Gender Equality?! I LIKE CHEESECAKE!
By
AmazingMOO,
Posted on: 2011-12-02 23:30 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Quote:
Hanging around Atlas Park and seeing the female models, I think "shiny, scanty, cutout" would be a definite profit victory.
|
Originally Posted by Crystal_Smoke
Ah, but see, I would be unlikely to pay for any of the shiny, scanty, cutout options you present, so if we consider a consumer base that consists of just you and I, I think it's a wash for NCSoft, in terms of profit.
 |
Quote:
Well, okay, if you're going to start counting people other than me and Moo...
|
Originally Posted by Jophiel
Hanging around Atlas Park and seeing the female models, I think "shiny, scanty, cutout" would be a definite profit victory.
|
Quote:
Gunslinger pack, Sam |
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Here, I'll show you:
"Gender Equality" is a reference to the thread the Techbot started shortly after the Steampunk set was released- |
/threadNazi, skips away
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
|
Quote:
His "statements" aren't what you claim them to be, and what you've quoted repeatedly doesn't say what you claim it says.|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
His statements weren't ambiguous - they were quite straight forward. They only become cryptic if we assume they aren't sexist.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
He make a remark about his wife, their closet, and who pays for what, and who should wear what. You appear to be saying that in talking about his wife, he didn't mean his wife. In talking about his closet, he didn't mean his closet. And that in talking about women, he didn't mean women.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
He also told us what he thinks women need in terms of clothes.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
May I also question the consistency of the position of chastising someone on a forum for chastising someone on a forum?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
If you think I'm being overly sensitive, say so.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
But this business of telling me that MOO didn't say what he clearly did say - to the point that I have quoted it repeatedly - is not going to get much traction with me personally.
|
Be offended if it makes you feel any better. You're simply missing the point by a mile.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
Tomato, tomato. Does my point not work with either pack? |
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
Gunslinger pack, Sam
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Just for the sake of being thorough, here's how I read MOO's OP:
At the time this thread was made, there was a great debate about gender parity of costume piece, both in the Techbot's thread on the subject and David Nakayama's own official thread on it. I read MOO's thread as addressing two of the most popular subjects of debate - gender-neutral pieces and parity in number of costume pieces.
The former is what I consider to be an overreaction by quite a few of us, in the form of a request that all new costume pieces be ported to all models. While this stemmed from a desire to give women the pieces they lacked, it also had the extreme downside of also denying women actual female-specific, feminine clothing, as those couldn't be ported to men. MOO disagrees with this, and rightly so. He sees his wife as attractive and, as a counterpoint to the drive to make men and women in this game more homogeneous, he speaks out to oppose this trend, postulating that women are sexy and that's OK.
The latter is a largely reasoned argument that it's impossible to give women ports of all costume items they can use from men AND give them feminine clothing because that would mean women would have vastly more costume pieces than men would, and people would complain. MOO disagrees with this, based on personal opinion. He sees that his wife possesses many times more articles of clothing that he does, and yet finds that he's OK with this. Personally, I agree with him on this point entirely.
The line which spawned this "controversy" is merely saying the above two paragraphs in a single sentence, more or less. Women, i.e. female characters in this game, for which the term "women" is used interchangeably in casual posting practice, need more clothing and, in particular, more sexy clothing. While I don't disagree with this assertion overall, I happen to believe that they've had enough sexy clothes and could use some other clothes for a while yet. I recall Bad Influence going quite a ways to disagree with this, so it's not an empty statement to make, and well worth making, in fact. Just not in its own brand new thread, but that's besides the point.
Additionally, I do agree that women need to have more clothes than men. They're at the disadvantage of having just one character model with severely limited physical build variety to men's two models of rather variable build, plus it's generally socially acceptable for women to wear pretty much all men's clothing, plus they have a whole host of female clothing that it's not generally socially acceptable for men to wear, thus the game generally tends to avoid representing them.
There's no need to misread this. All that does is detract from the point.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Ok, I'm willing to go one more round, and then I'll drop it.
