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.

Basically, given the right environment and exposure, any one of us could be the "Monsters" we see every day on the news.

d-usa wrote:We are all around 72 hours away from becoming these monsters, IMO.

Fair enough. I still find it a bit harsh but at least it sounds reasonable compared to the "I could go for strangling some little girls right about now, and if it weren't for those meddling police officers I'd have gotten away with it" vibe the last comment was giving off .

Delaphont wrote:You're not on my side of the discussion, you're on your side of the discussion, debating an aspect you believe in. I don't think anyone is here to take sides, we're simply here to debate a point, that your angle of debate may in some degrees parallel my own does not make us of a like mind in all things.

True. withdrawn. I was just dividing the 'pro-eldar rape scene' and 'contra-eldar rape scene' camps for simplicity's sake.

(funny btw, that this thread started as one about nude models and ended up in this interesting discussion. Tits have long stopped to be the issue anymore. If the diorama was just one of an eldar sunbathing topless there would be a lot less of a hassle about it.)

Delephont wrote:I think you have to take WH40K quite serious to be offended by nude figures, which in itself is quite worrying really.

To be offended by a bare breast, or an exposed thigh, and yet not blink an eye at a Ravaging Green Ork, or an emaciated Dark Eldar running into battle bare foot is just hillarious.

I'm married and have obviously enjoyed the company of a women, as my 5 month old son will bear witness, and I love seeing well sculpted female forms in both Statue form or large scale miniature form (I collect 54mm and up, and also collect Sideshow Premium Format Statues). I think the female form is great, and everytime I get a chubby looking at a female Marvel comic character, I get the pleasure of knowing everything in the plumbing department is working A-OK, and that my mental chip is still firing on optimum!

All of that said, I was not offended by the Eldar rape scene, quite the opposite, I found it absolutely fascinating. It was a side of WH40K that is not explored because it will offend the kiddies (like severed heads, and the destruction of entire planets is somehow more acceptible?!?).

Regarding the part naked Commissar, well, ok, there I draw the line. Not because it depicts a naked woman, no, that part I like....it's more because it depicts an idiot! Any woman going into combat without torso protection, I don't care how good a warrior you are, is either going to end up dead or taking part in the Eldar rape scene....as the Eldar!

pretty much everything here.
I don't think nudity is the problem, its the practicality.
A naked commissar isn't bad because she is naked, it is bad because it doesn't make sense. People like things that somewhat make sense in regards to entertainment and such. A good scifi show or movie isn't 'hoaky'. Its believable within that setting's paradigms. A naked commissar on the battlefield? Not so believable. Guardsmen raping and humanoid female on the battlefield, pretty believable with quite a strong message.

spaceelf wrote:Most of the debate has centered around whether or not nude models are appropriate. I would like to add another dimension, the consequences of creating such artwork. In 1987 Peggy Hettrick was murdered and sexually mutilated in Fort Collins CO. The main suspect was a teenager named Tim Masters. There was no physical evidence that he committed the crime and no witnesses. He was hounded by police but no further evidence turned up. About a decade later he was charged with her murder. Central to the prosecution's case was testimony by a psychologist who interpreted graphic drawings that Tim made as a teenager. Tim was convicted of murder and spent close to a decade in prison. This case would certainly make me think twice before making a rape diorama, even if I thought that it was art.

Well Tim obviously had some serious issues well before committing the act, he would have committed them even if he hadn't made those drawings, it my models I like lots of blood and gore on my Khorne models, I have no desire to run round with a massive axe cutting people into tinny bits, sometimes people just have ideas and what to see how it plays out, like with the eldar rape thing I think Its a mixture of being original and shock effect, I don't think we need to start making more of this than need be. To the original subject of nude models, who really cares, if it isn't something you like then no amount of explaining is going to change you mind, its abit like trying to explain the hobby to a chav, no matter what you say they will never see past the fact its adults playing with toys, I don't own any nude models, if thats how AoW decide to make some witch elf count as then I will.

itsonlyme wrote:

spaceelf wrote:Most of the debate has centered around whether or not nude models are appropriate. I would like to add another dimension, the consequences of creating such artwork. In 1987 Peggy Hettrick was murdered and sexually mutilated in Fort Collins CO. The main suspect was a teenager named Tim Masters. There was no physical evidence that he committed the crime and no witnesses. He was hounded by police but no further evidence turned up. About a decade later he was charged with her murder. Central to the prosecution's case was testimony by a psychologist who interpreted graphic drawings that Tim made as a teenager. Tim was convicted of murder and spent close to a decade in prison. This case would certainly make me think twice before making a rape diorama, even if I thought that it was art.

