Are Female Armors Denigrating?

[BlackBaron2]

That's better than the usual "boobplate", Ginny. :)

 

Basically, the larger chest/slightly smaller waist to allow for feminine proportions is nice. I think it is better than a metal corset with boob cups and a thong, but what do I know, I'm just a creeper using feminism to get female attention, apparently. Guess some people forgot that I don't swing that way. Not now, not later, not ever :P

[LadyMilla]

Problem is, I find it incredibly hard to balance between 'sexy' and practical: I try to aim for a compromise, but I really don't know if it's good. Maybe you guys can judge, is it denigrating, or is it acceptable?

 

It is denigrating. It almost completely hides the beauty of the female body in a rigid puristic armor. It is surely based on the male concept of owning/dominating the female who should not expose her beauty to anybody else except her owner.

 

Am I serious? Of course not. I just wanted to present a different point of view.

 

Concerning the original question: I do not think that the so called 'skimpy' armors (even the G-string chain bikini armors) are denigrating. If you are an ultra-feminist then they may be denigrating for you, but then again I knew a few ultra-feminists who feel insulted if a man stares at them for more than 5 seconds, and his line of sight is not level, if you catch my meaning. If "skimpy" armors are denigrating for women because they objectify women then various games / realism mods that introduce chopped limbs, torn out guts, squirting blood and rolling heads are denigrating for men because they suggest that males are little more than murderous barbarians.

[Shantih]

Well, you obviously aren't discussing anything at all, just kind of showing ego around, that's interesting. Also, it's a bit sad if you can't tell what is extremly obvious joke, which is possible, considering how dead-serious you seem to be.

 

Either way, you don't have to run in raging into every conversation around, you can just ignore threads or people, when you know you won't be able to control your "hate". Think about that and have a nice day. No point in continuing, wouldn't you agree?

 

Well if that's your idea of a joke:

 

Well, I wasn't trying to promote or demote ME series, I just wanted to point out that the people offended by "skimpy" outfits and similar adult-oriented mods (or parts of a game) are usually either rather unintellectualy looking women or middleaged men who keep going on about sexism and that's just ...weird and somewhat ironic.

 

Then maybe you should consider using smileys.

 

For the record there is absolutely no "hate" in what I've posted but I do dislike disparaging comments that are thrown around in an offhand manner because someone happens to be disagreeing. Insulting someone's intelligence is never conducive to a healthy and thought provoking discussion. On that note I will concur that this particular exchange is indeed pointless.

 

If you are an ultra-feminist then they may be denigrating for you, but then again I knew a few ultra-feminists who feel insulted if a man stares at them for more than 5 seconds, and his line of sight is not level, if you catch my meaning.

 

It may become a problem however when these hardcore feminists start dressing up in sexy outfits... :happy:

 

After all it's only human to look at a gorgeous woman (or man depending on your orientation). Then again there is a difference between looking at someone and stalking/harrassing them.

 

'm not sure that having the same armour model for both male and female characters is an improvement. For instance the Dwarven armour in Skyrim uses the same textures for both genders and in fact the difference between a male character and a female character wearing that particular armour becomes rather insignificant. Just like a character wearing a power armour in Fallout 3 or Falout New Vegas.

 

The "boob plating" may be a bit on the silly side but without going as far as some of the examples that have been posted in this thread having a different look for female characters is probably not such a bad thing in the end.

[Deleted472477User]

Problem is, I find it incredibly hard to balance between 'sexy' and practical: I try to aim for a compromise, but I really don't know if it's good. Maybe you guys can judge, is it denigrating, or is it acceptable?

 

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2011/349/3/a/perennia_3_by_dazzerfong-d4j7sy0.png

 

 

That armor is just fine. It's form-fitting, but not unrealistic. and lately, my own thoughts on stuff have shifted to a more middle-ground approach for both genders. Mind, I still play at a level that suits my level of suspension of disbelief, but other than that, I'm not as fussed as I was.

[TheBaer]

For some reason I can't vote in OP's poll. Anyway:

 

Obviously they're denigrating. There's nothing 'immersive' about wearing what amounts to a metal handkerchief on your breasts, vagina and butt, and leaving everything else open to attack. But, like others have said, TES is about fantasy, and modders are just extending this idea to include sexual fantasy.

I don't know what the case was with Oblivion, but I'm glad to see that at least the men are being as objectified as are the women in this installment. :biggrin: Quid pro quo.

When/if I finally get a grasp on this modding thing, I plan to release some more period-appropriate attire for women and men, so not all mods are going to be skin-fests ... :rolleyes:

 

Addendum: even 'boob-pouches' on armours are completely unrealistic. I'd rather Bethesda'd used the male armour models and just cinched the waist in a bit.

Edited December 22, 2011 by TheBaer

[hector530]

i find it annoying how many female only mods there is but i never really thought it was denigrating.

 

because i always thought most of the modders(of this type) are female i mean...

 

they spend so much time making detailed bikinis in 30 different colors

 

have a girly user name, with a girl as a profile pic, with their image share being only female toons.

 

so i assumed they were female so i never really thought it was denigrating

[BlackBaron2]

hector, that's why we have some few dedicated people making male stuff that covers nothing--and female stuff that covers a little more.

