D&D 5E Inappropriate breasts on female monsters

[Desdichado]

Nope. We've had threads on sexism, as it applies to gaming. Morrus even had a series of videos with interviews on the topic not too long ago. My comment is within bounds on that basis.

In that case, I'll respond that I think the notion of casual sexism as it relates to "dragonboobs" is ridiculous and insulting. When in our culture the icons of feminism, such as Beyonce, revel and even gloat about their sexuality, it makes it absurd, counter-productive and paradoxical to simultaneously insist that in our fantasy art, women need the equivalent of a fantasy hijab because God forbid we think of them as sexy.

Feminism has long had a very strong vibe of wanting to have it's cake and eat it too, and now that it can't reasonably make a case anymore that it's fighting for real injustices, it's desperately trying to make stuff up to be outraged about in an attempt to stay relevant by creating fake outrage. This is at the core of the circus-like antics of the SFWA with their ridiculous fake outrage about Mike Resnick and Barry Malzburg, it's at the heart of #gamergate and the desperate attempts of the gaming journalist industry to salvage a shred of their credibility and relevance (too late for both) and it's at the heart of internet debates about dragonboobs and their appropriateness.

 

[mcbobbo]

The result is still something that should be corrected if at all possible, once you realize the problem.
...
It kind of amounts to, "Since I am not a mover and shaker on the large scale, I can be a jerk!"

Is always, or could sometimes be?

And what is more 'jerkish', boobs on dragonborn or armchair debates on feminism? I am certainly no expert on the topic, and I haven't seen anyone here claim otherwise.

Point being, culture is a thing. It's a huge, monstrous thing that typically changes slowly and with much gnashing of teeth. Dragonboobs do not seem to be an important part of that thing, and are likely just a reflection of it.

 

[Grainger]

In that case, I'll respond that I think the notion of casual sexism as it relates to "dragonboobs" is ridiculous and insulting. When in our culture the icons of feminism, such as Beyonce, revel and even gloat about their sexuality, it makes it absurd, counter-productive and paradoxical to simultaneously insist that in our fantasy art, women need the equivalent of a fantasy hijab because God forbid we think of them as sexy.

Feminism has long had a very strong vibe of wanting to have it's cake and eat it too, and now that it can't reasonably make a case anymore that it's fighting for real injustices, it's desperately trying to make stuff up to be outraged about in an attempt to stay relevant by creating fake outrage. This is at the core of the circus-like antics of the SFWA with their ridiculous fake outrage about Mike Resnick and Barry Malzburg, it's at the heart of #gamergate and the desperate attempts of the gaming journalist industry to salvage a shred of their credibility and relevance (too late for both) and it's at the heart of internet debates about dragonboobs and their appropriateness.

You seem to be characterising everyone on one "side" of the issue as a monolithic group with a desperate agenda. I appear to be on the "side" you are criticising, in as much as I think it's worth examining this sort of issue, and yet I haven't heard of most of the stuff in your post, let alone got on board with some agenda/masterplan.

I still think representation of women in gaming bears scrutiny and thought. Just because other media arguably takes it further, it doesn't mean as gamers we can't look at what's going on in our own backyard, as the saying goes. Taking your argument to its logical conclusion, we should only ever be bothered about, or examine, the most extreme examples of a phenomenon.

 

[Alzrius]

The road to heck is paved with good intentions. It is possible to bring a wrongness into the world, even when acting in good faith - you can make a mistake, you can not fully consider the ramifications of your actions, and so forth. The result is still something that should be corrected if at all possible, once you realize the problem.

If the "wrongness" is that you've created some art, fiction, or media that some people find distressing, then I disagree that there's any moral impetus to necessarily "correct it if at all possible." Simply put, while taking steps to correct such distress is indeed a virtuous action, it's above and beyond the call of moral duty - you are not acting immorally if someone is upset by the media you've created, and you elect not to change it to appease their sensibilities.

Everything from Elvis's hips to comic depictions of the Prophet Mohammed (Praise Be Upon Him) have elicited outrage from some segment of the population that was deeply offended. That doesn't mean that these were things that needed to be "corrected."

You may try to make the argument that since the books do not really influence culture at large, there's no point in worrying about it in gaming books. But, I think that's a cop-out. It kind of amounts to, "Since I am not a mover and shaker on the large scale, I can be a jerk!"

I disagree that it's a cop-out. It's not being a jerk to elect not to change your work to soothe the outrage of those who find it offensive.

 

[Elf Witch]

In that case, I'll respond that I think the notion of casual sexism as it relates to "dragonboobs" is ridiculous and insulting. When in our culture the icons of feminism, such as Beyonce, revel and even gloat about their sexuality, it makes it absurd, counter-productive and paradoxical to simultaneously insist that in our fantasy art, women need the equivalent of a fantasy hijab because God forbid we think of them as sexy.

Feminism has long had a very strong vibe of wanting to have it's cake and eat it too, and now that it can't reasonably make a case anymore that it's fighting for real injustices, it's desperately trying to make stuff up to be outraged about in an attempt to stay relevant by creating fake outrage. This is at the core of the circus-like antics of the SFWA with their ridiculous fake outrage about Mike Resnick and Barry Malzburg, it's at the heart of #gamergate and the desperate attempts of the gaming journalist industry to salvage a shred of their credibility and relevance (too late for both) and it's at the heart of internet debates about dragonboobs and their appropriateness.

