D&D 4E Women in 4E

[RPG_Tweaker]

Compare these two pictures:

Does the one on the left take anything away from the picture?

Yes. It takes away the artist's conception.

Does the one on the right add anything to the picture?

‽‽‽‽‽‽
It is the picture as it was originally inteded by the artist. Your question is illogical as it presuposes that the left one existed first.


It's funny; all this banter about how wrong the armor is, when that shield is just as useless. But of course people aren't really arguing about the realism of the armor anyway; it's merely window-dressing to argue puritanical attitudes towards the subtext of female sexuality.

 

[Shades of Green]

And, yeah, I'd like to see some dwarven women in the art.

Here's one for you, drawn by my girlfriend... Sure, this is fan-,ade art, but a female Dwarf fighter nonetheless...

 

[Klaus]

I have no major problem with the armor, but the way her spine is enlongated and twisted, I'm thinking yuan-ti might just be a PHB race.

Maybe she's of the same race as the rogue on the cover of Explorer's Handbook.

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

Saying it isn't is also an unproven assertion.

Well by all means, keep arguing for the crazier possibility.

Because it's impossible to discern the difference between a gnome and a human unless they're shirtless or in bras, right?

Alright, I'll bite, oh guardian of gaming morality. Riddle me up the answer to this dilemma.

Fact #1: The 3e PHB contains identically styled drawings of a member of each PC race, one for males and one for females.
Fact #2: In both cases, these figures are drawn in featureless underwear, as might be fashioned from simple cotton fibers in a fantasy world.

Assertion #1: The female figures are drawn in their underwear to highlight physical differences.
Assertion #2: The male figures are drawn in their underwear to highlight physical differences.

Your Assertion #1: We can tell physical difference just fine on fully dressed models.
Your Assertion #2: The male figures are not drawn in their underwear to titillate.
Your Assertion #3: The female figures are drawn in their underwear to titillate male readers.

The Conundrum: The male figures are drawn in their underwear to ___________.

By all means, reader of artists' minds, fill in the blank.


Additionally, while I didn't want to quote from that far back, Wik had said there is more sexualization of females than males in the art of D&D. I think if you drop "the", "of", and "D&D" from that sentence you'd be on to something.

 

[Zzyzx]

Additionally, while I didn't want to quote from that far back, Wik had said there is more sexualization of females than males in the art of D&D. I think if you drop "the", "of", and "D&D" from that sentence you'd be on to something.

When I showed this thread to my wife (conservative, religious, 3 kids, etc.) this was her thought exactly.

What I am seeing is railing at D&D art in specific for perceived excesses in art in general.

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

When I showed this thread to my wife (conservative, religious, 3 kids, etc.) this was her thought exactly.

What I am seeing is railing at D&D art in specific for perceived excesses in art in general.

Discussions about this thread with my fiancee (none of the above) produced the same conclusion.

I like to think that's a good sign I'm not just beating my chest here.

 

[Clavis]

Additionally, while I didn't want to quote from that far back, Wik had said there is more sexualization of females than males in the art of D&D. I think if you drop "the", "of", and "D&D" from that sentence you'd be on to something.

The best art is about sex, because art is ultimately a form of sexual display. Through their art, artists can display (or more importantly, appear to display) such desirable (in a mate or breeding partner) qualities as perceptive insight, emotional openness, manual dexterity, and original thought. Artists often have higher libidos than ordinary people, and tend to have more sexual partners than someone of equivalent physical attractiveness and economic status. Its no surprise that artists are drawn to creating art that is sexy.

Societies controlled by non-artist can scream all they like about morality, or objectification, but the fact is people like to have sex with artists (this includes musicians). This ensures that the genetic stock that create the predisposition to becoming an artist is prevalent, and will survive.

The best religious art is also ultimately sexual. Check out such pieces as the "The Ecstasy of Saint Theresa": http://www.luc.edu/depts/history/dennis/Visual_Arts/02-Baroque_Bernini_Ecstasy-of-St-Theresa.jpg
and you tell me what's happening to her. Does her description of an angel "stabbing " her help? And lets not forget that "love" is just sublimated sexual desire. The crossover between sex, religion, and art is obvious to anyone who spends a little time looking at the art of the classical world, the European Renaissance, or the art of medieval India.

If you want good art, eventually its going to be sexy. As soon as Europe started painting well again, they put naked people in their churches (Sistine Chapel anyone?) Conversely, show me a society where nakedness is utterly forbidden, and I'll show you a place whose art (if they have any) is inferior.

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

A bunch of that had nothing at all to do with what you quoted.

Also, I certainly don't recall judging this particular trend or inclination one way or the other. I just thought some clarity was in order.

 

[Clavis]

A bunch of that had nothing at all to do with what you quoted.

Also, I certainly don't recall judging this particular trend or inclination one way or the other. I just thought some clarity was in order.

Sorry, I guess I was just ranting a little. It's just that so much of the condemnation about the objectification of women in art (and fantasy art especially) sounds like old-fashioned prudity in a feminist guise. I know you weren't judging yourself, I was just using the quote as a springboard. I certainly didn't mean any offense to you.

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

Sorry, I guess I was just ranting a little. It's just that so much of the condemnation about the objectification of women in art (and fantasy art especially) sounds like old-fashioned prudity in a feminist guise. I know you weren't judging yourself, I was just using the quote as a springboard. I certainly didn't mean any offense to you.

's all good.