Honest question ... if that was a male torso, would it be OK?
It would still be very fucking weird.
But the fact that they strapped boobies onto it makes it even weirder.
This is itself a somewhat sexist statement. You are shaming the female body by implying that female breasts should be treated differently than male breasts, something most feminists and people for woman's rights are fighting to change. They are only "boobies" to you when they happen to be on a female, it seems.
Plus, kids and people in general get to see "boobies" of that size and bigger at the beach every year. This is just a regular (kind of badly modeled) female torso with the limbs cut off (since it's a zombie game set on a resort island where people are generally in swimwear). It fits the game fine and is the same as many of the in-game NPCs. Plus it's a lot cheaper than doing a full body.
Woman come in all shapes and sizes, some have natural, nearly big as your head breasts, while still being fit; and some have a basically flat chest, smaller than most guys. Yet, people seem to mainly only take issue when a character is given large breasts, suddenly she's a "sexualized" character, even though girls like her do exist. If you give a woman a v-neck dress in a game, who has a small chest, it's usually seen as "elegant", but if the breasts are large, it's suddenly "slutty" or "sexualized", merely due to the fact larger breasts have more surface area and curvature to show in the same dresses. How do you think that makes large breasted females feel when people around the net are telling them they should be shameful of themselves because of their large breasts? A large part of society has developed this belief that large breasts are shameful and sexual, and it has become the base belief for many people using your types of arguments.
But sure, large breasts are somewhat overused, which can contribute to self esteem issues for some woman, but there is nothing inherently wrong with a character having large breasts and being ok with showing some skin in an imaginary world. If a game is aiming to be a realistic reproduction of the real world, then yes, be practical; which is actually what usually happens. You'd be hard pressed to find many games that are trying to simulate real life, where the armor/clothing for the woman is impractical. It's generally just fantasy games where that happens... because it's a "fantasy" game. In all other cases, people should be free to create their imaginary characters however the hell they like!
/long_first_post.end
(I didn't sign-up to argue about this though haha, even though it may seem that way, just happened to be the first topic I came across and felt like posting on this morning!)
He's not "shaming" breasts. He's shaming the developers for trying to tack on sex appeal (already a frowned-upon practice) on a CORPSE.
But that is exactly the problem I'm getting at. Suddenly it's sex appeal because it's a female body. But if it was a male body, it's no longer sex appeal? How is that not sexist? You are then implying only the female body is a sexual object and thus must be covered up well, because clearly we live in the 18th century and showing skin is sinful and means you're going to hell.
This is itself a somewhat sexist statement. You are shaming the female body by implying that female breasts should be treated differently than male breasts, something most feminists and people for woman's rights are fighting to change. They are only "boobies" to you when they happen to be on a female, it seems.
Mind blown.
***
I was on Rock Paper Shotgun the other day guys and saw another example of this silliness. It was an ad for the Elders Scrolls MMO; an animated rotating .GIF. It really highlighted this issue for me. It cycled through the three main characters in the cinematic cut-scene we got a while back. Beardly barbarian dude, strapped up and armour plated everywhere. Male. Less buff beardless dude, strapped up and armour plated everywhere. Male. Elf, armoured except where someone would love to shoot an arrow through her heart; female.
People mistake my meaning and think I'm all 'pro-womens rights' or whatever; I am, but this is not what makes me angry about this. I find it insulting because the people who make these games, including marketers, think that I, as a consumer, would actually find this titillating, or that I am more likely to buy their product because it has women dressed up like this. I find it personally insulting. It might work on 13 year old boys but I think you'll find most people with purchasing power aren't in that demographic.
It's a huge problem here in Korea too. They have some amazing looking MMO's that are exclusive to Korea here. I'd learn the language just to play them. But seeing dudes wearing armour that increases their mass 300% while their fellow female warriors run around in bikinis just puts me right off.
I was on Rock Paper Shotgun the other day guys and saw another example of this silliness. It was an ad for the Elders Scrolls MMO; an animated rotating .GIF. It really highlighted this issue for me. It cycled through the three main characters in the cinematic cut-scene we got a while back. Beardly barbarian dude, strapped up and armour plated everywhere. Male. Less buff beardless dude, strapped up and armour plated everywhere. Male. Elf, armoured except where someone would love to shoot an arrow through her heart; female.
