|
Where the male form was elevated in culture (like the Greeks, for example) if often had homosexual overtones (and, of course, they considered women to be virtually subhuman, which doesn't really point them out to be very liberated either).
Reading into Greek and Roman history, it seemed like quite a lot of the men of those states, particularly the military and leaders (of whom we know the most, since the farmers didn't have as much written about them...) regarded women for marrying and continuing the family line (and keeping at home) and men as peers they could talk to about the things they considered important, relate to on a day-to-day basis and love, emotionally and physically. It's like they just gave up on the whole communication-between-the-sexes thing and spent all their time 'out with the guys.'
The culture has changed enough that the island of Lesbos, home of Sappho, is suing to get people to stop calling gay women 'lesbians,' because they don't want to be associated with teh gay, and the thought that an Alexander the Great movie might make mention of Alexander's relationship with Hephaestion is enough to have people shouting in the streets, but it doesn't change history.
Then again, Rome is still home to the largest collection of cross-dressing men-who-shun-women-and-deny-them-equality in the world, so the old ways aren't totally dead yet...
And finally, there was a cover of Dragon that actually had a beefcake cover (a sort of Greek god type with rippling muscles). There were actually quite a lot of complaints about it (see the "threatened" comment above). Obviously, that probably isn't the sort of reaction that the publishers want. It might not be right, but to some extent you have to pander to what your customers want, not sternly tell them what is good for them and risk alienating them.
Aren't all pictures of male fantasy heores beefcakes? That was my impression anyway. And I'm not sure I feel threatened by this. Maybe a bit jelous... So I hit the gym, and then it's all good again.
Acctually, ever since I started practicing martial arts and training at the gym (martial arts training started at 9 years old), I've always used comic-book heroes as guidelines. This way I'll never reach my goal wich keeps me inspired.
Of course, to acctually touch on the topic of the thread, I do understand that it's not as easy for women to just hit the gym if they feel offended by the artwork.
|
Well, it didn't bother me much either, but there were a few (I was about to say a lot, but that might have been an overstatement) who really hated it and went on the boards to say so.
Personally, I have normally preferred the nimble and clever achetype of the fantasy hero (more Locke Lamora than Conan) than the big beefy dude, but that might be more me as the dispraxic accountant who never really liked sports.
She also seems to be saying that her money won't be spent on magazines that have sexualized images of women. Go Krissbeth. People should make thoughtful decisions about where they spend their money.She also seems to be saying that Paizo shouldn't publish these sexualized images of women and implying that I'm a troglodyte if I enjoy them. To that I say, 'hey, mind your own desires; these are mine.'
Uh... take a look at the thread title, please. The thread's about pushing for more sexualized images of women. She's just pushing back, hard. She was minding her own desires until this thread came along.
I'm pretty much argued out on this one, having said my piece. I've enjoyed reading the rational arguments from those who took it upon themselves to actually *discuss* the topic, on both sides (Tarren Dei, roguerouge, Sutekh the Destroyer, etc, etc) and didn't feel the need to troll or fling poop or call us gamers troglodytes or pathetic or whatever.
It's a credit to this little community that the one name-caller in this thread is not a 'local' and has deemed this an 'unfriendly' place to be.
Aubrey and Set: Nice. Real nice. Way to add yourself to the "name-caller" list.
Not that your ad hominem argument has any validity, but I'll respond to it. This is a DM-centered web site. There's tons of spoilers here. It's not unusual for posters to have a virtual presence here through their DMs.
Krissbeth is local. She's my player in my one-PC campaign. Her creative RP work has cited by me in all of my posts on rehabilitating Paizo goblins, on running one PC campaigns, on skills in PfRPG, on side quests for Runelords and Crimson Throne, and on the validity of romance and sex in fantasy gaming. (If you'll note my posts there, you'll see that my posts are consistently pro-sexuality and pro-romance. I'm just against public wanking on internet sites as gross, alienating, and lame.)
She's been "local" in my more than 400 posts.
Does that mean that suddenly her arguments have validity? Does her not having posts on Attacks of Opportunity theory mean that her opinions on gender have less weight?
Clearly, we must exile her for being frustrated and righteous (in the best manner) when she (and many other posters on this thread) have felt more than a little baited by the very subject of this thread.
This thread was not about the proper depiction of male sexuality.
This thread was not about the proper proportion of sexualized and plausible images of the female body in fantasy literature.
This thread was about a bunch of posters getting together for the Lulz to shriek for more boobies. Yes, it was a comedy thread, but it was a mean-spirited and demeaning form of comedy.
They were trying to push their agenda, but she is to be blamed for having one in response? She and I support this company which I and she support due in part to their progressive politics. We don't support Green Ronin any more after their last Freeport module. I fail to see what's invalid about letting the creators of this site know that their art work can ALSO be a disincentive for some of their buyers.
And finally, you can disagree with her, but to dehumanize her by likening her to an APE is not only beyond the pale of this community, it's beyond the common decency which you allege to uphold.
If you actually hold that position, you'll apologize for losing your cool.
I'm not saying that they need to slam pics of naked chicks (maybe not the best term) but I've yet to see anything wrong with the art from Paizo.
To repeat from a middle post:
The female mummy of the Osiron module is the one that's been concerned with skin-care and aerobicizing.
Geppa in Red Raven is barely clothed, yet she's survived a few days in an area made of ice and cold stone. Paizo saw fit to put her as a temporary cover girl.
There was a thread on whether Seoni is going commando, and even people on this thread taking neutral or positive stances towards objectification/hyper-sexualized fantasy illustrations have observed that it's problematic.
The female barbarian prominently displayed leaping to attack Seoni in River into Darkness is wearing a loin cloth and halter top, while her peers in the background wear actual armor.
