|
Post by Indiana Jones on Jun 18, 2021 19:21:41 GMT 1
Batman can beat criminals to a pulp, take on supervillains and live a double life as a billionaire playboy and caped crusader … but he can’t, apparently, go downtown — not downtown Gotham City, he can, obviously, certainly go there, but he can’t go to, you know … the other downtown. In a rather surprising revelation, the co-creator of the R-rated Harley Quinn animated series told Variety that DC blocked the inclusion of a scene from the upcoming third season of the show where Batman was going to perform oral sex on Catwoman. That alone is pretty eyebrow-raising. But what really set off fans Monday is the alleged reason the scene wasn’t included. “In this third season of Harley [coming to HBO Max] we had a moment where Batman was going down on Catwoman,” Justin Halpern said. “And DC was like, ‘You can’t do that. You absolutely cannot do that.’ They’re like, ‘Heroes don’t do that.'” Continued Halpern: “So, we said, ‘Are you saying heroes are just selfish lovers?’ They were like, ‘No, it’s that we sell consumer toys for heroes. It’s hard to sell a toy if Batman is also going down on someone.'” Halpern made the comment in the context of noting how much creative freedom he’s otherwise enjoyed on the show. Superhero content creators are generally expected to abide by certain rules governing character behavior in order to protect the franchise and consumer products sales. That said, Bruce Wayne has seduced and discarded supermodels and Russian ballerinas like disposable props, in movie after movie, decade after decade, and that behavior apparently isn’t frowned upon. And Harley Quinn is considered a graphic show for adults. So in that context, objecting to giving a woman pleasure has struck some fans as a bit wrongheaded. Social media is having some fun with this. www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/batman-oral-sex-catwoman-harley-quinn-1234968296/
|
|
|
Post by AQUA CAT! on Jun 18, 2021 20:31:59 GMT 1
Damn what's the point of it being R-rated then?
"Heroes don't do that" my ass. Boooooooooooooooooo.
Pretty interesting though.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jun 18, 2021 23:37:56 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by AQUA CAT! on Jun 19, 2021 19:22:34 GMT 1
I did not make this, but I would have if I knew how:
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 13, 2021 17:03:47 GMT 1
Batman can beat criminals to a pulp, take on supervillains and live a double life as a billionaire playboy and caped crusader … but he can’t, apparently, go downtown — not downtown Gotham City, he can, obviously, certainly go there, but he can’t go to, you know … the other downtown. In a rather surprising revelation, the co-creator of the R-rated Harley Quinn animated series told Variety that DC blocked the inclusion of a scene from the upcoming third season of the show where Batman was going to perform oral sex on Catwoman. That alone is pretty eyebrow-raising. But what really set off fans Monday is the alleged reason the scene wasn’t included. “In this third season of Harley [coming to HBO Max] we had a moment where Batman was going down on Catwoman,” Justin Halpern said. “And DC was like, ‘You can’t do that. You absolutely cannot do that.’ They’re like, ‘Heroes don’t do that.'” Continued Halpern: “So, we said, ‘Are you saying heroes are just selfish lovers?’ They were like, ‘No, it’s that we sell consumer toys for heroes. It’s hard to sell a toy if Batman is also going down on someone.'” Halpern made the comment in the context of noting how much creative freedom he’s otherwise enjoyed on the show. Superhero content creators are generally expected to abide by certain rules governing character behavior in order to protect the franchise and consumer products sales. That said, Bruce Wayne has seduced and discarded supermodels and Russian ballerinas like disposable props, in movie after movie, decade after decade, and that behavior apparently isn’t frowned upon. And Harley Quinn is considered a graphic show for adults. So in that context, objecting to giving a woman pleasure has struck some fans as a bit wrongheaded. Social media is having some fun with this. www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/batman-oral-sex-catwoman-harley-quinn-1234968296/Super heroes were not made for sexual education, exploitation, or messaging. As soon as a comic starts exploring the benefits of a super power on sex we're going to see Professor X mentally commanding favors and orgasms, multiple man and time travelers running trains, super sperm ripping people in half. They were not designed with sex in mind and when you do more than allude to it, you open a can of worms that shouldn't be brought into it. Of course Batman goes down on super models but there's no need to explicitly address it. Do that with off brand, but once it's mainstream, it's an unfixable error.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2021 17:10:56 GMT 1
Batman can beat criminals to a pulp, take on supervillains and live a double life as a billionaire playboy and caped crusader … but he can’t, apparently, go downtown — not downtown Gotham City, he can, obviously, certainly go there, but he can’t go to, you know … the other downtown. In a rather surprising revelation, the co-creator of the R-rated Harley Quinn animated series told Variety that DC blocked the inclusion of a scene from the upcoming third season of the show where Batman was going to perform oral sex on Catwoman. That alone is pretty eyebrow-raising. But what really set off fans Monday is the alleged reason the scene wasn’t included. “In this third season of Harley [coming to HBO Max] we had a moment where Batman was going down on Catwoman,” Justin Halpern said. “And DC was like, ‘You can’t do that. You absolutely cannot do that.’ They’re like, ‘Heroes don’t do that.'” Continued Halpern: “So, we said, ‘Are you saying heroes are just selfish lovers?’ They were like, ‘No, it’s that we sell consumer toys for heroes. It’s hard to sell a toy if Batman is also going down on someone.'” Halpern made the comment in the context of noting how much creative freedom he’s otherwise enjoyed on the show. Superhero content creators are generally expected to abide by certain rules governing character behavior in order to protect the franchise and consumer products sales. That said, Bruce Wayne has seduced and discarded supermodels and Russian ballerinas like disposable props, in movie after movie, decade after decade, and that behavior apparently isn’t frowned upon. And Harley Quinn is considered a graphic show for adults. So in that context, objecting to giving a woman pleasure has struck some fans as a bit wrongheaded. Social media is having some fun with this. www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/batman-oral-sex-catwoman-harley-quinn-1234968296/Super heroes were not made for sexual education, exploitation, or messaging. As soon as a comic starts exploring the benefits of a super power on sex we're going to see Professor X mentally commanding favors and orgasms, multiple man and time travelers running trains, super sperm ripping people in half. They were not designed with sex in mind and when you do more than allude to it, you open a can of worms that shouldn't be brought into it. Of course Batman goes down on super models but there's no need to explicitly address it. Do that with off brand, but once it's mainstream, it's an unfixable error. What about Iron Man?
