@Riot A serious discussion about gender. Please read

First Riot Post
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Whiteglint3

Senior Member

10-07-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by chumbler View Post
I realize now that I wrote that post poorly. What I meant was that a version could be imagined where she is instead lunging at the viewer. I was not defending her current, ridiculous splash art.



Please stop responding to Whiteglint3. He's made it abundantly clear by now that he's an idiot.
I can't even imagine what that would make you, but i'm sure whatever it would make you would be within your realm of what "sexy" should or shouldn't be.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Brychanus

Senior Member

10-07-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMage View Post
Just reminding people that there's a ton of creative space between generic supermodels in pinup poses and Lady Gragas, and that it's perfectly possible to design attractive female characters without sexualizing them.
TL;DR: If you actually care about this issue, you should read this.
This. I am encouraged by these posted designs and agree that they are mostly not sexualized.

It is concerning to me that despite the many important points of the original poster, his concerns were only generally, superficially, and dismissively addressed (if at all) by the red community.

Let us assume that the OP was somewhere remotely close on the sexualization (3.5% for males, 78% for females). Even if you add a massive error to that figure due to the OP's personal rating opinions, the difference in means is astronomical. So if we assume that this figure is even partly true, it suggests a true trend in champion design. Specifically, sexualization of females.

I appreciate that there has been red attention to this post, but the responses miss the mark. That is, if the fact is that there is a massive sexualization trend, and the fact is that the reds are in control over both the past examples of this and any future instances. The reason I want to weigh in here is that I have worked in diversity education for over 7 years, and many of the red reactions fall into prototypical rationalizing strategies that are used by those in the majority (or otherwise with power) as mechanisms for avoiding addressing the valid facts, which in this case is a fairly clear case of sexualization of females in game. Reds, I'm being hard on you, because while the community has said things far more egregious, you are actually the ones in power.

Following the OP's original argument and review of the facts, red postings can be categorized as follows. I paraphrase and summarize in order to avoid direct finger pointing at the moment and to emphasize main points. However, I encourage the posters to look at their responses critically. I anticipate that your public response (if you care to give one at all) will be largely political and recapitulate the categories I outline below. I say this deliberately both to challenge you and to continue to emphasize some obvious examples of rationalization (or at least rhetorical obfuscation):

- “I agree with you wholeheartedly. I want to remind you that we put a lot of thought into design, including breadth and depth, of champions. We attempt to modify character designs based on our intentions, and care about this issue.” Note that this does not directly address the fact that, despite “variation” in design, 78% or so are sexualized, suggesting that this was either a baffling trend of lack of oversight in champion design or an intentional goal in champion design.

- “In return for sexualized females, we make sexualized males.” The latter does not do away with the former.

- “Sexy comes in many forms. Don’t assume to know what I find sexy.” In addition to becoming personally defensive to prove a point, this is also directing attention away from the main point with another valid point. While “Sexy comes in many forms,” there are many probabilistic studies in psychology suggesting that there are consistent features that are rated as “more sexy” in males as well as females. It is unlikely to be coincidental that many of the features of the 78% sexualized female champions, they tend to have features such as angular faces with well-defined, large eyes that conform to features known to be attractive in female celebrities (e.g., Angelina Jolie), waist-to-hip ratios somewhere around .6-.8 (eyeball test, since I don’t have access to model data), exposed skin, “flirtatious” poses, and stripper outfits as the OP suggests. These features are probablistically known to be sexually attractive, and are instrumental for profit in a game that stands to profit based on the purchase of female champions and sexualized skins by a largely young male fan base. As an aside, the red that made this argument proceeded to state that he/she finds at least some proportion of the females in the game attractive, so unless they are the 22%, we may assume that this poster finds at least some of these features appealing. Finally, if you know that female champions don’t need to be sexy, why are they so in approximately 78% of cases? Also, “I believe this is sexy, but other people think other things... Sexy is part of what we choose for design.” Even though this could be argued to be different than “sexualization,” it happens up to 78% of the time for one gender, as low as 3.5% for the other.

