HOME | DD
Noruuuu β Dickie in heels
Published: 2013-04-28 13:57:59 +0000 UTC; Views: 1764; Favourites: 52; Downloads: 6
Redirect to original
Description
yes, the sassy little diva he is.Related content
Comments: 54
Very nice! I think Dick has the grace and physique to look very good in heels.
π: 0 β©: 1
Omg yis.
PS. kuolet jos saat jotai ajatuksia tiedΓ€t-kyllΓ€-mihin liittyen :::: DDD ::: DDD
Kumminki suunnittelet siellΓ€
π: 0 β©: 1
XDDD joo Γ€lΓ€ huoli
ehkΓ€ joskus
maybe
π: 0 β©: 1
sshhhhhhh
tai puetaan Scottie mekkoon
eiku
mit
shhhhh
en sanonut mitÀÀn
shhhhhhhhhhhh
oon lukenu kaheksan sivuu ootko ylpeys
π: 0 β©: 1
HHAHAHA
yes maybe mmmh
and yes I'm proud
π: 0 β©: 1
8))))))))))
es good u is proud
mut joo sellane tyllikermakakku vai sellane ihonmyΓΆtΓ€ne halkiomekko?
...ei helvetti nyt, tuun stiimiin, pakko selittÀÀ siellÀ yks kauheen hirveen kamalan hieno visio minkÀ sain
koht kyl saunings mut en nyt tÀssÀ ala selittÀÀ pfffff
π: 0 β©: 0
... really, this is still something people do to get laughs out of others? When a woman dresses and poses like a man, that's cool and badass to people in general. But when a man dresses and poses like a woman, THAT's suddenly meant to be taken as a joke and something to laugh at?
... does anyone even realize how this affects males in general? No matter how badly some males might want to be a bit more effiminate, we won't feel like we are allowed to because everyone views it as a joke. Yes, I know there are males who are brave and strongwilled enough to do it. But a lot of other males are suppressing themselves because they feel insecure and vulnerable.
I might not want to be a transvestite or anything - but I personally want to be allowed to be myself. And I AM insecure and vulnerable. Sorry for "ruining" the whole fun with this for you, but I think this is a serious topic not to take lightly. Some people even goes so far as to commit suicide for not being allowed to be themselves - and when it's taken as a laugh when a male does something that is very common for a female to do and generally accepted of them to do, that's as far away from equality as you can get.
π: 0 β©: 3
WARNING!! Multiple coffee induced trains of thought up ahead, so be warned, it won't make any sense (it's 1:25 am)
I understand where you are coming from, and you have made me think from a different perspective. I guess it is kind of like the top-freedom arguments; some people agree for the equality reasons, but others agree because of their libidos.
I reckon it is seen as humor because for centuries men have been seen as the dominant ones in society, and to stand down and act feminine would be to give up that dominance, therefore become the 'laughing stock'. But for a woman to fight for her right to be 'manly' would be attempting to gain dominance, therefore, seen seriously, or even a threat to man.
I think I was going to say something else, but I've forgotten, I'll probably remember after I click Add Comment.
π: 0 β©: 1
Well, glad I could make you think from a different perspective. 
And feel free to say more you think about if it comes to your mind. That's cool, I love discussing things.
π: 0 β©: 0
While I admit I took this as a joke at first too, your post was unexpected, and kinda awesome. Like you I'm not a transvestite myself, but I'm not exactly the most macho guy around, and I can see where you're coming from. A lot of people do commit suicide over the fact that they want to dress or act effeminate but are too ashamed to do so, especially in certain cultures that are very strict when it comes to gender identity and sexuality.
Now, some people will probably comment here and tell you not to take things so seriously, and I apologize in advance on behalf of them for that, but thank you for making an excellent point on why things like this shouldn't be taken so lightly or comically.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm actually beyond happy I got a response like your's, actually. 
Thanks, man. One can only hope things will get better with how society and media views it.
π: 0 β©: 1
No problem. Hopefully, given the fact that once upon a time women weren't allowed to dress like men (in fact, in some versions of the bible and Quaran and similar religious texts, its outright considered a sin for a woman to wear pants, seriously) and now you're more likely to see a girl wearing jeans then a skirt, it will eventually become more common place and less of an issue for people. But, sadly, we still live in a world where the rights of gay people's marriage and the thought of the Hawkeye initiative is enough to make people physically angry, so it'll probably take some time.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, you're right. 
And indeed. I hope for more diversity in the future with superheroes and stuff, accepting the LGBT community. I often wonder why they can not as an example make Lobo bisexual? I mean... why not? Wouldn't ruin or change the character - just add something more to him.