Sabina's tight mini-skirt armor inCotCT makes some sense I guess, if you assume it rides up in combat rather than restricting her to tiny steps.
Tornulis from Guardians of Dragonfall seems to be wearing a diaphanous shower curtain as a top.
The one male version of this in the Gamemastery and Pathfinder lines has been the male monk iconic.
While I tend to think that gender-balanced objectification has some problems, as I think that it normalizes a rather dehumanizing viewpoint, I'm more than willing to accept it as a compromise.
And finally, there was a cover of Dragon that actually had a beefcake cover (a sort of Greek god type with rippling muscles). There were actually quite a lot of complaints about it (see the "threatened" comment above). Obviously, that probably isn't the sort of reaction that the publishers want. It might not be right, but to some extent you have to pander to what your customers want, not sternly tell them what is good for them and risk alienating them.
Right. Because clearly one instance is the statistically valid sample size you need to conclusively prove that change is hopelessly idealistic and will never work.
For a gaming company that normalizes gay relationships.
And has a good-aligned abortion provider.
And has a black female iconic paladin.
And hires freelancers with controversial opinions on the Iraq war.
Clearly, it's inappropriate of me and the other posters on this site to have raised expectations when it comes to hyper-sexualized images.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
This thread was about a bunch of posters getting together for the Lulz to shriek for more boobies. Yes, it was a comedy thread, but it was a mean-spirited and demeaning form of comedy.They were trying to push their agenda, but she is to be blamed for having one in response? She and I support this company which I and she support due in part to their progressive politics. We don't support Green Ronin any more after their last Freeport module. I fail to see what's invalid about letting the creators of this site know that their art work can ALSO be a disincentive for some of their buyers.
there's a lot I'd like to respond to in your post, RR, but probably not on this thread, other than:
...to note that, with apologies to the OP, it has been inclined to be toxic since its inception, and
...to ask what's up with Freeport?
|
|
And finally, you can disagree with her, but to dehumanize her by likening her to an APE is not only beyond the pale of this community, it's beyond the common decency which you allege to uphold.
A) I never said she was an ape, nor did I dehumanize her. If you've read my posts, I've been arguing that *hiding* women dehumanizes them, and that cultures who hide their women also, almost invariably, dehumanize and disenfranchise them, while cultures who openly admit and admire their women are the ones who end up with women who can vote, own property, hold public office, etc.
I'm completely 100% against keeping women 'hidden under a bushel.' If Paizo had covers depicting only men as 'adventurers' and made the tacit assumption that women were barefoot and pregnant, I'd be completely uninterested in the world of Golarion, because it would sound like a nasty place to live. Fprtunately, Golarion hasn't been portrayed that way, and has women rulers, women warriors and some fairly prominent female gods (Sarenrae, Pharasma, etc), who, unlike many historical pantheons, aren't just 'wife of male god X' or actively negative, like the portrayals of Hera in Greek myth.
B) She said that male gamers were troglodytes, pathetic, juvenile and a few other things that I can't be bothered to look up (basement-dwellers, comes to mind). So it's apparently *not* beyond the pale of this community. I *haven't* called her subhuman, as she has the male posters in this thread who disagreed with her. More to the point (as krissbeth hasn't called *me* anything personally), I haven't called women in general (or women gamers) sub-anything, nor have I argued, as some have, that the books are marketed to young men or whatever and therefore 'it's okay' and she 'shouldn't mind,' because that's not my belief.
I do think that the name-calling, which wasn't from me, and indeed, came almost solely from her, was unnecessary, and didn't do much to strengthen her position, but what's done is done, and I've tried to argue my position in good faith, only to have it ignored, time and again, in favor of new put-downs instead of what could have been informed debate, from the position of someone whom, I assume, has actually taken some Women's Studies courses and *should* be able to express her position with some real information (which might just blow me out of the water and prove me wrong, I even offered a suggestion that she could find some research stating that my posit that sexually open cultures are friendlier to women's rights is one-sided, but she didn't take me up on that, even though I am perfectly willing to concede that I am not a scholar of Women's Studies, and can go years without even hearing the word patriarchy, let alone be accused of being a part of one), and not just insults.
C) I'm not fond of the cherry-picking going on. I agree with her that Amiri, in particular, makes no sense to be a front-line fighter with an exposed midriff. Crickets. I list you as one of the posters with well-reasoned arguments. Massive attack.
Is it possible to agree with some things, and post the points of agreement, as I have, or am I wasting my time treating other positions with some open-minded respect when the favored line of response is attack, attack, attack?
D) If krissbeth feels that one of my posts likened her to an ape, I apologize. If she's read any of my posts (which I'm not sure, since she never responded to what I said), she'd know that I've been pushing the entire time for the acceptance and humanization of women (and men, for that matter), not the opposite. I may have referred to 'trolling' at one point, but I don't think she lives under a bridge either, I was referring to the internet phenomena.
|
I am (with no small amount of hesitation) finally going to enter this thread, but only long enough to respond to one very specific point:
The female mummy of the Osiron module is the one that's been concerned with skin-care and aerobicizing.
Said character is also specifically described as shallow and vain, a point that her image conveyed quite effectively to my players when I showed them her picture. ("That's how she's spending eternity? Working on her tan?")
...to ask what's up with Freeport?
[off-topic]
Multiple examples gang rape and necrophilia in the fifth module.
[/off-topic]
I am (with no small amount of hesitation) finally going to enter this thread, but only long enough to respond to one very specific point:
The female mummy of the Osiron module is the one that's been concerned with skin-care and aerobicizing.Said character is also specifically described as shallow and vain, a point that her image conveyed quite effectively to my players when I showed them her picture. ("That's how she's spending eternity? Working on her tan?")
Yeah, there's a justification. And there's a justification for Seoni. It becomes problematic in the larger body of work, when it's not balanced by depictions like that of CotCT 3.
