D&D 5E Should the next edition of D&D promote more equality?

Libramarian said:

Could you explain to me what is morally wrong in your opinion about the cover of Savant & Sorcerer there? It's not to my taste (I find it ludicrously hypersexualized) but I'm struggling to find anything sexist or demeaning about it. She doesn't need to be dressed for battle or strenuous travel within the context of that image, and she's not portrayed as submissive or as a passive receptacle, if anything she is the dominant figure (the viewpoint is from beneath her, the men around her are sort of bowing to her).

Click to expand...

I find nothing "morally" offensive about that picture (other pieces of art featured in Exalted do, however, anger me profoundly). It isn't particularly sexist either (it's exploitative, yes, but the character portrayed isn't debased or dominated by a male character). What it is, is dumb. The men surrounding her are all clad in armour, and she is striding forward wearing less clothes than a dancer at the Carnival in Rio.

If this was set in a tropical clime, and the men were all bare-chested and wearing loincloth or something like that, I'd have less of a problem with the "basic" design of her attire, but still...

Seriously, a pair of pants or an actual dress wouldn't make her any less formidable and would actually provide some (albeit mediocre, but still) protection.

Also, the angle of that picture is strictly used to showcase her... nether region.

Libramarian said:

Could you explain to me what is morally wrong in your opinion about the cover of Savant & Sorcerer there? It's not to my taste (I find it ludicrously hypersexualized) but I'm struggling to find anything sexist or demeaning about it. She doesn't need to be dressed for battle or strenuous travel within the context of that image, and she's not portrayed as submissive or as a passive receptacle, if anything she is the dominant figure (the viewpoint is from beneath her, the men around her are sort of bowing to her).

Click to expand...

:blink:

I can't...I mean...WHO WEARS THAT? It looks uncomfortable as heck, cold, and is apparently sprayed on. What's her motivation? Why is she wearing that...that...whatever the hell it is? (Incidentally, these images bother me not because they show skin, but because the attire is stupid. Why would you want to be the one always shown wearing useless "clothing"?)

And how do her stockings stay up?

Anyways, because This Thread is Useless Without Pics, here's one that's very similar, but with a guy. This doesn't look silly at all, right?



Not realistic, you say? Here ya' go, lets get a photo of this guy from that down-low angle!


(And for realism AND remaining true to the spirit of the image, check this out! Just take the line breaks out of the address EDIT: OK, it seems to be linking whether I insert funny characters or link breaks, but at least it's not displaying the page, so just clicky the linky. It's technically SFW, I think, but I'll err on the side of caution anyways. I might buy this for me someday, if I want my wife to die of laughter.)
https://bodyaware.com/product

/view/no-touch-leather-cod-piece-c017 )

I told my mom they wouldn't put my face in those ads...

(She worries.)

Nellisir said:

(And for realism AND remaining true to the spirit of the image, check this out! Just take the line breaks out of the address EDIT: OK, it seems to be linking whether I insert funny characters or link breaks, but at least it's not displaying the page, so just clicky the linky. It's technically SFW, I think, but I'll err on the side of caution anyways. I might buy this for me someday, if I want my wife to die of laughter.)
https://bodyaware.com/product

/view/no-touch-leather-cod-piece-c017 )

Click to expand...

Yummy. All the men in D&D should totally be wearing that for armor. Maybe I'll allow some +5 black leather Nipple Tassels of Protection, just to make sure they are properly protected.

TanithT said:

Are you saying that women are bisexual, but men aren't?

You seem to be saying that human nature is to be bisexual

Click to expand...

Well, no, that's not what he's saying, but this entire thread seems to be "people that say [this] must think [that]," which is why I'm staying out of it. I'm not a fan of the art from early in the thread (belly buttons, little clothing, etc.), but I'm so not about to get into a "discussion" with the overly-aggressive posters in this thread.

It's about time for it to come to a close, in my opinion. EN World can't really sustain long conversations on anything gender-related. Which is a shame, because it handles everything else so well. As always, play what you like

TanithT said:

Wat. Srsly. Are you saying that women are bisexual, but men aren't?

Click to expand...