- “We played with parameters and the models all scaled to look similar.” It’s not just about model parameters, but outfits, postures, facial expressions and features, phrases, etc. Additionally, model parameters will present with a large range of options, and the current rate of 78% for females suggests that these have historically only been modified within a narrow band.

- “Wait and see, we’re gonna change a lot in the future.” But you’re not going to change much about the past? We might expect responses to this to be something like “it’s too much work, people (males) like sexy so it would ruin our income (you may not say this in public), etc.”

Again, I expect that the response (if any) will be political or at least somewhat defensive. It was simply my main purpose to highlight the issues in red posts in terms of their evasion of addressing the true issues. I respect the reds that have posted in the spirit of what I believe was their best effort to be honest and helpful, but it does not point to the fact that there is a true issue of female sexualization here, and the arguments and follow-ups have fallen short of closing the loop on the topic. I know you want to sell a product, Riot, but you sound (and have historically behaved) pretty obviously similar to many other organizations when confronted with clear examples of sexism, regardless of your reasons and rationalizations. And to reiterate posts from before, I do truly love otherwise what you do as a game organization.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sylvr

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

10-07-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rauhel View Post
So I was watching the quarterfinals today, and they did a segment on Alex Ich. Alex talked about how he is one of the few gamers who is married, when inspired a rather odd comment from Phreak. “More girls should play League of Legends.” I found it odd, because the LoL community isn’t always the most welcoming. I know of plenty of girls that do play, and they choose a gender neutral summoner name because of the grief they receive for making their gender known. I know of even more girls that choose not to play LoL at all because they don’t feel welcome.

One of my best friends is a girl gamer. She does play LoL, but only when playing with her boyfriend and myself. She feels marginalized by the LoL community, and Riot endorses this attitude indirectly. Whenever gender issues are brought up in these forums, there is a huge backlash. It’s almost as if gamers are threatened by this topic. They don’t want them womenfolk to change their games to make them more inclusive. They like that Riot caters to the majority (straight white male). Any time someone makes a perfectly valid point about sexism, they are met with massive downvotes and malicious comments.
How has Riot endorsed this attitude? While I’ve never witnessed a Riot take part in burning these feminists at the stake, they do dismiss these topics. I made a post about how human female champions are treated differently than human male champions, and Morello pointed out that I ignored counterexamples like Lulu, Tryndamere, Riven, etc. and therefore my point was invalid. I attempted to reengage Morello in conversation, but it he had moved on to other questions. Meanwhile, I’ve seen two threads this week mocking the entire conversation, each attracted three red posts joining in. These threads claimed that Pentakill Olaf and Gragas over-sexualize the male gender, and has caused the poster to be insecure with his body.

If Riot seriously wants to attract more girls to their games, then I suggest they listen to what the few girls who do play League of Legends have to say. Have a real conversation with them. Entertain the idea that there really is a problem with how women are treated by the players, and how female champions are treated by Riot. I’d find it refreshing if a Riot employee could actually admit that there is a problem, or that I at least raise some valid points. My friend knew Pentakill Olaf was going to be used as a counterpoint to “male champions aren’t sexualized” the second she saw him. But Olaf is not aesthetically pleasing to most women. His physique still caters to the same people that Miss Fortune does. I see the argument that “This is a game. Who cares if a champion is sexy?” That’s not the issue. The problem isn’t that there is no mancandy for women to oggle over. The problem is that champions are treated differently based on whether it is male or female. Riot is completely comfortable sexifying female champion, even in cases where it isn’t actually appropriate for the character. Akali’s outfit is impractical for a ninja. Shen and Kennen are completely covered up, and Akali is constantly on the edge of a nip slip.

Yes, there are obvious exceptions. Since I don’t want to be accused of sampling champions that prove my point, and ignoring ones that don’t, I am going to compile a complete list. But first, let’s list all the champions that are irrelevant to the conversation. Morello used Lulu as a counterexample, but I was careful to use the term “adult human females” because yordles just shouldn’t count. They exist to be cute, not sexy. Male yordles are fuzzy animals. Likewise, children shouldn’t count, because sexualizing them is awkward and inappropriate.