Well Tim obviously had some serious issues well before committing the act, he would have committed them even if he hadn't made those drawings, it my models I like lots of blood and gore on my Khorne models, I have no desire to run round with a massive axe cutting people into tinny bits, sometimes people just have ideas and what to see how it plays out, like with the eldar rape thing I think Its a mixture of being original and shock effect, I don't think we need to start making more of this than need be. To the original subject of nude models, who really cares, if it isn't something you like then no amount of explaining is going to change you mind, its abit like trying to explain the hobby to a chav, no matter what you say they will never see past the fact its adults playing with toys, I don't own any nude models, if thats how AoW decide to make some witch elf count as then I will.

Just to make sure that noone gets the wrong idea from my original post. Although Tim was convicted of murder and put in prison for almost a decade, it is my understanding that he was granted a new trial and the charges were dropped. He was released from prison and is no longer a suspect in the case.

In summary they put the wrong guy behind bars because he created some disturbing drawings.

The manga artwork that is mainstream in Japan makes anything shown thus far very very tame............

One persons disturbing/wrong/sick is anothers pleasure.

I guess we all have to make our own decisions about that and perhaps collectively what we consider and allow as mainstream?

Mr Morden wrote:The manga artwork that is mainstream in Japan makes anything shown thus far very very tame............

One persons disturbing/wrong/sick is anothers pleasure.

I guess we all have to make our own decisions about that and perhaps collectively what we consider and allow as mainstream?

Please don't use mainstream Japanese culture as a baseline, it makes everything seem tamer by far

As to the OP, so long as the figure is well done, I don't have a problem. The trouble is so many of these figures are just bad - akin to the Fallen Madonna with the Big Boobies. In part this is why I like the Dark Eldar, because they look like female warriors and not Jordon with sword.

As to the rape diorama - yes it is very well modelled, and rather distrubing, but I suspect that the fate of the female eldar is going to be something rather worse than rape - in the conventional sense.

But then I find it odd how quickly the discussion moved from female nudity to rape.

This has attracted an insane amount of responses in a short time, wow. When I started this thread I gave the examples not to single them out specifically. I was mainly talking about nudity in general on models where its just stupid. I do agree that nudity on some models makes complete sense and is acceptable. The nudity in general on any model is not offensive to me, I just find it stupid and less interesting than the clothing or armor that usually covers those parts. The exception of course being demonettes and other models with a reason to be nude. I do like where this thread went though, I had a good time reading through it and I think it made a lot of people think. Many great responses, I guess this topic is on many more minds than I originally assumed. This matter will never be agreed upon one way or another because it is based on peoples opinions, but its cool we could all come on here and have a good time discussing it with each other! Cheers!

Love it or hate it, one thing is for certain: The eldar rape scene diorama is a success as a piece of art. This thread proves it. It has provoked strong repsonses and thoughtful discussion.

I'm fine with sensible, artistic nose art on valkyries and bits of armor partially torn off by a vicious salvo of gunfire or explosions, revealing the female wearer's legs a little bit. However, when people cross the line into highly offensive and inappropriate depictions that would be removed by moderators if it were a real image of people actually doing whatever is being displayed, I find it offensive and discomforting. That kind of crap is made by people with perverse minds who have ben truly corrupted by the demon of Slaneesh. The body is to be respected universally, not abused graphically in any way.

That's my conservative view of the day, folks.

killykavekommando wrote: That kind of crap is made by people with perverse minds who have ben truly corrupted by the demon of Slaneesh. The body is to be respected universally, not abused graphically in any way.

