Oh, and please, stop underestimating gamer girls: I'm currently organizing the first PFS in my country.
You are awesome. :-D
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am actually worried about pathfinders inability to allow women to express their sexuality. I think pathfinder should adopt a policy to stop repressing women and to allow them to wear more revealing clothes as an expression of their femininity. We need to stop masculinizing women.
| 37 people marked this as a favorite. |
*sigh*
You might want to take a look at my post above, Arnwolf.
Showing a variety of women expressing a range of attitudes toward sexuality and clothing isn't repressing anyone. And not every woman expresses her sexuality by showing off her body to strangers. There's no One Right Way to do it.
And wearing non-revealing clothes isn't "masculinizing." It's just a choice of clothing. (I find it kind of disturbing, by the way, that you phrase having choice in clothing as something that's being done to women. Choosing not to wear dresses or skimpy clothes unless I'm at a formal event or a beach, respectively, isn't something that's done to me -- it's a choice I make to prioritize comfort and functionality.)
What we need to do is stop telling women that there's one appropriate way for them to dress.
The idea that all women should wear revealing clothing to "express their sexuality" is just as oppressive as the idea that they all have to cover up. Freedom's about choice.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
*sigh*
You might want to take a look at my post above, Arnwolf.
Showing a variety of women expressing a range of attitudes toward sexuality and clothing isn't repressing anyone. And not every woman expresses her sexuality by showing off her body to strangers. There's no One Right Way to do it.
And wearing non-revealing clothes isn't "masculinizing." It's just a choice of clothing. (I find it kind of disturbing, by the way, that you phrase having choice in clothing as something that's being done to women. Choosing not to wear dresses or skimpy clothes unless I'm at a formal event or a beach, respectively, isn't something that's done to me -- it's a choice I make to prioritize comfort and functionality.)
What we need to do is stop telling women that there's one appropriate way for them to dress.
The idea that all women should wear revealing clothing to "express their sexuality" is just as oppressive as the idea that they all have to cover up. Freedom's about choice.
I agree with everything you said there Jessica. That said, I strongly suspect Arnwolf was being sarcastic in his post... sadly sarcasm doesn't come across so well in messageboard posts.
Yadda yadda yadda I know we're still not going to get any kobold pinups. Grumbles.
Everything is fine as long as there will never be ponies in any pose.
THAT would be disturbing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with everything you said there Jessica. That said, I strongly suspect Arnwolf was being sarcastic in his post... sadly sarcasm doesn't come across so well in messageboard posts.*sigh*
You might want to take a look at my post above, Arnwolf.
Showing a variety of women expressing a range of attitudes toward sexuality and clothing isn't repressing anyone. And not every woman expresses her sexuality by showing off her body to strangers. There's no One Right Way to do it.
And wearing non-revealing clothes isn't "masculinizing." It's just a choice of clothing. (I find it kind of disturbing, by the way, that you phrase having choice in clothing as something that's being done to women. Choosing not to wear dresses or skimpy clothes unless I'm at a formal event or a beach, respectively, isn't something that's done to me -- it's a choice I make to prioritize comfort and functionality.)
What we need to do is stop telling women that there's one appropriate way for them to dress.
The idea that all women should wear revealing clothing to "express their sexuality" is just as oppressive as the idea that they all have to cover up. Freedom's about choice.
Maybe. :-)
Given that I've had people in real life tell me, quite seriously, that I should wear dresses more often because I shouldn't be ashamed of my femininity (which, you know, ALL THE HEADDESKING FOREVER WOW WAY TO NOT GET IT), it doesn't seem implausible to me that it could be serious.
Arnwolf, if you were being sarcastic, sorry for misreading you!
Hah, yeah that's an impressive level of misunderstanding. I've seen a lot of that sort of attitude towards my friends in the town I grew up in, where guys are meant to be manly men and women should be effeminate and delicate flowers...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Everything is fine as long as there will never be ponies in any pose.
THAT would be disturbing.
Yadda yadda yadda I know we're still not going to get any kobold pinups. Grumbles.Check out the inside front cover of Quests and Campaigns.'
It's a goblin, not a kobold, yeah, but, well, hey, it's a short monster, anyway!
There's something strangely familiar about that goblin... ;)
Two wrongs don't make one right.
As for personal attacks, I suggest you reread tour posts.
If you can't prove your points without hyperboles and implying that Erik (and Paizo) was dishonest then I conclude you do what I see straight males do again and again : try to prove you are cool and aware by proving others are not.
I’ll leave you an edited quote by SKR from another threadI tried pretty hard to limit my hyperbole, actually. The sheer bulk of evidence I cite throughout all my posts should make that clear. Do some reading and look up what I mention if you don't believe it.
