| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Before I start, I would like to note that I really, really hate 5 button mice and that you can't find non five button mice anymore, and the fact that I accidentally clicked the "back" button, which, with this lovely board and its antiquatedness, caused the post I was about to post to disappear when I clicked forward. I hadn't even gotten the chance to Ctrl C yet (which I always do before posting).
NOW: onto the discussion, and please understand I probably lost some of my momentum:
I like that folks have brought ancient Greek artwork into this, because Greek artwork was humanistic and was about celebrating the human form. There were a lot of naked folks, men and women alike, and yet... it's hard to put to words to it, but it's hard to be shocked at the naked folks. Something about that celebratory nature comes through--even if it depicts a relatively erotic scene, my innate response isn't to go, "My god, she must be freezing," or something.
I think we can agree the line between "celebratory" and "exploitative" is blurry, but I think most of us can also agree it's there. And the more one veers into the latter, the more there are people whose reaction is going to be disgust or defensiveness rather than titallation (even if titillation also increases). I think a lot of this has to do with context, both in terms of the internal context of the artwork as well as of the external setting or purpose of the artwork, along with intent of the artist. And context and intent tends to get lost in discussions like these.
We're human beings, the vast majority of adult humans like sex, and we like to look at naked people. No one is saying that anyone should be ashamed of that. But we should be wary to prevent images which attempt to display a disempowerment half of our population (whichever half that might be) and a double standard of that display at that. We should also think about what kind of images are appropriate for marketing and what's appropriate to enjoy on one's on private time; after all, controversial artwork may only attract one customer at the sacrifice of other profit makers.
Now, what really upsets me about this thread, for the record---is that it seemed to be started in all good intentions. The OP found some cool pictures he or she liked, and linked to them. The pictures I think most people can agree were not exploitative.
The first responder to this harmless sharing said, "Blasphemy"; the next response was "Meh." Not able to keep disinterest to themselves, further responders successfully derailed the thread away from the intent of the thread to share these pretty, harmless pictures, to talk about naked people of all kinds, and to shame anyone who might enjoy, I don't know, pictures of people who might not be naked for once. There have certainly been ample discussions here from people who've talked about their enjoyment of cheesecake and beefcake (I enjoy both, for the record)---that some posters felt so insecure and defensive about their enjoyment of such things that they had to derail this thread makes me very, very sad. It's not that such things shouldn't be discussed; it's the disrespectful treatment of the intent of the original post that upsets me.
(And yes, I know I posted some flippant things too to this thread, although it was an attempt to get things back on track, as poorly made attempts they were.)
It's nice that the thread has led to some interesting discussion in the end, and I don't mean to silence that, but I wanted to share that thought.
Before I start, I would like to note that I really, really hate 5 button mice and that you can't find non five button mice anymore...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The classic "fantasy" depiction of a musclebound man looks far more like a body-builder (or body sculptor) than an actual warrior or soldier. The characters themselves could realistically be portrayed with less symmetry and muscle definition and more bodyfat, as befitting a person who eats well and gets his workout from fighting not targeting certain body areas for aesthetic reasons.
A bodybuilder as a male fighter is every bit as silly and exploitative as a swimsuit model for a female fighter.
Like all things, the internet is a sine wave, rising to inspiring heights and depressing lows.
DQ, I truly hope I didn't offend you with my meh response on the first page! I didn't mean to disrespect the original idea- I do like to keep my cheesecake and more realistic stuff separate- but the meh was more aimed at the occasional comment in the tumblr thread itself that couldn't help but to elevate reasonable armor while being dismissive, insulting, or even encouraging violence towards cheesecake and those who might enjoy it.
A bodybuilder as a male fighter is every bit as silly and exploitative as a swimsuit model for a female fighter.
Having sweet 'beach muscles' is actually not very good for the average fighting man.