Yes, it's silly. But if this isn't the kind of advertising that attracts you, then it's not advertising meant for you. It is meant to attract people who are into that, of which there are many. You act as though all advertising must appeal to your own beliefs.
... I find it personally insulting. It might work on 13 year old boys but I think you'll find most people with purchasing power aren't in that demographic.
Except, that is actually who have the purchasing power, in a sense. Teens are the ones playing these games, and in droves they get their parents to buy them subscriptions to these games, or have little part-time jobs to make a little cash, or even just simply having an allowance as many privileged kids have these days. Their largest demographic is young teens who have a lot of time to waste and parental money to spend, not you.
Sorry Invertex your argument is a bit silly.
You claim that the male chest is not sexualised in the same way as the female chest.
I'm sorry when was the last time that male nipples were used in making babies. Female breasts are sexualised because of evolutionary traits, not because of social dynamics.
Claiming that the female breasts are on the same level as male breasts is on a scientific level just wrong.
Feminism isn't about putting both sexes on the same level, its about equal opportunity. There are inherent differences in the sexes that mean it will never be the same.
And besides here the problem isn't that people make big breasts, its the intent of the artists that make them that are at fault here.
Sorry Invertex this is a very childish view you have here.
I agree. Invertex, the whole point of making a product is to make as much money as possible. You're saying that they've spent millions to make a niche game for 13 year old breast appreciators? They want to sell ES:Online to EVERYONE. Especially, I would think, to fans of ES that don't play MMO's. So if anything this is geared directly for me, as I am in that demographic. The whole point of connecting it to a huge franchise (Star Wars, another MMO example) is to draw people that would normally not consider buying it, as well as MMO fans in general.
Sorry if this sounds harsh Invertex but your thought process is hopelessly obtuse.
I am however relatively curious about why you registered to bump this thread which must have been buried four or five pages back. It hasn't been posted in in nigh-on two weeks.
What happens when a woman designs a female character in a sexualized outfit? Are they also contributing to the ongoing oppression, devaluation, and abuse of women in society?
What happens when a woman designs a female character in a sexualized outfit? Are they also contributing to the ongoing oppression, devaluation, and abuse of women in society?
Again, read my post. My problem with this is not necessarily those factors; it's more that I am insulted that they think that I, as a gamer, want that in my games. I'm nearly 30 but they are treating me like a pre-pubescent 13 year old.
And it makes gaming as a hobby look bad to non-gamers. We've made leaps and bounds when it comes people seeing gaming as an adult as the norm, and something that is acceptable for an adult to do, but this kind of nonsense drags us back years. We already have uninformed fools dragging the medium through the mud every time there is a shooting, we should not be adding fuel to that fire. :thumbup:
Again, read my post. My problem with this is not necessarily those factors; it's more that I am insulted that they think that I, as a gamer, want that in my games. I'm nearly 30 but they are treating me like a pre-pubescent 13 year old.
I wasn't talking to you but your argument makes no sense anyway.
When you see a gay porno advertisement do you assume that the advertiser must think that you, as a porno consumer, must be into gay porn? Do you sit there in indignation over the fact that they've mistakenly judged what sexually arouses you or do you rationally conclude this porn is clearly not made for you and move on?
Sorry Invertex your argument is a bit silly.
You claim that the male chest is not sexualised in the same way as the female chest.
I'm sorry when was the last time that male nipples were used in making babies. Female breasts are sexualised because of evolutionary traits, not because of social dynamics.
Claiming that the female breasts are on the same level as male breasts is on a scientific level just wrong.
Feminism isn't about putting both sexes on the same level, its about equal opportunity. There are inherent differences in the sexes that mean it will never be the same.
On a scientific level, it is not wrong. Did you even try to do research before pretending you knew this as fact? This may come as a shock to you... but, male breasts are just small breasts. We have mammary tissue, we have milk ducts, we have the hormones "oxytocin" & "prolactin", we even get BREAST CANCER, we merely don't have enough estrogen to cause them to grow to a bigger size and produce significant amounts of milk (although sometimes it does happen in men, where they will grow larger breasts due to hormonal imbalances, and some even producing milk.) Our breasts are EXACTLY the same until we hit puberty, at which point the higher estrogen a female typically has, causes them to grow to a larger size than a males do, but not always.
