|
So the name of the thread might be a little inflammatory but it's the best that came to my mind.
The question is basically very simple. I don't think that anyone can argue that, at least as far as art is concerned, roleplaying companies today have a *huge* tendency to exploit and reveal at the body and figure of women. True, sometimes men will also appear near nude, flashing some huge muscles and looking good in the "western society beauty ideal" way, but that happens in a far lesser frequency than with women. Just pick up any of your (for example) Paizo books, be it rulebooks or AP volumes or whatnot... a large part of the women you will see will be either sexy and adorned in revealing outfits, or have suggestive looks on their faces... hack, even most of the female monsters will have an obscenely large bosom and other exaggerated proportions. Now do the same with men. You will see far greater variety, most probably.
Now, I am a heterosexual male and I like the way girls look just like the rest of you guys. That doesn't, however, mean that I think showing women like they do now does any good to anyone. Nobody can blame Paizo for catering to their (mostly) male audience and playing our sexual inclainations to their favor. We can however blame ourselves for accepting that as part of our hobby without asking too many questions.
Let's look for example on this Christmas gift card with Seoni on it
I know, it's funny. I love it myself. But Seoni *is* presented as barely more than a sexual object. There *is* another way to make the holyday cards great - check out the one that came this year
I liked this one even more! Not only do we get to see all of our loved iconics in a very... human position, and not only is this card funny, but nobody is sexualized in it.
So I guess my question is: does any of you actually want this? Does any of you think that it's a good idea to have the art of roleplaying products be abusive of the female body? Because if not, I think it could be very reasonable to ask Paizo to stop doing so. I know personally that many girls feel alienated by it and some stated the abusive art as a reason they don't want to try out PF!
This topic has come up before. IIRC many of the female posters here are not bothered by it.
Here is more recent one. click me.
|
|
First, to "exploit women" there have to be real women to be exploited, Paizo uses cartoon images.
Second, Paizo has a strict PG-13 rule. There are no nude men or women in paizo's products. Period. Saying that there are only shows how little you know of their product.
Third. . . Seriously? This is what you want to crusade against? The sex industry exploits people every day, they traffic in humans, many of whom are under age. Ditto with the drug industry. Warlords in third world countries have kidnapped tens of thousands of children and turned them into soldiers. And you want to crusade against cartoon images of women in pg - 13 situations? Wow. . . Way to try and make the world a better place.
A) Repeatedly showing women as little more than sexual objects is, actually, exploiting women. Not specific women, but the entire gender.
B) I own dozens of Paizo products. I was not clear enough in my initial post, I suppose. While there is no actual nudity in any of them, most of those showing women do so in a way that is obviously meant to be sexually exciting. I am not actually the kind of person who is bothered by either complete or partial nudity. It is just that I noticed that females are drawn a lot more nude than males , and what they do get to wear is often revealing in a way most girls won't dress most of the time. Again I'm speaking in broad terms here and this only holds for the majority of art, not all of it.
C) I am not a crusader. I don't recall calling anyone to my banners or beating on the drums of war. Furthermore I see my ability to affect things like wars in the third wars as minimal, if it is at all existent. My intention was not to start any sort of organized protest. I was merely curious to know if the phenomena of sexualizing women in the way they are graphically presented in our products has a wide support. What I'm trying to understand is this: if a person would ask you, "Would you prefer that women would not have been presented in a distinct sexual connotation in roleplaying products?", what would you say?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why do they exploit men??!!?! They just KNOW that if I see a picture of Ezren, I will be lost for hours in his chisiled chin, luscious lox of hair, strong fatherly presence. And don't get me started on his cane.
Um...it is just not RPG industry that does this....every industry does it. Watch TV for 5 seconds...or look at book covers(just don't judge the book themselves), etc.
Tell you what you get them to stop...than we'll talk about Pazio stopping.
|
|
Here is more recent one. click me.
thanks for the link!
However that previous thread has only partually to do with what I'm trying to talk about here.
