Salt-N-Pepa Let's Talk About Sex

Salt-N-Pepa Let's Talk About Sex

I just wanted to leave this here in case anybody else ever needs this page for any reason. - Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 08:36, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

Upon further inspection, this video seems to be more about talking about talking about sex than about sex. - The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hatebunny (talk • contribs).

I don't see how it relates to the DC wiki so I made the file link non-embedded so it doesn't distract from the talk. talk2ty 01:49, February 18, 2015 (UTC)

On-panel instances

I'm going to arrange these chronologically like I did with the gallery so we can do an easier comparison of how they match up. I'd like to know though: can we also include off-panel instances in a separate list? The Cheetah/Carr thing was before/after shots, for example. talk2ty 01:49, February 18, 2015 (UTC)

I think off-panel sex is so common as to cease being noteworthy. - Hatebunny (talk) 02:02, February 18, 2015 (UTC)
Tycio, I really like the way this looks. That being said, I agree with Hatebunny. This page is less about interesting characters who have had sex (e.g. Grace Choi/Plastic Man), and more about the portrayal of sex as an act. So we wouldn't include something like... I don't know, Thomas and Martha Wayne conceiving Batman. - Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 12:21, February 19, 2015 (UTC)
There's off-panel and then there's off-issue. There's a major difference between the vague idea that the parents of a character hooked up and the numerous scenes where we see characters immediately before or immediately after the act. talk2ty 08:28, August 7, 2015 (UTC)

Off-panel instances

Since these were removed from the page as 'irrelevant', I am hoping it will be okay if I keep track of them here on the talk page in case they later become relevant for consideration ...

If anyone wants to edit in some additions to the above data, my post is open to you to do so. talk2ty 08:28, August 7, 2015 (UTC)

Explicit v suggestive

I can see another batch was recently removed:

Hatebunny mentioned in 2015 that off-panel is "so common as to cease being noteworthy" and well... I think on-panel is certainly MORE noteworthy, but immediately-adjacent "cut-to-sex" or "cut-from-sex" before/after scenes still seem notable in some way.

If acknowledging them would bloat the article and distract from the more-noteworthy on-panel instances, could we possibly cover them in a sub-page?

I think this is more specific than discussing broad "Thomas and Martha" situations where we know people procreated but there's no "undressing before" or "smoking/cuddling after" panels associated with that knowledge.

Having subpages would also allow us to discuss borderline "is it on or off panel" situations a little better. To use Batman as an example:

  • the Catwoman panel File:Batman Prime Earth 0009.jpg isn't 100% clear that sex is actually occuring in that specific panel. You see Batman's shirt hiked up but this could still be a "before" shot or an "after" shot.
  • the Batgirl shot in Batman: The Killing Joke (Movie) was one of the ones recently removed, it's more than a suggestion (she says "it was just sex!" later in the film) and seems just about as explicit as the Catwoman pic...

the clip could arguably be more explicit because of Barbara removing her shirt and Batman grabbing her hips, the only disqualifier is that we see the pants are still on as the shot pans up so we know sex hasn't happened yet, whereas...

Actually no, because in the Bat/Cat panel BOTH are still clearly wearing their pants. We just can't see the front of their pelvises because of the angle, so I guess people are speculating there is a fly-opening at the front of both costumes that is open? Or at least with Catwoman because hers are visibly all-the-way-on from the rear vantage. The ruffling of the material on Batman's right thigh could be interpreted as an indication that they are pulled down rather than having an open fly.

It's still basically guesswork / implications though, as even when 2 characters are dawn nude, we never see the actually genitalia so we're always making assumptions about what is obscured by angles. Due to that there's at best "on-panel possibility" than verifications, because even if there is verbal affirmation that 2 characters had sex, that is not verification that the specific instance depicted in a panel had coitus happening at that moment. talk2ty 05:37, April 29, 2018 (UTC)

I didn't read past the first paragraph because I thought, oh great, not this again. These pages had potential until you turned them into cruft lists. I very much favor deletion now. --Tupka217 06:41, April 29, 2018 (UTC)