malifaux is too sexual?

[Ausplosions]

Again: Just so we are clear.

Sex = bad.

Violence = fine.

Is that about the gist of it?

[solkan]

There are a few very important historical facts to note here:

 

1.  As of a year ago (March, 2013), miniwargaming essentially doesn't carry anyone else's miniatures because they closed their store down and converted to doing hobby videos.  Because of the sales terms for a certain gaming company from England.

 

2.  The top search result for "miniwargaming malifaux" is two years old, and made irrelevant by fact #1.

 

Disclaimer:  The repurposed website (which I gave up on waiting to load) has hosted previews for a certain Spanish science fiction wargame.  The "Sexual objectification in <Game Name Here>" thread continues to break new records in post count and other merics of human suffering.

 

The train left the station, went through the breach, and came back already.

[Cats Laughing]

So basically what we're looking at here appears to be a necro-troll thread?

[Math Mathonwy]

Again: Just so we are clear.

Sex = bad.

Violence = fine.

Is that about the gist of it?

There is a very strong argument that depictions of violence aren't real while depictions of sexism in a way are. There is a lot of background sexism and objectification of women (an insane amount, actually) that permeates our society and adding to it is not a good idea as it reinforces the underlying attitudes. Meanwhile seeing violence doesn't cause violence in normal people.

Now, I'm sure that the natural reaction you'll have after reading that passage is to throw in a pithy comment and argue against and that's OK. I'm not really trying to convince or educate you. I'm just saying that there is a strong, non-insane argument that you could boil down to "violence = fine, sexism = bad". Whether you buy it, I really don't care, but if you're interested there's a lot of literature that has been written on the subject.

[dgraz]

Again I say, totally ridiculous. People complain about a model showing a g-string....and claim that it shouldn't be like that because a woman would never walk around like that.....what a crock. Have you ever been to the mall? You can see more thongs, skimpy tops, and tramp stamps in one afternoon than there is in the entire Malifaux range.

 

So a woman can 'objectify' women by dressing herself up like that, but if a guy draws a picture, or makes a TOY model.....step aside Vader...there's a new dark lord in town.

[Buceph]

Again I say, totally ridiculous. People complain about a model showing a g-string....and claim that it shouldn't be like that because a woman would never walk around like that.....what a crock. Have you ever been to the mall? You can see more thongs, skimpy tops, and tramp stamps in one afternoon than there is in the entire Malifaux range.

 

So a woman can 'objectify' women by dressing herself up like that, but if a guy draws a picture, or makes a TOY model.....step aside Vader...there's a new dark lord in town.

 

And yet you deride women in your very post by referring to a tattoo as a "tramp" stamp. It pretty much sums up the attitude which makes these depictions bad. "Woman are slutty."

That's cool. If you want that from your play time that's fine. I don't. I think it will keep women away from the game.

[Falconrider]

This question would be best answered by female Malifaux players 

[dgraz]

Lmao!! People are so silly. I did not say women are slutty.....well, not all of them anyway...but I sure know a few.

 

I also did not refer to all tattoos as tramp stamps. I think you're being silly to read into what I said that much. Everybody knows what a tramp stamp is, even you did..........everybody calls it that.....if you want to bury your head in the sand and not believe that that's the truth, that's your problem.

 

And again, don't project your feelings onto me by saying 'that's what I want from play time'.......when I want boobs during my play time, I have play-time with my wife....but playing with toy soldiers with a little cleavage is so trivial compared to what else it going on the world.........well it makes me sick. Murder, torture, children being sodomized, etc..........yeah, let's worry about objectifying women by showing cleavage or a thong in a toy soldier game.

[Ausplosions]

And yet you deride women in your very post by referring to a tattoo as a "tramp" stamp. It pretty much sums up the attitude which makes these depictions bad. "Woman are slutty."

That's cool. If you want that from your play time that's fine. I don't. I think it will keep women away from the game.

Wow.

Way to read something that isn't there.

[zFiend]

Wow.

Way to read something that isn't there.

 

Indeed. Wow. 

[Buceph]

And no, I didn't deride women.......I derided tramps. There's a difference........I guess if you can't tell them apart, maybe the problem lies with you.

 

 

Wow.

Way to read something that isn't there.

 

He's pretty open with his declaration that women with a particular tattoo are tramps. Of course he didn't explicitly state it at first, I took it from what he said. As the quoted post shows I was right. You seem to agree that supposedly women with a tattoo on their back are tramps. That's great and I think it casts a very specific light on the arguments being made so far.

[Dirial]

Okay, this has nothing to do with the original discussion. But before this argument derides into personal attacks (which arguments about sex often do, regrettably), I want to shortly address a certain hyperbole of arguments:

 

There are many problems with the oversexualization of our society as well as with the taboo about it. There are even more problems with gender equality in our western cultural hemisphere (won't address other cultures, because half-knowledge is dangerous, as well).

