It was pretty cool working under a woman lead artist when I became a character artist, sexyness was never brought up as an important trait. We were making games for teens so sexyness was usually actively avoided and we focused more on treating both sexes with respect. I don't know if we were a hundred percent successful but I'm pretty proud that I haven't had to make any stripper-warriors in my career so far.
WTF is just the right respnse suitable for your twisted brabble about physically harming penis, im sure a painting/picture of a penis is not going to rape you, also the penis is not primaly used for violence (even during rape), more like feet and fists, teeth and the forehead, and im sure its not improperly to draw feet, fists, teeth or the forehead.
...a vagina, which in and of itself, is not capable of doing him harm.
As a sufferer of Erb's Palsy , I can tell you that this is completely untrue. Vaginas are dangerous and you should keep an eye on them at all times. Female heroes wear revealing outfits as proof of their trustworthiness, since you can easily see if their vagina is about to do something sinister.
I'll take that the way it was intended. As an insult.
No one's insulting you, just your statement.
First of all, this depends a lot on culture and is not even remotely true "across the world". Some cultures teach that vaginas have teeth in them. In such a case, a vagina would almost certainly be considered capable of violence and harm. (Oddly enough, there are rare cases where vaginas do have teeth in them, usually because they formed in a cyst and then migrated.) Also, it's perfectly possible for a woman to rape a man -- if the body responds it doesn't mean that the mind is necessarily willing. That is presumably the sort of violence you're referring to. There's also the part where a penis could do a young boy harm. Should we ban them from seeing them? Blindfold them when they use a toilet?
Secondly, there are children who live in nudist colonies. They have seen penises and vulvas (that would be the actual name of a woman's external genitalia, btw -- the vagina is internal and not generally seen without a speculum). Other people allow nudity in the privacy of their own homes. There are also any number of cultures that have different norms about clothing than the most commonly encountered cultures. Somehow all of these kids have survived to adulthood and remained psychologically sound. For that matter, clothing is a rather recent development in the whole of human history. And none of that even addresses the reproductive organs of non-humans. Should we ban children from zoos? They might see penises being used there, both for reproduction and otherwise. Most primates masturbate. (If we want to discuss penises capable of harm in this part too, cats have literal barbs on theirs that rip the vagina on removal. I suppose I would support female kittens not having to know about that before they have to.)
A penis will only be seen by a child as something dangerous if the child is taught that by someone. Same with my example above regarding dangerous vaginas. Past that, most kids anywhere know that penises and vulvas exist, even if they've never seen one or don't know the precise anatomical term. Kids talk to each other -- my daughter asked me about penises (in rather childish terminology) when she was 4. She said that one of the boys in her preschool told her about it. She survived that without any harm, and she even made it through learning about anatomy after that question. She's even managed to survive having flipped through most of my artistic anatomy books. (She's 8 now, and alternately thinks naked people are gross and/or hilarious, but only if they're naked in an unexpected place. The people in the anatomy books aren't interesting to her anymore because they're supposed to be naked.)
Here is a partial list of things belonging to or created by humans (or accessible because of other humans) that are more dangerous than seeing a penis: fists, feet, teeth, fingernails, hands, heavy objects that might be dropped on a body part, falling off of something, stairs, escalators, motorized vehicles, words, furniture, electricity... I could seriously do this all day. Most of those things cause more harm to kids on the whole than actual penises do. I mean, not the escalators, but I would bet far more children are hurt by cars.
To sum up, genitalia is only a source of danger to kids if a) someone teaches them that it is or b) the genitalia in question belongs to a pedophile. The mere sight of genitalia poses no harm to anyone unless they've been taught to think it's harmful.
Conan isn't a good example, if you want to see men portrayed just like women are in popular media, take a stroll down DeviantArt.
You can post a women with a cyber postage stamp covering her vagina and Polycounters will report the people who complain about it. Post a man with a cyber banana hammock and there will be a flood of reports about how it's disgusting and NSFW.
Is this really true though? Every once in awhile the what are you working on thread devolves into nothing but penises. Normal penises, tank penises, massive penises on small dragons, helicopter penises, veiny penises, smooth penises, penises on feminine looking men, large penises on manly men. Lots of them.