Additionally, try reading my posts with an open mind instead of a closed one.
I’m sorry about my knee jerk reaction. I think Threeshades summarizes pretty well my feeling, especially the ‘social justice warrior’ part.
You do raise some important questions and I really hope Paizo will be listening AND ACTING on the input from you and others. It gets a bit frustrating when Paizo again and again says “we are listening”. That simply isn’t enough.
As for your post, I didn’t read the whole post because of fear of spoilers.
There is however some stuff I want to point out.
I have noticed you said you are sorry that you “used the term "hypersexualized" in reference to Pathfinder girls”. Good, the bad part is that some of the damage is already done, but I’ve done the same thing and it just one of those things you got to try to learn from.
Another problem I have is the lack of liberating reading you are doing. You pretty much dismiss Transmission89 and Threeshades that tries to have a more liberating take on some issues. I also think some of the stuff you brought up are plain wrong, stuff like “certain races are designed purely for the benefit of straight, white, male gamers”. That say it is still good these questions are raised. I too think Paizo could do better on when it comes to be more inclusive portraying ethnicity. I have long asked for an Icon with a “Hispanic” look, but I’ll doubt we will ever get one and I also hope we get more Iconics with facial hair.
Just as Nicos I feel that what you do not like is not the amount of female "sexualization" but the lack of male counterpart.
Finally, I get you love Paizo and what it to be better. Be advised however that the first lines in a post pretty much sets the tone of that post. “I love Paizo, but…” doesn’t grant you immunity to bash something without getting respond from others that disagree without. I’m not saying that was your intent, but ….you know.
As for pies. If someone serves me a pie sprayed with dirty (or Gasoline or whatever) I’m not going to eat it even if the pie was delicious before it got dirt on it.
I don’t agree with everything you say, but hope something good comes out of the thread. It is good people raises these questions and hopefully Paizo will do more than just listen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In other words, do you think this discussion is going to change Paizo's stance on this issue?I do.
Well let’s hope it does then. Isn’t this a bit like the time before we got an FAQ? Paizo agaion and again said, we hear you. It wasn’t until James Jacobs almost got lynched trying to defend Jason (and you and Jason stepped in and calm people down) that things started to happen.
Look, since I already had to come back with a new angle on some of my own comments from 7 years ago, I'm not really sure why another old post loaded with defensiveness originally written about a different OP by someone who no longer works for Paizo and does not represent its opinions has any relevance whatsoever to the current discussion.
Let’s not get derail this thread with why I quoted SKR. I should have explained why I added that quote and I should have pointed out to which parts I found valid and which parts I didn’t agree with.
Let me just ask you. Are you seriously saying that SKR’s opinions are no longer of any interest just because he no longer work for Paizo? “someone who no longer works for Paizo “ Is that what SKR has become?I can quote anyone I want be it SKR or… let’s say DeathQuaker. If they work for Paizo or not is besides the question. I happen to think both of them are excellent even if none work for Paizo and are not active in this thread. I’m not sure you meant to bash SKR, perhaps I’m reading you wrong. Perhaps you are only bashing the post I quoted, but to me it looks ugly. Really ugly.
Obviously xeose4 thinks the points raised here are going to change Paizo's policy.
I hope that they do, because most of the points raised are completely valid.
Well then let’s both hope the valid points raised are going to change Paizo's policy.
Please don't try to shut down criticism like this.
I’m not, but when someone starts to bashing the company I love I have a right to express my views even if I’m not employed by Paizo. Have I not, or are you trying to shut me down?
Getting feedback regarding when we've fallen short of our players' expectations is just as important as hearing about what a great job we are doing with something else.We can handle it.
C’mon. I obviously believe Paizo appreciate feedback. Why would I otherwise be involved with playtests or in this thread. As for Paizo being able to handle it? I’m counting on it, but it up to Pazio to prove me, and the OP ,right.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
All joking aside, My Little Pony has provided an excellent gateway for girls into heroic fantasy. I can directly link my 9 year old daughter's interest in Pathfinder to MLP FIM... and I see her pony-loving friends now springboarding to stuff like How to Train Your Dragon and Harry Potter. In the future there could be a much larger female audience for FRPGs as a result... especially given the social nature of the game.
I'd love to start a Pathfinder group for my daughter and her friends, but I'm stopped because of the way women are portrayed in Pathfinder art. While I agree that Pathfinder represents a leap forward to female depictions in fantasy gaming (thank you for having Kyra and Seelah appropriately dressed) several other iconics are sexualized to some degree (Seoni of course, and does Merisiel really need a boob-window in her outfit?)
