| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tanith, have you seen this? I can't decide if Oglaf is the most egalitarian web-comic of them all, or just a series of very obvious dirty jokes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, TanithT, you are saying that it is "stupid and suicidal" to charge into combat with boob-plate, but it's not just females that are stylized in regards to armor. Take a look at Sajan and his MAGNIFICENT TORSO. An unarmored torso. Completely bare in the face of the scathing fire elementals or what have you. One could argue that is stupid too.
Or everyone and their lack of helmets (Seelah aside). Or all those bits and bobs and would get caught on quite possibly anything. Or Amiri and her improbably massive sword.
Your argument only stands if everyone but the females are practically armored and armed, but that is simply the case. Everyone is fantastical and impractical. Everyone.
You can argue something without being so caustic, too. It'd help people not want to turn on you automatically.
See that's just it Tanith, I object to the bait and switch tactics that the anti-boob armour people are trying to apply.
" The problem is when you sexualize one gender all over the place to the point of making them look really stupid, just for the viewing pleasure of the other gender, you send a message of exclusion. Eg, this product is not for you to enjoy. You ARE the product."
And when we cut through the hyperbole we get to terms like 'all over the place' and 'look really stupid' and we can immediately tell this is a subjective opinion. So at the end of the day its opinions vs opinions.
"We're not talking about them here. We're talking about the difference between a properly fitted chest plate that deflects blows and one that directs and transmits incoming force to a vulnerable point on your body."
Is that all your PC's are likely to face in a high level game past about level 5? Unlikely. You also assume the armour is solely there as a protective measure. I dunno, millennia of my ancestors fought myriad battles wearing far less.
Can you kindly explain why full plate has no impact on a reflex save though, because if we are sticking to defensive properties that defy logic being used as an argument to attack one armour, why can't we apply the same scrutiny to the 'sensible' armours?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, TanithT, you are saying that it is "stupid and suicidal" to charge into combat with boob-plate, but it's not just females that are stylized in regards to armor. Take a look at Sajan and his MAGNIFICENT TORSO. An unarmored torso. Completely bare in the face of the scathing fire elementals or what have you. One could argue that is stupid too.
Or everyone and their lack of helmets (Seelah aside). Or all those bits and bobs and would get caught on quite possibly anything. Or Amiri and her improbably massive sword.
Your argument only stands if everyone but the females are practically armored and armed, but that is simply the case. Everyone is fantastical and impractical. Everyone.
You can argue something without being so caustic, too. It'd help people not want to turn on you automatically.
look at Merieisiel's leather catsuit
it's highly impractical should she be required to change clothes or undress swiftly, such as a potty break, seducing the local baron for information, a dinner party at the imperial castle, or a variety of similar things, i'd say it's less practical than boob plate
look at Damiel's trenchcoat of explosive beakers. if he tripped down a staircase just right, he could kill his whole party in a chain reaction of explosions
look at Alazreal or whatever her name's skimpy outfit, she is a member of a class that starts a feat away from heavy armor, and doesn't even wear medium armor, no, just some underwear
look at Feiya, she dresses just as Skimpy as Alazreal, just add a pair of thighhighs, is she seducing the baron? or is she adventuring?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love how Tanith started ignoring me when their argument fell apart. You're really not doing yourself or your cause favors
There's nothing sexist about it, in fact it's more realistic than otherwise.On what grounds are you saying the author of the piece is wrong? I can personally testify to the physics of wearing various kinds of plate armor, with and without padding, and how it interacts with hard objects (stage steel or rattan) intersecting it at high speed. The author is absolutely correct.
A single smooth curve will turn a blade. Boob curves on a chestplate are deadly dangerous *to the person inside that kind of armor*, both because of how the force is distributed when a blade strikes them and because of what happens if you fall forward onto it or take a heavy blow across a wide area of it, and the point of impact is focused on your sternum instead of distributed out towards the sides.
Ab armor? Not so much. Jangly medals on the chest and some etchings or ripples down towards the abdomen aren't optimal, but they also aren't an automatic death trap. Boob armor is. Seriously. If you don't believe me, put some on (it doesn't matter if you actually have boobs or not) and get into a serious rattan fight. You'll have to get an equally disbelieving buddy to help, because SCA marshals will not let you on the field for insurance reasons if you are wearing improper gear that puts you at high risk of injury. Good luck with that and let us know how it goes. Er, if they have good wi-fi in the hospital you end up in.
