Alternative: Girls (females) in D&D/ Roleplaying

[Krensky]

I took my rant about the original OP 'off campus' for a blog post, as I 'disagreed' with the way the other OP had been seeking to link 'Storytelling games' and other 'ungodly' activities to 'girl gamers'.

Having said my piece on that I wasn't sure where I'd draw any exact 'lines' on images, because it's so much to do with context. On reconsidering the images I referred to at the time, I've kind of worked out/ working out my own idea of what I consider OK. Here are three fantasy images - do you 'guys' see a distinction between any of them?

The first one is the better executed of the three (somewhat subjective, I'll explain later) and, while very mildly titillating, fits with the theme of the title and isn't objectify or offensive. Now, the book as a whole might be, but I haven't read it. Since it's a humor book it gets the benefit of the doubt that the theme of the piece works with the cover. The second strikes me as an add for a low rent porn site. It's not offensive, but is all about the sex and big cartoon breasts. The third, is either the least well executed or the most depending on the artists' intended style and intent of the piece. It's not offensive or objectify.

 

[Dausuul]

Actually, that's not entirely true. She didn't have any problem lining up publishing writing as Joane Rowling, but Bloomburg, her publisher, thought that the percieved target audience, i.e., young boys, might be leery of reading a book written by a woman.

So actually your example doesn't really prove what you think it proves at all.

In other words, it's short for "I made up these initials so my potential readers won't know I'm a woman."

 

[Glade Riven]

As an artist, the only time I have recieved the complaint "she needs bigger boobs" is from women. Other artist freinds that I've talked to about drawing women is that most women prefer to be drawn with certaint things accentuated, even if they are extremely comfortable with their own body. Many women artists that I've met that are interested in the genre themselves create cheesecake and beefcake artwork. Most of cheesecake shows fit, empowered women. The best example of this is the fantasy painter Julie Bell.

My character Robin Goodfellow is drawn with thick-heeled boots because she has a complex about being short. She has curves because it is a visual identifier that she's not a pre-teen or early teen. Typically, she has a "Deer caught in the Headlights" look with her eyes as part of her creepy-cheerful personality. The closest she can get to looking seductive ends up slightly awkward because of it.

As a guy, this is one of those things where I can't win for losing. So I'll draw what I want, I'll draw what the client wants (within reason - there are things that I refuse to draw), and if someone decides to be offended by it, I shrug it off.

 

[Dausuul]

My character Robin Goodfellow is drawn with thick-heeled boots because she has a complex about being short. She has curves because it is a visual identifier that she's not a pre-teen or early teen. Typically, she has a "Deer caught in the Headlights" look with her eyes as part of her creepy-cheerful personality. The closest she can get to looking seductive ends up slightly awkward because of it.

I don't see anything wrong with either of those pictures. There's nothing wrong with portraying attractive women! And there's nothing wrong with portraying them in revealing garb and a sexy pose if it's appropriate in context.

The problem comes up when a woman with no earthly reason to dress or pose seductively is shown doing so anyhow. It's when I see supposedly professional adventurers, engaged in their professional line of work, who are dressed in steel bustiers, spike heels, and G-strings, and posed with their hips cocked and a "come-hither" look on their faces. That's when I have an issue with it.

As to Seoni... well, her clothing is certainly sexualized. Good luck wearing that in a dungeon! Pose-wise, that varies, as it often does. At one extreme you have the holiday card example; at the other, you have this, which is some fairly awesome art and (aside from Seoni's standard outfit) not sexualized at all. I would say Seoni is a fairly typical example for modern fantasy art; the poses have improved quite a lot from twenty years ago, but the clothing still needs work.

 

[nedjer]

The first one is the better executed of the three (somewhat subjective, I'll explain later) and, while very mildly titillating, fits with the theme of the title and isn't objectify or offensive. Now, the book as a whole might be, but I haven't read it. Since it's a humor book it gets the benefit of the doubt that the theme of the piece works with the cover. The second strikes me as an add for a low rent porn site. It's not offensive, but is all about the sex and big cartoon breasts. The third, is either the least well executed or the most depending on the artists' intended style and intent of the piece. It's not offensive or objectify.

