Sexism in Comics is Not New--Here's What You Should Do about It

@uniform said:

Well now I feel guilty for owning a poster of the Adam Hughes Power Girl cover. If we're sending the message that we want change by not purchasing the comics that have committed these offenses, that doesn't leave much left for me to read. Oh well, I guess I'll go read ALF.

Why do you feel guilty about owning an AH! poster!? I think people are getting confused between exploitation and over-sexualization vs what is sexy. You can have a character who is sexy, or uses sex appeal or is physically attractive so long as those are not the be and end all of their qualities as a character. There's nothing wrong with Power Girl being sexy in a poster as long as its tastefully executed. You can be strong *and* sexy.

Take two examples from DC's new 52: The problem with Starfire is that she seemed to be completely objectified in 'Outlaws,' by herself, and by her teammates for no valid reason (unless you take into account her character history, but even she doesn't remember what that is), and it read like a negative message to be sending out; not only for female readers, but for a lot of men who read comics as well.

Voodoo #1, for example, (I would argue and some would disagree) is a good interpretation of a character who was strong and sexy. Yes, the story was set in a strip club; but the strip club served merely as the setting. Voodoo is a spy (we find out in the first issue) from an alien planet who is manipulating men "when their defenses are down" in order to garner information from them. There is a reason why she is a stripper,

When I read it I thought, Yes, Voodoo is on a stage stripping; she's exploiting herself. However, she is also exploiting the men who have come to watch her perform because she is not only taking their $$, but she's also stealing high level information from them.

P.S. Detective Jess Fallon is SUCH a badass.

I don't know, this is just how I feel. I never thought that a woman couldn't be strong and sexy; in fact those are the types of books I like to read. I would recommend you go out and get more AH! posters because he's a master when it comes to capturing the essence of a woman's strength and sexiness. Just saying. :)

I agree completely with the sentiments in the post. Yes, those comics some people find exploitative have every right to exist because their readers have every right to have access to them. That doesn't mean I'm forced to read them nor especially to buy them.

The argument I've faced is people telling me "but I love THAT character, I don't want to read a different book." That's limiting yourself as a reader. When reading is a hobby that you enjoy you can choose to read only James Patterson or you can choose to look around and explore and find other authors that have other characters you might not only love as well but prefer.

Thank you, Sara for being level-headed in this unusual time of high emotions in comics.

One step better I think is to try and support indie comic book titles when they do such things as gender balance well. I think DC and Marvel can get confused with attributing success with books, because there are so many different complicated and mixed, clashing, aiding, reasons to attribute success and failure to a book. 

I agree with some points, and I dislike seeing some women being portrayed as they are. On the other hand writers may say scantily clad females such as Starfire are merely empowered. I haven't read of the 52 so I can't really comment on what's going on there, but I see someon female figures as strong, and far superior to many super-men, for example, Ms. Marvel.

I agree with the thoughts on Starfire, I also agree with those who say the exploitation goes both ways.

I do totally think everyone over-reacted with Catwoman though.

@Babs: i hated the fact that she exploited her 7 year old daughter for just a stupid article and she is a little girl and she made her read a T+ book

There is no way in hell i'm not picking up the next "Red Hood and the Outlaws", the book isn't called Starfire's Outlaws, she is not team leader, not babysitting a group of teenagers, and she has no responsibilities, honestly the way she is acting in this book is in noway different from how Jason and Roy are relaxing its like she's one of the guys..(that you can have sex with and it would not be gay)

So what she forgot her past adventures, teammates, and relationships, Roy and Jason are guilty of trying to do the very same thing! but they just suck at it and need to man up if they really want to be Outlaws

I rather enjoy fan service every now and then hate any type of censorship at a artist point of view! I kinda liked Starfire's male mentality as seeing sex as fun, why should we think too much by this issue anyway

I think the point that people are making with Starfire isn't that they have an issue with her having sex with both of them or even.how she was drawn. The thing that people (myself included) have a problem with is that cbined with her complete and utter lack of personality. She came across as hollow and essentially a blow up doll.