Quote:
This is just "Is not!" "Is too!" and isn't getting us anywhere.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
His "statements" aren't what you claim them to be, and what you've quoted repeatedly doesn't say what you claim it says.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
It's called a metaphor. What MOO was saying is something many people have said before - they like sexy clothes in real life, therefore they like sexy clothes in the game. Real life, in this case, is the source of the desire, but not the aim of suggestion. MOO makes a lot of threads, but they are almost always directly aimed at the game and various interpretations of it. I've read a lot of his threads, and I don't recall him trying to extract truths from the game to apply to real life.
|
My problem with the statement is not that he might be trying to extract truths from the game to apply to real life, but just the opposite - that because women should dress to please men in real life, there's no problem with them doing so in the game.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Need to have, not necessarily need to wear. Hence why this is relevant to City of Heroes and not real life. This is a question born of costume design as expressed through booster packs and aimed at costume design as expressed through booster packs. Unless this is literally the entire thread you read from all of the forums in the last two weeks, then you are deliberately and intentionally ignoring very clear context and trying to nit-pick the man's words in order to feel offended.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Because I don't appreciate my fellow posters being the subject of witch hunts, especially not someone like MOO who, to the best of my memory, has not said a mean word to another poster. Yes, I realise this means I do the same thing I'm arguing against, but in this case I'm fine being the bad guy. I feel very strongly that this is a point well worth arguing, because I oppose the kind of character assassination you insist on perpetuating just as a matter of principle. If you have a problem with a poster, you take it to PMs, you explain your grievances, you ask for an explanation and only when you KNOW what that poster aimed to say do you do something about it. This kind of public shaming when you clearly misunderstood is embarrassing, and I mean that for all of us.
|
Hmm, "...just as a matter of principle." Personally, I revere principle above politeness. The forum culture I typically post in is substantially more rough-and-tumble than the boards here, and you might be right about doing this in PM's.
For what it's worth, when MOO himself responded to my post, he didn't claim to be hurt or upset, and he didn't ask me to apologize for being rude, assassinating his character, or setting up a witch hunt. Let me say that if I have hurt anyone, I apologize.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
You are overly sensitive. Absurdly so. There's no need to toss around accusations over what you believe someone said when nothing of the sort was said, deliberate misreading aside.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Keep quoting it. It won't make it say what you claim it says any more than it does. Because you're not basing your outrage on what MOO said, but rather on what you think he meant between the lines. Yes, if you disregard any form of context that comes with this game and these forums, you can twist his words. I could easily do the same and and ask why everyone seems to be making cartoons all the time or what people have against puppies.
|
It was the lines.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Be offended if it makes you feel any better. You're simply missing the point by a mile.
|
He appeared to be supporting the general notion that there was no good reason to restrict the vast majority of pieces to male-only, or to make any substantial distinction between the base pieces all three figures have access to - unlike the Magic, Steampunk and Gunslinger packs, which pretty much set this whole issue in motion.
If those weren't his points, than, yes, I missed them.
If they were, I didn't.
In the midst of making his largely tongue-in-cheek and lighthearted post touching on these very valid points, he used a couple of phrases I found objectionable, and I objected to them.
I didn't feel the need at the time to state that I agreed with his overall post, as I have said so previously. I have since clarified this in this thread as well, for those that might have missed it. I just clarified it again, for those that haven't picked up on it yet.
"Strength of numbers is the delight of the timid. The valiant in spirit glory in fighting alone."
- Mahatma Gandhi
Still CoHzy after all these years...
Quote:
You're right Sam!|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Just for the sake of being thorough, here's how I read MOO's OP:
At the time this thread was made, there was a great debate about gender parity of costume piece, both in the Techbot's thread on the subject and David Nakayama's own official thread on it. I read MOO's thread as addressing two of the most popular subjects of debate - gender-neutral pieces and parity in number of costume pieces. The former is what I consider to be an overreaction by quite a few of us, in the form of a request that all new costume pieces be ported to all models. While this stemmed from a desire to give women the pieces they lacked, it also had the extreme downside of also denying women actual female-specific, feminine clothing, as those couldn't be ported to men. MOO disagrees with this, and rightly so. He sees his wife as attractive and, as a counterpoint to the drive to make men and women in this game more homogeneous, he speaks out to oppose this trend, postulating that women are sexy and that's OK. The latter is a largely reasoned argument that it's impossible to give women ports of all costume items they can use from men AND give them feminine clothing because that would mean women would have vastly more costume pieces than men would, and people would complain. MOO disagrees with this, based on personal opinion. He sees that his wife possesses many times more articles of clothing that he does, and yet finds that he's OK with this. Personally, I agree with him on this point entirely. The line which spawned this "controversy" is merely saying the above two paragraphs in a single sentence, more or less. Women, i.e. female characters in this game, for which the term "women" is used interchangeably in casual posting practice, need more clothing and, in particular, more sexy clothing. While I don't disagree with this assertion overall, I happen to believe that they've had enough sexy clothes and could use some other clothes for a while yet. I recall Bad Influence going quite a ways to disagree with this, so it's not an empty statement to make, and well worth making, in fact. Just not in its own brand new thread, but that's besides the point. Additionally, I do agree that women need to have more clothes than men. They're at the disadvantage of having just one character model with severely limited physical build variety to men's two models of rather variable build, plus it's generally socially acceptable for women to wear pretty much all men's clothing, plus they have a whole host of female clothing that it's not generally socially acceptable for men to wear, thus the game generally tends to avoid representing them. There's no need to misread this. All that does is detract from the point. |
But then I think MOO has a point, in so much as I think there's really less pieces a majority of people would put their male avatar into, versus what a majority of people would put their female avatars into.