Monsters*:
Anivia, Cho’gath, Fiddlesticks, Fizz, Galio, Hecarim, Karthus, Kha’Zix, Kog’Maw, Malphite, Maokai, Nocturne, Sion, Skarner, Trundle, Urgot, Yorick

Yordles:
Amumu, Corki, Heimerdinger, Kennen, Lulu, Poppy, Rumble, Teemo, Tristana, Veigar, Ziggs

Automatons:
Blitzcrank, Orianna

Children:
Annie, Nunu

Anthropomorphic Animals:
Alistar, Nasus, Rammus, Renekton, Rengar, Twitch, Volibear, Warwick, Wukong

Anomalies**:
Brand, Dr. Mundo, Jax, Kassadin, Mordekaiser, Nautilus, Xerath

*My definition of “monsters” might be broader than yours. I went ahead and included all the undead champions, void creatures, and anything that wasn’t humanoid. Anivia is the only female monster, which stands out even further if you lump in the champions that I categorized as Anthropomorphic Animals and Anomalies.

**Anomalies are champions I really didn’t know how to categorize. An argument could be made that they are human enough to qualify for the main conversation, or that they could be thrown into the monster list. If someone wants to reference one of these champions for the sake of an argument, I’d be willing to consider it.
So that leaves us with the following champions:

Adult Humans:
Ahri, Akali, Ashe, Caitlyn, Cassiopeia, Darius, Diana, Draven, Evelynn, Ezreal, Fiora, Gangplank, Garen, Gragas, Graves, Irelia, Janna, Jarvan IV, Jayce, Karma, Katarina, Kayle, LeBlanc, Lee Sin, Leona, Lux, Malzahar, Master Yi, Miss Fortune, Morgana, Nidalee, Olaf, Pantheon, Riven, Ryze, Sejuani, Shaco, Shen, Shyvana, Singed, Sivir, Sona, Soraka, Swain, Syndra, Talon, Taric, Tryndamere, Twisted Fate, Udyr, Varus, Vayne,Viktor, Vladamir, Xin Zhao, Zilean, Zyra

Not all of these champions are human, such as Zyra, Varus, Kayle, Shyvana, etc., but have enough human traits to count. Sure, Cassiopeia is partially a snake, and Ahri has nine tails, but what keeps them from being anthropomorphic animals is the fact that parts of their bodies look completely human.

So now that we got that out of the way, we can finally get to the meat and potatoes. The argument I am trying to make is not that every female champions is sexualized, and zero male champions are. My argument is that female champions are treated differently, and that there is less diversity amongst the female cast members. I will start with the most obvious disparity, which just happens to be sexualization.

Let’s compare male and female champions that receive comparable skins. Male champions tend to receive legitimate “profession” skins, like cop, doctor, cowboy, etc. Female champions tend to get stripper versions of those skins. The following is a list of what I call “Stripper Skins.” For contrast, I compare them to equivalent male skins.

• Nurse Akali is a stripper nurse. No real nurse dresses like that. However, strippers with themed costumes do dress like that. Surgeon Shen is an actual medical professional.
• Cowgirl Miss Fortune is just missing a pole. Her attire is completely impractical I sure hope she is wearing underwear under that flap. High Noon Twisted Fate actually looks like he belongs in the Wild West. Sheriff Caitlyn is wearing hotpants.
• Officer Caitlyn is in many ways the most disappointing. She is in a position of authority. She is the Sheriff of Piltover. But, she gets a stripper cop outfit. Riot Graves, and outlaw, actually looks like a real cop. No officer in real life dresses like Caitlyn. They’d never be taken seriously. She could have been a badass. Real missed opportunity, here.
• Battle Bunny Riven is a Playboy Bunny. This is the most blatant one of them all. You can’t even pretend that this is anything but a stripper skin. There isn’t a male counterpart for this.
• Prestigious LeBlanc is a Vegas showgirl. Magnificent Twisted Fate is an actual magician.
• French Maid Nidalee is something you’d see in a gentleman’s club.
• Heartseeker Vayne. I guess if Jack of Hearts Twisted Fate is the male equivalent, though again, the male character is fully clothed.
• Mistletoe LeBlanc, Candy Cane Miss Fortune, Snow Bunny Nidalee draw a strong contrast to Santa Gragas and Old St. Zilean.
• Sandstorm Katarina is a belly dancer.
• Red Card Katarina doesn’t dress like any referee I’ve ever seen. Fifa banned players from taking their shirts off.
• Kitty Kat Katarina reminds me of Halle Berry’s Catwoman, and that’s offensive on a whole new level.

