|
Why are we only focusing on the women, here? There's plenty of room for scantily clad men in Golarion as well.
I agree, I surely wouldn't mind some more shirtless warriors cutting swathes through monsters of all kinds (mostly goblins) like back in the days of old.
Nothing beats the old "I'm too badass to wear armor" style warrior (complete with arrows sticking out of him) in my books.
Here's a more 'modern' example of what I'm going on about:
New Beefcake
And here's a pic of the 'old' stuff that I really enjoy:
Old Beefcake
There's plenty of room for scantily clad men in Golarion as well.
Aww yeah! "Cabana Boys of Golarion." :D
There's plenty of room for scantily clad men in Golarion as well.Aww yeah! "Cabana Boys of Golarion." :D
I'll have Sarah put the 2010 calendar on her schedule. :)
When you said PC I thought it was because of the high attrition rate some of those women have caused. Darn Political Correctness to Heck for corrupting the true meaning of PC.
It might have some virtue at the very core, but no one ever saw that, because people put a big fat layer of "go crazy with euphemisms" around it. Like saying "Petrchochemistry Trading Professional" when talking about the guy who sells you gas. If you clean toilets, you're a toilet cleaner. If you don't like being called a toilet cleaner, get a different job.
|
I'm partially deaf (I was born with no hearing in my right ear) you wouldn't know it because of good hearing in my left ear and years of speech classes as a child, but I personally went from being deaf to being "Impaired" I hated it personally, Deaf to me was simple straightforward and simple. But some A-hole decided that there were stigmas attached to the descriptions for disabilities, and suddenly instead of just being partially deaf, I was hearing Impaired. Which to me sounds a lot worse. Impaired sound a lot more negative to me, it sounds like some kind of big set-back. I hate political correctness.
|
On the original topic, i'd be in favor of any pinup art of pathfinder NPCs, but Lavender Lil just jumps out at me. I say give equal time to the folks who like beefcake too.
On the subject of beauty, I like real women, with real curves. I'm not fond of brest implants. They often look just odd. Voluptuous women get my attention. That's not to say that I can't recognize a thin woman as beautiful. If a woman is naturally thin and proportional and healthy that can be very lovely. Women who look like they are underweight, however, I don't find attractive.
Now, now, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Or some PC crap like that. Apparently, the 'dying of a combination of heroin and HiV' look is really, really hot to some people.
Part of the appeal of the heroin chic is that they are easy to design clothes to, and that's why many designers and high fashion in general have embraced that look. Women with breasts and hips are much more problematic.
And...if you can tell someone has breast implants something is wrong. Huge amount of women in fantasy art seem to have breast implants. Reviewing some basic anatomy is always a good idea for an artist (unless they are drawing something like helium elemental or goddess of balloons, then they can go wild).
|
I'm partially deaf (I was born with no hearing in my right ear) you wouldn't know it because of good hearing in my left ear and years of speech classes as a child, but I personally went from being deaf to being "Impaired" I hated it personally, Deaf to me was simple straightforward and simple. But some A-hole decided that there were stigmas attached to the descriptions for disabilities, and suddenly instead of just being partially deaf, I was hearing Impaired. Which to me sounds a lot worse. Impaired sound a lot more negative to me, it sounds like some kind of big set-back. I hate political correctness.
[beginrant]
It's wierd that a word like 'dwarf' or 'black,' one can take as an identity all it's own, an inclusive 'tribe' of sorts, but when it's PC-ed into 'little person' or 'african-american' it linguisitically transforms to something *exclusive,* 'like a normal person, but with something wrong with them / different about them.'They aren't 'little persons' they are *people,* no modifier needed. A US citizen with black skin isn't some wierd subfaction of 'American of African descent,' he's just a damned American like everyone else, just as nobody feels the need to call me an 'American of Scottish descent,' because society isn't *trying to hold me at arms length, set me apart and claim that I'm different than themselves.*
Deaf is an identity group. It's a tribe, or a family, or a community. 'Hearing-impaired' states right out front that there is something damaged, something *wrong* with the person. 'Like us, but with something missing.' It's exclusive, no matter it's frilly intentions.
Calling a deaf person 'hearing impaired' is like calling a woman 'man without a dick.' It defines the person by how they are missing something (by the speakers standards) or are 'not right.'
[/endrant]
|
|
I'm partially deaf (I was born with no hearing in my right ear) you wouldn't know it because of good hearing in my left ear and years of speech classes as a child, but I personally went from being deaf to being "Impaired" I hated it personally, Deaf to me was simple straightforward and simple. But some A-hole decided that there were stigmas attached to the descriptions for disabilities, and suddenly instead of just being partially deaf, I was hearing Impaired. Which to me sounds a lot worse. Impaired sound a lot more negative to me, it sounds like some kind of big set-back. I hate political correctness.[beginrant]
It's wierd that a word like 'dwarf' or 'black,' one can take as an identity all it's own, an inclusive 'tribe' of sorts, but when it's PC-ed into 'little person' or 'african-american' it linguisitically transforms to something *exclusive,* 'like a normal person, but with something wrong with them / different about them.'They aren't 'little persons' they are *people,* no modifier needed. A US citizen with black skin isn't some wierd subfaction of 'American of African descent,' he's just a damned American like everyone else, just as nobody feels the need to call me an 'American of Scottish descent,' because society isn't *trying to hold me at arms length, set me apart and claim that I'm different than themselves.*
Deaf is an identity group. It's a tribe, or a family, or a community. 'Hearing-impaired' states right out front that there is something damaged, something *wrong* with the person. 'Like us, but with something missing.' It's exclusive, no matter it's frilly intentions.
