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.

I found this issue quite hilarious and quite unimportant.

You see i can understand about not exposing the boy to too much Graphic violence (chopped heads, torn out hearts and such) but *half naked* women it's quite hilarious.

Mostly because as someone who lives in a coastal area where people walk tru the beach nearly 9-10 months per year in bikini, kids here don't sexualize things like that it's just a bathsuit and they couldn't care less.

P.S: at least until hormones kick up.

I let my three year old daughter play with my models. I Play nurgle in sigmar and orks in 40k. She likes skaven because she likes rats in general. a lot of the nurgle models have guts hanging out. She asked what they are ...I said "those are his organs" and now she tells her friends and teachers "daddy plays with organs"

If you explain they are toys, I doubt he will understand the implication of holding a heart or bloddy daggers. But be careful what you say as they repeat EVERYTHING

 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:
I let my three year old daughter play with my models. I Play nurgle in sigmar and orks in 40k. She likes skaven because she likes rats in general. a lot of the nurgle models have guts hanging out. She asked what they are ...I said "those are his organs" and now she tells her friends and teachers "daddy plays with organs"

If you explain they are toys, I doubt he will understand the implication of holding a heart or bloddy daggers. But be careful what you say as they repeat EVERYTHING

Alright. Tangent Story time.

I used to run with an Irish Historical reenactment group (ie: Rennasiance Fairs). Like any 'artistic nerd' group we could be a little rated R but were young enough that we didn't think about the consquences with some of the small children in our group. We were completely unaware of the consquences of doing so until one day a member of ours (who happened to be mother to a 5 year old) comes into the backyard and puts her head down for a moment before looking at us. "Guess who had a Parent-Teacher meeting today?"

Apparently the child had been offered hand lotion by her kindergarten teacher. Imagine the teacher's suprise when this little 5 year old blonde sweetie grabs the bottle and starts singing "It puts the lotion on its skin...Or else it gets the hose again!"

Luckily the teacher recognized the reference and there was no police charges filed

If Daughters of Khaine are a problem, better be prepared to keep the kids away from the public pools, camping trips too close to rivers, the beach, drugstores/supermarkets (Sports Illustrated!), and even broadcast tv nowadays. feth, PBS runs British shows occasionally nowadays, and they joke about stuff resembling peopleparts regularly. Oh yeah, and the radio. It's got plenty of filth on it, and there's almost no effort made to code it in nuance anymore. Also, the internet is probably kind of a bad idea too, but I've been saying that for years now.

I understand the sense of caution, but I feel like it's an overreaction. I'd probably make a gak parent, but based upon the behaviors of the people who I know that are parents, hiding midriffs from children will probably do more harm than good. Maybe they're all wrong? I'll let you know in about 5-10 years.

Frankly, and for better or worse, I don't understand how any pre-20th century concept of morality can survive in an Internet age.

Okay, speaking from experience, I wouldn't worry about what the models look like at the moment. The main priority would be to keep your modelling stuff, modelling knives, glues, etc, basically anything sharp or toxic at a safe distance. If the models themselves are pointy, keep them out of the way.

One thing to watch out for when the child gets older is the art in some of the army books and codex's. That can be quite graphically violent/gory. My six year old daughter says she had nightmares after looking at the Plague Marine stuff in the Dark Imperium box set.

Hope this helps.

Depends on your culture. Here in Europe it´s no big deal. Though one thing would be more despicable in America:

Summoning demons & devils during a game of D&D. That act was so vile that demons & devils had to be renamed in the 80s to tanar´ri & baatezu respectively.

The only thing that gets Americans wound up more is the sight of a woman's nipple.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The only thing that gets Americans wound up more is the sight of a woman's nipple.

Janet Jackson´s nipplegate caused her a lot of grief in retrospect. It even seemed that Timberlake initiated the "Wardrobe malfunction" on purpose.

The only thing to worry about is how to keep the models out of your kid's hands. They will smash them together, drop them on ceramic tile, "accidentally" hide them under their bed.

They will put them in their mouth.

My boys, 6 and 8, understand that it's a game. Most fiction has good guys and bad guys. I don't explain the horror background. These guys look cool, and those guys look cool, and we roll dice to see if they kill each other.

I'd say that the only issue is that the models are fragile and have sharp edges; if a child gets one, they could sustain a very mild injury, whilst snapping the model in half. Nothing that keeping them in a case can't prevent.

It's the danger to your sanity you should be more concerned with, I painted a unit of 40 of them and it was the least enjoyable painting experience of my hobby life. Took twice as long as the rest the whole army.

