Premium Format SSC Harley Quinn

[-COI-]

So comments like the one that started this debate, "the only thing I hate is the nipples, I can't wait to get this statue" are invalid? Since when have these threads ever conformed to your standard of only discussing the positive aspects of a statue so as not to ruin the joy of the people who disagree with your point of view? At least the comment and many the share the opinion are coming from people who actually own or purchased it, which is so much better then the constant trashing of statues that these threads endure on a daily basis from people who never had any intention of buying the statue to begin with.

Umm, all I said was it's kinda silly that this debate is happening now, when pics of this statue have been out for a year. That's it. I made no judgment on the validity of the complaints either way, and I made it clear that I understood the criticism.

 

[DarthChrisDK]

It makes sense that it is happening now. Now is when this piece is reaching the customers. The thread is experiencing new life, and pros and cons of this statue will be discussed once again.

 

[-COI-]

It makes sense that it is happening now. Now is when this piece is reaching the customers. The thread is experiencing new life, and pros and cons of this statue will be discussed once again.

I understand, but I still think it's funny. It's not the critique itself, but the subsequent debate that I find silly. That said, far be it from me to interfere with such fascinating discourse.

 

[DarthChrisDK]

I understand, but I still think it's funny. It's not the critique itself, but the subsequent debate that I find silly. That said, far be it from me to interfere with such fascinating discourse.

That's because a lot of people take the critique rather personal when they, themselves, have gotten this piece, or plan to get it. As I said a few pages back: This thread is for everybody. Not just the owners of this piece. Most of the critique I've read is constructive, and well-founded.

 

[csi]

That's because a lot of people take the critique rather personal when they, themselves, have gotten this piece, or plan to get it. As I said a few pages back: This thread is for everybody. Not just the owners of this piece. Most of the critique I've read is constructive, and well-founded.

 

[-COI-]

That's because a lot of people take the critique rather personal when they, themselves, have gotten this piece, or plan to get it. As I said a few pages back: This thread is for everybody. Not just the owners of this piece. Most of the critique I've read is constructive, and well-founded.

I agree with you; the critiques are valid, which I said twice already. But the heated debate that followed from the critique is funny. I find humor in people insulting each other over nipples on a comic book statue.

 

[filip629]

LOVE the EX portrait on this piece. I'll have to wait another 2 weeks or so to get this because I have my final flex payment on the 20th. Also LOVE the nips on this piece. She's as sexy as she is crazy.

 

[devilof76]

We had a year to have this debate; the nip has sailed at this point.

It has, but the henpecking is hard to resist.

Yes, I get what you mean, however your original argument was that she was originally "conceived" this way, which is absolutely false.

Absolute on which planet? She has always been an educated woman who fell for a homicidal clown, and fell hard. You can pretend that her sexuality is dissociated from that if you like, and you can wave the whopping 9 cartoon episodes that she was in as evidence for her platonic attraction, but the fact that a children's cartoon is no place to make that fact explicit is not an argument against its existence.

If you're trying to reduce my argument to a claim that Timm and Dini's character was originally sconceived to have nipple poking through her costume, you're fishing for red herring. That's not what I'm saying so dispense with the sophistry. If you're trying to deny that the character was sexualized in her original incarnation, then you have the entire rest of her history as depicted by the same artists to contend with, as well as her regular appearances in the cartoon (some of which have already been posted here, but a basic google search will further support that). As early as 1994, she was presented in comics with an overt sexual slant (even to the extent of graphic depiction of her breasts---the first panel she's in, as a matter of fact, as well as the cover).

Sure, she has been sexualized in various comic and artistic representations over the years, but was not originally created that way, nor was that the norm for the character.

Wrong on both counts. Various? Try most, including the cartoon. No, it was not realistically explicit. That doesn't change the subtext, or the suggestivity that anyone over the age of 6 would pick up on.

So yeah a statue can be marketed in a way that appeals to older (what you call mature) collectors, but let's cut out the sanctimonious BS about it being originally created that way, since that is a flat out lie, and honestly a rarity to how the character was depicted most of the time in any format.

The statue is no exception, and you're in flat out denial (sanctimoniously so, I'd reckon, but won't stoop to presume). If you're going to accuse people of forcing data to conform to a subjective narrative, you might want to either learn what those words mean, or look in a mirror. Nine cartoon episodes vs. the entirety of her comic history (even the Dodson art, who saw fit to put large breasts on a woman whose muscle content would have made that much adipose tissue impossible), her video game history, and her extensive history as a pin-up subject in the portfolio of the man who invented her contradict any claim to the effect that the essence of Harley Quinn is a cute, desexualized, villain by errant emotional commitment. She's a violent (uh, no blood in the cartoon? she must not have been that violent ), insane woman with an utterly non-platonic passion for a man whose violence she can only hope to match (compelled by a virginal, soft-nippled love, I'm sure).

 

[csi]

I has, but the henpecking is hard to resist.



Absolute on which planet? She has always been an educated woman who fell for a homicidal clown, and fell hard. You can pretend that her sexuality is dissociated from that if you like, and you can wave the whopping 9 cartoon episodes that she was in as evidence for her platonic attraction, but the fact that a children's cartoon is no place to make that fact explicit is not an argument against its existence.

If you're trying to reduce my argument to a claim that Timm and Dini's character was originally sconceived to have nipple poking through her costume, you're fishing for red herring. That's not what I'm saying so dispense with the sophistry. If you're trying to deny that the character was sexualized in her original incarnation, then you have the entire rest of her history as depicted by the same artists to contend with, as well as her regular appearances in the cartoon (some of which have already been posted here, but a basic google search will further support that). As early as 1994, she was presented in comics with an overt sexual slant (even to the extent of graphic depiction of her breasts---the first panel she's in, as a matter of fact, as well as the cover).



