And I'm not sure why it's hard to not classify a woman's profession by her appearance. Do you assume that all tan, blonde, curvy, voluptuous women are strippers? Or do you just assume that when they dress revealingly? At the beach are you mentally cataloguing women as stripper, stripper, housewife, stripper, librarian, stripper? There are many women in America who look like Seoni, and they're not hookers, strippers, or porn stars.
Thanks.
I've been biting my tongue pretty hard while reading through this thread, but that's a point I wanted desperately to make, and I am very glad you did it for me.
Now back to my regularly scheduled tongue-biting.
I see two possibilities here:
Possibility one:
Leper27, I think a large portion of what you are experiencing can be chalked up to cultural relativity.
If you look at some of the older advertisements from France, there was a LOT of sexuality. And in general, it was not offensive to French people. You're basing your perception of Paizo's ethics and standards on your own level of ethical or moral criterion. This is generally what gets us dumb humans in trouble when communicating with people outside our limited band of influence; we assume we know something we don't.
Possibility two:
You is trollin everyone.
All of this aside. I dig the arts. Keep em up. Oh I will also state that I found Seoni's attire to verge on the ridiculous. Mostly because it seems flimsy and not really practical, like it would get in the way of trying to do just about anything. Not that Prestidigitation doesn't take care of...well all of that. Regardless, there are always little idiosyncrasies in illustrations that don't necessarily make the most sense, but they make for nice art. And as my college drawing teacher pointed out so often, If it looks right, it is right. If it looks wrong, it is wrong.
That said, I would say a woman "never" has to be scantily-clad in an RPG rulebook (I can see it in a bestiary...the image of the Dryad in the first bestiary, for example, I think is well-done and scantily-clad). In the rulebook context, it's almost always gratuitous.
You're dodging the question. I didn't ask if she had to be scantily clad. I asked, [your words, not mine]
Okay. Allow me to rephrase: I would say there is never a good reason to include a scantily-clad woman in an RPG rulebook. (But if you can imagine a good reason to include a scantily-clad woman, I'd listen)
And I'm not sure why it's hard to not classify a woman's profession by her appearance. Do you assume that all tan, blonde, curvy, voluptuous women are strippers?
Nope.
Or do you just assume that when they dress revealingly?
Getting warmer.
At the beach are you mentally cataloguing women as stripper, stripper, housewife, stripper, librarian, stripper?
Nope.
There are many women in America who look like Seoni, and they're not hookers, strippers, or porn stars.
If they look and dress like Seoni (i.e. fake boobs, tan and bleach blonde, and wearing scant clothing with no underwear), they look like strippers. Any woman who looks and dresses like that can't be far from one of those professions.
All of Paizo's female iconics are attractive in different ways, so clearly it's not hard to draw them so they don't look like strippers (only 1/9 female iconics are "drawn like strippers," according to your definition). So I think you're overgeneralizing when you complain "I'm not sure why it's so hard" to draw them as non-strippers.
There's Alahazra too...not quite as egregious, but she falls into the category as well IMO.
Would you still say Seoni looks like a stripper if she were dressed like this? Does...
No, I wouldn't. Do you think she's less charismatic that way?
I removed a post. Don't post angry, please.
removed post
I'm basicly asking you the same question. I'm showing that if you apply your same logic to a different circumstance, it's idiotic.
You're ok with (and would be correct, imho) to let your daughter read or watch a national geographic show without having concern with it affecting her, even though there is obvious but non-sexual nudity, but her seeing a painted representation of a female who is merely "scantily clad" in a rpg book might affect her negtively or be awkward.
I'm trying to understand, honestly.
Maybe there's inherent awkwardness in being the father of a daughter I'm not aware of...meh.
If they look and dress like Seoni (i.e. fake boobs, tan and bleach blonde, and wearing scant clothing with no underwear), they look like strippers. Any woman who looks and dresses like that can't be far from one of those professions.
What a remarkably Victorian mindset.
If they look and dress like Seoni (i.e. fake boobs, tan and bleach blonde, and wearing scant clothing with no underwear), they look like strippers. Any woman who looks and dresses like that can't be far from one of those professions.What a remarkably Victorian mindset.
Well, poor taste and all that.
Hark! The mall be full of strippers and whores!!
Yeah, I'm kind of a Bruce Lee fan and I found the "Um, Bruce Lee almost certainly took steroids" comment in very poor taste AND almost certainly not true.
It's hardly the first time he's said something in poor taste. One of his first poor taste comments in this thread he admits to making purely to make an impression. In other words, he's a troll.
And the white knighting in the defense of poor women everywhere really needs to stop. Half-naked sorceresses may seem degrading to women, but it's more degrading that women are a class of people that need to be defended by males on the Paizo forums.
So far, aside from males being white knights and the mention of other times males have been white knighting, we have one Leper's wife as the evidence that Paizo has a problem, because anecdotal wife opinions are surely symptomatic of major issues facing the RPG industry. To balance things out, I know many other women who enjoy plenty of things in media full of objectified women. It's everywhere and for the most part it's not an issue.
(P.S. When do we get the thread complaining about how Valeros is perpetuating the stereotype as males as drunken womanizers?)
Yes exactly. I am saying that there are so many messages coming from multiple sources that all basically say "in order to have value as a woman you must be sexy, dress sexy and seduce men" basically just about every reality show etc. So it's something I try to protect against. Its the same reason I strongly support her playing sports or doing academic activities etc. Because I want her sense of value to come from her character and accomplishements
Glad I'm not the only person who sees this. Good post and kudos to your judgment as a parent.
removed postI'm basicly asking you the same question. I'm showing that if you apply your same logic to a different circumstance, it's idiotic.