Skirt and Pants options would likely get equal use on a female avatar. On a male avatar, that skirt will not be used all that much at all, and likely prove to be a waste of developer time.
What I took MMO's OP to be is that he thinks it's best to give females EXTRA options as that's where the money will lie.
Now, I do think there is room to even the gap between male and female avatars. Like a new top section!
Give male avatar's access to shirts! They'll have the ability to wear a baggy shirt and not one tight to them. They can even give them a cutoff shirt so they can go all 80's!
They could also give them some more short options! Don't see why they can't make Shorts 1, 2 and 3 available to male avatars.
And then while they're at it, they can make male/female versions of cutoff jeans (buttoned and unbuttoned versions) at daisy duke length and a bit longer length for both male and female avatars!
Which of course, you combine that new short option with males having the short cut off shirt option and you can call it the 80's pack!
BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection
Quote:
Erm... There's no problem with people dressing their female characters in a way specifically designed to please men. That's kind of the point of having such a powerful costume creator. Whether you or I would isn't really relevant to whether someone else should, or whether someone else could. Postulating that isn't a call for sexism or objectification, but merely a call for not excluding costume pieces which could support it. I, personally, happen to be a great proponent of open expression. If people want to use this expression to be sexist ********, then let them. I simply won't have anything to do with it, but it's their subscription, their time, their characters.|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
My problem with the statement is not that he might be trying to extract truths from the game to apply to real life, but just the opposite - that because women should dress to please men in real life, there's no problem with them doing so in the game.
|
You seem to be coming from the stance - and correct me if I'm wrong - that people wanting or making sexist costumes is somehow wrong and people should be ashamed of this. I disagree with this on a fundamental level. If people want to make sexist costumes, let them. If that's what they want in their entertainment, let them have it. Players aren't the issue. What the art team makes and, moreover, what the art team DOESN'T make is.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
I haven't attempted character assassination on anyone. I have said that MOO is a good guy - twice now. I have said I don't think he was trying to be sexist - merely that he did so involuntarily. That's why I pointed it out.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
Hmm, "...just as a matter of principle." Personally, I revere principle above politeness. The forum culture I typically post in is substantially more rough-and-tumble than the boards here, and you might be right about doing this in PM's.
|
Sure, if someone's being an *** an making a mess of the forums, then kick 'im in the shins, metaphorically speaking. I'll be right there with you. But when someone makes a relatively reasoned post, it just feels... Mean-spirited to cut them down like this. I know that's not what you were trying to do, but it comes off like this.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
For what it's worth, when MOO himself responded to my post, he didn't claim to be hurt or upset, and he didn't ask me to apologize for being rude, assassinating his character, or setting up a witch hunt. Let me say that if I have hurt anyone, I apologize.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
If you think I'm a liar - that I'm deliberately misreading things - you probably should stop discussing things with me.
|
I get that you believe it's clearly said, but I simply don't see it in a straight reading.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tetsuko_NA
MOO's point appeared to be that the in-game costume creator should be weighted more heavily towards female models, as players typically dress their female characters in a wider variety of clothing than their male characters. His point appeared to be that 'sexy' costumes are likely to be popular among the playerbase, and are likely to be something that players will be willing to pay for.
He appeared to be supporting the general notion that there was no good reason to restrict the vast majority of pieces to male-only, or to make any substantial distinction between the base pieces all three figures have access to - unlike the Magic, Steampunk and Gunslinger packs, which pretty much set this whole issue in motion. If those weren't his points, than, yes, I missed them. If they were, I didn't. |
Those of us who make walls of text tend to "adorn" our post with hyperbole, embellishment and sometimes even outright fabrications, not to make the occasional choice done in poor taste. That's just how that goes. Read enough of my post and you'll invariably find I've unintentionally said something racist or sexist or just downright stupid. The other day, someone sent me a PM that a link I'd posted as leading anime jet packs instead lead to a desktop stripper site just because I'd goofed when doing a Google search. These things happen, but if they're not the point, are they really that important? It just feels to me like we're trying to re-educate people on how to live their lives even if their lives aren't relevant to what they're saying.