 

But depicting women in sexy outfits or sexy poses is not objectifying women. Objectifying women is.

 

Don't assume that people who like the sexiness of a certain medium (a game, in this case) are objectifying other people. That assumes they perceive a difference between a body and a personality, and it's a very rude assumption. Depicting oneself as sexy can be an expression of personality, and degrading an expression of personality because of personal taste is a dangerous attitude.

 

That said, I have spoken with my girlfriend about the issues perceived in this thread. She scoffed. Sex is a difficult subject, but as long as no one is hurt it's a matter of taste.

[quiche]

I wasn't too pleased that my Vicky of Blood was wearing what seemed like chaps and with her underwear showing. I don't think it's something that even feels right for someone who goes fighting.

**Spoiler**

Read the M2E Big book story re: Levy & Alyce's insighta on the above question.. ;P

[Ryoken]

Alright, guys.  How about we simmer down now with the declarations and assumptions.  Bickering back and forth on this will get us no where.  

 

What I really want to see is the OP's link.  I also did a topical look across Miniwargamings Facebook page and did not find anything.  So I would be interested in seeing where the statement originated.  

 

As for minis being sexualized, I have little problem with it.  Part of that is because of all the Anime I watch, the other part is because  you can just paint it up different, or use a bit of greenstuff.   Most of the female models in Malifaux are done tastefully, especially the masters.  Some of them look a little extra frisky, sure, but it is no worse than what I see in fantasy RPGs or Anime.  

 

Opinions are great, peoples takes and modifications on the models are great too.  It is possible to be respectful of each others views without being aggressive about it.  Let's try to keep the community positive.  People that might be interested in the game come to the forums to see what the community is like.  We should aim to grow the player base, not lessen it.  Try to keep the topic positive.  If you like the metal bVik in her metal bikini because it reminds you of the old DnD armor class joke, then great!  If you do not like it and painted jeans over the model, or used some greenstuff, huzza!  Excellent job and problem solved with creativity and a bit of work. 

 

Keep it positive and keep it classy!  

[Ratty]

Being an aging punk the Viks make sense to me, the Victorian era were very prim and proper. Punks dressed the way they did to separate themselves from society and place themselves outside it's rules. Therefore if the Viks are doing it for similar reasons (and the models are hugely punk) the way they are depicted makes sense, with the puritan dress codes of the time, then it feels natural to me.

I think the problem is that people equate sexual with sexist. The Suffragettes were known for breaking societies rules, doing stuff that was unladylike and just being contrary. The feminist movement in America did bra burning, and quite a bit of running around with their tops off, getting done for social indecency etc. Now I wouldn't say they were being sexist, but they were definitely breaking sexual taboos to assert their own control over their bodies. And I know a lot of punks who show flesh feel the same way. They have tattoos, piercings, show flesh, wear leather, studding etc for reasons of empowerment.

[Math Mathonwy]

But depicting women in sexy outfits or sexy poses is not objectifying women. Objectifying women is.

A dude doing whatever it is that Lilith is doing would look... weird. Now, whether that counts as objectification is open for debate but a reasonable argument could be put forward that Lilith's depiction is sexist. I might not agree with that assertion but it wouldn't be silly to make such an assertion.

Now, sexism is an endemic and a systemic problem. "Tramp stamp" -style language is a part of it, certainly (the whole Madonna-whore dichotomy where you divide women into prudes and sluts). Now, I'm not saying that dgraz is evil for using said language. I wouldn't label him a sexist, either - merely as a part of a sexist society (as are we all, mind) perpetuating the mores of said society. This isn't evil but it is something that we shouldn't engage in in the hopes of eventually changing the society.

[Buceph]

Being an aging punk the Viks make sense to me, the Victorian era were very prim and proper. Punks dressed the way they did to separate themselves from society and place themselves outside it's rules. Therefore if the Viks are doing it for similar reasons (and the models are hugely punk) the way they are depicted makes sense, with the puritan dress codes of the time, then it feels natural to me.

I think the problem is that people equate sexual with sexist. The Suffragettes were known for breaking societies rules, doing stuff that was unladylike and just being contrary. The feminist movement in America did bra burning, and quite a bit of running around with their tops off, getting done for social indecency etc. Now I wouldn't say they were being sexist, but they were definitely breaking sexual taboos to assert their own control over their bodies. And I know a lot of punks who show flesh feel the same way. They have tattoos, piercings, show flesh, wear leather, studding etc for reasons of empowerment.

 

 

Maybe they'd have more wounds if they wore armour instead of going around in their underwear.