 

Oh, and those "ultra feminists" who complain about staring, LadyMilla? That's a straw person argument. I've only ever heard people in general complain about obvious leering (with or without drooling), disgusting comments about body parts and unwanted physical contact. These are things that shouldn't even be remotely controversial, everyone should understand that others' bodies are not public property, and that anyone can be a creeper or get creeped on. That's not to say "be scared of everyone", mind, just that no gender is purer than another.

[LadyMilla]

Oh, and those "ultra feminists" who complain about staring, LadyMilla? That's a straw person argument.

 

Do you deny that there are ultra-feminists who suspect exploitation/denigration everywhere? Just like anti-pedophilia crusaders who suspect child abuse at every corner? (There were quite a few of them on this site too, who cried foul at the sight of mods like "Shojo Race" for Fallout 3).

 

The OP asked a question and I simply stated my opinion:

 

a) I don't think the mods in question are denigrating.

b) I brought an example that probably there were people on the extreme end of the scale who would find them denigrating.

 

I don't see any strawman argument here. Unless you want to call me a liar and question the truth of my statement that I actually encountered a few such feminists. But if you prefer a different argument that let's just say these armors are as denigrating as a Luis Royo painting.

[Tidus44]

As I read through the thread, I am stunned at some (actually most) of the comments and opinions that are expressed.

 

Maybe I’m missing something, but how does someone demean or belittle a character in a game, and particularly how by dressing them in clothing or armor? Further, if no one but the player sees the character they have placed in their game, how does that affect anyone, anywhere or any time?

Actually, the most confusing areas of discussion for me deal with a number of points concerning “realism”, “functionality” and “lore” or “immersion”.

 

I am not sure where the rules concerning realism are or who wrote them down, but it would be nice to see them. While there were numerous women in the past who were involved with armies and who became warriors and who did wear various forms of armor, there were also some who went into battle completely naked, wearing nothing but blue tattoos. Others were somewhat more modest and at least wore a loose skirt and sandals, but were quite effective at killing Greeks. I doubt any of these women felt denigrated, they were too busy scaring the living cr*p out of and killing the male soldiers they were fighting. And really, the last time I walked across Westminster Bridge and looked at Boadicea and her daughters, that didn’t actually look like plate armor they were wearing so I suppose the statue should be removed as it is obviously not showing acceptable “realism”.

 

If a character is dressed in armor with a rating of 50, then how does it matter if the armor is full head to toe coverage plate metal or a piece of string with a patch of cloth? The armor rating is 50 and offers the exact same level of functionality does it not? Exactly how is one more or less vulnerable to attack or injury based upon the design or the functionality of the armor when the level of protection or rating is exactly the same?

 

The lore/immersion points are actually the most confusing. Why is it fully acceptable that slavery, racism and any number of generally questionable activities are just part of the game, but some piece of clothing or armor is potentially offensive or damaging. I just read a book in the game about the “fun” and “profit” that can be achieved through hunting and skinning the Khajiit for their fur. This is apparently acceptable lore and immersion but some clothing or armor that doesn’t meet some standard of realism or functionality is not? I don’t get it.

 

While personal taste is just personal taste and everyone is welcome to their own, there is at least one part of the thread I do find denigrating. That being the judgmental comments some have made regarding the modders, the mods and those who use the mods, particularly those comments addressed at the “why”. I wish I had that level of ESP or osmosis or whatever to draw such conclusions.

 

I look at a lot of clothing and armor mods and will likely use a number of them as I enjoy and appreciate the artistic and imaginative talents of the modders who make up the Nexus community. While I do not profess to have the same ability as some to glean the purpose the modder may have had in making their armor or clothing, I do feel reasonably comfortable in believing it wasn’t to purposely offend anyone else, but most likely to meet their personal tastes in realism, functionality, lore and immersion. And there is nothing wrong about that.

[BlackBaron2]

Oh, and those "ultra feminists" who complain about staring, LadyMilla? That's a straw person argument.

 

Do you deny that there are ultra-feminists who suspect exploitation/denigration everywhere? Just like anti-pedophilia crusaders who suspect child abuse at every corner? (There were quite a few of them on this site too, who cried foul at the sight of mods like "Shojo Race" for Fallout 3).

 

The OP asked a question and I simply stated my opinion:

 

a) I don't think the mods in question are denigrating.

b) I brought an example that probably there were people on the extreme end of the scale who would find them denigrating.

 

I don't see any strawman argument here. Unless you want to call me a liar and question the truth of my statement that I actually encountered a few such feminists. But if you prefer a different argument that let's just say these armors are as denigrating as a Luis Royo painting.

 

I'm not denying the existence of horrible radfem harpies who think porn and sex work are inherently bad. The "complaining about staring" thing AND lumping all feminists in with radfems is what you got wrong.

 

People who don't care for scantily-clad barbie dolls everywhere aren't all radfems. We're usually normal people, just like people who are into skimpy stuff. Finding a lack of good, decent-coverage female armour problematic and a less-than-flattering reflection on gamer culture does not a radfem make. It also doesn't make you a radfem to question the double standards regarding gender and revealing clothes. If a female character can walk around showing her bits then so can a male character. Nobody should be harassed, but there's a lot of unpleasantness towards those who won't support certain body mods and those who put skimpy stuff on male characters, with much less directed at those making barbie mods.