So, Mike Choi’s redesign of Laura Kinney’s costume for new X-23 series is controversial. To put it mildly. I decided that the best way to express what the flying boar in a submarine is wrong with this outfit would be to borrow the amazing Female Armor Bingo from @bikiniarmorbattledamage . Thankfully he had enough decency to not add a thong or it would score a full row.
Now, people have been telling me to go read Choi’s thread on Twitter, where he goes through his previous designs. Supposedly, it will change my mind about the costume. We’ll see about that.
He put his points in several threads, let’s start with the very first.
They wanted the outfit be different from her Wolverine outfit AND based on the X-Force one. This is bizarre. Her final Wolverine suit carries clear X-Force inspirations. It’s inspired by Logan’s X-Force costume. It just feels like they’re trying to bring back nostalgia to that specific time in Laura’s history. Which is funny, when you remember that the most of online fandom hated X-Force when she was on it (Kyle and Yost’s run). Despite the critical acclaim. It was seen as the epitome of why making comics darker and edgier is the worst thing you can ever do. I know, I got into arguments with these guys. But now the same people go online wanting it back if that means Laura will be showing off her midriff again. Go figure.
Now, if you pardon me breaking chronology a bit I want to address the second and sixth point on his thread together.
So let me get this straight – he was told by everyone (and agreed!) how pantless leotard is out of character for Laura, and then gave her equally skimpy short shorts on another try? All while completely aware that her outfit will be drawn by other artists who will likely make the shorts smaller and sexualize her further? He needed two separate attempts and two different arguments to understand Laura needs long pants?
Now back to the chronological order of these tweets. Third part.
Where do I even begin? If he accepts the blame for her having an exposed midriff, why not use an opportunity to fix it and give her an outfit that does not have one? What not being Wolverine has to do with practical costume design? Why cannot she still wear non-revealing outfit under new or old codename? How can he talk about respecting her agency and personality considering what book he is making these designs for? A series that, for all that we know so far, will force her back into a codename that she outgrew? Laura had a whole arc about it, with her proclaiming she is not X-23. To speak of respecting her character when such a big regression is done to her is just a sad joke.
As a side note – the top picture? These words? They’re out of context. They directly quote a speech Laura makes in issue #19 of All-New Wolverine. A speech that starts with ‘I’m not X-23″ and ends with “I’m Wolverine”. They cherry-picked lines from that monologue and slammed them on a cover for a book that goes against the entire point. It takes away from her both Wolverine title and outfit and forces her back into codename and costume she left behind. In that context talking about respecting her character is just a piece of impudence.
And this argument about her taste of clothes comes as asinine for a number of reasons. One is that she is a fictional character, she doesn’t really make a choice to dress like this – the artist does. Giving her a midriff always undermines her as a competent fighter. You end up saying she decided to expose herself in the fight, putting herself at risk for fashion.
These outfits would be okay as everyday clothes, I could tolerate them if she wasn’t wearing a costume but was just one of those superheroes who fight in whatever they are wearing at the moment like Luke Cage or Jessica Jones. But she is not, she goes and dresses for a mission, why should fashion sense or taste of clothes have anything to do with it?
And finally…. if he cares about staying true to her character, why did he try to put her in shorts after being told bare legs are ooc for her?
I agree that talking about fictional character’s agency is an oxymoron. Which is why comparing Laura to real life women, who can choose their own wardrobe, makes no sense. While Choi acknowledges Laura as a fictional person, he still frames it as if he wasn’t the one in control of her looks. This is what trying to call the critics “narrow-minded orthodoxies” and claiming they accuse HER of being some sort of temptress boils down to. It is the artist we have a problem with, the artist who made a choice to dress her like that and now tries to say it’s liberating. He asked his students what they would wear as superheroes. They told him they wanted to express their independence. And somehow this shit is the only way to convey that he could think of?
And finally the fifth part. While he speaks about the boots, I need to bring attention to what he says about practicality and realism
Again with false equivalences. Superhero costumes can look cool while still being practical, many male outfits prove that. Hell, Snake-Eyes is a good example. And I’m pretty sure “that thing” on his face is eyes protection if a stylized, properly stylized, one. To say you cannot make a character look practical without losing the cool factor is an admission of a failure as an artist.