---
I don't MEAN to be the bad guy, here or elsewhere, and I know it's far from my job to police the forums. Oh, god, is it far from it! I have a whole collection of "post deleted" messages from a whole host of forum moderators, and I even got into an argument with a mod one time. I just really want to keep the boards as friendly and comfortable as possible, because that, to me, is what fosters the particular brand of goofy creativity that sets our community apart from the rest.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
I do not disagree with any of this at all.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Erm... There's no problem with people dressing their female characters in a way specifically designed to please men. That's kind of the point of having such a powerful costume creator. Whether you or I would isn't really relevant to whether someone else should, or whether someone else could. Postulating that isn't a call for sexism or objectification, but merely a call for not excluding costume pieces which could support it. I, personally, happen to be a great proponent of open expression. If people want to use this expression to be sexist ********, then let them. I simply won't have anything to do with it, but it's their subscription, their time, their characters.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
You seem to be coming from the stance - and correct me if I'm wrong - that people wanting or making sexist costumes is somehow wrong and people should be ashamed of this. I disagree with this on a fundamental level. If people want to make sexist costumes, let them. If that's what they want in their entertainment, let them have it. Players aren't the issue. What the art team makes and, moreover, what the art team DOESN'T make is.
|
I was objecting to MOO's apparent statement about what happens in the real world, not the costume creator. Yes, the overall discussion is about the costume creator, but some statements have been made about the real world.
Comments about what sort of clothes (not virtual costumes) women (not female characters) need strike me as sexist, and I'll tend to say so.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
"He's a good guy, he's just sexist" is pretty much still this. I don't know whether to call it damning with fine praise or just masking attacks as compliments, but it doesn't sit well with me.
|
I try not to be, and I suspect MOO does not want to be, either.
When I say something unconciously sexist, I would want people to call me on it so I can examine it and see what I was thinking. That's the thing about unconcious sexism: you don't see it yourself.
Neither you nor MOO have to accept my definition of what's sexist (heck, you don't have to accept my belief that MOO is a good guy, either), but if I see something that strikes me that way, I'm likely to mention it. If I do that with too much snark, that's a fault of mine.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I'm probably the last person to talk about being nice or polite, especially given my posting history, but it's generally my belief that keeping the forums a nice, friendly place where people feel comfortable enough to open up and share their ideas is a good thing. Personally, I'd never consider speaking in favour of Furry artwork on any other game's forum but this, just because I know it's an "easy to hate" target that will get me mocked and ignored. That's why the City of Heroes community is different. We're tolerant of people's vices and virtues and look for ways to incorporate both in the game.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Sure, if someone's being an *** an making a mess of the forums, then kick 'im in the shins, metaphorically speaking. I'll be right there with you. But when someone makes a relatively reasoned post, it just feels... Mean-spirited to cut them down like this. I know that's not what you were trying to do, but it comes off like this.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I should point out that I'm not really making this point entirely on MOO's behalf, or because I feel he's hurt. Like I said, it's just a principle thing with me. I don't like seeing people accused of things in what I consider to be an unfair way. In this case, it's even more than that, because what I hate more than anything else is reading statements into people's words that they didn't actually say. Few things get under my skin these days, but posts starting with "So you're saying that..." are one of the few still remaining. I've actually put people who continually twist my words on ignore just because I'm developing an ulcer from reading their posts.
|
I just think you and I differ on what we think MOO said.
For what it's worth, I'm not trying to yank your chain - or anyone else's. I might be mistaken, but I'm being honest in what I think.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I don't believe you're lying, if that's what you took from it. I believe you understand what he's saying, but believe he means more than he says. I generally consider reading a statement as something significantly different than what it says on face value is a deliberate misreading. That doesn't mean it's wrong (for passive-aggressive people, it's downright necessary), but it's far, far too easy to read into a person's words something the person never intended to say. As I said - I've had this happen to me so many times I just want to punch people over the Internet when they do that to me.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I get that you believe it's clearly said, but I simply don't see it in a straight reading.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Let me ask you this, then: If you knew what he meant, then why pick on something he didn't mean to say and chastise him on it when it was sideways of the topic and thread and general point? That'd be like me saying that after I found Blasters to be garbage, I realised how great Brutes were, and then went on to make a whole post about how great they are... And then you come along and criticise me for misrepresenting the worth of Blasters (that's happened before, actually). Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm not, but that's not the point.
|
I think that there is a balance point between making a public case about specific statements you find are objectionable, and just dealing with it privately - and, heck, picking your battles and not dealing with it at all.