At least we've reached the point where fantasy games are providing some justification for these art decisions, rather than just making them assumed normal for women. That's progress of a sort.
And finally, you can disagree with her, but to dehumanize her by likening her to an APE is not only beyond the pale of this community, it's beyond the common decency which you allege to uphold.
A) I never said she was an ape, nor did I dehumanize her.
...or fling poop...
Which would make her a monkey, in the common parlance.
|
|
And finally, you can disagree with her, but to dehumanize her by likening her to an APE is not only beyond the pale of this community, it's beyond the common decency which you allege to uphold.
A) I never said she was an ape, nor did I dehumanize her.
...or fling poop...
Which would make her a monkey, in the common parlance.
If you wish to put words in my mouth (or, uh, text in my keystrokes? No, this metaphor makes no sense), so as to have something to get angry about, you are free to do so. I didn't call her a a monkey, or an ape, nor a fish, nor any other creature that expels bodily waste at other creatures (or is said to fling, smear or otherwise sully another, such as politicians or guests on the Springer show).
You can manufacture whatever offense you wish from my statements, but I did not *give* offense, nor seek to.
Nor, when I mentioned trolling, did I mean to suggest that I think that she is nine foot tall, green and capable of regeneration, but you are also free to believe that I meant this as well.
In fact, to save time, assume that I mean the exact opposite of everything I post.
Which would make her a monkey, in the common parlance.
...or fling poop...
Or it could mean that she is throwing around bulls*it arguments and accusations which is what I read it to mean and more in line with the context.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
She also seems to be saying that her money won't be spent on magazines that have sexualized images of women. Go Krissbeth. People should make thoughtful decisions about where they spend their money.She also seems to be saying that Paizo shouldn't publish these sexualized images of women and implying that I'm a troglodyte if I enjoy them. To that I say, 'hey, mind your own desires; these are mine.'
Uh... take a look at the thread title, please. The thread's about pushing for more sexualized images of women. She's just pushing back, hard. She was minding her own desires until this thread came along.
Since she hasn't clarified whether she wants to see more positive representations of women (which I agreed with) or no sexualized ones (which is what she was being read as saying by many posters), I won't comment other than to say that I believe in speaking up for yourself but not controlling what other people see.
|
|
I'm pretty much argued out on this one, having said my piece. I've enjoyed reading the rational arguments from those who took it upon themselves to actually *discuss* the topic, on both sides (Tarren Dei, roguerouge, Sutekh the Destroyer, etc, etc) and didn't feel the need to troll or fling poop or call us gamers troglodytes or pathetic or whatever.
It's a credit to this little community that the one name-caller in this thread is not a 'local' and has deemed this an 'unfriendly' place to be.
Aubrey and Set: Nice. Real nice. Way to add yourself to the "name-caller" list.
Not that your ad hominem argument has any validity, but I'll respond to it. This is a DM-centered web site. There's tons of spoilers here. It's not unusual for posters to have a virtual presence here through their DMs.
Krissbeth is local. She's my player in my one-PC campaign. Her creative RP work has cited by me in all of my posts on rehabilitating Paizo goblins, on running one PC campaigns, on skills in PfRPG, on side quests for Runelords and Crimson Throne, and on the validity of romance and sex in fantasy gaming. (If you'll note my posts there, you'll see that my posts are consistently pro-sexuality and pro-romance. I'm just against public wanking on internet sites as gross, alienating, and lame.)
She's been "local" in my more than 400 posts.
Does that mean that suddenly her arguments have validity? Does her not having posts on Attacks of Opportunity theory mean that her opinions on gender have less weight?
Clearly, we must exile her for being frustrated and righteous (in the best manner) when she (and many other posters on this thread) have felt more than a little baited by the very subject of this thread.
This thread was not about the proper depiction of male sexuality.
This thread was not about the proper proportion of sexualized and plausible images of the female body in fantasy literature.
This thread was about a bunch of posters getting together for the Lulz to shriek for more...
There is a very strong subtext (and not very well hidden) that those who like depictions of attaractive women are stupid, immature and inferior. Those of us who live in the real world are pretty happy actually the way we are, and feel little need to conform to some right-on stereotype of how men are supposed to act. Moreover, we also possess senses of humour, and can tell when a thread with a title like this is (a) intended to be humorous and (b) not worth a deep analysis.
Secondly, Krissbeth did not actually bother to engage with the subject she started. I posted about how I broadly agreed with her ideas on what appropriate gear for a female adventurer might be, but put the images down to marketing, and she simply used it as an excuse to post her imflammatory "troglodyte" comment without even noting the actual thrust of the post. Flinging this stuff around clearly makes her feel superior, and frankly I get the same impression from you too, even if you like to dress it up a bit and can actually form an argument.
At the end of the day, a troll is a troll is a troll. The crap over a thread and then depart. Whether she is a friend of yours is irrelevant - I judged her on her conduct, not her geneology. She is free to do the same - and in fact has done so.
|
Viewed with that in mind, is it truly ridiculous for a female drow to use her sexuality as a method of maintaining control over the weaker, less favored males of her species (who somehow also drew the further weakness of still being as sex-driven as males of other humanoid races)? Is Seoni really that foolish for dressing herself in a way that maximizes the likelihood that her male companions will sacrifice themselves to protect her survival because they believe her provocative dress indicates interest in mating with them? Especially when you consider that her ability to cast spells would be retarded by wearing something more practical (like full plate armor)?
Okay. First off, the use of sexuality to achieve control is done to gain power when more traditional avenues to power are not available. So, the drow men should be the ones tarting themselves up to get power, wearing the ridiculous shoes and uncomfortable and revealing clothing. I'll be looking to see what art choices are made in the next AP to see if the editors and CEO take the politics of their art as seriously as they take the political implications of their text.