While I'm a bit uncomfortable with these depictions and the example they represent for my daughter, it's a major issue for my wife. And since most of my daughter's fantasy-loving friends come from non-gamer households, I can imagine some of their parents would have a similar reaction to the art. It's a potential exploding can of worms I simply don't want to open.
Everything is fine as long as there will never be ponies in any pose.
THAT would be disturbing.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
All joking aside, My Little Pony has provided an excellent gateway for girls into heroic fantasy. I can directly link my 9 year old daughter's interest in Pathfinder to MLP FIM... and I see her pony-loving friends now springboarding to stuff like How to Train Your Dragon and Harry Potter. In the future there could be a much larger female audience for FRPGs as a result... especially given the social nature of the game.
I'd love to start a Pathfinder group for my daughter and her friends, but I'm stopped because of the way women are portrayed in Pathfinder art. While I agree that Pathfinder represents a leap forward to female depictions in fantasy gaming (thank you for having Kyra and Seelah appropriately dressed) several other iconics are sexualized to some degree (Seoni of course, and does Merisiel really need a boob-window in her outfit?)
While I'm a bit uncomfortable with these depictions and the example they represent for my daughter, it's a major issue for my wife. And since most of my daughter's fantasy-loving friends come from non-gamer households, I can imagine some of their parents would have a similar reaction to the art. It's a potential exploding can of worms I simply don't want to open.
I completely understand your concerns as a responsible parent and as a conscientious steward of the children of others when they are in your care... but in my opninion, while Pathfinder is potentially a perfectly 'family-friendly' game, its not one that's solely directed at children. For instance, I'm certain you would choose not to expose the girls to demons and devils, to blood magic or even excessive violence in the course of their Potteresque adventures. That same sense of discretion, I imagine, would apply to any aspects of the game that you felt was sexually inappropriate for the children, from how character backstories are written up to and including how a very, very small minority of them are garbed.
Personally, I don't really see the problem with girls seeing a dozen women and having them represent the vast array of women they are likely to see in their daily lives - some straight-laced, some gruff or intimidating, some deliberately androgynous and, yes, some sexually appealing. Whether its on the street, on television, at the homes of their friends or even in your own home, I suspect word will get out (indeed, if it hasn't already), that sometimes women dress sexy. Not all the time certainly, and as has already been shown, 'all the time' is not an issue with Paizo products - quite the opposite in fact.
If you aren't put off by piracy on the high seas where innocent merchants are slain and their goods stolen, not put off by demon-summoners or witches who make pacts with their familiars and so forth, I imagine you will be able to successfully maneuver around occasional images of a woman's cleavage as well.
Wiggz has a real good point there. Merisiels little boob window is surely not one of the biggest concerns about Pathfinder and children.
A responsible way on how to deal with violence, aggresion, suppresion and problem solving that they enounter in the game is much more important in my eyes.
Anyway, i think the game can be used to teach children good ways on how to interact with problems they will meet in real life, among them sexism, racism, suppression, capitalism, neo-liberalism and others.
|
|
Thanks Wiggs. You're right that Pathfinder itself is not necessarily designed as a family-friendly game (although it can be adapted to be one), nor is it targeted at 9 year olds. One of the beauties of the game (and I completely agree with you) is that I can adapt game material to make it age appropriate on those occasions when my daughter sits in on a Pathfinder game with my friends. As she gets older, some of the things that are a concern now won't be as big a barrier (at least for me).
As a parent, it's the art that is the biggest flag for me - because pictures speak louder than words. It's the sort of thing that other parents can have an immediate negative reaction to from flipping through the core rulebook. It's what my wife reacts to more than any other aspect of the game. Based on her reactions, and those of a few other friends in our circle, it seems that the proportion of iconics (and illustrations of women) that are sexualized in Pathfinder are substantially higher than you would see in the general population.
Thanks to shows like MLP there could be a greater appetite from girls for fantasy roleplaying in this next generation. I think the game is outstanding for learning, for building social bonds, and a million other kinds of yumminess. It'd definitely something I want to encourage my daughter to participate in should she continue to be interested... and anything we can do to build bridges and expand our community would be awesome!
I completely understand your concerns as a responsible parent and as a conscientious steward of the children of others when they are in your care... but in my opninion, while Pathfinder is potentially a perfectly 'family-friendly' game, its not one that's solely directed at children. For instance, I'm certain you would choose not to expose the girls to demons and devils, to blood magic or even excessive violence in the course of their Potteresque adventures. That same sense of discretion, I imagine, would apply to any aspects of the game that you felt was sexually inappropriate for the children, from how character backstories are written up to and including how a very, very small minority of them are garbed.Personally, I don't really see the problem with girls seeing a dozen...