I'm willing to accept that I'm on the wrong side of that point in this case.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Those of us who make walls of text tend to "adorn" our post with hyperbole, embellishment and sometimes even outright fabrications, not to make the occasional choice done in poor taste. That's just how that goes. Read enough of my post and you'll invariably find I've unintentionally said something racist or sexist or just downright stupid. The other day, someone sent me a PM that a link I'd posted as leading anime jet packs instead lead to a desktop stripper site just because I'd goofed when doing a Google search. These things happen, but if they're not the point, are they really that important? It just feels to me like we're trying to re-educate people on how to live their lives even if their lives aren't relevant to what they're saying.
|
I see it as a matter of being willing to accept being called out on sexist, racist, or stupid things if you say sexist, racist, or stupid things. I've done all of those things (mostly just stupid, thank goodness), and I expect to be called out on it.
That's how I get better.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I don't MEAN to be the bad guy, here or elsewhere, and I know it's far from my job to police the forums. Oh, god, is it far from it! I have a whole collection of "post deleted" messages from a whole host of forum moderators, and I even got into an argument with a mod one time. I just really want to keep the boards as friendly and comfortable as possible, because that, to me, is what fosters the particular brand of goofy creativity that sets our community apart from the rest.
|
Thanks for keeping things in perspective.
Heh, you and I have gotten into it before (on griefing in PvP? It was a long time ago, and I forget), and the fact that you were willing to go toe-to-toe with me is one major reason I value your opinion. I don't know if that's healthy for the forums, though, which appears to be your point.
Lesson learned - I'll take it to PM's next time.
"Strength of numbers is the delight of the timid. The valiant in spirit glory in fighting alone."
- Mahatma Gandhi
Still CoHzy after all these years...
Somewhat tangentially, I also want to point out that around here, threads often seem to take on a course of their own. It's not always a good thing, but it's not always a bad thing, either, depending on how it goes. Yes, I admit we derailed MOO's thread (even if I feel he accomplished his goals with it), but I for one don't think it has been a waste. Whether the thread's topic reflects the title or the original intent seems somewhat less important than whether it's productive, and I feel this one has been, both on topic and off it.
I once mentioned the topic of gender equality is not going to go away if we ignore it hard enough. It's going to keep coming up, and every time it will be louder and more angry until something happens to address it. Luckily, we didn't we of the community didn't have to armwrestle each other over Internet deadlock as David stepped up and did what I consider to be one of the biggest favours to the community I've ever seen, so the "controversy" around the subject feels less pronounced now. That doesn't mean gender equality and sexism have been "done," however, and as we've shown, there's always more to say.
The funny thing with sexual objectification of characters - and this is a conclusion I reached some time ago - is that while it's bad as a general practice, it's not ALWAYS bad. At the end of the day, games and entertainment in general sell us fantasies, and much as we try to "rise above" the more questionable cliches, the fact of the matter is that they're cliches for a reason - because we still want them. A lot of the time, people seem to want to "fix" the game's representation of women or "fix" people's costume-making practices. Far too often we see men who make skimpy-clad women ridiculed here on the forums, and I really don't think that's the point. That's part of why calls of sexism rub me the wrong way.
The whole drive here is to give people a choice. Those of us who don't like cheesecakes sometimes feel slighted by what the art team offers us, as though we're expected to have come to the game for the heels and the corsets, and giving us more choice is the request. But that's not to say that the "cheesecake" choice needs to suffer for it, because people like that, too. Hell, I like it from time to time. A few mean words were said in the various gender equality threads as to which outfits were good or bad and which people were good or bad for wanting to use which outfits, and again, that's not the point.
The point is always choice, and I think that's what MOO was saying. But choice means being able to choose the "moral high ground" AS WELL AS being able to choose the "moral low ground." That's kind of what choice is, which we seem to forget from time to time.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
This probably comes the closest to what my opinion on the whole matter has been, since the very first time it appeared on the forums until now. Put simply, in the general case I will always support someone that says "I would like something more than this." I will always oppose someone that says "I would like something *other* than this." If you want an option the devs don't provide, you have every right to ask for that option specifically and I'm all for it. If you have to bolster your argument by claiming the options we do get are somehow wrong and shouldn't exist, you lose me right at that point.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
At the end of the day, games and entertainment in general sell us fantasies, and much as we try to "rise above" the more questionable cliches, the fact of the matter is that they're cliches for a reason - because we still want them. A lot of the time, people seem to want to "fix" the game's representation of women or "fix" people's costume-making practices. Far too often we see men who make skimpy-clad women ridiculed here on the forums, and I really don't think that's the point. That's part of why calls of sexism rub me the wrong way.