Sigh way to just completely trivialize feminism. Take looking sexy yes Beyonce uses her looks and her femininity as tools as well as her voice to get ahead in the music industry she is choosing to do that. And yes feminism is okay with that the issue we have as feminists is when it become required that all female singers have to be sexy and strut themselves to be successful.

As a female gamer I don't have an issue with some sexy hot female characters as long as they are dressed in a way that a hot male character would be dressed. But I hate it when all of them are dressed like porn adventurers. It is the same with superheros in comics why do the women have to be dressed without pants? Is there anything more stupid looking than Black Canary in her fishnet stockings leather jacket high heels and leotard. And why do all of them have double D boobs? Sure I expect them to be buff and fit but you know boob size has nothing to do with that.

My issue with dragonboobs has nothing to do with feminism or sexism I simply prefer them not be so human in nature because that is more interesting to me.

As for the the thing with SFWA I have read a lot of people sides on this and I think in some ways there was an over reaction but I also think the original authors were insensitive as well a lot of blame to go around.

As for your comment about feminism not having any real injustice left to fight well it is impossible to get into that here with the restrictions of discussing politics.

 

[gamerprinter]

I've included nipples on an illustration of a dragon before, but there was nothing to indicate whether they belonged to a male or female dragon - so they weren't dragon boobs per se - rather, just a curiosity more than anything else (and just nipples). It was an artistic choice and had nothing to do with sexism. Here's the illustration I did, with the nipples...

 

[Incenjucar]

I think a fair way to do things is to make only those creatures with human-like male chests have human-like female chests.

Thri-kreen, for example, are generally not depicted with pectorals, so there's no expectation for thri-kreen women to have a chest like a human woman. Minotaurs, on the other hand, are basically bull-headed humans, so drawing them more like a human makes sense.

Personally, I would launch a book with the very-human dragonborn beside very-lizardy lizardfolk.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

"These are not breasts: they're poisons sacs."

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Feminism has long had a very strong vibe of wanting to have it's cake and eat it too, and now that it can't reasonably make a case anymore that it's fighting for real injustices, it's desperately trying to make stuff up to be outraged about in an attempt to stay relevant by creating fake outrage.

OMG, I really can't believe you just said that. So is it your opinion that anytime any woman says something is sexist they are just "desperately trying to make stuff up to be outraged about in an attempt to stay relevant" or is this based on something I missed? Because it comes off both insulting, Misogynistic, AND Dismissive of half the opions in the world...

please tell me when I want the only 4e race in the PHB that gets a + str to appear female so I can make str based female characters with it... what is the cake in the anology? what is it?

please tell me why Any of this is about remaining relevant?

This is at the core of the circus-like antics of the SFWA with their ridiculous fake outrage about Mike Resnick and Barry Malzburg, it's at the heart of #gamergate and the desperate attempts of the gaming journalist industry to salvage a shred of their credibility and relevance (too late for both) and it's at the heart of internet debates about dragonboobs and their appropriateness.

I thought #gamergate would fall under the politics off topic, but if I was wrong I will let you know why I disagree with this too, but I really don't want to get that derailed...

 

[I'm A Banana]

The suspension of disbelief is often helped by the small details that fit in with our notions of reality. I don't have to hand wave everything because I've hand waved one thing. I am coming to really hate the argument "If you can accept this fantastic thing, you should be able to accept that one too."

I'd generally agree, but there's a playability threshold for any of this. "I have to play a character with an alien anatomy" is a pretty high playability threshold.

But I get it, an argument from the meta-game isn't going to convince anyone who gets hung up on the fiction of it. So I could also put it this way for the "logic!" crowd:

Dragonborn are, in 5e myth, "shaped by draconic gods or the dragons themselves." They hatched fully-formed from dragon eggs as divinely created magical beings.

Also, they have genders and apparently breed true (first words in the dragonborn entry in the PHB: Her. Father.).

They didn't evolve. They didn't arise from lizards or dragons or dinosaurs or what-have-you. They were artificially created. The same is actually true in 4e lore of minotaurs and shardminds -- created, artificial beings.

This changes the convo from: "gems don't have boobs" to "Why would gem creatures choose to have a gender identity shared with other humanoids?" or "Why would dragon-gods give their creations mammaries?"

That's a question you answer mythically. Like, maybe shardminds take a "Hedwig" approach to gender: they were originally all one creature, and their different gender identities are things that they regard as flaws, signs of a fallen people, broken in half. This fits the myth of their creation, as bits of a shattered gate. A shardmind adopts the form and identity of a human female (or feels like this is the natural expression of her form) because she sees in that division an acknowledgement of a great tragedy, a division where none need exist.

For dragonborn, the idea behind mammaries might be some of the same benefits real humans get from them: close family bonds and strong ties between mothers and children. The idea of dragonborn clans reinforces this -- heck, maybe dragonborn clans are matrilineal? -- by emphasizing family relationships. If you wanted your artificial race to have strong family ties to each other, functional breasts are a good way to do that.

For minotaurs, if you're making a creature bipedal and making them mammalian, udders don't make much biological sense. Upright postures drive mammaries to be carried higher, and don't produce the racks of six or eight that we see in the quadruped world.

In-universe, it's perfectly sensible.

And if you want to talk about why it must be that way in-universe, we're back in the meta-game, and "because a lot of people like to play characters that are anatomically relatable" pops up. I mean, why do elves and dwarves have breasts, if you really want to press it.