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 13, 2021 17:14:53 GMT 1
Super heroes were not made for sexual education, exploitation, or messaging. As soon as a comic starts exploring the benefits of a super power on sex we're going to see Professor X mentally commanding favors and orgasms, multiple man and time travelers running trains, super sperm ripping people in half. They were not designed with sex in mind and when you do more than allude to it, you open a can of worms that shouldn't be brought into it. Of course Batman goes down on super models but there's no need to explicitly address it. Do that with off brand, but once it's mainstream, it's an unfixable error. What about Iron Man? Obvious BOB and augmented reality jokes?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2021 9:16:24 GMT 1
Batman can beat criminals to a pulp, take on supervillains and live a double life as a billionaire playboy and caped crusader … but he can’t, apparently, go downtown — not downtown Gotham City, he can, obviously, certainly go there, but he can’t go to, you know … the other downtown. In a rather surprising revelation, the co-creator of the R-rated Harley Quinn animated series told Variety that DC blocked the inclusion of a scene from the upcoming third season of the show where Batman was going to perform oral sex on Catwoman. That alone is pretty eyebrow-raising. But what really set off fans Monday is the alleged reason the scene wasn’t included. “In this third season of Harley [coming to HBO Max] we had a moment where Batman was going down on Catwoman,” Justin Halpern said. “And DC was like, ‘You can’t do that. You absolutely cannot do that.’ They’re like, ‘Heroes don’t do that.'” Continued Halpern: “So, we said, ‘Are you saying heroes are just selfish lovers?’ They were like, ‘No, it’s that we sell consumer toys for heroes. It’s hard to sell a toy if Batman is also going down on someone.'” Halpern made the comment in the context of noting how much creative freedom he’s otherwise enjoyed on the show. Superhero content creators are generally expected to abide by certain rules governing character behavior in order to protect the franchise and consumer products sales. That said, Bruce Wayne has seduced and discarded supermodels and Russian ballerinas like disposable props, in movie after movie, decade after decade, and that behavior apparently isn’t frowned upon. And Harley Quinn is considered a graphic show for adults. So in that context, objecting to giving a woman pleasure has struck some fans as a bit wrongheaded. Social media is having some fun with this. www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/batman-oral-sex-catwoman-harley-quinn-1234968296/Super heroes were not made for sexual education, exploitation, or messaging. As soon as a comic starts exploring the benefits of a super power on sex we're going to see Professor X mentally commanding favors and orgasms, multiple man and time travelers running trains, super sperm ripping people in half. They were not designed with sex in mind and when you do more than allude to it, you open a can of worms that shouldn't be brought into it. Of course Batman goes down on super models but there's no need to explicitly address it. Do that with off brand, but once it's mainstream, it's an unfixable error. Even in a show like Harley?
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 14, 2021 11:35:49 GMT 1
Super heroes were not made for sexual education, exploitation, or messaging. As soon as a comic starts exploring the benefits of a super power on sex we're going to see Professor X mentally commanding favors and orgasms, multiple man and time travelers running trains, super sperm ripping people in half. They were not designed with sex in mind and when you do more than allude to it, you open a can of worms that shouldn't be brought into it. Of course Batman goes down on super models but there's no need to explicitly address it. Do that with off brand, but once it's mainstream, it's an unfixable error. Even in a show like Harley? There should be no graphic sex in mainstream comics. These things were meant to inspire children to aspire to be their best selves and learn lessons like perseverance through adversity. X-Men was specifically designed for all of the social aspects through the euphemism of mutation. Even villains flipping or sometimes being good carries the lesson of redemption and forgiveness, along with the lesson that those ideals don't always work but are worth believing in the possibility of. There is no such thing as adult content when the standard is "please check the box to verify that you're 18" so there is no such thing as a safe separation. Adults may enjoy the characters and stories, but the values are for the children. Such content has always carried subtle adult humor and content, but when you remove the subtlety, you've just given graphic detail to underdeveloped minds. Nearly every straight man and lesbian is drawn to Harley Quinn due to the extreme sexuality of the character, but the implication is still where that should end. That may sound puritanical, but there's plenty of alt content, porn, and hentai in the world where mainstreaming that stuff as canon is completely uncalled for. She can be a lesbian, of course, what we don't need to see is actual sex scenes, joker dildos, bat vibrators, and sentient plant sex made regularly available in canon comics book stories. England just had a rainbow dildo butt monkey at a library children's story hour.... Clearly a line needs drawn.