The whole drive here is to give people a choice. Those of us who don't like cheesecakes sometimes feel slighted by what the art team offers us, as though we're expected to have come to the game for the heels and the corsets, and giving us more choice is the request. But that's not to say that the "cheesecake" choice needs to suffer for it, because people like that, too. Hell, I like it from time to time. A few mean words were said in the various gender equality threads as to which outfits were good or bad and which people were good or bad for wanting to use which outfits, and again, that's not the point. The point is always choice, and I think that's what MOO was saying. But choice means being able to choose the "moral high ground" AS WELL AS being able to choose the "moral low ground." That's kind of what choice is, which we seem to forget from time to time. |
The fact that we can't have everything because resources are not infinite means ultimately everything we get is something else we don't get. But that doesn't change the fact I believe its productive to ask for what you want that you don't get, and destructive to ask for someone else to not get what they want in order to get what you want.
Its really that simple for me, and gender issues with costumes are only one specific case of that principle.
For me, there is no moral high ground (I know what you meant, just saying). This is escapist fantasy. Armor-clad fire blasters are no more the high ground than bikini-clad dual blade slashers. No one's preferences are higher or lower than anyone else's. No one's preferences are better or more justified than anyone else's.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
I agree with you completely, and indeed this isn't limited to gender issues. I've run into the same destructive arguments in regard to requests for new costume pieces which aren't traditionally associated with American comic books (large weapons, medieval armour, etc.) as well as themes drawn from other media (anime, fantasy, etc.), with people insisting that this is a comic book game and shouldn't have these things. That always rubbed me the wrong way, as it's essentially making an argument that people who want these things SHOULDN'T get them. The problem is that this is bad for the game AND for comic books at the same time.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Its really that simple for me, and gender issues with costumes are only one specific case of that principle.
|
In fact, one of the gender equality counter-arguments was that because comic books are sexist, the game should be sexist, too. Because it's a comic book game. That... Just hurts my brain to think about it. So, yes, I'm right there with you. I will always support people asking for more costumes even when I don't really want them, but I will never support people asking for less choice because it "doesn't belong." Comic books should be used as a source of inspiration, not as a limiting factor.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
For me, there is no moral high ground (I know what you meant, just saying). This is escapist fantasy. Armor-clad fire blasters are no more the high ground than bikini-clad dual blade slashers. No one's preferences are higher or lower than anyone else's. No one's preferences are better or more justified than anyone else's.
|
The beauty of video games is even if you do something that's generally considered wrong in the real world inside a game, you're really not hurting anybody. A woman walking down the street in nothing but a thong and a tube top would cause people's monocles to pop out of their eye sockets in real life, but in a game? Who cares? Your dime, your time. How we dress and what we create is purely our own business, and people who disapprove of it are free to simply avoid us. Sure, there are a few things we really SHOULDN'T create - racist characters, profane characters or anything else that breaks the T for Teen rating - but those are few and far in-between.
Just because someone happens to like something which isn't the height of moral purity, it doesn't mean the game shouldn't provide. It's an indulgent fantasy.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Going back a bit....
Quote:
I prefer to have the waist slider fairly far to the right (frequently on both men and women). However, it gets nudged back on a lot of them because larger waists react REALLY oddly with most of the jackets, and an awful lot of my characters (male and female) wear jackets. |
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
That's nothing compared to the waist slider. My default for my girls is halfway to the right or more. None of them are anorexic, so... >_>
|
<sigh> Try to make a reasonably-proportioned human being, end up looking like an innertube smuggler.
--Isus Trikanda
10 50s, a 48, and and better than 100 sub-50 alts... the altitis is strong in this one.
Quote:
I actually really, REALLY dislike how the body sliders affect female characters for the most part. Physique aside (that's just breasts and butt), almost every other slider just makes your woman "wider." But heavier-set women are not simply wider side-to-side, they are actually larger. You'll see this very clearly if you compare as upposedly big female character from this game with a big character from a game which actually supports this, like Saints Row or Lineage II.|
Originally Posted by IsusTrikanda
Going back a bit....
I prefer to have the waist slider fairly far to the right (frequently on both men and women). However, it gets nudged back on a lot of them because larger waists react REALLY oddly with most of the jackets, and an awful lot of my characters (male and female) wear jackets. <sigh> Try to make a reasonably-proportioned human being, end up looking like an innertube smuggler. |
Let's take the Waist slider, for instance. Yes, that makes your waist WIDER, as in it's bigger left-to-right, but it does not actually make it thicker, as in it's just the same thickness back-to-front. What this means is you have a woman with a very wide stomach when looked at from the front, but who still has that nasty curved spine and tiny little waist when looked at directly from the side. Neither muscles nor fat widen a waistline in this way. Muscles, especially, make the waist more rounded, rather than more elliptical.
