What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

[Bedrockgames]

Spoiler: Just to be safe.

View attachment 279442

View attachment 279443

And here's the thing: I'm not going to say he's not sexy, not at all. But the camera absolutely does not treat him as such. He looks beat up. He moves like he's a hurt animal. The camera doesn't ogle his abs. He doesn't give off that vibe, nor does he act it in those moments. He comes off as the reverse of Arnold, which is intentional.

I agree he is the reverse of Arnold, and it’s intentional but you don’t have to focus on Ava for something to be sexy. I am sure lots of people would find the vulnerability and woundedness of the character sexy. But also that second shot, while it isn’t abs, is absolutely facing at his back muscles and his triceps. You could say similar things about the first one. I wouldn’t say that one has no sexual component or ‘gaze’

And sexy doesn’t necessarily mean there are blaring horns and a guy standing with his hips on his shoulders and chest thrust out. There is a huge range there

 

[Justice and Rule]

I agree he is the reverse of Arnold, and it’s intentional but you don’t have to focus on Ava for something to be sexy. I am sure lots of people would find the vulnerability and woundedness of the character sexy. But also that second shot, while it isn’t abs, is absolutely facing at his back muscles and his triceps. You could say similar things about the first one. I wouldn’t say that one has no sexual component or ‘gaze’

And sexy doesn’t necessarily mean there are blaring horns and a guy standing with his hips on his shoulders and chest thrust out. There is a huge range there

I'm really not trying to argue that he's not sexy, I just don't find those scenes to be trying to be sexy (Whereas I find artwork is generally trying to be, even if it might not be succeeding). Outside of a few scenes, I don't really think it is, but there is just inherent sexiness in the characters, which is what the article is talking about: there was a time when you'd think "Ah yeah, that character would totally f***" that just really doesn't exist in the big blockbusters like it used to. It's not just enough to be beautiful/look good, there has to be something else there to trigger that sort of "sexiness" reaction.

But as it relates to RPGs, I think that the whole removal of sexiness thing feels overplayed in part because, at the end, it's the players that decide what to do and how to do it, and I just don't see players not doing that. In fact, I feel like newer players are way more down for that stuff. Critical Role is just a good example of seeing that in action.

 

[Scribe]

Read the new Gail Simone run.

So, I did a bit of googling, and...it would seem unless I'm being lead astray...I dont understand what you are asking me to pick up from this because I dont think I'm learning the lesson intended lol

 

[Justice and Rule]

So, I did a bit of googling, and...it would seem unless I'm being lead astray...I dont understand what you are asking me to pick up from this because I dont think I'm learning the lesson intended lol

Dynamite® The Complete Gail Simone Red Sonja Omnibus Oversized Edition Hardcover

Rating: Teen + Cover: Jenny Frison Writer: Gail Simone Art: Walter Geovani, Jack Jadson Genre: Action/Adventure Publication Date: September 2019 Format: Hardcover Page Count: 528 Pages ON SALE DATE: 9/11/2019 Collects all of Gail Simone's amazing work on Red Sonja in one beautiful oversized...

www.dynamite.com

She moved her away from some of her more problematic elements. Plus Simone is generally a good read.

Edit: Damn, it took long enough to find a good link that appeared correctly.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Music videos and RPG books are not the same thing.

Neither are movies and RPG books but I didn't see you make that argument in the last several pages. Like I said, when it doesn't suit the argument...

 

[Sepulchrave II]

This is part of what the original desexualization of art, films, TV and so on was trying to address - but instead of making so everyone had hot people, anyone could be sexy and so on, they made it so no-one did, and no-one was (except in a sort of repressed way), because that played better with certain groups, and didn't, at that time, create any red flags for more open-minded groups (well, it did for me, but I like Egon Schiele so what do I know? I'm taking the piss out of myself here, not suggesting we have Schiele-style art in RPGs btw lol).

Thats actually it. The Action Heros (think of McClane walking on glass in Die Hard, how human he looked and must have felt) vs the absolute sexless plastic, false version of Action Figures we get now. Thats exactly it. Everything is safe, bubble wrapped, fake, plastic, and unquestionably less 'human'.

I mean, most of these complaints really seem levelled against Disney and their sprawling franchise - which is fair enough. But Die Hard and Terminator were never PG-rated, so it's not really a fair comparison. Disney was always family-driven, and careful to adhere to the most conservative moral standards of the day - the only difference now, is that it's a lot bigger, and the nuance of those moral standards has shifted.

