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.

/thread

Why did it take 3 pages for someone to come up with that line?

JOHIRA wrote:

The Unending wrote:1. That was one sentence in my entire post. Even if I removed that one sentence the rest of it would still stand on its own. You have failed to address the rest of my post and singled out a weak sentence that in retrospect may have been unnecessary

Calm down. My intent here is not to say "You, The Unending, are wrrrrooooonnnnnnnggggg!!!!!", but to try and get people to keep from taking this over the top.

3. Ball-Slingshot men were disgusting even by female standards the same way most men hate fat chicks in thongs. Now if you were to take a Nordic warrior covered in bear skins with an exposed chest or Fabio esque man with the typical romance nove pose with his chest hanging out and a rose in his mouth you would not get the same reaction.

Actually, I think I would from the guys here. Just look at the Twightlight movies. Has there been nothing but support for them on Dakka?

I did not mean to sound as upset as I did. I was mostly upset at the straw man accusation.

On the note of the twilight novel series relating to the exposing of the male form. The Twilight series is made fun of due to its facepalming moments and depiction of vampires. It has more to do with the content than the imagry. Where as the ball slingshot men were outright vomit inducing by any standards.

Let's not overlook Fallout 3!



Miss Lyons isn't half-bad looking, is she? Yet she's wearing the intentionally unisex T-45d Power Armour. It's unisex because, like Space Marine power armour, it's had so much plating and augmentation added to it that the outer layer no longer needs to conform to the individual wearing it to achieve a good fit.

That's not to say the armour worn by the Sisters of Battle isn't legitimate; while bulky, it's intentionally sculpted to emphasize their femininity. If we don't go overboard and break the fourth wall, there are several good reasons for this. Their dramatically graceful and female appearance is a reminder that they are women who forgo the easy life their beauty could grant them and fight in the Emperor's name.


Moving a step down to plate armour, it makes sense for it to be a LITTLE more slender for the simple fact that a lot of space between your armour and your body would make it uncomfortable. That would lead to something like this:






And yet, not all women who take to the battlefield, especially those in fiction, are as willing to sacrifice their femininity in the name of practicality. Though perhaps it shouldn't be taken to the extreme of metal lingerie, I think it's more than okay for armour to emphasize its wearer's feminine assets as long as it doesn't become entirely useless in the process.

Orlanth wrote:

solkan wrote:
As much as I agreed with the rest of your post, this example doesn't support your thesis because the female models pictured above are not wearing any armor. The three casters have ARM 12, the same armor given to all of the other Cryx models that aren't wearing effective armor. Completely naked undead constructs get an ARM 12, and a model has to strap a rocket to its back or be a non-warcaster wearing cloth in order to get a lower ARM stat.

That's not porno armor because that's not armor. Whether that makes it worse or not, I don't know.

Its armour alright, its just that PP realised that porno plate protects nothing and decided to stat the witches accordingly. If you look at the artwork the articulated halterneck and other attire are plate metal. I have the book but not a scan of the imagery. Page 86 of Apotheosis. Let me see if I can find a picture.....I found cosplayers with cloth versions of the Covens armour, and I found fan art (which doesnt count) but the orginal artwork is very clear its plate. So if it is clothing on account of its ARM 12 its clothing made of thick metal plates held together with rivets and screws. In fact other than some thin arm straps and a G-string, with the gusset replaced by metal plates the witches are not wearing any visible clothing at all, just metal. The miniatures are different in that they also have cloaks, omitted from the codex artwork.

If a weapon hits the plate the girls will possibly be ok, but there is no padding (common to porno plate) and wide open vitals from various common attack directions. The witch in a plate crop top is the nearest to having a chance as her armour is broadly similar to that of a secutor, but she only carries a dagger, not short sword and tower shield needed to survive that level of armouring, just too bad.

I'm sorry, but if a Princess Leia slave outfit doesn't provide any armor benefit you don't get to call it porno armor. You can justifiably call it a porn outfit, but if it's not armor you can't complain about it providing a benefit that it doesn't provide.

Completely buck naked undead constructs like the Mechanithralls and Skarlocks have just as much armor rating as the Coven has, and Bilethralls and Necrotechs actually have a higher armor rating than that. Hell, even the Satyxis raiders have that same "might as well not be wearing anything" armor rating.

