Switch Theme:

Is this a Sexualized Pose?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
[DCM]
Infiltrating Prowler





Portland, OR

Since it is 2018 I figure it is about time to start a new discussion centered sexualization of miniatures again. However this time I am going a different route. We have already agreed to disagree on multiple parts that sexualization is subjective based on the perception of the artist as well as those that view a miniature.

Instead of recapping and rehashing those discussions, let's talk about something else that I thought was an interesting disagreement. I'll start it by calling it "Is this a sexualized pose?". There are probably better titles for what the discussion is trying to encompass and I'm open to suggestions for let's start with that.

When having discussions an industry person made an interesting statement/question, "Are talking or typing on a thread to add to a conversation or are you talking 'to be right'". I definitely want to add and I'm not saying I'm right or someone is wrong, but just trying to add some perspective from different sides.



Some various quotes about the pose:
"one of the worst Sniper models to date, and that includes the poledancing Al-Hawwa Sniper"

"How can this model possibly be construed as a poledancer? She's literally just standing next to her rifle. She's one of the least sexualized models in the entire range."

"It's more because that particular model's pose has what CB considers their 'special lady' pose. Hips slightly to one side in an attempt with one hand on hip to make the model look sassy. "

"It is a common "resting pose"."

"If it's such a common "resting pose", where are the males doing the same thing?"

I am trying to look at this from the various perspectives and objectively. I thought it was interesting that the comparison was basically 'since there are no males modeled that way' the natural conclusion was it must be sexualized. Is that true simply because males are modeled differently or are they just unrelated? It was also interesting that the takeaway, hip cocked to the side or hand on hip is meant to be sassy. We all know that men and women don't normally walk or stand similar. It isn't that they can't or won't, as there also exceptions and some definitely do but more in trying to understand "is there a reason why".

For this I decided to be a bit more scientific and that meant observation. I like to people watch because the interactions of different people from different cultures, views and backgrounds is interesting to see how it impacts their interactions. So off to the mall I went, starting with eating lunch at the food court at the mall and watch people. The one thing I noticed is that males generally walked in 'male-like' and women tended to have a sway to hips. That is a general statement as there were definitely people to the exception of that. People stood in different resting places. Context is obviously important as people by themselves tend to have different gaits about them, then someone who looked like they were flirting with someone. Of course, I had no idea if they were flirting, since I wasn't listening to interactions just eating as I looked around... so them flirting was an opinion based from body language and my perceptions.

That got me wondering why do people walk or stand a certain way. My son walks in what society would consider a masculine way and my daughter walks in a feminine manner. I didn't teach them to walk in a particular way, this is how they walk and they learned on their own. I'm sure some of that is probably influenced by who they interact with, observations and adapting to their environment. I can say my outward attitudes and walk was different in Hawaii than it was when I lived in LA to some degrees. I definitely don't walk or stand in a particular way because it is sexy, but that doesn't mean someone doesn't do something to be 'sexier'.

I asked my wife who was fiddling with her phone, with her hip cocked to the side (no there wasn't one hand on the hip) and asked her why she stood that way. Her response was simply "it is comfortable". So I wondered if men and women have a different center of gravity... and the answer was, yes. Generally speaking, a man’s center of gravity is located at the center of his chest at his sternum while a woman’s center of gravity is located approximately in the center of her pelvis. That is also changed more depending on their body type. There are actual videos and tests called physics center of mass experiment also known as the chair experiment.

Interesting that gave me a different perspective on poses. I still believe it is still subjective based on personal experiences, tastes, and perceptions. However, it was interesting to realize there are some things that women can do and can't do. Just because one is one way and another isn't, doesn't necessarily mean those two equate out to the same thing.
   
Made in us
Courageous Space Marine Captain






Yes no maybe

its different for different people.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/10 19:34:00


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Scott-S6 wrote:
And yet another thread is hijacked for Unit to ask for the same advice, receive the same answers and make the same excuses.

Oh my god I'm becoming martel.
Send help!

 
   
Made in ca
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife






That's an "At ease" pose. Any sexualization comes from the form fitting torso armor.

   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

No, they are just looking for attention. I see a soldier standing with her rifle. If they see a pole dancer then they have some sexual repression issues they need to work out.

What I have
LM
What I like stomping


Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in ie
Dominating Dominatrix






Dublin, Ireland

Im a male.
I stand like the sniper girl all the time.
My back is fubar'd cause of it.
Don't do it gentlemen.

Dman137 wrote:
goobs is all you guys will ever be

By 1-irt: Still as long as Hissy keeps showing up this is one of the most entertaining threads ever.

