I have a self project in mind for my free time. Mostly because it will give me an excuse to go back and read all of my Pathfinder books again. And my dear love will think I'm just prepping for game, which always makes him happy.
This was brought about by the "Cheesecake factor- too much?" thread and the blog which was mention therein: http://gomakemeasandwich.blogspot.com/
Project: go through the pathfinder products (I will be starting with the Adventure Paths) and determine the percentage of sexy female:non sexy and sexy male:non sexy.
Preliminary observation: I'm currently running Second Darkness and Serpent's Skull, and I think there are more male pictures than female. This, coming from the generally accepted position that more males game than females, surprised me... I was expecting more girls.
However, it has been pointed out that I am not the best judge of cheesecake. Something to do with something. I think it is because I grew up in Hawaii and men and women walking around half naked doesn't have the same sexual tones that it does to you cold dwelling peoples.
From reading the 'go make me a sandwich blog' I think (personal opinion based on her blog, nothing more) her definition includes pretty much anything that sexualizes the female form: focus on the breasts and behind, tight clothing, poses that express passiveness or overt sexuality, and facial expression that are 'vapid'.
So what do you consider cheesecake?
Oh, for me it comes down to poses.
You know, I've typed and deleted two responses to that question, and just can't seem to answer it. It's really hard to come up with a verbal description for a visual idea. I know it when I see it. Which is totally not helpful....
Gratuitous panty-shots for no reason other than to have gratuitous panty shots.
Nipple armor.
Those breastplates that encompass each breast separately. (bonus points if the above are included.)
80% of content posted on danbooru. (warning, often NWS)
Gainax breast jiggles.
Gratuitous pointless cleavage for cleavage's own sake.
Any succubus.
Realistically speaking there's a lot of cheesecake fanservice out there. I don't necessarily ever believe it to be a bad thing, but this is probably because I am not only a pervert, but also far too busy getting my information from the d20srd to ever crack open a book.
I know... thus the question. (Which I posted in the wrong place... bad mana).
So what do you consider cheesecake?
My personal definition of 'cheesecake' would be art which emphasizes the sexual characteristics of the female form in contexts where that sexuality is irrelevant to the context of the rest of the art. By which I mean supine postures, arched backs, cocked hips, pointed toes, upthrust breasts, and pouty lips with seductive expressions in a battlefield scene where a male character would be portrayed in an active and powerful pose.
|
Cheesecake is a dessert consisting of a topping made of soft, fresh cheese on a base made from biscuit, pastry or sponge. The topping is frequently sweetened with sugar and flavored or topped with fruit, nuts, fruit flavored drizzle and/or chocolate.
(sorry couldn't resist)
On a serious note I think cheesecake depends on your point of view. I have no problem personally with clothes that accentuate the sexiness of characters. They are supposed to be the Golarion pin ups and I would rather have them good looking (on both sides of the gender divide) than realistic.
That however is my taste. Personally I think there is a touch of cheesecake amongst the paizo iconics but really it's nowhere near as overt as you see in certain comics for example.
My definition of cheesecake is any image that enhances the sexiness of a character beyond what would be obviously practical. There are degrees to it though and I think paizo has it about right. Are the Iconics cheesecake? Yes, most of them are designed to look attractive and therefore they are. However I would venture that this is not a bad thing. When pictures focus exclusively on sexualised or suggestive poses that (in my opinion) is the point that it goes to far.
So in conclusion, the iconics have a touch of the cheesecake about them but not too much.
YMMV of course.
There are contexts where female sexuality is irrelevant? I don't get it.
Surely he meant irreverent.
I'll take this many (holds up X number of fingers).
There are contexts where female sexuality is irrelevant? I don't get it.
Of course, you're right! There is no artistic context in which women are inappropriately sexualized. Pouting seductively at the audience while exposing miles of cleavage and thigh is exactly what every female soldier does when she's eviscerating enemies, so it's entirely realistic portrayal and not at all irrelevant to the context of the art to emphasize women's sexuality in such contexts.
To be fair, THAT's not what the evil Dr. Mairkenstein said. It could always be relevant, whether it is was inappropriate or not. Mind you, I'm not protecting the evil doctor, just pointing out an instance that's not mutually exclusive.
In a word? Cleavage.
Actually, that's a terrible definition.
In more than a word, you're on target as regarding poses. Start with totally divorcing the picture from its context, then ask "how much does this look like a Vargas painting?" It's really not so much to do with nudity, or even sexiness, but sexualization.