(Consider that Don Juan and James Bond are represented it as doing it for the adventure and fun, not simply to survive. This is opposed to virtually all female sexual adventurers, who may have fun, but the purpose is rarely represented as that; namely, they're scheming to get power that they can't have.)
Dispensing for a second with the side-track Krissbeth's argument (ad hominem, non-sequitir, and full of claims to authority that I don't know anyone has yet validated) seems to have provoked, I want to take a moment to consider the two points made by roguerouge:
1) That sexuality would be used to gain power only when more traditional avenues of power are not available.
I concur that, in our historical experience, that has been the case. That is largely because violence has been available to obtain sex and to legitimize the taking of sex. In the fantasy drow culture, that could also be the case given the depictions of how females use males. On the other hand, the existence of the male warrior societies, male mage guilds, and other, sexually segregated institutions of power and violence seem to indicate that rape does not enjoy the social acceptance in drow culture that it does in ours. On the contrary, it seems to indicate that while females are the dominant sex in every way, that dominance is somehow tempered as regards male drow. In fact, it appears sociologically that the drow are more racist than sexist since there are no equivalent power centers in drow culture for members of other races.
As a brief example: A male drow adult, belonging to a Noble House and/or a Warrior Society resists the sexual advances of a female drow adult. The male has options besides submission and resources to defend his choice.
That reality justifies the argument that male drow need not tart themselves up in order to obtain power. Instead, he could demonstrate martial skill, magical talent, or sexual utility as a means of achieving power.
As a second point, I wonder to what degree does having a demon like Lolth as your society's guiding star imposes hyper-sexuality on the females of the species. Elistraee's cult also appears to place a high premium on sexual power. Perhaps the Drow are the case study that invalidates that argument?
Perhaps the argument that sexual power is an option of last resort, an avenue of desperation, is itself a marker of the puritanical/Augustinian mindset that has so long damaged our human pysche in the West?
2) I don't think you can argue that Lara Croft adventures as she does out of desperation. Instead, it seems that her character adventures for the same reason James Bond does. And, she utilizes an atypical power source just as (Sean Connery's) James Bond does. Both have access to the typical power source (Lara Croft could easily use her sex appeal to get the job done/James Bond could easily use his combat training and Q's devices to overcome obstacles) but they, instead, reach for the power source that is most appealing to them, free of the preconceptions of what is preferred or weaker in the eyes of the larger society.
As a final aside, please note that I am not arguing for or against more depictions of scantily-clad females. I am arguing that the rationales we apply to such depictions are often themselves rooted in cliche understandings of what such depictions mean. In the 21st century, can we not consider sexual power as one more path to power that can be used, or not used, according to the design of the individual seeking to apply it? That is the most modern feminist view of such questions, free of stereotype and prejudice.
Or it could mean that she is throwing around bulls*it arguments and accusations which is what I read it to mean and more in line with the context.
I'll plop down my two yen and say that that's pretty much how I read it, and didn't even conceive of the possibility of it being used to refer to someone as a monkey until roguerouge mentioned it.
This feels very much to me a case of either easily offended people reading too much into comments, or people wanting to be easily offended to play the victim angle by intentionally misreading comments.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
As a final aside, please note that I am not arguing for or against more depictions of scantily-clad females. I am arguing that the rationales we apply to such depictions are often themselves rooted in cliche understandings of what such depictions mean. In the 21st century, can we not consider sexual power as one more path to power that can be used, or not used, according to the design of the individual seeking to apply it? That is the most modern feminist view of such questions, free of stereotype and prejudice.
Like Lavender Lil, the tiefling harlot from the July 9th Paizo blog?
|
|
Come now Gailbraithe, I didn't say Paizo should adopt an art policy suitable for 8 year olds. I just said that I -- notice the 'I' -- don't need more scantily clad women in my Pathfinder. I like what Paizo's doing and trust them to make intelligent choices in their work as they have done so far. You've misread me and then been rude about it.
If I misunderstood your intent in mentioning your son, then I'm sorry. It just came of very "Won't someone please think of the children!" in the context you brought it up in. In either case, I was totally out of line implying you're a bad parent, which is a ridiculous conclusion to draw from a single post and for that I apologize.
|
|
And finally, there was a cover of Dragon that actually had a beefcake cover (a sort of Greek god type with rippling muscles). There were actually quite a lot of complaints about it (see the "threatened" comment above). Obviously, that probably isn't the sort of reaction that the publishers want. It might not be right, but to some extent you have to pander to what your customers want, not sternly tell them what is good for them and risk alienating them.
There are guys who won't buy from my step-dad's specialty auto parts company because the website (not the actual products) is done in a lot of fuschia and teal, and they don't think those colors are manly enough. they actually post on car resortation forums complaining about it. Not the products, the colors of the website.
Some of his loyal customers even complain bitterly about it, like they feel ashamed every time they check the page for new products.
|
|
This thread was about a bunch of posters getting together for the Lulz to shriek for more boobies. Yes, it was a comedy thread, but it was a mean-spirited and demeaning form of comedy.
That's one particularly dismissive and uninsightful way of interpreting the intent of this thread, but I think it ignores the larger social context in which this sort of humor exists.
The fact is that masculinity has been under constant attack for the entirety of most of our lives (assuming the average age around here is about 30). It's become entirely acceptable to paint any man who displays any signs that he is actively sexually attracted to women as immature and juvenile.
That men of our generation have largely embraced juvenility -- childish behavior -- as a mask to allow them to express their sexuality is a troubling sign: I call it the Maximization of American men. But we have to identify it's real cause: a defensive reaction to an all out assault on male sexuality that has left an entire generation of men adrift and uncertain about their gender role.