Feminism isn't just about equal opportunity, it's about equal rights as well. Woman shouldn't be denied the right to be topless in public, just because many men happen to be attracted to females and their bodies. That's creating male privilege. Many woman find strong male pectoral muscles to be a turn on, yet that's no issue flaunting around in public. And this is the sort of ignorant belief that is making it hard for woman to fight for the right to breastfeed in public as well.
The fact is that the male "breasts" are a side effect of evolution. Breasts only exist because of their function of rearing children. It may not be a technically be part of the reproductive system but it only exists for the purpose of supporting the growth of babies.
Of course the male tissues are underdeveloped versions of female tissue. But what i am referring to is that the attraction is an evolved trait. If it were not then quite possibly you would find female monkeys and walruses to be attractive.
I don't actually have an opinion on whether women should or should not be able to bare their breasts in public, its not something i have put a ton of thought into so i wont argue it. What i was challenging was the idea that both male and female chests are the same and it should be equal based on those grounds.
But whats your deal seriously dude.
Bumping an old thread as your first post to argue sexism on an art forum?
Skimmed through the tread, and found some strong opinions I don't care to read all the way.
My thoughts on OP: If it fits the style of the game, mechanics, art, story, pace, and design. Practicality can come in any form within the design process, and it's subservient to aesthetics. If your style is practical and realistic, make it practical! If it's over-the-top crazy and badass, make it so!
The only time I'd say practicality wins in this battle is when tech limits what you can do. A character who's armor intersects itself badly when he moves is bad design, no matter how awesome he looks in his bindpose.
Do your research, part of good design and aesthetics is making it work. That's the heart of good design! It looks good because it works. But that fact that it's working doesn't make it realistic or practical.
I wasn't talking to you but your argument makes no sense anyway.
It makes complete sense and if you were asking someone in particular, specify.
My argument is that artists and game devs should have integrity. We shouldnt be running towards a conclusion where our art and games look like the search results of a deviantArt page; http://browse.deviantart.com/digitalart/3d/ (Hit 'show more' for even more examples). And no, I'm not talking about wine glass renders or tasteful assets like slips Dom War entry. I'm talking about DDD's hanging out, for no fucking reason whatsoever. Fucking Poser art. It cheapens the medium of games. And it cheapens artists (male or female). Not sure how that makes no sense, seems pretty clear to me.
And are we seriously discussing the difference between genders and their breasts? Seriously Invertex, you're rambling like a crazy person. Do please stop.
The fact is that the male "breasts" are a side effect of evolution. Breasts only exist because of their function of rearing children. It may not be a technically be part of the reproductive system but it only exists for the purpose of supporting the growth of babies.
Of course the male tissues are underdeveloped versions of female tissue. But what i am referring to is that the attraction is an evolved trait. If it were not then quite possibly you would find female monkeys and walruses to be attractive.
I don't actually have an opinion on whether women should or should not be able to bare their breasts in public, its not something i have put a ton of thought into so i wont argue it. What i was challenging was the idea that both male and female chests are the same and it should be equal based on those grounds.
But whats your deal seriously dude.
Bumping an old thread as your first post to argue sexism on an art forum?
But you agree that the male breast is merely a less enlarged version of the female breast, so my point still stands. Not all men are attracted to breasts, and some aren't even attracted to woman at all. What we like as humans also has a lot to do with our experiences. In older days, very plump woman were seen as the peak of beauty, but now it's fit woman with large booties and breasts. Society itself has its own evolution that shapes us as people.
And the fact still remains that most woman find nice strong jawlines and large pectoral muscles, or strong muscles in general to be sexually attractive, yet we never treat it the same, even though both are sexually attractive traits. Men were also selected for sexually, based on higher testosterone levels that benefited males in growing muscles to provide and protect the children. The most dominant males produced the most babies.
"Eww, I saw this advertisement that had this super beefy male soldier with rippling muscles and no shirt on, swinging an axe at an orc. I can't believe they think this is the type of sexualised advertising would attract me! They shouldn't do this, it's wrong!"
Do you see the ridiculousness in that? But people never really say that, even though it's the exact same thing as showing some cleavage. That is my point.
We live in a modern age now, we shouldn't be basing our laws or views of sexuality around whatever course evolution was taking way back when, or on views we held a few centuries ago. We should be basing our views on modern day logic and how society is beginning to accept all sorts of sexuality types.
