First a caveat: I DESPISE GENDER STUDIES!!! I've had so many credits revolving around it I should be granted an extra degree in it for free. That being said I fully recognize the damage that a long history of misogynism and bias/bigotry has inflicted (especially in America due to its puritanical and extremely imbalanced cultural construct).
Which is kind of weird, because the distorting effect that the uncritical addition of gender studies and a particular narrow brand of academically-endorsed feminism has had on academia is also strongest in America. The latter being a response to the former, I guess.
Now that that's out of the way, if you don't like looking at naked (or semi-naked) people there's something wrong in your psychological makeup. Not being rude, I'm suggesting you seek counseling for your own well being. Sex is, simply put, the second greatest thing on this bloody spinning rock (after twue wove of course), and anything which celebrates that is normal and healthy.
Well, some people just are asexual; and not everybody else is primarily aroused by naked or semi-naked people. Sexuality is more diverse and complex (and awesome) than that. But then I play D&D to arouse my brain, not my loins.
I'm here to tell you that the 1st Amendment is NOT about media empires stalking celebrities so the stock holders can get a new Bentley...it's about a broke, mad genius painting a gorgeous, borderline jailbait female half naked on a rock with hordes of randy warriors fighting to be first to claim the prize. The first would celebrate what is worst in life, the second what is best...not because it's sexist or violent, but because it acknowledges the power and centrality of beauty and creation and joining to our lives.
A lot of us live far beyond the reach of the First Amendment.
And I'd like to think that "what is best in life" goes far beyond either of the images you've conjured up. Of course Perseus rescuing Andromeda is a good heroic image. (A gender-flipped version would be kind of awesome too.) Heroic images are often somewhat sexualised, and that's to be expected. But there are plenty of other things which have inspired great art. Ever seen Wright of Derby's "Experiment on a Bird in the Air-Pump"? Turner's "Reichenbach Falls"? Gaming can inspire us with the joy of discovery and awe at the universe, as well as with the thrill of combat and the satisfaction of survival.
D&D ISN'T AN historical game. It's at best 'alternate history', with magic changing things alot.
It would also touch women and men clothes. Like Eberron show to a point.
There can be very well women warriors in D&D, guys. -_- We should be warry of historical 'canon lawyerism'.
I'd strongly agree. My main concern with my long first post to this thread was to show that historical archetypes are both different and more varied than people expect. It's been a recurring feature of these kind of threads that those who call most loudly for the game to have a sound historical base in the Middle Ages don't respond to, or even specifically disregard, actual historical evidence.
But yes - the imagined, secondary world is very different to our own. I want to see things I haven't seen before, whether in history books or in Playboy.
Z.
PS: The censorship system here strikes again. I notice from one of my earlier posts that it blanks out the word I prefer to use to describe my own sexuality.
Which is kind of weird, because the distorting effect that the uncritical addition of gender studies and a particular narrow brand of academically-endorsed feminism has had on academia is also strongest in America. The latter being a response to the former, I guess.
Well, some people just are asexual; and not everybody else is primarily aroused by naked or semi-naked people. Sexuality is more diverse and complex (and awesome) than that. But then I play D&D to arouse my brain, not my loins.
A lot of us live far beyond the reach of the First Amendment.
And I'd like to think that "what is best in life" goes far beyond either of the images you've conjured up. Of course Perseus rescuing Andromeda is a good heroic image. (A gender-flipped version would be kind of awesome too.) Heroic images are often somewhat sexualised, and that's to be expected. But there are plenty of other things which have inspired great art. Ever seen Wright of Derby's "Experiment on a Bird in the Air-Pump"? Turner's "Reichenbach Falls"? Gaming can inspire us with the joy of discovery and awe at the universe, as well as with the thrill of combat and the satisfaction of survival.
Z.
I understand the asexuality bit, but it IS an aberration. That doesn't apply a normative judgment, merely a factual, statistical observance. For most people sexuality is a primary motivation...it has to be or we'd cease to exist as a species. I was being partially facetious, and partially genuinely concerned. A great amount of sexual dysfunction resulting in frigidity, impotence, or general lack of arousal from stimulation stems from the aforementioned psychological traumas, and they're completely treatable with proper help. While many people don't actually need sex to be happy, for most of us it's such a monumentally enjoyable and psychologically important act that I hate to see anyone robbed of it. Then again, I married a stripper+ so my proclivities are well documented and heavily biased. 8-)
The nod to the 1st was mostly about the importance of not allowing expression to be censored, or unduly influenced by those with the power to do so. Obviously it doesn't literally apply since it only restricts government. The IDEA of it, however, should be universal. I just want to get the raw vision of the artist, since so often humans respond better to raw than to polished. That's what I was driving at...give me the raw, core human emotions, not the filtered, politically correct summary report of the meaningless crap people do.
I completely agree that there are other valid representations besides the sexual. D&D has always promoted varying styles and differing subject matter. It's not like any edition is just a collection of cheesecake, and I support that. I just also acknowledge that the sexuality is as much a part of the game as swords, dragons, and so on. At least, for many of us.