If I'm being honest about those threads, I think they're pretty stupid and immature, but everyone seems to have a good time, I can't imagine too many reports coming in.
But I also have no idea of the inner workings or report stats, which is why I'm asking. The only thing I've ever seen that seemed to cause polycount a hangup was the seemingly transgendered male in very suggestive female poses.
And pancakes, I found you post sort of offensive, but mostly just sad. I think iconoclast put it best when he was talking about his daughter going through his anatomy books and recognizing context. It depends on how you teach kids about it. And teaching a child that a penis will hurt them is incredibly unhealthy.
To sum up, genitalia is only a source of danger to kids if a) someone teaches them that it is or b) the genitalia in question belongs to a pedophile. The mere sight of genitalia poses no harm to anyone unless they've been taught to think it's harmful.
Mines dangerous if I start swinging it around. No TKO for you!
To be fair...
I think some r under-estimating the "potential" psychological trauma involved with forced penetration? Something the vagina doesn't impose. Furthermore...
I have read that males with partners who have been violently raped who voluntarily are "penetrated" themselves with a phallic substitute develop empathy with regards to traumatic penetration.
Thankfully most artists need only imagine.
haha, yeah. I'm not sure if making the crotch bigger would be a good idea as I'm not sure if that's what women/gay men look at when checking them out. All I've heard is that it's mostly about the male forms of different muscles and more.
A nice face and body in general will do the trick. Girls are not as visuals as us guys. Plus, the big crotch thing is really a porn stereotype, I never met a girl that want a guy with a big crotch, it just says "painful sex" to them. Haha.
This was the first image that popped into my head when I read 'How sexy is too sexy'
I found it interesting to read a few posts in this thread. To see the different perspectives here on polycount.
I understand it has a lot to do with where the viewers are located in the world. -Along with the
religious background they have & how women are treated in their localized society at the time.
This idea of sexiness seems to differ over time, or every couple generations. Some generations becoming
desensitized. While, others become increasingly sensitive.
When asking on a international public forum... there will never be a definitive answer on the subject. Ever.
All you'll get is a headache trying to please everyone.
I think iconoclast put it best when he was talking about his daughter going through his anatomy books and recognizing context. It depends on how you teach kids about it. And teaching a child that a penis will hurt them is incredibly unhealthy.
Normally I don't care, but in this case I find it worth noting that I'm female. Seems like it's of some level of relevance given the topic.
I think some r under-estimating the "potential" psychological trauma involved with forced penetration? Something the vagina doesn't impose. Furthermore...
I have read that males with partners who have been violently raped who voluntarily are "penetrated" themselves with a phallic substitute develop empathy with regards to traumatic penetration.
No, there is not any underestimation happening here. It has nothing to do with penetration in unto itself (though I'll also take an excuse to note that men can be assaulted by other men). It has to do with someone else using sex as a means of controlling your body and removing your choice. Oral sex is also sometimes used in rapes. That's also still traumatizing and has nothing to do with penetration either.
As to voluntary penetration by partners, if that works for someone, fine. But it isn't at all relevant for anyone I've ever spoken to, I've never seen it mentioned in any research or other scholarly publications, and it isn't going to demonstrate the terror and loss of control in the slightest. There's simply no possible way that any voluntary act is going to impart the experience of sexual assault.
Rape is about sex the same way that being beaten is about baseball bats. It's the weapon used, but neither has a primary purpose as a weapon. More importantly, neither weapon is the focus of the act in question. Both are about using something to demonstrate some sort of dominance or control over the victim.
If you'd rather have something more directly on topic, I'll highlight some posts from The Hawkeye Initiative since I didn't see it in my skimming of the thread. They redraw the poses of female superheroes with male characters (it was originally just Hawkeye, hence the name). It's full of point-making and sometimes a scantily-clad (and very hairy) Wolverine.
If you'd rather have something more directly on topic, I'll highlight some posts from The Hawkeye Initiative since I didn't see it in my skimming of the thread. They redraw the poses of female superheroes with male characters (it was originally just Hawkeye, hence the name). It's full of point-making and sometimes a scantily-clad (and very hairy) Wolverine.
