Supergirl is NOT for Girls

I don’t give a crap what Eddie Berganza says. Supergirl is NOT for girls and this statue pretty much proves it (Warning: this thing is barely work safe… no pun intended).

So girls, what do you think? Want to give the Supergirl series a chance? Yea… I didn’t think so.

9 responses to “Supergirl is NOT for Girls”

  1. In the earlier Supergirl comics she performed Supergirl feats. She wasn’t trying to find herself, she fitted in with the super title. That made the comic interesting. I’m all for Supergirl, I keep hoping it will get better. With her joining Smallville it might re-gain it’s popularity. If the writers do her character justice it could very well revive her presence. Let Supergirl be Supergirl. Have her fight justice against other supervilains and villainesses. Have her up against criminals who use kryptonite on her. Make her character be serious in fighting crime. If they do that (comics and tv) she could very much be a strong role to follow. Please don’t make her into a teenybopper.

  2. Yeah well freedom of speech and all that but you should also remember that alot of girls don’t have a problem with sexualized female characters/popstars etc. DC were just trying to cover all demographics, there’s a strong independant heroine for the girls and a sexy blonde in skimpy clothing for the boys. Okay so the current look of Supergirl does set a better example and all that but they’ve gone too far in trying to make her “real” because of all the negative feedback from comic bloggers who love to complain.

  3. Somehow I think DC didn’t simply change Supergirl’s look based solely on comic bloggers who “love to complain”.

    And as for complaining, should I just give everything a good review even when it’s not worthy of one? Or should I simply publish good reviews and not talk about the bad?

    There are a lot of good comic books out there and a lot of bad ones. It’s best to talk about both.

  4. Joe Louis:
    I was not talking about reviews, the comic itself wasn’t selling very well so by all means share your opinions why that is. I was merely saying that there’s been ALOT of criticism about the new Supergirl not because people didn’t like the comic but cause she shows alot of skin OMG! How dare a fictional character not physically represent a healthy body type cause everyone knows that teenage girls these days starve themselves because of comics… um right?…

  5. I see where you’re coming from now… sorry about the confusion.

    I believe people are criticizing her somewhat revealing clothing for two reasons:
    1. The comic is specifically target towards girls according to DC. While there may be a small percentage of girls that don’t mind the look, I’d venture to say that most don’t like it.

    2. Supergirl is supposed to be 16 years old… so sexing her up is just a little weird.

    While I can’t speak for every other blogger / reviewer, that’s where my complaints have come from.

    That and the terrible writing. The look of Supergirl is actually a secondary complaint of mine. The horrible writing that Joe Kelly brought to the comic completely killed it for me.

  6. Besides the fact that Supergirl is a bit too young to be that sexy, I don’t feel there’s anything wrong with this statue, it may be too stimulating for kids but people probably felt the same way about He-Man back in the day. Yes Supergirl should be more cute than hot because of her age, but would this statue be so wrong otherwise? Just because a title is aimed at girls doesn’t mean the heroine can’t wear short flowing skirts and bare her firm toned stomach, there’s nothing degrading about that so what is the problem? I think what we have here is homophobia, girls not wanting to see other girls icky bodies oh no! Is this really 2008?…

  7. Wat is everyone complaining about? This statue is beautiful… pretty face, firm perky breasts, sexy bare midriff… what’s not to like?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.