It's an interesting project. Grabbing the main book, I don't think you get further than the cover - I could let the thigh slide, but sideboob? Interestingly, the following Seoni picture (though having arguably more skin and potentially more cheesecake pose, I don't think would count, and I'd count the next *cake on p. 18, with Setyuiel.
Cake is overrated. Pie is underrated. Want more pie.
Fixed it for you.There are contexts where female sexuality is irrelevant? I don't get it.LOL, I get it! It's a joke!
Ah yes, the "Lighten up! Get a sense of humor!" response. Right on cue. Thanks.
(Yes, I knew it was a joke. I didn't find it funny. Nor will I apologize for that.) Someone asked for a definition. I gave one. Someone else chose to dismiss that definition with 'humor'. I don't much like being headpatted and dismissed, so I responded with sarcasm. I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to contribute to the conversation by telling me it was a joke.
stuff
Not to put words into Mairk's mouth, but he's the last person to objectify women or take the issue less than seriously. I took his snark as an attempt to defuse this threads growing flamability and not as any kind of rebuke or dismissal towards you.
Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.
stuffNot to put words into Mairk's mouth, but he's the last person to objectify women or take the issue less than seriously. I took his snark as an attempt to defuse this threads growing flamability and not as any kind of rebuke or dismissal towards you.
Thanks for the vote of confidence, Amby. I try. But I bolded one part, because there's no way I'm that good all the time. ;-)
|
Fixed it for you.There are contexts where female sexuality is irrelevant? I don't get it.LOL, I get it! It's a joke!Ah yes, the "Lighten up! Get a sense of humor!" response. Right on cue. Thanks.
(Yes, I knew it was a joke. I didn't find it funny. Nor will I apologize for that.) Someone asked for a definition. I gave one. Someone else chose to dismiss that definition with 'humor'. I don't much like being headpatted and dismissed, so I responded with sarcasm. I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to contribute to the conversation by telling me it was a joke.
Maybe I had this delusional hope that you might just lighten up. Welcome to the world of real life where sometimes we come across things we don't like. If it's something as trivial like this, then we put our big boy/girl pants on and get on with our lives.
I understand that the topic of female sexuality seems to be one of your "Hot buttons", and by all means feel free to rant your head off. But don't be surprised when some of us try to lighten things up with a joke.
|
|
Thanks for the vote of confidence, Amby. I try. But I bolded one part, because there's no way I'm that good all the time. ;-)stuffNot to put words into Mairk's mouth, but he's the last person to objectify women or take the issue less than seriously. I took his snark as an attempt to defuse this threads growing flamability and not as any kind of rebuke or dismissal towards you.
The second... or maybe third to the last to be sure Prof.
To the original point; Cheesecake are was defined pretty well by Lindisty.
I also find nothing wrong it it, personally.
I don't see what the big deal is. A person liking cheesecake art certainly isn't causing the decline of western civilization.
-Idle
Fixed it for you.There are contexts where female sexuality is irrelevant? I don't get it.LOL, I get it! It's a joke!Ah yes, the "Lighten up! Get a sense of humor!" response. Right on cue. Thanks.
(Yes, I knew it was a joke. I didn't find it funny. Nor will I apologize for that.) Someone asked for a definition. I gave one. Someone else chose to dismiss that definition with 'humor'. I don't much like being headpatted and dismissed, so I responded with sarcasm. I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to contribute to the conversation by telling me it was a joke.
Maybe I had this delusional hope that you might just lighten up. Welcome to the world of real life where sometimes we come across things we don't like. If it's something as trivial like this, then we put our big boy/girl pants on and get on with our lives.
I understand that the topic of female sexuality seems to be one of your "Hot buttons", and by all means feel free to rant your head off. But don't be surprised when some of us try to lighten things up with a joke.
Right-o!
Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.
I recognize that you didn't intend it that way, but it certainly did come across that way to me.
I don't buy the 'always relevant, whether it's appropriate or not' explanation, either, for what it's worth. Or at least, I don't think that a woman's sexuality is any MORE relevant to any given artistic context than a man's sexuality is. Human beings are human beings, and sexuality is part of all of us. Having sexuality emphasized so dramatically and consistently in art, and especially in ways that make the subject appear passive, is something that happens predominantly to women. If a male character's sexuality wouldn't be considered relevant in a particular artistic context, why would a female character's sexuality be relevant in that same context?
I don't buy the 'always relevant, whether it's appropriate or not' explanation, either, for what it's worth. Or at least, I don't think that a woman's sexuality is any MORE relevant to any given artistic context than a man's sexuality is. Human beings are human beings, and sexuality is part of all of us. Having sexuality emphasized so dramatically and consistently in art, and especially in ways that make the subject appear passive, is something that happens predominantly to women. If a male character's sexuality wouldn't be considered relevant in a particular artistic context, why would a female character's sexuality be relevant in that same context?