One thing to note with what cultures wore armor and what type, it depended as much on their neighbors as themselves. Heavy armor rose into use as melee and ranged weapons became stronger, thus stronger protection was needed. When firearms came into their own, the trend reversed because it was impossible to make practical armor that was capable of stopping bullets. As a result, tactics changed which emphasized a different kind of armor. In Africa, or even the Americas, armor was less common, especially heavy armor, because the weapons technology and responding tactics grew at about the same, relatively slow rate. Since the climate and tactics of tribal warfare encouraged light gear and mobile warfare, major changes came only when invaders from outside came in and disturbed the regional balance.
Good Stuff
Good post.
Which is not to downplay the awesomeness of Arny as Conan... The first film, at least.
Yeah I liked the pictures of fighter in realisitic armor more.
Which is not to downplay the awesomeness of Arny as Conan... The first film, at least.
I recall hearing that Ahnuld actually changed his training regiment for that movie to add more bodyfat and to better resemble someone who was strong from physical trials and genetics rather than body-building.
Which is not to downplay the awesomeness of Arny as Conan... The first film, at least.I recall hearing that Ahnuld actually changed his training regiment for that movie to add more bodyfat and to better resemble someone who was strong from physical trials and genetics rather than body-building.
While that is quite interesting, Arnold Schwarzenegger could never be convincingly not-a-bodybuilder. The man is an icon!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Female fighters in reasonable armor look a lot like male fighters in reasonable armor. Which isn't really all that surprising...
ideas on what constitutes decent armor vary wildly by culture and environment.
You are correct I retract the phrase ‘decent armor’ and replace it with just ‘armor’ using any dictionary definition, assuming ‘protection’ means actual protection (not ‘spiritual’ protection or something like that).
Either way really it is a moot point as the argument is really not about what so called ‘armor’ some folks were reported to wear when they didn’t have access to better or believed crazy stuff. (Oh, and that is not western bias talking. That is reality bias talking.) It is about how you seemed to want to dispute what should be indisputable facts.
A) There is no actual justification for a warrior leaving her chest and midriff exposed in battle if you have the option not to. You admitted to that much in your reply, so we made it past that at least.
B) The primary reason fact A is ignored by artists can be summed up as, “Me like BOOBIES!”
A) There is no actual justification for a warrior leaving her chest and midriff exposed in battle if you have the option not to.
According to you, from a modernised and educated western background, and who has not, nor known anyone who has, come from and fought in a different culture with different beliefs.
General Butt-Naked would like to laugh at you, I wonder how you'd go telling him and his cannibal army that they were 'wrong'... good luck with that. He's still alive by the way.
I think this is something to keep in mind
Hnn. Good point.
I think this is something to keep in mind
The realistic female picture looks hot.
I just think you all take this way to seriously and need to lighten up. Not everything has to be an attack on women/men.
RELAX. It's just a game.
This one is for FHDM. :-)
beautiful!
This one is for FHDM. :-)I'd say yummy... but, this just does not do it for me.
but i already ordered mine!
COOL!
Yes I took this pics, so i do own the rights :P
If only the Tortuga Twins played the Colorado Ren fair. The pics make me sad I didn't go this year.
The cake was appropriately beefy and cheesy by turns.
|
Yes I took this pics, so i do own the rights :P
If only the Tortuga Twins played the Colorado Ren fair. The pics make me sad I didn't go this year.
The cake was appropriately beefy and cheesy by turns.
These where last years pics. And I am sure we know or have seen each other. For I was on court (saturdays only) Last year and I go every Saturday
These where last years pics. And I am sure we know or have seen each other. For I was on court (saturdays only) Last year and I go every Saturday
To finish our little tangent: I'm sure we have at some point. The wife and I usually only get down from Boulder one-two days a season
That's just awesome, Iceni. I wish I could go to the con in Jersey regularly.
Back onto why people in fantasy games would not wear armor there are people that do not wear seat belts. Why wouldn't you wear a seat belt it is likely to save your life. It is also probably a lot more comfortable than armor.
|
Edit: The line is easy to see when you switch the genders. If a man looks ridiculous in the clothing/pose/whatever it is over the line.