Assistant Software Developer
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would add that the computer resources are great for this. The PRD has almost no pics at all but most of the rules used. It's not a perfect solution but it is a solution.
A friend of mine used to run a group of young girls in the summer months. I want to say there were 8 of them. One of them did a lovely pic of the group including animal companions and all kinds of stuff that hung in her games store locally. But it was a great learning resource and those kids returned every summer for Rose's Sandpiper group. It was a very tight group and no matter their differences, they came to the table for gaming in the summer for at least 4 or 5 years. This was with 3.5 rules subsets and Rose was really lenient in letting them write the story without the rules getting too much in the way and such.
You might consider doing what I did with 3.5. That is I made my own game using the 3.5 SRD and used print on demand services to get hard copies. That way you can get the game rules in a rule book and have control on the artwork you use. I only have artwork on the covers, but that was mainly due to trying to keep costs down and stick with open domain material.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While it might be economically reasonable, in case of dimorphic races maybe you should try to order pictures showing both (or all in case of monsters that have more than two) forms - like a picture showing both a male and a female for Lashuntas.Yes, I agree. This was a mistake that we did not do this. I wasn't so much trying to explain why the mistake isn't a mistake as I was trying to explain the practical context in which the mistake was made in the first place.
Just a note that we actually *do* have an illustration of a male lashunta coming out in the forthcoming People of the Stars (which went to print before this conversation started).
While the sexual dimorphism/"brutish male and attractive female" bit did indeed come from Almuric, I hope folks who read the lashunta's write-ups in various sources noticed that (unlike in Howard's books), both genders are portrayed as intelligent and scholarly, with the women as strong-willed, politically savvy leaders. In this way we hoped to subvert some of the classic pulp tropes. (Of course, some of the art--like the Distant Worlds cover--is still very pulpy, but many of our other illustrations of lashunta move away from that and try to portray them in a more practical/realistic light.)
I'm not saying there's not a problem with hypersexualization of women in Pathfinder--it's something we work to correct every day. I just hope that the lashunta are seen as more than simply "hot women on dinosaurs," since in my imagination their society is so much more!
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
Part-sexualization, average sexualization, strong sexulization, severe sexualization, mega-sexualization, ultra-sexualization, meta-sexualization, and, for some reason, pie sexualization.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Part-sexualization, average sexualization, strong sexulization, severe sexualization, mega-sexualization, ultra-sexualization, meta-sexualization, and, for some reason, pie sexualization.
Cant I even enjoy my lunch in peace?!!?!
|
|
Lissa and Pres man - both excellent suggestions worthy of consideration. Thank you!
Hayato Ken, I personally agree with you about the boob window not being my biggest concern with Pathfinder & children. However, for some parents it is THE concern. If I try to put together a Pathfinder group for my daughter and her friends, it's important that I take those concerns into consideration to mitigate potential negative repercussions for our daughter. For example, if her friends' parents get the impression that we as parents are not responsible, then it could impact her ability to have play dates with those friends.
It's not that it's impossible to socialize those issues and address them with parents in advance... but it isn't necessarily simple either. It would be easier if I didn't have to, and if the depictions of women were more modest (or at least more of the women were depicted as modestly dressed). After all, Merisiel doesn't need a boob window to be an attractive, powerful character. In fact, it might make her more identifiable. The same with Seoni - she doesn't need the high-cut dress to depict beauty and competence.
My apologies if I've diverted the thread off-topic. With Pathfinder making a real effort in outreaching to families through their kids' track, this back and forth has helped to crystalize for me one of the barriers I'm experiencing in introducing her friends and non-gamer families to the hobby.
I would add that the computer resources are great for this. The PRD has almost no pics at all but most of the rules used. It's not a perfect solution but it is a solution.
A friend of mine used to run a group of young girls in the summer months. I want to say there were 8 of them. One of them did a lovely pic of the group including animal companions and all kinds of stuff that hung in her games store locally. But it was a great learning resource and those kids returned every summer for Rose's Sandpiper group. It was a very tight group and no matter their differences, they came to the table for gaming in the summer for at least 4 or 5 years. This was with 3.5 rules subsets and Rose was really lenient in letting them write the story without the rules getting too much in the way and such.
What's the actual problem?
Is it:
a) Women are hyper-sexualized
or
b) Men aren't hyper-sexualized enough
If the problem is "a" then the solution is to stop doing it. Doing the same with men doesn't solve the problem nor does it "balance it out"; it just creates two problems where there was one.