[Uktena]

I dig cheesecake models.  It makes them interesting at least.  As opposed to faceless rigid grunt #3.  That said, it's certainly not a requirement of mine....and either way Malifaux has a long, long way to go to catch up to games like Infinity and Kingdom Death in the questionable posing/attire category. 

 

That was probably the first thing I noticed about M2E over 1.5:  The conservative shift in aesthetics.  It's all good, since the models have improved in quality dramatically, but there are some models that I still sort of expect some sauciness from.  It's why I was a little bummed that the artwork for Cassandra (the most beautiful woman in Malifaux?) was a forgettable blonde in a ruffly skirt.  I hope Lilitu at least resembles something that could tempt a poor victim.

[Ausplosions]

Maybe they'd have more wounds if they wore armour instead of going around in their underwear.

ridiculous. 

 

That's what you got from his post....

Did you read it?

[Dracomax]

While some of the clothing may seem a little impractical for the battlefield Malifaux has more strong, leading, and influential female characters than any other game that I know of. It would also make sense that since the characters represent people from all walks of life, female characters should make up close to 50% of the models. Sure undead female zombie hookers could be considered sexual, but would have been the type of targets for Jack the Ripper.

Part of the problem is that any even marginally realistic wargame set Victorian era back wouldn't have a lot of women. Gender roles were a lot more fixed in society than they are today. Stepping outside of them was not good. By which I mean that it often led to severe punishment, banishment, and death. and in those days, banishment was death. Even those women who did so by taking part in theater and the oldest profession were at best considered to be amongst the lowest class, often had short lives, and were still mostly expected to be ladylike.

 

Ahahaha!

Simulating grimmest brutal murders of other human beings and drawing pleasure from them is always ok. Showing the wrong 3mm of skin on a fictional 32mm sculpted piece of plastic is worse than for real.

Very funny

Thank God some people is far, far away from our invaluable Roman and Greek life-sized naked sculptures. They could be judged miseducating...

You know, I'm kind of getting sick of this argument. I didn't buy it when George RR Martin said it, and I don't buy it now. Gratuitous violence might lead to people being more violent, with very mixed studies basically showing at best it is an influence, though not the greatest one.

 

Gratuitous sex, especially degrading versions thereof, has been shown fairly consistently to warp attitudes about sex, and about members of the opposite sex, especially at younger ages.

 

In addition, violence often serves far more purpose in plot than sex. It may be possible to right a good book or script in which sexual congress advances the story and solves problems effectively, but I've never seen it. Most that even attempt it come out sounding either pointless, or like they were written by a teenager who just discovered internet porn.

 

The absolute closest I have ever come to seeing it done well is probably the HBO Game of Thrones, in which there are several scenes in which it serves to define character and make an emphasis for the scene; However, the vast majority of the sex and nudity in that show are completely pointless, and distracting to the more important dialogue going on at the time. nothing would be lost by omitting it in 90% of the show. There's a reason people call those scenes "sexposition"

 

And really, that's the heart of my problem with the argument that violence is shown, but sex isn't. I don't like violence unless it adds to the work either, and feel that, like sex, the less gratuitous and the more tastefully done, the more purpose to it, the better.

 

Also, Violence is fairly hard to depict in a mini. You can show them prepared for violence, taking actions that might be classified as violent, but it takes two figures to actually be violent. There really aren't that many Malifaux figs I would call violent; most of the violence happens in your head. Breasts are breast however you slice it though.

 

Well, the game has models with their tits hanging out and wearing their underwear into battle. I think it says something about the game, its designers and the people who approved and sculpted the models. Equally I think it says something about what they have to do to get attract a certain proportion of their players. It also says something about players who pick models because of "lol boobs." I think it says something about the nature of war gaming and gaming in general and its attitude towards women. This isn't happening in isolation though. Sci-fi and fantasy have had issues with the way they portrayed women on their covers for decades. This conversation is happening a lot in the comic book industry, Hollywood has huge issues with it, and in fact it's an entirely societal problem.

Honestly, Sci fi and fantasy readers have been complaining about it for years. It's sad that I can sit next to a woman reading a trashy harlequin book, while reading something like Foundation, or The Dragon Riders of Pern, and I get the looks like I'm reading porn, when she is reading something with a lot more explicit sex in one page than my book has in total. 

 

That being said, I much prefer to paint female models, simply because it seems like palletes and style have been far more interesting from a painting perspective over time. However, the performers are among the best, simply because they aren't half naked. they have great attitude and emphasize that they are female, but it doesn't make it objectifying. I appreciate these models that are less about cheesecake and more about style.

 

Again I say, totally ridiculous. People complain about a model showing a g-string....and claim that it shouldn't be like that because a woman would never walk around like that.....what a crock. Have you ever been to the mall? You can see more thongs, skimpy tops, and tramp stamps in one afternoon than there is in the entire Malifaux range.