^^^I have no problem with this. What I do have a problem with is Lady Death's dislocated head and then Hawkeye's head is dislocated too.
To sum up, genitalia is only a source of danger to kids if a) someone teaches them that it is or b) the genitalia in question belongs to a pedophile. The mere sight of genitalia poses no harm to anyone unless they've been taught to think it's harmful.
My daughter (22 months old, for reference) is obsessed with "willies" at the moment. whether it's mine when we're in the bath, or the one on my anatomy statue, or in any anatomy books, she points and shouts "WILLIE!".
i guess it's just a natural stage they go through, but we've (my girlfriend and i) taken it as an opportunity to learn:
"does Tyria have a willie?"
"no"
"who does?"
"daddy"
"does mummy?"
"no".
and then she says "good girl" and runs away. heh... kids.
anyway, as for this whole thing turning into a discussion about rape, rape culture, and how stupidly different women are portrayed than men in media...
let's just take a moment to remember than men can and are raped by women, and it is reported far less frequently than male on female rape due to an even more overwhelming shame culture in men. note: i'm not saying that men being raped is worse than women being raped, i just don't want to see everything become completely one sided here. rape is terrible regardless of its form or victim.
and as for the portrayal (regarding specifically here, the hawkeye initiative), just remember that while women are often posed provocatively or "sexily"... that men are often posed in the equal opposite way:
women are posed or drawn to accentuate all of their womanly attributes, men are posed or drawn to accentuate all of the "manly qualities" they possess.
example:
since everyone loves pulling apart the old avengers poster, i'll use that one.
Sure, black widow is posed to show of that ass, those curves, that womanly figure... the biggest criticism there is "why overly sexualize her", right? well, it's easy to see it that way, and it probably was done intentionally; men love the eye candy, simples.
But what about every guy there? Thor and Cap' standing strong, and tall, with a wide manly stance, the very essence of lady boner. Hawkeye there with his arms tensed, biceps bulging. the look on Thor's face... stern, unwavering, but still somehow kind and compassionate. It's almost as if these characters are drawn in a way that appeals to the women in the crowd just as much as the men!
i guess what i'm getting at, is that while certianly women are drawn or posed in overtly sexual ways, it's just very obvious. men are drawn or posed similarly in almost every case, it's just that women are turned on in a more complex manner than simply having an ass on display, and so it's not as immediately obvious. men are drawn in a way that makes other men want to be them, and women to desire them.
i guess what i'm getting at, is that while certianly women are drawn or posed in overtly sexual ways, it's just very obvious. men are drawn or posed similarly in almost every case, it's just that women are turned on in a more complex manner than simply having an ass on display, and so it's not as immediately obvious. men are drawn in a way that makes other men want to be them, and women to desire them.
Lol, I love how you follow up that mature and insightful post with a penis tank =P
In fact while I was attending a course Psychology in Game Design in my masters degree ( Game Technologies) I chose exact same subject as my term project and made a research proposal and presentation for it.
Here are the presentation and proposal, defining problems and offering solutions in a scientific perspective.
Any kind of critic and opinion is welcomed by the way. I have already passed the course but this question is something I am always interested in and find a solution to.
Could do with being a more in-depth else all you have there is basically a regurgitation of you-know-who's talking points (you even used a number of the same images and references they did) with very little real insight into the subject.
I personally want to see a morbidly obese main character in a AAA game, I'm bored of "good looking" main characters.
Are you sure? That strikes me as a sort of an unnatural response. Wanting to see a morbidly obese character is like wanting to see a character with an exceptionally lazy eye. Do you want to see an obese character so that you can laugh at him, pity him, or maybe root for him to stay just the way he is, or root for him to lose the weight?
I just don't believe you're being honest with yourself. It sounds cool to say you want to see a morbidly obese character. But I think you say that just as an intellectual exercise.
Could do with being a more in-depth else all you have there is basically a regurgitation of you-know-who's talking points (you even used a number of the same images and references they did) with very little real insight into the subject.
Yes that is right, you-know-who-she-is Thanks for the cirt mate.
But I think differently then you-know-who-she-is when it comes to offer a different type of heroine. I advised some different point at the end of both ppt. presentation and proposal, that are being using history as a reference point for "real" heroines who actually existed.