I'm not asking if it is legitimate to paint mostly naked sexy girls. I like seeing mostly naked sexy girls. However, my problem is that nearly evrey girl we see in an rpg product is a mostly naked sexy girl. For me, at least, this becomes distasteful at a certain point. Kinda like the tenth dead baby joke in a row. I was wandering if others feel diffrently than me, and actually want to have 90% of the girls pictured in the products we buy be a fullfilment of a male sexual fantasy.
Edit:
Cheapy, I'm not saying that there are no handsome men, or that there should be more. Only... when was the last time youv'e seen just a plain, handsome, perhaps even elderly women in an rpg product? compared to Seoni or the new witch iconic girl, you can see how Erzen is much more reasonable, right?
Kretzer - again with the "we have bigger problems" argument. After typing your post, did you leave your computer to continue your war against hunger in Africa? No? than your argument is invalid. The question is very simple - do you or do you not think that things should be as they are right now?
I don't think most of them are mostly naked. That seems to be an exaggeration.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Yes, Seelah, Kira, Merseial, Amrim the iconic inquisitor, iconic Ninja are all 'mostly naked sexy girls'. Hells, Sayjan shows more skin than any of them.
*rolls eyes* This is as bad as the Dynamite-is-Pornographic argument on their Martian books. While I don't like the proportions, they're drawing Dejah Thoris pretty much as described, same as John Carter. Hells the Disney movie shows more of Taylor whats-his-name than Lynn Collins.
(This also ignores that Dejah Thoris, Thuvia of Ptarth, Llana of Gathol etc kick as much aft as their men.)
|
|
I don't think most of them are mostly naked. That seems to be an exaggeration.
You do, however, notice the far greater inclination to show women dressed in sexually suggestive clothes than males, right? and if not, than most of the times the women will still have large breasts or a curvy body and will generally look very appealing to an audiance that is sexualy attracted to women. The same does not hold for most males presented. I tried this with some of my APs - just look through them and count how much art of girls you see that has nothing to do with sex or looking sexy. now do the same with males. I found the results to be decisive.
Men are more visually oriented than woman and it is a male dominated hobby. How is this different than the Swimsuit edition of sports Illustrated?
I am sure if the ladies said they wanted some bare chested men it would happen.
|
|
Yes, Seelah, Kira, Merseial, Amrim the iconic inquisitor, iconic Ninja are all 'mostly naked sexy girls'. Hells, Sayjan shows more skin than any of them.
*rolls eyes* This is as bad as the Dynamite-is-Pornographic argument on their Martian books. While I don't like the proportions, they're drawing Dejah Thoris pretty much as described, same as John Carter. Hells the Disney movie shows more of Taylor whats-his-name than Lynn Collins.
(This also ignores that Dejah Thoris, Thuvia of Ptarth, Llana of Gathol etc kick as much aft as their men.)
And would you really like me to count the amount of girls that are presented sexualy?
I must admit I am a bit surprised, since my intention was to discuss an issiue, but what all of you people are telling me is that there is no issiue to talk about... am I missing something crucial here?
|
|
Men are more visually oriented than woman and it is a male dominated hobby. How is this different than the Swimsuit edition of sports Illustrated?
I am sure if the ladies said they wanted some bare chested men it would happen.
So let me understand (and I really am only motivated by curiosity and not looking to argue with you about anything) : what you think is that yes, women are currently sexualized, and that this is legitimate because we roleplayers are a male dominated demographic?
This thread discusses the topic at some length, and contains a few posts from Paizo staff on the subject. (Towards the bottom of the page linked.)
Well part of the problem is that women like to imagine themselves as sexy characters as well as men liking to imagine sexy women.
Let me ask, how many female characters are dwarves or half-orcs as compared to humans, elves, or half-elves. I would wager that very few female characters are dwarves of half-orcs because their stereotypical body shapes (broad and blocky for dwarves, muscular and flat nosed for half-orcs) are not deemed to be desirable by most people of either gender.