That's my conservative view of the day, folks.

Are you being serious?

marielle wrote:Fallen Madonna with the Big Boobies

I am putting cheese in my ears over this topic

Delephont wrote:

killykavekommando wrote: That kind of crap is made by people with perverse minds who have ben truly corrupted by the demon of Slaneesh. The body is to be respected universally, not abused graphically in any way.

That's my conservative view of the day, folks.

Are you being serious?

For the most part, me being Catholic (here comes another argument!), minus the Slaneesh part. I truly think that many models are way over the top and I consider them sexist in that they regard females as toys to play with.

killykavekommando wrote:

Delephont wrote:

killykavekommando wrote: That kind of crap is made by people with perverse minds who have ben truly corrupted by the demon of Slaneesh. The body is to be respected universally, not abused graphically in any way.

That's my conservative view of the day, folks.

Are you being serious?

For the most part, me being Catholic (here comes another argument!), minus the Slaneesh part. I truly think that many models are way over the top and I consider them sexist in that they regard females as toys to play with.

All miniatures are toys to play with.
They have guys without shirts, nipple armor, rippling muscles, and plenty of models with dangly bits. I feel that this is sexist towards men and clearly made to attract a female crowd. I feel it is pretty balanced. To be offended by nudity is to be offended by human nature.

Besides, most models depict a different setting. Their social paradigms on nudity will probably be a lot different then our own.

I don't like forced sexual stuff in my 40k. This is something I do to relax. The last thing I wanna be wondering is, 'Are those veternas gonna sodomize Eldrad when we're done here?' because, frankly, I know too many victims of rape and sexual abuse. It's something that makes me angry and bitter. It's not what I wanna deal with when doing a hobby to calm me down.

Frankly, it has no greater place in the game than politics. Politics in 40k must be a nightmare. But no one proposes that we have rules where half there army can't use a gun because planetary budget cuts mean they have no ammo. Probably because you can't make models of politicians that look good (with some exceptions...Bionic Churchill would kick ass) and there's a lot less fascination with legislation than boobs. But, frankly, I don't really want to deal with either during my average game, and especially not something as vile as forced sex.

Then again, I also strongly disagree with the idea that anything can be art. Kiddy porn is never going to be art, not to any rational human being anyway. Stuff like this is more subjective...but I don't especially like it.

killykavekommando wrote: I truly think that many models are way over the top and I consider them sexist in that they regard females as toys to play with.

I agree with you on this.

Equally wierd is why the male genetals are almost always 'airbrushed'. Even on animals and the like.

And when they are depicted, as in the case of Celtic berzerkers, they are in proportion to real life.... *cue jokes*


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jon Garrett wrote:I don't like forced sexual stuff in my 40k. This is something I do to relax. The last thing I wanna be wondering is, 'Are those veternas gonna sodomize Eldrad when we're done here?' because, frankly, I know too many victims of rape and sexual abuse. It's something that makes me angry and bitter. It's not what I wanna deal with when doing a hobby to calm me down.

Indeed, but then it is also offensive the current parlance in which such and such a unit 'rapes' another unit, or 'I bent over and lubed up' to take the assault etc. Perhaps it is the weird way in which some people confuse sex and violence, and pass it off as bravado.

Jon Garrett wrote:I don't like forced sexual stuff in my 40k. This is something I do to relax. The last thing I wanna be wondering is, 'Are those veternas gonna sodomize Eldrad when we're done here?' because, frankly, I know too many victims of rape and sexual abuse. It's something that makes me angry and bitter. It's not what I wanna deal with when doing a hobby to calm me down.

Frankly, it has no greater place in the game than politics. Politics in 40k must be a nightmare. But no one proposes that we have rules where half there army can't use a gun because planetary budget cuts mean they have no ammo. Probably because you can't make models of politicians that look good (with some exceptions...Bionic Churchill would kick ass) and there's a lot less fascination with legislation than boobs. But, frankly, I don't really want to deal with either during my average game, and especially not something as vile as forced sex.

