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.

 Dark Severance wrote:

Asterios wrote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/new-poll-finds-9-in-10-native-americans-arent-offended-by-redskins-name/2016/05/18/3ea11cfa-161a-11e6-924d-838753295f9a_story.html

Do you understand how those surveys actually work? I will quote you from the actual survey done in 2004 that explains where the numbers came from:

The sample of telephone exchanges called was randomly selected by a computer from a complete list of thousands of active residential exchanges across the country. Within each exchange, random digits were added to form a complete telephone number, thus permitting access to both listed and unlisted numbers. Within each household, one adult was designated by a random procedure to be the respondent for the survey.

In other words they cold call people in the US. They ask them if they would like to take a survey, then they ask qualifier questions, do they consider themselves to be a Native American or Indian. When they answer yes, they ask questions.

The problem with those polls is that they are way too small of a sample size to determine anything. The survey you linked to asked 504 people, the one in 2004 asked 1,000 people. You also don't know what other qualifier questions were asked. Are these voters? What is the age range of these people? There is no evidence that the person asked is actually a Native American or Indian, they just have to say yes.

The advocates asking for change are multiple organizes and groups, one of them being National Congress of American Indians which has 1.2 million individuals within the organization. That is just one of the organizations... but a random poll of 1504 people is supposed to be considered a majority?

continue reading the article, it goes on about others in the nations and their not being ashamed of the name or its use , meanwhile the ones who are pushing it are back peddling and making excuses and such, also did you read the part how this survey also matched another survey that was done within the nations themselves?

in other words is a small minority, but its a poll and therefore not good, but if it backed your stance it would be all right with you, how hypocritical of you.

General depictions of women / men / nudity / etc in miniatures

Please stick to the topic. Whether the redskins should be called redskins is getting pretty far afield.

Randomrolls wrote:
Define "Racist". For instance, if I suggested to an asian woman she was not cut out to be an airforce pilot, and she thought it was because I was racist and not because the minimum height requirement for an airforce pilot to be 5'10 (as opposed to this woman's stature of 5'4), should I be censored for racism?

Air Force do have strict height/weight requirements for various reasons, which isn't 5' 10". However providing she didn't weigh more than 160 lbs at 5'4" she would qualify. If she weighed more then that is a valid reason to suggest she isn't qualified. Also providing she didn't require glasses with an eye refraction worse than +/-8.0.

It doesn't matter what she thought, if she didn't fit the height, weight, vision, age and health requirements. Now how it was stated to her (context), could have been identified as possibly racist. For example if you said, "the asian woman is not cut out to be an airforce pilot" then you are infering it is because of her race. Technically the race does't matter and the correct response should have been "the woman is not cut out to be an airforce pilot because she does not meet X/Y/X". That fact that she was asian doesn't matter.

Asterios wrote:
in other words is a small minority, but its a poll and therefore not good, but if it backed your stance it would be all right with you, how hypocritical of you.

Actually even if it was a poll that backed my stance it would not be all right with me. It is a poll, they aren't an accurate measurement of anything as they are designed to be biased. It also states that the people they are quoting are the 504 people that were polled.

Did you actually look at the actual poll document itself?
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/washington-post-poll-of-native-americans-on-redskins-team-name/2032/

They called 504 people. Did you know that only 100 of them were actually self identified Native American? So it wasn't that 504 Native American Indidians gave an opinon, only 100 did.

One of the questions asked was "Are you currently enrolled as a member with a Native American tribe? If yes what tribe?" - 44 people said yes, 56 were not enrolled.

Then they ask "As a Native American, do you fin dthe name offensive or doesn't it bother you?" - 9 Offensive, 90 does not bother and 1 no opinion.

Then they ask "In general, do you feel the word "Redskin" is disrespectful of Native Americans or not?" - 21 Yes, 73 No and 6 no opinion. WAIT! Didn't only 9 people find it offensive? See how selective data is... selective?

I find this question amusing, "If a NON-Native American person called you a Redskin, would you be personally offended or not? - 17 offended, 80 not offended and 3 no opinion. It also states "Based on 504 interviews" but it only qualifies and shows a 100 questions tallied. Are those Native Americans who answered that or just other people?

