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.

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:
2- I really missed were I tried to impose you anything and inverting arguments isnt your best bet here... I'm not Corvus belli I did not produce these minis they are totally ok and on target for me and I enjoy painting them...as a sculptor I can admire their very professional sculpts... I like anime and scifi. They didnt imposed anything on me and I have a good experience surfing their enjoyable fictitious universe... Some people dont like it, its OK, some people complain, its OK, some demand changes, Not OK, some people think they know better about Corvus belli creations than Corvus belli itself its a bit nonsense but OK I guess... So no I dont impose anything to anyone and I dont know nothing besides the place for gaming miniatures is on the wartable or painting displays not a tool to vent away my morality preferences and surely not a banner to my life standarts. Its not THAT context mate.

You just stated what was OK and not OK, as an argument in a discussion I might add, how is that not an attempt at imposing your values on me?

And I'm generally sorry for taking the jam out of your donut but the world is a nasty business and I can't alter that fact.

Your trying to reach something to hard, its not really there I dont really have a problem with you and could care less if you like the minis or not, if I express my opinion in disagreement to some of your points is not imposing you something. While you inserting your moral values into a wargame is in fact you imposing something out of context in peoples hobbies.

Thing is its indeed a nasty world thats why people like to play alternative universes because both are detached from another... you may want to try it its good and relaxing.

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:No, your opinion isn't as relevant as mine, because my opinion is the same as those that make the game.

Is that so? What makes it so? Are you suggesting that the opinion of those that think differently from the majority is of less value? That would be deeply disturbing.

No, I'm saying that in the context of the fictional universe called infinity, created by CB, the opinion of the creators of the setting has more value than yours. You are consistently forgeting that what we are discussing is in the context of a comercial miniature game.

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:Bollocks, the human mind can diferentiate from an inanimate representation and an actual person just fine after it leaves its infancy, only small childs have problems distinguishing reality from fantasy, adults who can't should seek mental help as fast as possible.

You seem to be the one having serious dificulties diferentiating between an inanimate object in a fantasy alternate universe and real women. If you wan't to really help real women then go to Iran protest against the women that is set to be stoned to death for the crime of being raped. If you wan't to help real women, then go to China and protest against the hundreds of babies that are killed for the crime of being born a women. If you wan't to help real women then go to Africa and protest against the clitorial mutilations of baby girls, or the rape of virgin girls because it cures AIDS, or the raping of lesbians because that cures Homosexuality (in the lesbian, not in the rapists)!

There are hundreds of causes around the world that would help real women and would really fight for women's rights to equalitty, demanding that a miniature company changes their business model to conform to your twisted view of morality isn't one of them.

I have no difficulties in separating facts from fiction. But you doesn't seem to grasp basic social science that most scientists agree on. There sure are, a lot of initiatives to enforce women rights and a whole lot of different rights, but still do you find the world an place of equal rights?

PhantomViper, as a general note you know this thing called science, it sometimes makes us understand what is beyond "common sense" like laws of gravity, the earth is round and so on. There is something called social science and psychology, you might want to look in to that.

"Social Science" is an oxymoron, talk to 10 diferent psychologists about one thing and you are very likelly to get 7 or 8 diferent answers... And trying to compare Psychology with a true science like Physics is laughable.

What my studies in psychology tell me for example is that you must have been brought up in a very controling environment (possibly religious), which repressed all views on sexuality other than for breeding purposes and where women were often relegated to secondary roles compared to man (i.e. a stay at home mom, or something similar), which led to your latent desire to protect them, even from themselves. Am I close?

And no, I don't find the world a place of equal rights for man and women, but I do find western societies to be places of equal rights, the living proof of that is that the most powerfull person in the entire EU right now is a women...

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:Your swimsuit illustrates a bit of your line of arguments towards CB behaviour... We talk about swimsuits and normal situations were does and he does not fit and you insert Forcing against your will... see what you did? Its the same with infinity, we talk about game tokens looks and you insert, racism, sexist etc... Its to extreme and doesnt help to illustrate IMO whats going on.

1- If you are suggesting that I said that all women are forced to wear certain swim wear, then you terribly misunderstood me.

NAVARRO wrote:If you feel 'm not really calling anyone a racist, but the system of values to which Infinity adheres is by no doubt racist, sexist and what not" then you really should not collect these game tokens, I'm sorry to say that maybe you should look elsewhere for something you take enjoyment... I doubt 90% of the wargames is for you to be honest.