"Feelin' goods, good enough". 
   
Made in us
Furious Fire Dragon





If you don't see male, "at ease", figures with the same pelvic tilt, then it's sexualized. If 'real' military women stand at ease like this, and men don't, then it's not. If men stand like that too, but never get modeled as such, then it's sexualized. By sexualized, I don't mean 'sexy'. That's a different discussion as far as I'm concerned.
   
Made in es
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets




Vigo. Spain.

No, it isn't. That pose, with the hips a little to the side, are more natural for woman than for men. Of course, for that reason, is consireded a "feminine" pose, and as nearly everything feminine, is deconstructed to the extreme by artists of all media to a point where just posing like that, even in a normal and not exagerated way, is considered "sexual".

 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in nl
Rampaging Reaver Titan Princeps





Somewhere... over the rainbow

If it were a normal resting pose, we should also be seeing male miniatures in a similar pose. We see not. Most notably, we would also see women in the real world standing at rest in normal circumstances in such poses. We see not. (women generally don't slant their hips when standing still)
Therefore, it is a sexualised pose. It accentuates the hips and the female form. Not that there is anything wrong with that. There is such a thing as bad sexuality, but this is model and this pose are completely normal.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/01/10 19:57:22


А сегодня, что для завтра сделал Я?
But today I don't feel like doing anything... 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Shangri-LA

 Dark Severance wrote:
I asked my wife who was fiddling with her phone, with her hip cocked to the side (no there wasn't one hand on the hip) and asked her why she stood that way. Her response was simply "it is comfortable". So I wondered if men and women have a different center of gravity... and the answer was, yes. Generally speaking, a man’s center of gravity is located at the center of his chest at his sternum while a woman’s center of gravity is located approximately in the center of her pelvis. That is also changed more depending on their body type. There are actual videos and tests called physics center of mass experiment also known as the chair experiment.

Interesting that gave me a different perspective on poses. I still believe it is still subjective based on personal experiences, tastes, and perceptions. However, it was interesting to realize there are some things that women can do and can't do. Just because one is one way and another isn't, doesn't necessarily mean those two equate out to the same thing.


This seems similar to the non-controversy that was "man spreading" on trains which was making the rounds two years back. Differing physical traits between men and women are going to create different at rest poses that are more or less comfortable based on body type.

However, regarding the sniper model's pose, and the concepts of "feminine" and "masculine" postures, I think that the sculptor was using well-established cues in the model's posing that would identify the model as female. Even a quick Google search of "how to draw a woman standing" returns many of the same "sassy" cocked hip, hand on the hip, poses. Where as a search for "how to draw a man standing" you get a more neutral posing that doesn't accentuate or draw attention to masculine aspects of the figure.

I think that is what people are hitting on when they say the figure is sexualized.

DCannon4Life wrote:
If you don't see male, "at ease", figures with the same pelvic tilt, then it's sexualized. If 'real' military women stand at ease like this, and men don't, then it's not. If men stand like that too, but never get modeled as such, then it's sexualized. By sexualized, I don't mean 'sexy'. That's a different discussion as far as I'm concerned.


I agree with DCannon4Life. I don't think the pose is sexy, but it is sexualized, in that the model's feminine traits are being focused on with her pose, in this case the figure's hips.

   
Made in us
Kid_Kyoto






Probably work

Yes it is horrible and anyone who is okay with it is unbelievable. This is 2018 after all and how do we not know better.

Or, no it's not in the slightest and anyone getting offended is just looking for reasons to get offended because this is what happens in 2018.

The real pity is that it's too early yet here to start drinking.

Assume all my mathhammer comes from here: https://github.com/daed/mathhammer 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Infiltrating Prowler





Portland, OR

 Desubot wrote:
Yes no maybe

its different for different people.
I can definitely agree to that.

 John Prins wrote:
That's an "At ease" pose. Any sexualization comes from the form fitting torso armor.
That is definitely fair. I can see how in that matter the context of the outfit can give a more sexualized perspective. I don't want too much into talking about the realistic aspect of armor vs anime vs practicality which would probably be its own separate discussion. But the context is important which can give a different perspective to a viewer.

DCannon4Life wrote:
If you don't see male, "at ease", figures with the same pelvic tilt, then it's sexualized. If 'real' military women stand at ease like this, and men don't, then it's not. If men stand like that too, but never get modeled as such, then it's sexualized. By sexualized, I don't mean 'sexy'. That's a different discussion as far as I'm concerned.
Would males "at ease" be the same as a woman's, with the same pelvic tilt, based on their different body types and center of gravity? Just because a woman stands one way and men stand a different way, does it mean that stance is sexualized because men don't stand like that?