There is a lot more in there that makes the whole poll itself funny. Again even if the poll was in my favor, it is a poll and not accurate. Why do you think there are so many issues when talking about gun violence, because there are polls designed to back each side.

Edit: Sorry I did not refresh before posting as I was still replying so did not see the mod warning. If someone wants to create a new topic on the Redskins, feel free though and we can continue the discussion there.

So Kingdom Death stuff, I honestly don't get.

These pinup models are highly sexualised and borderline porn, but people seem to go mad for them. Why? Is this some anime fan thing that I just don't get? Am I getting too old? I mean, I can understand bronies and even anime as interests, but this is just too far.

Am I alone in this? Every time I've brought it up it's been met with derision.

Mario wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Given the reports from the companies that care to give them out I would say people who want sexy miniatures over sensible" miniatures are a major buying force, so this is not a fear.

That sounds a bit like the "We don't need a ramp, we never had a customer with a wheelchair" argument. They are a major buying force but from their exiting customer-base (and often with a lack in the same variety as male miniatures). The industry is relatively small and it might grow even better if it had more options. Some people like a bigger variety of female miniatures and not the same sexy miniatures all the time. They might think these are not immersive, ridiculous, or whatever. We have the internet and people can voice their opinion, that makes it much easier for a small company to see what people might want. How is that a bad thing? They still can chose to produce something more conservative that their customer-base is used to or try to expand with that information. Nobody is forcing them and yes, some people who make their own miniature lines have told us in this thread that having a bigger variety can be a hard thing to do because of the production needs. It's still their choice and they can just ignore the articles and blogs and just do their own thing.

Overall i don't know how somebody can complain about the possibility of censorship and at the same time advocate for the silencing of dissenting opinion on grounds that somebody else might feel bad because of it? If people are okay with somebody feeling bad about a sexy female miniature then they should also be able to be okay with somebody else feeling bad about a review of that miniature.

Well Reaper famously quoted many times in this thread, did the test made the same models fully clothed sot so fully clothed and nude game then different names and didn't have them together and according to them the nudes sold always and consistently better than the not so clothed who sold better than the fully clothed version of the same model essentially.So I guess they did put the ramp, but did not see any significant reward for doing so.

Personally as I have said in this thread if somebody wants realistic female models he or she can be my guest put their money were their mouth is and create them and if they have a commercial success good for them it may also make others think about it, but demanding from established companies to change course because of their wants is not acceptable, if we go further and this thread has gone further, a small minority at the present society can indeed get a massive force multiplier and try to enforce their opinion on a much larger but less active majority.

Overall once freedom of speech and morality is involved along with any talk about an age rating system the discussion gets to a new level that government is involved and is enforced to everybody and that is always problematic.

kb_lock wrote:
So Kingdom Death stuff, I honestly don't get.

These pinup models are highly sexualised and borderline porn, but people seem to go mad for them. Why? Is this some anime fan thing that I just don't get? Am I getting too old? I mean, I can understand bronies and even anime as interests, but this is just too far.

Am I alone in this? Every time I've brought it up it's been met with derision.

Limited runs and great quality mean they sell well, and are a good collector's item.

People collect playboys and hustlers, but pinup miniatures are a step too far? Besides the Illuminated Lady none of the pinup miniatures are nude, and even then the IL isn't even considered a pinup. People collect lots of things, and eroticized miniatures are low on my list of "too far [out there]". But I may be a bit biased, seeing as I own a few of them.

So by that logic if I created a limited run, but great quality cast of a dog turd, you'd think it is an amazing item that has to be purchased?

Collecting playboys and hustlers is weird too - got nothing against reading them, but collecting them is bizarre.

kb_lock wrote:
So by that logic if I created a limited run, but great quality cast of a dog turd, you'd think it is an amazing item that has to be purchased?

Collecting playboys and hustlers is weird too - got nothing against reading them, but collecting them is bizarre.

I have no interest in scatological miniatures, so I think I'd keep my money. Sorry hoss.

kb_lock wrote:
So Kingdom Death stuff, I honestly don't get.