I wouldn't turn up at the game table with the first one. It's not hugely offensive - just not a big fan of standard fantasy Photoshop. If that's the route, I'm after stuff like the Pathfinder cover dragon.

The ladies in the room laughed at the second picture, because it's so obviously ridiculous - sort of 'go ahead, I dare you to click me when nobody's looking, do you feel sleazy enough tonight?'.

The third image is more typical of the mix of the forums over at conceptart.org. Had to shrink to post. A line sketch can easily pick up more views than standard fantasy there - most of the artists run sketchbooks side by side with finished work.

Despite the amount of uncovered 'flesh' on show the ladies were mainly interested in what it would look like as a poster at 3 metres.

 

[Desdichado]

Does it really matter if she chose this or her publisher?

I certainly think so, yes.

The point is, someone along the line decided that a female writer wasn't what young men would want to read. Kinda like Andre Norton. Actually, a LOT like Andre Norton.

It does show that we haven't maybe come as far as we'd like to think.

How so? Are we now to expect that little boys must be politically correct? Are we going to start chastising them for thinking that girls have cooties?

In any case, to whomever thought that from a marketing standpoint, I think they've been proven spectacularly wrong; it's hardly a mystery that J. K. Rowling is a woman to anyone who knows anything at all about Western culture these days. It certainly doesn't seem to have had any impact on Harry Potter's popularity with boys.

So no matter how you look at it, I can't see that this is a case for a sexist approach without really pushing it beyond the bounds of reasonable discussion.

 

[Desdichado]

In other words, it's short for "I made up these initials so my potential readers won't know I'm a woman."

Sure, but you can't take that out of context and wave it around expecting it to mean something other than what it does in its correct context.

 

[nedjer]

Gentlemen, please - the thread is just starting to serve up some decent artwork

 

[Umbran]

It does show that we haven't maybe come as far as we'd like to think.

Well, be careful there. You're talking about an immature audience. Kind of by definition, they don't act like mature people do. You really want to use folks who are not finished learning how society operates as an indicator of how far society has gotten? How does that make sense?

Umbran - while it is true that she is in a position of power, the Piratical Lingerie outfit is a bit much.

Yes, I already said it was silly. I'd go so far as to say it is downright nonsensical. But my point is that silly and sexist are not the same thing. The figure is drawn specifically and blatantly to be a target of sexual desire, yes. But she's not drawn to link that to being of lesser power or value. Quite the opposite, really.

 

[jonesy]

How to look sexy, powerful and an idiot (one swordswing and she's legless):
http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs21/f/2007/291/6/6/Female_Knight_by_dcwj.jpg

How to look sexy, powerful, and not an idiot:
http://wallpapers-free.co.uk/backgrounds/fantasy/warriors/female-knight-and-horse.jpg

As for the men, how about some ridiculous skintight armor (or whatever the hell that is):
http://gaygamer.net/images/rufusandburne.jpg

Did someone call for David Bowie.. I mean, Elric of Melnibone?
http://homepage.mac.com/antallan/images/whelan/elric.jpg

How about that Rawhide Kid:
http://hamrman52.tripod.com/PICRAWHIDEKIDMAXFORBLOG.jpg

Some skin and muscle from Silkroad Online:
http://www.2desktop.com/wallpapers/Silkroad_Online_10735_1024_768.jpg

Vega is sexy:
http://www.pixfans.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/vega_street_fighter.jpg
http://th00.deviantart.net/fs27/300W/i/2008/118/6/c/STREETFIGHTER__Vega_by_Summerset.jpg

Akward pose, the expression, male fighter:
http://images.playfrance.com/3/1832/artwork/zoom/2921.jpg

And Eros shows that men too can wear ridiculously skimpy armor:
Wen-M's Gallery

Edit: well, that was fast. Seems that some of those links are no longer working. Sorry about that.