Then again, I also strongly disagree with the idea that anything can be art. Kiddy porn is never going to be art, not to any rational human being anyway. Stuff like this is more subjective...but I don't especially like it.

All opinions are valid. THAT is why art and the humanities are ours to study and either rip up and beat our chests about, or enjoy and discuss with a good cigar, a bottle of good scotch, and a couple of opinions.

NO opinion in the matter is wrong. They are all equally valed.

I can accept your stance, as well, but if you go back to the beginnings of the old school game, Rogue Trader, D and D, Frank Franzetta's works, Conan the Barbarian, Gamma World, Aftermath, Car Wars, AD 2000, scifi from the 70's and 80's, and Heavy Metal, as well as other comic book janras, THAT is the birthplace of the hows and whys...

There is honestly no, "Getting it." It is art for arts sake. in a true "Do what thou whilst" spirit.

The fact that the stuff gets as strong a rise out of Sidster, as it does NOT get a rise out of Delephont is the obvious key as to WHY the piece was made. THAT is the brilliance of the thing.

On my own admission, I am an artist. I collect art for arts sake. I paint the miniatures, I like Pin up art, I like Gieger, Rodan, Bosh, Pellente, Vargas, etc. etc.etc.( I absolutely LOVE Helmut Newton.The sheer shock value, along with the inspiration and discussions that thier works provide is excellent( Much as this one has been.)

What I can honestly agree with is the point taken by the Sidster on the point of the audience, though. He's not a donkey cave for not liking it, getting a rise out of it, and he is entitled to his opinion.

The Audience of the work is part in parcel of the discussion, but there are so many factors, that to go into here and nit pick ,( I would be the donkey cave to go on and on about.)

His point of "The 12 year olds not being the crowd that should be able to honestly be viewing this" is a valid point. One that should be the main direction of that graphic portayal in miniature.

Some say " oh, it isn't... THAT bad." I have to digress back to point 1 here being- YOU might not, but you are not those 12 year olds parents, nor are you in a position to be making decisions for someone elses kids. The fact that it is out there is enough. The kids parents can go up in arms over it, while you sit there, scratching your head trying to figure out what they are going on about. ( Both opinions are valid.)

Well out there alongside the "Modanna portrayed in feces, Tank Girl, Vamperella, Lady Death, The works of Soloman Rushdi, Betty Page, Pin up art from the 20's- present, body modification, models for high classed advertising agencies, and any and all portrayals of the human form from times past to present. The artists make it to get a reaction... You like it, hate it, give a meh....The portrayal of females,males, animals, and aliens is open to the artist and the audience.

"Oh, this is art- thats not art..." is an ever changing opinion. One in which you do not get the luxury of being right or wrong in, because it is one that is an internal decision, crafted by your personal opinions and tastes.

Fantasy kitch, from which the scifi games, miniatures, and art were born from is basicly a sideshow.
Much like bondage art, tattoos, anime, cartoons, porn, etc.etc.etc.... It boils down to a matter of the way in which it is done, portrayed, and interprited by the artist and viewer. So in that, as an example.... A guy/girl reads AD 2000, (in which Judge Dredd is famous) then the guy/girl, a graphic artist, or designer decided to branch out, and to gain noteriety, draw a fantastic picture in ink and pencil. Then someone else sees it, maybe a minis designer and his pal, a cartoonist or graphic designer come up with a couple of minis designes because they loved the suits.... They make a mini, someone else sees that mini, takes the work, adds in a female form, with a ripped up shirt and a lawgiver, adds in a pin up pose, maybe has a muti on the right.....

as is the commisar, as is the diorama, as is the suckling demon midwives, etc.etc.etc....

( I wrote the last part here as a basic example of the hows and whys of the Inspiration process of someone who would make up a nude mini of say.. a Judge Hershey, or Anderson. The same process is done by anyone else for any other model, and in other ways for other games.)

It is an ever growing way in which the graphic nature of art, miniatures, and the gaming goes. THIS is the essence of the "Understanding why people make the nude minis, art, etc. and why do people like it."