If the problem is "b" then artwork, especially on covers, needs to be planned ahead with far more care and thought.
Both "a" and "b" can't be the problems though. Either hyper-sexualization is wrong or it's not. If it is then doing "b" is just as wrong and if it isn't then "a" isn't really the problem.
Publisher, Chief Creative Officer
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let me just ask you. Are you seriously saying that SKR’s opinions are no longer of any interest just because he no longer work for Paizo? “someone who no longer works for Paizo “ Is that what SKR has become?
I love Sean like a brother, but when it comes to old posts of him being super-defensive and basically asking people to stop their whining, yeah, I'd say that I'm less than interested in those types of opinions, and don't think they're relevant to Paizo's current policy.
The rest of your post, honestly, sounds like it is trying to bait me into a fight, which is also something I have less than zero interest in.
What's the actual problem?
Is it:
a) Women are hyper-sexualized
or
b) Men aren't hyper-sexualized enough
If the problem is "a" then the solution is to stop doing it. Doing the same with men doesn't solve the problem nor does it "balance it out"; it just creates two problems where there was one.
If the problem is "b" then artwork, especially on covers, needs to be planned ahead with far more care and thought.
Both "a" and "b" can't be the problems though. Either hyper-sexualization is wrong or it's not. If it is then doing "b" is just as wrong and if it isn't then "a" isn't really the problem.
It seems, based on my understanding of the conversation thus far, that some feel one way and some feel the other, but its Paizo's more-or-less official stance that the 'traditional' concepts of masculinity and femininity are not something that they as a company wish to acknowledge/pander to in their products. Women and men should each be depicted as gruff, intimidating, soft, gentle, sexual, asexual, brutish and nurturing in equal amounts across the board regardless of their actual gender and that if any exception is to be made it should be the feminine=sexy aspect as a counterweight to decades of overly sexualized women in fantasy products and the genre in general.
It is a position that I personally could not disagree with more, but I understand and respect their reasoning and - to be honest - as a white heterosexual male, I'm used to the idea that I've had my day/millennia, and my opinion counts for a bit less these days...
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
What's the actual problem?
Is it:
a) Women are hyper-sexualized
or
b) Men aren't hyper-sexualized enoughIf the problem is "a" then the solution is to stop doing it. Doing the same with men doesn't solve the problem nor does it "balance it out"; it just creates two problems where there was one.
If the problem is "b" then artwork, especially on covers, needs to be planned ahead with far more care and thought.
Both "a" and "b" can't be the problems though. Either hyper-sexualization is wrong or it's not. If it is then doing "b" is just as wrong and if it isn't then "a" isn't really the problem.
The problem isn't with A WOMAN being described and displayed as sexual, or even hypersexual. The problem isn't with A MAN not being described and displayed as sexual, or even hypersexual. The problem is when 99% of women are described in that way and 99% of men are described in the other way.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem isn't with A WOMAN being described and displayed as sexual, or even hypersexual. The problem isn't with A MAN not being described and displayed as sexual, or even hypersexual. The problem is when 99% of women are described in that way and 99% of men are described in the other way.What's the actual problem?
Is it:
a) Women are hyper-sexualized
or
b) Men aren't hyper-sexualized enoughIf the problem is "a" then the solution is to stop doing it. Doing the same with men doesn't solve the problem nor does it "balance it out"; it just creates two problems where there was one.
If the problem is "b" then artwork, especially on covers, needs to be planned ahead with far more care and thought.
Both "a" and "b" can't be the problems though. Either hyper-sexualization is wrong or it's not. If it is then doing "b" is just as wrong and if it isn't then "a" isn't really the problem.
The it would appear the problem is either a tragic and willful lack of knowledge or absolutely gross hyperbole... because when it comes to Paizo products, those numbers (i.e. 99%) are so off-base as to be insulting.
Please choose any Paizo product you like, ANY product, especially any one in the past few years, and support that position through example.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Faiths of Purity:
Cayden Cailean illustration, female revealing bust and hips
Desna: illustration, female revealing bust and thighs
Erastil illustration, male non-revealing
Iomedae illustration, male non-revealing
Sarenrae illustration, male topless
Shelyn illustration, female non-revealing (gnome, if relevant)
Torag illustration, male topless (concealing beard, dwarven if relevant)
Combat illustration, female bikini
Faith illustration male non-revealing
Magic illustration, female revealing bust and midriff
Social illustration male non-revealing
Faiths of Balance:
Abadar illustration, male non-revealing
Callistria illustration, female revealing
Gorum illustration, male non-revealing
Gozreh illustration, female bikini
Irori illustration, female non-revealing (halfling, if relevant)
Nethys illustration, female revealing bust and thighs
Pharasma illustration, female revealing bust and thighs
The Green Faith male non-revealing
Combat illustration, male non-revealing
Faith illustration male non-revealing
Magic illustration, ? non-revealing
Social illustration male non-revealing
In Faiths of Corruption the illustrations are all non-revealing, consisting of 4 male, 4 female and 1 I'm not sure of.