The call for "more boobies" is, on it's face, a facile and juvenile call for more titillation, but it's a mistake (I think) to claim that it's rooted in mean-spirited motivations. I think it is far more charitable to assume that the call for "more boobies" is a call for the shared fantasy space under discussion (Golarion and Pathfinder) to be a place where male sexuality will not be attacked, where it is okay for men to imagine the world as including sexually powerful and desirable women like Seoni. And not a place, like WOTC has become, where counting nipples is considered a reasonable way to determine how sexist the books are.
This thread was about a bunch of posters getting together for the Lulz to shriek for more boobies. Yes, it was a comedy thread, but it was a mean-spirited and demeaning form of comedy.That's one particularly dismissive and uninsightful way of interpreting the intent of this thread, but I think it ignores the larger social context in which this sort of humor exists.
I'll quote then examples of what I mean ...
To catch a troll, you need line, a poll, and bait...
So, the point of the OP was to be rude and see if he could get enough people out to annoy the rest of the boards. That was soon accomplished...
And a few pix of me doing Merisiel, too.
This poster gets what the real world equivalent of this thread...
Despite my previous comments, a counter-balance to the wolf-whistles encountered up to that point
I do recall the Widow Razor is possessed of some sweet, sweet boobage
most ... probably have various porn accounts of their own... So, once more... scantily clad females!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Then there's these beauties responding to criticism that this thread might be in poor taste and a touch off-putting and lame to fathers or women:
I like women in all shapes and forms. I understand many people are ashamed that they have those "feelings" and are afraid of their primitive side. I am also aware that many people want to do the politically correct thing, but forget that there is a natural thing as well.... As for hiding the pics of the drow... sounds like someone needs some therapy.
And I certainly do not feel the Gor books hated women. Subjected women yes, but that is not the same as hatred. Subjugation, and dominance-submissiveness is not the same as hate. If the Gor books hated women, then women would have been slaughtered whenever encountered. That was not the case.
And this man stepped up:
I have teen age daughters. One is a gamer. Do you? Feel free to explain it to yours, how that degrading bondage bit on the cover is "the highest form of humanity"
Which led Krome to suggest that the prior poster had special feelings... in one of the more vile bits of baiting that I've seen in a while...
Funny how you were the one who projected the degrading bondage bit and I didn't.... maybe you need to consider where that just came from? :)
But it's all for the lulz:
Booooobies!
>This< is the first DnD vid I have seen where the women (at the end) get into the game too.
[
That men of our generation have largely embraced juvenility -- childish behavior -- as a mask to allow them to express their sexuality is a troubling sign: I call it the Maximization of American men. But we have to identify it's real cause: a defensive reaction to an all out assault on male sexuality that has left an entire generation of men adrift and uncertain about their gender role.
... I think it is far more charitable to assume that the call for "more boobies" is a call for the shared fantasy space under discussion (Golarion and Pathfinder) to be a place where male sexuality will not be attacked, where it is okay for men to imagine the world as including sexually powerful and desirable women like Seoni. And not a place, like WOTC has become, where counting nipples is considered a reasonable way to determine how sexist the books are.
The problem is that the Gamemastery and Pathfinder flagship franchises are not SHARED fantasies, as I've pointed to the disparity in representation several times. I've already agreed that they do better than other companies that do exceptionally poorly in this regard. I've already agreed that there are some female characters that they represent without encouraging ogling.
As far as the Maximization of American men, I couldn't agree more. I can understand why men regress into that persona without condoning it or finding it to be a remarkably healthy or effective manner of reclaiming their lost balls. There's so many opportunities for people to man-up in our society--whether it be through union organizing, enlisting in the armed forces, joining a volunteer fire department or Neighborhood Watch, or teaching in schools with high-risk kids-- that I really don't find much charity in myself for this behavior.
Especially when it's clearly paired with a successful attempt to alienate people from this site.
I don't have time to read through the last couple of pages since the last time I posted in this thread, but are we getting our 'Cheesecake Calender' or not?
45, and EXTREMELy juvenile - otherwise I wouldn't be playing the same game since I was 12. ;)
That men of our generation have largely embraced juvenility -- childish behavior -- as a mask to allow them to express their sexuality is a troubling sign: I call it the Maximization of American men.
I think "Emasculation" was the word you were looking for.
I got divorced last year and finally grew mine back.
|
|
I think that you've been unfair. To ignore intelligent posts and focus on just the 'silly ones' which may be in poor taste is disingenious. Kissbeth could have called out the posters that specifically said something she said offensive, but she specifically stated that she was not responding to any one individual, but rather, all men who supported pictures of attractive women in Pathfinder.
Personally, I didn't take the title of the thread at face value. Rather than believing it called for more scantily clad women, I decided that it supported images of attractive women. I don't see a problem with that.
Especially when it's clearly paired with a successful attempt to alienate people from this site.
I think her attacks were uncalled for. They targeted an entire demographic (men) and not individuals. It would be equally out of line for me to have comments that denegrated any specific racial or religious group. There have been some comments that are from 'supporters' of scantily clad women that are at least close to the line (regarding Muslims - but Shar'ia Law does have things that progressive women should feel very uncomfortable with). If anyone has been alienated from this thread or this board, that is a choice they made. I call shennanigans on calling that an 'attempt to alienate people'. If anything, there have been numerous calls for her to restate her position in a less inflamatory way so that a discussion can be had.
If she chooses to leave after insulting most of the posters in this thread, I can understand that. But it wasn't because the posters in this thread were hurling insults back at her. Even the 'poo flinging' isn't an insult. It describes a behavior, not an attitude or personality. Poo is a metaphor for hurtful comments/comments without merit. It is slightly more appropriate in the context than 'mud slinging' which implies insults only. At least, that's my take.
But you've been here long enough, RogueRogue, to know what this community is like. It is obvious you don't share your player's assessment. Why not? Have you shared with her why you find this a community worth belonging to?