No, and in reality none of AoS or 40k are child friendly, you have people running around smashing each otehrs skulls in with war hammers, a faction that takes pleasure in causing as much pain as possible, a faction that LITERALLY says blood for the blood god and skulls for the skull thorne and advance in ranking by getting more of them.

NOTHING about the setting is child friendly lol.

How to resolve the issue:

Child: "Why do the ladies have no clothes on?"

Parent: "Helps them fight faster".

That's basically it. You don't need to get into detail about how the worship or anything, just say their an army of assassins and having no Armour helps them fight in their style,

Likelihood is that your child will most like the more special things like the Gorgon things and will be too preoccupied with the big monsters to bother to ask questions about their clothing. Kids like big monsters and Gorgons and Harpies fit that description.

I'd be more worried about choking hazard and spiky bits on the models.

Yes, they are child friendly.

It's 2018.

If you think your 12 year old has never been on the internet, you are fooling yourself.

Especially since you've probably bought your daughter Barbies when she was 4 years old. They are nude, you know.

I'm a bit more concerned about the negative backlash recieved by our OP: Call them whatever you will, but the beliefs that caused the OP's concern are some peoples morals. If one cannot accept the beliefs of others when they disagree and those beliefs are contrary to culture, how is that not intolerant?

To the OP: If you are concerned enough, I would go with ChargerIIC's (Rather clever!) opinion: Paint their midriffs cloth. I also would avoid making them seem taboo like a number of people warned; that's more harm then good generally, though we don't know the boys personality.

Thinking back to when I was growing up in the 80-90s we had He-Man and all those similar cartoons. They had as much "flesh" on show in cartoon as the DoK models do; and they had epic sword fights aplenty.

I also remember playing many many a game of wargames with toy tanks and infantry (big box of green soldiers). To kids that's basically what Warhammer is - its just higher priced, requires putting together and painting, but otherwise its just toy soliders game.

The Lore behind them is grim-dark but its so over the top that its almost in line with the cartoons.


Honestly I'd say you should be fine, so long as you keep smal parts away from the very young (swallowing) and if you care for your models chances are you'll want to keep them out of reach anyway.

I think it's important to consider that miniatures are inanimate, and the background and stories have to be enacted.
What I mean is that a DoK model across the table from Bloodreavers is very different than an AoS movie that would show a fight between DoK and Bloodreavers. When a kid watches violent stuff on TV, he/she just sits there and takes it in. With action figures/miniatures, the story is only as violent as the kid makes it, which is very very different. Even watching people play AoS is very lame to a kid: no "pew pew" sounds, no smashing figures into one another, just endless dice rolling. There is no violence to be seen. The setting sure is violent, but the kids that would be old enough to read (and care) about it would be old enough to understand that it's fiction. As long as you don't read AoS novels as bedtime stories, I don't think the AoS universe is going to do any harm to your kids.

About how the DoK look, I don't think it's a big deal. Seriously, Wonder Woman barely has more clothes on, and you see her everywhere. She's also a fighting woman, with little colthing and a sword, jumping around fighting villains. But it's a real woman, so a lot more relatable than a plastic figure is. If showing the WW movie poster is acceptable, I think showing a DoK model also is.

 BuFFo wrote:
Yes, they are child friendly.

It's 2018.

If you think your 12 year old has never been on the internet, you are fooling yourself.

Especially since you've probably bought your daughter Barbies when she was 4 years old. They are nude, you know.

Might help if you actually read the original post before you respond to it.

 Lazzamore wrote:
I'm a bit more concerned about the negative backlash recieved by our OP: Call them whatever you will, but the beliefs that caused the OP's concern are some peoples morals. If one cannot accept the beliefs of others when they disagree and those beliefs are contrary to culture, how is that not intolerant?

To the OP: If you are concerned enough, I would go with ChargerIIC's (Rather clever!) opinion: Paint their midriffs cloth. I also would avoid making them seem taboo like a number of people warned; that's more harm then good generally, though we don't know the boys personality.

Unfortunately we have a group here on Dakka Dakka that are terrified that someone is going to send the government to seize their pinups and introduce women and minorities to the community. Even worse, they are matched by another group that is fairly certain that WH40k is some kind of final bastion of the Patriarchy that needs marching upon. Posting anything gender,sexuality, or US Politics based draws them in droves. Still - I like to think some good feedback is in there amongst all the vitriol.

Since the issue related to the OP has more or less been resolved, I would genuinely like to know from those who do not think it's appropriate for children to play with half-naked miniatures what negative consequences they anticipate will occur as a result. That isn't snark or whatever, I'd genuinely like to understand. As an addendum, it would be great if there was some sort of evidence to support claims, but this isn't an academic discussion so I understand if that doesn't happen.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
once I was old enough not to try to eat it

That is the only concern she has when it comes to anything Warhammer. Those tiny parts are choking hazards for kids his age. So, I just need to keep a very close eye on them and make sure they aren't accessible at all to him until he's old enough.