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 14, 2021 15:20:08 GMT 1
Even in a show like Harley? There should be no graphic sex in mainstream comics. These things were meant to inspire children to aspire to be their best selves and learn lessons like perseverance through adversity. X-Men was specifically designed for all of the social aspects through the euphemism of mutation. Even villains flipping or sometimes being good carries the lesson of redemption and forgiveness, along with the lesson that those ideals don't always work but are worth believing in the possibility of. There is no such thing as adult content when the standard is "please check the box to verify that you're 18" so there is no such thing as a safe separation. Adults may enjoy the characters and stories, but the values are for the children. Such content has always carried subtle adult humor and content, but when you remove the subtlety, you've just given graphic detail to underdeveloped minds. Nearly every straight man and lesbian is drawn to Harley Quinn due to the extreme sexuality of the character, but the implication is still where that should end. That may sound puritanical, but there's plenty of alt content, porn, and hentai in the world where mainstreaming that stuff as canon is completely uncalled for. She can be a lesbian, of course, what we don't need to see is actual sex scenes, joker dildos, bat vibrators, and sentient plant sex made regularly available in canon comics book stories. England just had a rainbow dildo butt monkey at a library children's story hour.... Clearly a line needs drawn. I mean, they tried sex with Wonder Woman 84 and accidentally ended up with Wonder Woman raping a dude and the valuable highly defended lesson of "it's not rape if they're unconscious."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2021 17:08:25 GMT 1
There should be no graphic sex in mainstream comics. These things were meant to inspire children to aspire to be their best selves and learn lessons like perseverance through adversity. X-Men was specifically designed for all of the social aspects through the euphemism of mutation. Even villains flipping or sometimes being good carries the lesson of redemption and forgiveness, along with the lesson that those ideals don't always work but are worth believing in the possibility of. There is no such thing as adult content when the standard is "please check the box to verify that you're 18" so there is no such thing as a safe separation. Adults may enjoy the characters and stories, but the values are for the children. Such content has always carried subtle adult humor and content, but when you remove the subtlety, you've just given graphic detail to underdeveloped minds. Nearly every straight man and lesbian is drawn to Harley Quinn due to the extreme sexuality of the character, but the implication is still where that should end. That may sound puritanical, but there's plenty of alt content, porn, and hentai in the world where mainstreaming that stuff as canon is completely uncalled for. She can be a lesbian, of course, what we don't need to see is actual sex scenes, joker dildos, bat vibrators, and sentient plant sex made regularly available in canon comics book stories. England just had a rainbow dildo butt monkey at a library children's story hour.... Clearly a line needs drawn. I mean, they tried sex with Wonder Woman 84 and accidentally ended up with Wonder Woman raping a dude and the valuable highly defended lesson of "it's not rape if they're unconscious." I would never defend the disaster that was WW84’s Steve Trevor invades a guy subplot, but there’s a ton of comic book movies that feature sexual relationships. That is far from the only one to have “tried sex”.
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 14, 2021 17:17:42 GMT 1
I mean, they tried sex with Wonder Woman 84 and accidentally ended up with Wonder Woman raping a dude and the valuable highly defended lesson of "it's not rape if they're unconscious." I would never defend the disaster that was WW84’s Steve Trevor invades a guy subplot, but there’s a ton of comic book movies that feature sexual relationships. That is far from the only one to have “tried sex”. I was hoping that would come through as an obvious joke. I was clearly not made for the internet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2021 17:22:14 GMT 1
I would never defend the disaster that was WW84’s Steve Trevor invades a guy subplot, but there’s a ton of comic book movies that feature sexual relationships. That is far from the only one to have “tried sex”. I was hoping that would come through as an obvious joke. I was clearly not made for the internet. No, I got that. But paired with your previous post it felt like you were still making a point.