There is a very strong subtext (and not very well hidden) that those who like depictions of attaractive women are stupid, immature and inferior.
See the post where I delineate the provocations that led to that accurate description of several of the listed posters. This is directed to Set, mostly, but also to Krome. People seem to be skimming right past a lot of the provocation to blame someone who finally stopped ignoring the bile headed her way.
As far as what I wrote:
Teaching love and sexuality are fine. Gaming does far too little of that, IMHO. Unfortunately, the illustrations that we're talking about here promote objectification and wanking, which has little to do with love, sensuality, or reproduction.
See also my prior post on the multiple cries for "boobies" and the citation of the actual pics I'm responding to.
Krissbeth wrote this in reply to Krome's suggestion that I needed therapy because I disagreed with his position:
I think "juvenile" and "pathetic" are the messages being sent, actually.
Then again, I'm not one for overt sexual objectification in my hobbies.
Clearly, she--and not Krome--deserves your names and ire. Will you be calling out Krome as well for baiting? Or will you not be consistent?
Also, krissbeth clearly stated that she does not mean "all men" merely all men who are acting like jerks on this thread. See the exchange at the bottom of page two and the top of page three:
All men are juvenile and pathetic?
Is that a sister trollin'?
Does that say "all men"?
Kruelaid agreed that krissbeth had been correct in her post. She then gave him a muffin to indicate that she accepted his apology.
Here's the other raving lunacies and poop that she's flung:
And asking for more boobies is not lame, immature nor sexist, it is humorous, something unfortunately it appears most Paizoans lack.
It's really only humorous if you're what's considered the "default" sex. Go Patriarchy! Womenfolk are for decoration!
That would be sarcasm.
Then there's this beauty from Set, in which he accuses krissbeth of being a lousy lay :
There are plenty of places where the female body is not to be seen, perhaps covered under an all-concealing burqa. I'd rather avoid that sort of mentality myself and not see the female body (or male, for that matter) as shameful or sinful or something that has to be hidden away.
Some people say sex is bad. I say that they're doing it wrong.
She restricts herself to observing that her point has been missed by Set, rather than stooping to that level.
Then we get to what seems to be your issue:
Some people's idea of "fantasy" is not being objectified.
I love the men in the thread being defensive and telling women that they shouldn't be offended. Congratulations on being part of the problem.
Representations of my sex are reduced to decorative trinkets in much of "fantasy" gaming. f@## yeah, that makes it less fun and less enjoyable to this consumer. Women have every right to be angry about it. Become a historically shat on demographic and maybe you'll understand. Educate yourself in women's studies and maybe you'll understand. Clearly, few of you do.
If you're going to say that she's out of line to write that, for finally being the first one of us to get ANGRY at your baiting, then perhaps Set (and all the people who praised Set's writing) should look in the mirror for praising someone who implied that Krissbeth and anyone else who disagreed with the "Yay! Even more boobies!" party line just needed a good XXX.
That's not good writing. That's mean and not humorous at all.
And to respond to a prior poster, that's exactly the line sexists used to belittle and dehumanize feminists in the prior three waves.
Or it could mean that she is throwing around bulls*it arguments and accusations which is what I read it to mean and more in line with the context.I'll plop down my two yen and say that that's pretty much how I read it, and didn't even conceive of the possibility of it being used to refer to someone as a monkey until roguerouge mentioned it.
This feels very much to me a case of either easily offended people reading too much into comments, or people wanting to be easily offended to play the victim angle by intentionally misreading comments.
Type "flinging poo" into google and you'll find that the first three links reference a monkey doing that. Since Set previously referred to Krissbeth as hating sex and doing it wrong, I didn't really feel the need to be more charitable and look further down the list.
I think that you've been unfair. To ignore intelligent posts and focus on just the 'silly ones' which may be in poor taste is disingenious.
People have been making a lot of unsourced claims about why krissbeth's posts are the way they are. I have no idea what her intentions are. But looking back at the thread makes it pretty clear why she got angry and why she had a right to be.
I took only from the first two pages, the pages that set the tone. Jal Dvorak, Dark White, I, R_Chance, Krissbeth, and Chris Mortika all kept being told that we had no sense of humor because we couldn't see the funny here. Quoting nine posts and the OP is hardly an unfair way to show the mean-spiritedness of the original posters' "humor."
Then following that up with Set's post and the objected-to response is about as neutral as you're going to get.
|
|
This thread reminds me why I don't date Western women. Why must everything become a "rrrrrrrrarrrgh! patriarchy" argument. The thread title was obviously in jest, the posts that followed it probably would be too. I'm pretty sure if someone made a "more beefcake" thread, you wouldn't see a bunch of people with their knickers in a bunch over it.
Basically, if a thread looks like it's a joke you're not going to like...why peek in? I think we all knew what this thread was about.
But yeah, sticking to asian women for sure.
|
|
Yeah, wouldn't want people to think that gamer men are like *every other straight man on the planet, and like boobies.*
I think "juvenile" and "pathetic" are the messages being sent, actually.
Then again, I'm not one for overt sexual objectification in my hobbies.
Krissbeth's first post in this thread right? Wow, yeah that wasn't a troll-like post at all.
|
|
The problem is that the Gamemastery and Pathfinder flagship franchises are not SHARED fantasies, as I've pointed to the disparity in representation several times. I've already agreed that they do better than other companies that do exceptionally poorly in this regard. I've already agreed that there are some female characters that they represent without encouraging ogling.
I'm sorry, I don't understand what this is supposed to mean. I'm not familiar with your previous arguments, so it's hard to contextualize this comment. I don't want to leap to the assumption that you mean that Pathfinder only qualifies as a shared fantasy world if it never panders to men's interests. Because that would be a weird definition of shared.
As far as the Maximization of American men, I couldn't agree more. I can understand why men regress into that persona without condoning it or finding it to be a remarkably healthy or effective manner of reclaiming their lost balls.