Ok, so here's how I see it. Like Babs says if you don't like the way a character is portrayed don't read the book because major publishing companies like DC especially are testing to see what sells if they realize that people aren't buying Catwoman or Red Hood and the outlaws they'll either change things about the books or cancel them all together. Me personally, I was disappointed in the way Starfire was portrayed in Red Hood and the outlaws, but however I did enjoy the title character Red Hood so I'll keep reading and hope something changes as far as Starfire goes, if not maybe I'll write a letter to DC but with there only being one issue I don't think there's a need for that just yet. For all we know Starfire has a plan for taking out Jason and is simply playing dumb to lower his guard. I honestly didn't care for Batman in Batman and robin or Detective comics (Hope I didn't just commit blasphamy there lol) so I decided I simply wont read those titles and maybe DC will get the hint.

I think this is the last time that I'm going to sound off on this whole thing because, to be honest, I'm kind of tired of reading about it, and I'm tired of reading people whine about it on the internet.

This has always existed in comics. Every woman, and every man, in superhero comics wears skintight spandex almost exclusively. Erase the detail of almost any given superhero costume and you've basically got a nude drawing with a domino mask and maybe a cape. When have we ever seen Starfire with a proper amount of clothing on? Never, except for maybe in the Teen Titans cartoon, which was for children.

Also, I've never been a huge fan of the Teen Titans to begin with, so I don't have a ton of fondness for Starfire. As such, I don't have the context of her old character to fit it with her new one. That said, everything I've read the creators and people at DC say about the new characterization of Starfire, makes her characterization in this comic, while one dimensional, still in character. I get that this isn't what her character used to be, but it's what it is now. She was an abused war prisoner and a warrior from a planet that didn't see the point of clothing. This is her character now, so her being cold and distant and just using people for the physical pleasure she gets from sex makes sense for her new character.

Ultimately, this is a character that changed that people are reacting badly to. I get that, I do, but change in comics happens. Getting upset because a character that is mostly naked most of the time is a little more nakeder in this comic is dumb. I don't know why Catwoman using Batman for sex is empowering, but Kory using Roy for sex isn't. People all talk about they way that characters evolve and how it's important. This is the next evolution in Starfire's character. We don't know what happened before she joined up with Jason Todd to make her this way, I'm sure we'll find out. Just be patient.

Until then, if it's a deal breaker, stop reading it, I guess. As for me, I liked the book, so I'll keep reading it. I want to see where these characters go.

I always said it was easier to just find things you do like instead of complaining about things you don't like.

@ HexThis I guess you're just going to ignore the other three names I dropped since they counter your argument. That's five male characters in comics off the top of my head who fight in nothing but their underwear. They would BEG to be allowed to wear as much clothing as psylocke wears into combat. Those were just off the top of my head. If I wanted to, I could come up with dozens more. But I don't really want to spend my afternoon imagining scantily clad muscle men. I'd rather surf the web for lesbian porn quite frankly. And skintight bodysuits are every bit as stripperiffic as bikinis, if not moreso. Bikinis are pretty common place nowadays. Skintight bodysuits just SCREAM fetishwear.

I really was reading this. In the end I really feel that of course there is sexism in comics, sex sells and people want to sell you comics, is it right, well that depends. One hand no of course not you can't depict all your characters as big breast bimbos with a tendency to wear next to nothing. On the other this is fiction and entertainment writers and artist can create visions of whatever they want, not to still this argument but straight talk, The Avengers, Justice Leage and a slew of others had and really even now has no relatable characters for a black comics fan I don't read it plain and simple. You want solid writers and diverse class of characters then stop buying crap let those books get cancelled and bomb those editors letterboxes with your opions or notice of cancelations, at least that's what I think

@knighteagle said:

This is a comment made by the colorist of the Outlaws book:

"Keep reading, you may find there hasn't been any damage done. She's an alien and a sensualist, she has alien views about sex.

She's not an amnesiac, she's a sensualist who experiences life differently than we do. She's an alien. I'm already working on issue 4, and I can assure you she's not portrayed that way in every issue. I hope you will keep reading.

