning used to have a mask with a built-in activist fro, I always thought that was cool.

 

I figured there was a helmet under the spray-on hair.