So, yeah. Not 99% but not off-base either
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Faiths of Purity
Not 99% but not off-base either.
No, not 99% and that's with the most egregious example you can find. In AP's, modules and world books that number continues to drop noticeably to the point that the percentage of scantily clad women in Pathfinder begins to pretty closely mirror the percentage of scantily clad women in my day-to-day life.
I think many - such as in the post above - are grossly exaggerating the problem and doing so in an apparently misguided attempt to convince the lone company in the industry that doesn't need convincing. I suspect that its not the company they're actually trying to convince on these message boards, hence the hyperbole and straw men that are so often advanced as hard fact.
|
You know, even as a evil, evil, evvviiill SWM (shocking, I know), I have never been particularly offended/aroused/intrigued/other by Paizo art ... as opposed to what I regularly see IRL just by looking around me in normal life (without any special effort) ?
I find the very notion that the current art is some kind of porn downright silly and absurd. In fact I don't think about the art. At all. I look at it and forget it. Offense is in the eye of the Eye Tyrant.
The fact also that I regularly see reports from the world, where women are actually oppressed into wearing non revealing clothes that rot their lives and how they would so much like to lead normal lives, if only they could...
Makes me look at this whole thread with a huge grain of salt.
I just wonder where the outrage is concerning the hypersexualized males? Sajan, Seltyiel, and the upcoming (what I assume to be) bloodrager iconic are all 3 in revealing clothing. Many of the old 70s and 80s artwork of fantasy genre all how hypersexualized males as well. Or does shirtless heavily muscled male bodies not count, because their groin isn't overly large like the complaints about rather large breasts?
I am honestly curious, as all I ever hear are complaints about women in revealing clothing, "well endowed", and seductive.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
99% of statistics are made up on the spot
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Faiths of Purity
Not 99% but not off-base either.
No, not 99% and that's with the most egregious example you can find. In AP's, modules and world books that number continues to drop noticeably to the point that the percentage of scantily clad women in Pathfinder begins to pretty closely mirror the percentage of scantily clad women in my day-to-day life.
I think many - such as in the post above - are grossly exaggerating the problem and doing so in an apparently misguided attempt to convince the lone company in the industry that doesn't need convincing. I suspect that its not the company they're actually trying to convince on these message boards, hence the hyperbole and straw men that are so often advanced as hard fact.
I know everyone loves to talk about art but the OP was not about art.
It was about NPC interaction with PCs.
Otherwise it isn't hyperbole, it's lying.
For example, if I get a 3% raise and I tell everyone I got a 10% raise that is a lie.
However, if I tell everyone I got a 99% rise and punch the air, they know I'm exaggerating (either to show excitement, or to be ironic).
Presman was using the common, accepted rhetorical technique of hyperbole to (a) show that it is a significant factor and (b) admit that he doesn't have exact numbers.
I can't believe I am having to explain hyperbole... darn interwebz!
I'd like to take a moment to just say that I really appreciate all the comments in the thread, because I was looking to get out of my own head and see what other people thought. If I offended anybody in the thread, I hope either my apologies have already been accepted from earlier or else they're accepted now. And, just to be clear, Mr. Mona, if my thanks from my response to you was deemed as sarcastic, or if I was dismissing your post, I wasn't. I really meant it, it was wonderful to see your response, I appreciate the thoughtful criticism comment, and it's just cuss-worthy cool of you and the other Paizo staff to take such active parts in the forums, up to and even including explaining how the process works. So I mean it when I say I appreciate your respectful approach you guys take and the care with which you all choose your words.
There's some continuous confusion that is probably very much my own fault in choosing the title. I know I mentioned this earlier, but could I change the thread title, I very much wish that I'd written something more along the lines of "The over-sexualization of women, relative to the lack of sexualization of men in pathfinder materials" and then started out with saying that I personally was posting about the text often accompanying various creatures and encounters. I had no idea that the art Paizo uses is an issue for so many people - in my own experience, it's pretty tame compared to what other companies put out there with utter seriousness. I get how my choice of thread titles would totally lead to that conclusion, and the reasons why people want to talk about it. I don't want to shut any of that down, I just want to clarify that it was not my intent with my personal post.