No, he's saying something even sillier: that women are either completely asexual or are lesbians, and men are heterosexual but homophobic. That's why his post about "sexy people" really only talks about sexy ladies (women want to be them! men want to do them!) but somehow manages to completely omit any discussion of sexy gentlemen. If women aren't interested in sexy gentlemen, then either they're asexual or they're lesbians (i.e. only interested in sexy ladies). The men, curiously, do not want to be sexy gentlemen or imagine being sexy gentlemen; I can't think of any explanation for this except that the men are apparently both heterosexual (not wanting to 'be around' the sexy gentlemen) and pretty homophobic (not even wanting to be around, or imagine being, sexy gentlemen).

At least, that's how the surface logic breaks down. The underlying logic in these arguments, usually, boils down to "I'm a straight dude, I don't like looking at other dudes, I do like looking at ladies, therefore gaming should cater to my libido and the rest of you can jump off a pier." After all, if fair is fair, then the guy who enjoys looking at a 3D holocover of Loviatar should shrug and turn the page when the endplate shows a half-elf fighter based on a Tom of Finland drawing, on the grounds that maybe it doesn't turn his crank, but it's a well-done piece art and probably somebody likes looking at it.

JamesonCourage, it's one thing to stay out of a thread; it's yet another thing to suggest that people drop personal remarks; but it's pretty obnoxious to come in and post on a thread to say "I don't like this discussion and I think the mods should shut you all up." Sheez.

mythago said:

JamesonCourage, it's one thing to stay out of a thread; it's yet another thing to suggest that people drop personal remarks; but it's pretty obnoxious to come in and post on a thread to say "I don't like this discussion and I think the mods should shut you all up." Sheez.

Click to expand...

I'm all for civil discussion, but I just don't see it happening in this thread anymore outside of a couple of posters.

Nellisir said:

Anyways, because This Thread is Useless Without Pics, here's one that's very similar, but with a guy. This doesn't look silly at all, right?
*img*

Click to expand...

It's silly and it missed the point because men and women are sexualized differently.

These are hypersexualized males.


But we're also improperly comparing imagery. You can't compare say, Seoni to a Paladin(even Seela), the basics of their profession put different demands on their apparel. It doesn't matter if a wizard wears a robe or a bikini. It does matter if a Paladin wears full plate or a bikini. The further you move from heavily armored classes, the more likely you'll find women in revealing outfits.

As an aside: Asian MMORPG depictions DO NOT COUNT because they are designed and targeted at a non-Western audience, and even among them, it's not unreasonable to find:

The Choice said:

All of those things? They aren't censorship, they aren't about modesty. It's not a temperance movement for RPGs or games in general. It's about being a !#$&* human being that recognizes the existence of other human beings with feelings around us. None of the people who have posted in this thread are trying to shame women into covering up, either in real life or in the pages of RPG game books. What I'm trying to articulate is that in the context of a dungeon exploration adventure game where danger lurks around every corner, female characters should wear appropriate protective gear.

Click to expand...

All the time? Like, even in their wizard study, they cannot wear comfy clothing like silk robes, as do their male counterparts? How about in an urban setting, in a social gathering of nobility and court intrigue. Is it okay for women to be...women, then? I guess so long as they're flat chested and wearing super baggy shirts, they'll be acceptable. I wonder how well-endowed women would feel if you told them they can't wear tight clothes in the summer time. Maybe I went to sleep last night and woke up in Dubai or something ..//scratches head

I hope you get my point. Conan wore a loincloth in most of the art that portrays him. I guess we should tell him to wear plate armor too, to avoid offending our sensibilities. Oh wait....does he care who he offends? You simply cannot do anything in this life without offending someone, somewhere.

Let people be people, men, women, it's all good. People like looking at alluring photos and art, I don't see why D&D art should be held to some different standard. The only criteria should be that the art is good, and relevant. Would you draw a succubus wearing plate armor? Or some scantily clad outfit. How about slaves, who cannot afford clothing? I guess we can't depict those, either. Sirens? Nope, can't have them. Mermaids, gods no, that would be too scandalous for our children's precious eyes.

I could go on, but it's late, and I've made my point.