If you ( and of course everyone else ) have any crits about this aproach I would surely like to hear them.
There is no limit to how sexy armor can be and who cares what people think, if they want to get butthurt that's their problem. People who get offended can go cry more in front of their computer screens.
There is no limit to how sexy armor can be and who cares what people think, if they want to get butthurt that's their problem. People who get offended can go cry more in front of their computer screens.
I personally want to see a morbidly obese main character in a AAA game, I'm bored of "good looking" main characters.
The strange thing about your comment here, is that i have seen metrics for obese
character choices in mmo's. This is hard data pulled straight from the character create and despite the popular comment that people would LOVE to play as a huge fat person, or someone super deformed, the bottom line is the majority of players simply do not.
So no matter how often I hear this - that data always jumps to mind. I think most people who think this way like to have the CHOICE but would never actually play as that character.
Now try approaching the $$$$ man who is funding the development of your game and convince them that you need more manpower or time to expand your character create to include fat / obese versions / sliders to your character create when they now have access to data that proves most people wont play as them. Total waste of time / resources that could be use elsewhere......
I don't know, I feel like that's a bit of a cop out.
I mean I think just about everyone would agree that, for a developed adult, there is no such thing as 'too sexy'.
You could make a character the craziest wildest fantasy possible, and for an adult who is into that, great, fine, nobody cares what you do in your own home.
But this conversation seems more geared towards mainstream games, games that enter the public consciousness, and are played by NON-Developed adults.
So in that case, the conversation is more about 'what is too much to feed to kids, or teens, who don't understand the impact that these things have on their sexuality/personal development?' 'At what point does a game begin to re-enforce gender-negative, either male or female, traits, in the kids who play it?'
This isn't an opinion post, its a question post. Im not saying 'games with sexuality hurts kids', I'm asking 'where, if anywhere, is the line for you?'
Yes that is right, you-know-who-she-is Thanks for the cirt mate.
But I think differently then you-know-who-she-is when it comes to offer a different type of heroine. I advised some different point at the end of both ppt. presentation and proposal, that are being using history as a reference point for "real" heroines who actually existed.
If you ( and of course everyone else ) have any crits about this aproach I would surely like to hear them.
Oh thanks for reading and replying by the way
The problem you've got is that the examples you cite all have inherent contradictions when looked at through a different (sexist) lens; Joan as the Virgin Mary - sexist because she's represented using the trope of innocence/virtue?; of the Empress being akin to a man - sexist because she has to be a man to have worth as a warrior?; or Madam Liberty being a 'homely women' - sexist because women are not to be confined to being 'homely'?
In other words, in just that short paragraph above it's possible to see why this issue often devolves into the most vicious of flame-wars online because people are largely ignorant of, not interested in, or don't put much stock in the importance of historical context and significance of (traditional) gender roles, especially when it doesn't serve their agendas (that's not a dig at you by the way, but a general observation on how gender is used for self-serving purposes by a very vocal minority, undermining the entire valid and valuable discussion).
Are you sure? That strikes me as a sort of an unnatural response. Wanting to see a morbidly obese character is like wanting to see a character with an exceptionally lazy eye. Do you want to see an obese character so that you can laugh at him, pity him, or maybe root for him to stay just the way he is, or root for him to lose the weight?
I just don't believe you're being honest with yourself. It sounds cool to say you want to see a morbidly obese character. But I think you say that just as an intellectual exercise.
-The main point of my post was to move the topic on from the highly flammable rape/sexual abuse, since that topic always ends up on fire on the internet.-
Some people find larger people attractive or sexy. A society defines what a majority class as 'sexy' but that doesn't mean there aren't minorities with different opinions.
This topic is about "how sexy is too sexy", yet sexy is a variable.
The size and shape of a character shouldn't matter as long as it fits the intended content/story/purpose.
The problem you've got is that the examples you cite all have inherent contradictions when looked at through a different (sexist) lens; Joan as the Virgin Mary - sexist because she's represented using the trope of innocence/virtue?; of the Empress being akin to a man - sexist because she has to be a man to have worth as a warrior?; or Madam Liberty being a 'homely women' - sexist because women are not to be confined to being 'homely'?