If you'd like to complain about the other Cryx casters who happen to actually be wearing porno armor, you should do that. You could even start with Skarre, the source of the infinitely repeated of Great Rack jokes, or go straight to Deneghra with her convenient "insert polearm here" outfit, since the game stats imply that they're supposed to be wearing effective armor. And for extra credit ask why Mortenbra built herself a metal evening dress with matching metal shawl but left the top of her chest completely exposed.

But when the least effective looking armor is ACTUALLY not at all effective, it doesn't support your argument.

In_Theory wrote: but the Sisters Repentia and Chaos Daemonettes are what I really dislike... they are blatantly pornographic, even though it is not innately sexual.

uhhh... no.

Daemonettes could still be alluring and daemonic without having to expose breasts.

See, here's what I disagree with, people are getting hung up on content and not context. You're just taking it in the opposite direction from the BOOBIES FOR THE SAKE OF BOOBIES! crowd.

Daemonettes are the creation of a god of excess. It is entirely appropriate to render them with some exposed breasts, and not at all pornographic. (seriously, have you ever actually seen porn?) Any parent that doesn't want their children exposed to them should act like a parent and monitor their kid's gaming. The rest of us are adults and can make our own decisions.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

The Unending wrote:On the note of the twilight novel series relating to the exposing of the male form. The Twilight series is made fun of due to its facepalming moments and depiction of vampires. It has more to do with the content than the imagry. Where as the ball slingshot men were outright vomit inducing by any standards.

You must have your finger on a very different pulse than I do. Pretty much every man I've heard deal with the Twilight phenomenon has mocked it for being a blatant self-insertion fantasy for women to use to imagine themselves surrounded by implausibly attractive men who are fascinated with them for implausibly vague reasons. Guys I know disparage Twilight and its fans at just about every opportunity and would resent it being worked into a game. And yet those same guys have absolutely no problems with the exact same fantasy that has the genders swapped.

Which isn't bad. It's not morally wrong. But if those same guys are going to whinge about women not taking their hobby seriously, we can surely all see the reason why, right?

JOHIRA wrote:

The Unending wrote:On the note of the twilight novel series relating to the exposing of the male form. The Twilight series is made fun of due to its facepalming moments and depiction of vampires. It has more to do with the content than the imagry. Where as the ball slingshot men were outright vomit inducing by any standards.

You must have your finger on a very different pulse than I do. Pretty much every man I've heard deal with the Twilight phenomenon has mocked it for being a blatant self-insertion fantasy for women to use to imagine themselves surrounded by implausibly attractive men who are fascinated with them for implausibly vague reasons. Guys I know disparage Twilight and its fans at just about every opportunity and would resent it being worked into a game. And yet those same guys have absolutely no problems with the exact same fantasy that has the genders swapped.

Which isn't bad. It's not morally wrong. But if those same guys are going to whinge about women not taking their hobby seriously, we can surely all see the reason why, right?

Again Twilight is mocked for its content what I am referring to is its imagery two very different things. Imagery is what this discussiong is about.

There have been repeated examples of "porno-plate" for men that many have no problem with. Sanguinary Guard with the six pack and chest worked into their armor, Nordic warriors in animal furs and nothing else, 300 with guys defending a mountain pass in banana hamocks and a guy whose clothes are made entirely out of piercings etc.

Now while I may have a problem with some of the reasoning behind them (i.e. twilight and its inane story) I will not have a problem with the visual appearence (i.e. the vampires with grey skin)

Owain wrote:Let's not overlook Fallout 3!



Miss Lyons isn't half-bad looking, is she? Yet she's wearing the intentionally unisex T-45d Power Armour. It's unisex because, like Space Marine power armour, it's had so much plating and augmentation added to it that the outer layer no longer needs to conform to the individual wearing it to achieve a good fit.

Read up two pages, Sarah Lyons has not been overlooked!
Yes her femininity shows through without the need for porno plate.

solkan wrote:
I'm sorry, but if a Princess Leia slave outfit doesn't provide any armor benefit you don't get to call it porno armor. You can justifiably call it a porn outfit, but if it's not armor you can't complain about it providing a benefit that it doesn't provide.

Completely buck naked undead constructs like the Mechanithralls and Skarlocks have just as much armor rating as the Coven has, and Bilethralls and Necrotechs actually have a higher armor rating than that. Hell, even the Satyxis raiders have that same "might as well not be wearing anything" armor rating.