Don't harden your opinion based on one issue, I hope you will keep reading the next 2 issues to finish the story. Issue 4 begins a new chapter with an emphasis on Starfire"

Thats all im going to say

She's a character first,and an established one.Sorry that excuse does'nt work,might as well have Superman acting like a retard.

@entropy_aegis said:

@knighteagle said:

This is a comment made by the colorist of the Outlaws book:

"Keep reading, you may find there hasn't been any damage done. She's an alien and a sensualist, she has alien views about sex.

She's not an amnesiac, she's a sensualist who experiences life differently than we do. She's an alien. I'm already working on issue 4, and I can assure you she's not portrayed that way in every issue. I hope you will keep reading.

Don't harden your opinion based on one issue, I hope you will keep reading the next 2 issues to finish the story. Issue 4 begins a new chapter with an emphasis on Starfire"

Thats all im going to say

She's a character first,and an established one.Sorry that excuse does'nt work,might as well have Superman acting like a retard.

They are going to try it with Supergirl admittedly not with the sex thing though but make her more alien like.

i think most of you have it completely wrong.

Sex is not the issue.

Characterization is.

Female Characterization is just something that people are jumping on because there are groups on both sides that have strong feelings as to the portrayal of women... these group also say, and have other saying, they are all about equality, but the fact that they are looking at only the female characterizations as bad is telling.

What is the problem is actually characterization and that those characters are tied to the marketing to kids or kids view these characters as role models.

Starfire IS a role model and her character is completely off from what it is in all her other books. So when you look at Starfire you see a big glowing problem because her character is wrong and she is setting a bad example and she is a role model that was advertised to kids, whether that was in another medium or not doesn't matter. Tie that along with the fact that she is a female and you got an even bigger negative reaction.

I personally find that Roy Harper, Jason Todd, Clark Kent, Perry White, Lois Lane, Catwoman, Harley Quinn and many others as big or bigger problems, but it's overshadowed by Starfire just being a perfect storm. There is nothing wrong innately with the character. What is wrong is that those characters are not the characters they are telling us they are. It is that there is literally nothing about Jason Todd, Roy Harper, and Starfire that is the characters before the reboot beyond a coat of paint.

I think if you want something to be offended at it should be that DC decided to change 1 characters race... and that one character... He's Satan and now he's black. That in my opinion is offense...like saying that blacks are innately satanic, but hey, that's just me ^.^

@The Stegman said:

nice article, and yes, i really am getting quite annoyed by people complaining over something that's existed since comics themselves, it''s making a mountain out of a mole hill

the fact that you....and I (to an extent) see it as a mole hill just shows how desensitized we've become to it. Just because it's existed since the dawn of time (like many other things) doesn't mean it's not a problem.

I am sorry but I like seeing stacked and packed babes pushing out their goodies for me to leer over and I am not about to stop dling comics for free because they offend feminazis

Thanks for the heads-up. I will not be buying 'Red Hood and the Outlaws.'

@spikevalentine said:

"Sexism" is America's new "Communism" apparently, people just throw around that word without regards of meaning and implication, just as a quick cop-out for the inability to take an art work for what it is.

To start with, we are talking about fictional characters. Really, to think that this is equivalent to rape, sexual harassment, and other real forms of sexism, is to have no regard for the suffering of those who actually suffer it. And by the way, most media, like soaps, also portray me in a "sexist" manner, like men are walking ATM machines, is it a real issue or is it a medium directed to what the female mainstream wants to see? Are we really going to censor fiction just for an unjustified sense of indignation?

My advice, if you don't like it, don't buy it. And if you want to empower the character, write comics, get good at it, and make your stories, and you might even get them published.

It is also laughable to expect this out of a medium that is mostly produced and consumed by male teens and adults (and I am not taking here into consideration the great quasi-feminist works of Joss Whedon, Martin Wagner, Daniel Clowes, Terry Moore, Chris Claremont, Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman... which girls are not seeming to mind).