Not a single male champion has a stripper skin. If I missed something, please let me know. You could have a sexy fireman or something. It’s something exclusive the female champions. It’s just one of the ways that women are treated differently.

Next, we will talk about the base design of champions. Miss Fortune and Ahri are flirtatious, and while that isn’t really a problem, there are no guys that tease or flirt. The following are champions that are sexualized, not just in skins, but in their default splash art.

• Zyra is technically a plant, but she is using a human body as a vessel; one that she barely covers.
• Syndra’s cleavage is the focal point of her splash art.
• Akali’s rather large breasts are barely covered by those strips of cloth. It’s completely impractical for a serious warrior.
• LeBlanc is barely covered.
• Sivir is wearing the most pointless armor of all time. She isn’t protecting any vital points.
• Sona’s boobs. Need I say more?
• Ahri at least has lore to justify her being a flirt.
• Miss Fortune is hands down the most sexualized character in the game. In her new splash art it looks like her clothes don’t even cover her nipples. If we had more of a bird’s-eye-view, this game would probably have an AO title
• Caitlyn should probably not shop in the children’s section and find something that fits.
• Fiora’s skin tight outfit accentuates her ass.
• Evelynn is wearing lingerie. She is literally walking around the fields of justice in her underwear. I guess she is relying on her stealth.
• Lux used to be a counterexample. She used to be.
• Morgana gets thinner and thinner, and her breasts get bigger and bigger. She is also wearing a bra to battle. Smart.
• Cassiopeia may not be human from the waist down, but if you are arguing that that disqualifies her, then you are arguing that mermaids are not a sexual fantasy to millions.
• Katarina screams ***. She has three stripper skins, but the default skin isn’t any less sexualized.
• Nidalee kind of has an excuse, since she is basically She-Tarzan.
• Janna even makes a phone *** reference, solidifying the portrayal of women as adult entertainment workers.
• Soraka’s old art was all about the side boob. Her new art is better, but still very sexy.
• Sejuani seems to be immune to the cold. In fact, everyone from Freljord seems to be.
• Ashe is better than Sejuani, at least.
• Varus. The only male champion that makes the list. More on why, later.

So here are the female champions that are not sexualized (much):

• Karma is great. Her Sun Goddess skin is culturally appropriate, so I don’t have any issues.
• Leona is wearing high heels to battle and her armor accentuates her figure a bit too much. Compare her to armored champions like Garen, Taric, Darius, ect. There is a noticeable difference. Still, Leona gets a passing grade.
• Kayle is perhaps the best portrayed female. Her armor is actually practical. No complaints.
• Shyvana is pretty well done. None of her skins really do her an injustice.
• Irelia is acceptable, in my opinion. Her Frostblade skin showcases her ass a little much, though. I really like that Aviator Irelia looks like a real pilot, and not a stripper.
• Diana’s default look is fantastic. I am not thrilled about her Dark Valkyrie skin.

So there are six female champions that aren’t overtly sexualized, and 22 that are (Battle Bunny Riven and Heartseeker Vayne did them in). Over 78% of the adult human female champions are sexualized. That number is pretty freakin’ high.

The following are male champions that people use as examples of sexualized men. They may show skin, but being shirtless means nothing when they are morbidly obese or freakishly muscular. Female body builders are nasty. Male body builders are also nasty.