If you'd like to complain about the other Cryx casters who happen to actually be wearing porno armor, you should do that. You could even start with Skarre, the source of the infinitely repeated of Great Rack jokes, or go straight to Deneghra with her convenient "insert polearm here" outfit, since the game stats imply that they're supposed to be wearing effective armor. And for extra credit ask why Mortenbra built herself a metal evening dress with matching metal shawl but left the top of her chest completely exposed.

But when the least effective looking armor is ACTUALLY not at all effective, it doesn't support your argument.

I have come to see that Privateer Press allocates ARM stats arbotrarily on account of game balance and sometimes has little bearing on the armour worn. I still believe the Coven wear porno plate on account of the picture on page 86 of Apotheosis (first edition) that what they are wearing is unequiqocably armour.

Leia as Jabbas slave was not really wearing armour just a metal cupped bra, it more fashion.

However my reason for saying this is because of what I have seen looking the other way. Take a look at Ashlynn D'Elyse who happens to have the fairly low ARM 14, only Caine and the Coven have lower ARM amongst warcasters and yet she wears field plate, very reasonable field plate by all accounts once you forgive the lack of helmet so customary of character models.




Ashlynn has the same ARM as the transparently porno plated Denegra and the Harbinger. Though we can make allowances for the Harbinger because she is being directly looked after by Menoth himself and probably doesnt need armour, she is certainly not wearing much of any, just a pectoral i cannot count her obviously decorate shoulder plates especially as she will be floating above whatever it trying to hit her.

Yet Ashlynn is less well armoured than ARM 15 Sorsha, with her red plate corset and armoured high heels. Skarre with her open chest and cloth sleeves also manages ARM 15.



Perhaps ginger is right:

ginger_nid_dude wrote:Because for female characters, armour class is inversly proportionate to amount of armour.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on Twilight. Your ideas of why it gets mocked are completely different from every experience I've ever had on the topic.

The Unending wrote:There have been repeated examples of "porno-plate" for men that many have no problem with. Sanguinary Guard with the six pack and chest worked into their armor, Nordic warriors in animal furs and nothing else, 300 with guys defending a mountain pass in banana hamocks and a guy whose clothes are made entirely out of piercings etc.

These are poor counter-examples. Sanguinary Guard armour is actually functional- the armour fully covers the wearer, and so it is automatically disqualified as "porno-plate". Nordic warriors are also poor examples because people actually dressed that way. And though I have seen the absurd outfits from 300 mocked by guys, I believe that it gets a pass because the behavior of the Spartans is intended to appeal principally to straight guys. It's written by a guy for guys, and uses over-the-top macho action to counter-balance the homoerotic subtext that oozes off the screen. It's not historically accurate, but it feels like the history many guys wish was true. In other words, the problem isn't strictly what the armour looks like, but the context it comes from. If it was more historically accurate, with the Spartans oiling each other up and washing each other's hair before battle, it would cross a context line into something that makes most gamers uncomfortable and catch a lot more flack.

That makes 300 a whole different tin of boobies from real "porno-plate", which is armour that is designed to be ineffective so it can erotically appeal to men when worn by women and is completely unsupported by any reasonable context in the game.

Black Corsair wrote:

Whats wrong with this armor? Her arms appear to be completely covered in chainmail, I don't see what is so bad about that.

JOHIRA wrote: I believe that it gets a pass because the behavior of the Spartans is intended to appeal principally to straight guys. It's written by a guy for guys, and uses over-the-top macho action to counter-balance the homoerotic subtext that oozes off the screen. It's not historically accurate, but it feels like the history many guys wish was true. In other words, the problem isn't strictly what the armour looks like, but the context it comes from. If it was more historically accurate, with the Spartans oiling each other up and washing each other's hair before battle, it would cross a context line into something that makes most gamers uncomfortable and catch a lot more flack.

That makes 300 a whole different tin of boobies from real "porno-plate", which is armour that is designed to be ineffective so it can erotically appeal to men when worn by women and is completely unsupported by any reasonable context in the game.

How ironic that is. The kewl parts of the script people like in 300 were taken from Herodotus, with a few exceptions. The 300 Spartans was a far better film, watched it again just yesterday. Not entirely accurate but not bad.