2 -The system as in the whole society, its a bit hard to escape from that. And I'm not saying that everything in it are racist and so on, but much of what we take for granted rests on dodgy values. I want to change that, hence my part in this discussion.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

NAVARRO wrote:

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:[

PhantomViper, as a general note you know this thing called science, it sometimes makes us understand what is beyond "common sense" like laws of gravity, the earth is round and so on. There is something called social science and psychology, you might want to look in to that.

So to fully understand what your saying we need to take a degree in Psychology and Sciences? maybe you should just take a degree in art in order to comment corvusbelli alternative fantasy world, or maybe a degree in JUST playing a fantasy wargame, because thats the topic here

3- No the topic is whether cheesecake minis are appropriate or not.

More numbers ok?

1- No I'm saying that you insert extreme ideas in the debates to dodge what's on the table.
2- You can change the world by doing something about it. You cant change other person imaginary fantasy worlds even if you want to do something about it. Wargames are not the real world
3- Appropriate for wargames not appropriate as the beacon of virtue in the real world.

NAVARRO wrote:

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:
2- I really missed were I tried to impose you anything and inverting arguments isnt your best bet here... I'm not Corvus belli I did not produce these minis they are totally ok and on target for me and I enjoy painting them...as a sculptor I can admire their very professional sculpts... I like anime and scifi. They didnt imposed anything on me and I have a good experience surfing their enjoyable fictitious universe... Some people dont like it, its OK, some people complain, its OK, some demand changes, Not OK, some people think they know better about Corvus belli creations than Corvus belli itself its a bit nonsense but OK I guess... So no I dont impose anything to anyone and I dont know nothing besides the place for gaming miniatures is on the wartable or painting displays not a tool to vent away my morality preferences and surely not a banner to my life standarts. Its not THAT context mate.

You just stated what was OK and not OK, as an argument in a discussion I might add, how is that not an attempt at imposing your values on me?

And I'm generally sorry for taking the jam out of your donut but the world is a nasty business and I can't alter that fact.

Your trying to reach something to hard, its not really there I dont really have a problem with you and could care less if you like the minis or not, if I express my opinion in disagreement to some of your points is not imposing you something. While you inserting your moral values into a wargame is in fact you imposing something out of context in peoples hobbies.

Thing is its indeed a nasty world thats why people like to play alternative universes because both are detached from another... you may want to try it its good and relaxing.

To argument for something is by default imposing ones opinion on someone. Now you are using double standards here. I have as much of a right as you to express my opinion.

I quite enjoy playing miniature games and my view of the world seldom takes the fun out of it or the fun of participating in the real world for that matter. Try it, you might like it.

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:
2- I really missed were I tried to impose you anything and inverting arguments isnt your best bet here... I'm not Corvus belli I did not produce these minis they are totally ok and on target for me and I enjoy painting them...as a sculptor I can admire their very professional sculpts... I like anime and scifi. They didnt imposed anything on me and I have a good experience surfing their enjoyable fictitious universe... Some people dont like it, its OK, some people complain, its OK, some demand changes, Not OK, some people think they know better about Corvus belli creations than Corvus belli itself its a bit nonsense but OK I guess... So no I dont impose anything to anyone and I dont know nothing besides the place for gaming miniatures is on the wartable or painting displays not a tool to vent away my morality preferences and surely not a banner to my life standarts. Its not THAT context mate.

You just stated what was OK and not OK, as an argument in a discussion I might add, how is that not an attempt at imposing your values on me?

And I'm generally sorry for taking the jam out of your donut but the world is a nasty business and I can't alter that fact.

Your trying to reach something to hard, its not really there I dont really have a problem with you and could care less if you like the minis or not, if I express my opinion in disagreement to some of your points is not imposing you something. While you inserting your moral values into a wargame is in fact you imposing something out of context in peoples hobbies.

Thing is its indeed a nasty world thats why people like to play alternative universes because both are detached from another... you may want to try it its good and relaxing.

To argument for something is by default imposing ones opinion on someone. Now you are using double standards here. I have as much of a right as you to express my opinion.

I quite enjoy playing miniature games and my view of the world seldom takes the fun out of it or the fun of participating in the real world for that matter. Try it, you might like it.