How dumb do you have to be to voluntarily wear deathtrap armor that is effectively spiked on the inside to f&%$# its wearer up, versus armor with a single smooth curve that effectively turns blades and won't automatically punch the entire force of any wide blow into a small area of your sternum? If by 'realistic' you mean 'will realistically get you hurt or killed', then sure, it's realistic.
You will have to tell me how this goes then, because fencers with somewhat pointy breast chest pieces (hardened plastic plates) have deflected straight lunges and extended points (unable to get purchase on something that isn't at all a flat surface). As I explained above. I've seen it, it was not a fluke either. A female fencer in these breastplates can even adjust their stance to make the best use of it. I've seen them do that too.
Death trap? I was the guy and I lost many a point to the BOOBPLATE!
Here is an example of what my lunges sometimes bounced off:
http://cdn2.bigcommerce.com/server1800/0e1c2/products/219/images/346/sbs_e_ _98744.1313554976.1280.1280.jpg
This is sold en masse and protects female fencers every single day.
Historical armour suits have worked the angles to deflect piercing and slashing attacks (basing is harder for armour to soak, you need layers and to disperse it before it gets to the juicy defender inside). Pyramids and domes aren't all bad, boobplate is not a death trap.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, TanithT, you are saying that it is "stupid and suicidal" to charge into combat with boob-plate, but it's not just females that are stylized in regards to armor. Take a look at Sajan and his MAGNIFICENT TORSO. An unarmored torso.
The armour worn by generations from my nannas side.
Were they really fighting? Or just being sexualised all over the place to the point of making them look really stupid, just for the viewing pleasure of the other gender? Have they been sent a message of exclusion?
Death trap or not, I'd love to see all the dudes wearing boob-plate, 'cause it's just more functional than the regular kind. :P
Edit: Shifty, none of those examples accentuated their breasts.
All the dudes above are just wearing their pecs. #OMGbeefcakefanservice
Edit: Shifty, none of those example accentuated their breasts.
So lemme get this one straight - having your breasts out is completely fiiiine, but covering them in an armour that has suboptimal draw backs because of bad design (but still safer) is NOT ok. Cool :)
I didn't link the PNG stuff because the mens 'groin enhancements' they wore/wear are frankly NSFW.
look at Merieisiel's leather catsuit
it's highly impractical should she be required to change clothes or undress swiftly, such as a potty break, seducing the local baron for information, a dinner party at the imperial castle, or a variety of similar things, i'd say it's less practical than boob plate
look at Damiel's trenchcoat of explosive beakers. if he tripped down a staircase just right, he could kill his whole party in a chain reaction of explosions
look at Alazreal or whatever her name's skimpy outfit, she is a member of a class that starts a feat away from heavy armor, and doesn't even wear medium armor, no, just some underwear
look at Feiya, she dresses just as Skimpy as Alazreal, just add a pair of thighhighs, is she seducing the baron? or is she adventuring?
Playing devil's advocate here but.... Merieisiel wouldn't need to get out of her leather catsuit to seduce anyone for one. Two it is technically leather armor and well no armor is fun to potty break in. And unless she is crashing the party she will have some time to steal a nice dress, otherwise she will want the armor instead.
As for Freiya she lived with hags who wore nothing but rags and ruined clothes, and well if the rogue isn't going to seduce the baron then the witch will have to.
Note, none of what I just wrote should be taken seriously.
Kia ora bro from the East Island... ;-)
You forgot our northern neighbours and thier Penis Gourds....
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A note about male version of "boobplate" since it keeps coming up. The grecian muscle cuirass was worn almost exclusively by generals and not by common soldiers. As many people have said, it was used to impress and intimidate people. However, certain individuals have neglected to mention that it was an ornamental armor not to be worn into battle. Military Leaders would be dressed in this manner of armor at parades and medal-giving ceremonies. Click the link below if you don't believe me.
Now then, we can put to rest the notion of men "being forced" to wear impractical armor into battle. It assuredly never happened.
Even if it did, what are the men showing off exactly? They are showing off muscle, which exudes raw power. Women are more than capable of having that kind of abdominal strength themselves. If muscle cuirass armor was actually viable, it should logically follow that women could and should wear it as well as men. Because according to your own words, the message of armor is to "impress" the enemy and exert dominance over them.