It's the appeal to straight men thing that gets me laughing. You see those Spartans who marched with Leonidas would have been homosexuals, yep gay, every single one. It was part of their training you see, Spartans were taught this from when they entered training so that running away would be abandoning your lovers in battle, it worked. Sparta however suffered from a side effect of this policy as fewer Spartan men would marry and produce offspring willingly and many had to be forced to go and reproduce because they would rather be in the barracks with the guys. Sparta basically was running out of Spartans.

Orlanth wrote:

JOHIRA wrote: I believe that it gets a pass because the behavior of the Spartans is intended to appeal principally to straight guys. It's written by a guy for guys, and uses over-the-top macho action to counter-balance the homoerotic subtext that oozes off the screen. It's not historically accurate, but it feels like the history many guys wish was true. In other words, the problem isn't strictly what the armour looks like, but the context it comes from. If it was more historically accurate, with the Spartans oiling each other up and washing each other's hair before battle, it would cross a context line into something that makes most gamers uncomfortable and catch a lot more flack.

That makes 300 a whole different tin of boobies from real "porno-plate", which is armour that is designed to be ineffective so it can erotically appeal to men when worn by women and is completely unsupported by any reasonable context in the game.

How ironic that is. The kewl parts of the script people like in 300 were taken from Herodotus, with a few exceptions. The 300 Spartans was a far better film, watched it again just yesterday. Not entirely accurate but not bad.

It's the appeal to straight men thing that gets me laughing. You see those Spartans who marched with Leonidas would have been homosexuals, yep gay, every single one. It was part of their training you see, Spartans were taught this from when they entered training so that running away would be abandoning your lovers in battle, it worked. Sparta however suffered from a side effect of this policy as fewer Spartan men would marry and produce offspring willingly and many had to be forced to go and reproduce because they would rather be in the barracks with the guys. Sparta basically was running out of Spartans.

I'd also like to chime in and say that the leather briefs were only added into the film because the directors didn't think male viewers would want to see 300 phalluses just hanging out there on screen. Historically, save for their helmets, capes, and sandals, the Spartans fought in the nude. That probably would've made the film a no-go however, so they had to come up with some form of covering them up without totally killing accuracy. Enter ancient underpants

Female armour is what it is because the lines of the female body are truly a work of art. You don't like women body? shame on you. I don't think we see many real exaggerations with female armor. The witch hunter armours are based on finely detailed corsets made to be worn on the clothes, sure it's not normal to wear corset-like beautiful armor but in fantasy male armour is also over the top and nobody seems to complain.

You think that's practical armour? http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat50013&prodId=prod790890

Certainly that guy wears something totally normal with no exaggerations... http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat50005&prodId=prod790848

I don't see what's wrong with this, the armour is base on clothing, sure it's not practical for fighting but it's a pretty display armour and most fantasy armour are based on display armour rather than actual combat armour. http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/1/10459/840914-sister_of_battle_color_large.jpg

metallifan wrote:

I'd also like to chime in and say that the leather briefs were only added into the film because the directors didn't think male viewers would want to see 300 phalluses just hanging out there on screen. Historically, save for their helmets, capes, and sandals, the Spartans fought in the nude. That probably would've made the film a no-go however, so they had to come up with some form of covering them up without totally killing accuracy. Enter ancient underpants

Sorry, this is the weirdest historical mistake I've ever heard. One of the reasons all the Greeks did so well at pitched battles, and one of the reasons only a certain class of men could fight as hoplites, is that everyone was wearing a load of bronze armour. I have no idea where you're getting the whole nude thing from. Honestly, how do you think a city becomes the biggest power in Greece if they're the only ones who haven't realised they forgot their clothes at home?

In the comics, the Spartans were nude. But the comic is based on another movie('The 300 Spartans' - 1962), which is based on a very romanticised version of the actual history.

Things were lost in translation.

Legion wrote:

Why is armour in video games usually sexist?

Every entertainment meduim embraces sexuality in some form or another, and any or all of this could be interpreted as sexist.

Personally, I just like the titties.

^ This made me laugh! ^
Female armour tends to not actually armour in video games as most gamers are tenns and male.
Male means that most of the time they like girls.

poipo32 wrote:Female armour is what it is because the lines of the female body are truly a work of art. You don't like women body? shame on you.