My friend if you consider argumentation by default imposition you dont have a clue what is to impose something, in fact its the opposite... Arguments and the liberty to express yourself is something some of us consider liberating... But lets not go there, please. Again and for the last time I never said you are not entitled to your opinion so WHY do you keep bring it?

What games do you play?

NAVARRO wrote:
More numbers ok?

1- No I'm saying that you insert extreme ideas in the debates to dodge what's on the table.
2- You can change the world by doing something about it. You cant change other person imaginary fantasy worlds even if you want to do something about it. Wargames are not the real world
3- Appropriate for wargames not appropriate as the beacon of virtue in the real world.

Numbers are fine, I wish I'd thought of it.

1. Well I don't try to dodge what's on the table, I'm pointing at what I find is obvious and I do know it might sound extreme. My goal have never been to make anyone feel bad about playing miniature games or buying cheesecake minis and I've been trying to say so god knows how many times.
2. Wargames are not real, true, are they as phenomenon isolated from the rest of the world, no.
3. Since you terribly misunderstood everything I've been trying to say I can't really give you an answer to this one.

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:
To argument for something is by default imposing ones opinion on someone. Now you are using double standards here. I have as much of a right as you to express my opinion.

I quite enjoy playing miniature games and my view of the world seldom takes the fun out of it or the fun of participating in the real world for that matter. Try it, you might like it.

Hmmm, no.

Saying that you don't like something because of reason X or Y and that you will not be buyng it because of it, is having your personal opinion.

Saying that you don't like something because of reason X or Y and that the COMPANY should change to acomodate your reasons (therefore also changing for every other customer that they have and that possibly do not agree with your reasons), is trying to impose your opinion on others.

See the diference?

I have never deprived anyone the right to buy cheesecake minis or any other mini or to discredit someone to for doing so. I have tried to be very clear about this.

I have however tried to raise awareness about certain subjects and have tried to explain why these are relevant even to war-gaming.

And I have never said that playing any game makes you abuse woman or any other group of people, that has nothing to do with it.

And yeah, I believe that you guys are referring to "discussing" rather than "to argument".

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:
More numbers ok?

1- No I'm saying that you insert extreme ideas in the debates to dodge what's on the table.
2- You can change the world by doing something about it. You cant change other person imaginary fantasy worlds even if you want to do something about it. Wargames are not the real world
3- Appropriate for wargames not appropriate as the beacon of virtue in the real world.

Numbers are fine, I wish I'd thought of it.

1. Well I don't try to dodge what's on the table, I'm pointing at what I find is obvious and I do know it might sound extreme. My goal have never been to make anyone feel bad about playing miniature games or buying cheesecake minis and I've been trying to say so god knows how many times.
2. Wargames are not real, true, are they as phenomenon isolated from the rest of the world, no.
3. Since you terribly misunderstood everything I've been trying to say I can't really give you an answer to this one.

1. How would you feel if you collected a esher gang ( you seem to like your necromunda?) went to a game and someone starts telling you that punk with huge silicone breast gals are not appropriate for wargaming and its kind of sexist?

I think that sums a bit of all we have been talking here

Melissia wrote: Outside of GW you're not forced to. But again, why should I be restricted from complaining about the company's lack of ability to produce models to my taste?

We're not restricting you from complaining, but but people will react to your complaint if they think it's over the top.. and they have just as much right to do so as you do..

Folks buy minis for games for a -lot- of reasons. About 1/3 of my models are ones from no particular game system, that I picked up simply because they "look cool" a fair number of those are in fact cheese/beef/fruitcake, When it comes to what folks choose to actually -play- with that's a diffrent matter, Some go for looks, others go for play style, others for the genre, To paraphrase IIRC Lincoln,- you just can't find the perfect fit for all of the people, all of the time- the best bet for a company is to have a little bit of something for everyone in every faction, perhaps hiliting one or two aspect over others,and most people will overlook the things that -don't- float their boat...

And then you have the folks who won't....

And there we get to the sticky bit here, where we have a debate over who should have to do the work to please those outliers, Weather the company should produce more models to fill out all the niche's that folks want, or the gamer who's unhappy should come up with their own solution. . Me, I'll say outright, that the onus is on the hobbist, Find an model alternitave, buy a couple extra models from the range you -do- like, break out the greenstuff and sculpt a jacket on the bared midriff or repose her so her gun isn't pointed at the sky or.. play another game. To whinge for 16 pages that the models are being forced down one's throat, and that the company should take the extraordiary steps of making a seperate range is a bit much, since it hasn't 'been shown that the problem so extraordinary to merit that solution...