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 14, 2021 17:35:14 GMT 1
I was hoping that would come through as an obvious joke. I was clearly not made for the internet. No, I got that. But paired with your previous post it felt like you were still making a point. Well, it is tied. The WW84 sex scene wasn't organic. It was a director desperately wanting to shove a love scene in without thinking about the actual scenario she was setting up. It was a careless screw up because sex was the point of the scene and not some story development.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2021 17:39:16 GMT 1
No, I got that. But paired with your previous post it felt like you were still making a point. Well, it is tied. The WW84 sex scene wasn't organic. It was a director desperately wanting to shove a love scene in without thinking about the actual scenario she was setting up. It was a careless screw up because sex was the point of the scene and not some story development. I disagree. Diana having a sexual relationship was not the issue. In fact, it was vital to the story they were trying to tell about Diana’s losses and sacrifices as a hero. The problem was simply the horrendously bad writing. Had Steve simply reappeared instead of mind occupying a dude there wouldn’t have been that weird issue. Superman II is a much much better executed version of the same story and it features a jump cut from Superman giving up his powers to Superman naked in bed with Lois.
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 14, 2021 17:45:26 GMT 1
Well, it is tied. The WW84 sex scene wasn't organic. It was a director desperately wanting to shove a love scene in without thinking about the actual scenario she was setting up. It was a careless screw up because sex was the point of the scene and not some story development. I disagree. Diana having a sexual relationship was not the issue. In fact, it was vital to the story they were trying to tell about Diana’s losses and sacrifices as a hero. The problem was simply the horrendously bad writing. Had Steve simply reappeared instead of mind occupying a dude there wouldn’t have been that weird issue. Superman II is a much much better executed version of the same story and it features a jump cut from Superman giving up his powers to Superman naked in bed with Lois. That's my point though. They desperately wanted to bring in wish with a price powers and failed to bother to direct the film well because they had to also have a sex scene. They had like fifteen "oh but also this" things going on in the film, and maybe, just maybe, we should not want our superhero stories to include sex ed. Aside from the man rape, WW's magic whip could be used to ruphie somebody into sex by making them admit to themselves that they wanted to. She could also just sheer dominate someone by force. There are tens of thousands of questionable to obviously wrong sex boundaries that are opened by bringing detailed sex into the comic universe. The two simply don't mesh, and any attempt to the contrary is destined for error.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2021 17:49:33 GMT 1
I disagree. Diana having a sexual relationship was not the issue. In fact, it was vital to the story they were trying to tell about Diana’s losses and sacrifices as a hero. The problem was simply the horrendously bad writing. Had Steve simply reappeared instead of mind occupying a dude there wouldn’t have been that weird issue. Superman II is a much much better executed version of the same story and it features a jump cut from Superman giving up his powers to Superman naked in bed with Lois. That's my point though. They desperately wanted to bring in wish with a price powers and failed to bother to direct the film well because they had to also have a sex scene. They had like fifteen "oh but also this" things going on in the film, and maybe, just maybe, we should not want our superhero stories to include sex ed. Aside from the man rape, WW's magic whip could be used to ruphie somebody into sex by making them admit to themselves that they wanted to. She could also just sheer dominate someone by force. There are tens of thousands of questionable to obviously wrong sex boundaries that are opened by bringing detailed sex into the comic universe. The two simply don't mesh, and any attempt to the contrary is destined for error. I think that’s pretty extreme to be honest. Featuring sexual relationships in movies is not a slippery slope to turning the genre into hardcore porn. WW84’s mistake was not implying sex, it was in being bizarrely and mind numbingly oblivious to the implications of Steve using someone else’s body. A WW movie would never have to address whether or not she would use her powers to rape because it should be understood that she would never do that! They wouldn’t have to “go there” I’ll have to continue this conversation later though, because I am literally leaving for the theater to see Black Widow right now! Fingers crossed for a sex scene!
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 14, 2021 17:55:50 GMT 1
That's my point though. They desperately wanted to bring in wish with a price powers and failed to bother to direct the film well because they had to also have a sex scene. They had like fifteen "oh but also this" things going on in the film, and maybe, just maybe, we should not want our superhero stories to include sex ed. Aside from the man rape, WW's magic whip could be used to ruphie somebody into sex by making them admit to themselves that they wanted to. She could also just sheer dominate someone by force. There are tens of thousands of questionable to obviously wrong sex boundaries that are opened by bringing detailed sex into the comic universe. The two simply don't mesh, and any attempt to the contrary is destined for error. I think that’s pretty extreme to be honest. Featuring sexual relationships in movies is not a slippery slope to turning the genre into hardcore porn. I’ll have to continue this conversation later though, because I am literally leaving for the theater to see Black Widow right now! Fingers crossed for a sex scene! Enjoy. I'll not spoil it, but good luck with that hope. I know it's extreme for WW, but consider Purple Man from Jessica Jones. In a realistic world, every moderately attractive woman within 500 miles of him would be walking around in lingerie and begging for his attention with unspeakable acts of depravity. They don't do it because it's obviously crossing a line which darkens the acceptability of the entire genre. That line has to be ahead of the superheroes, not after it, or you are moments away from a story twist that shouldn't be in front of kids.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2021 21:00:00 GMT 1