 

So a woman can 'objectify' women by dressing herself up like that, but if a guy draws a picture, or makes a TOY model.....step aside Vader...there's a new dark lord in town.

I've never seen these things going on in a warzone. Which is fairly explicitly all of Malifaux. I have as much problem with the bare chested men, though. It's a stupid thing to do unless you are very, very skilled. It's a good way to get dead.

 

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Wyrd have some of the best range of models. most other companies I've seen either tend not to do women, or they are all hyper-sexualized. Wyrd have typically run the gamut of sexy to Zoraida and back again, showing women of varied states and attitude. Good for them.

[Tye_Informer]

While I think the discussion is good, I wish someone could change the title of the thread. I don't think this has anything to do with miniwargaming, just an unfortunate OP post without a link.

 

I really like Malifaux as a game and really like most of the models as well. I have the Viks, Raspy, Tara, and Ramos crews. I'm building a McMourning crew but didn't start with the crew box. My wife is painting the Lillith crew box and I bought her Lady Justice as well, just in case she likes it.

 

Some models I really like, for example the new Raspy (I have an old sculpt and the new one). I like the old Viks better than the new ones, but I also painted pointy Vik with a little more clothing covering her legs.  That is one of the cool things about the hobby, a great sculptor makes the base model and then I get to put my own interpretation on the model, colors, pose, etc. My new Raspy is painted with Khador colors (Warmachine) because I wanted to do that and will probably use her to lead my Khador army every once in a while. 

 

Screaming sexism because of a piece of plastic is a little pre-mature. Sexism is an attitude and way of looking at the world, but that is impossible to tell just by looking at one thing. If a guy showed up to play and every one of his models was a naked woman and he called the women in the store demeaning names on the way in, I would suspect he was a scumbag. Of course, if he showed up with fully-clothed models that were not demeaning in any way, yet called the women demeaning names on the way in, I would still suspect he was a scumbag. Perhaps the models he brings has nothing to do with it, perhaps its' the way he treats women that is the indicator.

[mythicFOX]

In the absence of anything pointing to miniwargaming actually holding this view I've edited the title. Changing the title to simply 'malifaux is too sexual?' and dropping the reference to miniwargaming.

 

</mod hat>

[mythicFOX]

Oh and this is the official 'keep calm and be nice to each other or I'm locking the thread' warning.

 

</mod hat>

[The Godlyness]

Maybe they'd have more wounds if they wore armour instead of going around in their underwear.

Zing! See that is humor. Which some people missed. On the too sexual thing nah. I play the game to play the game I have not once thought oh hey how would this person be offended if I brought these minis.

But same note I going to assume everyone with a job has had the sexual harassment speech that just because you don't find it offensive someone else might. Which at that time you be polite and acquiesce to there request to be less....whatever.

Now if anything you should be offended that zoraida is forgetting underwear not that the viks are wearing any lol.

It's all in the mind of the person and the onlookers of what is determined decent. That is what culture and society is. So of course people will differ from the "norm"

So to answer the questiom: Yes malifaux is to sexual to some people. And also no it is not to sexual. Each person has the right to define their beliefs. If they don't want to play I am sorry for their loss. But hey to each their own.

[r4st4f4n]

A dude doing whatever it is that Lilith is doing would look... weird. Now, whether that counts as objectification is open for debate but a reasonable argument could be put forward that Lilith's depiction is sexist. I might not agree with that assertion but it wouldn't be silly to make such an assertion.

 

It wouldn't. Beowulf fighted naked. Hercules fighted naked. Leonidas fighted half naked. David against Goliath. This is the handsome famous Achilles.

Zeus as well as any other masculine divinity used their phisical appearance to fascinate the opposite sex for sexual purposes. And the same sex too (e.g. Ganymede).

Now we have Arrow and Thor, who don't waste an occasion to show their abs, and receive appreciation...

Valkyrie and Amazons only considered their chests when they were impeded by them.

(What's wrong with Lilith, btw? o.O)

 

Also, Violence is fairly hard to depict in a mini. You can show them prepared for violence, taking actions that might be classified as violent, but it takes two figures to actually be violent. There really aren't that many Malifaux figs I would call violent; most of the violence happens in your head. Breasts are breast however you slice it though.

So, a blood-flooding Pennangalan, Abominations, Lost Love(old and new), old Kirai with a fresh chopped head at her feet, her Avatar, Molly, aNicodem, Tara, Wendigo, Flesh Construct w/ Victim, Chihuahua, Coppelius, Illuminated, Jack Daw, Hanged on a Tree, a Mourning with a head on a plate, Simulacrum, Killjoy...

And counting not only phisical violence, Essence of Power, Enslaved Nephilim, Scales of Justice...

Yep, they're really few. At least, no more than breasts showed everywhere (One? A half? o.O)