trevor wrote:Orchard wrote:Female costumes have always made sense
Where as little as possible ? That makes sense in one way (sales), but not so much in practical crime fighting
Orchard wrote:But anyway, we are getting off-topic, and I'm not going to be responsible for another mass-derailing.
It's my thread and I'll derail it if I want to ... Mwuahahahaha !
Well, okay then, but if someone complains, I'll be sending them to you...
And yes, when I said the female costumes made sense, that's exactly what I meant: I knew exactly what was going through the mind of the creator when they were drawn. It was a combination of: "Man is she HAWT!" and "Man this is so going to sell!" I don't think any of the early guys drawing female superheros ever ONCE stopped to think "Man, this is SO impractical".
But what were they thinking when they drew Superman? "Man, I am SO going to wear my underwear like that!" No! They weren't thinking that. They thought, "hmm, needs more red; I know, I'll color this part red--that brightens it up a bit". No one ever had the guts to say, (because this was quite a while a go) "Um mister, he's wearing underwear. Why?" But it doesn't make sense. It wasn't sexy, and they weren't gay. (At least, I don't think they were). And they weren't trying to sell to a female audience. So what was the point?
Oh, and I wasn't asking for the init panel above. I know its in the works, and it'll happen. I was just commenting that it seems to get requested a LOT, despite the fact that it is one thing that we are promised repeatedly. I have patience.
0+0=1, for very unstable CPUs.