I'm sure this has been brought up before; but given the majority of the target audience that cheesecake art appears in is adolescent males. I'm not saying the end justifies the means; but it's not exactly as if it's not smart business.
Again, I'm sure you've heard/read that before; but I'm wondering what your take on that position is? Consider this curiosity and not a "challenge".
-Idle
Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.[snip]
I don't buy the 'always relevant, whether it's appropriate or not' explanation, either, for what it's worth. Or at least, I don't think that a woman's sexuality is any MORE relevant to any given artistic context than a man's sexuality is.
That's fine. Once you accept your second statement, I don't see how you can avoid buying the distinction between relevance and appropriateness. If sexuality is always relevant, then appropriateness is measuring the expression of that relevance against some kind of checklist of taste, morality, or some such that measures appropriateness. Viz., your list above about certain bodily positions, gestures, and so on. I'm not sure how far the discussion of such standards will get you. I find more interesting your statement about female soldiers.
Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.I recognize that you didn't intend it that way, but it certainly did come across that way to me.
I don't buy the 'always relevant, whether it's appropriate or not' explanation, either, for what it's worth. Or at least, I don't think that a woman's sexuality is any MORE relevant to any given artistic context than a man's sexuality is. Human beings are human beings, and sexuality is part of all of us. Having sexuality emphasized so dramatically and consistently in art, and especially in ways that make the subject appear passive, is something that happens predominantly to women. If a male character's sexuality wouldn't be considered relevant in a particular artistic context, why would a female character's sexuality be relevant in that same context?
Never mind him.
I made it to work on the slick, treacherous icy roads of Dallas today and he didn't, so he has to make up for his insecurity in his masculinity somehow's.Even the Superbowl teams had their own sand trucks to go before them as they made their way to the arena of Jerry Jones the Plastic Faced Emperor....I just had my pantherlike reflexes, skilz, and general badassery.
Maybe I had this delusional hope that you might just lighten up. Welcome to the world of real life where sometimes we come across things we don't like. If it's something as trivial like this, then we put our big boy/girl pants on and get on with our lives.
I understand that the topic of female sexuality seems to be one of your "Hot buttons", and by all means feel free to rant your head off. But don't be surprised when some of us try to lighten things up with a joke.
Because dismissing people and making fun of them is always a good way to improve communication? I'm not trying to be sarcastic here, I just really don't understand what it is that you intend to accomplish by continuing to dismiss my opinions in this way. Yes, these are issues that are important to me. You don't know me. As far as I know, I've never dismissed any of your serious opinions out of hand and told you how humorless you were for taking them seriously. Why do you feel a need to do that to me about this?
...If a male character's sexuality wouldn't be considered relevant in a particular artistic context, why would a female character's sexuality be relevant in that same context?
I kinda think most everyone is in agreement with that.
A question then: Drow society is primarily matriarchal and decadently sensual. If drow women dress provocatively -- because of social expectations, or to manipulate the males, or as a sign of their confidence/power, or whatever -- is it still cheesecake? What if the males are also similarly depicted?
|
|
Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.I recognize that you didn't intend it that way, but it certainly did come across that way to me.
I don't buy the 'always relevant, whether it's appropriate or not' explanation, either, for what it's worth. Or at least, I don't think that a woman's sexuality is any MORE relevant to any given artistic context than a man's sexuality is. Human beings are human beings, and sexuality is part of all of us. Having sexuality emphasized so dramatically and consistently in art, and especially in ways that make the subject appear passive, is something that happens predominantly to women. If a male character's sexuality wouldn't be considered relevant in a particular artistic context, why would a female character's sexuality be relevant in that same context?
Never mind him.
I made it to work on the slick, treacherous icy roads of Dallas today and he didn't, so he has to make up for his insecurity in his masculinity somehow's.
Even the Superbowl teams had their own sand trucks to go before them as they made their way to the arena of Jerry Jones the Plastic Faced Emperor....I just had my pantherlike reflexes, skilz, and general badassery.
And did you have cheesecake?
Cause I like it with cherries on top.
Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.I recognize that you didn't intend it that way, but it certainly did come across that way to me.
