@Riot A serious discussion about gender. Please read

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

MTaur

Senior Member

10-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karolina View Post
Arguing semantics ? That's not a good idea ever... it derails any thread (unless it's a thread about semantics).
You could accept the small correction and move on. And it's not pointless, because people think they can call something the "f word" and consider the matter dismissed, and... that just shouldn't fly. "That's the feminist agenda" can be a true statement, but it's not a real argument and it doesn't say why feminists would be in the wrong. Disowning feminism for the sake of making your position look better to people who think "feminism" is a bad word is dismissive of feminism and unfair.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

kenzoil

Member

10-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTaur View Post
An agenda is something that a person or a group wants to accomplish. The right to marry is on the gay agenda. Positive media representations of adult human females who aren't all 18-33-year-old swimsuit models is on the feminist agenda. (Ok, there isn't any one official agenda with precise wording that all gay rights advocates or feminists agree on, but I don't think that either of the statements I just made are far from mainstream in either group.)
And female champion character designs are negative towards female groups outside of 18-33 year old, how?

Design is not the problem. Social construct of females in society is the problem. And shaping character into shapes and forms to represent their history/personality/story is not anti-breaking down social constructs of female in society. it's impartial. As my philosophy majoring feminist friend would put it, you are the problem.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

MTaur

Senior Member

10-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by kenzoil View Post
And female champion character designs are negative towards female groups outside of 18-33 year old, how?
It's negative to implicitly say that they don't deserve to exist in an ideal world of epic champions, yes.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Karolina

Senior Member

10-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTaur View Post
You could accept the small correction and move on. And it's not pointless, because people think they can call something the "f word" and consider the matter dismissed, and... that just shouldn't fly. "That's the feminist agenda" can be a true statement, but it's not a real argument and it doesn't say why feminists would be in the wrong. Disowning feminism for the sake of making your position look better to people who think "feminism" is a bad word is sort of dismissive of feminism and unfair.
Okay, you are right ! I tried to roll with the impression some people have of an "agenda" being sort of an evil conspiracy, that's why I said that. But you are correct so moving on !

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiryana View Post
So, suppose this goes some where and the people arguing for basically a recall on overly sexualised skins get what they want. Do you think people who bought all these "stripper skins" will get a refund?
No. Read the OP. No changes to what has already been created are suggested.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

MathMage

Senior Member

10-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by jireo View Post
Serious skin? So playing videogames is serious business? Did you even notice that they are two different artists? Didn't one of riot's staff said they didn't want to hindered the artist view too much? Do you take Freljord Ashe less serious in game? Lux splash is a dynamic artistic approach. You're just complaining about the artists' work. Have you seen skinny girls? They look like that too. I dont understand how wearing a dress is a wardrobe malfuntion. you can wear pants and shorts without belts... should i complain to people about your "wardrobe malfuntion"?
I take Freljord Ashe's splash art less seriously because it is portrayed as unserious. Her model doesn't have the same issue, so obviously that doesn't translate into the game itself.

Lux's splash is not just dynamic, but broken-backed.

Akali's sideboob is entirely gratuitous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kenzoil View Post
Design =/= Proportions

I hate to see MF on any Character Design bashing list. She is by far one of the best designed female champs. Her design represents her personality and abilities. And whenever I see someone post her as a badly design character. It makes me think that they have no clue of what character designing is all about.
Just because MF has good overall design doesn't mean she has no problems whatsoever.

But by the same token, it doesn't mean fixing that problem requires a complete overhaul that ruins her design on other levels.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

MTaur

Senior Member

10-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by kenzoil View Post
Design is not the problem. Social construct of females in society is the problem. And shaping character into shapes and forms to represent their history/personality/story is not anti-breaking down social constructs of female in society. it's impartial. As my philosophy majoring feminist friend would put it, you are the problem.
This paragraph is completely unintelligible and I can't even begin to reply to its intended content.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Darkwahn

Member

10-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMage View Post
Why? Because that's how little it takes to make a skin look like fanservice rather than serious business--and conversely, how little self-restraint it takes to make a skin serious. (And while they're not strictly zero-sum, there IS a massive tradeoff.)
.

Because there aren't really any upsides to making it fit what a few people consider "serious."


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

kenzoil

Member

10-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTaur View Post
It's negative to implicitly say that they don't deserve to exist in an ideal world of epic champions, yes.
In the same sense, were is our average Joe male that will go along with average Jane.

I would laugh if they ever released a female and male character that was 8 head length with 1 head length wide chest, 2 head lengths stomach/hips, 1 head length wide hips, 3 head length arms, 4 head length legs, 1 head length hand, 1 head length feet. After they design these champions to be completely proportionally correct and NORMAL, they can dress them in normal clothes. And the character's combat skills will be based off of punching and kicking that are completely and utterly average.

And to answer the question that is being begged by your statement, average champions should not exist an area of above average champions. Would it be fair to make Justin Bieber fight Mike Tyson in a boxing match. I don't think it would be fair at all.

To me, I view "anti-implicit superficiality" style of feminism the same way I view PETA's views on Poke'mon, horrendously misplaced and unwanted.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

get dat birdman

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

Senior Member

10-09-2012

So, was thinking about something.

I think part of the broader issue is that people are up in arms over specific skins. Remember that unless they are the default skin (aka NOT Battle Bunny Riven, Heartseeker Vayne, Freljord Ashe), you have exactly zero obligation to purchase or use these skins. Moreover, the biggest issue I can see with Freljord Ashe is not her pose, but the fact that there is no focus on her bow, so really, it's just disregarding the fact that she's an archer. Moreover, I would again compare to the old NA splash, because this one is still miles ahead. (Personally, I think the current splash is very tasteful and people are honestly looking for something to say negatively about it - just because it's a frontal pose showing a bit of cleavage doesn't mean this is the entirety of the splash; Woad Ashe also shows generous cleavage, but no one has mentioned that.)

That all said, I think unless it's iconic of the character in their lore (Ashe, Evelynn, for example), a player shouldn't really be forced to using such a skin (because every player is forced to have the default skin for champions they use, but not purchased skins). However, I think some leniency is deserved for non-default skins, BECAUSE they are optional. That doesn't mean every skin ever should just throw away decency, but I do think that it could stand to be a little less stringent in terms of at the very least clothing and to a degree poses (we still want men and women to look like they are naturally able to pose however they are doing so).


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

kenzoil

Member

10-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTaur View Post
This paragraph is completely unintelligible and I can't even begin to reply to its intended content.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-topics/

First the link will help you at least understand most aspects of feminism by it's philosophical nature.

Feminism is against the social constructs, an implied nature of a person in the community (like women do better at reading and art, and men do better at math and science), And I see some feminist groups take it further in a very proper and well mannered path, removing the stereotyping of genders all together. But then there are the superficial feminist, a group of people that are against anything that would emphasize women's natural physical differences from men (butts, boobs, and hips.)