So virtually ALL female clothing is bad. men in heels,skirts? men sitting with legs crossed like a woman, especially larger men, looks ridiculous. Of course that is part of MY issue with it, nothing a man does or wears is seen as wrong for a woman but a man is ridiculed for doing anything deemed female.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So virtually ALL female clothing is bad. men in heels,skirts? men sitting with legs crossed like a woman, especially larger men, looks ridiculous. Of course that is part of MY issue with it, nothing a man does or wears is seen as wrong for a woman but a man is ridiculed for doing anything deemed female.
Not to ignore your point (the larger part anyway, which I find perfectly valid), men in skirts look sexy, as do men in (some) heels, and men crossing their legs in the "feminine" style looks sophisticated. The key for the clothing isn't that it's skirts and heels, it's that men look ridiculous in skirts and heels cut for women. For reference...kilts are, effectively, men's skirts, and those can look really good on guys. And heels...look at some of the Renaissance-ish boots and shoes for men. Some look...well, froofy, yes, but some look rather dashing too, and even modern dance shoes for men have heels a lot of the time.
|
|
Back onto why people in fantasy games would not wear armor there are people that do not wear seat belts. Why wouldn't you wear a seat belt it is likely to save your life. It is also probably a lot more comfortable than armor.
Or if you are surrounded by waddling kettles of armor,being able to move might be the best defense. Expecting a grapple fest? nude and oiled is best. Then agian, some might just do it to prove they don't need the armor because they are so good.....
|
|
So virtually ALL female clothing is bad. men in heels,skirts? men sitting with legs crossed like a woman, especially larger men, looks ridiculous. Of course that is part of MY issue with it, nothing a man does or wears is seen as wrong for a woman but a man is ridiculed for doing anything deemed female.Not to ignore your point (the larger part anyway, which I find perfectly valid), men in skirts look sexy, as do men in (some) heels, and men crossing their legs in the "feminine" style looks sophisticated. The key for the clothing isn't that it's skirts and heels, it's that men look ridiculous in skirts and heels cut for women. For reference...kilts are, effectively, men's skirts, and those can look really good on guys. And heels...look at some of the Renaissance-ish boots and shoes for men. Some look...well, froofy, yes, but some look rather dashing too, and even modern dance shoes for men have heels a lot of the time.
But her standard is if it looks silly on a man. right size i agree but if you change it beyond that it is not the same. A kilt is not a poodle skirt, renaissance mens wear is not strappy stilletos. The reverse however, even completely ill fitting mens clothes on a woman is accepted if not seen as inherently hot. The part that makes me laugh is that details flip over time, camel toeing tights were once a male fashion unthinkable on women and men carried a purse.
camel toeing tights were once a male fashion unthinkable on women
And well toned calfs were enough to make any fair maid, and few fellows, blush. (Just don't let'm have a squeeze or they'll realize its mostly stuffed.)
There is no actual justification for a warrior leaving her chest and midriff exposed in battle if you have the option not to.According to you, from a modernised and educated western background, and who has not, nor known anyone who has, come from and fought in a different culture with different beliefs.
General Butt-Naked would like to laugh at you, I wonder how you'd go telling him and his cannibal army that they were 'wrong'... good luck with that. He's still alive by the way.
Yeah, it’s my bias that makes covering your cleavage preferable in battle situations. Whatever. When you have something better, I’ll actually take the time to rebut it. Like maybe a counterpoint or at least something more than making up stuff about who or what I don’t know. Right. Because only someone sheltered and ignorant would disagree with you on this. Why not educate me then?
Did you even do a cursory google on General Butt-Naked? He is the one going around telling the world he was wrong. However before he came to jesus or whatever and started wearing clothes again I wouldn’t have gone to the trouble to tell him he was wrong. I’d just shoot his naked ass while wearing the best armor available to me – You know like a person would. Or would a man insist on showing the guy some side boobage before taking him out? - Now I wonder how closely said armor would have resembled stripper attire... What do you think? Also, have you ever wondered why his army consisted of primarily children? Think about it.
right size i agree but if you change it beyond that it is not the same. A kilt is not a poodle skirt, renaissance mens wear is not strappy stilletos.
