You're wrong on a number of points, here.
Firstly, WW's use of "armour" is incidental, if it occurs at all. I seem to recall that you are somewhat preoccupied with the notion that superheroes should be encased in armour- hence your support for the Batman design in the computer game referenced by your username. WW, however, is invulnerable, and her costume is just that- a costume. So the image you attached is irrelevant: this is not a matter of reducing the coverage of protective armour for the sake of meagre titillation.
Secondly, the objection to pants (from me at least) has nothing to do with them being unattractive. In most depictions of WW wearing pants they are in fact skin-tight leggings, which have a tendency to be as if not more revealing than a battle skirt or even her classic trunks. I would take WW wearing ankle-length toga over her wearing skin-tight pants. The black pants are, however, a complete departure from the Hellenic/mythic themes that make the character interesting. They are also decidedly modern in appearance and, in my opinion, boring and uninspired.
If you're going to try and link my forum name to my post, at least do a better job in paying attention to detail. For one, the In and Justice are capitalized, implying that they are not part of a compound word, like say...Injustice. In fact, the Injustice game has nothing to do with my name. My name is actually referencing a video game quote in which it states, "In justice we trust." Now obviously that would be too long for the requirement, so I figured InJustice would be nice enough. Secondly, I think the Batman suit in Injustice is absolutely horrendous, ranging from the disgusting cowl design, to the the subpar and somewhat bulky armor design (I'd prefer the Arkham suit over Injustice any day, although that does sound a bit hypocritical given Arkham's bulky size).
Anyways, back on track. I should preface, when I brought up that image, it was mainly to show how ridiculous the one piece suit is in praticality. My issue is with people who think the one-piece works well.
Just because Wonder Woman is invulnerable, it doesn't mean that she cannot wear a costume that isn't revealing (in the sense of accentuating her "goods"). Superman is invulnerable and he can get away with wearing a suit. I'm not saying that WW's costume shouldn't be unique to her identity, but to expect a one piece costume is to sell her character short (note: I have no problem with the battle skirt if you had read my post about Donna Troy's costume). I'd personally find it hard to take her seriously when she's essentially become TNA with legs, while male superheroes continually look badass. And I'm sure male audience members will enjoy the visual aspect of her character more so than the substance behind it. You can have Wonder Woman wearing armor (aka Donna Troy's costume) to signify Theymscira's rich history that sets her apart from simple human beings. A costume doesn't have to be just "that," you can do more with it. And for comparison's sake, Superman's costume wasn't just "that," it was a signifier for Kal-El's family.
Maybe you dislike pants for different reasons, but every time I objected to the one piece costume (because I think it's silly and fails to translate well on live-action), and suggested pants, I was faced with resistance saying that it was unattractive and that the one-piece is the more iconic costume. THeir focus was simply on sex appeal and the visuals, rather than legitimizing and making Diana's character badass. We can agree on something though, I'd want Diana to have a myriad of costumes, her battle suit, toga etc., to reference the mythical features that makes her character awesome. And you having critiqued pants in that way, I can at least understand the downside of pants rather than from people who's thinking with their other head.
t:
Your references to armour (and the caricature of the child Elf poledancer) threw me off course.