His points I spotted are in green. I also put in purple arguments I’ve seen from people trying to defend his designs and the fans. Arguments that were always thrown in defense of sexualized outfits for Laura, by the way. The “Great story makes up for these ridiculous designs” is one I especially need to highlight. People are coming to me saying that I should not judge Mariko Tamaki’s story before it appears. And I need to underline that I’m sure she can write a great story with Laura. In fact, I hope she does. But that will in no way change the fact this outfit is horrible.
Just like is the case with Mike Choi’s designs – they suck, all of them, be it unused ones or the final one. And while I can understand some parts of his thought process in working on them, they do not justify what he created and cannot serve as a good defense for the outfit he went with.
– Admin
So not only all those new outfit ideas for Laura were the generic “must. show. female. skin!” shit and the one approved in the end is no better than the rest… The designer also walked us through his “creative” process and didn’t manage to give a single satisfactory explanation to why he landed on any of those!
It’s pretty amazing how so many completely valid points, like consulting actual women, considering how other artists will draw it and referencing the character’s history were supposedly taken into consideration… and nothing about those boring rags informs us of that.
~Ozzie
Why does it feel like every time Mike Choi talks about the “research” and “introspection” he did with regards to women, he’s actually trying to blame them?
Also, I really love that this veteran of the comics industry apparently assumes that, if anything has even one impractical element, then it is 100% impractical. If that’s the case, Laura’s outfit is immediately impractical, due to the fact that I don’t see any bra straps under that see-through fabric! And wearing a strapless bra into the kind of acrobatic fights that Laura gets into is a bad idea. Too bad he didn’t ask any of his students about that, though he probably would have ignored them anyway.
that I picked to redesign for the same week: Velvet! I started out by giving her actual pants. Then I moved the leg armor she has from her right leg to the left, in order to balance out the armor on her right arm, to which I added more parts. I decided to keep the leg belts because she seemed like an edgy character from the backstory I read up on the game wiki.
I spent a lot of time trying to figure out what to do about her red shirt. There were probably like 6 different iterations, and I didn’t really like any of them. The final design before this final one was actually:
Because despite the awful execution, I could see what the artist was trying to do: frame her body with large shapes (the coat, the monster arm, and the hair), and fill the inner body with small shapes. I did like the torn edges to her shirt, but didn’t know what to do with the collar.
Then after the last stream I spent working on her, we got an ask from @solaela explaining that her outfit was put together from prisoner belongings when she escapes from jail early in the game. That gave me the idea that, what if she found an old breastplate that was confiscated, or on a guard that had to be knocked out, or whatever? It wouldn’t fit her perfectly, and it might be old and dirty, but even if Velvet doesn’t care about modesty, she should probably care about staying alive. So I gave her a breastplate and broke it up into smaller shapes.
While the Thermian Argument is a poor excuse for bad design, I do think knowing about the character helps to makes for better designs.
“why can’t female heroes kick arse in heels” because it’s not practical and will literally snap your damn ankle you can scream weaponised femininity all you want but first off, you need to admit that they’re not an almighty symbol of empowerment, and secondly that if you do a job with a lot of physical activity in heels you’re risking your own safety. all these women fighting in heels on tv are going to end up seriously injuring themselves.
weaponised femininity is a concept made up in an attempt to get us to embrace the industries created to hold us back/profit from our insecurities so that we can continue to fit into the male expectation of what a woman should be and not question why we are forced to spend thousands on our appearance every year
just a small anecdote. I had a friend who worked in theater; she was the stage manager and an actress came to her in tears one day because the director absolutely refused to let her do a choreographed fight scene in less than 3 inch heels because “they’re platforms so you’ll be okay.” My friend, who is a woman’s size 10, brought her own heels in the next day and DEMANDED the director put them on and try the choreography before the actress did it. He finally agreed to change it, without putting the heels on.
so like I know you might think of “all those women on tv fighting in heels” as fictional woman who WOULD hurt themselves in real life, but its fiction so its okay…except those women are portrayed by real actresses who are actually fighting in actual heels, being directed by dudes who have never worn a pair of heels in their lives, alongside men who aren’t expected to constantly wear things that make their stunts 2x more dangerous than they have to be. Just a thought.
