Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
buglips*the*goblin

Bones question

Recommended Posts

What does this discussion say about the half naked MALE figures with swartznegian figures? (ie Bartok etc)

The problem with this is that being hulked-out like that is a male fantasy, not a female one. Bartok isn't marketed as explicitly sexual. His shirt is off, but he's showing off his massive muscles--it's a male power fantasy, not a female sex object. And I bet most women wouldn't see him that way; that amount of muscle isn't sexy to most women. (Of course, this whole discussion is assuming everyone is straight and cisgendered, but that's a whole other issue.) Then you have something like 50084, who is a woman with her shirt off. But there's nothing powerful about that; she's clearly a sex object being marketed to men.

 

Now, Reaper is much better than many companies at this sort of thing, and from what Bryan's said, there is a particular body type that sells much better than others, so we can hardly blame Reaper for trying to make a profit. On the other hand, an argument could definitely be made that making a concerted effort to reduce the "boys club" aspect of the hobby, and encourage more women to participate by creating explicitly-sexual men as well as realistic and non-sexualized women figures, a company could vastly increase profits in the long-term by tapping into a market that is too-often turned away by the obvious discrepancy between the way male and female miniatures are treated.

 

Also, David Willis did a pretty great comic on a related subject.

 

Oh, and as for Succubi, I agree it makes sense for them to be naked and explicitly-sexual. But whereas Reaper has two pages of results for "succubus," many/most of whom are completely nude and... generously proportioned, they sell just one incubus, who is actually wearing more clothes than many female warriors. Reaper sells dozens of naked women, but I don't think I've ever seen a mini of theirs with male genitalia, especially not in an explicitly-sexual context.

Edited by Slendertroll
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://thehawkeyeinitiative.com/

 

Warning. Do not sip coffee while reading.

 

That is disturbing. Deeply so.

 

It amuses me how a thread based on weather or not a demon chick is wearing a bra has turned into a discussion about societies' sexual stereotypes. Personally I don't see anything wrong with a little "cheesecake" or "beefcake" as it goes. Whatever people say out loud, humans are sexual beings, and the human body (or various mixtures thereof) can be a beautiful thing. To enjoy the way it looks is no bad thing.

 

My favorite beefcake mini of reaper's is 03086, Nephal Shadow Prince Demon. He's got pleasing muscles, without being overly muscled, you can see most of him and his kilt is tight enough around the back that you can tell he has a nice hiney, and he's in a graceful pose. My favorite cheesecake mini has to be 50188 sleeping beauty. I figure that one is based on one of the older versions of the tale, where she doesn't wake up until her children are breast feeding (oh ya, that kind of story! thanks a bit disney...)

 

Anyway, I think reaper does a good balancing act. I can tell you from a female perspective that beefcake models probably wouldn't sell as well to women as just really neat minis. I really like that shadow prince, but he's pretty low on my list of minis to buy. I can't and certainly won't speak for all women, but it's been my experience that women are less likely to buy sexualized images of the male body than men are to buy sexualized images of the female (or male, depending on preferences). That's why porn sells so much better to men. Romance novels are the female version of porn, and look how many a badly written one sold last year; made the top of bestseller's list!

Edited by redambrosia
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://thehawkeyeinitiative.com/

 

Warning. Do not sip coffee while reading.

 

That is disturbing. Deeply so.

 

It amuses me how a thread based on weather or not a demon chick is wearing a bra has turned into a discussion about societies' sexual stereotypes. Personally I don't see anything wrong with a little "cheesecake" or "beefcake" as it goes. Whatever people say out loud, humans are sexual beings, and the human body (or various mixtures thereof) can be a beautiful thing. To enjoy the way it looks is no bad thing.

 

My favorite beefcake mini of reaper's is 03086, Nephal Shadow Prince Demon. He's got pleasing muscles, without being overly muscled, you can see most of him and his kilt is tight enough around the back that you can tell he has a nice hiney, and he's in a graceful pose. My favorite cheesecake mini has to be 50188 sleeping beauty. I figure that one is based on one of the older versions of the tale, where she doesn't wake up until her children are breast feeding (oh ya, that kind of story! thanks a bit disney...)

 

Anyway, I think reaper does a good balancing act. I can tell you from a female perspective that beefcake models probably wouldn't sell as well to women as just really neat minis. I really like that shadow prince, but he's pretty low on my list of minis to buy. I can't and certainly won't speak for all women, but it's been my experience that women are less likely to buy sexualized images of the male body than men are to buy sexualized images of the female (or male, depending on preferences). That's why porn sells so much better to men. Romance novels are the female version of porn, and look how many a badly written one sold last year; made the top of bestseller's list!

 

Hmm, it is worth noting, perhaps, that most of the scantily clad female miniatures that I painted last year were for female players.... Including two units of nekkid dark elves from Raging Heroes, repurposed for WH40K.

 

But I also ended up painting one of Nephal, for that same female player. (With exacting instructions on how to paint his sword....) I... am not sure that I ever want to play 40K against her.... She also plays fantasy battle.

 

But when I am looking for female miniatures for my own games I typically buy ones that are wearing reasonable clothing and armor. (A whole bunch of the Reaper miniatures by Sandra Garrity are in my cases.) I look at a female warrior with an exposed navel and I think 'Well, she's dead come next combat'. The belly is the part that you want least to expose in battle - a punctured gut is not a nice way to die.