I have never thought that people would try to look at it that way. I always thought the quite opposite when these three examples are given, especially Joan and Jingu.
Now you made me curious mate. If you would allow me can I ask you to imagine a female character that would not get in to these tropes ? It could be from history or some character you made up at the moment. I am really curious now. Oh, by the way sorry if that sounds too... psychiatric
But thanks for sharing this point of view mate. I'll keep it in my mind for future chances of further delving into that subject.
.. imagine a female character that would not get in to these tropes ?
I'm not entirely sure it's possible because someone will always find something offensive in the depiction of the female form (in particular) if that's all they're looking for, hence the comments above (not suggesting they are bad examples by the way, rather just how easy it is to find fault when looked at devoid meaning and context).
The strange thing about your comment here, is that i have seen metrics for obese
character choices in mmo's. This is hard data pulled straight from the character create and despite the popular comment that people would LOVE to play as a huge fat person, or someone super deformed, the bottom line is the majority of players simply do not.
So no matter how often I hear this - that data always jumps to mind. I think most people who think this way like to have the CHOICE but would never actually play as that character.
I created an obese and old character once for Star Wars Galaxies, it was unbelievable the verbal abuse my character got form other players everyday, just because he looked old and fat. Never understood why people go through the trouble of insulting a toon :-/
Exactly.
This is precisely why that whole trope witch hunt is so annoying. If you try hard enough you will find a trope EVERYWHERE.
Not saying that there aren't cases of obvious ones. But what's offensive is highly subjective.
I've seen quite a few times someone bring up some female game character as a great example independent heroine,
and then some other "trope hunter" would say that it's still a "male fantasy" since it's woman doing same stuff that men do.
If this doesn't show how subjective the whole issue is, I don't know what else can.
Exactly.
This is precisely why that whole trope witch hunt is so annoying. If you try hard enough you will find a trope EVERYWHERE.
Not saying that there aren't cases of obvious ones. But what's offensive is highly subjective.
I've seen quite a few times someone bring up some female game character as a great example independent heroine,
and then some other "trope hunter" would say that it's still a "male fantasy" since it's woman doing same stuff that men do.
If this doesn't show how subjective the whole issue is, I don't know what else can.
Exactly. Trope hunting is psuedo-intellectual exercise with a 100% basis in subjectivity. If you like a musician, you say they are innovative. If you hate them, you say they are a hack. If you like a character, you say they're special. If you don't like them, you say they are a 1 dimensional trope.
Just like real people. If you hate an entire country you can say "just bomb them all". If you love your best friend, or girlfriend or whatever, then every little thing they do becomes special. The way they smile or laugh, even though millions of other people have the exact same smile and laugh.
Replies
It was pretty cool working under a woman lead artist when I became a character artist, sexyness was never brought up as an important trait. We were making games for teens so sexyness was usually actively avoided and we focused more on treating both sexes with respect. I don't know if we were a hundred percent successful but I'm pretty proud that I haven't had to make any stripper-warriors in my career so far.
I'll take that the way it was intended. As an insult.
As a sufferer of Erb's Palsy , I can tell you that this is completely untrue. Vaginas are dangerous and you should keep an eye on them at all times. Female heroes wear revealing outfits as proof of their trustworthiness, since you can easily see if their vagina is about to do something sinister.
First of all, this depends a lot on culture and is not even remotely true "across the world". Some cultures teach that vaginas have teeth in them. In such a case, a vagina would almost certainly be considered capable of violence and harm. (Oddly enough, there are rare cases where vaginas do have teeth in them, usually because they formed in a cyst and then migrated.) Also, it's perfectly possible for a woman to rape a man -- if the body responds it doesn't mean that the mind is necessarily willing. That is presumably the sort of violence you're referring to. There's also the part where a penis could do a young boy harm. Should we ban them from seeing them? Blindfold them when they use a toilet?