Wrong on both counts. Various? Try most, including the cartoon. No, it was not realistically explicit. That doesn't change the subtext, or the suggestivity that anyone over the age of 6 would pick up on.



The statue is no exception, and you're in flat out denial (sanctimoniously so, I'd reckon, but won't stoop to presume). If you're going to accuse people of forcing data to conform to a subjective narrative, you might want to either learn what those words mean, or look in a mirror. Nine cartoon episodes vs. the entirety of her comic history (even the Dodson art, who saw fit to put large breasts on a woman whose muscle content would have made that much adipose tissue impossible), her video game history, and her extensive history as a pin-up subject in the portfolio of the man who invented her contradict any claim to the effect that the essence of Harley Quinn is a cute, desexualized, villain by errant emotional commitment. She's a violent (uh, no blood in the cartoon? she must not have been that violent ), insane woman with an utterly non-platonic passion for a man whose violence she can only hope to match (compelled by a virginal, soft-nippled love, I'm sure).

Lol, so you want to discount the cartoons because they don't fit your narrative. Fine, but I'm willing to bet that if you take the entirety of her comic book appearances, there will be way more examples of her without nipples poking through, then with. Either way, the passion you are defending the need for nipples is fascinating. Why is it so had to say you like sexualized media and accept that some people don't? You don't need to make crap up to defend your position, at the end of the day your opinion is no more right or wrong then anyone else.

 

[csi]

LOVE the EX portrait on this piece. I'll have to wait another 2 weeks or so to get this because I have my final flex payment on the 20th. Also LOVE the nips on this piece. She's as sexy as she is crazy.

Mine was supposed to ship yesterday, but I had to call and have it delayed because I am out of town for two weeks

 

[devilof76]

 

[devilof76]

 

[devilof76]

Lol, so you want to discount the cartoons because they don't fit your narrative. .

I didn't discount them. I said they were less overt. I'm pretty sure the last two posts say plenty about who is making crap up to fit their narrow (and by this point, clearly dishonest and/or deluded) point of view.

Also, where did you learn to BS like that? You're still trying to reduce my argument to 'nipples' when they're only a representation of her sexuality, which is what I'm arguing. She's a sexual character, and always has been.

I'm getting flashbacks of arguing with Nam...

 

[-COI-]

It has, but the henpecking is hard to resist.



Absolute on which planet? She has always been an educated woman who fell for a homicidal clown, and fell hard. You can pretend that her sexuality is dissociated from that if you like, and you can wave the whopping 9 cartoon episodes that she was in as evidence for her platonic attraction, but the fact that a children's cartoon is no place to make that fact explicit is not an argument against its existence.

If you're trying to reduce my argument to a claim that Timm and Dini's character was originally sconceived to have nipple poking through her costume, you're fishing for red herring. That's not what I'm saying so dispense with the sophistry. If you're trying to deny that the character was sexualized in her original incarnation, then you have the entire rest of her history as depicted by the same artists to contend with, as well as her regular appearances in the cartoon (some of which have already been posted here, but a basic google search will further support that). As early as 1994, she was presented in comics with an overt sexual slant (even to the extent of graphic depiction of her breasts---the first panel she's in, as a matter of fact, as well as the cover).



Wrong on both counts. Various? Try most, including the cartoon. No, it was not realistically explicit. That doesn't change the subtext, or the suggestivity that anyone over the age of 6 would pick up on.



The statue is no exception, and you're in flat out denial (sanctimoniously so, I'd reckon, but won't stoop to presume). If you're going to accuse people of forcing data to conform to a subjective narrative, you might want to either learn what those words mean, or look in a mirror. Nine cartoon episodes vs. the entirety of her comic history (even the Dodson art, who saw fit to put large breasts on a woman whose muscle content would have made that much adipose tissue impossible), her video game history, and her extensive history as a pin-up subject in the portfolio of the man who invented her contradict any claim to the effect that the essence of Harley Quinn is a cute, desexualized, villain by errant emotional commitment. She's a violent (uh, no blood in the cartoon? she must not have been that violent ), insane woman with an utterly non-platonic passion for a man whose violence she can only hope to match (compelled by a virginal, soft-nippled love, I'm sure).

On the internet, there is a direct correlation between the coherence of an argument, and the propensity with which that argument will be glossed over and diminished by the people against whom the argument is directed. So I hope you get a kick out of writing, because the logical quality of posts like this will be lost on most. I'm a fan, though.

 

[devilof76]

Thank you sir.

My pleasure.

 

[themadchadder]

I think a New 52 head sculpt of Harley would be cool. I know her costume is different, but the hair color and smeared eyeshadow would be awesome and sinister.

 

[chrisdeeds]

Mine shipped yesterday...so looking forward to it!

 

[csi]

I didn't discount them. I said they were less overt. I'm pretty sure the last two posts say plenty about who is making crap up to fit their narrow (and by this point, clearly dishonest and/or deluded) point of view.

Also, where did you learn to BS like that? You're still trying to reduce my argument to 'nipples' when they're only a representation of her sexuality, which is what I'm arguing. She's a sexual character, and always has been.

I'm getting flashbacks of arguing with Nam...

The whole debate were if the nipples were necessary or not, the statue is quite sexy without them, the nipples put it over the top.

 

[devilof76]

And I'm debating that there is no reason why they should not be there because the fact that she's both turned on and not wearing anything under her clownsuit is part and parcel of the essence of the character as she is and always has been. Don't conflate my participation in the argument with the nature of the arguments as presented by other participants, thanks.

When another poster tried to tag you as creationist because you were arguing against their necessity, I called him out. Mutual respect would be appreciated (I know, it's a lot to ask).

 

[mikedanger]