Even in a show like Harley? There should be no graphic sex in mainstream comics. These things were meant to inspire children to aspire to be their best selves and learn lessons like perseverance through adversity. X-Men was specifically designed for all of the social aspects through the euphemism of mutation. Even villains flipping or sometimes being good carries the lesson of redemption and forgiveness, along with the lesson that those ideals don't always work but are worth believing in the possibility of. There is no such thing as adult content when the standard is "please check the box to verify that you're 18" so there is no such thing as a safe separation. Adults may enjoy the characters and stories, but the values are for the children. Such content has always carried subtle adult humor and content, but when you remove the subtlety, you've just given graphic detail to underdeveloped minds. Nearly every straight man and lesbian is drawn to Harley Quinn due to the extreme sexuality of the character, but the implication is still where that should end. That may sound puritanical, but there's plenty of alt content, porn, and hentai in the world where mainstreaming that stuff as canon is completely uncalled for. She can be a lesbian, of course, what we don't need to see is actual sex scenes, joker dildos, bat vibrators, and sentient plant sex made regularly available in canon comics book stories. England just had a rainbow dildo butt monkey at a library children's story hour.... Clearly a line needs drawn. Well, I know one DC animated movie where rape was committed by Harley with Nightwing. You didnt actually see it but it was going to happen. He was tied to the bed Im pretty sure there are general films/shows that are below the R-rating which get away with certain risqué or sex scenes. Sure it doesnt go all the way but if it's fine for that then it should be fine for a r-rated cartoon. The Harley Quinn show is definitely not for kids. Further I seriously doubt they wouldve gone all-in with that "going down" scene anyway. I mean look at this. Basically nothing
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 14, 2021 22:22:26 GMT 1
There should be no graphic sex in mainstream comics. These things were meant to inspire children to aspire to be their best selves and learn lessons like perseverance through adversity. X-Men was specifically designed for all of the social aspects through the euphemism of mutation. Even villains flipping or sometimes being good carries the lesson of redemption and forgiveness, along with the lesson that those ideals don't always work but are worth believing in the possibility of. There is no such thing as adult content when the standard is "please check the box to verify that you're 18" so there is no such thing as a safe separation. Adults may enjoy the characters and stories, but the values are for the children. Such content has always carried subtle adult humor and content, but when you remove the subtlety, you've just given graphic detail to underdeveloped minds. Nearly every straight man and lesbian is drawn to Harley Quinn due to the extreme sexuality of the character, but the implication is still where that should end. That may sound puritanical, but there's plenty of alt content, porn, and hentai in the world where mainstreaming that stuff as canon is completely uncalled for. She can be a lesbian, of course, what we don't need to see is actual sex scenes, joker dildos, bat vibrators, and sentient plant sex made regularly available in canon comics book stories. England just had a rainbow dildo butt monkey at a library children's story hour.... Clearly a line needs drawn. Well, I know one DC animated movie where rape was committed by Harley with Nightwing. You didnt actually see it but it was going to happen. He was tied to the bed Im pretty sure there are general films/shows that are below the R-rating which get away with certain risqué or sex scenes. Sure it doesnt go all the way but if it's fine for that then it should be fine for a r-rated cartoon. The Harley Quinn show is definitely not for kids. Further I seriously doubt they wouldve gone all-in with that "going down" scene anyway. I mean look at this. Basically nothing I get the base concept of it being okay, but superheroes, specifically, need separated from it. It just isn't the lessons they're intended to teach and it pairs terribly. You can't have it with heroes because it begs the question of villains, who have far fewer scruples. Then some really dumb author trying to make his/her name decides to do something really risque. If bathead is okay, why not other versions of sex? Anal? Three ways? And the standard just keeps sliding, all without regard for it being intended for children. What is gained by detailing sex acts among super heroes? If it doesn't help the story, it's gratuitous. "I daresay that woman is suffering from a terrible snakebite" isn't going to do it. It doesn't matter if they slap an R on it, it's already a children's domain. I also am against an adult teletubbies or sesame street show where they do meth and beat hookers to death coming out and just upping the rating. There just isn't sufficient cause to include it and, to refocus on my villain issue, that's a whole lot of rape stories and variety. Carnage was absolutely sick when he came out, but a highly detailed serial rapist out of every third villain is extremely unnecessary and the long term logical conclusion of making sex a common part of superheroes. An unstoppable villain follows their desires, so including that desire as a prevalent part of the universe begs for it. There are just too many villains with powers, motivations, and personalities that would absolutely do that. No way Shadow King respects a person's right to choose. I get that comics get dark, but that's the death of comics if it takes off.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 9:03:57 GMT 1