SG

Overread wrote:Thinking back to when I was growing up in the 80-90s we had He-Man and all those similar cartoons. They had as much "flesh" on show in cartoon as the DoK models do; and they had epic sword fights aplenty.

Funny, I don't remember Teela, Evil-Lyn, She-ra, or the rest of the women in bikinis. They were all in one-pieces with knee-high boots at the most.

Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote:Since the issue related to the OP has more or less been resolved, I would genuinely like to know from those who do not think it's appropriate for children to play with half-naked miniatures what negative consequences they anticipate will occur as a result. That isn't snark or whatever, I'd genuinely like to understand. As an addendum, it would be great if there was some sort of evidence to support claims, but this isn't an academic discussion so I understand if that doesn't happen.

A lot depends on the age and the experience of the child. If they are used to seeing bikinis all the time at the swim park, then it may not be a problem. If their puberty hormones are running, though, it can lead to frustration which can cause them to seek release through a variety of means, not all of which are healthy for others, much less them. Even before then, it can also lead to behaviors which are embarrassing or demeaning to others.

Of course, that is just possibilities and it varies on a case by case basis. It is the parents' and guardians' responsibility to properly decide what their children are ready for, and not every standard will work for every child. Too much openness about such topics can be just as damaging to a child as much as to much repressiveness. It all depends on the child in question and what they take away from it.

If mama doesn't want the boy to be around models in bikinis, it should be respected, but one should be just as careful taking the child to a public pool, or even a mall, as well.

 Charistoph wrote:

Overread wrote:Thinking back to when I was growing up in the 80-90s we had He-Man and all those similar cartoons. They had as much "flesh" on show in cartoon as the DoK models do; and they had epic sword fights aplenty.

Funny, I don't remember Teela, Evil-Lyn, She-ra, or the rest of the women in bikinis. They were all in one-pieces with knee-high boots at the most.
.

Well I was talking more about the fighting side, though if we want more - risky - clothing then there's always good old
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PldT2jq7ApM

 Overread wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Overread wrote:Thinking back to when I was growing up in the 80-90s we had He-Man and all those similar cartoons. They had as much "flesh" on show in cartoon as the DoK models do; and they had epic sword fights aplenty.

Funny, I don't remember Teela, Evil-Lyn, She-ra, or the rest of the women in bikinis. They were all in one-pieces with knee-high boots at the most.
.

Well I was talking more about the fighting side, though if we want more - risky - clothing then there's always good old
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PldT2jq7ApM

Most of the quoted words were about clothing vs flesh. And, funny, that doesn't look like a cartoon .

 Overread wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Overread wrote:Thinking back to when I was growing up in the 80-90s we had He-Man and all those similar cartoons. They had as much "flesh" on show in cartoon as the DoK models do; and they had epic sword fights aplenty.

Funny, I don't remember Teela, Evil-Lyn, She-ra, or the rest of the women in bikinis. They were all in one-pieces with knee-high boots at the most.
.

Well I was talking more about the fighting side, though if we want more - risky - clothing then there's always good old
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PldT2jq7ApM

Funnily enough you'd actually be hard-pressed to find an example of he-man hitting someone with his sword...

http://nowiknow.com/the-sword-isnt-so-mighty-after-all/

True - Conan did more hitting, but then it was more touching with a magical warp sword that sent the lizards back where they came from

At 2 years old, the biggest issue you have is them eating your figures, so you want to make sure that they are high up or locked behind glass. Hobby miniatures are not designed to the standards of children, and as such, they don't pass the puncture test and have small pieces that can break off and be swallowed (if you've magnetized any models, magnets are really bad to swallow). More than anything, I think it is important to understand how dangerous miniatures (and the paints, knives, and clippers that accompany them) can be in the hands of a two year old.

Second, at two, kids don't have much of an imagination and you can basically watch horror movies in front of them with no repercussions. When they hit the mid-threes though, that's when they start not being able to sleep because you watched Gremlins with them. There are several AoS models which I would be wary about giving nightmares to a young child - but honestly, it is a part of growing up and learning to deal with that sort of thing. And you can never predict what it will be. There's one particular Dr. Seuss book that my wife (now 40) refused to read to our kids because one of the pictures scared the crap out of her as a kid.