Unless, somehow you've confused impressing the enemy with providing titillation for the audience.
Go ahead and explain to me how a red dragon is going to be frightened by a pair of big metal boobies.
Edit: Shifty, none of those example accentuated their breasts.So lemme get this one straight - having your breasts out is completely fiiiine, but covering them in an armour that has suboptimal draw backs because of bad design (but still safer) is NOT ok. Cool :)
That's exactly it, though. If everyone walks around bare-chested, that's no big deal for women or men. If your armor has to have t$%@ on it cause you're a girl, then men should wear boob-plate for all the same reasons, right?
You forgot our northern neighbours and thier Penis Gourds....
I didn't forget, just those things are 100% NSFW on these forums.
The Kanak people also wore enormous penis extenders as both casual and battlewear.
A note about male version of "boobplate" since it keeps coming up. The grecian muscle cuirass was worn almost exclusively by generals and not by common soldiers. As many people have said, it was used to impress and intimidate people. However, certain individuals have neglected to mention that it was an ornamental armor not to be worn into battle. Military Leaders would be dressed in this manner of armor at parades and medal-giving ceremonies. Click the link below if you don't believe me.
Now then, we can put to rest the notion of men "being forced" to wear impractical armor into battle. It assuredly never happened.
Even if it did, what are the men showing off exactly? They are showing off muscle, which exudes raw power. Women are more than capable of having that kind of abdominal strength themselves. If muscle cuirass armor was actually viable, it should logically follow that women could and should wear it as well as men. Because according to your own words, the message of armor is to "impress" the enemy and exert dominance over them.
Unless, somehow you've confused impressing the enemy with providing titillation for the audience.
Go ahead and explain to me how a red dragon is going to be frightened by a pair of big metal boobies.
I highly doubt anyone with a size category/int score over 2 would be intimidated by armor-muscles.
There's always good King Henry's codpiece.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I highly doubt anyone with a size category/int score over 2 would be intimidated by armor-muscles.
"Did you see that dudes armour muscles? He totally lifts"
I highly doubt anyone with a size category/int score over 2 would be intimidated by armor-muscles.A note about male version of "boobplate" since it keeps coming up. The grecian muscle cuirass was worn almost exclusively by generals and not by common soldiers. As many people have said, it was used to impress and intimidate people. However, certain individuals have neglected to mention that it was an ornamental armor not to be worn into battle. Military Leaders would be dressed in this manner of armor at parades and medal-giving ceremonies. Click the link below if you don't believe me.
Now then, we can put to rest the notion of men "being forced" to wear impractical armor into battle. It assuredly never happened.
Even if it did, what are the men showing off exactly? They are showing off muscle, which exudes raw power. Women are more than capable of having that kind of abdominal strength themselves. If muscle cuirass armor was actually viable, it should logically follow that women could and should wear it as well as men. Because according to your own words, the message of armor is to "impress" the enemy and exert dominance over them.
Unless, somehow you've confused impressing the enemy with providing titillation for the audience.
Go ahead and explain to me how a red dragon is going to be frightened by a pair of big metal boobies.
You're right. Maybe people should stop wearing "showy" armor in the first place. ;)
You're right. Maybe people should stop wearing "showy" armor in the first place. ;)I highly doubt anyone with a size category/int score over 2 would be intimidated by armor-muscles.A note about male version of "boobplate" since it keeps coming up. The grecian muscle cuirass was worn almost exclusively by generals and not by common soldiers. As many people have said, it was used to impress and intimidate people. However, certain individuals have neglected to mention that it was an ornamental armor not to be worn into battle. Military Leaders would be dressed in this manner of armor at parades and medal-giving ceremonies. Click the link below if you don't believe me.
Now then, we can put to rest the notion of men "being forced" to wear impractical armor into battle. It assuredly never happened.
Even if it did, what are the men showing off exactly? They are showing off muscle, which exudes raw power. Women are more than capable of having that kind of abdominal strength themselves. If muscle cuirass armor was actually viable, it should logically follow that women could and should wear it as well as men. Because according to your own words, the message of armor is to "impress" the enemy and exert dominance over them.
Unless, somehow you've confused impressing the enemy with providing titillation for the audience.
Go ahead and explain to me how a red dragon is going to be frightened by a pair of big metal boobies.