A LOT of people have replied to this thread: I'll reply to some of the issues I want to personally reply to here:
As for the OP thanks for starting the conversation by blaming the majority, seriously, as SWM I an aware it's my fault and that if only understood that other people like other things them maybe you'd get that mince meat and squash pie you've been pining for.
You are the audience. You have no control over what is produced, and thus are not to blame. I'm sorry if you feel attacked by the use of any term used, but no one should ever blame you for something you did not cause. The fact that your tastes are catered to is not your fault, plain and simple, and if anyone tells you that it is, they're wrong.
If, however, someone asks for an equal, or even just a larger-than-what-they-currently-have share of the pie and you say "well tough luck, you should be happy with what you got," then... I mean that really doesn't seem like fairness at all. Again though, there seems to be a conflation of two issues, and I really apologize if it was my thread title that gave that impression: I genuinely do not care how sexy/not sexy they make girls in the art or text. My only concern is that they no longer have a running theme of when they DO have sexual situations/implications/whatever, that it not be exclusively women placed in positions of sexual subservience. I made an effort to be very specific and explicit in the material I took issues with; feel free to examine that material in the context of how I suggested it could be read and decide for yourself if there's any merit to what I'm talking about, but don't say I'm vilifying it without looking into it first.
Another problem I have is the lack of liberating reading you are doing. You pretty much dismiss Transmission89 and Threeshades that tries to have a more liberating take on some issues. I also think some of the stuff you brought up are plain wrong, stuff like “certain races are designed purely for the benefit of straight, white, male gamers”. That say it is still good these questions are raised. I too think Paizo could do better on when it comes to be more inclusive portraying ethnicity. I have long asked for an Icon with a “Hispanic”...
Thanks for the response dude, and I genuinely mean that (without any sort of brush-off). I think you definitely have a point about me going too far with utterly dismissing certain races. If I appeared to be off-hand rejecting better interpretations of different races without thought, it's not because I don't think those are way-cool interpretations that could be absolutely fantastic in a campaign; it's because I got beef with the way the text as-written coincides with the art used, and both of those things in the context of the overall arc of Paizo materials over the years. It was a blind-spot that I felt that people, not-attuned to this matter, were not noticing. It's not that I'm opposed in any way to more positive interpretations, but that such a negative interpretation is possible from the material itself.
I'm also very new to forum posting! I AM learning a lot, heh, this isn't something I've done much of before.
@Zark and @Strayshift
I've wondered why there aren't more hispanic (and asian) characters in the iconics too, although I do like that in general at least they're broader in appearance than usual. In terms of expanding representation:
I do think Paizo is very, very capable, very conscientious, and very aware of what they do! I genuinely think that they will continue to do extremely well, regarding their beliefs, in the future.
and then for disabled characters:
and the Oracle class has, in my opinion, an amazing explanation for how a disability could persist in Pathfinder worlds, providing opportunity for characters and interactions where not being as-able as other people isn't the "well we have to get some magic to fix this right away!" detriment it would seemingly be otherwise. It's not as much as what might be desired, I know though, but if you weren't aware of it, maybe it's a start? I have no experience with what you want, however, so I honestly don't know if I can speak to it at all. Just wanted to put it on your radar.
I was going to type my open letter to Paizo again but then I remembered that I do not have to type it again
I'm not exactly sure what post you saw in this thread that made you think this, but to my knowledge, nobody in this thread has threatened to leave or stop buying Paizo products. Pointing out that some parts look 'less than stellar" is not tantamount to threatening to leave.
It is a position that I personally could not disagree with more, but I understand and respect their reasoning and - to be honest - as a white heterosexual male, I'm used to the idea that I've had my day/millennia, and my opinion counts for a bit less these days...
Sorry in advance if I'm not reading your comment right, but as said before, sarcasm is pretty hard to read on these boards. Equality means that people with different opinions than yours will sometimes get heard. You opinion doesn't get heard less, it is just one (of many) instead of just the one (of one).
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just wonder where the outrage is concerning the hypersexualized males? Sajan, Seltyiel, and the upcoming (what I assume to be) bloodrager iconic are all 3 in revealing clothing. Many of the old 70s and 80s artwork of fantasy genre all how hypersexualized males as well. Or does shirtless heavily muscled male bodies not count, because their groin isn't overly large like the complaints about rather large breasts?
I am honestly curious, as all I ever hear are complaints about women in revealing clothing, "well endowed", and seductive.
1) The reason, I believe, that you don't hear complaints about blatant sexualization of male characters is because it's comparatively rare. As I keep saying, I don't believe that anyone here is complaining that objectified female characters exist -- they're complaining that it seems to be the norm, or at least too common.