It's ridiculous to complain about how this fiction is handled, seriously, if you don't like what you are getting, just don't buy it, it's the first rule of consumerism. Why would want to ostracize the medium? Humans are sexual by nature, and believe me, in the history of art, sexuality has played a huge role in an artistic work, not to mention this actually is very conservative in comparisson (no that that is any sort of merit).

Sexually progressive cultures gave us mathematics, literature, philosophy, civilization and the rest, while sexually restrictive cultures gave us the Dark Ages and the Holocaust. -Alan Moore

Very well stated. I completely agree. At to be honest, I agree with Babs. The cheesecake elements of comics don't bother me at all and I am not going to avoid a comic because some character is sexually idealized. But I'm not going to go looking for Red Hood just to ogle Starfire either.

The bottom line here is that we have come to a point where everyone takes everything way too seriously. This morning I read an article that PETA was complaining about an ad that showed a raw chicken posed in a 'pin-up' position. They said it was OFFENSIVE. In fact, every day there is some new issue where someone is OFFENDED by some innocuous thing.

To me, politically we should rename the two sides of the isle. We say conservatives and liberals, but 'liberals' in this nation are so conservative they demand that every word, action and thought be held to the scrutiny of their standards, and anything that falls short is labeled and decried as some type of '-ist'.

As for this discussion; they are comic book characters. Chill the heck out. Buy what you want and enjoy for what it is.

Sexism in Comics is Not New--Here's What You Should Do about It:

Fap v.v

@Lonestar88 said:

The fact that Starfire was promiscuous did not bother me at all.  The thing that bothered me was her utter lack of any personality. With no personality, her promiscuity became her defining trait. Not only is that sexist, it also makes for an incredibly uninteresting character.

Starfire is from a world where sexuality is viewed differently,her outfit is not really any different than it ever was and I am a big Titans fan so I know that plus truthfully her personality was a bit under-developed compared to the other Titans. Funny,not one of you mention Power Girl almost falling out of her outfit or Bat-Woman always being reviewed and portrayed as a lesbian Jewish super-heroine,why because they both have depth,PG's bosom and BW's sexuallity and religon are not and should not change the story. They are WOMEN,so what if they have cleavage showing or skin-tight outfits,how is that different than Anita Blake comics showing men barely clothed many of whom Anita has had sex with. Bad-mouth one,but not the other that's a double standard. Cat-Woman is and always has been sexual,period,her outfit,personality,attitude all say "Hey I'm sexy,I'm a dangerous lady" That's not sexist! If she was not outrageous she would not be Cat-Woman.

Really? We need an article on this? Have people never heard of a boycott?

@boopie said:

I am sorry but I like seeing stacked and packed babes pushing out their goodies for me to leer over and I am not about to stop dling comics for free because they offend feminazis

Nobody is telling you that you can't leer over cartoon goodies.

@DominionX: Same here. During her Teen Titans days, Starfire's personality was lackluster & kinda dull, but it did exist. In Red Hood & the Outlaws, all she has is sex. And what really bothered me about it was when they stated that she could barely tell humans apart. So all these friendships & relationships that Koriand'r had before mean nothing.....not even her engagement to Dick Grayson, because she sees us the same way we see dogs or cats. That was the part that made the book ridiculous to me.

@boopie said:

I am sorry but I like seeing stacked and packed babes pushing out their goodies for me to leer over and I am not about to stop dling comics for free because they offend feminazis

Exemplary post.

That was sarcasm if you didn't catch it.

I love that the article left out the following panel where Starfire blatantly states sex isn't about love. She's an alien, doing whatever she likes, whenever she likes, because she feels like it. Starfire is an Outlaw, as the book states, in even the most basic of ways. There are women who act like Starfire does. Everyone knows it. The creators just chose to show it in a character. Kudos to them, really. Red Hood and the Outlaws was a good book in my opinion, and I'll continue to support it by buying it every month.

@Rudyftw: At the risk of sounding like a meme machine: Feminazis! Because wanting equal treatment is the same as invading Poland.

Agreed. Stop buying what you don't like. I also agree with writing letters, which may actually effect change a bit faster.