Just like a woman looks ridiculous going to battle in a poodle skirt and strappy stilettos. That is my point.
I believe there are two points being debated here: what's an acceptable representation of characters (both male and female) in fantasy art and what is a realistic representation of characters (both male and female) in fantasy art. An image can be one without being the other, in both directions.
This can go beyond the attire (or lack thereof). Nobody is going to convince me that Amri's oversize weapon could ever be realistically wielded in combat by anyone of that size. Here the artist (in which I include the developers) has chosen a non-realistic representation of the character (and I'm not talking about the way she is dressed-up).
Other "properly dressed" representations can be overly romanticized or exaggerated in other ways to make it equally unrealistic.
But I'll give that much to GoldenOpal: most cleavage art isn't realistic in its context, even if some manages to be coherent in its context.
'findel
|
|
There is no actual justification for a warrior leaving her chest and midriff exposed in battle if you have the option not to.According to you, from a modernised and educated western background, and who has not, nor known anyone who has, come from and fought in a different culture with different beliefs.
General Butt-Naked would like to laugh at you, I wonder how you'd go telling him and his cannibal army that they were 'wrong'... good luck with that. He's still alive by the way.
Yeah, it’s my bias that makes covering your cleavage preferable in battle situations. Whatever. When you have something better, I’ll actually take the time to rebut it. Like maybe a counterpoint or at least something more than making up stuff about who or what I don’t know. Right. Because only someone sheltered and ignorant would disagree with you on this. Why not educate me then?
Did you even do a cursory google on General Butt-Naked? He is the one going around telling the world he was wrong. However before he came to jesus or whatever and started wearing clothes again I wouldn’t have gone to the trouble to tell him he was wrong. I’d just shoot his naked ass while wearing the best armor available to me – You know like a person would. Or would a man insist on showing the guy some side boobage before taking him out? - Now I wonder how closely said armor would have resembled stripper attire... What do you think? Also, have you ever wondered why his army consisted of primarily children? Think about it.
right size i agree but if you change it beyond that it is not the same. A kilt is not a poodle skirt, renaissance mens wear is not strappy stilletos.Just like a woman looks ridiculous going to battle in a poodle skirt and strappy stilettos. That is my point.
Who said battle? It was "if it looks wrong on a man it is wrong on a woman". of course in reality, women dressed for combat are simply dressing like men....
Yeah, it’s my bias that makes covering your cleavage preferable in battle situations.
And there you make a most salient point.
YOUR BIAS.
I don't need to come up with a rebuttal against your subjective opinion, I can simply point out that there are significant numbers of people who had a different bias. I don't need to justify their actions, nor justify what was going throgh their heads, nor whether they made any practical sense whatsoever.
You take exception to naked cheesecake.
That doesn't mean naked cheesecake didn't exist.
...and so artists should feel free to go right ahead and cheesecake away as its as accurate and legitimate as your bias and preferences.
BTW I reckon all General Butt-Naked's opponents thought they'd all be able to pull the same stunt you reckon you could. Didn't work out so well for them eh? He put on clothes once he found Jeebus. He never said he was wrong to be naked, only that the Devil told him he had to and that he would have magic powers if he did. Lo and behold, he fought all those battles and lived... so others would look to him surviving and believe it.
Um Shifty. That was sarcasm. But this isn’t: Give me one reason cleavage is preferable in battle situations that you are trying to survive. Just one.
You are still on this Butt-Naked guy thing. Seriously? How about a truce:
I’m in fine with depicting not crazy/suicidal people making the free conscience choice to go butt naked into battle despite reality’s bias against them surviving and the fact that no one can come up with one example... if they are surrounded by a human shield of children and only engage in battles against people even less well equipped than them and defenseless civilians? Then this attempt at justifying this type of thing almost, sort of, kind of works. Okay not really, but I will to pretend it does if it means you will stop trying to do the impossible.