Secondly, there are children who live in nudist colonies. They have seen penises and vulvas (that would be the actual name of a woman's external genitalia, btw -- the vagina is internal and not generally seen without a speculum). Other people allow nudity in the privacy of their own homes. There are also any number of cultures that have different norms about clothing than the most commonly encountered cultures. Somehow all of these kids have survived to adulthood and remained psychologically sound. For that matter, clothing is a rather recent development in the whole of human history. And none of that even addresses the reproductive organs of non-humans. Should we ban children from zoos? They might see penises being used there, both for reproduction and otherwise. Most primates masturbate. (If we want to discuss penises capable of harm in this part too, cats have literal barbs on theirs that rip the vagina on removal. I suppose I would support female kittens not having to know about that before they have to.)
A penis will only be seen by a child as something dangerous if the child is taught that by someone. Same with my example above regarding dangerous vaginas. Past that, most kids anywhere know that penises and vulvas exist, even if they've never seen one or don't know the precise anatomical term. Kids talk to each other -- my daughter asked me about penises (in rather childish terminology) when she was 4. She said that one of the boys in her preschool told her about it. She survived that without any harm, and she even made it through learning about anatomy after that question. She's even managed to survive having flipped through most of my artistic anatomy books. (She's 8 now, and alternately thinks naked people are gross and/or hilarious, but only if they're naked in an unexpected place. The people in the anatomy books aren't interesting to her anymore because they're supposed to be naked.)
Here is a partial list of things belonging to or created by humans (or accessible because of other humans) that are more dangerous than seeing a penis: fists, feet, teeth, fingernails, hands, heavy objects that might be dropped on a body part, falling off of something, stairs, escalators, motorized vehicles, words, furniture, electricity... I could seriously do this all day. Most of those things cause more harm to kids on the whole than actual penises do. I mean, not the escalators, but I would bet far more children are hurt by cars.
To sum up, genitalia is only a source of danger to kids if a) someone teaches them that it is or b) the genitalia in question belongs to a pedophile. The mere sight of genitalia poses no harm to anyone unless they've been taught to think it's harmful.
Is this really true though? Every once in awhile the what are you working on thread devolves into nothing but penises. Normal penises, tank penises, massive penises on small dragons, helicopter penises, veiny penises, smooth penises, penises on feminine looking men, large penises on manly men. Lots of them.
If I'm being honest about those threads, I think they're pretty stupid and immature, but everyone seems to have a good time, I can't imagine too many reports coming in.
But I also have no idea of the inner workings or report stats, which is why I'm asking. The only thing I've ever seen that seemed to cause polycount a hangup was the seemingly transgendered male in very suggestive female poses.
And pancakes, I found you post sort of offensive, but mostly just sad. I think iconoclast put it best when he was talking about his daughter going through his anatomy books and recognizing context. It depends on how you teach kids about it. And teaching a child that a penis will hurt them is incredibly unhealthy.
Mines dangerous if I start swinging it around. No TKO for you!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wlf0PBO1ed0
To be fair...
I think some r under-estimating the "potential" psychological trauma involved with forced penetration? Something the vagina doesn't impose. Furthermore...
I have read that males with partners who have been violently raped who voluntarily are "penetrated" themselves with a phallic substitute develop empathy with regards to traumatic penetration.
Thankfully most artists need only imagine.
A nice face and body in general will do the trick. Girls are not as visuals as us guys. Plus, the big crotch thing is really a porn stereotype, I never met a girl that want a guy with a big crotch, it just says "painful sex" to them. Haha.
Happy days.
I found it interesting to read a few posts in this thread. To see the different perspectives here on polycount.
I understand it has a lot to do with where the viewers are located in the world. -Along with the
religious background they have & how women are treated in their localized society at the time.
This idea of sexiness seems to differ over time, or every couple generations. Some generations becoming
desensitized. While, others become increasingly sensitive.
When asking on a international public forum... there will never be a definitive answer on the subject. Ever.
All you'll get is a headache trying to please everyone.
Normally I don't care, but in this case I find it worth noting that I'm female. Seems like it's of some level of relevance given the topic.
No, there is not any underestimation happening here. It has nothing to do with penetration in unto itself (though I'll also take an excuse to note that men can be assaulted by other men). It has to do with someone else using sex as a means of controlling your body and removing your choice. Oral sex is also sometimes used in rapes. That's also still traumatizing and has nothing to do with penetration either.