Flipping the question a bit, are superhero comics an appropriate place for any amount of sex at all? If so, what are some good, positive examples of using sex in comics? If not, is eliminating sex in any way detrimental? Why do we make a big deal about a handful of panels that overemphasize sex but ignore or otherwise accept extreme violence found everywhere in the medium?

Neither Starfire or Batwoman are good role models. Starfire is a slut, and Batwoman is a lesbian.

Neither Starfire or Batwoman are good role models. Starfire is a slut, and Batwoman is a lesbian.

I apologize if someone already posted this or something similar but I didn't have time to read every response.

In reference to Starfire in Outlaws, my hope is that the writers have a plan to develop her into something more than an over-sexed alien. I honestly think they are doing this the right way because the reverse would get them even MORE negative attacks from female readers. Starfire, Red Hood, and Arsenal are all at low points in their lives at the beginning of the book. My feeling is that they plan on having her develop as a character as the book goes on. Imagine if they had started her off innocent and pure and then had her degenerate into how she is depicted in issue 1, people would be losing their freaking minds.

And like I said previously, there are promiscuous people in every walks of life. IF in the entire DC superhero community there is ONE female who will sleep with anyone, that's a far smaller percentage than most communities.

I appreciate the road you took on this article, Babs, but sometimes voting with your wallet makes no impact if the creators don't know why the comic isn't being bought, which is where the discussions are useful. God forbid a drop in sales for Red Hood resulted in more t&a, for instance. I believe it's a combination of the two that has the potential for real change, while buying books of portrayals one agrees with (Batwoman was a fabulous example, thank you) is a great start.

I really disagree with the idea that starfire is some representation of a male fantasy and nothing more in red hood and the outlaws. Am I the only one that thinks this? Let's reverse the roles here, let's say it was a good looking guy having sex with two women he openly admitted meant nothing to him. In this case he would be an ass who is taking advantage of two women but no one would stand up nd say that the male character is stero typing men. Starfire is doing the same thing, Jason and Roy mean nothing to her and she's using them for her own ends. Why is this garnering so much attention? Why is everyone hoping on DC for sexism and claiming it's against women here? What a woman can't be cold and vindictive? A woman can't use men for sex? Am I the only one that's seen "Chasing Amy"? Isn't it just a little sexist on the part of others that think Starfire is being unfairly portrayed to assume that the writer only plans to use her as a whore, that the guys are just gonna pass her back and fourth and never care? I mean believe it or not men can develop feelings for people that they happen to be having sex with.

@Sydpart2 said:

I really disagree with the idea that starfire is some representation of a male fantasy and nothing more in red hood and the outlaws. Am I the only one that thinks this? Let's reverse the roles here, let's say it was a good looking guy having sex with two women he openly admitted meant nothing to him. In this case he would be an ass who is taking advantage of two women but no one would stand up nd say that the male character is stero typing men. Starfire is doing the same thing, Jason and Roy mean nothing to her and she's using them for her own ends. Why is this garnering so much attention? Why is everyone hoping on DC for sexism and claiming it's against women here? What a woman can't be cold and vindictive? A woman can't use men for sex? Am I the only one that's seen "Chasing Amy"? Isn't it just a little sexist on the part of others that think Starfire is being unfairly portrayed to assume that the writer only plans to use her as a whore, that the guys are just gonna pass her back and fourth and never care? I mean believe it or not men can develop feelings for people that they happen to be having sex with.

I agree. There are all types of women in the real world, and they should all be represented in comics. Just because a particular type of woman isn't popular, doesn't mean she should be ridiculed.

@TheBlackHood said:

I apologize if someone already posted this or something similar but I didn't have time to read every response.

In reference to Starfire in Outlaws, my hope is that the writers have a plan to develop her into something more than an over-sexed alien. I honestly think they are doing this the right way because the reverse would get them even MORE negative attacks from female readers. Starfire, Red Hood, and Arsenal are all at low points in their lives at the beginning of the book. My feeling is that they plan on having her develop as a character as the book goes on. Imagine if they had started her off innocent and pure and then had her degenerate into how she is depicted in issue 1, people would be losing their freaking minds.