If you think that anyone who doesn't want to only see female characters that have been stripped of their effective gear and turned into sex objects doesn't like women's bodies, I think you have serious social problems.

You think that's practical armour? http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat50013&prodId=prod790890

No, but at least it covers his vitals.

Certainly that guy wears something totally normal with no exaggerations... http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat50005&prodId=prod790848

No, but at least it covers his vitals.

How on Terra would you tell the SoB from the SM if the armour was the same? While I agree that a woman (Red Sonja) in a chainmail bikini is way OTT, its the same with Conan and his fuzzy loincloth. You need to see the indentation of the female-tailored armour so you needn't spend several minutes deciding whether you call your model a he of a she.

And, as mentioned many times above, Sex sells, there's no two ways around it. The gender used depends on the target audience, if the targets are women, then a male model is used, while in video games and wargames, the target is most definitely the male population, from late teens to mid-20s, the period of time where a guy says "whoah, boobies", so characters like Bayonetta, Red Sonja, and Lara Croft brandish bowling balls strapped to their chests.

Successful marketing strategy? Sure. Sexist? Yep. Realistic? Hardly.

While I don't agree with it, you can't say it doesn't work, and pointing it out if like saying "oh look! Final Fantasy characters are largely angsty spiky-haired teenagers with over-compensatory swords!" We all already know it, we're hoping it's gonna go away, but trying to point it out to us is repetitively redundant.

I find RPGs that only have one player mode , rather than a party e.g dragon age to have uni-sex armour . You can still see some of the defined curves, but overall its not too bad. I think its just easier for programmers sometimes, just having a default armour .

Female fighters dont need armor, they factor in the sex deprved soldier bearing down at them suddenly stopping to gawk at the hawtness and starts drooling, rusting their own weapons, while the women walks up and sexily skewers them with her blade and continues on, it's the succubus constant effect or SCE for short

And if she's really hot they would prolly just let her kill them, after all, its so hard to destroy something beautiful...

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:

metallifan wrote:

I'd also like to chime in and say that the leather briefs were only added into the film because the directors didn't think male viewers would want to see 300 phalluses just hanging out there on screen. Historically, save for their helmets, capes, and sandals, the Spartans fought in the nude. That probably would've made the film a no-go however, so they had to come up with some form of covering them up without totally killing accuracy. Enter ancient underpants

Sorry, this is the weirdest historical mistake I've ever heard. One of the reasons all the Greeks did so well at pitched battles, and one of the reasons only a certain class of men could fight as hoplites, is that everyone was wearing a load of bronze armour. I have no idea where you're getting the whole nude thing from. Honestly, how do you think a city becomes the biggest power in Greece if they're the only ones who haven't realised they forgot their clothes at home?

This is quite correct, and actually gets towards the real fact of the matter. 300 uses naked Spartans not because they actually left their panoply at home, but because the Greeks depicted their warriors as fighting naked in thier artwork because they liked the way it looked. In otherwords, the culture of the time desired stylized portrayals of idealized warriors whooping up with they helmets up over their heads (not down over their faces) their perfect bodies exposed to be seen and admired, not covered in 1/4" of bronze.

The same factor is at play in current representations of "armor". No Norseman ever ran around in just a loincloth and helmet, save perhaps in the summer. 1: It is bloody cold up there most of the time. 2: Even when it is warm you need cover at night, in the rain, etc. While VERY old warriors (circa Rome) might have run around naked to show off during battle, by the middle ages most people going to war were wearing and carrying what they could. But we often see such representations of men. Likewise, no one wore the crazy spiked armor you see on anything "BADWRONCHAOSRAWR!" Having 3 foot horns and 6 inch spikes sticking out of your armor is not practical, nor is wearing 300 pounds of steel. But again, look at chaos warriors from GW, or really any "EEEEEEVIL" model from any maker. Likely they are wearing armor that is completely impractical for moving around in, even if it would likely stop a rifle round.
Similarly, no woman who went to war after a certain point did so naked. They would dress according the standards of their time. However, just as overly wrought armor with spikes bigger than your arm or naked except for a loin cloth is popular for male armor, so is decorative "Look at how I am a woman!" armor is popular for women. Big and tough and warlike is what the culture expects from warrior men, and sleek and sexy is what it expects from warrior women. That both of those notions have little bearing on reality is besides the point.