If the old school art masters could have done minis, how far do you think they would have pushed the envelope?

Great discussion, by and by.
Here's Churchill for you, too.

Mewiththeface wrote:A naked commissar isn't bad because she is naked, it is bad because it doesn't make sense.

That's my take on it as well. Whereas the Eldar rape scene tells a fascinating (if dark and often not depicted in 40K) story, with each of the perpetrators having their own little story within the diorama (exactly what a diorama is meant to do).

I think that many people do obscene stuff in their dioramas and minis because they:
Alpha: Can't get a girl.
Bravo: Love the shock value. Many modern artists and photographers are like this.
Charlie: Are perverse and regard women as inferior. This is the kind of people that I have the beef with. These are the scum of the universe. PURGE THE UNCLEAN!!!!
Delta: For artistic value that they don't understand. True art doesn't need this kind of stuff in it.

What a narrow view...

killykavekommando wrote:I think that many people do obscene stuff in their dioramas and minis because they:
Alpha: Can't get a girl.
Bravo: Love the shock value. Many modern artists and photographers are like this.
Charlie: Are perverse and regard women as inferior. This is the kind of people that I have the beef with. These are the scum of the universe. PURGE THE UNCLEAN!!!!
Delta: For artistic value that they don't understand. True art doesn't need this kind of stuff in it.

To counter your opinion with my opinion, I think you are right and wrong because:

Alpha: Even some of the most perverse people are in happy relationships.
Bravo: There is a difference between "I will shock you" and "I want people to think about this". Just because it provokes thought and discussion does not mean it is done for shock value.
Charlie: Usual "I don't like what you did so I will judge you" comment
Delta: There is no such thing as true art. Art is art because the artist says so.

i love the rape scene model.........instantly it reminded me of platoon and the lessons on how brutal war truly is..........it brings out the worst in people and how quickly we forget this is another being who is truly not that much different than us

d-usa wrote:

killykavekommando wrote:I think that many people do obscene stuff in their dioramas and minis because they:
Alpha: Can't get a girl.
Bravo: Love the shock value. Many modern artists and photographers are like this.
Charlie: Are perverse and regard women as inferior. This is the kind of people that I have the beef with. These are the scum of the universe. PURGE THE UNCLEAN!!!!
Delta: For artistic value that they don't understand. True art doesn't need this kind of stuff in it.

To counter your opinion with my opinion, I think you are right and wrong because:

Alpha: Even some of the most perverse people are in happy relationships.
Bravo: There is a difference between "I will shock you" and "I want people to think about this". Just because it provokes thought and discussion does not mean it is done for shock value.
Charlie: Usual "I don't like what you did so I will judge you" comment
Delta: There is no such thing as true art. Art is art because the artist says so.

You make quite valid points, and I admit that I am quite narrow-minded at times. However, I meant the truly obscene stuff, such as extreme Hentai 40k version, not moderate inappropriateness. I'm targeting truly perverse stuff, not airplane nose art. I actually appreciate the historically accurate nose art on valkyries, if painted well.

I don't care for either myself. I find it tasteless and offensive. I also don't agree with the o it's just art so I can paint or display whatever I want for shock value.

I know that such things happen in real life but I don't believe it's necessary to depict them in a game setting for amusement. Especially one the young children participate in.

I don't like to read Steve Ericksen's novels for the same reason. There is a certain level of realisem and violence that I'm willing to tolerate and then there's just giving me to much info. I find it distasteful.

I found the rape diorama thought provoking and superbly executed. The fact that it was done with minitures just changes the canvas. That is all.

How many NCIS episodes have some girl telling about the gang rape she endured. How many movies have depicted a brutal and violent rape scene? How many times has such a scene been depicted in charcoal, photography (mock or not), pencil, etc.

The diorama was just a snap shot, a frozen frame as it were of the above movie. It was just done in a different medium. Would there be this same outcry if the models were Nepolionic historicals? The sinerio is the same, just the uniforms have changed. Is the real issue that the models being used are traditionally used in a "kids game"? I think this is probably the bigger issue of where the real outcry is coming from.