NAVARRO wrote:

1. How would you feel if you collected a esher gang ( you seem to like your necromunda?) went to a game and someone starts telling you that punk with huge silicone breast gals are not appropriate for wargaming and its kind of sexist?

I think that sums a bit of all we have been talking here

I play orlock and not escher, the escher minis are their to add women to my Orlock gang and I'm also "dressing" them in an attempt to enhance their kick-ass-ness instead or their femininity.

But no that is not what this is all about, I would never do that myself and that is not what in advocating. I have never called anyone anything for liking anything in this thread and that have never been my goal either. I have been saying this repeatedly.

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:

1. How would you feel if you collected a esher gang ( you seem to like your necromunda?) went to a game and someone starts telling you that punk with huge silicone breast gals are not appropriate for wargaming and its kind of sexist?

I think that sums a bit of all we have been talking here

I play orlock and not escher, the escher minis are their to add women to my Orlock gang and I'm also "dressing" them in an attempt to enhance their kick-ass-ness instead or their femininity.

But no that is not what this is all about, I would never do that myself and that is not what in advocating. I have never called anyone anything for liking anything in this thread and that have never been my goal either. I have been saying this repeatedly.

You say many things, here's one of them:

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:
CB is in fact imposing morality on its surroundings. We are imposing values in our every action, this is widely recognized throughout the world of psychology and social science. I'm not really calling anyone a racist, but the system of values to which Infinity adheres is by no doubt racist, sexist and what not.

Sarcasm/ Im not a racist but I like to play a game that is sexist, racist and etc... I feel so good now Your not sexist for playing with esher but the company that made those esher created a damn sexist game... no place for those kind of minis in wargaming and are totally inappropriate /

Lets not drag this mate, I think I get what your trying to say but I believe your choosing the wrong context to express your concerns.

The topic made me think this was about food. Jerks :p

NAVARRO wrote:

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:
CB is in fact imposing morality on its surroundings. We are imposing values in our every action, this is widely recognized throughout the world of psychology and social science. I'm not really calling anyone a racist, but the system of values to which Infinity adheres is by no doubt racist, sexist and what not.

Sarcasm/ Im not a racist but I like to play a game that is sexist, racist and etc... I feel so good now Your not sexist for playing with esher but the company that made those esher created a damn sexist game... no place for those kind of minis in wargaming and are totally inappropriate /

Lets not drag this mate, I think I get what your trying to say but I believe your choosing the wrong context to express your concerns.

What I tried to say is that CB reflects its own "context" or surrounding society/world, as most fiction do, but do little to question some of those values inherited in that context. This does not necessarily make them anything but they do never the less reproduce a set of values. And I agree, we do not have to drag this any longer, I don't believe that we will overcome anything by that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BTNeophyte wrote:The topic made me think this was about food. Jerks :p

Haha, yeah it does make me want a piece of delicious cheesecake every time I read the "headline"!

Hello,
From a painters stand point, ( I don't tend to wargame as much as paint) I believe the "cheesecake" is great, it gets me to purchase models that I enjoy painting, as for is it appropriate, we are playing a game, as long as I know what it is from a glance or three, and it is not pornographic then I see no problems. That said I would like to purchase the vixen model on its own I know once painted it will sell for a nice chunk, to the anime/gamer crowd that hangs at the game store. If you dont like a model because of cheesecake then trade it for another that has the same function, problem solved.

Regards,
Carl

Kanluwen wrote:This is pointless.

No one is saying they are "horribly bad". People are saying there is no reason, whatsoever, that these models should be the primary models of the range...

Except for people, who are not you, that do enjoy them. These other people are willing to pay CB for them, and keep the sculptors a sculptin'.

I don't disagree that this is pointless, but continuously railing against a company's business model based on your own opinions generally is.

Except their business model also incorporates plenty of models which I do like. My opinion is formatted based upon the entirety of their range, not one or two models.