π: 0 β©: 1
Well, to some people, it would 'ruin or change' the character. Recently I was talking to someone who felt that straight characters should stay straight, and if they want to add more gay or bi characters they should introduce more. Though, given their views towards slash pairings and how angry they got over it, I think the person might've been a bit homophobic. Still not as bad as some people I've interacted with though.
π: 0 β©: 1
I think those who wants "straight" characters to stay straight are either homophobes (unintentionally or not), or they are extreme purists which is more unlikely.
No one will care about new introduced characters in Marvel or DC that are gay or bi. Better to just change it with some of them - either to be bi, or even gay if it's open for that. People are just being thickheaded assholes about it if you ask me.
π: 0 β©: 2
The person did strike me as a bit of a purist, a lot of his views on many aspects struck me as someone who is very obsessed with continuity. There was also someone who made an ass out of themselves on the Marvel Heroes Online Beta forum by acting disgusted at the idea of the Hawkeye Initiative.
Unfortunately true, new characters have an upward battle for sales; unless they join a team or take the title of a previously established hero and make a good enough impression, then its hard for them to gain a solid following, especially if they're not a straight white male. It also doesn't help that characters that were given justifiable explanations for them coming out as gay, such as Shatterstar, then have to deal with their original creators complaining about the change.
π: 0 β©: 1
Hmph, I see. -_-' Those idiots tend to be irrational about things changing, even if it's for good well-written reasons.
Original creators complaining? Jeez... still so filled with homophobes, these things are... >~<;
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah. The Anti-HI idiot was just a straight up homophobe though. Fortunately, the rest of the forum seemed to be far more tolerant, some even quipped that if he's so worried about being turned gay at seeing a half naked male character, then it says more about him then it does anything else.
Yeah; Rob Liefeld, Shatterstar's 'creator' (though given that Liefeld steals all his ideas anyway...), was so deadset against Shatterstar dating Rictor that he swore to undo it should he work for Marvel ever again. Luckily, he quit DC, then attacked Tom Brevoort on Twitter, thus destroying any chance of getting back into Marvel.
π: 0 β©: 1
LOL Indeed it does. 
Well, that's good. The DC and Marvel companies will probably work a lot better without people like him involved.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yep, now if only they can get rid of Mark Millar and ensure Frank Miller and Chuck Austin stays away, things should get better. Honestly, they need more Kieron Gillen-like writers; not only is he very vocally supportive of gay characters (and very defensive of female characters when they get slut shamed), he's also a damn good writer.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh man, Frank Miller... I just don't get it. The Dark Knight Returns was an awesome comic. Heck, the few flaws it had, the two animated movies got rid of. Like, the fact that one dude says Batman hits the right people and should go after the gays next. They changed that into that he hopes he beats his landlord next, which... well, feels a lot more appropriate.
Frank Miller needs some serious help with how slut shamed and sexualized he makes his females. And... I don't really know what his stance really is when it comes to homosexuality. I kinda feel like he could be a homophobe, but... I don't know? Is that confirmed in any way?
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, its quite surprising, considering he flat out admits he felt bad about turning Catwoman into a brothel owner and later retconned her into a prostitute. Its amazing just how far he's fallen, though, even back in his hey day he had some problems, what with the fact he turned Daredevil's love interest into a drug addicted stripper desperate enough for a fix she sold him out to criminals. Linkara sums it up pretty nicely every time he does a Miller Time review.
I'm not completely sure, though given how he wrote Joker!Dick Grayson and Batman's relationship in DKSA its not a hard thing to think, and I know Alan Moore accused him of such. After Miller's infamous 'All the Occupy protesters are just lazy criminals and rapists that should enlist because Muslims are evil' rant, Moore responded by calling him out on his decline in quality and how some of his later work was filled with misogynistic and homophobic tones.
π: 0 β©: 1
Though, I think it worked surprisingly well to have Catwoman as a prostitute in Year One... the animated movie - not read the comic.
I know nothing about DKSA... not sure what it stands for. o3o; But okay, I see. Well, those things certainly are pretty bad indeed. >.<;
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm not overly fond of it, mostly because I feel Frank Miller doesn't really write prostitutes with much respect, but I do admit she was pretty badass once she put on the costume and started kicking butt, though I personally proffer Rises version, with Ann Hathaway (I just love the way she responds to being threatened by anyone by breaking something). She was easily the best thing about the movie.
'Dark Knight Strikes Again'. The ending has Dick Grayson revealed to be the mysterious 'New Joker' that has a healing factor and shape shifting abilities. Batman beats him up while calling him a 'sissy' with a very homophobic undertone to his actions.