2) Heavily muscled male bodies aren't necessarily equivalent to scantily clad female ones, because they're not necessarily designed to appeal sexually to the viewer. Many of those heavily muscled male barbarians and warriors from 70s and 80s fantasy art aren't designed to appeal to women or gay men -- they're designed to appeal to straight men. They're not sexual fantasies, they're power fantasies.
(This Shortpacked Comic explains it pretty well.)
If you want to get a sense of what women find attractive, it's worth looking at things like the Glamour poll (in which 90,000 women voted on who they thought were the sexiest men -- with that large a sample size, it's worth paying attention to). You're not going to see a lot of wrestlers or bodybuilders there, which is a decent first clue that that 70s and 80s art isn't really designed with a female audience in mind. It's largely art by men, for men.
No, not 99% and that's with the most egregious example you can find.Faiths of Purity
Not 99% but not off-base either.
The most egregious example I can find? I haven't gone and exhaustively scoured all my Paizo products (not that I've got that many anyway). You said 'find any product', I went and fetched my Faith Books.
In AP's, modules and world books that number continues to drop noticeably to the point that the percentage of scantily clad women in Pathfinder begins to pretty closely mirror the percentage of scantily clad women in my day-to-day life.
I don't know where you live but in my day-to-day life, I see women of all ages, very few of whom are scantily clad. (Or do you only notice women at all if they're under 35, say?)
I think many - such as in the post above - are grossly exaggerating the problem and doing so in an apparently misguided attempt to convince the lone company in the industry that doesn't need convincing. I suspect that its not the company they're actually trying to convince on these message boards, hence the hyperbole and straw men that are so often advanced as hard fact.
I agree the post is an exaggeration, but not that gross an exaggeration. I agree that Paizo are doing a vary good job, I'd still like to see them do a better job.
Oh, and thank you James and Lissa and Erik (and any other Paizo staff reading) for your responses to this thread. It's really nice to know that you're paying attention and think we might have a point.
(I'll ... go away now, before I devolve into complete snark.)
Oh, and thank you James and Lissa and Erik (and any other Paizo staff reading) for your responses to this thread. It's really nice to know that you're paying attention and recognise that there is a valid point to be made..
|
|
You know, even as a evil, evil, evvviiill SWM (shocking, I know), I have never been particularly offended/aroused/intrigued/other by Paizo art ... as opposed to what I regularly see IRL just by looking around me in normal life (without any special effort) ?
I find the very notion that the current art is some kind of porn downright silly and absurd. In fact I don't think about the art. At all. I look at it and forget it. Offense is in the eye of the Eye Tyrant.
The fact also that I regularly see reports from the world, where women are actually oppressed into wearing non revealing clothes that rot their lives and how they would so much like to lead normal lives, if only they could...
Makes me look at this whole thread with a huge grain of salt.
OP was not really about art.
|
|
I just wonder where the outrage is concerning the hypersexualized males? Sajan, Seltyiel, and the upcoming (what I assume to be) bloodrager iconic are all 3 in revealing clothing. Many of the old 70s and 80s artwork of fantasy genre all how hypersexualized males as well. Or does shirtless heavily muscled male bodies not count, because their groin isn't overly large like the complaints about rather large breasts?
I am honestly curious, as all I ever hear are complaints about women in revealing clothing, "well endowed", and seductive.
OP is not really about art and does not really reference iconics.
None of what you've written deals with the issue of NPC interaction/presentation in APs and modules over a lengthy period of time.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's sad that some people seem to want to make this thread a re-hash of old threads rather than engaging with the OP's interesting argument which I don't believe has been seen on the boards before.
Of course, the art has a connection with the OP's point but it isn't really the deal.
So, try talking about it in context of the OP, otherwise you can just link to old threads which have, at great length, covered almost every perspective on clothing/gender/sexualisation or iconics/art.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
TBH, I have not read every post in this thread, but succubi might not be the standard for sexualized depictions of women in Pathfinder. I mean, they're sex demons. You wouldn't expect the sex demons not to be sexualized. And there's a legitimate distinction between succubi (seductive sex demons) and incubi (rapacious sex demons). I'd think you wouldn't expect the rapey demons to be sexualized in the same way.
No comment on the larger issue.
tl;dr of OP so geraintelberion can stop posting a bunch in a row
more female npcs act sexy or want sex in the context of the AP, module, scenario etc, than male ones
of the ones who do want sexy times, the females are generally very desirable while the males are generally lecherous and/or not sexually desirable
discuss
also I am going to ask Lamontia if that batman drawing is kissable or needs to be set on fire