I like how you left out though that double the amount of cheesecake is in that one range.

c0un7_z3r0 wrote:My point have been that there must be an equal representation of contradicting images of our genders, that is not to say "there shouldn't be cheesecake miniatures", rather "there should also be fat and ugly women and men, thin and sissy men, old and saggy woman and men and so on". I'm not just talking about the infinity range now, and yes there are some models out there to fill all these boxes to, but far from enough. There must be room for far more diversity, cheesecake or not

But is it a business's responsibility to provide those alternative body types if that product does not sell as well? Should any company take that financial risk to satisfy an inclusive world view?

I'd have to say no. The sculptors do what they do because they enjoy it. They have some degree of freedom to create what appeals to them personally (depending completely on the company environment). The company is producing a product that needs to pay everyone's salaries. Ideally they can produce a socially-redeeming product, but that won't happen if it conflicts with a) design goals, and b) profitability.

Your philosophy (companies should provide a diverse sampling of humanity) conflicts with the reality (businesses must provide a product or service that people want to stay profitable). If the state were to provide minis, I would agree with the diversity, but I don't feel private individuals have an obligation to take financial risks to better serve society.

PS. I haven't responded to your long post responding to me yet. I respect your opinion, and think where we are farthest apart is whether the individual has a responsibility to sacrifice for society for symbolic reasons. In some cases I would agree the answer is yes. In the topic of minis, I would say no. I doubt we're going to move any much closer to agreement, but for what it's worth I do understand your argument if not entirely agree with it.

This is entirely separate from our miniatures discussion, and I believe supports your beliefs more than invalidate them. I don't include them to debate, but because I think it would be of interest to you:
Google "FBI's definiton of rape updated". The FBI's archaic definition of rape was finally "modernized" last month. The US (and Canada as well, to a lesser degree) has also had the same problem as Sweden, where defense lawyers use victim-blaming to excuse their client's deplorable actions. The new definition weakens those arguments, though unlikely to end them.

Anyways, that's going pretty far off-topic, so feel free to PM me if you want to discuss further.

Aleph is totally not cheesecake. It's not even made of organic matter. At best it's clunkie-cake. Can you have clunkie-cake? Maybe clunkie-oil, or clunkie-fuel-cells. Whatever it is that robot fetishists think that robots use for fuel.

Anyway, it doesn't objectify women! It objectifies robots. Which are objects. So that's fine then.

Ian Sturrock wrote:Anyway, it doesn't objectify women! It objectifies robots.

... this is just... I... bluh...

I don't think I can politely respond to this.

My mind.

She has exploded.

Kanluwen wrote:

I like how you left out though that double the amount of cheesecake is in that one range.

My apologies. ALEPH is over-the-top cheesecake. I suggest you avoid it for the moment, let the people who do like the models play it, and A) wait for the alternate models to be sculpted or B) convert your own. If you are unhappy with the raw materials available at the moment, stick to option A.

Please let me know if I have missed anything else.

I'm actually referring to Ariadna, but okay.

The Devas and Asuras can be fixed with a simple paintjob not showing nipples. The reasoning behind them being "less clothed" than the rest is because they're meant to be interacting with the general populace more often, and not be as threatening.

All the armor plating is subdermal.

I'm going to have to LOL at the 'psychology' that popped back up in this thread. Some rubbish about human minds and objectifying women and other such toss that seems to imply that because I paint a tiny metal womans arse, I think real womens arses should be shown to me on demand at every opportunity or some such guff, can't tell one from the other, am some sort of proto-rapist, or a sexist or something and a load of other crap as well. .

Actually, I wouldn't mind that in the slightest, because I'm a functional human being who enjoys looking at attractive examples of the opposite sex. Which is pretty normal by most definitions.

<image redacted - please don't post bare image macros in threads; they don't serve to advance the conversation, and fall under Dakka's definition of spam --Janthkin>

ArbeitsSchu wrote:I'm going to have to LOL at the 'psychology' that popped back up in this thread. Some rubbish about human minds and objectifying women and other such toss that seems to imply that because I paint a tiny metal womans arse, I think real womens arses should be shown to me on demand at every opportunity or some such guff, can't tell one from the other, am some sort of proto-rapist, or a sexist or something and a load of other crap as well. .

Actually, I wouldn't mind that in the slightest, because I'm a functional human being who enjoys looking at attractive examples of the opposite sex. Which is pretty normal by most definitions.

This meaningful and insightful post is going to serve to advance the conversation in the thread how, exactly?