And yes, I necro'd this thread by accident, I hadn't remembered to check the last posted date before replying. But I signed up before finding this thread. It just happened to be the first thing I posted in, it is not at all what I planned to be doing here, haha. I even said that in my first post -_-
And are we seriously discussing the difference between genders and their breasts? Seriously Invertex, you're rambling like a crazy person. Do please stop.
Of course, because these things matter and do apply to how one's views are shaped on this type of issue. I don't know how you cannot see that. Not to mention you bring up "boobies" first.
Of course, because these things matter and do apply to how one's views are shaped on this type of issue. I don't know how you cannot see that. Not to mention you bring up "boobies" first.
Actually we all let this thread die because it was pretty clear it was going nowhere good; there are several relevant articles etc. on the internet that I saw since we did that but chose to bite my tongue.
when i'm designing a character i generally go for aesthetics but i make sure to keep functionality in mind, meaning clothes aren't miraculously attached via double-sided tape but by proper means and would also be able to be animated properly. unless it's a style i'm going for and it's the design norm in the universe the character is from. so it's really depends on how real world functional a design would be.
i didn't read through most of the thread because i don't care what a female character wears as long as she is designed well and the clothes fit into the universe.
also i'm female and i support the cleavage movement...soooo red sonja! i don't know if you guys talked about her or not, but i think the idea of wearing a chain mail bikini would be rather uncomfortable on bare skin, but i assume it's much easier to draw it like that then to also show leather underneath that contacts the skin instead of the chain mail. i'm sure if it ever gets remade into a film, they won't just have her walking about like that and make it more functional but still keep the aesthetics of the bikini (unlike the first movie which i still love). even though a metal bikini is rather useless in protection, it works for her, and it's her image. so i love her and the many many interpretations of her
i honestly just want to make sure whatever i am designing looks awesome, fits into the world, and would properly animate
for me its a really big issue if something looks too unpractical. I spend a lot of time on my own stuff doing, often unneccesary, planing to make all things work. this can be both practical things and more setting related. i think im the oppisite of "make it look cool"-kind of people. i could probably benefit from having a looser view on this and just do cool stuff, since its often a hinderence designing stuff.
on the other hand, practicallity and aestethics often go hand in hand. starting to think about how that impossible fantasy armor is put together and moves along the joints often adds detials that is very aesteticly pleasing, straps, belt buckles and such. many scifi designs benefit from borrowing elements from real technology and indusrtial stuff.
off topic;
this is what would happen if the andreas's of the forum would leave and hazardous and b1ll would have free reign:
(btw its a joke, please don't answer with wall of text)
I find it interesting you refer to it that way, instead of 'the muzz's', considering he's expressed the exact same opinion in this thread; or in fact, the 'poopinmymouth's'... we all remember THAT 10 page Quantic Dream tech demo clusterfuck. 'Male Gaze' me arse.
The things with jokes see, is that they should be funny, and not make you look like a silly ****.
you seem more vocal than the others, at least in this thread.
as the way i see it, on the great battlefield of polycountia, where the dispute over the mytical "sexist values" still rages on, you are the general of the "maybe we should think how this affect everyone"-army which strong in courage and numbers, but weak in firepower, tries to overthrow the regime of "why cant i have tits and ass in my own art?!". poopinmymouth is has faught hes fair share of battles, but is tired and seem to favor more diplomatic ways. muzz is somekind of covert ops specaillist that seems to prefer sneakier methods, and the troops that follow your banners seem to be younger, a new generation that wants a new philosphy, based on more ethic values.
far up in his mountian hold, the great king Hazardous, leader of the regime, sits on his throne, made of bossums and booty. He is in a slumber, and rarely wakes up, but when he does he makes his enemies remember why they fear him. He swings in battle his mightiest weapon, called "wall of text", which only a few have lived to tell about. It is said to strike at the most unforseen moment, often at places unrelated to the great dispute.
Next to him stands hes most loyal man, sir Almighty_gir, always ready to fight in the kings place. The king also have many unkown allies, often the older, ancient dwellers of polycountia. b1ll is one of such creatures and has come from lands almost unheard of. He struck out, seemingly unproveked and the king hurried to his defence.
No one knows what will happend to the vast and prosperuos land of polycountia. Is it to be torn apart, like the king envisioned, or will the people manage look past their differences and stay as one, strong nation to face the looming threat of its rival neighbours cghubia and gameartisanesia?
Replies
it's ok to not like one of his designs.
