MovieChat Forums > Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) Discussion > No bulge? Why is the male form discrimin...

No bulge? Why is the male form discriminated against?

posted 7 years ago by [deleted]
38 replies | jump to latest

Women can go around in tight clothing with their breasts showing and wear thongs at the beach yet the male anatomy is still taboo.

They made his crotch so flat I was left to wonder if he had been desexed? Airbrushing or they actually made a 'skin tight' suit with built in flatener technology? At least with Batman and Robin in 1995 they decided to make a suit that wasn't trying to hide their gender. http://www.batman-online.com/features/1343578888_kilmer-odonnell-forever.jpg

[–] Bubbathegut (17220) 7 years ago

The missing bulge was annoying.

[–] thecritic (191) 7 years ago

When they were shooting this some photos came out and yeah you could see. But normally they don't want people so see that. Yeah not sure why they do it. Maybe they wanted to make sure they kept the PG-13 rating?

Funny the first spider-man movie with Tobey had Mary Jane all wet headlights showing! And still got a PG-13 rating. I think genitals are taboo, even an outline. I get what you mean. But he get's down to his boxers in this and it happens twice. Showing off his abs and stuff so he does display the male form somehow.

Maybe like the other people are saying not to over sexualize people playing HS characters. And women don't show Camel toe mostly so yeah.

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

Well a bulge is different than if you could make out his exact anatomy (which I what I think your camel toe example would be in the female form.)

Cartoons give superheroes a bulge. Action dolls do too. Its not sexual its just the male shape. If someone is wearing a skintight costume and there is nothing there it means they've been desexed or were born female.

[–] thecritic (191) 7 years ago

Ohh I get what you are saying now. Well maybe it's his posture in this behind the scenes pic you can see it:

http://cdn02.cdn.justjaredjr.com/wp-content/uploads/pictures/2016/06/tom-suit/tom-holland-spider-man-costume-first-look-set-02.jpg

But in officially released photos you can't

http://imageslogotv-a.akamaihd.net//uri/mgid:file:http:shared:newnownext.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/spiderman-homecoming-Sony-1498938308.jpg?quality=0.8&format=jpg&width=980

Maybe it's the pattern of the costume. But yeah a little bulge would have been better. I don't pay much attention to these things but I did feel like something was not right. And yeah seems like in all other types of spm there was a bulge. Good point, only thing I can think of is this is the youngest spm ever in a movie. Although they have the bulge in cartoons so yeah. Good catch tho! I did not even really notice until you pointed it out. And I remembered he was so flat...hmm

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

The first one is very modest. What was their problem?

[–] Peitr (9) 7 years ago

On one hand, the practical side is since it is such a sensitive area it makes sense that his d**k is protected somehow so it can not be hurt in battle and therefore it is not so visible in the skin-tight costume.

On the movie aesthetic/visual side, the way women's superhero costumes show so much, Spider-man's should at least show the outline of his c**k shaft and outline of his hanging balls and more detail on his a**.

So there.

[–] KevMill (242) 7 years ago

I would ask "Gay much"?! but unsure of your gender, so I'll leave it alone.

[–] dakowill11 (27) 6 years ago

I watched Spider-Man: Homecoming the other night and tbh I noticed this as well particularly in the final scene when the camera pans from his feet to his face. I was thinking to myself, "His groin looks kinda flat." It looked odd as it was more like a female's anatomy than a man's. For instance, when I'm wearing even loose tracksuit pants you can see the outline of my "manhood." Maybe they didn't want his natural male form to evoke any sensual feelings especially on a subconscious level from their younger audience?

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

They are so PC, but women can flaunt their "assets", wear jean-shorts with their cheeks hanging out but men apparently aren't allowed to even be a sexual being these days. If you take offence at a bulge then you're offended by being human, which is silly.

[–] untildawna (103) 5 years ago

You poor thing, maybe one day you can get another chance to stare at a 15yo characters bulge.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

You make it sexual, it's not sexual, it's part of the human anatomy that distinguishes sex. But making him flat they've robbed him of his masculinity. Men aren't flat.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Simple...it's a PG-13 movie.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Yeah, PG 13, not G rated.

[–] Kowalski (57835) 4 years ago

IM SURE ONE DAY YOU WILL FIND YOUR SPIDER BULGE.👰🏼🤵🏿

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

And not R-Rated either, where you could actually see the penis! Worrying about why you aren't allowed to see bulges speaks more about you than it does about the film.

[–] MovieTeen (4) 4 years ago

I am only fourteen years old and my d**k is already two times the size of Tom Holland's, so it would be perfectly normal to see a bulge. Even in that tight suit.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

My aren't we proud of something that no-one can normally see. And how do you KNOW how big Tom's penis is? Hummm?

[–] MovieTeen (4) 4 years ago

Ok, i meant bulge. Sorry, my fault. You are right, daveat23.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Did you notice his flatness or was it my post? lol

[–] MovieTeen (4) 4 years ago

I meant of course his regular bulge, in normal clothes and not edited.
And i don't exactly know what you mean with "or was it my post?"

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

This post in this forum.

[–] MovieTeen (4) 4 years ago

Ah, okay

[–] Kowalski (57835) 3 years ago

NEVER FORGET YOUR LOVE OF THE BULGE.