I think that plenty of movies are being made which have raw, visceral heroes are still being made (The Northman and Nobody spring to mind, for quite different reasons). And I simply don't see any "desexualization" on TV or in movies - quite the opposite, in fact. I think it's become thoroughly normalized, acceptable, inclusive.

But I don't watch anything owned by Disney*. I mean, anything. And I don't have kids, so I don't need to.

*[EDIT] Disney or Disney-adjacent.

 

[Bagpuss]

The problem isn't heterosexual relationships. The problem is putting out fanservice art.

Sorry going on a bit of a tangent, semi-related to art, but more about the sort of reactions you often get when mentioning romance, sexuality, etc. in RPGs, but particularly D&D.

There was, apparently, an erotic adventure yanked from, or heavily censored on, DM's Guild, despite having art (geared for gay men) that wasn't really worse than art produced in WotC's own 3x books--which were of the "sexy babe for male eyes" variety.

I heard about that but didn't actually see it.

 

[Bagpuss]

Not that my group ever explicitly role plays such things, when the DM asks me what my young, physically fit character flush with gold who makes his living putting himself in mortal danger on a regular basis is doing in his down time my answer is very often, "I'm spending 500 gold on hookers and blow." My character is having a good time at various drinking establishments buying random people ale, wine, or whatever it is they want to drink, food, and spending some time with women of negotiable affection. We even had a game of Apocalypse World where my character had sex with a sentient dolphin from outer space played by another PC. Nothing explicit of course.

 

[Hussar]

Look, we can go around and around about this all you like.

The fact is, when D&D stopped, or at least greatly reduced, the use of gratuitous sexualized art - the Caldwells, the Parkinsons', the Elmore's, stuff like that, and started leaning more heavily into more diverse representations, we see a growth in the demographics of gamers. From the late 90's, we have about 20% of D&D gamers being female. Now, we've got around 40%, and, also a heck of a lot larger number of gamers as well, meaning that not only has the diversity grown by nearly double, but, the straight up numbers must have been even more.

THIS is what happens when we reduce the amount of gratuitous inclusion of controversial elements. When we stop just putting in slavery cos we need a reason for bad guys to be bad in need of killing, and actually make slavery the subject, or when we stop putting images of half naked women on the cover of the DMG,

To me, the equation is simple. Which is more important, people or tropes? Is it more important to keep some trope in the game or is it more important to make the game feel more welcoming to more people? To me, I'm always going to come down on the side of more people. If that means I have to give up on some setting or some trope, it's worth it. No setting or theme or trope or art or anything else is ever worth making people not feel welcome in the hobby.

 

[ilgatto]

You asked, "When does it stop being a problem?" Perhaps what you meant by "it" is a touch vague.

If you included a bunch of racy art in the 2024 PHB, it would be a serious problem for that book. So, in that sense, it hasn't stopped being a serious problem. As soon as it is present, it'd be a problem.

Is the current level of sexism in the art of the current WotC D&D core books a problem? Probably not, insofar as I don't think we see much complaint about the current art. If they kept similar art direction, I don't expect it would be an issue.

Actually, I do think there definitely is a problem with the art in the current edition of D&D. In my opinion, I think the majority of these images define beauty and heroism in humans and human-like individuals as being slim, youthful, muscular, and having highly regular features, a stereotypical and unrealistic look that is wholly devoid of any substance and realism - stylized, empty, and dare I say Manga-esque - and which I would consider problematic especially re those of the young internet generation that do not look like any of that. I do believe that there has been some recent research into how images like this have a negative, even dangerous, influence on children and teenagers growing up with them.

5E PHB, pp. 25, 29, 38, 42, 44, 51, 55, 61, 64, 67, 70, 76, 90, 94, 99, 105, 125, 129, 130, 134, 137, 138, 140, 148, 167, 192, 199, 200, 206, 217, 220, 232, 253, 262.

I do believe that is the vast majority of the art in the PHB.

Now, how and whether this relates to the subject of "cheesecake" or "sexual content" is, I think, matter of opinion but I suppose it could be argued that "cheesecake" art back in the day served to express notions of heroism and sexuality the authors believed "appropriate", just like the creators of the art of today may believe theirs to be.
And who knows how folks of the future will define the art of today?

In my opinion.