• Gragas. Everyone uses him as a joke example, but it’s frustrating for those of us trying to have a real conversation.
• Tryndamere is built like a rhino. I’m tempted to move him to the anthropomorphic animals list.
• Pentakill Olaf is not going to turn anyone on. He still caters to straight guys’ tastes.
• Lee Sin is shirtless, and not hideously muscular. But his shirtlessness is more about him being a martial artist. It serves a practical function. It’s not about being seductive.
• Ruthless Pantheon isn’t contorting his body in unnatural ways to show off his body. His physique is secondary to his battle prowess. There is nothing about this skin that suggests the artist wanted to make him look sexy, even if he isn’t wearing much. To me, it’s the same as Sun Goddess Karma. It’s not about *** appeal.
• Twisted Fate is suave, but his charm has nothing to do with his body, and more to do with his style.
• Ezreal has boyish good looks, and he is a favorite amongst players who are attracted to males. But being attractive and being a sexual object is not the same thing. If it were, I’d have to change the verdict on all six of the female champions that have a passing grade.

If you don’t agree with me, or you think I missed a champion or skin that should have made the list, let me know. I’m open to discussion. In fact, that's the entire reason I am posting this. I want this to turn into a discussion.

Now, Varus made the sexy list because he has an attractive physique, and his nakedness doesn’t seem to serve any apparent function other than fanservice. Still, he is the only example I could find that meets these requirements. That is one male champion out of 28. That means 3.5% of male champions are sexualized, and 78.5% of female champions are sexualized. How can you tell me that there is no disparity? That everything is fine. How can you deny the fact that women are treated differently?

Moving on, let’s talk about body types. I won’t devote too much time to this, because there isn’t much to say, but when you look at the guys, you have skinny Shaco, bulky Tryndamere, obese Gragas, Athletic Talon, and everything inbetween. Female champions range from super model thin to anorexic supermodel. You can see Morgana’s rib cage. There really is only one body type that gets recycled with every female champion. Bust sizes may vary from moderately large and “you’ve got to be kidding me,” but the frame of the ladies is indistinguishable.

Next, I want to talk about apparent age of champions. The men enjoy a huge range; you have youthful Ezreal, who could pass for a teenager, to Zilean, who is ancient. Here are the champions that look middle aged or older:

• Darius is graying and wrinkles are forming. He looks like he is in his mid 40’s.
• Draven can’t be much younger. Early 40’s.
• Gangplank’s beard makes it hard to see his face, but he looks like he is at least late 30’s. His skins can age him quite a bit.
• Gragas can be anywhere between 30 and 50. It’s hard to tell.
• Graves looks at least 45. Jailbreak Graves looks even older.
• Ryze is tough to place, because he is blue, but if Tribal Ryze is his human form, dude looks 50+.
• Shaco looks like a creeper. The makeup makes him impossible to place, but his bone structure suggests that he is well past young-adulthood.
• Singed is definitely past his prime.
• Swain doesn’t look a day younger than 50.
• Tryndamere is at least 40.
• Udyr is certainly in his 50’s.
• Viktor’s prototype skin shows that he is graying.
• Zilean is a geezer. For someone with time powers, he makes no attempt to reverse his age.

Absent from this list is every single female champion. Diana looks the oldest, at maybe early 30’s. This is pretty indisputable proof that Riot has different design philosophies for male and female champions. I’m not asking Riot to make an ugly female champion just for the sake of making her ugly. I just don’t understand why every female champion has to be young, thin, and attractive, but they aren’t afraid to deviate from that mold when they are making a male champion. I tell you, I would absolutely love a Baba Yaga inspired champion. Ursula and Maleficent is extremely popular as far as Disney villains go, so it’s not like older ladies, or even fat ladies don’t have any appeal.

So Riot, what say you? I worked hard on this because I believe in you as a company. I’m really hoping this doesn’t go ignored.
I can appreciate the subject that you're speaking for, but if I were an active member of that cause, I would not use this post in my argument. IronStylus may like your post, and I like IronStylus, but I can't get past the metric ton of bias that it contains, all the while stating that you're posting without bias.

Namely, you're using your personal tastes as the foundation of what counts and what doesn't for sexualized male champions. Granted, the numbers would still be largely in your favor, but NOT by the margin you claim. It's just bad science, and that really digs at me.

Keep fighting the good fight, but if you claim to be objective, then BE objective. If you aren't sure, then say so. That's how you make a legitimate case.

