Quote from: elfandghost;620939Have you seen this?



Article here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21033708

AND

this: http://thehawkeyeinitiative.com/ which recreates those pictures of revealing women in comic art and replaces them with Hawkeye to see if it still works. They largely don't.

Y'know, if they used actual beefcake and could actually make good art those would be perfectly fine.

Frederick's of Hollywood has its counterpart in Tom of Finland (the analogy doesn't have a perfect correlation -- one is definitely pornographic -- but it sounds too good not to use). That some are unaware of such things, or don't like them, is neither here nor there.

So all I have to say is they could learn how to draw representational beefcake better.

Quote from: vytzka;620901It's rejecting criticism that is inappropriate for the context.

FANTASY! is not a context; it's an excuse.

There are many flavors of fantasy, not all of which reject the notion that centuries of aggregated practical experience with armor produced an understanding of what works and what doesn't.

Quote from: vytzka;620901This is Cloud Strife with the Fusion Sword(s). If you try to tell me that sword is unrealistic and too heavy to use comfortably I'm gonna laugh in your face.

:rolleyes:

Quote from: vytzka;620901Mind posting something from your favorites, like that Flashing Blades thing?

It's not from FB itself, but if you want to picture a swordswoman in my campaign, this is the general idea.

Quote from: TristramEvans;621046And yet, thats horrible, but the Romance genre, which regularly outsells EVERY othe rgenre of fiction by several magnitudes is all about picture sof beefcake designed to appeal to women.

Not quite equivalent, at least in terms of artwork.  There's a shot on the front cover, sometimes, of pretty generic beefcake.  But where the Mercy Thompson series' tends to put a car mechanic in long earrings and a stomach-showing top, I've yet to see a shirtless guy trying to arcweld.   Outside of a number of ways not to ride a horse, you could replicate most of the stuff without spine-breaking contortions, and you have to get into the deep end of the erotica (or into outright written porn) before anyone's very obviously got their pants off or is fondling themselves on the cover.

  ((The romance genre has separate problems, especially the Harlequin imprint.  Really unhealthy relationships are pretty much an editorially-mandated requirement in the genre, and artwork tends to the 'male possessive' attribute pretty heavily.))

The interest isn't in stripping sexuality and even sexual poses entirely from cover art, especially works where sexuality is a primary aspect to things.  I don't think there's any level of tits or cameltoe that would have been surprising in the SeXXXalted April Fool's joke.  I'm not terribly concerned if there's implied nudity in Empowered, even implied nudity in combat.  But it gets to be a bit much if you're drowned in it where it doesn't make sense.

QuoteJust like putting human beings in poses by Spider-man don't work. The big problem here is that a large number of people don't know how to tell the difference between sexism and bad art. Its funny how little sexism one finds when one specifically avoids bad art.

It kinda depends on the artist.  Some of the Hawkeye stuff is cribbed from Land, which is just pointless: he does draw the guys like they're about to give or take a sausage, too, and the claims he's tracing porn when drawing Mr. Fantastic are unfortunately plausible.  Or they take calendar pinups and are surprised to see bedroom eyes there.  Or bad proportions in Leifield work.  There's a lot of it that really just belongs on Escher Girls.

Worse, a lot of it ignores differences in physiology, turning it into self-parody.  A Hawkeye with wide hips, thick thighs, and a thinner waist looks girly?  Oh, and putting him in a bra makes him look like an extra for Rocky Horror?  I wonder if that's because testosterone tends to not result in those attributes?

But by avoiding bad art, we're also avoiding folk through the criteria of "includes spine-bending boob-and-butt pose" and a number of other stupid anatomy errors, which is one of the sexist things they're trying to point out.  There's an unfortunate number of artists who can actually ink and color and get most other anatomy close, but either have posebooks or editors with posebooks that treat that position as if it were normal.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;621095

What comic is that from? I'm guessing a Dark Horse one?

Other depictions in popular media that I think are good, believable women warriors?

Sarah Conner, Terminator 2
Lux, WotDG (already mentioned)
Vasquez, Aliens
Pam Grier in just about anything
River Tam (Serenity, although more of an assassin than fighter)

Quote from: Sacrosanct;621144Other depictions in popular media that I think are good, believable women warriors?

Brienne of Tarth, obviously, both in the books and on the HBO show.

Let me take the opportunity to congratulate all posters on having a multiple page thread on a potentially inflammatory topic that (as far as I've read) has been very civil and well-reasoned. I wish we could all be as civil as this on every topic.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;621144Other depictions in popular media that I think are good, believable women warriors?

Sarah Conner, Terminator 2
Lux, WotDG (already mentioned)
Vasquez, Aliens
Pam Grier in just about anything
River Tam (Serenity, although more of an assassin than fighter)

I was with you until River.

But I'll throw in Brienne in Game of Thrones

Quote from: danbuter;621137What comic is that from? I'm guessing a Dark Horse one?

You guess correctly - it's Dark Agnes from Savage Sword no. 1.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;621095FANTASY! is not a context; it's an excuse.

There are many flavors of fantasy, not all of which reject the notion that centuries of aggregated practical experience with armor produced an understanding of what works and what doesn't.


:rolleyes:


It's not from FB itself, but if you want to picture a swordswoman in my campaign, this is the general idea.

Thank you.

And yes, that is an awesome pic.

Quote from: danbuter;621060I like boobies.

+1      ...er, make that +2

Quote from: danbuter;621060I like boobies.

Quote from: TristramEvans;621196+1      ...er, make that +2

To quote a great and eminent sage: "I also want to make an announcement- that I am pro-tit all the way, okay?"

Quote from: flyerfan1991;621190Thank you.

:hatsoff:

Quote from: flyerfan1991;621190And yes, that is an awesome pic.

She's a fun character.

Quote from: gattsuru;621111I'm not terribly concerned if there's implied nudity in Empowered, even implied nudity in combat.  But it gets to be a bit much if you're drowned in it where it doesn't make sense.

Adam Warren's Empowered? Heck, "I can make my suit turn invisible whenever I want" is even a major plot twist at one point.

Quote from: Nexus;621148I was with you until River.

But I'll throw in Brienne in Game of Thrones

Yeah, that's why I had her as more of an assassin.  But I guess I was going for the "doesn't need to be half naked and make up all over to be a badass."

Quote from: vytzka;620481While sexist (or oversexualized) art can drive people off, there are some very unfortunate implications about role of women in the zealous opposition to it (I can see some skin, so she's not a REAL warrior! OMG, how dare that woman look attractive in front of everyone)

This is true. Alot of this arm-chair "feminism" looks an awful lot like "Slut Shaming" in practice.