Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

There seems to be a fair bit of discussion around here recently regarding the pros and cons of fan service/cheesecake/overtly sexualised female miniatures. Why, there's two such threads here and here.

Why do we need another thread on the subject, then? Well, this thread is different. This thread is special. While the primary purpose of those threads is debate, this thread is intended to be purely practical. No matter what one's opinion on the subject, it's hard to deny that female models are both fairly rare and also frequently sexualised. This presents problems for those of us who either find such things distasteful or who want a bit more variety. Therefore, let's use this space to make a catalogue of female models that might interest others with similar concerns - a wee little repository that fellow gamers can use to find that badass warrior woman they've been looking for, to round out their army!

Now, people's opinions are going to differ on which models meet the criteria of this thread. It is a pretty subjective area, after all. As such, I'd suggest we adopt a lenient approach in order to avoid in-fighting. At the same time, I'd ask that contributors remember that sexualisation/objectification goes beyond mere skimpy attire. If a female model is modestly dressed, but still looks like she's posing for a glamour photographer, some people might still find that rather irritating. At the same time, it is possible for skimpy outfits to be done right (e.g. properly tough female barbarians), but let's try not to flood the thread with too much "empowered skimpiness", for obvious reasons.

I've got a couple of examples of my own, but I'll open the floor for other posters first, because I want this opening post to remain relatively short and neat. So, go ahead and start posting non-fanservice-y female models that you like! Let's see how many we can find...

Pumpkin wrote:. This presents problems for those of us who either find such things distasteful or who want a bit more variety.

These people don't exist, so stop pandering to the inexistent.

The top one that comes to mind is High Arbiter Arkeid shown above. She is wearing full plate armor without the usual metal breasts you see on female models giving her a very gender neutral look. She obviously has a slender figure but doesn't have an oversized bust or flaunt her sexuality in any way.
The most surprizing thing is that she comes from the same range as several highly sexualized female models like Maria here, I suppose you can't say that they lack variety.

Top left in this pic - Rocket Girl from Colonel Schaffer's Last Chancers



Of course, she's kind of balanced out by Warrior Woman wearing a skimpy top and skirt in the same squad

So are we getting a thread on non-objectified male models next?

PhantomViper wrote:So are we getting a thread on non-objectified male models next?

That's every other thread, essentially.

I proffer the obligatory Lt. Kara Black of Studio McVey:

Ouze wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:So are we getting a thread on non-objectified male models next?

That's every other thread, essentially.

I proffer the obligatory Lt. Kara Black of Studio McVey:

Thats a gorgeous model. Bizzare base tho, looks like shes fighting in a paint factory

PhantomViper wrote:So are we getting a thread on non-objectified male models next?

I'd love to see examples of "objectified" male models because WOW I can't believe someone unironically said that.

Ouze wrote:I proffer the obligatory Lt. Kara Black of Studio McVey:

Awesome. I always was a fan of Vasquez from Aliens.

So basically you opened a thread to catalog something that differs from person to person? And even then do you understand that for a extremely prude person cataloguing 10% of every female mini outhere its just not doable... now imagine someone is very liberal and cataloguing 100% of every female models on the market... Good luck !

NAVARRO wrote:So basically you opened a thread to catalog something that differs from person to person? And even then do you understand that for a extremely prude person cataloguing 10% of every female mini outhere its just not doable... now imagine someone is very liberal and cataloguing 100% of every female models on the market... Good luck !

I think objectification of women is pretty easy to tell. Now a person's ability to perceive that differs from person to person, but that is a societal problem, more than a personal opinion problem.

Brother Gyoken wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:So basically you opened a thread to catalog something that differs from person to person? And even then do you understand that for a extremely prude person cataloguing 10% of every female mini outhere its just not doable... now imagine someone is very liberal and cataloguing 100% of every female models on the market... Good luck !

I think objectification of women is pretty easy to tell. Now a person's ability to perceive that differs from person to person, but that is a societal problem, more than a personal opinion problem.

Because people don't make personal decisions based on the society they live in? even then it can change greatly if someone's is part of a religion etc... So to me ITS NOT that clear that its easy to tell if objectification of women is present on miniatures in the first place... even assuming it is the percentage changes from person to person.

Ouze wrote:I proffer the obligatory Lt. Kara Black of Studio McVey

That's awesome! Also led me to see their amazing Utility Carapaces... unfortunately they're 22 pounds for a single fig . Even on a 40mm base, that's insane if you wanted to use them for a unit in another game system...

Also from McVey, the Blight Witch!




And the Harbinger of Menoth.

Thankyou for starting this thread, I wanted to post this pic in the previous one but it got shut down because of all the delicious cheesecake pictures



So what is the opinion on this one?