P.S. Please never try to guess my age.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Whiteglint3

Senior Member

10-07-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brychanus View Post
TL;DR: If you actually care about this issue, you should read this.
This. I am encouraged by these posted designs and agree that they are mostly not sexualized.

It is concerning to me that despite the many important points of the original poster, his concerns were only generally, superficially, and dismissively addressed (if at all) by the red community.

Let us assume that the OP was somewhere remotely close on the sexualization (3.5% for males, 78% for females). Even if you add a massive error to that figure due to the OP's personal rating opinions, the difference in means is astronomical. So if we assume that this figure is even partly true, it suggests a true trend in champion design. Specifically, sexualization of females.

I appreciate that there has been red attention to this post, but the responses miss the mark. That is, if the fact is that there is a massive sexualization trend, and the fact is that the reds are in control over both the past examples of this and any future instances. The reason I want to weigh in here is that I have worked in diversity education for over 7 years, and many of the red reactions fall into prototypical rationalizing strategies that are used by those in the majority (or otherwise with power) as mechanisms for avoiding addressing the valid facts, which in this case is a fairly clear case of sexualization of females in game. Reds, I'm being hard on you, because while the community has said things far more egregious, you are actually the ones in power.

Following the OP's original argument and review of the facts, red postings can be categorized as follows. I paraphrase and summarize in order to avoid direct finger pointing at the moment and to emphasize main points. However, I encourage the posters to look at their responses critically. I anticipate that your public response (if you care to give one at all) will be largely political and recapitulate the categories I outline below. I say this deliberately both to challenge you and to continue to emphasize some obvious examples of rationalization (or at least rhetorical obfuscation):

- “I agree with you wholeheartedly. I want to remind you that we put a lot of thought into design, including breadth and depth, of champions. We attempt to modify character designs based on our intentions, and care about this issue.” Note that this does not directly address the fact that, despite “variation” in design, 78% or so are sexualized, suggesting that this was either a baffling trend of lack of oversight in champion design or an intentional goal in champion design.

- “In return for sexualized females, we make sexualized males.” The latter does not do away with the former.

- “Sexy comes in many forms. Don’t assume to know what I find sexy.” In addition to becoming personally defensive to prove a point, this is also directing attention away from the main point with another valid point. While “Sexy comes in many forms,” there are many probabilistic studies in psychology suggesting that there are consistent features that are rated as “more sexy” in males as well as females. It is unlikely to be coincidental that many of the features of the 78% sexualized female champions, they tend to have features such as angular faces with well-defined, large eyes that conform to features known to be attractive in female celebrities (e.g., Angelina Jolie), waist-to-hip ratios somewhere around .6-.8 (eyeball test, since I don’t have access to model data), exposed skin, “flirtatious” poses, and stripper outfits as the OP suggests. These features are probablistically known to be sexually attractive, and are instrumental for profit in a game that stands to profit based on the purchase of female champions and sexualized skins by a largely young male fan base. As an aside, the red that made this argument proceeded to state that he/she finds at least some proportion of the females in the game attractive, so unless they are the 22%, we may assume that this poster finds at least some of these features appealing. Finally, if you know that female champions don’t need to be sexy, why are they so in approximately 78% of cases? Also, “I believe this is sexy, but other people think other things... Sexy is part of what we choose for design.” Even though this could be argued to be different than “sexualization,” it happens up to 78% of the time for one gender, as low as 3.5% for the other.

- “We played with parameters and the models all scaled to look similar.” It’s not just about model parameters, but outfits, postures, facial expressions and features, phrases, etc. Additionally, model parameters will present with a large range of options, and the current rate of 78% for females suggests that these have historically only been modified within a narrow band.

- “Wait and see, we’re gonna change a lot in the future.” But you’re not going to change much about the past? We might expect responses to this to be something like “it’s too much work, people (males) like sexy so it would ruin our income (you may not say this in public), etc.”