Or how about the shoulders? If you widen your shoulders, you literally do just that - your shoulder joints pull out of your body and spread apart. The thing is, people who are said to have "broad shoulders" don't have that just because they have unusually long collar bones, but rather their shoulders are broad because their chest and rib cage are bigger. From behind, a broad-shouldered person with a big chest is very obviously different from a smaller person, and it's just not because one person's shoulder blades are farther apart than the other's.
I get that our models are hugely legacy and that messing with them in any way opens up a can of worms, but I feel it's high time we did something to fix up at least our basic skin model so it looks less like a balloon animal. Seriously.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
People like you are why men are given negative stereotypes. "Men don't care about the way they look". This is absolute crap.
Quote:
I like cheesecake too. But unlike you, I am a man that actually cares about how he looks. I go to the gym, I do cardio and lift weights. I go shopping and I enjoy it. I like nice dress shirts, as well as creative graphic tees, designer jeans, a variety of shoes, different coats and suits and accessories. My closet ranges from from sharp and dressy to casually stylish. Because I want to look good.|
Originally Posted by AmazingMOO
COH Artists and Developers: Please include VASTLY MORE costume pieces for female models than you do male models. More accessories, shoes, boots, and costume items. The more attractive, the better. Scanty is quite alright. Sheer and lacy items are wonderful. Cutouts are awesome. Shiny is fantastic.
Because I like Cheesecake, and I'm willing to pay for it! |
I am a V.I.P. subscriber too. This does not make me special, nor you. The majority of players here have at least one V.I.P. account. Some friends of mine have two. And as a subscriber, I also pay for the costume options being made. As do all the other V.I.P.'s here. We all have opinions, and I am proud to say mine happen to differ from yours.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Firemoth
It's not that we're saying we have nothing, a lot of us are saying we're tired of the overly sexy costume pieces we keep getting.
So when I make characters, I tend to go with more "conservative" outfits. Yes I still have the "sexy" and "skimpy" outfits from time to time, but that's only if it would fit with the character's personality. For me, having sexy after sexy coming out leaves me with the same things to keep using, and it gets old. |
I fully support as many possible costume options for BOTH genders. As well as a Huge Female body type. What I am really getting sick of, is the female costumes getting special treatment. I want more male equivalent costume parts. Give us a long jacket that has the detail and customization of the bolero, with a jacket tail that actually moves. Like that "old and busted" trench coat but with "new hotness" detail and customization. This fallacy that women have more fashion needs is just as insulting to me, as the overly sexy and skimpy outfits are to you.
Be sure to drink your
Quote:
Agree with all of this!
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I actually really, REALLY dislike how the body sliders affect female characters for the most part. Physique aside (that's just breasts and butt), almost every other slider just makes your woman "wider." But heavier-set women are not simply wider side-to-side, they are actually larger. You'll see this very clearly if you compare as upposedly big female character from this game with a big character from a game which actually supports this, like Saints Row or Lineage II.
Let's take the Waist slider, for instance. Yes, that makes your waist WIDER, as in it's bigger left-to-right, but it does not actually make it thicker, as in it's just the same thickness back-to-front. What this means is you have a woman with a very wide stomach when looked at from the front, but who still has that nasty curved spine and tiny little waist when looked at directly from the side. Neither muscles nor fat widen a waistline in this way. Muscles, especially, make the waist more rounded, rather than more elliptical. Or how about the shoulders? If you widen your shoulders, you literally do just that - your shoulder joints pull out of your body and spread apart. The thing is, people who are said to have "broad shoulders" don't have that just because they have unusually long collar bones, but rather their shoulders are broad because their chest and rib cage are bigger. From behind, a broad-shouldered person with a big chest is very obviously different from a smaller person, and it's just not because one person's shoulder blades are farther apart than the other's. I get that our models are hugely legacy and that messing with them in any way opens up a can of worms, but I feel it's high time we did something to fix up at least our basic skin model so it looks less like a balloon animal. Seriously. |
Be sure to drink your
Quote:
i appreciate and agree with your post |
Originally Posted by Red_Addiction
People like you are why men are given negative stereotypes. "Men don't care about the way they look". This is absolute crap.