I didn't say that. Rule of cool still applies to my games, I just don't think it has any intimidating effects on others unless it's like, made of dragon tongues.
I think you will find that there have been enough finds of muscle cuirass with battle damage to show that they were not uncommon. They were the Lamborghinis of the age most dudes turned up in Ford Festivas and Honda Civics.
I love how Tanith started ignoring me when their argument fell apart. You're really not doing yourself or your cause favorsMy argument is largely the basic physics of impact dissipated over a large area or focused on a small area, and how safety protocols and liability insurance works when people wear metal armor and whack on each other at high velocity with sticks and steel. You have yet to demonstrate how that 'falls apart'.
As for ignoring you, I generally do that when I don't think someone has anything particularly interesting to say.
Yeah, yeah, save face however you want. Everyone sees your straw men and "physics" bull.
and how safety protocols and liability insurance works when people wear metal armor and whack on each other at high velocity with sticks and steel.
Actually the safety protocols and liability insurance is a significant reason why the methodology and belief systems become flawed. If anything they take weight off the expertise, not add to it.
Same with most contact sports.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Were they really fighting? Or just being sexualised all over the place to the point of making them look really stupid, just for the viewing pleasure of the other gender? Have they been sent a message of exclusion?There is nothing sexualized about those poses or attire. There isn't any exaggerated boob-n-butt posing, come-hither looking, or anything but a normal state of dress for the region and climate they are in.
What were folks saying about straw men? I think we have some literal ones here.
No, see, they have a chest area, and thus are sexualized. Much like women wearing boob-plate.
What were folks saying about straw men? I think we have some literal ones here.
Will that be all, or are we to see more chopping and changing and bait-and-switch arguments from you?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just face it. Debates like this are pretty much entirely about people trumpeting their superior sensitivity and moral clarity arguing with people who can't possibly win because it's all "so, you are in FAVOR of sexism huh? Huh? Huh?"
Spare me.
That's about it AD.
No, see, they have a chest area, and thus are sexualized. Much like women wearing boob-plate.Are you seriously that clueless, or just pretending to be?
This is a sexualized image.
So is this.
These are just guys with no shirts on. They're nicely built, but just showing male torso doesn't make an image sexual.
But ceremonial wussy-paladin boob plate armor is sexual because it has boobs, so following the same logic, men just existing without a tin can over them is sexual.
No, see, they have a chest area, and thus are sexualized. Much like women wearing boob-plate.Are you seriously that clueless, or just pretending to be?
This is a sexualized image.
So is this.
These are just guys with no shirts on. They're nicely built, but just showing male torso doesn't make an image sexual.
According to your subjective opinion, se the theme here? Your whole argument is bent about your subjective tastes being the superior ones. I find these about as sexualised as I find boob-plate, which is to say 'not at all'.
So now we accept that being sexualised is a subjective one we end up with the bait and switch where the anti crowd start talking about the so called protective values, the 'what about the children' defence. That hasn't stood up too well either.
I'm willing to cede the moral high ground here. I'll come right out and admit it.
I like boobs. They get my attention. I like pretty much every thing about them. I don't know why. I know I'm not supposed to. It's a weakness I suppose. I guess I'll just have to live with the shame of it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is when you sexualize one gender all over the place to the point of making them look really stupid, just for the viewing pleasure of the other gender, you send a message of exclusion. Eg, this product is not for you to enjoy. You ARE the product.
If the product IS porn, that's one thing. But if it's an RPG game, do you really want to make sure that it appeals only to folks of one gender and orientation? .
I don't know about your PC's being more likely to face breath or magic attacks than physical ones. I guess it's possible if your campaign is written that way. But if your armor is set up to basically punch you in the sternum every time you take a physical blow, that's eventually going to be problematic.
Have you seen the Iconic Magus? His outfit is so low cut it's looks like something from a awards show- a porn awards show. Beefcake.
The Iconic Monk? Serious Beefcake.
Yes, the Sorcerer is Cheesecake, but she's wearing the opposite of "boob plate" .
And as I posted before the iconic Paladin, the only female wearing "boob plate" is obviously not there for fanservice.
Thus, you point fails completely. Paizo does indeed have characters wearing sexy outfits- both male and female. They also have iconics wearing outfits designed for practicality, and outfits designed to be showy.