DISCLAIMER - Everything said by anyone is absolute subjective opinion. There are no objective claims being made by me, or anyone else, unless they overtly state 'The following is an objective claim'. At this point if you choose to be offended by anything I (or anyone else) say the problem is ENTIRELY your own.
WotC won't let us give them money because they won't produce a game we want to play.
I LARP on a pretty regular basis. I Larp in a pretty rugged campground. Lots of nettles and briars, and uneven terrain. We even have a cave of sorts. The females that are able to do so, often dress as sexy as possible showing as much skin as possible. So yeah Tisha might dress like that to go adventuring. Especially with magic items. We have a girl that wears a scale mail analog of the chainmail bikini top. Why does she wear it? Because it is a magic item that gives her armor points.
I have been to numerous larps. People, guys and girls will do sexy over functional quite often.
I am 100% completely OK with IDW's version of Tisha.
LARP has nothing to do with actual adventuring. You don't put your life to risk while LARPing. And I guess if you would send your female LARP friends off to battle in some war or scout for the army, they would put away those revealing "armor" faster than you'd think
I LARP on a pretty regular basis. I Larp in a pretty rugged campground. Lots of nettles and briars, and uneven terrain. We even have a cave of sorts. The females that are able to do so, often dress as sexy as possible showing as much skin as possible. So yeah Tisha might dress like that to go adventuring. Especially with magic items. We have a girl that wears a scale mail analog of the chainmail bikini top. Why does she wear it? Because it is a magic item that gives her armor points.
I have been to numerous larps. People, guys and girls will do sexy over functional quite often.
I am 100% completely OK with IDW's version of Tisha.
LARP has nothing to do with actual adventuring. You don't put your life to risk while LARPing. And I guess if you would send your female LARP friends off to battle in some war or scout for the army, they would put away those revealing "armor" faster than you'd think
Just as a point, D&D roleplaying characters have no more to do with actual adventuring than a larp character. More than likely even less. The LARP character experiences more of the environment.
On another point, very few soldiers or scouts wore protective gear. Remember the Celts attacked the Romans only protected by Woad. They were naked in the bogs. The highlanders very often threw off their kilts to engange in battle. Lets not even talk about the SCOUTS of the ancient world armies. There is a misconception that armor was commonly available. The viking captains had ring mail analogs in the dark ages. Their scouts certainly did not. We would find alot more of it on digs if everyone was wearing armor.
We have this image of armor being a necessity in the middle ages and ancient world. It was a luxury not a necessity.
CAMRA preserves and protects real ale from the homogenization of modern beer production.
I'm a straight guy, and I got to somewhat disagree. Tisha is a slobbering fanboys wet dream, on par with Lady Death and the rest of the hooterific comics of the 90's.... I'm also assuming those gazooms are magicaly enhanced, because ratios like that just dont happen in nature.
As far as the 10 to 1 emails in praise of her, I'm somewhat suspect. People (myself included) gripe more than they praise. If it really is 10:1 in favor of it, are opinions solicited? Gamers are sadly incredibly unprogressive, and D&D is still pretty much an affluent, straight, white boys club. At the first whiff of anything threatening their chainmail bikinis, the "anti-PC police" show up in full force. Sure, they may say they're ok with muscle bound dudes, but throw in some art of "sky clad" berserkers or anything homoerotic, the inevitable poop storm ensues, and it turns out that really they arent that ok after all. One of biggest complaints about Oathbound's art was that it was too "gay" (and not in the fanboy approved 2 elf chick way), mini enthusiasts cant seem to ignore the scrotums/genitals on Banelegions amazing minis... For many, it seems that its ok to have a muscle dude in a loincloth thats idolized, but when he's sexualized (or worse... into guys!), look out.
That WOTC is even having this conversation gives me hope, but the fact that Juggs McGee is deemed A-OK kind of squelches it in the same breath. I think rather than going through a checklist of "is this near naked chick ok", WOTC should figure out how much dudity is ok, and then apply it towards the other gender. Try out a test of a scantily clad incubus and his male victim, then go from there.
I'm a straight guy, and I got to somewhat disagree. Tisha is a slobbering fanboys wet dream, on par with Lady Death and the rest of the hooterific comics of the 90's.... I'm also assuming those gazooms are magicaly enhanced, because ratios like that just dont happen in nature.
As far as the 10 to 1 emails in praise of her, I'm somewhat suspect. People (myself included) gripe more than they praise. If it really is 10:1 in favor of it, are opinions solicited? Gamers are sadly incredibly unprogressive, and D&D is still pretty much an affluent, straight, white boys club. At the first whiff of anything threatening their chainmail bikinis, the "anti-PC police" show up in full force. Sure, they may say they're ok with muscle bound dudes, but throw in some art of "sky clad" berserkers or anything homoerotic, the inevitable poop storm ensues, and it turns out that really they arent that ok after all. One of biggest complaints about Oathbound's art was that it was too "gay" (and not in the fanboy approved 2 elf chick way), mini enthusiasts cant seem to ignore the scrotums/genitals on Banelegions amazing minis... For many, it seems that its ok to have a muscle dude in a loincloth thats idolized, but when he's sexualized (or worse... into guys!), look out.