As to voluntary penetration by partners, if that works for someone, fine. But it isn't at all relevant for anyone I've ever spoken to, I've never seen it mentioned in any research or other scholarly publications, and it isn't going to demonstrate the terror and loss of control in the slightest. There's simply no possible way that any voluntary act is going to impart the experience of sexual assault.
Rape is about sex the same way that being beaten is about baseball bats. It's the weapon used, but neither has a primary purpose as a weapon. More importantly, neither weapon is the focus of the act in question. Both are about using something to demonstrate some sort of dominance or control over the victim.
If you'd rather have something more directly on topic, I'll highlight some posts from The Hawkeye Initiative since I didn't see it in my skimming of the thread. They redraw the poses of female superheroes with male characters (it was originally just Hawkeye, hence the name). It's full of point-making and sometimes a scantily-clad (and very hairy) Wolverine.
^^^I have no problem with this. What I do have a problem with is Lady Death's dislocated head and then Hawkeye's head is dislocated too.
My daughter (22 months old, for reference) is obsessed with "willies" at the moment. whether it's mine when we're in the bath, or the one on my anatomy statue, or in any anatomy books, she points and shouts "WILLIE!".
i guess it's just a natural stage they go through, but we've (my girlfriend and i) taken it as an opportunity to learn:
"does Tyria have a willie?"
"no"
"who does?"
"daddy"
"does mummy?"
"no".
and then she says "good girl" and runs away. heh... kids.
anyway, as for this whole thing turning into a discussion about rape, rape culture, and how stupidly different women are portrayed than men in media...
let's just take a moment to remember than men can and are raped by women, and it is reported far less frequently than male on female rape due to an even more overwhelming shame culture in men. note: i'm not saying that men being raped is worse than women being raped, i just don't want to see everything become completely one sided here. rape is terrible regardless of its form or victim.
and as for the portrayal (regarding specifically here, the hawkeye initiative), just remember that while women are often posed provocatively or "sexily"... that men are often posed in the equal opposite way:
women are posed or drawn to accentuate all of their womanly attributes, men are posed or drawn to accentuate all of the "manly qualities" they possess.
example:
since everyone loves pulling apart the old avengers poster, i'll use that one.
Sure, black widow is posed to show of that ass, those curves, that womanly figure... the biggest criticism there is "why overly sexualize her", right? well, it's easy to see it that way, and it probably was done intentionally; men love the eye candy, simples.
But what about every guy there? Thor and Cap' standing strong, and tall, with a wide manly stance, the very essence of lady boner. Hawkeye there with his arms tensed, biceps bulging. the look on Thor's face... stern, unwavering, but still somehow kind and compassionate. It's almost as if these characters are drawn in a way that appeals to the women in the crowd just as much as the men!
i guess what i'm getting at, is that while certianly women are drawn or posed in overtly sexual ways, it's just very obvious. men are drawn or posed similarly in almost every case, it's just that women are turned on in a more complex manner than simply having an ass on display, and so it's not as immediately obvious. men are drawn in a way that makes other men want to be them, and women to desire them.
Lol, I love how you follow up that mature and insightful post with a penis tank =P
In fact while I was attending a course Psychology in Game Design in my masters degree ( Game Technologies) I chose exact same subject as my term project and made a research proposal and presentation for it.
Here are the presentation and proposal, defining problems and offering solutions in a scientific perspective.
Any kind of critic and opinion is welcomed by the way. I have already passed the course but this question is something I am always interested in and find a solution to.
https://www.dropbox.com/home/Research
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/9dxe397ug3p7qyk/AACrAsOjEx6e4AbraoSsoZk0a
who is your audience?
Video topic is kinda NSFW.
[ame="
Are you sure? That strikes me as a sort of an unnatural response. Wanting to see a morbidly obese character is like wanting to see a character with an exceptionally lazy eye. Do you want to see an obese character so that you can laugh at him, pity him, or maybe root for him to stay just the way he is, or root for him to lose the weight?
I just don't believe you're being honest with yourself. It sounds cool to say you want to see a morbidly obese character. But I think you say that just as an intellectual exercise.
Yes that is right, you-know-who-she-is
But I think differently then you-know-who-she-is when it comes to offer a different type of heroine. I advised some different point at the end of both ppt. presentation and proposal, that are being using history as a reference point for "real" heroines who actually existed.