These pinup models are highly sexualised and borderline porn, but people seem to go mad for them. Why? Is this some anime fan thing that I just don't get? Am I getting too old? I mean, I can understand bronies and even anime as interests, but this is just too far.

Am I alone in this? Every time I've brought it up it's been met with derision.

Well if you start by insulting people who disagree with your world view than you might get derision...

The models are well done both as sculpts and as design, depict what they are supposed to depict and quite a few humans have no issue with the naked human form, it has its audience and people who care about such things buy, you don't you do not buy, there is nothing more to really understand about it.

So the cast quality and limited run are moot points then. So what is the appeal of the miniatures? I honestly want to know. I'm not judging, you be whoever you are, but it is such an alien concept to me.

There's all likelihood that I'm the weird one, and I am happy to accept that


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PsychoticStorm, how did I insult people?

kb_lock wrote:
So Kingdom Death stuff, I honestly don't get.

These pinup models are highly sexualised and borderline porn, but people seem to go mad for them. Why? Is this some anime fan thing that I just don't get? Am I getting too old? I mean, I can understand bronies and even anime as interests, but this is just too far.

Am I alone in this? Every time I've brought it up it's been met with derision.

It isn't exactly that people go mad for them but there is a limited amount of them. Kingdom Death Kickstarter had 5,410 backers. The limited runs are usually 250 miniatures (if I recall). The rule of 80/20 says at least 20% of those 5410 backers would like those pinups, which is 1082. There is a higher demand than supply available. They are popular but it still a boutique thing.

kb_lock wrote:
So by that logic if I created a limited run, but great quality cast of a dog turd, you'd think it is an amazing item that has to be purchased?

If there was demand for a cast of that, then yes. There isn't a demand for it, even if it was a limited run. Now maybe if you put googly eyes on it, you might be able to make one. LOL!

There is a damand for unique, highly detailed, high quality miniatures. I prefer the 54mm and larger pinups vs the 28mm simply because they do go with some of my anime resin garage kits. There are many that aren't for me. Although I understand the horror theme, the monsters are actually over the top for me and I haven't bought them. I can get away with having pin-ups but trying to play a game with some of monsters, with my children around, probably not so much.

Also just the sculpting themselves. There is something about highly detailed but there is almost an art for just the right details. The miniatures don't tend to be too busy, the leather outfits and designs tend to sculpt just the minimum but the right details. Hard to explain but when you compare the sculpts to others it is easier to explain.

kb_lock wrote:
So the cast quality and limited run are moot points then. So what is the appeal of the miniatures? I honestly want to know. I'm not judging, you be whoever you are, but it is such an alien concept to me.

There's all likelihood that I'm the weird one, and I am happy to accept that

When I said they sell well, I meant resell for high amounts on eBay, so you also have the scalpers come in to churn the numbers and make them even harder to get for the limited audience it already has.

Personally I like female pinups/models in general(miniatures, statuettes, posters, art prints). As for Kingdom Death main I've been a long time fan of the 80s "body horror" horror films- Hellraiser, The Thing, The Beyond and such. It tickles that itch.

I quoted you when you wrote anime fan and not "some anime fan thing"

Dark Severance wrote:

kb_lock wrote:
So Kingdom Death stuff, I honestly don't get.

These pinup models are highly sexualised and borderline porn, but people seem to go mad for them. Why? Is this some anime fan thing that I just don't get? Am I getting too old? I mean, I can understand bronies and even anime as interests, but this is just too far.

Am I alone in this? Every time I've brought it up it's been met with derision.

It isn't exactly that people go mad for them but there is a limited amount of them. Kingdom Death Kickstarter had 5,410 backers. The limited runs are usually 250 miniatures (if I recall). The rule of 80/20 says at least 20% of those 5410 backers would like those pinups, which is 1082. There is a higher demand than supply available. They are popular but it still a boutique thing.

kb_lock wrote:
So by that logic if I created a limited run, but great quality cast of a dog turd, you'd think it is an amazing item that has to be purchased?