I don't buy the 'always relevant, whether it's appropriate or not' explanation, either, for what it's worth. Or at least, I don't think that a woman's sexuality is any MORE relevant to any given artistic context than a man's sexuality is. Human beings are human beings, and sexuality is part of all of us. Having sexuality emphasized so dramatically and consistently in art, and especially in ways that make the subject appear passive, is something that happens predominantly to women. If a male character's sexuality wouldn't be considered relevant in a particular artistic context, why would a female character's sexuality be relevant in that same context?
Never mind him.
I made it to work on the slick, treacherous icy roads of Dallas today and he didn't, so he has to make up for his insecurity in his masculinity somehow's.
Even the Superbowl teams had their own sand trucks to go before them as they made their way to the arena of Jerry Jones the Plastic Faced Emperor....I just had my pantherlike reflexes, skilz, and general badassery.
Oh Heathy, if you think my masculinity is bound up in others having to drive in idiotic conditions, then hug that to you like the toasty blanket it must be. I did fine when I lived in the NE where stuff was done to the roads in question that didn't make them a solid sheet of ice. And since this is a gender thread, maybe I should point out that my wife didn't have a choice and she drove there and back without incident. Thankfully.
I'm with most of the others here...I don't see a problem with cheesecake, even if I do recognize it. Honestly, I like it myself (I know, shock, a woman liking cheesecake!).
Why? Well, it's pretty simple, really...I want to be sexy too. When I play a character in a game, I want that character to be sexy. That doesn't mean I want them (or me) to be only sexy - far from it, I want them to be capable too, but these characters are an idealized form of some aspect of me...and damnit, if I'm idealizing, I want to idealize my looks too!
Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.I recognize that you didn't intend it that way, but it certainly did come across that way to me.
That's because you have a feat spent for Skill Focus (Perception) to arrive to that conclusion when you took on the Inquisitor class to pronounce your judgment.
I don't buy the 'always relevant, whether it's appropriate or not' explanation, either, for what it's worth. Or at least, I don't think that a woman's sexuality is any MORE relevant to any given artistic context than a man's sexuality is. Human beings are human beings, and sexuality is part of all of us. Having sexuality emphasized so dramatically and consistently in art, and especially in ways that make the subject appear passive, is something that happens predominantly to women. If a male character's sexuality wouldn't be considered relevant in a particular artistic context, why would a female character's sexuality be relevant in that same context?I'm sure this has been brought up before; but given the majority of the target audience that cheesecake art appears in is adolescent males. I'm not saying the end justifies the means; but it's not exactly as if it's not smart business.
Again, I'm sure you've heard/read that before; but I'm wondering what your take on that position is? Consider this curiosity and not a "challenge".
I understand it as a business practice. I know companies are in business to make money, and as such, I know they have to pander to their target audience. Personally, I wish more gaming companies were serious about promoting gender and racial diversity in their products, but until there's established demand for it amongst a significant portion of the gamer market, it won't happen. Which, I think, says more about gaming 'culture' than it does about the companies in question.
As others have said, it's mostly a matter of including 'sexy' stuff doing so doesn't actually make sense in context, is gratuitous, or is just plain goofy. A warning sign is 'female armor' that doesn't look like real armor, anbd bares a lot of skin for no good reason. The poses, though, as others have said, are as important as the costuming or looks of the female characters.
Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.I recognize that you didn't intend it that way, but it certainly did come across that way to me.
I appreciate it. Tone is notoriously difficult to gauge on the internet. Intention even more so, even in person.
Ewan! About time you made it here. ;-)
Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.I recognize that you didn't intend it that way, but it certainly did come across that way to me.That's because you have a feat spent for Skill Focus (Perception) to arrive to that conclusion when you took on the Inquisitor class to pronounce your judgment.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
I failed my save and fell for this post. I admit it.
On a lighter note; I kind of like the variety in cheesecake offered in Paizo products. The characters don't even have to be partially nude to evoke the cheesecake stereotypes. It's less Boris Vallejo and more... you know I don't have a followup for that.
-Idle
|
I'm with most of the others here...I don't see a problem with cheesecake, even if I do recognize it. Honestly, I like it myself (I know, shock, a woman liking cheesecake!).
Why? Well, it's pretty simple, really...I want to be sexy too. When I play a character in a game, I want that character to be sexy. That doesn't mean I want them (or me) to be only sexy - far from it, I want them to be capable too, but these characters are an idealized form of some aspect of me...and damnit, if I'm idealizing, I want to idealize my looks too!
Most women I know fall into that as well including myself. Not all of course.
|
|
Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.I recognize that you didn't intend it that way, but it certainly did come across that way to me.That's because you have a feat spent for Skill Focus (Perception) to arrive to that conclusion when you took on the Inquisitor class to pronounce your judgment.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
I failed my save and fell for this post. I admit it.
