What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

[Faolyn]

That makes me wonder.

What if it's the other way round - i.e., a forceful expression of female sexuality - from a man - and a pictorial representation of a sexualized woman - by a woman?

Is the woman making that image for her own reasons? Or was she hired to do so? Because if it's the latter, then it's usually still a pictoral representation of a sexualized woman for a man.

 

[MGibster]

Lol... is it a woman who is creating said artwork or choosing that artwork for the publication? Otherwise it's really not an apt comparison.

We run into what I like to think of a Schrödinger Offense. It's when we look at something and can't decide whether we're offended by it until we know who created it. When it comes to Doom of Odin from Avalanche Press, I don't need to know who the artist was to say the cover art was dumb and offensive. If I see an image and need to figure out who created it before I'm offended then it probably isn't offensive.

 

[Gradine]

I mostly agree with you, but it's also more complicated than that.

For example, it's been true for some time that the prevalence of both scantily clad women and scantily clad men are both symptomatic of the male gaze- just not always the straight male gaze.

Yes, yes, we've all seen Nightmare on Elm Street II

 

[Kaodi]

I am generally happy with the direction of more functional armour, and I think this topic is best approached with the thread topic as context: "eliminate" as opposed to, say, "restrain" . It actually looks like everyone in this thread is fine with some of the bad old habits being heavily restrained.

A couple of points though:
1) I have a hard time believing that most people look at a piece of fantasy art and then immediately interrogate who made it and who commissioned it. They mainly evaluate it on whether they like it and whether they think it belongs irrespective of the creator(s).
2) Which is worse, a character in unreasonable armour doing reasonable things; or a character is reasonable armour doing unreasonable things?

Also, more scars in fantasy art could be a good thing. For back line magic users too, since they tend to wear the least armour. I have been playing the Witcher games for a couple of months and there is virtually no one more scarred than Geralt of Rivia and he is literally the best at what he does. In the Hearts of Stone expansion for Witcher 3 his friend Shani even comments on him having fifteen new scars since the last time she saw him. He does not wear a lot of armour because in his line or work it is usually more important to not get hit rather than try to absorb the blows.

 

[Faolyn]

Who says RPG aren't erotic, at least in a very soft-core sort of way. Lots of people enjoy flirtatious and titillating moments in RPGs, along with the dramatic, comical, heroics and the like.

I have a strong hunch that when most people say "flirtatious and titillating," what they mean is, "can my fighter have sex with the bar maid."

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Yes, yes, we've all seen Nightmare on Elm Street II

How YOO doin?

Oh ... I think I misplaced my love of SAX!

 

[cranberry]

Then they came for the artist...

 

[Faolyn]

Apparently not. What a time to be alive.

When men are shown armorless like this or only in an armored loincloth, it's usually to show how tough and manly they are. These are not erotic poses.

When women are shown armorless (not like this) or only in a chain mail bikini, it's usually to show how sexy they are.

 

[Thourne]

No, it generally isn't a problem anymore.

Now, ask yourself WHY isn't this a problem anymore? Is it not because about fifteen (around) years ago, people actually stood up and repeatedly told the hobby that pinup art in the game was making thing feel unwelcome?

And, oh look. They pull most of the sexualized art from the game, and now, poof, 40% of gamers are apparently female. About two or three times the percentage from even ten years ago where women made up around 10-20% of gamers according to virtually every single poll out there.

Huh, funny how taking the stuff out that makes people feel unwelcome in the hobby results in those people joining the hobby in greater numbers.

Mate, you keep saying that about the % divide on gender.
I told you about WotC own poll which showed it was 20% female in 1999. I personally think that is low for the hobby overall but believe it was probably about right for D&D.
Women in gaming has been increasing year over year since then.
It was not just a sudden spike in the last 10 years. That data point you keep trying to use is not accurate.

I am all for practical armor in art. I personally prefer it but can we please use accurate information when making a point?

 

[Scribe]

When men are shown armorless like this or only in an armored loincloth, it's usually to show how tough and manly they are. These are not erotic poses.

When women are shown armorless (not like this) or only in a chain mail bikini, it's usually to show how sexy they are.

Sure.