This is itself a somewhat sexist statement. You are shaming the female body by implying that female breasts should be treated differently than male breasts, something most feminists and people for woman's rights are fighting to change. They are only "boobies" to you when they happen to be on a female, it seems.
Plus, kids and people in general get to see "boobies" of that size and bigger at the beach every year. This is just a regular (kind of badly modeled) female torso with the limbs cut off (since it's a zombie game set on a resort island where people are generally in swimwear). It fits the game fine and is the same as many of the in-game NPCs. Plus it's a lot cheaper than doing a full body.
Woman come in all shapes and sizes, some have natural, nearly big as your head breasts, while still being fit; and some have a basically flat chest, smaller than most guys. Yet, people seem to mainly only take issue when a character is given large breasts, suddenly she's a "sexualized" character, even though girls like her do exist. If you give a woman a v-neck dress in a game, who has a small chest, it's usually seen as "elegant", but if the breasts are large, it's suddenly "slutty" or "sexualized", merely due to the fact larger breasts have more surface area and curvature to show in the same dresses. How do you think that makes large breasted females feel when people around the net are telling them they should be shameful of themselves because of their large breasts? A large part of society has developed this belief that large breasts are shameful and sexual, and it has become the base belief for many people using your types of arguments.
But sure, large breasts are somewhat overused, which can contribute to self esteem issues for some woman, but there is nothing inherently wrong with a character having large breasts and being ok with showing some skin in an imaginary world. If a game is aiming to be a realistic reproduction of the real world, then yes, be practical; which is actually what usually happens. You'd be hard pressed to find many games that are trying to simulate real life, where the armor/clothing for the woman is impractical. It's generally just fantasy games where that happens... because it's a "fantasy" game. In all other cases, people should be free to create their imaginary characters however the hell they like!
/long_first_post.end
(I didn't sign-up to argue about this though haha, even though it may seem that way, just happened to be the first topic I came across and felt like posting on this morning!)
Mind blown.
***
I was on Rock Paper Shotgun the other day guys and saw another example of this silliness. It was an ad for the Elders Scrolls MMO; an animated rotating .GIF. It really highlighted this issue for me. It cycled through the three main characters in the cinematic cut-scene we got a while back. Beardly barbarian dude, strapped up and armour plated everywhere. Male. Less buff beardless dude, strapped up and armour plated everywhere. Male. Elf, armoured except where someone would love to shoot an arrow through her heart; female.
People mistake my meaning and think I'm all 'pro-womens rights' or whatever; I am, but this is not what makes me angry about this. I find it insulting because the people who make these games, including marketers, think that I, as a consumer, would actually find this titillating, or that I am more likely to buy their product because it has women dressed up like this. I find it personally insulting. It might work on 13 year old boys but I think you'll find most people with purchasing power aren't in that demographic.
It's a huge problem here in Korea too. They have some amazing looking MMO's that are exclusive to Korea here. I'd learn the language just to play them. But seeing dudes wearing armour that increases their mass 300% while their fellow female warriors run around in bikinis just puts me right off.
Except, that is actually who have the purchasing power, in a sense. Teens are the ones playing these games, and in droves they get their parents to buy them subscriptions to these games, or have little part-time jobs to make a little cash, or even just simply having an allowance as many privileged kids have these days. Their largest demographic is young teens who have a lot of time to waste and parental money to spend, not you.
You claim that the male chest is not sexualised in the same way as the female chest.
I'm sorry when was the last time that male nipples were used in making babies. Female breasts are sexualised because of evolutionary traits, not because of social dynamics.
Claiming that the female breasts are on the same level as male breasts is on a scientific level just wrong.
Feminism isn't about putting both sexes on the same level, its about equal opportunity. There are inherent differences in the sexes that mean it will never be the same.
And besides here the problem isn't that people make big breasts, its the intent of the artists that make them that are at fault here.
I agree. Invertex, the whole point of making a product is to make as much money as possible. You're saying that they've spent millions to make a niche game for 13 year old breast appreciators? They want to sell ES:Online to EVERYONE. Especially, I would think, to fans of ES that don't play MMO's. So if anything this is geared directly for me, as I am in that demographic. The whole point of connecting it to a huge franchise (Star Wars, another MMO example) is to draw people that would normally not consider buying it, as well as MMO fans in general.
Sorry if this sounds harsh Invertex but your thought process is hopelessly obtuse.