 

Meanwhile, Garrity's wizards are clothed from top to toe - with the lass with the book being my favorite.)

03343_w_1.jpg

 

Demons, Daemons, and Devils runnin' around in their nuddy does not bother me - starkers they are better protected than most folks in mail, and they have no real fear of death, infection, or disease. More incubi would be good - in mediaeval literature they were actually more common than succubi; tempting nuns for the most part. (If anyone wants to read some pretty horrific examples of gynophobia and misogyny... the mediaeval church was pretty danged bad.)

 

The Auld Grump

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What does this discussion say about the half naked MALE figures with swartznegian figures? (ie Bartok etc)

The problem with this is that being hulked-out like that is a male fantasy, not a female one. Bartok isn't marketed as explicitly sexual. His shirt is off, but he's showing off his massive muscles--it's a male power fantasy, not a female sex object. And I bet most women wouldn't see him that way; that amount of muscle isn't sexy to most women. (Of course, this whole discussion is assuming everyone is straight and cisgendered, but that's a whole other issue.) Then you have something like 50084, who is a woman with her shirt off. But there's nothing powerful about that; she's clearly a sex object being marketed to men.

 

Now, Reaper is much better than many companies at this sort of thing, and from what Bryan's said, there is a particular body type that sells much better than others, so we can hardly blame Reaper for trying to make a profit. On the other hand, an argument could definitely be made that making a concerted effort to reduce the "boys club" aspect of the hobby, and encourage more women to participate by creating explicitly-sexual men as well as realistic and non-sexualized women figures, a company could vastly increase profits in the long-term by tapping into a market that is too-often turned away by the obvious discrepancy between the way male and female miniatures are treated.

 

Also, David Willis did a pretty great comic on a related subject.

 

Oh, and as for Succubi, I agree it makes sense for them to be naked and explicitly-sexual. But whereas Reaper has two pages of results for "succubus," many/most of whom are completely nude and... generously proportioned, they sell just one incubus, who is actually wearing more clothes than many female warriors. Reaper sells dozens of naked women, but I don't think I've ever seen a mini of theirs with male genitalia, especially not in an explicitly-sexual context.

 

 

I think Reaper has the non-sexualized females down great. In fact, that's one of the main aspects that pushed me over the edge when it came to the KS. My gaming group consists of straight girls and gay men. When I saw how many great female sculpts they were using, I couldn't pass it up, even if a few like the Succubus will never see the light of day.

 

It would be nice to see more Incubi! I get that it might make male players uncomfortable to see a nude male miniature (possibly with something conveniently covering his dangly bits), but they have to take into account that minis like the naughty maid or Sleeping Beauty make others feel the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for nude males. I believe nudityin general is acceptable, and people should be proud of their bodies, regardless of shape or size. Humanity is as beautiful as it is ugly.

 

On a side note, I saw miniatures of some Scots, and they were showing their dangly bits in a classic taunt. Fantastic.

 

-Dave

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://thehawkeyeinitiative.com/

 

Warning. Do not sip coffee while reading.

 

That is disturbing. Deeply so.

Well that's the point, isn't it? Why do we accept that women in comics are always drawn with breasts and butts pointing at the viewer at all times, regardless of the action being taken, but as soon as we put a man in the same positions, it becomes deeply disturbing?

 

But anyway, yes, I mostly agree with everyone here that Reaper is far better than most companies in the industry about this sort of thing, and that they have so many examples of clothed and unclothed members of both sexes is great.

 

I will point out though, that women picking scantily-clad PC minis isn't really a statistically-significant point, given that it's a largely self-selected group. Women who have gotten to the point of picking a mini to represent them are already somewhat okay with the status quo: they're already the ones who haven't been chased away by the inequalities between men and women's armor. If a woman's first experience with the hobby is walking into a game store, getting creeped out by the guy behind the counter, and seeing a wall of hulked-out men and bikini models, she might very well think that all her preconceived ideas about nerds and D&D and comics and whatever else were true, and flee the hobby, never to return. The ones who stick around are the ones who saw the cheesecakey models and decided they were okay with it.

 

Of course, I don't really see the appeal of mostly-naked figures at all. If you want porn, it's out there for free; you don't need to buy and paint a little piece of metal to get it. I want my minis to represent warriors, and it doesn't make sense for most of them to have individual boob-pockets in their armor, or chainmail bikinis, and so forth. I get that others do, which is great; I honestly just don't get it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reaper sells dozens of naked women, but I don't think I've ever seen a mini of theirs with male genitalia, especially not in an explicitly-sexual context.

 

 

 

Ok you asked for it............ ^_^

 

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/ghoul/latest/03388

 

& even undead nudity!!! ha ha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Reaper sells dozens of naked women, but I don't think I've ever seen a mini of theirs with male genitalia, especially not in an explicitly-sexual context.

 

 

 

Ok you asked for it............ ^_^

 

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/ghoul/latest/03388

 

& even undead nudity!!! ha ha

 

Worth noting that the bones minotaur is plausibly anatomically correct as well. Lets just say the loincloth is one sided, and the back of said loincloth looks more loin than cloth....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, but how about some reasonably-attractive humans? Plenty of sexy human or human-appearing female nudes; why are all the naked men grotesque or monstrous?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the event that anyone would like nude male miniatures, you can get naked Gaesati fanatic figures from more than one manufacturer. The current consensus seems to be that they are historically correct, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...