To be fair I do know real military women who do stand like that. They wouldn't be standing like that while holding a sniper rifle and I don't know anyone who would stand like that with their rifle. I know women in the office who do stand like that and it wasn't to garner attention either or meant to be sexualized. On the flip side, I also know real military women who stand like men do normally. They do tend to have body types that are more masculine looking body shape compared to a curvy women.

I'm not sure how much different body types, muscular effects center of gravity. Generally speaking physically men tend to gain muscle easier and faster, while women tend to have more fat. That doesn't mean that women can't be as physical or strong as men (I have a few friends that competitively lift and they definitely put men I know to shame). It is usaully because they are more underdeveloped (in terms of upper body strength) they have to work more to get at the same point.

What is harder to find out with examples, if a man and woman have the same body type and size then do they stand relaxed, walk or generally do things in a similar method of body movement and poses? Or are there still going to be differences in how they move, are those differences more subtle or more apparent?
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Shangri-LA

 Dark Severance wrote:
To be fair I do know real military women who do stand like that. They wouldn't be standing like that while holding a sniper rifle and I don't know anyone who would stand like that with their rifle. I know women in the office who do stand like that and it wasn't to garner attention either or meant to be sexualized. On the flip side, I also know real military women who stand like men do normally. They do tend to have body types that are more masculine looking body shape compared to a curvy women.


I think this is the issue people have with the pose.

The pose isn't sexy, but it is using a pretty standard female posture to accentuate the models hips and add a flair of sex to a figure that otherwise doesn't need to be posed in that manner.
   
Made in us
Consigned to the Grim Darkness






Svalarheima, MA

I like that model - one of my favorites from the Haqqislam group.

I don't find it overly or even overtly sexual.

Nil nos tremefacit.
 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Infiltrating Prowler





Portland, OR

 Iron_Captain wrote:
It accentuates the hips and the female form. Not that there is anything wrong with that. There is such a thing as bad sexuality, but this is model and this pose are completely normal.
That is sensiable and something I can agree with. I am not so sure just because we don't see a male in a similar pose, that makes it sexualized. Although I would probably say it isn't a "normal resting pose" either. I do consider it a resting pose, but wouldn't exactly label it normal nor would I say it was sexualized.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

However, regarding the sniper model's pose, and the concepts of "feminine" and "masculine" postures, I think that the sculptor was using well-established cues in the model's posing that would identify the model as female. Even a quick Google search of "how to draw a woman standing" returns many of the same "sassy" cocked hip, hand on the hip, poses. Where as a search for "how to draw a man standing" you get a more neutral posing that doesn't accentuate or draw attention to masculine aspects of the figure.

I think that is what people are hitting on when they say the figure is sexualized.
That was the issue when I was first looking at resting, stances and poses for men and women. The majority of artwork and references does tend to accenstiate masculine and feminine aspects to better differeinatiate. That was one of the reasons I hit the mall to look at people who normally interact and aren't intending to be in a "sexualized" environment like a club or bar.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
I think this is the issue people have with the pose.
I can agree with the sentiment to a degree. I think this is why I believe context is important. If this was a WWII war game or even one not really centered or based on anime influences, then absolutely I would probably think the pose was bad... still not sexualized to be sexy, but sexualized to emphasize it is a woman (which I don't necessarily think is a bad thing). It isn't much of a stretch though to see "Major Kusanagi" from Ghost in the Shell posed like that which is probably why it is more acceptable, at least to me.

Don't get me wrong, there are definitely worst poses, even if you give it an anime stylization and theme that are just bad. Clothing aside because that is really a different discussion. But I can't see "Major Kusangai" doing any of these poses:
Spoiler:

Like I have no idea what is going on here, it looks like she might have to use the bathroom. I have tried to imagine movement or how someone would be moving and it being a picture with bad timing but can't even see how it would come about.


From the third angle, this doesn't actually look bad. It could be someone spinning around to look but when you look at the other angles, it just looks horrible. I do not understand the knees close together pose, while feet at a wider stance.


I have a flashback of a Rudolph saying, "She said I'm cute" as she struck the pose.
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

DCannon4Life wrote:
If you don't see male, "at ease", figures with the same pelvic tilt, then it's sexualized. If 'real' military women stand at ease like this, and men don't, then it's not. If men stand like that too, but never get modeled as such, then it's sexualized. By sexualized, I don't mean 'sexy'. That's a different discussion as far as I'm concerned.