Wow! First of all, you wildly misunderstood my point. Also, dude, seriously you've got some unaddressed anger in there somewhere. I'm not going to say this juvenality is healthy, it's definitely not, but it doesn't have anything to do with "lost balls" or "manning-up." For all you know, Krome is a firefighter.
It's about sexuality. Being a firefighter, doing butch manly things, is not going to compensate for feeling that you aren't allowed to express your own sexuality without guilt and shame. It won't make that guilt many modern men feel for succumbing to the lure of sex appeal and participating in the objectification of women go away -- and its important to remember just how much women are willing, and even sometimes gleeful, participants in the same process. It's stressful, especially for guys who aren't very deep or insightful, trying to deal with a world where some women use sex appeal to get what they want, and are quite obviously gleefully willing participants in the "objectification of women" and other women are claiming that the "objectification of women" is destroying them emotionally or driving wedges in society or whatever else they wish to pin on it.
You have to admit it, a lot of the time it comes off as half of women blaming men for falling for the wiles of the other half of women, and it does make one wonder if women should maybe be pointing the finger at their own sisters. It gets even sillier when artists get blamed for causing the "objectification of women" when they reference the wiles of women in their art. It's like if Wayne stopped drawing sexy women, there would be no more sexy women! Halleljah paradise of asexual mutual respect at last!
Anyways, all of this repression, all of this guilt-mongering over the horrible, terrible truth that guys think girls are hawt tends to lead to people blurting. Since blurting is funny, it becomes a running joke of its own. It becomes a safe way of expressing things.
It's much easier to say "Yay for boobies!" than to try to make a meaningful and deep statement about one's love and fascination with the female form without sounding like a complete and a utter ponce.
Especially when it's clearly paired with a successful attempt to alienate people from this site.
Look, I get that she's your friend, but she alienated herself when she decided to introduce herself on a thread about these issues the way she did. She just walked in unannounced and started taking potshots at everyone who uses these messageboards, and big surprise, got booed out of the room. If she had come in and said "Krome is a dumbass." I probably would have liked her. The problem is she came in and said everyone -- which includes me - was a whole lot of nasty things, and then she gave us all the kiss-off. That doesn't do a thing to dispose me towards liking her, or wanting her to stick around.
So you know, @#%& her and the horse she rode in on. It's got nothing to do with the fact that she's a girl, though if it helps her sleep at night thinking that, more power to her. She was just a jerk, and she got the reception jerks get.
|
|
Krissbeth's first post in this thread right? Wow, yeah that wasn't a troll-like post at all.
Krissbeth wrote this in reply to Krome's suggestion that I needed therapy because I disagreed with his position. That would be your troll.
No she wrote it in reply to what Set said actually. Hence the quote.
The problem is that the Gamemastery and Pathfinder flagship franchises are not SHARED fantasies, as I've pointed to the disparity in representation several times. I've already agreed that they do better than other companies that do exceptionally poorly in this regard. I've already agreed that there are some female characters that they represent without encouraging ogling.
I'm sorry, I don't understand what this is supposed to mean. I'm not familiar with your previous arguments, so it's hard to contextualize this comment. I don't want to leap to the assumption that you mean that Pathfinder only qualifies as a shared fantasy world if it never panders to men's interests. Because that would be a weird definition of shared.
To repeat a third time:
The female mummy of the Osiron module is the one that's been concerned with skin-care and aerobicizing.
This example has already been debated.
Geppa in Red Raven is barely clothed, yet she's survived a few days in an area made of ice and cold stone. Paizo saw fit to put her as a temporary cover girl.There was a thread on whether Seoni is going commando, and even people on this thread taking neutral or positive stances towards objectification/hyper-sexualized fantasy illustrations have observed that it's problematic.
The female barbarian prominently displayed leaping to attack Seoni in River into Darkness is wearing a loin cloth and halter top, while her peers in the background wear actual armor.
Sabina's tight mini-skirt armor inCotCT makes some sense I guess, if you assume it rides up in combat rather than restricting her to tiny steps.
Tornulis from Guardians of Dragonfall seems to be wearing a diaphanous shower curtain as a top.
The one male version of this in the Gamemastery and Pathfinder lines has been the male monk iconic.
While I tend to think that gender-balanced objectification has some problems, as I think that it normalizes a rather dehumanizing viewpoint, I'm more than willing to accept it as a compromise.
|
|
Well since 8x as many men play DnD then it's not a surprise that women get objectified in 8x as many pictures. It sorta balances at that point right?
Let's look at a movie. Last time I watched an Ice Cube movie such as Friday it far and away had mostly black people. BUT wait!!! That's not fair cause blacks make up like what, 15% of the population? Quick someone protest the total lack of white people in those films please.
The game mainly targets males, therefore yeah you're gonna see more hot chicks than men. That's life. Wake up to the real world about that. Anyways, this isn't ancient rome or greece, the male body isn't considered artistic by most. But many people (both men and women) find that the female body is more beautiful, while the male body is just meh, just a body.
Now I'm gonna request that Paizo bring up their representation of Asian women in their pictures.
Type "flinging poo" into google and you'll find that the first three links reference a monkey doing that. Since Set previously referred to Krissbeth as hating sex and doing it wrong, I didn't really feel the need to be more charitable and look further down the list.
It seems to me that you and Krissbeth are making an effort to read the worst possible into what people say. When someone says "Flinging Poo" I figure they are referring to the act and not directly talking about the person. To read more into it you need to go beyond the actual statement and the context and get creative. Maybe that was the intent of the post? I'm not sure, a thinly veiled insult did not seem to be the tone of that message.