Well, I know one DC animated movie where rape was committed by Harley with Nightwing. You didnt actually see it but it was going to happen. He was tied to the bed Im pretty sure there are general films/shows that are below the R-rating which get away with certain risqué or sex scenes. Sure it doesnt go all the way but if it's fine for that then it should be fine for a r-rated cartoon. The Harley Quinn show is definitely not for kids. Further I seriously doubt they wouldve gone all-in with that "going down" scene anyway. I mean look at this. Basically nothing I get the base concept of it being okay, but superheroes, specifically, need separated from it. It just isn't the lessons they're intended to teach and it pairs terribly. You can't have it with heroes because it begs the question of villains, who have far fewer scruples. Then some really dumb author trying to make his/her name decides to do something really risque. If bathead is okay, why not other versions of sex? Anal? Three ways? And the standard just keeps sliding, all without regard for it being intended for children. What is gained by detailing sex acts among super heroes? If it doesn't help the story, it's gratuitous. "I daresay that woman is suffering from a terrible snakebite" isn't going to do it. It doesn't matter if they slap an R on it, it's already a children's domain. I also am against an adult teletubbies or sesame street show where they do meth and beat hookers to death coming out and just upping the rating. There just isn't sufficient cause to include it and, to refocus on my villain issue, that's a whole lot of rape stories and variety. Carnage was absolutely sick when he came out, but a highly detailed serial rapist out of every third villain is extremely unnecessary and the long term logical conclusion of making sex a common part of superheroes. An unstoppable villain follows their desires, so including that desire as a prevalent part of the universe begs for it. There are just too many villains with powers, motivations, and personalities that would absolutely do that. No way Shadow King respects a person's right to choose. I get that comics get dark, but that's the death of comics if it takes off. Going to have to agree to disagree here. There are different avenues for different styles. Look at the boys or umbrella academy. Even Doom Patrol to an extent
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 15, 2021 10:50:06 GMT 1
I get the base concept of it being okay, but superheroes, specifically, need separated from it. It just isn't the lessons they're intended to teach and it pairs terribly. You can't have it with heroes because it begs the question of villains, who have far fewer scruples. Then some really dumb author trying to make his/her name decides to do something really risque. If bathead is okay, why not other versions of sex? Anal? Three ways? And the standard just keeps sliding, all without regard for it being intended for children. What is gained by detailing sex acts among super heroes? If it doesn't help the story, it's gratuitous. "I daresay that woman is suffering from a terrible snakebite" isn't going to do it. It doesn't matter if they slap an R on it, it's already a children's domain. I also am against an adult teletubbies or sesame street show where they do meth and beat hookers to death coming out and just upping the rating. There just isn't sufficient cause to include it and, to refocus on my villain issue, that's a whole lot of rape stories and variety. Carnage was absolutely sick when he came out, but a highly detailed serial rapist out of every third villain is extremely unnecessary and the long term logical conclusion of making sex a common part of superheroes. An unstoppable villain follows their desires, so including that desire as a prevalent part of the universe begs for it. There are just too many villains with powers, motivations, and personalities that would absolutely do that. No way Shadow King respects a person's right to choose. I get that comics get dark, but that's the death of comics if it takes off. Going to have to agree to disagree here. There are different avenues for different styles. Look at the boys or umbrella academy. Even Doom Patrol to an extent That's not actually a disagreement. I don't care about non-mainstream. Watchmen had swinging blue pipe and a detailed multiple duplicate electric tingly sex act, plus the sky firegasm. It wasn't taking classic comics and watching them bang. Watchmen was made separate, gritty, and adult. DC never should have incorporated them into their universe proper because of that dividing line. They also had the most morally grey "hero" class of virtually any story. There is a purity to classic heroes where Watchmen and The Boys were specifically about that purity being removed. Superman isn't going to gooify someone for not playing ball or incinerate a crowd of protestors, though, admittedly, I don't exactly expect DC to hold itself on any sort of level, particularly the shows they spread across several networks, as their desperate floundering for attention has abandoned any concern about most things. They killed Jimmy Olson and the only reason anyone knew was the credits. Superman destroyed so much of Metropolis that they had to use it as the motivating factor for B v S to make it look purposeful. Batwoman is a complete garbage fest. But character butchery is still different than suddenly opening the door to super sex.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 12:30:23 GMT 1
Going to have to agree to disagree here. There are different avenues for different styles. Look at the boys or umbrella academy. Even Doom Patrol to an extent That's not actually a disagreement. I don't care about non-mainstream. Watchmen had swinging blue pipe and a detailed multiple duplicate electric tingly sex act, plus the sky firegasm. It wasn't taking classic comics and watching them bang. Watchmen was made separate, gritty, and adult. DC never should have incorporated them into their universe proper because of that dividing line. They also had the most morally grey "hero" class of virtually any story. There is a purity to classic heroes where Watchmen and The Boys were specifically about that purity being removed. Superman isn't going to gooify someone for not playing ball or incinerate a crowd of protestors, though, admittedly, I don't exactly expect DC to hold itself on any sort of level, particularly the shows they spread across several networks, as their desperate floundering for attention has abandoned any concern about most things. They killed Jimmy Olson and the only reason anyone knew was the credits. Superman destroyed so much of Metropolis that they had to use it as the motivating factor for B v S to make it look purposeful. Batwoman is a complete garbage fest. But character butchery is still different than suddenly opening the door to super sex. It is a disagreement. I was just providing other examples. The Harley Quinn show wasnt opening the door to anything gratuitous (as I have shown above in that clip) and again it is a r-rated series. Your holier-than-thou affinity for the mainstream is clouding your judgment