If there was demand for a cast of that, then yes. There isn't a demand for it, even if it was a limited run. Now maybe if you put googly eyes on it, you might be able to make one. LOL!

There is a damand for unique, highly detailed, high quality miniatures. I prefer the 54mm and larger pinups vs the 28mm simply because they do go with some of my anime resin garage kits. There are many that aren't for me. Although I understand the horror theme, the monsters are actually over the top for me and I haven't bought them. I can get away with having pin-ups but trying to play a game with some of monsters, with my children around, probably not so much.

Also just the sculpting themselves. There is something about highly detailed but there is almost an art for just the right details. The miniatures don't tend to be too busy, the leather outfits and designs tend to sculpt just the minimum but the right details. Hard to explain but when you compare the sculpts to others it is easier to explain.

Googly eyed resin dog turd kickstarter launches in 3 weeks, stay tuned!

Are there other pinup models like this that aren't KD?

Sinful Hero wrote:

kb_lock wrote:
So the cast quality and limited run are moot points then. So what is the appeal of the miniatures? I honestly want to know. I'm not judging, you be whoever you are, but it is such an alien concept to me.

There's all likelihood that I'm the weird one, and I am happy to accept that

When I said they sell well, I meant resell for high amounts on eBay, so you also have the scalpers come in to churn the numbers and make them even harder to get for the limited audience it already has.

Personally I like female pinups/models in general(miniatures, statuettes, posters, art prints). As for Kingdom Death main I've been a long time fan of the 80s "body horror" horror films- Hellraiser, The Thing, The Beyond and such. It tickles that itch.

I know they sell well, I just don't get the appeal of them. WHY do they sell well? Is there a game associated with the pinup models? Is it JUST the rarity of them? Your comment does shed more light on it now though, thank you.

PsychoticStorm wrote:I quoted you when you wrote anime fan and not "some anime fan thing"

I never changed the wording of that

Dark Sword and Reaper have a few pinup models I believe(Sophie th Succubus for Reaper I know). There are a fair few boutique manufacturers scattered around that sell Pinups, but you'd have to search for them.

As for why they sell well, they're pinup female miniatures. People like scantily clad females, whether it be a calendar in the garage or a marble statue amidst a topiary garden. The pinup models are just another variation of that.

There should be a game eventually for the non-pinup non-KD:Monster figures, but the pinups are totally their own thing. More than likely a small reason, but Adam Poots(creator of Kingdom Death) has said quite often that they're to just support KD and keep it going. Charity boosts basically. I believe it's in one of the Kickstarter updates that resin sales contributed a large portion of the shipping cost.

As for your Kickstarter idea Flying Assault Butts was funded, and delivered!

kb_lock wrote:
Are there other pinup models like this that aren't KD?

There are probably way more than you want to know but the answer is absolutely. Although Kingdom Death are probably some of the highest quality I've seen. Take a look at e2046.com, although what they are known as resin garage kits they have a vast range.

I like them because I find them good looking miniatures but also because of the challenge to paint them. You would think they are easy to paint but they provide an excellent canvas to properly learn how to paint lighting and layering.

Cant delete my post, so I'm just doing this instead. Sorry, old reply is old.

@Dark Severence, On the contrary, I think they'd be extremely difficult to paint well, which is why I was more baffled by it.

@Sinful Hero, I am well aware of the attraction to scantly clad females, it's delivered me 3 kids so far and even that isn't enough of a deterrent. My confusion was more, why 28mm models to get that? Anyway, I think you've all answered my question - it makes more sense, and it just isn't my thing apparently

I didn't say they were easy to paint, I said they were challenging which is why I like them, pinups that is. They are a good practice because to make them look good, layering techniques need to be used (but that is my opinion technically). The armored versions have other complications but we're talking pinups overall. The larger pinups like the holiday ones aren't too bad though. They also look pretty. Now that doesn't' mean I like them all, there are ones that are overtop so I wouldn't get them at all. Otherwise are strangely posed but I don't expect everyone to have the same taste.

kb_lock wrote:
So by that logic if I created a limited run, but great quality cast of a dog turd, you'd think it is an amazing item that has to be purchased?

