Earlier today, I stumbled upon this article on npr.org (because even when I can’t listen to npr, I can find it online…), and in addition to falling in love with the writing of journalist Linda Holmes, I was fascinated by the subject matter.
In case you weren’t aware: NBC is filming the pilot for a possible upcoming TV series featuring Wonder Woman as the title character. Interestingly, this is about as much as I have been able to glean from the web about the actual upcoming series.
Except, of course, a giant debate on her costume that has fired up the interweb.
Costume: Take One
Costume: Take Two
So, the release of the first costume design is a little frightening. That’s an awful lot of pleather, even for a super hero. The second costume is slightly more legitimate, but I agree with Holmes in that “[She] will get arrested if [she] fights crime in that top”.
But I think what it boils down to is this:
Why is it that we are focusing so much on her costume, anyway?
Holmes goes on to say that we have reached a place in society where women are no longer forced to choose between identities as sex bombs and crime fighters, and she’s right, “Buffy didn’t slay vampires in a tube top”. That is a success of the feminist movement and the progression of society as a whole.
So why is it that we are forcing Wonder Woman into a costume that so impractical that it doesn’t even make sense in the comic book world?
While it is vital to recognize the successes of even being able to market a female superhero in an otherwise homogeneously male crowd of superheroes, I can’t shake the notion that this focus on her costume is the symptom of the underlying sexism stitched into the fabric of our society, even at the fantasy level.
It could be argued that without Wonder Woman’s iconic bosom-thrusting costume, she’d be unrecognizable, just as Spiderman would be nothing without his mask and web. And an even more compelling argument could be made in saying that everything about a super-hero is, by definition, impractical.
However, I challenge you to imagine a scenario in which any male, superhero or not, would be forced under the same scrutiny of the public eye in regards to his costume. If pictures of a new Spiderman movie were to be released, would the sexuality (or lack thereof) stitched into his costume be an object of debate?
I am inclined to think that more focus would be placed on the special effects of the movie and the accuracy of the characters to their comic book roots than the bounce of his bosoms from one rooftop to the next.
ShoutOut! James Madison University 
Actually, in the comic world, every detail of a reboot is hashed and rehashed from the story line to the props. For instance, I don’t know any fans of the X-Men comics that like the X-Men movies.
Maybe the sexuality of a male hero’s costume isn’t debated but almost everything else about it is. There are those “die hards” that scorn any new design in costume, no matter how practical, realistic, or sexy. Don’t believe for a second Wonder Woman was the only super hero whose costume was criticized (and really, she’s getting off easy compared to some debates I’ve heard.)
I’ve always loved that Wonder Woman was a strong female character who had no problem fighting and standing up for herself. And you have to admit, the long pants and short heels (in version 2) are a drastic improvement to the hot pants and sometimes short skirts in earlier versions. The top hasn’t changed in several decades, but change comes slowly precisely because of the backlash by fans over stupid things.
If it makes you feel better, google what the new costume in the comic looks like. Leggings and flats, like the TV one but darker (they look black in the pictures but they may be dark blue) and her top is more of a structured tank with a jacket over it with pockets and padding. The only thing I dislike about it is the gauntlets/gloves because I don’t think they’re big enough to serve their purpose (shields, primarily.) The main criticisms about it I see aren’t that it’s not sexy enough or too sexy, but that the colors are too dark (and not all-American red, white and blue) and looks a little 80’s.
LikeLike
Thank you so much, Heather!
It’s so nice to hear from the perspective of someone involved in the comic book community. I think you’re absolutely right about the criticisms of the movie versions of comic book costumes. I think that comes from being really passionate about a particular art form. As an avid broadway nerd, I know how critical I can be of movie versions of popular broadway characters.
And it sounds like the criticisms from the comic book community are more concerned with legitimacy and accuracy, which comes from being well-versed in the subject matter. However, mainstreaming a comic book character means that the people on E News (http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b231777_superhero_fashion_police_new_wonder.html) also get a stab at her.
I think my point is just that Wonder Woman has to deal with this overlying layer of sexual appeal that Superman or Spiderman are reprieved of, you know?
LikeLike
Ps. I looked up the new comic book costume, and it’s great. It looks like she might actually be able to kick some SERIOUS bad-guy ass! Why don’t they use THIS for the tv show?
LikeLike
I think it’s also important to look at the show’s creator and potential plot lines I’ve read for this. David E. Kelley is also the man who created Ally McBeal and reduced women to all sorts of misogynistic stereotypes in a show meant to be about strong women. By the end of the show, Ally was crazy and hysterical and all of the other criticisms levied against women in power.
Also, and I think this is WAY gross, is that one character on the show (being played by the MUCH older Cary Elwes) is a pseudo-uncle/father-figure and POTENTIAL LOVE INTEREST.
So not only is she forced into an impractical and sexist costume choice, the show’s creator also wants her to have the potential to have a romance with her PSEUDO-UNCLE. Barf.
LikeLike