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 15, 2021 12:40:56 GMT 1
That's not actually a disagreement. I don't care about non-mainstream. Watchmen had swinging blue pipe and a detailed multiple duplicate electric tingly sex act, plus the sky firegasm. It wasn't taking classic comics and watching them bang. Watchmen was made separate, gritty, and adult. DC never should have incorporated them into their universe proper because of that dividing line. They also had the most morally grey "hero" class of virtually any story. There is a purity to classic heroes where Watchmen and The Boys were specifically about that purity being removed. Superman isn't going to gooify someone for not playing ball or incinerate a crowd of protestors, though, admittedly, I don't exactly expect DC to hold itself on any sort of level, particularly the shows they spread across several networks, as their desperate floundering for attention has abandoned any concern about most things. They killed Jimmy Olson and the only reason anyone knew was the credits. Superman destroyed so much of Metropolis that they had to use it as the motivating factor for B v S to make it look purposeful. Batwoman is a complete garbage fest. But character butchery is still different than suddenly opening the door to super sex. It is a disagreement. I was just providing other examples. The Harley Quinn show wasnt opening the door to anything gratuitous (as I have shown above in that clip) and again it is a r-rated series. Your holier-than-thou affinity for the mainstream is clouding your judgment It's not holier than thou. It's a children's product. It should not include sex. Giving it a higher rating doesn't remove it from being a children's product. The non mainstream can do it because they didn't start as children's products. If Lego starts making adult products but stores them on the same shelf as the toys with a label that says "not for kids", they have just made children's sex toys. Having standards and holding to them does not equate to holier than thou. What is the need for watching these characters have sex that makes you think I should need to defend my fairly standard, we shouldn't sexualize children, stance? It's grotesque to take an existing children's product and sexualize it for mainstream consumption. In closing, as I'm quite tired of having to think of super powered sex acts: Stan Lee didn't think they should mesh. 'Nuff said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 12:48:35 GMT 1
It is a disagreement. I was just providing other examples. The Harley Quinn show wasnt opening the door to anything gratuitous (as I have shown above in that clip) and again it is a r-rated series. Your holier-than-thou affinity for the mainstream is clouding your judgment It's not holier than thou. It's a children's product. It should not include sex. Giving it a higher rating doesn't remove it from being a children's product. The non mainstream can do it because they didn't start as children's products. If Lego starts making adult products but stores them on the same shelf as the toys with a label that says "not for kids", they have just made children's sex toys. Having standards and holding to them does not equate to holier than thou. What is the need for watching these characters have sex that makes you think I should need to defend my fairly standard, we shouldn't sexualize children, stance? It's grotesque to take an existing children's product and sexualize it for mainstream consumption. In closing, as I'm quite tired of having to think of super powered sex acts: Stan Lee didn't think they should mesh. 'Nuff said. You think the killing joke comic is for kids? There are even Marvel comics that arent for kids..Kraven's Last Hunt or something. Some pretty serious, heavy material in both Bottom line it is a r-rated show..what you cant seem to grasp or are unwilling to understand for whatever reason..not meant for kids...
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 15, 2021 13:08:34 GMT 1
It's not holier than thou. It's a children's product. It should not include sex. Giving it a higher rating doesn't remove it from being a children's product. The non mainstream can do it because they didn't start as children's products. If Lego starts making adult products but stores them on the same shelf as the toys with a label that says "not for kids", they have just made children's sex toys. Having standards and holding to them does not equate to holier than thou. What is the need for watching these characters have sex that makes you think I should need to defend my fairly standard, we shouldn't sexualize children, stance? It's grotesque to take an existing children's product and sexualize it for mainstream consumption. In closing, as I'm quite tired of having to think of super powered sex acts: Stan Lee didn't think they should mesh. 'Nuff said. You think the killing joke comic is for kids? There are even Marvel comics that arent for kids..Kraven's Last Hunt or something. Some pretty serious, heavy material in both Bottom line it is a r-rated show..what you cant seem to grasp or are unwilling to understand for whatever reason..not meant for kids... That's two consecutive relatively insulting statements about me. A disagreement is different than a need to disrespect. My stance is that there is no reason to give a detailed sexualization of mainstream comic characters, regardless of rating. A children's product doesn't become an adult property just because you slap a higher rating on it. The kid is already into the product and will watch it. This is different than violence. Comics are inherently violent, constantly focusing on physical battles between opposing forces, so a slightly more violent comic is not a change to the expectation of the product. Sexualization is. Clearly we don't agree on this, but as you don't seem willing to address why detailed sex should be injected into mainstream comics, there isn't really a reason to continue the discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Jul 15, 2021 18:18:18 GMT 1
Putting aside personal preferences and ideological stances for a moment, I think the real question is whether the addition of sex (especially graphic sex acts) adds anything of value to the comic book genre.
Does the addition of erotica in comic books result in more nuanced and compelling storytelling, or is it just another vehicle for shock value and titillation?