<Last warning, folks - if your post isn't constructively contributing to the topic, you shouldn't be posting it here>

Mastiff wrote:
PS. I haven't responded to your long post responding to me yet. I respect your opinion, and think where we are farthest apart is whether the individual has a responsibility to sacrifice for society for symbolic reasons. In some cases I would agree the answer is yes. In the topic of minis, I would say no. I doubt we're going to move any much closer to agreement, but for what it's worth I do understand your argument if not entirely agree with it.

And I respect you for disagreeing. But my answer to your post would of course be that I do believe that private business have a responsibility to a certain degree, but yes, they do have to earn a living as well. And CB is IMO a good example of a company that takes this responsibility.

Mastiff wrote:This is entirely separate from our miniatures discussion, and I believe supports your beliefs more than invalidate them. I don't include them to debate, but because I think it would be of interest to you:
Google "FBI's definiton of rape updated". The FBI's archaic definition of rape was finally "modernized" last month. The US (and Canada as well, to a lesser degree) has also had the same problem as Sweden, where defense lawyers use victim-blaming to excuse their client's deplorable actions. The new definition weakens those arguments, though unlikely to end them.

That sounds interesting I'll check that out, thanks!

ArbeitsSchu wrote:I'm going to have to LOL at the 'psychology' that popped back up in this thread. Some rubbish about human minds and objectifying women and other such toss that seems to imply that because I paint a tiny metal womans arse, I think real womens arses should be shown to me on demand at every opportunity or some such guff, can't tell one from the other, am some sort of proto-rapist, or a sexist or something and a load of other crap as well. .

Actually, I wouldn't mind that in the slightest, because I'm a functional human being who enjoys looking at attractive examples of the opposite sex. Which is pretty normal by most definitions.

That is not really what I've said is it? If you would read what I've actually said and how I've tried to explain this to people that seem to have misinterpreted what I've written in the same way as you seem to have, you might reach to another conclusion. I don't expect you to agree with me but you can at the very least respect me for my opinion. And if you didn't have the guts to throw this directly at me, why bother?

What was the original question?

Oh, yeah, I think cheesecake is not only appropriate for wargames, but should be required.

Eighteen pages later...

If we can't objectify our miniatures, who can we objectify?

Redbeard wrote:Oh, yeah, I think cheesecake is not only appropriate for wargames, but should be required.

Preferably a good baked vanilla cheesecake, with a raspberry sauce...

Redbeard wrote:
If we can't objectify our miniatures, who can we objectify?

A miniature or an image of a miniature is not an objectification of a miniature, its an objectification of a person(imaginary or real)/monster/robot/whatever. Objectification in it self isn't bad though, I can't see why anyhow.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dysartes wrote:

Redbeard wrote:Oh, yeah, I think cheesecake is not only appropriate for wargames, but should be required.

Preferably a good baked vanilla cheesecake, with a raspberry sauce...

If we are actually talking cake, I'll second that!

I don't see how minis can't be objectified versions of what they're supposed to represent, or how that could be a bad thing... here's a definition of objectification (from Wikipedia), with my notes as related to minis in [square brackets]:

Instrumentality – if the thing is treated as a tool for one's own purposes [it's a tool for playing games]
Denial of autonomy – if the thing is treated as if lacking in agency or self-determination [fortunately it does lack agency -- we move it about for our own purposes]
Inertness – if the thing is treated as if lacking in agency [again, hopefully it's inert -- just don't leave Finecast out in the sun]
Ownership – if the thing is treated as if owned by another [I own all my own minis! Hurray!]
Fungibility – if the thing is treated as if interchangeable [pretty much, as long as it's WYSIWYG]
Violability – if the thing is treated as if permissible to damage or destroy [yay! Conversions!]
denial of subjectivity – if the thing is treated as if there is no need to show concern for the 'object's' feelings and experiences. [those poor minis! Killed! Again!]

I'm still not convinced that the sexy robots have anything to do with the sexual objectification *of women*. Studies into objectification of women find it varies depending on the amount of naked flesh on show. Robots just don't do that. They don't ever look vulnerable, even if they look somewhat female. The reaction is always closer to Uncanny Valley territory -- the robot is perceived as unheimlich. People who find that sexy are probably not entirely normal... not that there's anything wrong with that (I regard myself as a pervert and proud of it) but it's not exactly part of the mainstream objectification of women. I would see lads' mags and the barely-softer-than-soft-porn objectification that's common in advertising as contributing far more to perceptions of women as sex objects, than the ALEPH range does.