So yes, most art (and other advertisements in other areas of society) tend to have sexually attractive women. But this isn't solely the fault of men, it is also the fault of women. Women want to fantasize about being those sexually attractive women and thus also push to see those stereotypical images.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
IIRC, there was a controversy/outcry over the Seoni Christmas card. I was one of the people who felt it crossed a line into exploitation (and I often enjoy looking sexy women, but there IS a line there for me). There was a lengthy discussion at the time, with many viewpoints explored -- but it's over and done now. IIRC the take home message was Paizo does need to be careful with how it portrays women--and men--but a little cheesecake/beefcake isn't in and of itself a bad thing. I think the worst offender was that card, and I haven't seen anything since as bad personally.
Lord Snow, I think if you are "missing something crucial" is that you are digging up a discussion that was already had in detail some time ago. It doesn't mean we stop discussing exploitative artwork in general--but I think you did miss the mark a little on where to start the conversation. You may well not have been aware of the discussions that have gone on before, that's not your fault. I do encourage you to look them up.
For me, as a woman and a feminist--but one who also, again, enjoys the sight of a beautiful woman sometimes--the line between appropriate and inappropriate for "sexy art" in fantasy (or pop culture in general) has to do with how women are portrayed in CONTEXT to their appearance.
A lot of fantasy art in RPGs traditionally didn't just depict women in chain bikinis -- it depicted women in chain bikinis tied up, wounded, stepped on, being rescued by a male. CONSISTENTLY -- men were depicted as heroes, women as victims. That in itself was and is the root of the sexism and the exploitation; that their mode of dress and poses were often overtly and obviously sexualized was what made it all the worse. The message given by this PARTICULAR kind of artwork is "women are weak beings only good for sex. They are treasure to be collected from monsters and be ravaged afterwards."
Compare that to an image of one of the female Paizo iconics casting a spell bringing down a dragon, or slaying a monster, or rescuing a male teammate, or picking a trap, etc. These images show strong women being HEROIC. It doesn't matter much, to me, that sometimes they might be showing a little cleavage -- the image is still that of an empowered woman. Indeed, a lot of women like to see images of women looking sexy--even if they are not aroused by them--because if the CONTEXT of the picture is that the woman is empowered that they do not become objects, but a source of inspiration.
More often than not, I think Paizo does a good job of showing female heroes being heroic, just as they do of male heroes. There are a few times I've seen a picture of a woman and gone... "Uh.... no. That's not appropriate." Fortunately, this is the exception rather than the rule, as far as I have seen personally. When the questionable pictures DO show up (more recently than the controversial Christmas card from a few years ago), I hope we all speak up, and I hope Paizo listens.
Further, I'm fine with some sexiness in fantasy artwork 'cause--well, it's fantasy! And as long as it's EQUAL OPPORTUNITY---cheesecake and beefcake for all, and no one is depicted consistently as weak or useless.
Men are more visually oriented than woman and it is a male dominated hobby. How is this different than the Swimsuit edition of sports Illustrated?
I think you vastly discount the number of women who are in this hobby and on these boards, Mr. Swagger.
But if you actually need someone to explain to you the difference between Sports Illustrated and Paizo's products.... good Lord, all I can say is you need someone more patient than me to get started...
I am sure if the ladies said they wanted some bare chested men it would happen.
1) There are all kinds of bare chested men and sexy man imagery in Paizo's products. Check out the Eldritch Knight/Magus for one.
2) There are men/male-identified individuals in this hobby who also like to look at sexy men. Please do not discount them.
3) There are women/female-identified individuals in this hobby who do not like to look at sexy men (but might want to look at sexy women). Please don't discount them either.
4) There are all kinds of people, myself included, in this hobby who like a taste of both beefcake and cheesecake, thank you very much.
