what the heck did they do to Raven's costume (and Raven in general) in the new DC 52?

[SUPA FRANKY]

I watched the old Teen Titans cartoon last summer and it still holds up in my opinion.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

they added a lot of PLOT and BACKSTORY if you know what i mean


i dont get it, the people who know characters like raven, cyborg, beastboy and starfire, most likely know em thanks to the very popular and very well made teen titans animated series, THE PREVIOUS animated series

what is the point of this kind of extreme transformation? why all the excessive sex appeal? you are just driving away the fans that animated show brought you

What about her pose is sexualized? I really want to know.

And yea, it be cool if they matched her apperance with the cartoon, but hey, New 52 is a revamp.

dem tits and dat ass, dunno i feel its too much

i liked the character in the show so im not specially confortable with this redesign

Well, latex is what SUper Heroes wear, both Men and Woman.

And Women have tits and an ass....

You'd have a point if she was doing stripper poses and wearing a swimsuit or something, but I don't see how it's sexualized. Her pose screams " I'm reveling in my power" then " LOOK AT MY TITS"

im not complaining because she has tits and ass

im complaining because she has bigger tits and a bigger ass, it looks like pandering from my point of view, tough it seems the raven that existed before the animated series was no better

Well, when your in preety good shape, your ass and tits look better.

The Starfire poses way back when, I agree was pandering. But there are plenty of strong female characters in DC.

tits and ass dont simply grow like that man, but lets leave it like that, teen titans raven was an exception, not the rule

 

[rbstewart7263]

"Ugly" is subjective.

Of course. I would have thought that was given.

"Offensively sexualized"? No more so than old Raven:

I didn't say old Raven was a role model for young women everywhere, but still, there are degrees.

EDIT: That said, using Ed Benes art as proof of a character's sexualization is kind of like using a Minnesota state fair as proof that Americans have a weight problem.

Not everyone of them needs to be a role model(though more are needed this is true) everytime I hear this criticism I find it odd? as though they are saying that all we males have are role models.

 

[JimB]

You said that the outfit's tightness and its grip on her tits (the latter of which I ignored because, for better or for worse, all superheroine's outfits mold to their tits like body paint in defiance of any logic or physics) make the outfits equally sexualized. I think that ignores context like diaphanous peekaboo panels in the middle of a swimsuit shaped like the slingshot suspenders Borat wears.

In other words, you ignored the massive amounts of sexualisation in her old outfit for the sake of your argument.

Certainly no more so than you're ignoring my comments right now about composition and presentation for the sake of your argument.

Both of those statements are different. Especially when compared with the rest of the sentence, which not only points out the New 52 version is at least equally, if not less, sexualised, but that it's not the point.

I am truly baffled by how you can, in a single sentence, say, "Nu52 Raven's costume is not less sexualized than the old one, but it's equally sexualized if not less so than the old one." I would really like to believe you're being earnest here and there's some stutter in my logic causing me to miss the train of thought that would make such a statement make any sense, but it's getting very hard for me to continue being charitable in my assumptions toward you, particularly since you have decided to call me a liar.

I didn't say old Raven was a role model for young women everywhere, but still, there are degrees.

Not every one of them needs to be a role model(though more are needed, this is true). Every time I hear this criticism I find it odd, as though they are saying that all we males have are role models.

What criticism? Are you saying I said all female characters need to be role models? Because I didn't. I mean, you quoted me not saying that.

 

[Generalsexbad]

Why is everyone only focusing and getting mad at her breast, and not paying attention to the overall costume? It's way more interesting than her old one, which was just a goth girl who had a hood.

 

[JimB]

Why is everyone only focusing and getting mad at her breasts, and not paying attention to the overall costume?

I'm not sure how much of this thread you've read, because several people have commented on the costume being ugly without ever referencing Raven's tits. I can't blame people who choose to focus on them, though, because what else should we be looking at? Her eyes? Can't really do that, can we?

 

[JimB]

I addressed your argument; you just chose to ignore some incredibly important things.

I was about to say, "No, you did not," but upon reflection, I suppose ignoring it and calling it a lie is a form of addressing it. I'm not sure how anything I said to you is less an attempt to address your points than what you said to me, but oh well.

There's no real point in continuing if you're just going to ignore things.

That's a curious statement. What was the point before?

I guess you'll have to continue to be baffled then. I explained it in about three different ways now, but you either don't understand (unlikely) or are pretending to not understand (likely).

Between that post where you announced everyone complaining about Raven's costume is a liar and your constant insistence I am being dishonest, I must wonder if this is a "no one fears theft like a thief" situation. You genuinely cannot understand how "This costume is not less sexualized, except maybe it is" is a confusing statement?

 

[JimB]

I explained it in about three different ways now, but you either don't understand (unlikely) or are pretending to not understand (likely).

I might owe you an apology, Pluvia.

I have always understood the phrase "if not," in the kind of situation you originally used it, to mean something like, "granted for the moment, but only for the purposes of argument and not because I believe it's true." Like, "The Democratic party is as responsible for the state of American decline as the Republican party, if not more." I think it might be a local idiom thing. At some point before I drifted off last night, though, it occurred to me that if I take those two words literally, they just mean something like, "The costume is as sexualized as the old, even if it's not more."

So...yeah. I have misunderstood your meaning, and I withdraw my questions about that specific line.

I won't bring myself to apologize because I'm still pretty pissed off at you calling me a liar for not getting it, though. I will just acknowledge that I might owe you one.

 

[JimB]

This part though, I skimmed my posts to check if I called you a liar, even Control + F'd "lie", "lying" and "liar", and nothing appeared.

Forgive me if I choose not to explain myself and just let this go. I just do not foresee anything I say bringing a conclusion to the argument rather than extending it.