And like I said previously, there are promiscuous people in every walks of life. IF in the entire DC superhero community there is ONE female who will sleep with anyone, that's a far smaller percentage than most communities.

He does have a plan but nobody's wants to wait and see.People just love to hate.

@Sydpart2 said:

I really disagree with the idea that starfire is some representation of a male fantasy and nothing more in red hood and the outlaws. Am I the only one that thinks this? Let's reverse the roles here, let's say it was a good looking guy having sex with two women he openly admitted meant nothing to him. In this case he would be an ass who is taking advantage of two women but no one would stand up nd say that the male character is stero typing men. Starfire is doing the same thing, Jason and Roy mean nothing to her and she's using them for her own ends. Why is this garnering so much attention? Why is everyone hoping on DC for sexism and claiming it's against women here? What a woman can't be cold and vindictive? A woman can't use men for sex? Am I the only one that's seen "Chasing Amy"? Isn't it just a little sexist on the part of others that think Starfire is being unfairly portrayed to assume that the writer only plans to use her as a whore, that the guys are just gonna pass her back and fourth and never care? I mean believe it or not men can develop feelings for people that they happen to be having sex with.

I agree. There are all types of women in the real world, and they should all be represented in comics. Just because a particular type of woman isn't popular, doesn't mean she should be ridiculed.

@TheCrowbar: Because you have him cornered and bottled stupidity is bubbling out of him.

Sex sells. As long as that is true (which it will be as long as commerce exists) there will be "sexism" in comic books. It's everywhere, not just comic books! There will always be consumers whose interest in a title can partially be attributed to the sexual elements it contains.

I grew up around my big brother's comics, and I found myself religiously reading titles like Gen13, Witchblade and WildCATS on a regular basis. seriously, J. Scott Campbell and Bruce Timm are probably close to my favorite artists ever (having started reading TPBs of Gotham City Sirens, I also find Guillem March climbing up that list, despite his obvious taste for slightly over-the-top eroticism). having said that, that Starfire panel made even me cringe a little. however....

@Sydpart2 said:

I really disagree with the idea that starfire is some representation of a male fantasy and nothing more in red hood and the outlaws. Am I the only one that thinks this? Let's reverse the roles here, let's say it was a good looking guy having sex with two women he openly admitted meant nothing to him. In this case he would be an ass who is taking advantage of two women but no one would stand up nd say that the male character is stero typing men. Starfire is doing the same thing, Jason and Roy mean nothing to her and she's using them for her own ends. Why is this garnering so much attention? Why is everyone hoping on DC for sexism and claiming it's against women here? What a woman can't be cold and vindictive? A woman can't use men for sex? Am I the only one that's seen "Chasing Amy"? Isn't it just a little sexist on the part of others that think Starfire is being unfairly portrayed to assume that the writer only plans to use her as a whore, that the guys are just gonna pass her back and fourth and never care? I mean believe it or not men can develop feelings for people that they happen to be having sex with.

....I agree almost whole-heartedly with this sentiment. however, the problem I have is not that there are women being portrayed like this - there are billions of people on Earth with unique and distinct personalities, it's bound to happen that there's going to be more than a few out there who are willing to have themselves objectified to meet their own ends. my problem, as it stands, is the volume of women being portrayed like this. I like Starfire, but I've long-since accepted her status as a fanservice character. a character designed to pander is okay, but it can't hurt to have a little more depth beyond that. also, back to the subject of volume, characters designed to pander to a certain audience lack depth, and can end up more than a little bit shallow. personally, I agree with the general consensus that characters like Rucka's Batwoman (or Simone's Wonder Woman) are more indicative of the way female superheroes should be portrayed in the majority. however, I grew up reading Fathom and Danger Girl, so I'm no stranger to cheesecake and fanservice. I just wish the examples were a little fewer and farther between.

still, seeing as how I didn't pick up Red Hood and the Outlaws anyway, would that mean I'm already taking decisive action? :P

