Tattooed Superheroines?

[Aisbeforeyou]

I personally love tattooed girls, but have noticed that a lot of videos don't have tattooed actresses

[ranger87]

Tattoos can be fine...just not on superheroines. I like superheroine models/actresses to be tattoo free. Just my preference.

[SGWriter]

Tattoos can be fine...just not on superheroines. I like superheroine models/actresses to be tattoo free. Just my preference.

Same here, covered up under costume or tights is okay too, but generally I don't like tattoos on women.

[sugarcoater]

Funny how the posts are okay with tattoos, but the poll has over 80% against it.

[SGWriter]

Funny how the posts are okay with tattoos, but the poll has over 80% against it.

Well I voted no, but clarified if I don't see them I don't care which is kind of the same thing. If a video/photo set ended up with me seeing all the tattoos I'd skipped it.

[ChenSing]

I prefer no tats on superheroines, One inconspicuous one would be tolerable for me but anymore than that and it's just a turn off.

[Superman246o1]

Everyone has a right to do with their body whatever they want, but personally, I find tattoos to be a turnoff. Particularly in the SHiP genre, I find that they take away from the fantasy.

[Heroine Addict]

Everyone has a right to do with their body whatever they want, but personally, I find tattoos to be a turnoff. Particularly in the SHiP genre, I find that they take away from the fantasy.

I agree. We're supposed to believe a superheroine maintains a dual identity, yet she goes around with a prominent distinguishing mark (or marks) on her body.

This is fine if the tat(s) can be concealed by her hair, costume and/or boots while she's in one guise. However, it totally blows the fantasy if both guises have visible ink.

[tallyho]

Funny how the posts are okay with tattoos, but the poll has over 80% against it.

Not sure if you have read it right as there are only 3posts ahead of yours, .1pro by the author of the thread and 2con saying they didn't like seeing them on SHs.?

I'm against them - I loved Paris K when she was un-tattooed, now they are all over her arms and back she still looks a fox if they are covered (like as Flame in the Novawoman video) but with them exposed she looks more villainess than heroine. Something discreet is acceptable but the garish ones are just 'unheroic'. As stated by others it just spoils the fantasy, imo.

[Heroine Addict]

This sort of costume would work well with a heavily-tattooed model as there's very little skin on show.

http://suicidegirls.com/members/Jessyta ... ite/30466/

Of course, Barbara Gordon would need to rewritten slightly from the prim librarian we all know.


On a side note, does anyone know if this Batgirl costume was mass-produced or was it commissioned by Suicide Girls? The mask in particular captures the Silver Age Batgirl perfectly without looking too hatty or helmety.

[batgirl1969]

I like the heroines to be pure and not inked...its like if they can endure the pain of a tat what else could they take...now the villainess i love being a tattooed lezdom...makes her seem stronger and wilder to take the simple helpless little untainted heroine to new levels of pain and pleasure

[viking]

I agree with ranger87. Tattoos do not fit the image of the traditional superheroine. I do not purchase videos in which the model playing a superheroine has large or numerous tattoos.

[sugarcoater]

"Not sure if you have read it right as there are only 3posts ahead of yours, .1pro by the author of the thread and 2con saying they didn't like seeing them on SHs.?"

I did read it right, I just thought it was funny that the first few posts were not in the 80%. Pointless observation, but I found it amusing as I was talking to someone just a little earlier about the silent majority issue.

But as for tattoos, excellent point about the conspicuous look to the tattoo. There is also the matter of how big the tattoo might be, what the tattoo is, and how the tattoo fits the character. I won't say the cliche "everyone is entitled to..." nonsense as we all get that. But as the issue is of casting the proper model, the tattoo AT TIMES (not a rule of course) adds a level of trampiness to the character. And as none of the mainstream superheroines have a tattoo, the actress portraying the superheroine role having the tattoo takes away from the fantasy--it's harder to invoke the suspension of disbelief.
It would be weird seeing the "Man of Steel" movie if the actor playing Superman had a tattoo of his last name on his back or a tattoo of a half-naked woman on his forearm. I don't see Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne with knuckle tattoos. If a Wonder Woman movie ever came out, I don't see a butterfly or heart tattoo on her lower back.
This is all in the context of buying superheroine videos and has nothing to do with tattoos OUTSIDE of the realm of superheroine videos (my version of the "everyone is entitled to" cliche; I'm actually planning on getting one this summer).

[mike2]

We can suspend our disbelief when a slip of a girl throatlifts a dude twice her size, but we can't do it when her prominent tat supposedly gives away her secret ID? And yet somehow we accept that Supergirl fools the world by wearing a brown wig.

[sugarcoater]

First off, the suspension of disbelief connects to an already established superheroine in many cases. As most of the outfits used are designed to mimic a DC or Marvel character, the closer the model and outfit connect to that character, the easier the suspension of disbelief. The issue is not whether a small woman can throat-lift a large man, as that is precisely what a superheroine should be capable of doing. The suspension of disbelief goes further--it extends to the idea of a superheroine with pristine morals who would never deign to let a man, let alone a villain, have his way with her.

Simply put, and there is only anecdotal data to corroborate my perspective (but what else matters when I am merely expressing my own taste as part of a poll?), tattoos are more often seen on--shall we say looser--women. From the women I've known to what I've seen in the media, tattoos on women tend to be something connected to a looser, less up-tight personalities. This can be a representation of a free spirit or someone who is sexually very loose. This is not to say that there is not the occasional thoughtful, sentimental tattoo of important significance. But there is a reason why in "Wedding Crashers", Vince Vaughn's character says when he sees the woman with the tramp stamp, "Might as well be a bullseye." So simply put, I am not looking for some chick with tats to represent an already created and non-tattooed woman of virtue. That is entirely just my perspective to which some may agree and others may disagree, it's nothing personal.

That tattoos are mainstream are not the issue. It's simply whether tattoos make sense on superheroines. With very few exceptions, they don't seem to make much sense. That a 2006 tattoo was briefly used with Supergirl (as opposed to all the years of her existence without one) and the hypothesis that Palicki's tattoo(s?) might be seen by accident in a never-to-be Wonder Woman series doesn't really make a strong argument in favor of them or that I am too old. Superheroines generally don't have tattoos, and in the past never did. As most of us have to be at least 18 to buy any of the material linked here, we grew up with non-tattooed superheroines. It makes sense that the fantasies being created would mimic that for the most part.

Apologies for debating the issue, but I do enjoy a good discussion of differing views as long as they remain on topic and don't devolve to ad hominem arguments.