By Cory Doctorow at 5:45 am Thu, Sep 13, 2007
I’m sure Shaq just ordered a thousand.
And you know Jerry Seinfeld has a dozen or so…
Can we retire the term “underwear pervert” already?
Dan must have thought-stealing powers, because I was thinking the same thing.
Well, it’s not like we can legally refer to them by that other term, it’s copyrighted. (And yes, I know, fair use, blah blah; the point is, “underwear pervert” was coined for a reason, and that reason hasn’t gone away.)
I agree with the above posters about retiring “underwear pervert.” With all due admiration to to the inventive, ingenious Warren Ellis, superheroes are a childlike, to be certain, representation of higher ideals. Flawed in execution, simplistic in concept, and largely reduced these days to re-re-recycled cliches.
But if you’ve ever watched a little kid discovering these characters and their clear struggles against outsized evil, you might reconsider the “UP” swipe.
My first thought: Batman logo also?
I’ll third that – it was mildly amusing at first. Then kind of annoying. Then pretty much a continuing kick in the nuts to anyone that reads a comic title with capes in it. And now, finally, it’s just disrespecting THE ultimate comic hero (see how I did that without using s-u-p-e-r-h-e-r-o-e-s and thus providing an opportunity to use “underwear perverts” yet again?)
Next it will be, like, zen or something.
You guys are obviously shills for Marvel/DC. Keep it up, Cory. Underwear Perverts Forever!
Call for pricing? Hell No! I have a jigsaw & a spare piece of Plywood.
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Submit a tip
The rules you agree to by using this website.
Who will be eaten first?
Jason Weisberger, Publisher
Ken Snider, Sysadmin