π: 0 β©: 1
I... can not help but to say I really hate Anne Hathaway as Catwoman - both for her performance and for how the character is written. Allow me to quote my recent review of Rises:
I hate Catwoman in this movie. Some people think she's the best Catwoman ever... I don't see it. Not only do I think Catwoman in Year One is the perfect Catwoman to me (also in the DC Showcase Catwoman animated short) - but I also think Catwoman was better in Batman Returns, despite being a different character there. Anne Hathaway is not a great actor, people. She's not awful or even bad or anything, but... nothing special about her. She was terrible in Alice in Wonderland, and all her other roles except those two are forgettable as far as I am concerned. I will just always remember her as the bitch who indirectly killed a gay guy in Brokeback Mountain. 
So that was the end of that quote. 
π: 0 β©: 1
Ah, guess its a matter of opinion then, though I admit you have some valid points there (still, its better then the Catwoman in the self titled film, who goes beyond In Name Only), though Rises has many problems, not just concerning her. I honestly think it was the weakest of the three films, but then again its hard to really outdo Dark Knight.
It really is. I swear Miller must've been taking something when he wrote that, no way does anyone write something so...bizarre while sober, even if they're as crazy as Frank Miller.
π: 0 β©: 1
I've grown to feel like The Dark Knight Rises is one of the worst films I have ever seen - it's downright incredible how many flaws that movie has. But I can see good things in it, sure... but yeah, it sucks. HOWEVER, I think The Dark Knight is overrated. I think Nolan's Batman movies are overrated period. But I respect people for loving them... just expect them to do the same with me. I am constructive about it, so I try to help people see where I am coming from.
Yeah, not much more to say there, really. He wrote The Dark Knight Strikes Again as if he was just trying to say he doesn't give a shit about anything anymore.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh, agree there completely, they are VERY overrated, and the fandom annoys me a lot in how defensive they can be; similar to how I feel about Avatar. I can see why people love them, but they have a lot of problems, and I dislike how far they go to remove any fantastical element (Ra's Al Ghul is immortal!), as well as the asinine way of depicting Robin because they were so worried that it would make the film fail (seriously, orphaned circus brat gets coached and taken in by Batman is not that hard to depict in a dark and edgy manner, Dark Victory showed it can be done). Though, the three have enough good qualities I can enjoy them, but they're not as amazing as some people claim.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nolan's movies are fairly entertaining... well, except Rises, which is just shit to me. XP LOL But yeah. It feels like Nolan is only changing things for the sake of changing. I believe you should only change things around if it improves or makes it interesting. But... nope, Nolan changes the most odd and random things. I hate that. It's like he's too self-important. Not to mention... I suspect he's a racist, a homophobe and a womanizer. And that makes me like his movies even less. >_<;
π: 0 β©: 1
Not sure about the racist, homophobe, or womanizer thing, but I agree with the idea that he makes too many changes. Changes should only be made if it helps adapting them, like giving Irom Man an armour modelled after his Extremis suit from the beginning, or making Loki semi-sympathetic instead of being evil for the sake of evil. I feel the Nolanverse has some good ideas but many of the changes are unnecessary or hampering to the product.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yes, I agree. Like... Nolan is SO convinced his movies are SO realistic, even though they aren't. And some changes doesn't have to do with realism. He changes Bane from being hispanic to white, and doesn't have his spanish accent anymore but... instead sounds like Sean Connery doing a Darth Vader impression while swallowing a cat. And instead of his steroids, AKA his venom... he has a mask to make sure he's not in pain? Uhm, okay. I guess steroids are too unrealistic now...?
And hell, I can not get over Joker. Fine, whatever - he wears make-up here instead of the toxic waste backstory to his look... I think it's pointless and stupid, but I can accept it. But god damnit, where's his smylex gas? That's something I want to see a modern depiction of, since that gas can be very dark and disturbing if it's done right. But NO - instead, he just paints his victims with the same make-up he has.... bullshit, I say. >_<;
π: 0 β©: 1
Well, Bane was always at least part white, but yeah, its fairly silly to not at least give him a spanish accent. At least they didn't make him a dumb muscle bound thug though. I suppose the way Venom works is fairly unrealistic; steroids don't jut grant you muscle, it makes it easier for you to build it up, you still need to exercise. But, I don't get the pain idea they went for, and it kinda sucks that it was clearly meant to be a plot twist but they mention it in very interview about the character. I think if they really wanted to make it realistic, just explaining its some kind of adrenaline-based steroid that allows you to ignore your bodies in-built limitations; scientifically speaking, we only use about twenty percent of our muscle mass and our mind refuses to let us use any more unless we're in the middle of an adrenaline rush, so if they went that route they could make some sense of it, but they don't, and it kinda fails to make him all that fearsome.
I actually liked Joker in the film, but since we disagree on that I think its best to not get into why.
π: 0 β©: 1
If they did that, it would have been pretty cool actually. Still... I prefer Bane being the way he's supposed to be. Yes, even the mexican wrestler mask - I don't care, it looks to cool to avoid having.