Men take “let’s see feminine women being badass” to mean “let’s see women impractically focused on their appearance in combat situations.“
Also, as a side note, the things we consider “masculine” usually are just the things that are practical and comfortable for a situation. Usually when when we say a female character is “feminine, but able to kick ass”, specifically in reference to costume design, we actually mean “there are some very impractical elements in this design (read: wonder woman and valkyrie), but her boobs aren’t on full display and she’s not wearing stilettos”. The idea that practical and appropriate clothing for dangerous or physically demanding situations is inherently masculine really has to go, because it is all kinds of fucked up.
shoes etc.) are assumed to be inherently feminine, therefore mandatory for women in fiction, no matter the context. And that female characters who don’t comply to them to some degree are automatically “tomboys” or “rebels” or cheaply-achieved “good” female representation.
“why can’t female heroes kick arse in heels” because it’s not practical and will literally snap your damn ankle you can scream weaponised femininity all you want but first off, you need to admit that they’re not an almighty symbol of empowerment, and secondly that if you do a job with a lot of physical activity in heels you’re risking your own safety. all these women fighting in heels on tv are going to end up seriously injuring themselves.
weaponised femininity is a concept made up in an attempt to get us to embrace the industries created to hold us back/profit from our insecurities so that we can continue to fit into the male expectation of what a woman should be and not question why we are forced to spend thousands on our appearance every year
just a small anecdote. I had a friend who worked in theater; she was the stage manager and an actress came to her in tears one day because the director absolutely refused to let her do a choreographed fight scene in less than 3 inch heels because “they’re platforms so you’ll be okay.” My friend, who is a woman’s size 10, brought her own heels in the next day and DEMANDED the director put them on and try the choreography before the actress did it. He finally agreed to change it, without putting the heels on.
so like I know you might think of “all those women on tv fighting in heels” as fictional woman who WOULD hurt themselves in real life, but its fiction so its okay…except those women are portrayed by real actresses who are actually fighting in actual heels, being directed by dudes who have never worn a pair of heels in their lives, alongside men who aren’t expected to constantly wear things that make their stunts 2x more dangerous than they have to be. Just a thought.
Men take “let’s see feminine women being badass” to mean “let’s see women impractically focused on their appearance in combat situations.“
Also, as a side note, the things we consider “masculine” usually are just the things that are practical and comfortable for a situation. Usually when when we say a female character is “feminine, but able to kick ass”, specifically in reference to costume design, we actually mean “there are some very impractical elements in this design (read: wonder woman and valkyrie), but her boobs aren’t on full display and she’s not wearing stilettos”. The idea that practical and appropriate clothing for dangerous or physically demanding situations is inherently masculine really has to go, because it is all kinds of fucked up.
shoes etc.) are assumed to be inherently feminine, therefore mandatory for women in fiction, no matter the context. And that female characters who don’t comply to them to some degree are automatically “tomboys” or “rebels” or cheaply-achieved “good” female representation.
The first stream redesign I did was for the infamous “leatherbound books make a perfect skirt!” costume of Magilou from Tales of Berseria, which we bingoed before. I suppose the creators thought that being a magic user excuses her sense of fashion, but I wouldn’t know how to begin explaining their exact thought process.
Agreeing with Icy that poofy pants are great (and would compliment the shape of Magilou’s hat), I decided to put them in place of the mind-boggling book-skirt. Without books, her furry collar became the only splash of brown in her design, so I got rid of it, replacing it with a collar that would make her top wearable.
While working on that I noticed that the alternating blue-pink rythm of her color scheme was inconsistent in some small details, so I recolored her left shoe and painted light pink diamonds on her right sleeve. Also added a fringe to the pants and an undershirt that, along with new collar, fit the scheme of details being lighter shades of pink and blue, while primary shapes are colored darker.
Her hat was pretty awesome and its color asymmetry not really distracting, so I left it as it was.