Calling a deaf person 'hearing impaired' is like calling a woman 'man without a dick.' It defines the person by how they are missing something (by the speakers standards) or are 'not right.'
[/endrant]
Those are both very good points. Most people don't want to be identified by their race or a "disability". They want to be identified as a person, a whole, equal, unique person.
Plus, "African-American" is a mix of two really big assumptions: That he's American, and that he's got African ancestry. Neither has to be right. I know black people have moved to other continents than America, and they can come from other continents than Africa. What about someone who was born in Sri Lanka and then moved to Scotland? And before someone wants to rescue the term by saying that it's used in America, and most black Americans are from Africa originally, it's still an assumption about someone. Said Sri Lankan-turned-Scot could visit America, after all.
Plus, "African-American" is a mix of two really big assumptions: That he's American, and that he's got African ancestry. Neither has to be right. I know black people have moved to other continents than America, and they can come from other continents than Africa. What about someone who was born in Sri Lanka and then moved to Scotland? And before someone wants to rescue the term by saying that it's used in America, and most black Americans are from Africa originally, it's still an assumption about someone. Said Sri Lankan-turned-Scot could visit America, after all.
Aren't we ALL African Americans?
Genetic research says that every human being on Earth is descended from a population that lived in Africa, and from various subpopulations that left Africa at various times. Some people left Africa tens of thousands of years ago, and some people left Africa last week.
Quantum mechanics says that objects do not have a definite location, only a set of probabilities based on velocity and energy and all sorts of other things that I don't feel like looking up right now. So, per QM, we are ALL in the United States of America. It's just that some people are more in the United States than others.
Come to think of it, we are also all in Africa, too, just to different degrees of probability.
So the African-American distinction is useless.
Now if I can just figure out how to get this probability machine to work, so that all the molecules in Seoni's dress move exactly five feet to the left....
I don't trust them quantums. I will not tolerate cruelty to cats. Death is with me on this one.
But you're right with the african origin. A popular theory places the cradle of humanity in Africa. Something about them savannas made us grow big brains. Hm.... Maybe it still works, because I swear there's a lot of people who's brain is shrinking while you watch them or listen to them.
Anyone with a bit of venture capital and an interest to save mankind? We buy a big piece of savanna and put people there. :D
Plus, "African-American" is a mix of two really big assumptions: That he's American, and that he's got African ancestry. Neither has to be right. I know black people have moved to other continents than America, and they can come from other continents than Africa. What about someone who was born in Sri Lanka and then moved to Scotland? And before someone wants to rescue the term by saying that it's used in America, and most black Americans are from Africa originally, it's still an assumption about someone. Said Sri Lankan-turned-Scot could visit America, after all.
Time ago there was also an interesting bit of news in one US newspaper, about first black president in South Africa, Nelson Mandela...except that word "black" was avoided, leading to him being called first African-American president in South Africa...
And indeed current science places birthplace of humankind in Eastern Africa. A possible connection to cheetahs has been suggested (cheetahs store some of the meat they hunt on trees, where it is safe from most other animals...except upright-moving protohumans, who this way gained a good source for protein, causing growth of the brain...).
Plus, "African-American" is a mix of two really big assumptions: That he's American, and that he's got African ancestry. Neither has to be right. I know black people have moved to other continents than America, and they can come from other continents than Africa. What about someone who was born in Sri Lanka and then moved to Scotland? And before someone wants to rescue the term by saying that it's used in America, and most black Americans are from Africa originally, it's still an assumption about someone. Said Sri Lankan-turned-Scot could visit America, after all.
Oh, it's worse than that. Among certain segments of the population, President-Elect Obama is not "African-American" since he is not descended from a pre-U.S. Civil War slave.
My ethnically Iranian roommate and I are frequently amused by the fact that he is, technically, more Caucasian than any of these Anglo-Saxon mutts who have claimed the term.
Personally, I like to list my ethnicity as Callipygian.
While we're being politically incorrect about Seoni, may I ask why the lovely young Varisian lass, whose race is blatantly patterned on the Romany, is being depicted in fan art as having milky white skin? The young sorceress should have a more burnt sienna, or at least mocha, skin tone.
Brown is beautiful!
Because the Varisians are descendants of Thassilonians, and have been living in the same fairly far northern geographical region for the last ten thousand years? Seems logical to me. (It's the part where there haven't been any major population migrations in a span of time longer than our recorded history that bugs me.)
|
Here's a more 'modern' example of what I'm going on about:
New BeefcakeAnd here's a pic of the 'old' stuff that I really enjoy:
Old Beefcake
Ever notice how the new guy is more "steroid-y" looking than the old "Conan-esque" guy? (Mostly in the neck area). I have to say, I like the look of the Old Beefcake guy better; plus, his skin tone is much healthier and shiny....
*drool*