Two different flavors of prudes.
Mod Note:
Noting sexism is not being a prude.
And, for insulting people, you're out of this discussion.
Two different flavors of prudes.
Well, yes, but you give off the vibe of someone super cool to hang out with, so no one should be surprised. <3All I can say is that I appreciate all of the kickass ladies and theydies and sundry who have helped to make this hobby WAY more comfortable for the non-masculine than it was at its inception and an uncomfortably, unacceptably long time thereafter.
It's gotten to the point where most of my new recruits are female-identifying.
For me, context is important. I like the David Martin painting as well. If I owned a 1973 Chevrolet Van I'd want Martin's picture painted on the side of it. Or maybe a unicorn flying through space. I'm a multifaceted man with depth after all. Is it something I'd leave on the coffee table where guests might see it? No.
One of the many problems with these discussions is any one of us can point out the merits of a work of art someone else approves of. Me, personally, I think there's a place for cheesecake in fantasy art, even in D&D, but that doesn't mean I want to see it everywhere and there's a limit to how cakey I think is appropriate for most fantasy games. The key I think is not to look at individual paintings, miniatures, or other depictions but to look at it in the aggregate.
I think things have improved quite a bit over the last forty years. I paint a lot of minatures, and it wasn't that long ago where I had a hard time finding appropriate miniatures for women characters in the D&D games I was running. If you shop at some place like Reaper Miniatures, you'll find a lot of miniatures of women ranging from scantily clad fetish nuns all the way to fully armored and even inbetween. I've got a great dwarf woman miniature wearing plate and showing an excellent decolletage. Practical? Hell no. But the woman I painted it for loved it for her character.
As a wee MGibster, we didn't have any girls in our group. We didn't have girls in our group until were were in our early twenties. And even then we didn't have girls because they were women at that point. My particular group didn't include some of the more egregious examples of misogyny I've read about in other groups, but we had our share of bad jokes and we treated NPCs as sex objects and victims more often than we should have. Odds are good if we had a real live girl who actually wanted to play AD&D with us a lot of what we had at the table wouldn't have been there. I don't want to brag, but I was a reasonably good looking beholder in my younger days, and even then I knew you couldn't behave like a pig if you wanted to spend any time around girls. (Now we can discuss the trope of women as a civilizing force.)Also the homosocial atmosphere. Focusing in on guys and cracking jokes about women and portraying women in games to be sex objects, victims, or villains for the most part... And the nasty attitudes around tables and at conventions.
I will say this is an area I've seen considerable improvement on in gaming circles. It used to be there was always some smelly guy, possible named Ogre, who would hang out at the hobby shop. This guy was to hygiene as Snarf is to brevity. A few months ago I ran into an Ogre at my local game shop and it was the first time I had seen one in a long, long while. I've also noticed the number of visible butt cracks when down about ten years ago. My wife used to joke with me that she didn't want to go into the game store for fear of witnessing an errant butt crack, but (ha ha), you hardly see them anymore.Plus the infamous "Unwashed Masses" issue that is historically more likely to drive women away from gaming rather than guys.
So, -so-, true, Bestie! I've been at tables where the act cleaned up -fast-. The "Civilizing Force" of women is definitely a thing that -can- exist in a man-dominated space.As a wee MGibster, we didn't have any girls in our group. We didn't have girls in our group until were were in our early twenties. And even then we didn't have girls because they were women at that point. My particular group didn't include some of the more egregious examples of misogyny I've read about in other groups, but we had our share of bad jokes and we treated NPCs as sex objects and victims more often than we should have. Odds are good if we had a real live girl who actually wanted to play AD&D with us a lot of what we had at the table wouldn't have been there. I don't want to brag, but I was a reasonably good looking beholder in my younger days, and even then I knew you couldn't behave like a pig if you wanted to spend any time around girls. (Now we can discuss the trope of women as a civilizing force.)
Oh, for sure. It's -way- less common, now, than it used to be. There's also a generally stronger push on hygiene in general, these days.I will say this is an area I've seen considerable improvement on in gaming circles. It used to be there was always some smelly guy, possible named Ogre, who would hang out at the hobby shop. This guy was to hygiene as Snarf is to brevity. A few months ago I ran into an Ogre at my local game shop and it was the first time I had seen one in a long, long while. I've also noticed the number of visible butt cracks when down about ten years ago. My wife used to joke with me that she didn't want to go into the game store for fear of witnessing an errant butt crack, but (ha ha), you hardly see them anymore.
Unrelated, but excellent taste in VTubers there!
Nobody is judging this art for the aggregate. This art is fine. I’d even say I quite like it. But, if most of the art of women in D&D books were still of its ilk, that would be extremely off-putting, even if each individual piece was of excellent quality. Nobody is docking points from their assessment of any particular artwork. They’re saying, all the art of women within the hobby being sexualized sure makes it feel uncomfortable to be a women around people who are into the hobby.Well, I don't know. I mean I have problem with people raising the issue of the aggregate. But I also wouldn't want to judge one work because of an aggregate. I mean if someone manages to make a very impressive piece of art, I don't think that work should lose points because other people operating in that genre are doing too much beefcake for your liking. We should take each work on its own. Also this is a notable example, because if you just read the framing in the text of the article (particularly the part about it being soft core), and you haven't seen the image, you'd be very surprised by how well constructed and subdued it actually is. And sometimes there is a place for this stuff. Some artists just do that sort of thing well. They mention Caldwell and while his works are revealing they are also good (and for many settings it seemed appropriate). Look at Ravenloft. There is clearly a Hammer Film connection there, and Caldwell art helps to emphasize that (and Ravenloft was never overly sexual in the style of something like Vampire, but it needed some amount of sensuality to capture the gothic themes).