Again, all I ask is that the beefcake and cheesecake be equal opportunity, and that generally no double standards are set, and that no member of a single gender are notably and consistently depicted as victims or objects rather than as heroes (and great villains).
|
I don't think most of them are mostly naked. That seems to be an exaggeration.You do, however, notice the far greater inclination to show women dressed in sexually suggestive clothes than males, right? and if not, than most of the times the women will still have large breasts or a curvy body and will generally look very appealing to an audiance that is sexualy attracted to women. The same does not hold for most males presented. I tried this with some of my APs - just look through them and count how much art of girls you see that has nothing to do with sex or looking sexy. now do the same with males. I found the results to be decisive.
Because showing men in fantasy art is not a bs depiction either? You hadnt noticed that all the men look like they've been doing p90x for ten years and have 2% body fat. Real "men of action" dont look like that either. Out of all the active infantrymen and Operators I know, maybe 1 out of every 5 looks anything like that, and thats because they're vain as hell and have a diet that includes chicken, water, and beer only.
|
|
thank you, Deathquaker, for your response. You do make some very good points over there. I was, in fact, unawere of the previous threads that dealt with the subject when I posted this thread. Thakns for the link, Hitdice! very helpful and saved me some time digging through the archives :P
"Again, all I ask is that the beefcake and cheesecake be equal opportunity, and that generally no double standards are set, and that no member of a single gender are notably and consistently depicted as victims or objects rather than as heroes (and great villains)."
My thoughts exactly. What I was noticing was that this was not the case, which made me wonder how reflective of the roleplaying crowed the descision to sexualize women more actualy is.
Sex, or the illusion thereof, sells.
|
|
Because showing men in fantasy art is not a bs depiction either? You hadnt noticed that all the men look like they've been doing p90x for ten years and have 2% body fat. Real "men of action" dont look like that either. Out of all the active infantrymen and Operators I know, maybe 1 out of every 5 looks anything like that, and thats because they're vain as hell and have a diet that includes chicken, water, and beer only.I don't think most of them are mostly naked. That seems to be an exaggeration.You do, however, notice the far greater inclination to show women dressed in sexually suggestive clothes than males, right? and if not, than most of the times the women will still have large breasts or a curvy body and will generally look very appealing to an audiance that is sexualy attracted to women. The same does not hold for most males presented. I tried this with some of my APs - just look through them and count how much art of girls you see that has nothing to do with sex or looking sexy. now do the same with males. I found the results to be decisive.
You are 100% right. However, there are actually more men shown in fantasy who are not like what you described than women who are not shown as sex tools. For starters, there are *way* more males than females in the typical fantasy story (Paizo acatually did a good job of not falling to the specific pit - in most APs there are roughly the same number of prominent male and female NPCs) so more variance is obligatory.
Also, I'd choose to be seen as menacing and powerful over being seen as a sex toy evrey say of the week.
@OP - Wouldn't your time be better served by challenging the Republicans recent attacks on women's rights than complaining about scantily clad animations?
thank you, Deathquaker, for your response. You do make some very good points over there. I was, in fact, unawere of the previous threads that dealt with the subject when I posted this thread. Thakns for the link, Hitdice! very helpful and saved me some time digging through the archives :P
"Again, all I ask is that the beefcake and cheesecake be equal opportunity, and that generally no double standards are set, and that no member of a single gender are notably and consistently depicted as victims or objects rather than as heroes (and great villains)."
My thoughts exactly. What I was noticing was that this was not the case, which made me wonder how reflective of the roleplaying crowed the descision to sexualize women more actualy is.
I don't collect as much Paizo stuff as others do, so I can only speak to what I have personally seen. I'm generally cool with what I've seen in the rulebooks, which is what I most collect (yes, my tag is that of a AP subscriber, but I've only just subscribed to Skull and Shackles and I've never bought APs before so don't know what I'll be getting in terms of artwork and content).
What I'd suggest is as you buy new material and if you see artwork that is offensive, write directly to the Paizo staff and let them know (same goes for anyone).
|
|
@OP - Wouldn't your time be better served by challenging the Republicans recent attacks on women's rights than complaining about scantily clad animations?
While I happen to be a U.S citizen, that is only because I was born there (Texas) but only lived there a couple of years. I now live in Israel. I do not know much about U.S politics, but some things I heard about the republican candidates are indeed disturbing.