Also:
(Quoting Set) There are plenty of places where the female body is not to be seen, perhaps covered under an all-concealing burqa. I'd rather avoid that sort of mentality myself and not see the female body (or male, for that matter) as shameful or sinful or something that has to be hidden away
Some people say sex is bad. I say that they're doing it wrong.
RR: She restricts herself to observing that her point has been missed by Set, rather than stooping to that level.
Umm... again I think suggesting that he was referring to her capability to enjoy herself in the sack is taking offense where it wasn't necessarily intended. The way I see this post he is talking about cultures and the way cultures view sex. There does not seem to be any intent to project this view onto her. I suppose if krissbeth views sex as bad then perhaps she might take it personal. <-- Note, I'm not trying to imply this is her view I'm just saying IF she thinks that way...
If try to read veiled accusations and insults behind every message you are bound to find them.
Look, I get that she's your friend, but she alienated herself when she decided to introduce herself on a thread about these issues the way she did. She just walked in unannounced and started taking potshots at everyone who uses these messageboards, and big surprise, got booed out of the room. If she had come in and said "Krome is a dumbass." I probably would have liked her. The problem is she came in and said everyone -- which includes me - was a whole lot of nasty things, and then she gave us all the kiss-off. That doesn't do a thing to dispose me towards liking her, or wanting her to stick around.
So you know, @#%& her and the horse she rode in on. It's got nothing to do with the fact that she's a girl, though if it helps her sleep at night thinking that, more power to her. She was just a jerk, and she got the reception jerks get.
I get that you're angry too.
I guess I really can't see why people look at her post in isolation and ignore all of the provocation: the mean-spirited humor, Set stating that people like she (and I and several others who disagreed with him) need better sex because we hate sex, Krome suggesting that a father who disagreed with him is projecting his bondage fantasies, Krome stating that I needed therapy because I disagreed with him, the OP who states that he's looking to get people upset...
And, at the end of the day, it's her fault. Alone. And nobody else has anything to say about it. There were two people who said that this thread isn't typical of the site, who tried to introduce someone to the nicer elements of this community. I thank them for trying.
To me, this thread reads like a bunch of crude bullies wolf-whistling until they get called on it. Then, the new girl mouths off, sparking nastier comments from the bullies. And, strangely, everyone's obsessed with how uppity and rude the new girl is.
Well, I don't buy it. I might wish that she had used more politic language, but I definitely understand why she's been made to become angry.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think "Emasculation" was the word you were looking for...I got divorced last year and finally grew mine back.
No, emasculation has nothing to do with it.
It's about the ability to safely admit that you're a heterosexual male and like women. As in sexually. Like as in, you appreciate things about women that have absolutely nothing with their personality or intangible assets and a lot more to do with their asses and tits. Not to the exclusion of those intangible assets, but independently.
And yet, are not ashamed to step outside! Ieee! Monster!
Seriously, look around at the state of fandom. Girls who write homosexual rape porn featuring minors (Harry Potter slashfic! woo hoo!) and trade it with their friends are perfectly normal and healthy, while guys who think it would be nice if the art of their favorite fantasy world feature the occasional hawt sorceress babe in a revealing outfit are degenerate mouth breathing perverts. O_o WTF?
|
|
I get that you're angry too.
Dude, if I'm angry, it's at your attempts to make me guilty about blowing off someone who gave me and everyone else here the kiss-off before we even showed up. I don't like it when people try to manipulate me with feelings of guilt when they (or their friend) is in the wrong.
I guess I really can't see why people look at her post in isolation...To me, this thread reads like a bunch of crude bullies wolf-whistling until they get called on it. Then, the new girl mouths off, sparking nastier comments from the bullies. And, strangely, everyone's obsessed with how uppity and rude the new girl is.
Maybe because her post gave EVERYBODY on this forum and paizo the company in particular the kiss off on account of Krome, Set and like two others being jack-asses about their opinions. You conveniently ignore that in your summation.
Seriously, look around at the state of fandom. Girls who write homosexual rape porn featuring minors (Harry Potter slashfic! woo hoo!) and trade it with their friends are perfectly normal .... O_o WTF?
Uh... I wouldn't go that far. People may be trying to normalize amateur hurt-comfort pornography, but they're pretty far outside mainstream acceptance in academia, media law, and internet communities. And even those who defend their right to transgress against copyright law's ban on sharing or are interested in this subculture that goes back at least as far as Kirk-Spock aren't often found extolling the artistic virtues of the vast majority of said practices.
|
|
Has any male here, besides Heathansson, been in a room full of five women talking narsty smack about Kip Winger, or Fugazzi, or that singer dude from Red Hot Chili Peppers?
Rougerogue, grain of salt, arright? Whatever you're doing, you're dragging a lot of decent people's names through the mud. Give it a rest.
I can't even say some of the stuff I've heard on this board. I reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeealy think you're making a big deal out of nothing.
I fully expect to have some "two wrongs don't make a right" comeback, or no comeback at all, or.....heaven forbid.....one of my own innocuous posts thrown back at me blown totally out of proportion.
The only real difference is it wasn't posted on the internet for everybody to read, it was said in front of poor little sexually non-threatening Heathansson (whose husk received a viking funeral), and who chooses not to be a buzzkill when everybody around him is obviously having a good time, purile as it may be.
Meanwhile, DeadDMWalking said some things that are actually worth discussing. I'm not singling him out, I'm sure somebody else actually made a cogent point on this thread in between all the barbs of righteous indignation.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Has any male here, besides Heathansson, been in a room full of five women talking narsty smack about Kip Winger, or Fugazzi, or that singer dude from Red Hot Chili Peppers?
Rougerogue, grain of salt, arright? Whatever you're doing, you're dragging a lot of decent people's names through the mud. Give it a rest.
I was a shampoo boy in a women's hair salon. Bunch of grandmas coming in for their blue rinses. Those women were naughty in a way that constantly surprised me. :-)