If you ( and of course everyone else
Oh thanks for reading and replying by the way
gotta agree ^^
The strange thing about your comment here, is that i have seen metrics for obese
character choices in mmo's. This is hard data pulled straight from the character create and despite the popular comment that people would LOVE to play as a huge fat person, or someone super deformed, the bottom line is the majority of players simply do not.
So no matter how often I hear this - that data always jumps to mind. I think most people who think this way like to have the CHOICE but would never actually play as that character.
Now try approaching the $$$$ man who is funding the development of your game and convince them that you need more manpower or time to expand your character create to include fat / obese versions / sliders to your character create when they now have access to data that proves most people wont play as them. Total waste of time / resources that could be use elsewhere......
......like booby physics. :thumbup:
I don't know, I feel like that's a bit of a cop out.
I mean I think just about everyone would agree that, for a developed adult, there is no such thing as 'too sexy'.
You could make a character the craziest wildest fantasy possible, and for an adult who is into that, great, fine, nobody cares what you do in your own home.
But this conversation seems more geared towards mainstream games, games that enter the public consciousness, and are played by NON-Developed adults.
So in that case, the conversation is more about 'what is too much to feed to kids, or teens, who don't understand the impact that these things have on their sexuality/personal development?' 'At what point does a game begin to re-enforce gender-negative, either male or female, traits, in the kids who play it?'
This isn't an opinion post, its a question post. Im not saying 'games with sexuality hurts kids', I'm asking 'where, if anywhere, is the line for you?'
2. this character was fucking amazing:
and yes, that's a real, in-game purchasable aesthetic.
[ame="
BUT SO WAS EVERY CHARACTER IN THAT GAME! She wasn't amazing because she was obese. She was amazing because of the writing and the voice talent!
Don't tell me you want to see an obese character when what you really want to see is a well written and performed one!
In other words, in just that short paragraph above it's possible to see why this issue often devolves into the most vicious of flame-wars online because people are largely ignorant of, not interested in, or don't put much stock in the importance of historical context and significance of (traditional) gender roles, especially when it doesn't serve their agendas (that's not a dig at you by the way, but a general observation on how gender is used for self-serving purposes by a very vocal minority, undermining the entire valid and valuable discussion).
-The main point of my post was to move the topic on from the highly flammable rape/sexual abuse, since that topic always ends up on fire on the internet.-
Some people find larger people attractive or sexy. A society defines what a majority class as 'sexy' but that doesn't mean there aren't minorities with different opinions.
This topic is about "how sexy is too sexy", yet sexy is a variable.
The size and shape of a character shouldn't matter as long as it fits the intended content/story/purpose.
I have never thought that people would try to look at it that way. I always thought the quite opposite when these three examples are given, especially Joan and Jingu.
Now you made me curious mate. If you would allow me can I ask you to imagine a female character that would not get in to these tropes ? It could be from history or some character you made up at the moment. I am really curious now. Oh, by the way sorry if that sounds too... psychiatric
But thanks for sharing this point of view mate. I'll keep it in my mind for future chances of further delving into that subject.
I created an obese and old character once for Star Wars Galaxies, it was unbelievable the verbal abuse my character got form other players everyday, just because he looked old and fat. Never understood why people go through the trouble of insulting a toon :-/
This is precisely why that whole trope witch hunt is so annoying. If you try hard enough you will find a trope EVERYWHERE.
Not saying that there aren't cases of obvious ones. But what's offensive is highly subjective.
I've seen quite a few times someone bring up some female game character as a great example independent heroine,
and then some other "trope hunter" would say that it's still a "male fantasy" since it's woman doing same stuff that men do.
If this doesn't show how subjective the whole issue is, I don't know what else can.
Exactly. Trope hunting is psuedo-intellectual exercise with a 100% basis in subjectivity. If you like a musician, you say they are innovative. If you hate them, you say they are a hack. If you like a character, you say they're special. If you don't like them, you say they are a 1 dimensional trope.
Just like real people. If you hate an entire country you can say "just bomb them all". If you love your best friend, or girlfriend or whatever, then every little thing they do becomes special. The way they smile or laugh, even though millions of other people have the exact same smile and laugh.