So while I am not an american, I am a roleplayer. I think it is only natural I concern myself with things closer to my heart, and my community is presicely such a thing.
And, I must stress this - I am not trying to change anything here, only to get a better grasp of the situation. To understand, hopefully, if people actualy do agree with the scantly clad animations being part of their hobby or not. My motivation is curiousity and my goal is knowledge. That is all.
There is a fair amount of rhetorics on this issue. For example, if you have too few female NPCs, that is a problem, too many and it is exploitative. And of course, everyone has their own idea of the appropriate numbers. My impression is that Paizo is doing a fantastic job. Give them some slack in this. Sex sells, and frankly, I would by far that this gained Paizo some moolah than having a policy that kills them. The world is chock full of hypersexualized women's magazines. Give it a rest.
Why do they exploit women?
For fun and profit!
Seriously, it's the same reason why dragons exist and people conjure fireballs out of thin air.
Ever notice the guys on romance novels have perfect muscled chests which you can plainly seen through their open or missing shirts?
It's a fantasy.
My advice is to stop worrying about it.
What do you mean "today" ? This is a trend as old as D&D, and goes back to the pulps and beyond.
I'm not asking if it is legitimate to paint mostly naked sexy girls. I like seeing mostly naked sexy girls. However, my problem is that nearly evrey girl we see in an rpg product is a mostly naked sexy girl. For me, at least, this becomes distasteful at a certain point. Kinda like the tenth dead baby joke in a row. I was wandering if others feel diffrently than me, and actually want to have 90% of the girls...
I think, clearly, that the answer is "Yes", the vast majority feel differently than you.
My advice, however, is rather than speak in general terms, to actually publish hard statistics - by product - when beginning to discuss what you, personally, see as a issue.
|
Most of us are in America.
We exploit everything.
Even children. Look at fundraising for elementary schools. They send children out to do the work because it is free and it is harder to say no to a child.
You will never change human desires unless you change their DNA.
Why would you start a frivolous thread?
Well, your position would be far stronger if your assertions were not 'sweeping generalizations'.
I have all the APs and most of the modules, and quite nearly most of pathfinder supplements and quides and less than half of art depicting women in them are in what I would consider 'cheesecake' territory.
But to address the larger issue you bring up, just pass by in the supermarket checkouts and look at the covers of Cosmopolitan or Women's World and their ilk (not sure if those publications make it to Israel).
The women on those magazine covers are almost always ideal expressions of beauty of young, lithe (and most likely airbrushed) model-quality woman. Not older women. Not overweight women. Not women of other than ideal proportions. And a large number of the women on these magazines are dressed and posed for the cheesecake factor. Hell, even 'O' magazine only shows Oprah upper torso and up and rarely a full body shot without intervening props on account of her weight.
And these magazines are mostly bought by women. And the target readership is women, not men.
If there is a double standard as you have implied, then women seem to bought into the depiction of woman in media.
The problem is NOT Paizo. The problem is even women have embraced the stereotypical depiction of women in media. Few are crying foul.
Look at fundraising for elementary schools. They send children out to do the work because it is free and it is harder to say no to a child.
Man, and here I thought they were trying to teach children the value of earning something. I'm so naive sometimes.
|
|
Look at fundraising for elementary schools. They send children out to do the work because it is free and it is harder to say no to a child.Man, and here I thought they were trying to teach children the value of earning something. I'm so naive sometimes.
That is why I am here...to enlighten people.
Happy days for you :P
I am almost 100 percent sure you see nipples in the first Beastary...
lady nipples none the less I don't have a copy of the book on me. But I remember seeing that.
OP
I 100 percent agree with you and had my face handed to me for asking the same question unknowingly I asked "do you make a book with out the sexy art" because I want to introduce my daughter and wife when they are older and I was told to go play fairy magic RPG or mouse quest If I didn't like the way Seoni is dressed, My answer is to magic marker out all the cleavage and stuff I don't want to see. I only really need the rules.