Personally, I plan this on using this on a friend who plays PanO and takes the game far too seriously, and will laugh loudly as this model guns down his hardcore fusiliers as they advance towards her

I always thought the female Viridian Commando Sgt. from Void was pretty cool. Shame about her legs being different lengths, though.

Brother Gyoken wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:So are we getting a thread on non-objectified male models next?

I'd love to see examples of "objectified" male models because WOW I can't believe someone unironically said that.

Really? The entire Imperial Guard Catachan line from GW for a starter.

Or do you think that presenting male soldiers going to battle in their over-muscled bare chests and arms isn't objectifying men?

This thread is clearly not intended as an extension of the previous debate. Please confine further posts to pics of (in the poster's opinion) non-sexualized female figs, or discussion thereof.

Heresy miniatures female sci-fi trooper:

Heresy miniatures male sci-fi trooper:

PhantomViper wrote:

Brother Gyoken wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:So are we getting a thread on non-objectified male models next?

I'd love to see examples of "objectified" male models because WOW I can't believe someone unironically said that.

Really? The entire Imperial Guard Catachan line from GW for a starter.

Or do you think that presenting male soldiers going to battle in their over-muscled bare chests and arms isn't objectifying men?

Anyone have the link to where the "debate" is going on, since apparently we're not allowed to discuss it here?

Brother Gyoken wrote:


Anyone have the link to where the "debate" is going on, since apparently we're not allowed to discuss it here?

the thread was locked a few days ago before the fist fight broke out.

Skippy wrote:

Brother Gyoken wrote:


Anyone have the link to where the "debate" is going on, since apparently we're not allowed to discuss it here?

the thread was locked a few days ago before the fist fight broke out.

Excellent, I will go discuss it in the locked thread!

I tried to make this thread ages ago, it went downhill fast

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/356698.page




Automatically Appended Next Post:
But I will post what i posted in my old thread since it applies.

Yes, +1 to this thread, and thank you. I'm really looking forward to what folks will find!

Here are my contributions so far...

I've always like this reaper female elf ranger:



And here is a female knight:


I like her tunic, pants, and boots outfit:



The running theme of all of these? The models have a job. That job comes first in the model design- not bewbs. I didn't get a chance to look for sci-fi examples from reaper, but am now curious...

EDIT: OMG I love this model (Reaper Pathfinder Ameiko Kaijitsu). This just says, Come at me, bro.


This one is pretty badazz too (Briony, Cybertechnician):



Edit 2- Briony looked familiar, then I realized, I look at her and think: Amy Farrah Fowler from Big Bang Theory!

Hey, that's some pretty awesome stuff so far, peeps! Especially loving that kick-ass Studio McVey model. Do they do any 28mm minis? I'm just assuming that one isn't based on how detailed it is.

I should probably have made a short list before starting this thread, but I had an itchy trigger finger. I did at least remember one good model I liked, though. Brother Vinni specialises in historical male models and dabbles in sexual female models on the side. Obviously not the sort of thing that would fit in here. However, there is this delightful little gem nestled in amongst his "girlie" collection:-



The chest armour is a teensy bit corset-like around the waist, but I'd say it's just subtle enough to look stylish rather than sexual. I'd totally take one for a Bretonnian army or whatever.

NAVARRO wrote:So basically you opened a thread to catalog something that differs from person to person? And even then do you understand that for a extremely prude person cataloguing 10% of every female mini outhere its just not doable... now imagine someone is very liberal and cataloguing 100% of every female models on the market... Good luck !

Think of this as more of a "suggestions" thread. Of course everyone's tastes are going to differ, but this thread can still serve as a starting point for somebody's search. We don't all have to agree on everything. When I said "no arguments", I just meant no "skimpy clothes: yea or nay" debates - we can still discuss the models posted here, just so long as we're civil and remember to agree to disagree when appropriate.

I know I certainly like some models that wouldn't be to everyone's tastes. For instance, I absolutely adore Malifaux's resident stage magician, Colette Du Bois and her Showgirls. That's mostly because I'm a huge fan of frilly vintage dresses and the whole showgirl and burlesque aesthetic. I'd say it's a testament to the tastefulness of their designs that the Showgirls are some of the least cheesecake-y models in Malifaux (with the exception of Colette, who is pretty sexual, but at the same time fabulous). Still, I doubt many people would agree that they belong here, so I'll just leave that link instead of pics. Malifaux's fairly good for female models, overall. It certainly has a lot of them, and the majority would totally fit in here if the artists didn't feel the need to tack on plunging necklines all over the place.

Speaking of Malifaux, Sonnia and Kirai totally belong here:-

Sister_Lucy wrote:

As do Rusty Alyce...



...Abuela Ortega...



...and good ol' Molly Squidpiddge.