I think Joker is a pretty cool character in that movie - Heath Ledger gave a fantastic performance. I just don't like how they changed those two said things, is all. Not to mention... I can like him as his character more than as Joker. Joker isn't supposed to spread chaos - he's supposed to BE chaos.
I don't know, I just prefer them to try to be truthful to the characters.
π: 0 β©: 1
That's a good sentiment to have. I mean, I don't mind changing bits of an origin if it suits the story or makes them realistic; like I don't mind that they removed the wrestling bit from Amazing Spider-Man or that they put Tony Stark's abduction in the modern setting of the war on terror rather then the war with Vietnam.
But, I do dislike when they change the character themselves to such an extent that they're no longer who they're supposed to be; main fault I have with the original Spider-Man trilogy is the fact that they don't really play up Peter's witty sense of humour, and remove every likable trait from MJ and left her basically a plot device for Peter to angst about (contrary to popular belief, but Peter isn't meant to angst. He's meant to have a hard life, but in spite of that he goes on with a happy smile because he's strong enough to deal with his problems head on; its annoying how that was lost on so many people).
π: 0 β©: 1
I completely agree with you on all of these things, actually.
Speaking of unrecognizable characters... I don't get why Nolan changed Flass instead of writing a new character. So... in Year One, Flass is a tall muscular shorthaired blonde cop and a bully. In Batman Begins... Flass is still a cop, but that's about it. He's short, fat, has long curly hair, and is a pathetic coward. He's literally only Flass by name - it's just stupid.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, I personally loved it. I admit it has some flaws and some change I dislike (I'm not overly fond of the fact that Gwen is now basically MJ only more book smart and blond, especially given that Emma Stone is more famous as a red head, or that Captain Stacy is anti-Spidey, though it does work with their story), but its one of the best superhero films around, IMHO. I dislike just how much some people hate it, I mean, it underprformed thanks to the negative buzz it got for being a reboot. I just hope the sequel's good, because I like Garfield as Peter and hope to see him more.
Yeah, I though that was weird, though at least he's still a villain. I mean, Loeb went from the overweight and corrupt bully that tried to kill James Jr to the tall, respected, honourable commissioner that just so happens to be anti-Bat.
π: 0 β©: 1
Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker/Spider-Man is a really great pick. I love him in the role.
Oh well... weird changes here and there. XP
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, it helps that, in his own words, he's wanted to be Spider-Man since he was 3. Lifelong fans of a character always make the best choice, honestly. Look at RDJ as Tony Stark, he apparently nerdgasmed when he got the part becasue he's that much of a fan, and he plays the role perfectly.
Yeah. On the bright side, they're already talking about rebooting the series, or potentially making another live action TV show. Nothing concrete though.
π: 0 β©: 1
Probably true.
I really don't have anything else to say now, I'm sorry.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, I'm stumped for anything else to say too.
π: 0 β©: 0
Well let's just appreciate the fact that Batwoman is a proud, lovely lesbian!
π: 0 β©: 1
She is? o3o; Didn't know, but... that's awesome. X3
Oh, and Harley Quinn is bisexual, and so is Poison Ivy... which the animated series imply. There's an episode where they are living in a apartment, sharing the same bed and everything.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah that's great!
And I also love Dick because in one comic, he had a homosexual colleague at work, who was being beat up by some homophobic cops (that's fucked up, yes) and one time, Dick went to defend him and the cops asked something like ''What are you Grayson? His boyfriend?'' and Dick just replied ''What if I am?''
I think that was really cool!
π: 0 β©: 1
O.O; There's a comic where Dick Grayson does that? Oh my god, that is so freakin' awesome! ; w ; Wish I knew how to find that comic. But it's so hard for me to find comics from where I live and stuff... >.<;
By the way, would have made a lot of sense to me if Dick turned out to be bi. I mean... why not?
π: 0 β©: 1
Yup! And yeah, I can't remember where I found it. I guess I read about it from someone's blog and the person was discussing it and gosh, I want to read it so bad! And I feel you! I live in Finland myself so yeah.
Yeah he could obviously be bi, why not indeed
π: 0 β©: 1
Ugh, man... must find that comic one day. >.< And yeah, Sweden here.
Indeed indeed.
π: 0 β©: 0
Oh, I'm sorry if this picture makes you think like that... since it's not what I was after. I do agree with you that it can be slightly easier for women to dress up like men than vice versa, but I am not making fun of it? This wasn't a 'joke' or anything. I didn't want it to be insulting, no way. I just drew this because I find it attractive when men wear high heels, nothing else. Of course everyone should be allowed to be what they want to, I support that very much! People should forget the norms that society has created. I think no one should be afraid to show what they are, or want to be.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh, I see. Well, glad that wasn't your intention.
π: 0 β©: 1
Hey don't worry about it! I'm glad you said what you had in mind
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>