Personally, as a parent of two daughters, aged 9 and 12, I don't have a problem with the Daughters of Khaine models (in fact, I just picked up the Blood Coven box). Generally speaking, I believe that child psychologists recommend keeping sexually explicit material away from children (they do not have the social or reasoning abilities to be able to properly context and deal with it), but nudity in a non-sexual context is not a problem. If anything, exposure to nudity in non-sexual situations actually helps children in many ways (better self image, less anxiety, not making the human body "dirty"), whereas keeping it away from them could lead to a sort of unhealthy repression. There is literature out there on this and, if you are serious about this, I recommend seeking it out. It's been a while (over a decade) since I had to, so I can't really offer any references.

Ultimately, though, it is a decision you must make with your wife, and if she has a problem with it (or doesn't), her opinion is going to matter more than anyone's here. Like 90% of parenting is trying to not repeat the mistakes of your parents and failing.

 Sqorgar wrote:
At 2 years old, the biggest issue you have is them eating your figures, so you want to make sure that they are high up or locked behind glass. Hobby miniatures are not designed to the standards of children, and as such, they don't pass the puncture test and have small pieces that can break off and be swallowed (if you've magnetized any models, magnets are really bad to swallow). More than anything, I think it is important to understand how dangerous miniatures (and the paints, knives, and clippers that accompany them) can be in the hands of a two year old.

No doubt about that, but that applies to modelling in general (and not just to 2-year-olds), not the concerns about what the model itself can be presenting. Not to mention, 2-year-olds turn to 3-year-olds all too quickly.

 Sqorgar wrote:
Second, at two, kids don't have much of an imagination and you can basically watch horror movies in front of them with no repercussions. When they hit the mid-threes though, that's when they start not being able to sleep because you watched Gremlins with them. There are several AoS models which I would be wary about giving nightmares to a young child - but honestly, it is a part of growing up and learning to deal with that sort of thing. And you can never predict what it will be. There's one particular Dr. Seuss book that my wife (now 40) refused to read to our kids because one of the pictures scared the crap out of her as a kid.

This varies from child to child. Their time of awareness of such things can be early or it can be late. Most important of all is being aware of the child's development. It wouldn't be

 Sqorgar wrote:
Personally, as a parent of two daughters, aged 9 and 12, I don't have a problem with the Daughters of Khaine models (in fact, I just picked up the Blood Coven box). Generally speaking, I believe that child psychologists recommend keeping sexually explicit material away from children (they do not have the social or reasoning abilities to be able to properly context and deal with it), but nudity in a non-sexual context is not a problem. If anything, exposure to nudity in non-sexual situations actually helps children in many ways (better self image, less anxiety, not making the human body "dirty"), whereas keeping it away from them could lead to a sort of unhealthy repression. There is literature out there on this and, if you are serious about this, I recommend seeking it out. It's been a while (over a decade) since I had to, so I can't really offer any references.

Boys and girls are different. Even nudity without a sexual context can be arousing in a boy (National Geographic, anyone?). Nudity without a sexual context can also develop poor self images in women if they are comparing themselves to what they see. Simply put, while exposure may not be intended to be sexual, it can be turned in to it. Think about all the innuendos that people apply to otherwise innocent items these days.

As a side note, not all research is trustworthy, either. A lot of it can be skewed by seeking to prove a certain hypothesis, and some parties have dumped data which does not support the conclusion they are being paid to support (and "forgot" to mention it in the report). A group being paid to demonstrate that early nudity exposure could only report a majority of data which supports their conclusions.

Either way, being aware of the child's development and what they can handle is of paramount importance, no matter what the pastor or Dr Spock may say otherwise.

 Sqorgar wrote:
Ultimately, though, it is a decision you must make with your wife, and if she has a problem with it (or doesn't), her opinion is going to matter more than anyone's here. Like 90% of parenting is trying to not repeat the mistakes of your parents and failing.

Agreed. Let's not forget that just because it may have been a mistake with you, does not mean it is a mistake with the child. Each person is different and has different needs.

 Charistoph wrote:

Boys and girls are different. Even nudity without a sexual context can be arousing in a boy (National Geographic, anyone?). Nudity without a sexual context can also develop poor self images in women if they are comparing themselves to what they see. Simply put, while exposure may not be intended to be sexual, it can be turned in to it. Think about all the innuendos that people apply to otherwise innocent items these days.

They aren't. We have presumed for a long time that "girls don't do that" but they do. It was just not socially acceptable for girls to acknowledge it.

Attitudes to nudity are very personal, and mostly shaped by how you were brought up, but if someone finds, say, topless bathing arousing then the problem is with him, not the girls who just want to do away with tanlines. If my 4yr old son wants to keep bathing naked on the beach I won't force him to wear a swimsuit just in case there's a pedophile lurking around. It's him who has a problem, not me or my son.

I would say that the models are not child friendly. At least not the Khinerai. They are way too fragile to be handled by even the most careful adult. Beautiful models but infuriating to assemble as at any time you might break off some little bit.