I like it. Less exploitative female renderings (hopefully) equals more female gamers.
I think it does a lot as well to lessen the stereotype of the slathering male nerd obsessing over impossibly proportioned fantasy wenches.
Most female gamers like the chainmail bikinis. This is fantasy, not reality.
Um Shifty. That was sarcasm. But this isn’t: Give me one reason cleavage is preferable in battle situations that you are trying to survive. Just one.
You are still on this Butt-Naked guy thing. Seriously? How about a truce:
I’m in fine with depicting not crazy/suicidal people making the free conscience choice to go butt naked into battle despite reality’s bias against them surviving and the fact that no one can come up with one example... if they are surrounded by a human shield of children and only engage in battles against people even less well equipped than them and defenseless civilians? Then this attempt at justifying this type of thing almost, sort of, kind of works. Okay not really, but I will to pretend it does if it means you will stop trying to do the impossible.
Now I am picturing cleavage catching on fire. Clothes can catch on fire. Although the solution is stop drop and roll.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most female gamers like the chainmail bikinis. This is fantasy, not reality.I like it. Less exploitative female renderings (hopefully) equals more female gamers.
I think it does a lot as well to lessen the stereotype of the slathering male nerd obsessing over impossibly proportioned fantasy wenches.
Most female gamers - I would have to agree with based off of my experiences. But a huge portion of the female population that might be interested in gaming is turned off by such things, and many want more normal depictions.
You can also have non-exploitative images with chainmail bikinis. Their presence does not necessitate exploitation (see Amiri as an example), but it is often closely associated with it.
Give me one reason cleavage is preferable in battle situations that you are trying to survive. Just one.
Divert the opponent's attention.
I mean, sure that's crass, but it could work, especially if you knew your enemy was an undisciplined lech. Fencers will use all sorts of distractions to keep you looking where the blade isn't.
I'm generally against cheesecake, but some of the posters upthread have a very good point, including the ancient Hellenic cheesecake of naked warriors and athletes. Was that wrong? If so, why?
Honestly, exposing your upper chest isn't that terrible, the exposed midriff is way more suicidal.
You can definitely be a bloodthirsty murderer with no clothes at all. Just because PF doesn't represent that well (without recourse to magic) doesn't mean you can't find a dozen historical cases. But then again, appeals to realism in game discussions are beyond useless.
Give me one reason cleavage is preferable in battle situations that you are trying to survive. Just one.Divert the opponent's attention.
(snip)
Just because PF doesn't represent that well (without recourse to magic) doesn't mean you can't find a dozen historical cases.
Indeed.
Most of the times, nudity or "exposure" in combat was made with the intent of leaving some kind of impression or statement, either targeted at the enemy or at your own troops. From the naked Celts to the amazon-clad Eleanor of Aquitaine*, it has been observed in history throughout most continents and most epochs. I doubt that nakedness was done for no reasons.
*I'm aware that this is a historically disputed fact, but the fact that people talked about an amazon-clad (ie. bare chested) female rider notes the impression it left in the crusader's mind.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well if this thread's not already too derailed by 'debate', here's a few image of warrior women in non-sexualized armor:
The Girl Knight by Wen-M
Knight Girl by Wen-M
Samurai Girl by Wen-M
Aveline from DragonAge 2
BTW, one point I don't think I've seen raised is that characters aren't always walking around fully clad for a dungeon crawl or open warfare. At chiefly diplomatic events, it might make a great deal more sense to wear ceremonial armor or otherwise less Battle Practical™ attire so as to gain other advantages. In such situations it might even be against decorum to wear your full kit — particularly if it's all dinged and such from seeing actual usage in the field.
Not every depiction of a character (even one wearing armor) needs to assume they are currently in or expecting a fight. I don't know about you guys, but my characters and NPCs don't exactly walk around in the same gear 24×7. IMO it's a bit unfortunate that the iconic characters never seem to get a change of clothes. I'd personally love to see more variety in even a single character's attire.