Again, I expect that the response (if any) will be political or at least somewhat defensive. It was simply my main purpose to highlight the issues in red posts in terms of their evasion of addressing the true issues. I respect the reds that have posted in the spirit of what I believe was their best effort to be honest and helpful, but it does not point to the fact that there is a true issue of female sexualization here, and the arguments and follow-ups have fallen short of closing the loop on the topic. I know you want to sell a product, Riot, but you sound (and have historically behaved) pretty obviously similar to many other organizations when confronted with clear examples of sexism, regardless of your reasons and rationalizations. And to reiterate posts from before, I do truly love otherwise what you do as a game organization.
using subjective percentages for what is "sexualized" and then making a huge discussion based on the percents made up through pure opinion.

and lets NOT assume the OP was close, because the assumption would already be built on the OP's opinion (and he/she somehow turned his opinion into logical percents)


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Grand Eleven

Senior Member

10-07-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brychanus View Post
TL;DR: If you actually care about this issue, you should read this.
This. I am encouraged by these posted designs and agree that they are mostly not sexualized.

It is concerning to me that despite the many important points of the original poster, his concerns were only generally, superficially, and dismissively addressed (if at all) by the red community.
Going to stop you right there because this is a bit extremist:

This is not even CLOSE to the first time this topic or thread has come up in this forum, and yet a red devoted _30_ replies to it. How many threads surface that get that kind of response and feedback from when they aren't red initiated.

Everyone has an angle and opinion ... but you are severely downplaying the response that they gave to make some fictional point. If Riot felt like evading ... hey could have just not answered and pointed to the _hundreds_ of other threads that have come out on this topic that they already answered.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Grand Eleven

Senior Member

10-07-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by lemonchief View Post
I'll make this very simple for you, because you incapable of understanding. Look at Fiora's two other skins. They are fierce and in your face. They are action poses. They are the opposite of her original.
... do you really feel royal guard art looks that different? Still side view ... still arguably oddly arched spine to emphasize her curves like a photo-op ...


I think her legs are slightly awkward in the default, but honestly it looked to me like a deliberate attempted to switch her stance up so she wasn't on full "dat-@ss" display.... which would have drawn even more comments than how it is currently.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

MathMage

Senior Member

10-07-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteglint3 View Post
she isn't twisting, she's standing at her side, the only twisting involved is her hand behind her back with her dagger.
Okay, okay, okay, one last post just to laugh at you.

You can see from the splash art that Fiora's lower body is in a left-foot-forward stance, facing the right edge of the screen. Without twisting, this posture would naturally result in Fiora's right shoulder being behind her left shoulder, meaning you would be looking at the front of her body.

http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townn...review-300.jpg

The guy on the left in the linked image is in left-foot-forward stance. Notice how he's fencing with his left hand, because this stance naturally gives him a longer reach with his left hand than his right, because his left shoulder is also forward. To be fair, sword-and-dagger style can have the dagger in the forward hand, but a sword-and-dagger fighter would never put his dagger up behind his back, so that's a moot point.

Now notice how Fiora's right shoulder is ahead of her left shoulder in the splash art. That means she's had to twist her torso counterclockwise to achieve the desired effect. If she had no twist, her torso would face the camera, just like the guy in the above image.

You can also see that Fiora's hips are angled way down. Like 20 degrees forward or more. Yet her upper body is vertical. That means her torso is severely arched backwards, in defiance of all fighting postures around the world.

Now we look at Fiora's sword and see that it's held away from her body, and aimed even farther away from her torso's orientation. This runs counter to every martial posture in the world, and removes all power from her arm. If she has someone at swordpoint there, she couldn't even stab him properly because she can't put enough strength into the move.

So Fiora is twisted severely out of natural posture, back arched severely out of natural posture, she's fighting with the wrong hand, and she's got both her sword and her dagger in effectively unusable positions. That's an action pose, right? Right?

Like I said at the beginning of this post, I'm not even posting to refute you anymore. I'm just posting to laugh at you, because your ignorant denial of facts that don't suit your prejudice is so pathetic it's funny.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

omegademan

Senior Member

10-07-2012

torchlight 2 npc
Attachment 537914


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Grand Eleven

Senior Member

10-07-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMage View Post
Okay, okay, okay, one last post just to laugh at you.