Collecting playboys and hustlers is weird too - got nothing against reading them, but collecting them is bizarre.

There is a mindset that goes along with the idea that I bought it, its mine. So you have a subscription to Playboy, you read it for the interviews, ads, even the pin ups. Once finished you put it in a mag rack. You bought it, why throw it away. Next month the next one comes in. Rince and repeat. Now you have done this for six years. The mags still bring you enjoyment, so you keep the subscriptions coming. Now its been 20 years, man... that is quite a collection.

Many "collecitons" only dissapear once one of two things happen. One you move into a smaller place and just don't have the room and two, you die, and your inheritors have no use for them. I recently moved into a smaller home. In the process of moving I found 8 plaster gargoyle status. Just like the ones that were somewhat popular in the 90s (beause they were the ones that were popular in the 90s). So seriously, why did I need 8 gargoyles back then? Why do I need 8 gargoyles now, I donno, but I had a real hard time throwing out 6 of them because, well... I bought them, they are mine. We dont even mention the 14 various insense burners/trays. Hell, I don't even remember buying half of them.

People just collect stuff for many reasons and they hang onto them for many many more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dark Severance wrote:

kb_lock wrote:
Are there other pinup models like this that aren't KD?

There are probably way more than you want to know but the answer is absolutely. Although Kingdom Death are probably some of the highest quality I've seen. Take a look at e2046.com, although what they are known as resin garage kits they have a vast range.

You want a variety... check this page out. http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/topics.mv?id=286 You have everything from 1/4 scale Japanese Garage kits to 10mm model raill road. Yes, naked women in a bath tub all in glorious 10mm scale, naked booty 1/3 the size of a space marine, because that railroad hotel has to look authentic.

I like them because I find them good looking miniatures but also because of the challenge to paint them. You would think they are easy to paint but they provide an excellent canvas to properly learn how to paint lighting and layering.

I've done over 30 of the larger garage kits, some of the painting skills for minis caries over, but each kit does present its one unique challenges. For the curious my gallery can be found here. http://www.pbase.com/jayden63/resin_models

kb_lock wrote:
So Kingdom Death stuff, I honestly don't get.

These pinup models are highly sexualised and borderline porn, but people seem to go mad for them. Why? Is this some anime fan thing that I just don't get? Am I getting too old? I mean, I can understand bronies and even anime as interests, but this is just too far.

Am I alone in this? Every time I've brought it up it's been met with derision.

I'm not sure why you have to ask why (given we are on a forum dedicated to little plastic dollies).

Some people like display models, I don't find it any stranger that someone would like a display model of a half naked lady vs a display model of a Space Marine vs a display model of a viking vs a display model of a pirate.

As long as the person finds it aesthetically pleasing I don't really think there's any reason to ask why, and half naked or naked imagery has a history of thousands of years of people finding it aesthetically pleasing.

To me, it's less of a question of "why" and more a question "why not". Even though I typically find military subjects more to my liking, I've never questioned why someone might like some half naked ladies instead.

That is a good perspective to be honest

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
As long as the person finds it aesthetically pleasing I don't really think there's any reason to ask why

And here's where I have to disagree. Merely saying "I find it aesthetically pleasing" should not be an absolute end to the conversation. Just to name a couple extreme examples, what if someone finds it aesthetically pleasing to build and paint miniatures of children being raped, or KKK lynchings, or any of countless other really horrible things? Shouldn't we, in that case, have some pretty strong negative opinions about that person based on what they find aesthetically pleasing?

Now, obviously sexy miniatures aren't anywhere near that level of wrong, even by the most critical point of view. But there have been various moral objections that go beyond mere matters of aesthetic taste, and I don't think "shut up I like it" is at all a response to those concerns.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Well Reaper famously quoted many times in this thread, did the test made the same models fully clothed sot so fully clothed and nude game then different names and didn't have them together and according to them the nudes sold always and consistently better than the not so clothed who sold better than the fully clothed version of the same model essentially.So I guess they did put the ramp, but did not see any significant reward for doing so..