You're ok with (and would be correct, imho) to let your daughter read or watch a national geographic show without having concern with it affecting her, even though there is obvious but non-sexual nudity, but her seeing a painted representation of a female who is merely "scantily clad" in a rpg book might affect her negtively or be awkward.
I'm trying to understand, honestly.
I apologize.
Yes exactly. I am saying that there are so many messages coming from multiple sources that all basically say "in order to have value as a woman you must be sexy, dress sexy and seduce men" basically just about every reality show etc. So it's something I try to protect against. Its the same reason I strongly support her playing sports or doing academic activities etc. Because I want her sense of value to come from her character and accomplishements
I suspected as much. Thanks for the honest answer.
EDIT: I don't envy people trying to raise kids these days. You do the best you can. If you honestly feel the art in an RPG lends to what you're trying to protect her from, I really can't (and won't) argue.
Glad I'm not the only person who sees this. Good post and kudos to your judgment as a parent.
Yes exactly. I am saying that there are so many messages coming from multiple sources that all basically say "in order to have value as a woman you must be sexy, dress sexy and seduce men" basically just about every reality show etc. So it's something I try to protect against. Its the same reason I strongly support her playing sports or doing academic activities etc. Because I want her sense of value to come from her character and accomplishements
<chuckle>
Okay. Allow me to rephrase: I would say there is never a good reason to include a scantily-clad woman in an RPG rulebook. (But if you can imagine a good reason to include a scantily-clad woman, I'd listen)
I can think of four reasons the late, very great Frank Frazetta painted the ladies awaiting rescue in his Conan paintings (and other paintings depicting powerful men) scantily-clad.
1. It creates in the viewer a sense that the damsel-in-distress is even more vulnerable, thus increasing the sense of urgency in the painting.
2. This is a means of depicting an ancient, forgotten, time; a more uncivilized time; or a time and place with customs and morals somewhat alien to us.
3. It titillates the viewer.
4. He just liked bodacious babes.
Now, assuming, given your conservative tastes, that numbers three and four are right out, that leaves what I consider to be two very valid artistic choices in numbers one and two. Both qualify for inclusion in RPGs, based on their shared heritage with those paintings.
And in fact, I can think of illustrations in several old D&D books that qualified in both ways. Deities & Demigods had depictions of many ancient goddesses, based on actual real-world mythology, who had bare breasts as befitting our perceptions of those old religions and the world as it was (or at least a fantasized version of it). I believe the Fiend Folio also had some tasteful nudity.
There is a difference between understanding an artistic choice and choosing to dismiss the art based on a personal more. In my experience, there is no difference between somebody who flips out morally at the sight of a bare-chested female in art, or a kid who snickers and points at it. Either way, a person is not handling themselves with a lot of maturity.
What a remarkably Victorian mindset.
What a remarkably ignorant comment. Do you even know what Victorian means?
I'm not sure why I have to point this out, but there's a whole world of difference between Seoni's style and Victorian styles.
What a remarkably ignorant comment. Do you even know what Victorian means?
What a remarkably Victorian mindset.
I think he's speaking to the double standard of sexual morality during the Victorian Era. It's prevalent throughout the literature of the time.
Assuming a woman is a whore or a stripper based on how she's dressed would fit keenly in that mindset.
I think he's speaking to the double standard of sexual morality during the Victorian Era. It's prevalent throughout the literature of the time.
Assuming a woman is a whore or a stripper based on how she's dressed would fit keenly in that mindset.
In the Victorian era, you were immodest if you showed your ankles. If you've been paying any attention, that obviously isn't anywhere near what I'm suggesting.
This paint-me-as-an-extremist tactic is just a cheap ploy which I'm coming to expect of you guys.
You can disagree with me without being a dick, you know.
|
I think he's speaking to the double standard of sexual morality during the Victorian Era. It's prevalent throughout the literature of the time.
Assuming a woman is a whore or a stripper based on how she's dressed would fit keenly in that mindset.In the Victorian era, you were immodest if you showed your ankles. That obviously isn't anywhere near what I'm suggesting.
This paint-me-as-an-extremist tactic is just a cheap ploy.
You're not an extremist, you're just some 120 years late to the party :)
why do mommy and daddy always have to fight so loud
Okay. Allow me to rephrase: I would say there is never a good reason to include a scantily-clad woman in an RPG rulebook. (But if you can imagine a good reason to include a scantily-clad woman, I'd listen)
I can think of four reasons the late, very great Frank Frazetta painted the ladies awaiting rescue in his Conan paintings (and other paintings depicting powerful men) scantily-clad.
1. It creates in the viewer a sense that the damsel-in-distress is even more vulnerable, thus increasing the sense of urgency in the painting.
2. This is a means of depicting an ancient, forgotten, time; a more uncivilized time; or a time and place with customs and morals somewhat alien to us.
3. It titillates the viewer.
4. He just liked bodacious babes.
Now, assuming, given your conservative tastes, that numbers three and four are right out, that leaves what I consider to be two very valid artistic choices in numbers one and two. Both qualify for inclusion in RPGs, based on their shared heritage with those paintings.
And in fact, I can think of illustrations in several old D&D books that qualified in both ways. Deities & Demigods had depictions of many ancient goddesses, based on actual real-world mythology, who had bare breasts as befitting our perceptions of those old religions and the world as it was (or at least a fantasized version of it). I believe the Fiend Folio also had some tasteful nudity.
There is a difference between understanding an artistic choice and choosing to dismiss the art based on a personal more. In my experience, there is no difference between somebody who flips out morally at the sight of a bare-chested female in art, or a kid who snickers and points at it. Either way, a person is not handling themselves with a lot of maturity.
+1
I think 2-4 apply. More often than not Valeros is the damsel in distress.
I think we're done here.