On a lighter note; I kind of like the variety in cheesecake offered in Paizo products. The characters don't even have to be partially nude to evoke the cheesecake stereotypes. It's less Boris Vallejo and more... you know I don't have a followup for that.
-Idle
Bettie Page? :)
I'm with most of the others here...I don't see a problem with cheesecake, even if I do recognize it. Honestly, I like it myself (I know, shock, a woman liking cheesecake!).
Why? Well, it's pretty simple, really...I want to be sexy too. When I play a character in a game, I want that character to be sexy. That doesn't mean I want them (or me) to be only sexy - far from it, I want them to be capable too, but these characters are an idealized form of some aspect of me...and damnit, if I'm idealizing, I want to idealize my looks too!
Well said. And that pretty well sums up how I feel about my characters as well. Yeah I want them to kick ass and take names, but there's no reason why they can't look good doing it. :)
(And that doesn't make me a bad feminist either. Had that argument too many times already.)Also, I quite like cheesecake art. The female form is beautiful to look at and I see nothing wrong with appreciating it.
|
|
Bettie Page? :)Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.I recognize that you didn't intend it that way, but it certainly did come across that way to me.That's because you have a feat spent for Skill Focus (Perception) to arrive to that conclusion when you took on the Inquisitor class to pronounce your judgment.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
I failed my save and fell for this post. I admit it.
On a lighter note; I kind of like the variety in cheesecake offered in Paizo products. The characters don't even have to be partially nude to evoke the cheesecake stereotypes. It's less Boris Vallejo and more... you know I don't have a followup for that.
-Idle
Bettie Page was a goddess.
...Any succubus...Define Cheesecake
Really? I've heard that before, and I've also heard it about courtesan NPCs like Lavender Lil. I'd imagine neither would be particularly subtle about playing to their strengths. I think it would be incongruous to depict either in a way that doesn't acknowledge that. Now where to draw that line between an honest depiction and cheesecake is another discussion...
Bettie Page? :)
Actually that is a perfect description. Thank you!
-Idle
|
|
Cheesecake
Ingredients:
1 graham cracker pie crust
8 oz. soft cream cheese
1/3 c. sugar
2 tsp. vanilla
1 c. sour cream
8 oz. Cool Whip, slightly thawed
Cheesecake Recipe Directions:
1. Beat cream cheese until smooth, add sugar and mix well. Add sour cream and vanilla, mix well. Fold in Cool Whip.
2. Spoon into pie crust and chill for 4 hours.
Oh Heathy, if you think my masculinity is bound up in others having to drive in idiotic conditions, then hug that to you like the toasty blanket it must be. I did fine when I lived in the NE where stuff was done to the roads in question that didn't make them a solid sheet of ice. And since this is a gender thread, maybe I should point out that my wife didn't have a choice and she drove there and back without incident. Thankfully.Just in case my humor might have been taken as dismissive or head-patting (in this instance), let me assure you it was not.I recognize that you didn't intend it that way, but it certainly did come across that way to me.
I don't buy the 'always relevant, whether it's appropriate or not' explanation, either, for what it's worth. Or at least, I don't think that a woman's sexuality is any MORE relevant to any given artistic context than a man's sexuality is. Human beings are human beings, and sexuality is part of all of us. Having sexuality emphasized so dramatically and consistently in art, and especially in ways that make the subject appear passive, is something that happens predominantly to women. If a male character's sexuality wouldn't be considered relevant in a particular artistic context, why would a female character's sexuality be relevant in that same context?
Never mind him.
I made it to work on the slick, treacherous icy roads of Dallas today and he didn't, so he has to make up for his insecurity in his masculinity somehow's.
Even the Superbowl teams had their own sand trucks to go before them as they made their way to the arena of Jerry Jones the Plastic Faced Emperor....I just had my pantherlike reflexes, skilz, and general badassery.
Your wife can drink outta MY canteen.
You gotta get tuff'd up.We're in Texas, after all.
Doesn't this support the thesis that philosophy depends on leisure (=idleness)?
|
|
Bettie Page? :)I failed my save and fell for this post. I admit it.
On a lighter note; I kind of like the variety in cheesecake offered in Paizo products. The characters don't even have to be partially nude to evoke the cheesecake stereotypes. It's less Boris Vallejo and more... you know I don't have a followup for that.
-Idle
Bettie Page was a goddess.
She was one of my ... hero's... idols? growing up. Someone I looked up to and respected. So big Bettie Page fan.