(That's a skull she has clutched to here bosom - her neckline's pretty modest.)

Mannahnin wrote:This thread is clearly not intended as an extension of the previous debate. Please confine further posts to pics of (in the poster's opinion) non-sexualized female figs, or discussion thereof.

Thanks, Sheriff! We ain't lookin' fer no trouble here!

Brother Gyoken wrote:Anyone have the link to where the "debate" is going on, since apparently we're not allowed to discuss it here?

Yeah, my bad - I didn't realise that thread had been locked. You're free to go start the debate up again, but in a purpose-built thread, not in here.

Pumpkin wrote:
Think of this as more of a "suggestions" thread. Of course everyone's tastes are going to differ, but this thread can still serve as a starting point for somebody's search. We don't all have to agree on everything. When I said "no arguments", I just meant no "skimpy clothes: yea or nay" debates - we can still discuss the models posted here, just so long as we're civil and remember to agree to disagree when appropriate.
.

Okidoki as long as everyone understands that my idea of "Non-objectified female models" and yours or anyone else's may be totally different its all good I guess. I have some models of females I love and they are as decent IMO as a mini can be. Will post later. If we are going to be picky with what fits or not I could tell you now that depending on the Posters diferent background everything err fits

These from Hiterland are rather nice - http://hinterlandminiatures.weebly.com/index.html

Sister_Lucy wrote:I tried to make this thread ages ago, it went downhill fast

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/356698.page

Forgot to say thanks for the link. There's some good stuff in there!

"Non-Objectified" is really a poor term to use here, because all miniatures, as unthinking pieces of pewter/resin/plastic are objects and the characters they depict are objectified. A female model in a completely body-covering haz-mat suit is still being objectified, she's just (possibly) not being sexually objectified.

Sexual objectification hugely varies from person to person, but I would say any time the model's sex is apparent there is some degree of sexual objectification. But some of these examples of supposedly non-objectified models really strike me as absurd to say they aren't objectified:

Ouze wrote:I proffer the obligatory Lt. Kara Black of Studio McVey:

She's definitely objectified. Look at that face, those almond-shaped eyes, those lips. The object she represents is the "strong woman", which by virtue of having a sexual component makes her a sex object. And let me remind everyone, the "strong woman" archetype is every bit as shallow and superficial as the "hot chick" archetype.

Chowderhead wrote:Also from McVey, the Blight Witch!



And the Harbinger of Menoth.

I'd say both of these are very sexually objectified as well. The first is wearing unnecessarily form-fitting armor where several lines converge directly around her vagina (located in the compositional center of the model,) while the second features a priestly woman in white with bare thighs and chains.

Sister_Lucy wrote:

I say clothing a mini in a cultural millieux does not prevent it from being a sexual object. Victorian dress (or faux-Victorian) has many elements quite capable of being sexualized, particularly the corsets and garters present on so many of these figures. And as for the faux-Japanese and faux-Chinese minis, I'd say they are both sexually and racially objectified. The opium elemental in particular is like a laundry-list of attributes someone I know finds incredibly sexy, but wearing a skin-tight chipao that's blowing open in the wind should be obvious sexual objectification.

curran12 wrote:

Are you kidding me? Both of these models have pokey nipples on display, and the second has a frankly absurd bust-to-hip-to-waist ratio. Definitely sexual objects.


I can't help but think a lot of people here have missed the point of what sexual objectification means. These minis are not fully-fledged people who live complex lives. They are archetypes. Some are more shallow than others, but in the end they all represent something that is clearly recognizable just by looking at them. And that's what a good mini should be.

The only time sexual objectification is really a problem is when that sexual objectification is used in lieu of other kinds of objectification. So for example, the Wargames Factory Amazon plastics are a prime example of a bad kind of sexual objectification because the sexual objectification interferes with believably implementing other kinds of objectification. They can't really represent a "fierce warrior woman" archetype because plainly by looking at them they have a spray-on fake breast plate and have chosen thong underwear in lieu of clothing.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with depicting the female form, even with depicting it sexually. Sex is a part of who we are, and believe me, you can't shield a child from knowing there are differences between males and females. They know this before they could even comprehend what a miniature is. The problem is when sex is all there is to a miniature, and I think it's making a grave mistake to assume just because a miniature has uncensored naughty bits that sex is all there is to it. I'd say there is more non-sexual content in the wetnurse model, for example, than in most of the minis listed so far on this page. Because in the wetnurse model the sexual content is used to create a feeling of bizarre revulsion in the viewer. Whereas for many of these models the sexual content is depicted exclusively so the painter has something safe and pretty to look at. Not that there is anything wrong with safe and pretty. But in the end, safe and pretty isn't morally superior to nudity, it's still a form of sexual objectification.