Nope, the pelvis design of men and women differ so slightly different natural standing poses are the result

now whether this pose is naturally feel more comfortable in or not that I can't tell you

 
   
Made in gb
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets






Jesus christ, the pic above is considered sexualised?! Unbelievable what the pc police will do for funses these days. I stand like that all the time. Women stand like that all the time. It's a god damn resting pose you virgins! Everyone must be really sexualised if you think this is it.

If you're worried about this, don't search for "dark Eldar slaves", it'll blow your mind.
   
Made in us
Courageous Space Marine Captain






 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Jesus christ, the pic above is considered sexualised?! Unbelievable what the pc police will do for funses these days. I stand like that all the time. Women stand like that all the time. It's a god damn resting pose you virgins! Everyone must be really sexualised if you think this is it.

If you're worried about this, don't search for "dark Eldar slaves", it'll blow your mind.


Woh there edge master you might poke some ones eye out.


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Scott-S6 wrote:
And yet another thread is hijacked for Unit to ask for the same advice, receive the same answers and make the same excuses.

Oh my god I'm becoming martel.
Send help!

 
   
Made in us
Ollanius Pius - Savior of the Emperor






Right behind you.

daedalus wrote:Yes it is horrible and anyone who is okay with it is unbelievable. This is 2018 after all and how do we not know better.

Or, no it's not in the slightest and anyone getting offended is just looking for reasons to get offended because this is what happens in 2018.

The real pity is that it's too early yet here to start drinking.


An Actual Englishman wrote:Jesus christ, the pic above is considered sexualised?! Unbelievable what the pc police will do for funses these days. I stand like that all the time. Women stand like that all the time. It's a god damn resting pose you virgins! Everyone must be really sexualised if you think this is it.

If you're worried about this, don't search for "dark Eldar slaves", it'll blow your mind.

And this is why we can't have quality discussions about things like this.
   
Made in us
Kid_Kyoto






Probably work

Hey, I'm saving the thread by stating the two conflicting attitudes that will eventually ruin it anyway. Or something. Who cares. Casual nihilism and stuff.

I have no real dog in the fight other than a desire to not see the thread floating on the main page. I guess I can leave if you want.


Assume all my mathhammer comes from here: https://github.com/daed/mathhammer 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Shangri-LA

 Dark Severance wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
I think this is the issue people have with the pose.
I can agree with the sentiment to a degree. I think this is why I believe context is important. If this was a WWII war game or even one not really centered or based on anime influences, then absolutely I would probably think the pose was bad... still not sexualized to be sexy, but sexualized to emphasize it is a woman (which I don't necessarily think is a bad thing). It isn't much of a stretch though to see "Major Kusanagi" from Ghost in the Shell posed like that which is probably why it is more acceptable, at least to me.

Context helps, for sure. I agree an anime-themed game "makes more sense" to have sexualized figures in it because anime often uses overtly sexual themes, and or has characters with exaggerated sexual traits. However, doesn't that facet of anime argue *for* the sniper figure being intentionally sexualized? It is part of one of the games themes after all, and one that has been problematic for some players based on the overt sculpts that line has produced (some of which you referenced).

Knowing Infinity's history of sculpts, it is hard for me to accept that the figure wasn't intentionally sculpted to give the viewer a little titillation (which is fine). Otherwise the sniper would be posed realistically at rest, or just not swaying her hips. or even actually, you know, sniping. I guess the lack of agency on the model's part is what pushes this into sexualized territory for me. You could just as easily snip the gun off the figure and have a "pin-up" miniature. The only way I know she is a sniper is her giant gun, which seems secondary to her hips.

 Dark Severance wrote:
Don't get me wrong, there are definitely worst poses, even if you give it an anime stylization and theme that are just bad. Clothing aside because that is really a different discussion. But I can't see "Major Kusangai" doing any of these poses:


I am not sure if this fan art or not, but I can see the Major doing some of those dumb poses.
Spoiler:

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/10 21:42:00


 
   
Made in us
Consigned to the Grim Darkness






Svalarheima, MA

A lot of dumb, stupid, off topic and otherwise generally crappy posts have been deleted.

It IS possible to have a serious discussion about this topic - and the OP has legitimate reasons to want to have the discussion.

Posts that attempt to troll and/or derail in here will see the user in question move directly to suspension - we'll be skipping the warning phase.

Hopefully that is clear enough?

Nil nos tremefacit.
 
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

I think it goes back to the main argument of the past iterations of the question,an artist will try to enhance the details of the silhouette to make the gender of the sculpt, artwork, whatever medium they work on more prominent, the less you progressively interact with the character the more prominent the little details need to be in order to give the impression it needs to have.

Humans are sexually dimorphic poses and little details are slight to quite different between the genders and that is fine, we are different and there is nothing wrong with that.