.. so this is a topic that has been discussed and you not find much sympathy form people here on the boards. But take heart there are those of us out there that support you......all 3 of us.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo, stop exploiting goblins!!
If you felt that the aggregate of Paizo's work was a hindrance to the cause of equality (I'd say "feminism" but that's a poorly-understood landmine), you might have a reasonable position. The work that I am familiar with, however, makes it very hard to believe that Paizo has hindered equality in this respect. In fact, I'm pretty certain that they've made efforts to advance said cause where appropriate.
Does Pathfinder contain scantily-clad ladies? Yes. Some. Does Pathfinder contain scantily-clad men? Yes. Some. Is this an excuse to stick on the blinders and get worked up over a fantasy game when there are legitimate problems to tackle? I don't think it is.
I also take issue with the idea that creating a physically-attractive character - and even putting that physically-attractive character on display! - is something that is necessarily exploitative. The word implies that harm is being done, either on an individual basis (which isn't possible in a work of fiction) or a societal basis. Physical exposure alone isn't enough to make something exploitative. There needs to be an additional level of marginalization of other qualities, and that's simply not present in Paizo's works.
Not long now before my valiantly overcompensating maties show themselves...
Da'har...
Not long now before my valiantly overcompensating maties show themselves...
Da'har...
They haven't already?
Da'har... they be pale in comparison to me fearless captain.
LOL. Fair enough!
Am I in the misunderstood yet vocal minority that enjoys the depiction as they are, and are clamoring for even more edgy imagery?
I think the OP is overstating the case, and I'm only waiting for the overstated defense so I can argue with that some more. Why do I feel like I've been here before?
Round and round goes the wheel of fortune...
|
|
I think we covered things pretty well in the kotaku thread, personally.
The title of the thread is over the top...I don't know that you can say fantasy art is even capable of exploiting women. We could talk about it encouraging values or actions or words some find unpleasant, or we could talk about how a lack of representation of anything other than buxom 20 year old beauties as examples of women adventurers implies something about the way Paizo approaches their art orders, but none of these comes remotely close to exploitation of women.
The title of the thread is going to set the tone of the thread in many cases. This one isn't going downhill as fast as I feared, however, so yay!
Because showing men in fantasy art is not a bs depiction either? You hadnt noticed that all the men look like they've been doing p90x for ten years and have 2% body fat. Real "men of action" dont look like that either. Out of all the active infantrymen and Operators I know, maybe 1 out of every 5 looks anything like that, and thats because they're vain as hell and have a diet that includes chicken, water, and beer only.I don't think most of them are mostly naked. That seems to be an exaggeration.You do, however, notice the far greater inclination to show women dressed in sexually suggestive clothes than males, right? and if not, than most of the times the women will still have large breasts or a curvy body and will generally look very appealing to an audiance that is sexualy attracted to women. The same does not hold for most males presented. I tried this with some of my APs - just look through them and count how much art of girls you see that has nothing to do with sex or looking sexy. now do the same with males. I found the results to be decisive.You are 100% right. However, there are actually more men shown in fantasy who are not like what you described than women who are not shown as sex tools. For starters, there are *way* more males than females in the typical fantasy story (Paizo acatually did a good job of not falling to the specific pit - in most APs there are roughly the same number of prominent male and female NPCs) so more variance is obligatory.
Also, I'd choose to be seen as menacing and powerful over being seen as a sex toy evrey say of the week.
So its ok to promote near impossible standards of male attractiveness in fantasy art but not ok to do the same for female attractiveness? That is the very kind of double standard you are clainming to be opposed to. Both create negative body image in the part of normal people and dont even accurately represent think of 'active lifestyle' people that they are meant to represent. You cant call one appropriate and the other not and be anything other then a political talking point.
For me, as a woman...
You're a woman? That's hot.
For me, as a woman...You're a woman? That's hot.
Da'har...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For me, as a woman...You're a woman? That's hot.
Damn right I'm hot, and I'm more woman than you'll ever have.
:)