Comments on: You’re Not a Wonder, Wonder Woman

By: The All-New All-Different Howling Curmudgeons

The All-New All-Different Howling Curmudgeons — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 20:00:35 +0000

So the blogosphere is all a-twitter over the latest issue of Playboy. This cover model in this particular issue of Playboy is a young lady named Tiffany Fallon. The problem — and the reason it’s a topic for discussion on……

By: Reaction to Justice League being nixed | the Captain's JLA blog

Reaction to Justice League being nixed | the Captain's JLA blog — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 20:54:29 +0000

[...] Pink Raygun points out, reality TV star Tiffany Fallon made her own claim to be Wonder Woman using pots of bodypaint and [...]

By: 3d hd tv guy

3d hd tv guy — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 14:26:46 +0000

as an airbrush artist I have done a little body painting. I think they did a pretty good job with this. Of course, some folks get uptight at the slightest mention of nudity in any form. It's a shame. I thin she looks lovely.

By: swiss replica

swiss replica — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 02:50:53 +0000

great blog!

By: MAYRA23NIEVES

MAYRA23NIEVES — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 14:10:10 +0000

All people deserve very good life time and loan or just credit loan can make it much better. Because freedom is based on money state.

By: Ink-Stained Amazon » Blog Archive » Wonder Woman: Porn Star, Feminist Icon, Erotic Goddesss, or All of the Above?

Sun, 02 May 2010 23:52:38 +0000

[...] Playboy magazine cover has already been commented on all over the net with varying degrees of righteous scorn, insight, and “What’s the big deal/are you really so suprised-ness?” so while I doubt I have [...]

By: Baja

Baja — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 05:41:39 +0000

We'll stop being 'c*nts' if you start being smarter and not as cowardly.

By: mamoon

mamoon — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 16:07:58 +0000

this is waht i am dream about all time long

By: I'm me

I'm me — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:54:25 +0000

Those of you who think this is demeaning to the character should take a look at the original concept of Wonder Woman. Her only real powers originally were that she was super strong, fast, and she could tie men up and make them tell the truth. Her weakness was that if a man tied her up, she'd lose all her powers.

She's supposed to be a strong woman but from her initial conept sexuality is part of her strength.

By: sri

sri — Sat, 30 May 2009 21:58:02 +0000

i like porn alot and i think woman have the right to show there bodys in the way they are confertable with witch in some girls is sex/porn or just showing off there naked bodies for people to see.

By: Not a Lawyer

Not a Lawyer — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:00:35 +0000

Wonder Woman could get sued by this. The American flag is a trademark.

By: mark twain

mark twain — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 09:51:43 +0000

such a profound discussion on wonder woman let's you have an insight of the great minds of this country's people

By: Reaction to the Wonder Woman PLAYBOY cover | Bent Corner

Reaction to the Wonder Woman PLAYBOY cover | Bent Corner — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:36:35 +0000

[...] World: If they’re smart, they’ll put their foot down and try and reclaim that image. Pink Raygun (NSFW) asked if we’d see a model as Batman in the same sort of thing. The answer’s no. [...]

By: Ms.stake : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present

Ms.stake : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:47:54 +0000

[...] of Ms. featured Wonder Woman with the tag line ‘Wonder Woman for President.’ In 2008, Wonder Woman was on the cover of Playboy, and Ms. is instead symbolically looking to a male superhero to “rescue” feminism? Very [...]

By: Feminist Law Professors » Blog Archive » Not Really Super

Feminist Law Professors » Blog Archive » Not Really Super — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 17:22:39 +0000

[...] 2008, Wonder Woman was on the cover of Playboy, and Ms. is instead looking to a male superhero to “rescue” [...]

By: comicfan

comicfan — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:55:02 +0000

Thank you for the quick response. I honestly wasn’t expecting to get any, certainly not so soon, given my lateness. That’s a nice feature your website has.

By the way, here’s a link to the Superman/Lois Playboy pic I was referring to:

THIS LINK IS NSFW!!!!!
THIS LINK IS NSFW!!!!!
THIS LINK IS NSFW!!!!!
http://www.newsaskew.com/images/jen_playboy.jpg
THIS LINK IS NSFW!!!!!
THIS LINK IS NSFW!!!!!
THIS LINK IS NSFW!!!!!

By: Alpha-Girl

Alpha-Girl — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 04:42:43 +0000

We get updates on new comments by the minute, so even if you’re late, you’re not really late. If that makes any freaking sense at all. It’s late and I’m drunk on Obama right now.

I’m not so stubborn that I can’t change my position when presented with new evidence. You bring up good points, some of which I was not aware of at the time I wrote this piece. I may stand corrected on my original position.

By: comicfan

comicfan — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:33:47 +0000

I know I'm several months late to this discussion, but I just now found this page and I wanted to take issue with a comment made here.

In #33, Alpha-Girl says:

"DC DOES move to protect their male characters from showing up nude and sexualized. I’m not making that up. That’s not theoretical. That is a fact. And that’s the problem."

I disagree. And my example why comes, ironically, from Playboy as well.

In their 50th Anniversary issue for January 2004, one of the features was to have various movie directors recreate movie scenes with an erotic subtext. Among them was Kevin Smith, who photographed his wife as Lois Lane with Superman. She is shown on a rooftop in a black see-thru bra and black miniskirt which slightly exposes her genitalia. Behind her is an unknown male model in a Superman costume, his arms in Lois' arms, his head by her shoulder, while Lois looks at him approvingly. Both are in an obvious loving embrace. DC never raised any objections to this.

You may say this doesn't count because Superman isn't nude or bodypainted, but it is an undeniably sexualized image of Superman, even more so, I think, than Playboy's WW cover. The latter only suggests playful cheesecakery, while the former suggests full-blown eroticism. And again, DC never objected.

And as for the "nude" part, just look at that Smallville ad with the shirtless Tom Welling and painted-on Superman logo.

And I don't believe the Batman paintings analogy is a valid one. I believe DC's main objection was that the Robin depicted was underage, meaning those paintings crossed the line from homosexuality to pedophilia. If this Playboy cover were to show something like Wonder Woman kissing or being aroused by an underage Wonder Girl, then it would be a valid analogy. But it doesn't.

So this is why I believe you're wrong in saying DC holds their male characters to a different standard.

By: lgilynn

lgilynn — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:01:35 +0000

I dont mean to get on my feminist soap-box but I am so tired of seeing my favorite DC character being depicted this way. I mean really, WW is just now, in the past 5-7 years, recovering it’s image from the shity storylines and mediocre art of the Byrne years and the almost blatant bondage fetish/stupid haircut and costume Deodato years. And I agree that if Playgirl had used Batman or Superman with no apparent permission there would’ve been blood, not a wussy one sentence reaction.
AlphaGirl did an awsome job debating this by the way, the “waitress from North Carolina” would absolutly know the the Wonder Woman/feminism issue, basically if you live in the U.S. and havent been living under a rock for the past 35 years you would probably get it.

By: Blog@Newsarama » Just Past the Horizon: That’s Not Power

Blog@Newsarama » Just Past the Horizon: That’s Not Power — Wed, 21 May 2008 13:34:24 +0000

[...] Playboy is a magazine specifically for that. What bothers me is the text on the inside cover (from Pink Raygun — that link is NSFW, scans from inside the magazine): You know the painted lady on our cover [...]