marchoftheaprils:

Hey, I was just looking at that rule 63 Power Girl, and it got me thinking. Why do people, when they make these types of rule 63, focus on the primary sexual characteristics, and not the secondary? If you were to make a rule 63 of the rule 63 Power Girl, you would need to give her a huge clitoris/vulva.

image

(source)

Whether something classifies as a primary or secondary characteristic is mostly only of interest to biologists and people involved in medicine.   The classification refers purely to biological matters and development during puberty.

If someone were to make a Rule 63 of the Rule 63 would look like Power Girl, because massive genitalia is not what society considers “sexy” in women – but massive boobs are.

What’s really interesting to me is the disregard for all the other aspects involved.  For example, Power Boy’s lips remain full and kissable but his upper body is more bulked than Power Girl – but not as ripped and chiseled as conventional super heroes are.

– wincenworks

more about false equivalence on BABD

Thank you to icykitty for sharing the trauma of a set of armor that may actually be worse than the infamous outfit of Shahde from Prince of Persia.

– wincenworks

I like to think that the all-around badness of

this figure

kinda makes it an unintentional piece of commentary art. As if the designer/sculptor/company behind it was trying to say “You though you saw the worst of sexy female warriors? Nope, they could look like THIS!”.

And it just gets better when you turn it around and consider the anatomy… not only is her whole shoulder clearly dislocated and torso unnaturally swiveled, the sculpt of her underboobastic top makes it look as if she had an extra breast right under her armpit!

~Ozzie