@LB70145: Actually no, what I said is verifiable. I know neo-Nazis hate everyone other than the "Arian" (which is funny since that concept comes from the middle east) I was just making an example with this. And yes, that's what I mean, look, I lived for 3 years and a half in NYC/NJ, not to mention that well, I'm French, and that is where the civil liberties come from. America claims to be "the land of the free, home of the brave" well, that might have been true two centuries ago, it's laughable you consider that to be true when you know laws are being passes to limit your freedoms and rights; "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin-

Back to the issue at hand, according to the bill of rights, no, you don't have the right not to be offended, freedom of speech actually protects ideas that can be offensive (as long as they are not transgressing the law, as I previously explained) and it doesn't protect you of them if you are offended, so no, I mean, you have the ability to get offended, but it is not valid in a court of law. Regardless of the none-progressive examples from the past where women and African-Americans were considered second class citizens, that wasn't the bill of rights failing, that was America as society failing. And no I'm not arguing because I am in favor or against them, what I imply with them fictional is that you cannot apply laws and judgement to their actions because they are a piece of art and not actual people, we cannot go charge Sin for crimes against humanity and so forth...

If it offends you,do not read it. Easy,Simple. Same with television,movie,music,etc. Turn it off,this isn't rocket science. Choice is a wonderful thing. DC rebooted the comic,so past characterization goes out the window,they are different now so whining about Star Fire's "radical" change is pointless. I don't see much difference in outfit,she was always a bit closed off,so other than her being an abused slave and being more free with males and a bit colder (aren't warriors cold?) she's basically the same. Power Girl wasn't included in the reboot,so that is a non-issue,Bat-Woman is awesome,and umm she's plenty sexy.

Power Girl,a bimbo? Hmmm works as computer software designer,so she's smart,and she isn't with men every page,bimbo? No. The fact her bosoms are big is irrelevent. Bat-Woman,the "lesbo" as you crudely put is a well done character,with great art,her sexual preference is also irrelevent.

DC IS GOING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION THAN THEY SHOULD BE!

I have been wanting to see a short, curvy, not-size-zero woman fighting crime for some time now. And then DC did this. Screw you DC, I'm making my own comic.

Sexism is something u cannot avoid, unfortunetly. It is everywhere and in everything. If we want to "boycott" it, then u should might as well sit alone in a room w/ no windows. U just can't avoid it.

I do believe women in comics are overly sexualize and it does bug me. As a female, it makes it hard to enjoy comics. I'm not saying the women shouldn't be pretty, I mean shot, the guys aren't ugly (well, @ least some of them anyway). I hate the whole "sex sells" excuse, just because it gets dudes to buy ur stuff it doesn't mean it's right.

I did not buy Red Hood & the Outlaws and I will not buy another Suicide Squad issue. (what they did to Harley Quinn & Amanda Waller was really too much.)

Thanks Babs, for writing this article and not turning a blind-eye to this:)

I'm going to play devils advocate here, because honestly, I don't think it's sexism to see a woman in a bikini, nor one who is openly sexual - to me, that seems to be a powerful woman. The word sexism, get's thrown around a lot - you can't say anything about Sarah Palin (yeah, I went there) without being called a sexist...the issue is the over glorification of the human body that happens in comics...yeah, Power Girls costume may draw "attention to her ridiculously enormous tits" - but doesn't all costumes do that? What about males bodies - all the costumes are designed to show washboard abs, and large biceps and pecs - and in regards to a bikini - what about Namor - he's ran around in a speedo for decades...Comic book characters should be as different as people...some like their own body, have no issues about sex, other people don't for a various amount of reasons. I think the concern over Starfire is that it's a reinterpretation of her (although I remember her being pretty sexual) and since Teen Titans has become a cartoon on TV - does that mean all adult content should be edited out because of that? That would make a lot of our hero's rather....uh, rated G'ish...and boring to most readers. Food for thought.

What is really starting to worry me is how many ladies are uncomfortable with sexuality in general, that's an actual real issue. And no, I'm not saying go out to fuck or something, terms as porn-star being used as a derogatory term is troublesome, how they want to repress people that like to parade around half naked (like Conan the Barbarian never does it). Nothing wrong with sexuality (as long as it is consenting adults of whatever gender).