And as I showed, for a 1000 years males wore Muscle breastplates, several of which have rather large "cups" for each "man-boob" which would "punch you in the sternum". In REAL LIFE. We have actual samples of them:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_cuirass
Leaders wore this, in REAL Life. Males. To look good. Are you saying no female leader who want to look good? That's being sexist.
A note about male version of "boobplate" since it keeps coming up. The grecian muscle cuirass was worn almost exclusively by generals and not by common soldiers. As many people have said, it was used to impress and intimidate people. However, certain individuals have neglected to mention that it was an ornamental armor not to be worn into battle. Military Leaders would be dressed in this manner of armor at parades and medal-giving ceremonies. Click the link below if you don't believe me.
Now then, we can put to rest the notion of men "being forced" to wear impractical armor into battle. It assuredly never happened.
It assuredly did. Roman senior Officers wore them, and so did Greeks. For 1000 years. Yes, it was officers, but it was into battle. Of course the most elaborate versions were for parades, eytc, no doubt.
from your own cite:
...archaeological finds and artistic depictions suggest that it was worn in combat. The monument of Aemilius Paulus at Delphi shows two Roman infantrymen wearing mail shirts alongside three who wear muscle cuirasses.[13] They were worn mostly by officers, and may have been molded leather as well as metal, with fringed leather (pteryges) at the armholes and lower edge.[14] The muscle cuirass is one of the elements that distinguished a senior officer's "uniform."[15]
Red dragons? Either we're arguing from fantasy or Real Life. You can;t have it both ways.
No one is talking about inferior or superior, or any value judgments at all, but about how modeling poses look very different from people doing everyday stuff with their shirts off.
And yet we know that this isn't a universal truth either, and that the mere presence of flesh in some places is enough to have someone stoned to death for being 'wanton'. So the best you get is subjective.
Wat. Who is even saying that in this thread, or anywhere else on these forums. You are enacting the classic definition of a straw man here, since you are the only person who is making this argument for the sole purpose of attacking it.
You like saying strawman a lot I notice, perhaps you think they will float?
What I am stating here is that any time the subjective side of your argument gets too shaky you switch the conversation to one of 'pragmatism and protection' and then try prove that point by taking a very very narrow slice of 'fighting' and present it as a universal truth. You claim its about keeping realism, yet when the rest of the realism picture has the far greater flaws pointed out we go back to the subjective one.
Why does a strawoman wearing her 'sensible full plate' not have a worse relfex save than if she was wearing far lighter armour?
This said, impractical but impressive armor has been a thing in many cultures. Giant codpieces don't really do anyone much good in combat, either. Sometimes people do want to look good at the expense of combat effectiveness, especially if they are leaders.
Exactly. No one is saying that all the outfits are practical, some are obviously chosen more to look good and be impressive. The Iconic Paladin has gone for impressive more than practical. But it's not fanservice.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok this is definitely off the topic of 'safe' armor, but for those who are whining that morals are subjective... Obviously this is fantasy we are talking about, but it sure would be nice if my two kids,12 and 16, that both LOVE gaming and happen to be girls wouldn't have to keep asking me to tone down what they call 'the hooker look' to the minis they use. We are always filing down and filling in for their characters and commiserating over the art and why the female baddies so often are heavily sexualized while the male ones rarely are (not that that makes it ok for my kids or less sad). Rated R gaming just doesn't need to be the norm.
Certainly in an adult home game setting the only rules that need apply are yours, and when we sit down at a table and you can see the filters come on for most guys it is truly appreciated. But whether we are talking about art, storytelling, or attitudes at the table there is still a problem. It is just sad that for a game genre that started before I was born we are still having to argue about why its not ok to publicly objectify women as a matter of course. Do whatever you want in your home game, but don't expect to be respected by any intelligent self-respecting women who sit down to game with you for it.
Okay, TanithT, you are saying that it is "stupid and suicidal" to charge into combat with boob-plate, but it's not just females that are stylized in regards to armor. Take a look at Sajan and his MAGNIFICENT TORSO. An unarmored torso.The armour worn by generations from my nannas side.
Were they really fighting? Or just being sexualised all over the place to the point of making them look really stupid, just for the viewing pleasure of the other gender? Have they been sent a message of exclusion?
I was waiting for a fine counter, and that was it.
People fought naked and semi-naked. It wasn't all chainmail (bikini or no bikini).
