Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Korgoth" data-source="post: 4625122" data-attributes="member: 49613">You actually &quot;HATE&quot; those pictures? You might be the only one. Well, you and Gloria Steinem.Either a given artistic piece actually works or it doesn't. Oftentimes there's a scantily-clad women there just to excite prurient interest and it doesn't really work or do anything. That's quite dumb, especially when the girl doesn't look like she &quot;belongs&quot; in that (lack of) outfit. But I can imagine a piece showing a Red Sonja-esque character whose scantily-cladness emphasizes the character's raw physicality, contempt of personal danger and recklessly self-legislating lifestyle. Not an admirable character, but an interesting one to be sure.In that latter case it's just like Conan in a loincloth: either he's dressed like that because he's escaping the evil snake temple, or it emphasizes that this guy is really strong, brave and does things his own way, or both. A battle babe in a loincloth could say the same thing. Or it could be mere wankery. It depends on the overall composition, context and presence of the piece.I suppose there's an element of it that constitutes a judgment call on the part of the viewer. If I were to lay out a principle, it would be ask yourself this: does the bare broad in question look like she could slay a giant snake or cut a bloody swath through wicked minions in that state? If she really just looks like a modern bimbo that wandered into a fantasy realm then no it's probably not appropriate. If she looks like Conan minus the Y chromosome then yes it probably is.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Korgoth, post: 4625122, member: 49613"] You actually "HATE" those pictures? You might be the only one. Well, you and Gloria Steinem. Either a given artistic piece actually works or it doesn't. Oftentimes there's a scantily-clad women there just to excite prurient interest and it doesn't really work or do anything. That's quite dumb, especially when the girl doesn't look like she "belongs" in that (lack of) outfit. But I can imagine a piece showing a Red Sonja-esque character whose scantily-cladness emphasizes the character's raw physicality, contempt of personal danger and recklessly self-legislating lifestyle. Not an admirable character, but an interesting one to be sure. In that latter case it's just like Conan in a loincloth: either he's dressed like that because he's escaping the evil snake temple, or it emphasizes that this guy is really strong, brave and does things his own way, or both. A battle babe in a loincloth could say the same thing. Or it could be mere wankery. It depends on the overall composition, context and presence of the piece. I suppose there's an element of it that constitutes a judgment call on the part of the viewer. If I were to lay out a principle, it would be ask yourself this: does the bare broad in question look like she could slay a giant snake or cut a bloody swath through wicked minions in that state? If she really just looks like a modern bimbo that wandered into a fantasy realm then no it's probably not appropriate. If she looks like Conan minus the Y chromosome then yes it probably is. [/QUOTE]

Verification