I like cheesecake too. But unlike you, I am a man that actually cares about how he looks. I go to the gym, I do cardio and lift weights. I go shopping and I enjoy it. I like nice dress shirts, as well as creative graphic tees, designer jeans, a variety of shoes, different coats and suits and accessories. My closet ranges from from sharp and dressy to casually stylish. Because I want to look good. I am a V.I.P. subscriber too. This does not make me special, nor you. The majority of players here have at least one V.I.P. account. Some friends of mine have two. And as a subscriber, I also pay for the costume options being made. As do all the other V.I.P.'s here. We all have opinions, and I am proud to say mine happen to differ from yours. This is understandable. What else gets old though, females now getting EVERYTHING that males get AND MORE! I fully support as many possible costume options for BOTH genders. As well as a Huge Female body type. What I am really getting sick of, is the female costumes getting special treatment. I want more male equivalent costume parts. Give us a long jacket that has the detail and customization of the bolero, with a jacket tail that actually moves. Like that "old and busted" trench coat but with "new hotness" detail and customization. This fallacy that women have more fashion needs is just as insulting to me, as the overly sexy and skimpy outfits are to you. |
ty.
Quote:
I love this post, thank you!
|
Originally Posted by Red_Addiction
People like you are why men are given negative stereotypes. "Men don't care about the way they look". This is absolute crap.
I like cheesecake too. But unlike you, I am a man that actually cares about how he looks. I go to the gym, I do cardio and lift weights. I go shopping and I enjoy it. I like nice dress shirts, as well as creative graphic tees, designer jeans, a variety of shoes, different coats and suits and accessories. My closet ranges from from sharp and dressy to casually stylish. Because I want to look good. I am a V.I.P. subscriber too. This does not make me special, nor you. The majority of players here have at least one V.I.P. account. Some friends of mine have two. And as a subscriber, I also pay for the costume options being made. As do all the other V.I.P.'s here. We all have opinions, and I am proud to say mine happen to differ from yours. This is understandable. What else gets old though, females now getting EVERYTHING that males get AND MORE! I fully support as many possible costume options for BOTH genders. As well as a Huge Female body type. What I am really getting sick of, is the female costumes getting special treatment. I want more male equivalent costume parts. Give us a long jacket that has the detail and customization of the bolero, with a jacket tail that actually moves. Like that "old and busted" trench coat but with "new hotness" detail and customization. This fallacy that women have more fashion needs is just as insulting to me, as the overly sexy and skimpy outfits are to you. |
Types of Swords
My Portfolio
Quote:
Well she has to bear wearing something at the moment
|
Originally Posted by Zombie Man
I'm rifling through the closet and I can't seem to find her chaps or magic coat.
|
Thanks for the support! Another thread about this topic I am starting to get grieved over the same argument. That men like to look good too.
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showt...=1#post4135812
Be sure to drink your
Quote:
No one's stopping you getting new costume parts.
|
Originally Posted by Red_Addiction
That men like to look good too.
|
@Golden Girl
City of Heroes comics and artwork
Quote:
Actually, that is exactly what is going to happen now. Females will get everything males get, plus special unique things. And males will get nothing unique.|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
No one's stopping you getting new costume parts.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
Our practices, discussed at great length and worked out with the Community, are: Unique pieces for females and everything else equally ported between the body types. Yes, this ends up resulting in more pieces for females overall, however after the last 12 months of reading feedback and lengthy discussion with the Community we made this decision.
It's very unlikely we'll alter course on this in the immediate future. |
Be sure to drink your
COH Artists and Developers: Please include VASTLY MORE costume pieces for female models than you do male models. More accessories, shoes, boots, and costume items. The more attractive, the better. Scanty is quite alright. Sheer and lacy items are wonderful. Cutouts are awesome. Shiny is fantastic.
Because I like Cheesecake, and I'm willing to pay for it!
Now, it's not that I object to shiny, scanty, cutout options for my girls. It's just that we have so darned many of them already. Adding still more not only becomes repetitive and redundant (see what I did there?) but, in my opinion, it begins to send a message that is quite thoroughly covered already in Noble Savage's thread.
You know what I would spend points on? Possibly even extra actual money (although I make no promises in that regard)?
* "Normal" hairy chests for men. None of my male characters happen to be competitive swimmers, nor do they happen to be werewolves. I'd appreciate something between the extremes of "I shave all over" and "I howl at the moon." My guys would still not be walking around topless, but at least I could use the casual jacket on my main guy without putting a t-shirt under it to protect others from the glare coming off his chest. I believe there are other tops that show a bit of chest as well, just like many men do in real life.
* A 5:00 shadow as a face detail.
* Ditto for a shaved head. I don't mean razor shaved; we do have bald. I mean stubble.
* More hair for guys in general.
* Tattoos! For all the models, not just the guys! And for places other than back of the head, forearms and face (which you can sort of do now, with patterns).
I spend much more time on my male characters' costumes then my females and yet I always end up with the same few basic 'templates' because I find most of their options so dissatisfying. And yes, I do understand that that has to do with my personal tastes, and YMMV, but then, that's how the thread started.