As for naked bodies. The naked form has been depicted ever since the cave man first put rock to stone wall. Its not perverse, its not weird, its nothing to be ashamed about. Hell the the male species didn't find the female species visually alluring the human species as a whole wouldn't have made it very far. I sure as hell didn't find myself attracted to my wife because of her breath.

Now having said all that, yeah there is some stuff out there that just doesn't make any sense, has no real world application, nor does it even have any educational value.

To you.

Different strokes for different folk. We each have to decide for ourselves what we find offensive or necessary. What has value and what is a waste of material. But there is nothing ever that says one way is right or one way is wrong when it comes to art (any kind of art). After all (for example) photography is a form of art. And there are some really disturbing pictures out there of real world events that will evoke a powerful emotion. Its what you do with that emotion that each of us must decide for ourselves and we must realize that it is impossible for everyone to share the same option as you.

wowsmash wrote:I know that such things happen in real life but I don't believe it's necessary to depict them in a game setting for amusement. Especially one the young children participate in.

Well, in regards to the rape diorama I think we should also consider the event it was created for.

If somebody is playing at his or her FLGS and just sets down his rape diorama for display or uses it as a huge objective marker, then I will even agree that it is over the top and just plain weird.

But this diorama looks like it was created as a Golden Deamon entry. In my mind, Golden Deamon is about as far removed from the "game" as you can be. Golden Deamon is not "playing 40K with very well painted models and conversions", instead it is an actual artistic competition that just happens to use the GW models as a starting point, and the fluff of 40K as an inspiration.

I just got done reading Fulgrim, an official Black Library 40K novel. While not a Codex or a rulebook, I think that Black Library novels can be considered a solid part of the fluff. That novel alone included a scene where an woman is riding some random guy cowgirl style, and at the moment of their climax staps him in the throat and enjoys him dying while feeling "his warmth" inside of her. It also includes two scenes of giant orgies, the second of which is an orgy where Space Marines get their kicks killing people in mid-orgasmic bliss. It also makes it clear that during their fall to Chaos they cover their ship in all manner of Pornography.

Thats not some perverted fanfic or fanboy interpretation of events, that is 100% official GW fluff. And if somebody is looking for inspiration for a "true to fluff" diorama for a 100% artistic competition it would be perfectly legit to use any of these scenes.

You have to remember that Golden Deamon is not about playing the game, it is an artistic competition using the fluff of the game.

The eldar rape diorama is just as silly as the female commissar. Everyone knows doing the dirty with zenos scum is extra heretical, and those who even think about it are in line for bolt based re-education.

Necroshea wrote:The eldar rape diorama is just as silly as the female commissar. Everyone knows doing the dirty with zenos scum is extra heretical, and those who even think about it are in line for bolt based re-education.

Perfectly put, Necroshea.

@wowsmash: I agree with you also. Kids play this game, whether we choose to realize it or not. Whoever Steve Ericksen is, there is probably a reason why I don't read his stories.

Thare1774 wrote:Often while browsing CMON I see nude female miniatures that people paint. It doesn't offend me at all, I just don't get it. For example I saw two today, the first was a female commissar wearing only a trench coat and pants and boots. Breasts exposed as well as her whole upper torso all the way down nearly to her crotch. Why in the world would a female commissar be naked? What is the value of that model? I would think people in this hobby would rather see a really well sculpted legitimate female commissar in full uniform appropriate for gameplay. The second example I saw was a diorama basically depicting the rape of an Eldar female captured by some guardsmen. One had her breastplate in his hands and she was topless on the ground while another guardsmen had his pants unbuttoned and others were watching in amusement. It was really well painted and put together, but what is the motivation to depict a rape scene when it could have just been the same scene minus the rape and nudity? I think in MOST cases it cheapens the time and effort put into creating it, What do you think?

So first the original question. I don't see a problem with nude models. If someone wants to use them it's their choice. I can think two reason why nude models shouldn't be a wargame: a) kids and b) realism.