That's up to each person to decide for themselves. I've found that it rarely ever enhances a story, although I will admit to exceptions like Jessica Jones and The Dark Knight Returns.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2021 8:55:06 GMT 1
You think the killing joke comic is for kids? There are even Marvel comics that arent for kids..Kraven's Last Hunt or something. Some pretty serious, heavy material in both Bottom line it is a r-rated show..what you cant seem to grasp or are unwilling to understand for whatever reason..not meant for kids... That's two consecutive relatively insulting statements about me. A disagreement is different than a need to disrespect. My stance is that there is no reason to give a detailed sexualization of mainstream comic characters, regardless of rating. A children's product doesn't become an adult property just because you slap a higher rating on it. The kid is already into the product and will watch it. This is different than violence. Comics are inherently violent, constantly focusing on physical battles between opposing forces, so a slightly more violent comic is not a change to the expectation of the product. Sexualization is. Clearly we don't agree on this, but as you don't seem willing to address why detailed sex should be injected into mainstream comics, there isn't really a reason to continue the discussion. I wasnt disrespecting you but Im just puzzled as to why you would deny reality ie the r-rating. Sometimes in honest discussion you have to risk offending someone, just how it is. Honestly, I didnt think you were of the thin skin variety I have already addressed it. Also make no mistake Im not saying let's have this all the time or everywhere but it's not something Im going to strongly object to either (again Im going to point to the clip I showed) What are your thoughts on Deadpool?
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Jul 16, 2021 11:22:32 GMT 1
That's two consecutive relatively insulting statements about me. A disagreement is different than a need to disrespect. My stance is that there is no reason to give a detailed sexualization of mainstream comic characters, regardless of rating. A children's product doesn't become an adult property just because you slap a higher rating on it. The kid is already into the product and will watch it. This is different than violence. Comics are inherently violent, constantly focusing on physical battles between opposing forces, so a slightly more violent comic is not a change to the expectation of the product. Sexualization is. Clearly we don't agree on this, but as you don't seem willing to address why detailed sex should be injected into mainstream comics, there isn't really a reason to continue the discussion. I wasnt disrespecting you but Im just puzzled as to why you would deny reality ie the r-rating. Sometimes in honest discussion you have to risk offending someone, just how it is. Honestly, I didnt think you were of the thin skin variety I have already addressed it. Also make no mistake Im not saying let's have this all the time or everywhere but it's not something Im going to strongly object to either (again Im going to point to the clip I showed) What are your thoughts on Deadpool? It wasn't thin skin so much as the assumption of the cause of my reasoning. Holier than thou is incorrect because I don't care if it exists in The Boys and Watchmen. Both of those properties were intended for the extreme and adult audience from the outset. Both also instantly went into power sex, including crushing a guys skull through the wall and sending spikes through a guy's head from orgasm. Further, clearly I understand what a ratings system is and the assumption to the contrary is basically calling me an idiot. What I'm suggesting is that the ratings system is wildly imperfect when dealing with parents that aren't expecting to have to check Batman for a rating in case of lewd sex acts. Converting an existing children's product into something else is my issue because the child is already hooked and the parent has already vetted it for problems years before. The parent has no reason to check it and the kid isn't going to announce it until he's suddenly running around the room yelling about orgasms. It's a sleight of hand trick. I assure you, I'm no prude, and I have no sexual hangups other than we shouldn't intentionally lure children into sex. There's nothing incidental about it and it's unreasonable to assume that a ratings label in that scenario will get anywhere near 100%. If there isn't an overwhelmingly compelling reason for Bat-head, it shouldn't exist specifically because it is already a known safe children's series.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2021 11:31:16 GMT 1
I wasnt disrespecting you but Im just puzzled as to why you would deny reality ie the r-rating. Sometimes in honest discussion you have to risk offending someone, just how it is. Honestly, I didnt think you were of the thin skin variety I have already addressed it. Also make no mistake Im not saying let's have this all the time or everywhere but it's not something Im going to strongly object to either (again Im going to point to the clip I showed) What are your thoughts on Deadpool? It wasn't thin skin so much as the assumption of the cause of my reasoning. Holier than thou is incorrect because I don't care if it exists in The Boys and Watchmen. Both of those properties were intended for the extreme and adult audience from the outset. Both also instantly went into power sex, including crushing a guys skull through the wall and sending spikes through a guy's head from orgasm. Further, clearly I understand what a ratings system is and the assumption to the contrary is basically calling me an idiot. What I'm suggesting is that the ratings system is wildly imperfect when dealing with parents that aren't expecting to have to check Batman for a rating in case of lewd sex acts. Converting an existing children's product into something else is my issue because the child is already hooked and the parent has already vetted it for problems years before. The parent has no reason to check it and the kid isn't going to announce it until he's suddenly running around the room yelling about orgasms. It's a sleight of hand trick. I assure you, I'm no prude, and I have no sexual hangups other than we shouldn't intentionally lure children into sex. There's nothing incidental about it and it's unreasonable to assume that a ratings label in that scenario will get anywhere near 100%. If there isn't an overwhelmingly compelling reason for Bat-head, it shouldn't exist specifically because it is already a known safe children's series. Fair enough but if you're concerned about that, they can only be protected so much. Kids will be kids, they will do whatever they want regardless of restrictions or parental rules. This cant be stopped. I certainly couldnt and I can only assume it was the same for you Society has done its best in this case ergo the rating
|
|