That WOTC is even having this conversation gives me hope, but the fact that Juggs McGee is deemed A-OK kind of squelches it in the same breath. I think rather than going through a checklist of "is this near naked chick ok", WOTC should figure out how much dudity is ok, and then apply it towards the other gender. Try out a test of a scantily clad incubus and his male victim, then go from there.
Boris Valejo sexualized men all the time. There is a precedent for that in fantasy. People need to get over the fact that a majority of the D&D audience likes 'Tisha' art. I won't apologize for it.
If WOTC wants to try the tact of sexualizing men go ahead. It may not get them the money. I am one of those that is perfectly OK with the standard of art in D&D as it stands now. If however I think there is art that 'looks to gay', Sure as hell I won't buy it. I won't protest it. I just won't buy it.
Gamers are affluent, straight, white boy club? Where do you play in Kansas? The last thing I would call the various groups I play D&D or LARP, or MAGIC with is primarily white men. I can't speak to sexuality as I do not investigate anyone's sexuality nor do I care.
CAMRA preserves and protects real ale from the homogenization of modern beer production.
Tisha is fine for a comic book heroine. Hell, she's wearing more than most of them wear. I mean really, take a look at the rather enormous muscles and *ahem* packages of the male superhero type, and tell me both aren't being both idealized and sexualized. Big deal. We're sexual animals, really people just need to learn to deal with it. The human body isn't dirty, inappropriate or horrifying as a thing; it's our own lenses that determine that. I mean, does anyone really thing the bare breasted harpies of God of War are sexualized? Now, the Oracle, the "minigame" women and such, sure, yes, sexualized. But the foul, animalistic harpies are about as sexualized as a cow with exposed udders. It's all a matter of case by case basis.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." --Bill Cosby (1937- )
Vanador: OK. You ripped a gateway to Hell, killed half the town, and raised the dead as feral zombies. We're going to kill you. But it can go two ways. We want you to run as fast as you possibly can toward the south of the town to draw the Zombies to you, and right before they catch you, I'll put an arrow through your head to end it instantly. If you don't agree to do this, we'll tie you this building and let the Zombies rip you apart slowly. Dimitry: God I love being Neutral. 4th edition is dead, long live 4th edition. Salla: opinionated, but commonly right. fun quotesShow
If you can't understand how someone yelling at another person would make them fight harder and longer, then you need to look at the forums a bit closer.
quote author=56832398 post=519321747]Considering DnD is a game wouldn't all styles be gamist?
I'm a straight guy, and I got to somewhat disagree. Tisha is a slobbering fanboys wet dream, on par with Lady Death and the rest of the hooterific comics of the 90's.... I'm also assuming those gazooms are magicaly enhanced, because ratios like that just dont happen in nature.
As far as the 10 to 1 emails in praise of her, I'm somewhat suspect. People (myself included) gripe more than they praise. If it really is 10:1 in favor of it, are opinions solicited? Gamers are sadly incredibly unprogressive, and D&D is still pretty much an affluent, straight, white boys club. At the first whiff of anything threatening their chainmail bikinis, the "anti-PC police" show up in full force. Sure, they may say they're ok with muscle bound dudes, but throw in some art of "sky clad" berserkers or anything homoerotic, the inevitable poop storm ensues, and it turns out that really they arent that ok after all. One of biggest complaints about Oathbound's art was that it was too "gay" (and not in the fanboy approved 2 elf chick way), mini enthusiasts cant seem to ignore the scrotums/genitals on Banelegions amazing minis... For many, it seems that its ok to have a muscle dude in a loincloth thats idolized, but when he's sexualized (or worse... into guys!), look out.
That WOTC is even having this conversation gives me hope, but the fact that Juggs McGee is deemed A-OK kind of squelches it in the same breath. I think rather than going through a checklist of "is this near naked chick ok", WOTC should figure out how much dudity is ok, and then apply it towards the other gender. Try out a test of a scantily clad incubus and his male victim, then go from there.
Boris Valejo sexualized men all the time. There is a precedent for that in fantasy. People need to get over the fact that a majority of the D&D audience likes 'Tisha' art. I won't apologize for it.
I disagree that Valejo regularly sexualized men. Again, see the difference between an idolistic depiction, and a sexualized depiction. This often goes the same for many of his scantily clad women however. In his world, most everyone ran around in a pasties/panties or loincloth, so hey, at least its equal.
Gamers are affluent, straight, white boy club? Where do you play in Kansas? The last thing I would call the various groups I play D&D or LARP, or MAGIC with is primarily white men. I can't speak to sexuality as I do not investigate anyone's sexuality nor do I care.
Go to a con some time, and see how representative the diversity is to the population at large.