(a) For kids I think that graphic representation of violence needs to be removed as well. Sure parents can decide how much to allow which (violence and nudity). Unfortunately our cultures seem to think that nudity is a lot worse than violence. I don't really agree with that. So in that sense I think that tasteful nude models are fine as mild depiction of violence is fine as well. Then again if these models are used in 14 / 18 (depending on individuals) or up situations then this argument vanishes of course.

(b) While this is a valid reason, I don't really agree with it in this case. More detailed answer below.

ZacktheChaosChild wrote:Sometimes nudity makes sense. Do you think a greater daemon of Khorne or something would care to cove up his dingly bits?

Why would a Khorne Greater Demon have dingly bits? Slaanesh ... sure ... can figure out, but not the rest really.

Mewiththeface wrote:

Delephont wrote:Regarding the part naked Commissar, well, ok, there I draw the line. Not because it depicts a naked woman, no, that part I like....it's more because it depicts an idiot! Any woman going into combat without torso protection, I don't care how good a warrior you are, is either going to end up dead or taking part in the Eldar rape scene....as the Eldar!

pretty much everything here.
I don't think nudity is the problem, its the practicality.
A naked commissar isn't bad because she is naked, it is bad because it doesn't make sense. People like things that somewhat make sense in regards to entertainment and such. A good scifi show or movie isn't 'hoaky'. Its believable within that setting's paradigms. A naked commissar on the battlefield? Not so believable. Guardsmen raping and humanoid female on the battlefield, pretty believable with quite a strong message.

While I'd agree to this, in case of 40k I don't. That game has so many completely pointless things which break this rule that nothing new in this sense really matters. From the top of my head of which 1st was specifically selected for this point.
1. Battle sisters. I really would like to see someone explain why they don't then wear proper armour. Hint to those who might argue that they do, real combat gear are same for men and women.
2. Super heavies and Titans. Weight and reality doesn't really meet here.
3. Swords and other cc gear. How many modern soldier carries a sword?

Grot 6 wrote:

All opinions are valid. THAT is why art and the humanities are ours to study and either rip up and beat our chests about, or enjoy and discuss with a good cigar, a bottle of good scotch, and a couple of opinions.

NO opinion in the matter is wrong. They are all equally valed.

I can accept your stance, as well, but if you go back to the beginnings of the old school game, Rogue Trader, D and D, Frank Franzetta's works, Conan the Barbarian, Gamma World, Aftermath, Car Wars, AD 2000, scifi from the 70's and 80's, and Heavy Metal, as well as other comic book janras, THAT is the birthplace of the hows and whys...

There is honestly no, "Getting it." It is art for arts sake. in a true "Do what thou whilst" spirit.

I can agree that art can depict anything; I have a friend whose back is covered in a tattoo of a naked Japanese woman involved in bondage. It's a beautiful piece of work by an incredibly skilled person. On the other hand, some places aren't acceptable to show it off - he can't go to a public swimming pool or beach now because that thing will cause offence to anyone with small children. I'd say the same goes to to a wargame that, at least now, has a rating of...what? 8 and up? Which isn't to say the guy can't or shouldn't do it - as with my friend it's a well done, well executed piece, but it's not something I like and certainly not something I'd wanna see in any shop I visit.

I know in the olden days, one of the races in Warhammer use to reproduce via rape. That race got retconned out of existence. I know there are still some models that have exposed breasts, but I will say there's quite a large jump between 'Breasts on a demon of lust' and a rape scene.

I'd also say that while art can depict anything, not anything can be art. Again, using the extreme example, a snapshot of a child being sexually abused will never be art - just sick, twisted and vile. Some thing do need censoring, even in our age of free speech and free expression. You could, possibly, get away with the same thing drawn or painted, since at least no child was actually harmed, but a lot of people would still wanna set fire to it, myself included.

Grot 6 wrote:The fact that the stuff gets as strong a rise out of Sidster, as it does NOT get a rise out of Delephont is the obvious key as to WHY the piece was made. THAT is the brilliance of the thing.