Our July Kickstarter will have an element of exactly this, and I'll be happy to let people know the various sales levels of each type of mini.

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
As long as the person finds it aesthetically pleasing I don't really think there's any reason to ask why

And here's where I have to disagree. Merely saying "I find it aesthetically pleasing" should not be an absolute end to the conversation. Just to name a couple extreme examples, what if someone finds it aesthetically pleasing to build and paint miniatures of children being raped, or KKK lynchings, or any of countless other really horrible things? Shouldn't we, in that case, have some pretty strong negative opinions about that person based on what they find aesthetically pleasing?

Now, obviously sexy miniatures aren't anywhere near that level of wrong, even by the most critical point of view. But there have been various moral objections that go beyond mere matters of aesthetic taste, and I don't think "shut up I like it" is at all a response to those concerns.

So then people who play Dark Eldar and Chaos are disgusting people then? Because background wise, DE and Chaos do some pretty horrible stuff, and if one tries to make a faithful representation of them, one may sculpt such horrible things.
Would you not say that such a person finds such themes thematically or aesthetic?
What about those who write horror stories?

I may have misunderstood, but such a stance demonizing those who like their fiction and aesthetics harsh does not seem right to me.

Asterios wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Asterios wrote:
thats censorship when people are afraid of saying or doing something in fear of being labeled or called things and so forth.

So, your solution to that speech should be free of consequences? That we should silence people who would “label” others?
.

the right to freedom of speech is tantamount to our very constitution and is in our countries first amendment, censorship should not be allowed, nor be used to dictate our laws.

Are you telling me that because freedom of speech is so important, you should censor people because else there might be censorship?
This is getting more and more confusing.

no, people should not be censored, the problem is censorship is being forced on people by negativity from others, the issue is they should not allow censorship or the minority to make their decisions but they do because that minority is a very vocal minority.

Let's take a concrete example. Say, I want to complain about some preview of a model. Are you arguing that the company should be forbidden to change that model based on what I said because that would be censorship? Damn.

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
As long as the person finds it aesthetically pleasing I don't really think there's any reason to ask why

And here's where I have to disagree. Merely saying "I find it aesthetically pleasing" should not be an absolute end to the conversation.

In the context that I used it, I think it's a fitting response to the question. kb wasn't (I don't believe at least) trying to paint of picture of it be morally wrong, but rather "why would someone be interested?".

If you want to expand the context to "why do we like things in general?", as in why does someone think an image of a pirate is appealing, or why does someone thinks the image of a tank is appealing, or why does someone think a half naked woman is appealing, or why are we on a forum talking about miniature figurines, that's kind of a much broader and more philosophical question. If you then want to expand it further to include people finding interest in things like paedophilia, racist lynchings and so forth, that is a deeper question because then it does become more of a moral question as well.

I was not attempting to answer those questions, so your disagreement with my statement is a bit misplaced and out of context.

I would say broadly that if a person for whatever reason wants miniatures that depict those things, that's fine. I'd find it a bit odd and I'd be curious to know if they display such imagery proudly in their homes and gaming clubs where it might be a bit inappropriate for younger audiences and drive conversation that people may not want to have in such a setting. But overall I wouldn't really care, any more than I care about that sort of stuff being depicted in any mediums as long as no one is actually getting hurt in the process of creating it.

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
As long as the person finds it aesthetically pleasing I don't really think there's any reason to ask why

And here's where I have to disagree. Merely saying "I find it aesthetically pleasing" should not be an absolute end to the conversation. Just to name a couple extreme examples, what if someone finds it aesthetically pleasing to build and paint miniatures of children being raped, or KKK lynchings, or any of countless other really horrible things? Shouldn't we, in that case, have some pretty strong negative opinions about that person based on what they find aesthetically pleasing?

Now, obviously sexy miniatures aren't anywhere near that level of wrong, even by the most critical point of view. But there have been various moral objections that go beyond mere matters of aesthetic taste, and I don't think "shut up I like it" is at all a response to those concerns.