Just face it. Debates like this are pretty much entirely about people trumpeting their superior sensitivity and moral clarity arguing with people who can't possibly win because it's all "so, you are in FAVOR of sexism huh? Huh? Huh?"
Spare me.
Agreed. Motion passed.
Next!
Ok this is definitely off the topic of 'safe' armor, but for those who are whining that morals are subjective... Obviously this is fantasy we are talking about, but it sure would be nice if my two kids,12 and 16, that both LOVE gaming and happen to be girls wouldn't have to keep asking me to tone down what they call 'the hooker look' to the minis they use. We are always filing down and filling in for their characters and commiserating over the art and why the female baddies so often are heavily sexualized while the male ones rarely are (not that that makes it ok for my kids or less sad). Rated R gaming just doesn't need to be the norm.
Certainly in an adult home game setting the only rules that need apply are yours, and when we sit down at a table and you can see the filters come on for most guys it is truly appreciated. But whether we are talking about art, storytelling, or attitudes at the table there is still a problem. It is just sad that for a game genre that started before I was born we are still having to argue about why its not ok to publicly objectify women as a matter of course. Do whatever you want in your home game, but don't expect to be respected by any intelligent self-respecting women who sit down to game with you for it.
All intelligent self-respecting women are against boobplate? Do you want to take a run at that one again with less generalising language?
Surely you are going to at least exclude the fencing women that wear breastplates tailored to their bodies, from that statement?
Boobplate saves lives, and lowers bruising.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
boob plate isn't really perverted armor, it has a purpose
if a female armored warrior really wanted to appeal to perverted men as a seductive barbarianess, she would wear the following
a metal bandeau or tube top with
a chainmail micro miniskirt
she would go completely commando beneath the miniskirt
brigandine thighhighs
a partially visible visible intimate area
a pair of elbow length brigandine gauntlets
no helmet
she would carry some kind of long spear or polearm as an erotic symbol
she would do a lot of high output cardio acrobatics and gymnastics in combat to flaunt the fact she was commando beneath her chainmail micro miniskirt
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's at moments like this I'm glad none of my players follow these forums — pretty sure I'd have never gotten my GF into Pathfinder if she'd stumbled across some of these replies. :-\
I really do find it hard to believe some arguments are being framed around the narrow subset of artwork featured in Pathfinder. Considering many folks will readily admit Paizo is more progressive in this area than many of their industry peers, it's kind of like putting on blinders. Do none of you look at comic books, DeviantArt, or the like? The fact that I have to actually keep a list of artwork depicting women in reasonable armor because it's so rare in the genre as a whole just makes me wonder which Internet you guys are looking at.
That, coupled with the current tack about this being about what people from cultures with markedly different values have or have not worn, and whether it's for practical reasons or otherwise strikes me as counter-productive. Not that it couldn't be an interesting discussion, but in the big picture it's just addressing symptoms rather than the cause. The crux of the matter is that this is an inclusion issue, nothing more, nothing less.
It would really benefit the 'debate' (such as it is) if both sides ignored what's practical and what's come before in good ol' non-supernatural Earth. We guys like to look at boobs, and many women from our current culture feel creeped out by artwork that trends toward portraying men as powerful and women as prizes. The solution that's being sought by one side is to be able to have their in-game power fantasies without being relegated to being everyone else's conquest fantasy.
Is there some way that both sides can have it their way? If not, I'd sooner take the participation of additional players over yet more artwork with lots of T&A — I've got the whole rest of the Internet for erotica, I don't exactly need it at the game table. Thankfully, Paizo has made it much less of an issue than companies like DC, but the rotten apples do tend to ruin the batch.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok this is definitely off the topic of 'safe' armor, but for those who are whining that morals are subjective... Obviously this is fantasy we are talking about, but it sure would be nice if my two kids,12 and 16, that both LOVE gaming and happen to be girls wouldn't have to keep asking me to tone down what they call 'the hooker look' to the minis they use.
Which then asks the question about why you have a bunch of stripper minis :p
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think boob-plate distracts from the real problem in fantasy art. Posing. Boobplate is barely sexual. Maybe if you're younger, but it's really not so tantalizing. The problem here is that female characters are often drawn in titillating, silly poses. Or they are drawn vulnerable and submissive. This is the real problem in fantasy art and sexism. Boob plate isn't even treating a symptom. It's treating a cute near a severed arm.
I find the boobplate arguments silly because it's so insignificant compared to everything else.