I am however relatively curious about why you registered to bump this thread which must have been buried four or five pages back. It hasn't been posted in in nigh-on two weeks.
Again, read my post. My problem with this is not necessarily those factors; it's more that I am insulted that they think that I, as a gamer, want that in my games. I'm nearly 30 but they are treating me like a pre-pubescent 13 year old.
And it makes gaming as a hobby look bad to non-gamers. We've made leaps and bounds when it comes people seeing gaming as an adult as the norm, and something that is acceptable for an adult to do, but this kind of nonsense drags us back years. We already have uninformed fools dragging the medium through the mud every time there is a shooting, we should not be adding fuel to that fire. :thumbup:
When you see a gay porno advertisement do you assume that the advertiser must think that you, as a porno consumer, must be into gay porn? Do you sit there in indignation over the fact that they've mistakenly judged what sexually arouses you or do you rationally conclude this porn is clearly not made for you and move on?
Your consistency is appreciated.
On a scientific level, it is not wrong. Did you even try to do research before pretending you knew this as fact? This may come as a shock to you... but, male breasts are just small breasts. We have mammary tissue, we have milk ducts, we have the hormones "oxytocin" & "prolactin", we even get BREAST CANCER, we merely don't have enough estrogen to cause them to grow to a bigger size and produce significant amounts of milk (although sometimes it does happen in men, where they will grow larger breasts due to hormonal imbalances, and some even producing milk.) Our breasts are EXACTLY the same until we hit puberty, at which point the higher estrogen a female typically has, causes them to grow to a larger size than a males do, but not always.
Feminism isn't just about equal opportunity, it's about equal rights as well. Woman shouldn't be denied the right to be topless in public, just because many men happen to be attracted to females and their bodies. That's creating male privilege. Many woman find strong male pectoral muscles to be a turn on, yet that's no issue flaunting around in public. And this is the sort of ignorant belief that is making it hard for woman to fight for the right to breastfeed in public as well.
I realize it's not mainly what this thread is about, I was mainly just taking issue with Andreas's statement.
The fact is that the male "breasts" are a side effect of evolution. Breasts only exist because of their function of rearing children. It may not be a technically be part of the reproductive system but it only exists for the purpose of supporting the growth of babies.
Of course the male tissues are underdeveloped versions of female tissue. But what i am referring to is that the attraction is an evolved trait. If it were not then quite possibly you would find female monkeys and walruses to be attractive.
I don't actually have an opinion on whether women should or should not be able to bare their breasts in public, its not something i have put a ton of thought into so i wont argue it. What i was challenging was the idea that both male and female chests are the same and it should be equal based on those grounds.
But whats your deal seriously dude.
Bumping an old thread as your first post to argue sexism on an art forum?
My thoughts on OP: If it fits the style of the game, mechanics, art, story, pace, and design. Practicality can come in any form within the design process, and it's subservient to aesthetics. If your style is practical and realistic, make it practical! If it's over-the-top crazy and badass, make it so!
The only time I'd say practicality wins in this battle is when tech limits what you can do. A character who's armor intersects itself badly when he moves is bad design, no matter how awesome he looks in his bindpose.
Do your research, part of good design and aesthetics is making it work. That's the heart of good design! It looks good because it works. But that fact that it's working doesn't make it realistic or practical.
It makes complete sense and if you were asking someone in particular, specify.
My argument is that artists and game devs should have integrity. We shouldnt be running towards a conclusion where our art and games look like the search results of a deviantArt page; http://browse.deviantart.com/digitalart/3d/ (Hit 'show more' for even more examples). And no, I'm not talking about wine glass renders or tasteful assets like slips Dom War entry. I'm talking about DDD's hanging out, for no fucking reason whatsoever. Fucking Poser art. It cheapens the medium of games. And it cheapens artists (male or female). Not sure how that makes no sense, seems pretty clear to me.
And are we seriously discussing the difference between genders and their breasts? Seriously Invertex, you're rambling like a crazy person. Do please stop.
And the fact still remains that most woman find nice strong jawlines and large pectoral muscles, or strong muscles in general to be sexually attractive, yet we never treat it the same, even though both are sexually attractive traits. Men were also selected for sexually, based on higher testosterone levels that benefited males in growing muscles to provide and protect the children. The most dominant males produced the most babies.