Also, sexist is not synonymous with sexy. Porno armor is just a sylistic choice. Amusingly, it should probably be argued that it is a great step up from historical reality, considering that most women involved in armies were camp followers. If you want realism, the VAST majority of your women should be washing clothing, preparing meals and doing various sex work. Personally, I think women warriors in silly dress up armor is an improvement to "camp whore," but then I like smart, tough women more than prostitutes

(not directed at anyone in particular)

Grow up. If you can't see half naked DRAWN/CG/PLASTIC/METAL women without complaining that it's sexist then I'm surprised you can even survive in today's society.
I understand the argument point of this thread/dakka discussions and how argument is good etc. etc. but after 4 pages it's just the same points over and over (oh wait... ).

Even my female friends (see how I avoided girl friends there? HAH no jokes to be made...) laugh/don't care when they see stuff like this. The ones into anime even like it as it fits the style and... (heres where I tune out because I don't like anime).

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:

metallifan wrote:

I'd also like to chime in and say that the leather briefs were only added into the film because the directors didn't think male viewers would want to see 300 phalluses just hanging out there on screen. Historically, save for their helmets, capes, and sandals, the Spartans fought in the nude. That probably would've made the film a no-go however, so they had to come up with some form of covering them up without totally killing accuracy. Enter ancient underpants

Sorry, this is the weirdest historical mistake I've ever heard. One of the reasons all the Greeks did so well at pitched battles, and one of the reasons only a certain class of men could fight as hoplites, is that everyone was wearing a load of bronze armour. I have no idea where you're getting the whole nude thing from. Honestly, how do you think a city becomes the biggest power in Greece if they're the only ones who haven't realised they forgot their clothes at home?

Feel free to look it up yourself then, but Wehr already corrected you.

But at least know the facts before telling someone they made a mistake.

Likewise, no one wore the crazy spiked armor you see on anything "BADWRONCHAOSRAWR!" Having 3 foot horns and 6 inch spikes sticking out of your armor is not practical, nor is wearing 300 pounds of steel. But again, look at chaos warriors from GW, or really any "EEEEEEVIL" model from any maker. Likely they are wearing armor that is completely impractical for moving around in, even if it would likely stop a rifle round.

Yea but without spikes, how do we tell how evil they are? I mean, they have demons, they're bloodthirsty, some have got mutations, they wear armour covered in skulls and glyphs, and everything they own is usually bloodstained and/or has dead bodies hanging from it, but we need something -obvious- that tells us they're evil. Nothing says "Bad guys" like oversized spikes on your armour. Without the spikes, people might mistake them for good guys

ok think about this your a male space marine in pitched battle with a hot dark eldar chixk in porno plate your distracted she strikes your dead haha kudos to the woman

plaugerat wrote:ok think about this your a male space marine in pitched battle with a hot dark eldar chixk in porno plate your distracted she strikes your dead haha kudos to the woman

No Punctuation for you!

CrazyThang wrote:Grow up. If you can't see half naked DRAWN/CG/PLASTIC/METAL women without complaining that it's sexist then I'm surprised you can even survive in today's society.
I understand the argument point of this thread/dakka discussions and how argument is good etc. etc. but after 4 pages it's just the same points over and over (oh wait... ).

Yes, there's a reason those same points are being made over and over. Because a lot of you people are fundamentally misunderstanding your opponents. This isn't aversion to seeing half-naked women.

It's about context. If there's a good reason for the women to be half-naked, then we have no problem. But for a lot of people in this hobby, they want to see "tough" women (with the proportions of supermodels and no bulging muscles, natch) in armour that exposes them to the point that it serves no purpose. They want to strip the female characters of anything that truly makes them effective in battle and render them as pointless eye-candy. For no good reason. No context. There are a few women in gaming and no doubt a couple of you know some girls who don't mind that kind of thing, but it creates an undesired environment for many women. Not so much that they are offended, but more "Why would I ever want to get involved with that?" It makes gaming look childish.

And then gamers turn around and whinge about how they're so lonely and can't meet girls through playing with toy soldiers. This is why. Because they have created an environment where most female characters exist purely to appeal to them sexually and as we've seen in this thread, resent even the mere discussion that this doesn't have to be the only way.

Anyway, I've said my piece. I'm done with this thread. Just remember this: The next time you feel like you have to keep your hobby secret from some attractive woman because you're afraid of how it might look to them, think about why that would be.

You people eh?

Hmm.... well I wanted to disregard the rest of your post but I read it anyway and must say 2 words:

fantasy game

So instead of bashing "my side" and assuming what I think, try to view it from "my side's" angle. As a second point I must say, your very argument kills itself. Fantasy context is in fact scantily clad women doing crazy stuff as well as super muscle men doing equally crazy stuff in a FAKE setting. So yeah. Not real life.

Also I'm surprised no one posted this:

CrazyThang wrote:You people eh?

Hmm.... well I wanted to disregard the rest of your post but I read it anyway and must say 2 words:

fantasy game

So instead of bashing "my side" and assuming what I think, try to view it from "my side's" angle. As a second point I must say, your very argument kills itself. Fantasy context is in fact scantily clad women doing crazy stuff as well as super muscle men doing equally crazy stuff in a FAKE setting. So yeah. Not real life.

well formulated arguement my friend.

@JOHIRA Women in fantasy setttings are often treated very differently than women in "real life"
you have the archtypes of the damsel and of the "lady fighter"
the damsel is either a scantily clad hussie for the hero or a stuck up lady.
the lady fighters is usually a "hag" or a "guy" as in she's not feminine, but is an equal.
oh and as for the childish aspect of this hobby, your playing with plastic toy soldiers, doesn't exactly woo the college girls like you would imagine

metallifan wrote:

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:

metallifan wrote:

I'd also like to chime in and say that the leather briefs were only added into the film because the directors didn't think male viewers would want to see 300 phalluses just hanging out there on screen. Historically, save for their helmets, capes, and sandals, the Spartans fought in the nude. That probably would've made the film a no-go however, so they had to come up with some form of covering them up without totally killing accuracy. Enter ancient underpants

Sorry, this is the weirdest historical mistake I've ever heard. One of the reasons all the Greeks did so well at pitched battles, and one of the reasons only a certain class of men could fight as hoplites, is that everyone was wearing a load of bronze armour. I have no idea where you're getting the whole nude thing from. Honestly, how do you think a city becomes the biggest power in Greece if they're the only ones who haven't realised they forgot their clothes at home?

Feel free to look it up yourself then, but Wehr already corrected you.

But at least know the facts before telling someone they made a mistake.

What the devil? Unless I'm going blind or mad, Wehrkind agreed, and then pointed out that lots of contemporary artwork shows Greeks fighting in the nude for artistic reasons. This is correct, maybe I should've mentioned it in my post. I'm sorry if I came off as overly dismissive or something, I'm not trying to get at you. But you did say "Historically, save for their helmets, capes, and sandals, the Spartans fought in the nude" which is categorically incorrect. I don't know where you get your information, but every single book and professor I've ever read/heard is of the opinion that the Spartans did wear normal hoplite armour.

Just Dave wrote:You seem surprised?

Maybe it's just me being cynical, but as with all things like that, it's there because it will sell. People that play video and tabletop games don't exactly have the best reputations in regards to women (cue threads about a woman being in the LGS).

It just gives the consumer another opportunity to look at breasts and therefore a reason to buy the game. simple as that.

Which I am undeniably happy with

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:What the devil? Unless I'm going blind or mad, Wehrkind agreed, and then pointed out that lots of contemporary artwork shows Greeks fighting in the nude for artistic reasons. This is correct, maybe I should've mentioned it in my post. I'm sorry if I came off as overly dismissive or something, I'm not trying to get at you. But you did say "Historically, save for their helmets, capes, and sandals, the Spartans fought in the nude" which is categorically incorrect. I don't know where you get your information, but every single book and professor I've ever read/heard is of the opinion that the Spartans did wear normal hoplite armour.

Bah, sorry. I did misinterpret tone. No harm done? Anyway, late Spartans certainly did wear armour. But around the time of the battle of Thermopylae, Spartan Soldiers were known to go to battle in the buff. This was not -always- the case, but according to the Proffessor of the History course that the Girlfriend took, earlier Spartans would, from time to time, fight nude. Thermopylae (The setting of 300, for those unaware) was, I'm told, one of those cases. It served as a strong tool of intimidation when used. The fact that the Spartans seemed to believe they would not need a full set of armour would often unnerve opponents, or goad them on - causing them to make fatal mistakes.