You can see from the splash art that Fiora's lower body is in a left-foot-forward stance, facing the right edge of the screen. Without twisting, this posture would naturally result in Fiora's right shoulder being behind her left shoulder, meaning you would be looking at the front of her body.

http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townn...review-300.jpg

The guy on the left in the linked image is in left-foot-forward stance. Notice how he's fencing with his left hand, because this stance naturally gives him a longer reach with his left hand than his right, because his left shoulder is also forward. To be fair, sword-and-dagger style can have the dagger in the forward hand, but a sword-and-dagger fighter would never put his dagger up behind his back, so that's a moot point.

Now notice how Fiora's right shoulder is ahead of her left shoulder in the splash art. That means she's had to twist her torso counterclockwise to achieve the desired effect. If she had no twist, her torso would face the camera, just like the guy in the above image.

You can also see that Fiora's hips are angled way down. Like 20 degrees forward or more. Yet her upper body is vertical. That means her torso is severely arched backwards, in defiance of all fighting postures around the world.

Now we look at Fiora's sword and see that it's held away from her body, and aimed even farther away from her torso's orientation. This runs counter to every martial posture in the world, and removes all power from her arm. If she has someone at swordpoint there, she couldn't even stab him properly because she can't put enough strength into the move.

So Fiora is twisted severely out of natural posture, back arched severely out of natural posture, she's fighting with the wrong hand, and she's got both her sword and her dagger in effectively unusable positions. That's an action pose, right? Right?

Like I said at the beginning of this post, I'm not even posting to refute you anymore. I'm just posting to laugh at you, because your ignorant denial of facts that don't suit your prejudice is so pathetic it's funny.

Ever read a Spiderman comic? Any comic? Action poses in still art are routinely exagerated in order to convey the action in the scene. Comparing the pose to a real photo is completely pointless.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Unstable Fury

Member

10-07-2012

@Riot a cereal discussion about Diveristy and such. Please Read.

So I checked the forums today to see what the hub-bub was about the "cheating(?)" supposedly going down at the quarterfinals where i see the top thread is "@Riot serious discussion about gender..." DAFUQ? This again?

I wonder why a person pushing an agenda for more diversity for the female characters doesn't push for y'know, Diversity...like for everyone and stuff.

DIVERSITY.

Yeah. That's right. Somebody done gone and pulled the gender card, so I'm gonna pull the race card (even though "Race" is an antiquated notion that there's more than one human race, "Ethnicity" is probably more appropriate but "Ethnicism" doesn't sound as cool I reckon).

Ryze is the closest thing to a (insert PC term for "black guy") on LoL.

Closest thing to a person of Latino heritage is Bandito Fiddlesticks.

All of the people from Ionia, that Oriental Fantasy place, don't seem that Asian to me. Faramir (excuse me Lee Sin) and Master Yi do speak in "Engrish" accents though, so I guess that counts. Akari's probably the most asian but only in the exotic orientalist fantasy type way.

There is no one of Central Asian (or Middle Eastern if you prefer) descent. There is Katarina's Sandstorm skin, but I'm sure the ethnic garb on a white skinned, red-headed, green-eyed woman probably rub some people the wrong way. Maybe Malzahar's Aladdin thing upsets some people. I don't know.

Volibear and Rengar are furries but they are not from Bandle City. Conspiracy? Maybe there's something racist going on thar. I dunno.

You get the picture. Diversity's a problem across the board (so is THE COLOR PURPLE in this game. More people should complain about that maybe....)

People ***** and moan about all sorts of stuff (like what I'm doing right now) but offer no real alternatives.

Sorry Riot, there's no winning:

You make, say Rengar the Tribal Hunter or whatever a black guy, people will flip their shizz and scream racism.

You make Fiora, someone ostensibly French, Indian or something, people will flip their shizz and scream you white-washed her.

How do you make Master Yi and Faramir (I mean Lee Sin) sound asian without resorting to Engrish? I dunno.

TLDR: If you're gonna fight for diversity, let's fight for everyone. Except yordles. They can suck eggs.

Edit: Oh and this must be my attempt to derail or obfuscate the larger issue of Female Diversity/Equality. Not like Female Diversity/Equality is a distraction from the much larger issue of... Diversity/Equality for Everybody Else.