On my own admission, I am an artist. I collect art for arts sake. I paint the miniatures, I like Pin up art, I like Gieger, Rodan, Bosh, Pellente, Vargas, etc. etc.etc.( I absolutely LOVE Helmut Newton.The sheer shock value, along with the inspiration and discussions that thier works provide is excellent( Much as this one has been.)

What I can honestly agree with is the point taken by the Sidster on the point of the audience, though. He's not a donkey cave for not liking it, getting a rise out of it, and he is entitled to his opinion.

The Audience of the work is part in parcel of the discussion, but there are so many factors, that to go into here and nit pick ,( I would be the donkey cave to go on and on about.)

His point of "The 12 year olds not being the crowd that should be able to honestly be viewing this" is a valid point. One that should be the main direction of that graphic portayal in miniature.

I think part of the issue is the medium. With enough time, I guess you could do exactly the same thing with lego, albeit not in the same detail. But that's so clearly a kids medium and toy that it would be fething creepy. It's sorta the same here. 'So 12 years olds shouldn't be looking at models for armies they may well collect because the artist has done something perverse?'

Grot 6 wrote:Some say " oh, it isn't... THAT bad." I have to digress back to point 1 here being- YOU might not, but you are not those 12 year olds parents, nor are you in a position to be making decisions for someone elses kids. The fact that it is out there is enough. The kids parents can go up in arms over it, while you sit there, scratching your head trying to figure out what they are going on about. ( Both opinions are valid.)

Well out there alongside the "Modanna portrayed in feces, Tank Girl, Vamperella, Lady Death, The works of Soloman Rushdi, Betty Page, Pin up art from the 20's- present, body modification, models for high classed advertising agencies, and any and all portrayals of the human form from times past to present. The artists make it to get a reaction... You like it, hate it, give a meh....The portrayal of females,males, animals, and aliens is open to the artist and the audience.

"Oh, this is art- thats not art..." is an ever changing opinion. One in which you do not get the luxury of being right or wrong in, because it is one that is an internal decision, crafted by your personal opinions and tastes.

Fantasy kitch, from which the scifi games, miniatures, and art were born from is basicly a sideshow.
Much like bondage art, tattoos, anime, cartoons, porn, etc.etc.etc.... It boils down to a matter of the way in which it is done, portrayed, and interprited by the artist and viewer. So in that, as an example.... A guy/girl reads AD 2000, (in which Judge Dredd is famous) then the guy/girl, a graphic artist, or designer decided to branch out, and to gain noteriety, draw a fantastic picture in ink and pencil. Then someone else sees it, maybe a minis designer and his pal, a cartoonist or graphic designer come up with a couple of minis designes because they loved the suits.... They make a mini, someone else sees that mini, takes the work, adds in a female form, with a ripped up shirt and a lawgiver, adds in a pin up pose, maybe has a muti on the right.....

as is the commisar, as is the diorama, as is the suckling demon midwives, etc.etc.etc....

( I wrote the last part here as a basic example of the hows and whys of the Inspiration process of someone who would make up a nude mini of say.. a Judge Hershey, or Anderson. The same process is done by anyone else for any other model, and in other ways for other games.)

It is an ever growing way in which the graphic nature of art, miniatures, and the gaming goes. THIS is the essence of the "Understanding why people make the nude minis, art, etc. and why do people like it."

If the old school art masters could have done minis, how far do you think they would have pushed the envelope?

I think there's a big difference between something meant for younger people to do, and something meant for adults in a similar medium. Take comic books. There are plenty for younger people to read. Then, on the flip side, you have something like Crossed - one of the most violent and sexually graphic things I've ever seen in any medium. But despite being a comic book, it was never meant to be for anyone under 18 (or 21 in some countries!) where as this wasn't. I also don't like rule 34 pictures of disney princesses getting gangbanged and murdered for much the same reason. Plus I can't help but imagine the heart break my own daughter would go through seeing a female character they like being treated that way.

If there was an adult table top game with a fluff of rape and rules to sodomize, I wouldn't have an issue with it. Wouldn't play it, but wouldn't care. Those elements have been dropped from Fantasy and 40k, which I personally prefer.