"Eww, I saw this advertisement that had this super beefy male soldier with rippling muscles and no shirt on, swinging an axe at an orc. I can't believe they think this is the type of sexualised advertising would attract me! They shouldn't do this, it's wrong!"
Do you see the ridiculousness in that? But people never really say that, even though it's the exact same thing as showing some cleavage. That is my point.
We live in a modern age now, we shouldn't be basing our laws or views of sexuality around whatever course evolution was taking way back when, or on views we held a few centuries ago. We should be basing our views on modern day logic and how society is beginning to accept all sorts of sexuality types.
And yes, I necro'd this thread by accident, I hadn't remembered to check the last posted date before replying. But I signed up before finding this thread. It just happened to be the first thing I posted in, it is not at all what I planned to be doing here, haha. I even said that in my first post -_-
Of course, because these things matter and do apply to how one's views are shaped on this type of issue. I don't know how you cannot see that. Not to mention you bring up "boobies" first.
Actually we all let this thread die because it was pretty clear it was going nowhere good; there are several relevant articles etc. on the internet that I saw since we did that but chose to bite my tongue.
Only to you or other obtuse thinkers, believe me.
Large pectorals are practical because they give more strength, which is useful when carrying things and fighting stuff.
hint, hint, can we please stop bitching about sexism here and get back to the thread's titular topic?
Leave this thread alone for those of us that can look past it and want to discuss actual Practicality vs Aesthetics.
i didn't read through most of the thread because i don't care what a female character wears as long as she is designed well and the clothes fit into the universe.
also i'm female and i support the cleavage movement...soooo red sonja! i don't know if you guys talked about her or not, but i think the idea of wearing a chain mail bikini would be rather uncomfortable on bare skin, but i assume it's much easier to draw it like that then to also show leather underneath that contacts the skin instead of the chain mail. i'm sure if it ever gets remade into a film, they won't just have her walking about like that and make it more functional but still keep the aesthetics of the bikini (unlike the first movie which i still love). even though a metal bikini is rather useless in protection, it works for her, and it's her image. so i love her and the many many interpretations of her
i honestly just want to make sure whatever i am designing looks awesome, fits into the world, and would properly animate
on the other hand, practicallity and aestethics often go hand in hand. starting to think about how that impossible fantasy armor is put together and moves along the joints often adds detials that is very aesteticly pleasing, straps, belt buckles and such. many scifi designs benefit from borrowing elements from real technology and indusrtial stuff.
off topic;
this is what would happen if the andreas's of the forum would leave and hazardous and b1ll would have free reign:
(btw its a joke, please don't answer with wall of text)
I lolled
I find it interesting you refer to it that way, instead of 'the muzz's', considering he's expressed the exact same opinion in this thread; or in fact, the 'poopinmymouth's'... we all remember THAT 10 page Quantic Dream tech demo clusterfuck. 'Male Gaze' me arse.
The things with jokes see, is that they should be funny, and not make you look like a silly ****.
as the way i see it, on the great battlefield of polycountia, where the dispute over the mytical "sexist values" still rages on, you are the general of the "maybe we should think how this affect everyone"-army which strong in courage and numbers, but weak in firepower, tries to overthrow the regime of "why cant i have tits and ass in my own art?!". poopinmymouth is has faught hes fair share of battles, but is tired and seem to favor more diplomatic ways. muzz is somekind of covert ops specaillist that seems to prefer sneakier methods, and the troops that follow your banners seem to be younger, a new generation that wants a new philosphy, based on more ethic values.
to be contiuned...
far up in his mountian hold, the great king Hazardous, leader of the regime, sits on his throne, made of bossums and booty. He is in a slumber, and rarely wakes up, but when he does he makes his enemies remember why they fear him. He swings in battle his mightiest weapon, called "wall of text", which only a few have lived to tell about. It is said to strike at the most unforseen moment, often at places unrelated to the great dispute.
Next to him stands hes most loyal man, sir Almighty_gir, always ready to fight in the kings place. The king also have many unkown allies, often the older, ancient dwellers of polycountia. b1ll is one of such creatures and has come from lands almost unheard of. He struck out, seemingly unproveked and the king hurried to his defence.
No one knows what will happend to the vast and prosperuos land of polycountia. Is it to be torn apart, like the king envisioned, or will the people manage look past their differences and stay as one, strong nation to face the looming threat of its rival neighbours cghubia and gameartisanesia?