Now I would like to know a word in the English vocabulary to describe something as of been of a gender attribute without he sexual implications, sexualisation has fallen to that and we cannot use it to the common speak without meaning "sexy"

As for the figure itself, it is a resting pose that enhances the fact the model represents a female trooper, it gives it a silhouette that can be seen from far and most can determine its a female form and does what it needs to do differentiate the model from a male resting pose, for example the male Intruder sniper.



And there is nothing wrong with that, in fact an artist should use such poses and anything else that enhances the form of the character to further impact the feel he or she wants to express.

To conclude.

If by sexualised you mean the pose makes the model look female, yes it is sexualised.
If by sexualised you mean the pose makes the model look sexy, I don't know that is up to the viewers taste.
If by sexualised you mean the pose is designed to make the model sexually appeal to the male buyer, no it is not sexualised.
   
Made in us
Combat Jumping Ragik






Beyond the Beltway

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Now I would like to know a word in the English vocabulary to describe something as of been of a gender attribute without he sexual implications, sexualisation has fallen to that and we cannot use it to the common speak without meaning "sexy"
Masculine and feminine do quite well, with the verbs being masculinize/femeninize.

The mini in question is feminine. However, it is a mini, a thing. Best pronoun for it is... it, not she.


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





It's a pretty cool pose (I don't care for the rifle itself, but person is well done) without being exploitive, and to me that's providing more positive representation than negative. I personally find the "stripper pole" argument more harmful than anything, as its the kind of comment that tries to make something identifiably femine and make that itself a negative. A lot of that comes from "girl" being an insult for as long as it has, which is a parallel issue that's easy to mix up with exploitive representation.

To put it another way; try to imagine a world in which "ninja" was for whatever reason used as an insult. There are few models in gaming with poses as ridiculous as a ninja, but because we associate ninjas with cool things, we think those poses are cool, regardless of their practicality. Remember, sometimes we go out of our way to be impractical to look cool.

I don't personally regard something recognizably female and impractical for the sake of being aesthetically cool to necessarily be sexual. Perhaps more specifically, I associate the idea of something being sexualized as being exploitively so. In many ways it would be worse if the only female representation in a game looked boring compared to the cooler male models. I think its far more important to have things that look impractal and cool and at the same time clearly female, because representation of characters we self identify with is a huge part of what draws people into things like table top games.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/01/10 22:24:50


 
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

 Red Harvest wrote:
 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Now I would like to know a word in the English vocabulary to describe something as of been of a gender attribute without he sexual implications, sexualisation has fallen to that and we cannot use it to the common speak without meaning "sexy"
Masculine and feminine do quite well, with the verbs being masculinize/femeninize.

The mini in question is feminine. However, it is a mini, a thing. Best pronoun for it is... it, not she.


Apologies I meant neutral word, as is sexualised that can be used for male and female genders.
   
Made in us
Huge Hierodule





East Bay, Ca, US

My god people are so sensitive.

Feminine doesn't mean sexual.

Is this oversexualized because it has boobs?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/10 22:35:29


To compute the probability of a specific outcome on N DK dice, use the generating function F= (x+ x^2 + x^3 + . . . + x^k-1 + x^k)^n

 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy.
How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

 
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
 Red Harvest wrote:
 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Now I would like to know a word in the English vocabulary to describe something as of been of a gender attribute without he sexual implications, sexualisation has fallen to that and we cannot use it to the common speak without meaning "sexy"
Masculine and feminine do quite well, with the verbs being masculinize/femeninize.

The mini in question is feminine. However, it is a mini, a thing. Best pronoun for it is... it, not she.


Apologies I meant neutral word, as is sexualised that can be used for male and female genders.


Yeah, sexualised. Pretty sure its already gender neutral.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/10 22:36:08


What I have
LM
What I like stomping


Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in gb
Battlefield Tourist





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

 Alpharius wrote:
I like that model - one of my favorites from the Haqqislam group.

I don't find it overly or even overtly sexual.


Agree 100%

Probably one of my favourite miniatures in the Haqqislam range, and I know it is for a number of other people too.

Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
Small but perfectly formed! A Great Crusade Epic 6mm project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/694411.page
Excellent discussion forum & information collection for Epic and other small scale miniatures: http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/index.php

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Shangri-LA

 Marmatag wrote:
Is this oversexualized because it has boobs?


Are you reading the thread or just emotionally posting? The issue isn't breasts but the pose of the model, specifically the hips.


   
Made in us
Walking Dead Wraithlord






Christ, I hope these people never watch anime...they'll have a heart attack.

 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: