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.

 Seaward wrote:
So I diced with danger and didn't even know it. I'm even more of a badass than I thought I was.

Yeah, clearly half of the boards users don't actually know what culture is. This for example...

Yup. Most travel agencies and even the US state department will give you plenty of information for places like Glasgow before you are allowed to travel there as there are a lot of nuances to the local culture you need to know if you want to be safe. It might not be as extreme as going to Somalia Afghanistan but it's certainly not someplace the average Joe should go uninformed.

Is laugh out loud funny. Have you ever even been to the UK?

And even if you actually were likely to get a good kicking if god forbid, you dared to brazenly walk around such a bizarre and alien place as Glasgow without being thoroughly educated by the United States State Department, it still doesn't have anything at all to do with culture, it has something to do with daft gak like sectarianism and football hooliganism, oh and most importantly, booze.

The fact that every nation has stupid people who get drunk and fill people in occasionally, has literally nothing at all to do with culture, and even if every single time you went walking around Glasgow you would be brutally assaulted for not working out the staggeringly complicated nuances of "not pissing the local nutters off" it still wouldnt make Scotland culturally different from the United States in any significant way.

Seriously, if you want to think of yourself as some sort of jet setting travel hound because you went to Scotland for a fortnight, you are entitled to do so, but you really havent visited anywhere that is culturally different to the United States.

Well said Matty. I am currently failing to see how Scotland is any more dangerous than any other first world city. Sure, we Scottish (or part, in my case) have a reputation. A Hollywood reputation. There is no real difference in danger between Glasgow and, say, New York. Infact, given the population size, Glasgow is probably safer.

 paulson games wrote:

What does an American need to know about Scotland? Plenty. Try Glasgow.

Yup. Most travel agencies and even the US state department will give you plenty of information for places like Glasgow before you are allowed to travel there as there are a lot of nuances to the local culture you need to know if you want to be safe. It might not be as extreme as going to Somalia Afghanistan but it's certainly not someplace the average Joe should go uninformed.

Being a Glasgow native I don't think there's any information I'd give any tourists that concern safety that are unique to Glasgow. Yes there are some rivalries that exist but it'd be rare for a foreigner to get caught up in, and that could easily be summed up as "be careful with your surroundings, and no football (soccer) colours".

Culturally, as an American, you'd get on fine in Glasgow (Glasgae). You've got a common history and culture. Now try visiting Cairo instead; they have different traffic systems, writing systems, majority religions, histories and even toilets. You don't want to accidentally end up in a local Egyptian toilet, because you'll probably not know what to do. At least in Glasgow you can figure everything out or just ask.

I'm offended by feminist double standards. A woman in a loincloth makes as much sense as a man in a loincloth. You don't appreciate the male or female form so you don't notice the half naked men and get offended by the half naked women. It's a primarily heterosexual male hobby. Fan service if it enters into the equation (not so much for Games Workshop) tends to reflect that.

You're basically just arguing for more conservative standards under the banner of progress. Models and art only need to be justified in their own reality. Not ours. If a repentia is fit and naked with a big sword that's appropriate because she's being humbled and shamed by her nudity on the way to certain death in battle for her failures. If an inquisitor shows cleavage that's how she dresses. Since when is showing the throat and collar in bad taste? Her erogenous nipples are well concealed. There's not a hint of her crotch or bottom.

She's a tough independent woman and she's in charge making decisions and her gender doesn't enter that. Men in the setting usually kowtow to some authority, often female. I think Warhammer is liberal enough without intentionally going out of it's way for equal representation.

 paulson games wrote:
The American Navy has had a major presence in Japan since the 1850's. (so a bit closer to 160 years). The US was a huge influence in Japan becoming a modernized power and building their pre-war navy. A lot of the senior Japanese naval officers were trained in US military academies or by liaisons that were sent to Japan to work with building the Imperial Army and Imperial Navy.

Oh, my bad. I thought Japan's isolation period had ended way later than that.

 Col. Tartleton wrote:
I'm offended by feminist double standards.

I'm offended by people not reading a few pages of the thread before posting.

 Col. Tartleton wrote:
If a repentia is fit and naked with a big sword that's appropriate because she's being humbled and shamed by her nudity on the way to certain death in battle for her failures.

Yeah, I'm so much offended by repentia being naked that my avatar comes from what is as far as I know the only official 40k illustration showing a naked human breast .

 Col. Tartleton wrote:
If an inquisitor shows cleavage that's how she dresses.

If an Inquisitor wears a boob window, it is ridiculous looking, and stupid.
In other not totally unrelated news, if an Inquisitor wears a bandana and a cap, it is ridiculous looking and stupid. And it has nothing to do with feminism, does it ?


Also, some things are perfectly fit for this kind of fan service. For instance, Rodriguez movies are awesome, and they do include a lot of pretty ladies. Others are not. For instance, 40k. 40k is where you ought to find stuff that, especially when naked, look horrible and repulsive, not attractive. Like my avatar .

To be fair, that isn't a "boob window" it an entirely normal looking dress.

If she was absolutely hanging out of it, I could understand the complaints, but its a normal bit of cleavage on a normal bit of evening wear.

Its been said plenty of times already, but there are heaps of better examples of needless tit, dripping about that picture only serves to make feminists look needlessly pedantic, and I say this as a bloke who concedes that in many cases they take the piss.

KDM is ridiculous, needless and senseless nudity is ridiculous (Brother Vinni) but that picture is just.. so far away from being offensive I don't even know where to start.

 mattyrm wrote:
To be fair, that isn't a "boob window" it an entirely normal looking dress.

There is cloth above, below and all around the cleavage. I call that a boob window. Just like that :

 mattyrm wrote:
dripping about that picture only serves to make feminists look needlessly pedantic

Except to people that actually read my post enough to know there is no feminism aspect in my complaint.

 mattyrm wrote:
but that picture is just.. so far away from being offensive I don't even know where to start.

Then it is a good thing I only called it “ridiculous looking, and stupid”. And not, never ever offensive.
I trust it is possible to be ridiculous looking and stupid while not being offensive, is it not ?

Sigh. I think that this threads purpose was lost from page 2.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

There is cloth above, below and all around the cleavage. I call that a boob window. Just like that :

Spoiler:

It's nothing like the same. It's a normal dress worn with a cloak. Two separate garments. Totally different from Power girl's silly outfit.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Except to people that actually read my post enough to know there is no feminism aspect in my complaint.

Then just shut up, please.

Representation of women in games is an actual (somewhat) serious issue, and some of us care about it.

If this is not about feminism, then it is only about your personal preferences regarding what you think looks good. And frankly, no one cares about that.

The original picture that started this isn't really problematic at all. She has a dress and a cloak. Now, if all (or even most) women in the game's artwork show cleavage while men are fully dressed, that might be a problem. But that's not really the case with GW games. Their issue is that women are really underrepresented both as characters and as models. But I said this all already on the first page.

pgmason wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

There is cloth above, below and all around the cleavage. I call that a boob window. Just like that :

Spoiler:

It's nothing like the same. It's a normal dress worn with a cloak. Two separate garments. Totally different from Power girl's silly outfit.

A point I made directly some dozen or more pages ago, but HSoO doesn't view it that way.

Crimson wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Except to people that actually read my post enough to know there is no feminism aspect in my complaint.

Then just shut up, please.

Representation of women in games is an actual (somewhat) serious issue, and some of us care about it.

If this is not about feminism, then it is only about your personal preferences regarding what you think looks good. And frankly, no one cares about that.

The original picture that started this isn't really problematic at all. She has a dress and a cloak. Now, if all (or even most) women in the game's artwork show cleavage while men are fully dressed, that might be a problem. But that's not really the case with GW games. Their issue is that women are really underrepresented both as characters and as models. But I said this all already on the first page.

Ah! *clouds part! sunbeam shines down!*

His problem with the picture doesn't actually involve feminism/portrayal of women at all! Silly me, trying to reconcile a poster's argument with the subject of the thread that poster himself started! Ok, I get it now.

Power Girl?

Seriously, you are really off the mark there, chief.


If that is your standards, your really .... reaching at this point.

pgmason wrote:
It's nothing like the same. It's a normal dress worn with a cloak. Two separate garments. Totally different from Power girl's silly outfit.

You forgot the collar. Which happens to be made of a surprisingly similar cloth, with a surprisingly similar color as the rest of the dress. Let's not even mention the metal on the bra.

 Crimson wrote:
Representation of women in games is an actual (somewhat) serious issue, and some of us care about it.

Yeah. And why does it have to be only about feminism ?

 azreal13 wrote:
His problem with the picture doesn't actually involve feminism/portrayal of women at all!

It has something to do with portrayal of women. It has nothing to do with feminism. Is that really so hard ? Or is any portrayal of women necessarily either feminist or sexist ?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

You forgot the collar. Which happens to be made of a surprisingly similar cloth, with a surprisingly similar color as the rest of the dress. Let's not even mention the metal on the bra.

Wait, you mean you can tell what kind of CLOTH it is just by looking!? I envy your powers. My girlfriend usually touches and feels the cloth to see what kind it is!

Wait, you mean that women try to match COLORS when drawing together their attire for an evening? My girlfriend usually just puts on like a yellow shirt with bright blue pants and a bright red coat with pink-polka-dot headband.

Wait, you mean there's METAL in BRAS? I... I don't even know what to say. All my life I thought there were little metal wireframe thingies in some bras. Clearly, I'm all wrong and should be ashamed.

 azreal13 wrote:
His problem with the picture doesn't actually involve feminism/portrayal of women at all!

It has something to do with portrayal of women. It has nothing to do with feminism. Is that really so hard ? Or is any portrayal of women necessarily either feminist or sexist ?

Any relevant portrayal, yes.

Basically, after all this time, it turns out your issue with the image was completely divorced from whether the original image contained a woman or not, and was basically down to the fact that it wasn't exactly your flavour of absurd! If it was a man in that image that was wearing something you had deemed inaccurately inappropriate/stupid from your own opinion of what you want to see in 40K derived art, the. Your issue would remain the same.

To those who 'oppose' the kind of artwork that set all this off I have a question: what would you have done about such art? What is your 'fix'?

 azreal13 wrote:
If it was a man in that image that was wearing something you had deemed inaccurately inappropriate/stupid from your own opinion of what you want to see in 40K derived art, the. Your issue would remain the same.

Yeah. I can actually provide an example that I've already mentioned in this thread, with a “male” (kind of), though it's a bit different from that one since it's not exactly closing : I find the Exalted Ctan's barbie doll anatomy ridiculous too, and I've complained about it.
But it tend to happens much much more often with women.

 Kojiro wrote:
To those who 'oppose' the kind of artwork that set all this off I have a question: what would you have done about such art? What is your 'fix'?

Remove the boob window by filling the gap between the purple dress and the purple collar by, say, purple cloth.
And in the case of the Exalted Ctan, well, just stay true to the original material .

Honestly, my wife would wear a dress like that, I think its a massive stretch to get pissed off about it.

There are literally hundreds of better examples of needless cleavage, lets be honest..

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Remove the boob window by filling the gap between the purple dress and the purple collar by, say, purple cloth.

Ok, now provide me a reason why the artist should be in any way obligated or compelled to do so.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
If it was a man in that image that was wearing something you had deemed inaccurately inappropriate/stupid from your own opinion of what you want to see in 40K derived art, the. Your issue would remain the same.

Yeah. I can actually provide an example that I've already mentioned in this thread, with a “male” (kind of), though it's a bit different from that one since it's not exactly closing : I find the Exalted Ctan's barbie doll anatomy ridiculous too, and I've complained about it.
But it tend to happens much much more often with women.

But still has nothing to do with how women are represented in miniatures and everything to do with how various random things are represented in a manner that is different from how you would like.

 mattyrm wrote:
Honestly, my wife would wear a dress like that, I think its a massive stretch to get pissed off about it.

Well, I would wear a hoodie and bandana. Does that mean I want to see an Inquisitor with a hoodie and a bandana ?

 mattyrm wrote:
There are literally hundreds of better examples of needless cleavage, lets be honest..

Ok. Let us discuss them too, then.

 Kojiro wrote:
Ok, now provide me a reason why the artist should be in any way obligated or compelled to do so.

The artist has absolutely no reason to be obligated to do so. Why would it ? Now he or she can follow my sugggestion to make better art (which is of course subjective), or just to make its art more attractive to me personally .
I'm pretty sure that is the case for most, if not all criticism of model and illustration that happens on this website. The only exception I could see is when some model or illustration, for some reason, involve legal problem, like featuring a big black swastika on a white circle over some red background in Germany .

 azreal13 wrote:
But still has nothing to do with how women are represented in miniatures and everything to do with how various random things are represented in a manner that is different from how you would like.

It has to do with how random thing, including many women, are represented in miniatures in a manner that is different from how I would like.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
But still has nothing to do with how women are represented in miniatures and everything to do with how various random things are represented in a manner that is different from how you would like.

It has to do with how random thing, including many women, are represented in miniatures in a manner that is different from how I would like.

So, we've had a 28 page long discussion not based on any great higher moral issue, but rather because things don't look the way that HSoO thinks they should.

Got it.

Can we please lock this thread now?

Ya it's about that time. I hope one day a thread involving discussion of women and wargaming in any context will be able to be conducted in a civilized manner for more than 2 pages... sigh...