Are you playing Devil's advocate or just rattling the cage?
People can make diorama's of Slaneesh orgies, Guro, rape or whatever, as long as they understand that in an open forum there will be resistance, i made a topless Necromunda Escher gang, which i played at my local store, but i understand i could never take them to an official events, some common sense applies

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
As long as the person finds it aesthetically pleasing I don't really think there's any reason to ask why

And here's where I have to disagree. Merely saying "I find it aesthetically pleasing" should not be an absolute end to the conversation. Just to name a couple extreme examples, what if someone finds it aesthetically pleasing to build and paint miniatures of children being raped, or KKK lynchings, or any of countless other really horrible things? Shouldn't we, in that case, have some pretty strong negative opinions about that person based on what they find aesthetically pleasing?

Now, obviously sexy miniatures aren't anywhere near that level of wrong, even by the most critical point of view. But there have been various moral objections that go beyond mere matters of aesthetic taste, and I don't think "shut up I like it" is at all a response to those concerns.

Are you playing Devil's advocate or just rattling the cage?
People can make diorama's of Slaneesh orgies, Guro, rape or whatever, as long as they understand that in an open forum there will be resistance, i made a topless Necromunda Escher gang, which i played at my local store, but i understand i could never take them to an official events, some common sense applies

Probably both.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
If the the slave handler was a female would have been ok?

Female slave handlers you say? I can help you with that...


Apparently a pistol is the difference between 'sci-fi' and 'fantasy'. Renders from the current Raging Heroes campaign (you can, I think, still get in to the campaign).

 Peregrine wrote:

Asterios wrote:
the dog was an icon plain and simple

Too bad it wasn't a profitable one. Taco Bell's purpose is to make money, not to preserve marketing campaigns you consider "iconic".

And again, this just goes back to the real fears here: you're afraid that people who want to buy sexy miniatures are a small and powerless market, so any criticism of sexy miniatures needs to be silenced. The threat is not that someone is going to step in and ban sexy miniatures, it's that the people making them are going to voluntarily decide "this isn't making enough money anymore" and move on to more profitable product lines. And you're terrified that if the current companies producing sexy miniatures do drop those product lines you aren't a profitable enough market for new companies to start producing their own sexy miniatures.

This was mentioned a bit ago and I think it merits an answer, as Peregrine's hypothesis is very nearly the exact opposite of what my research into the market of miniatures reveals.

Put simply, the facts I have available to me indicate that the market for 'sexy' miniatures is vastly larger than the market for 'sensible' miniatures (vastly as in perhaps an order-of-magnitude larger). This is my evaluation based on Kickstarter performances and the oft quoted point by Bryan from Reaper about the relative sales of clothed versus unclothed versions of the same miniature.

Of course, this then begs the question: what are the "real fears"? Well, PsychoticStorm touched on this quite well earlier;

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
there is a possibility a product be successful but be canceled because of a minority of extremely loudmouthed minority abusing the normal democratic means to enforce their opinion on others.

This is not realistic to happen in the wargame industry at this point, but could happen if it gets more successful the boardgame industry is on the verge of getting the mass to draw attention and the industry that is huge enouph to be a close example is the computer games industry were they have a constant battle against media and people getting offence.

This is a branch of the same phenomenon that is currently running rampant in academia, which CH Summers refers to as 'Fainting Couch Feminism';


Call it fainting couch feminism, Social Justice Warriors, intersectional feminism, the Regressive Left or whatever, there is a growing recognition that a small number of voices, amplified by social media, are able to exercise outsize influence. Less than a week ago a fine example of this occurred when a handful of complaints motivated Fox Studio to Apologize for an ad where the Villain is attacking the Hero.

So what's happening now, in video games, movies and pop culture in general, is a process of hashing out what the markets actually want, and the process of eroding the unearned moral authority that feminists are now seeking to exploit. We're going to see a great deal more of what we saw last year in the Protein World controversy; not necessarily people initially seeking to offend, but understanding that when they do offend, the better strategy is not capitulation but defiance.

Heck, I had barely heard of Prodos prior to all of the controversy about their product lines. Or look at Raging Heroes; putting aside controversies related to business practices, they don't exactly suffer for their... let's call it 'unsubtle' aesthetic.