@IronStylus: I am very disappointed in you and the art team.

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

Shizuhara

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

Senior Member

11-16-2012

This isn't about feminism. The details aren't worth delving into, but let's not make it something it's not?

Most people, regardless of their views, are not going to avoid playing a champion who's kit they like because of this issue. At the same time, if Riot put a little effort into things and produced more cohesive female kits on a consistent basis, there wouldn't be less people playing the champions either.

Imagine that. How many people are going to not play the champion because their breasts are not properly exposed/pneumatic?

Honestly, I wouldn't have given Nami a second look if she had the standard beach ball bosom complete with her little sister's bra. It's the immensely confusing evolutionary path she's taken to achieve that form that throws me.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mindllapse

Senior Member

11-16-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shizuhara View Post
This isn't about feminism. The details aren't worth delving into, but let's not make it something it's not?
every issue concerning any aspect of gender and its social effects is precisely feminism


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Gespens

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

Senior Member

11-16-2012

Quote:
Right here you are assuming that the person you're speaking to isn't and adult, and likewise generalizing all adults to what you've seen in them. That is very childish of you. Why would all adults not care simply on the fact that they're adults. Its simple; they don't. People are different from eachother throughout all stages of life.
I never assumed anything. I just say it as it is. If you go out in public with a survey and ask people what bothers them the most; Government, portrayal of people in media, or Economy, I assure you that the minority would be the second option. If you wanted samples, it'd mostly be women from 15~30 in the second option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mindllapse View Post
I'm talking about historically. You do realize that having portrayals of women in media as being educated or skilled or professional and etc, has started happening within the past 5 decades right?
Because Joan of Arc, Queen Elizabeth and Mary Stuart totally were not educated, skilled, or professional.

Actual history has just as many women as men who are famous.

Media is what it is. And part of that was because women for the most part were not treated well over 50 decades ago for the most part.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mindllapse

Senior Member

11-16-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gespens View Post

Because Joan of Arc, Queen Elizabeth and Mary Stuart totally were not educated, skilled, or professional.

Actual history has just as many women as men who are famous.

Media is what it is. And part of that was because women for the most part were not treated well over 50 decades ago for the most part.
When I say historically, I obviously mean historically in the media, since that is what we were discussing. Joan of Arc, Queen Elizabeth, and Mary Stuart are not in any way prominent in the media, nor do they represent the majority of images being created of women in the media in the history of TV and film.

Actual history has just as many famous women as well as men, but that has very little to do with popular media which is not concerned with portrayals of famous people -- but of the common human being.

I really fail to see your point that you are trying to make.

Your original comment that I responded to was "In what way does having sexy females in media affect you, as a person. Answer me this."
And I pointed out an obvious social phenomena involving portrayal of women in media that affected everybody on a sociopolitical as well as economical level.
Then you began to make claims about the presence of historically famous women like Joan of Arc and Queen Elizabeth which has nothing to do with what we were discussing: the portrayal of women in media

I think you are just arguing to argue, arguing to win, so I will stop debating with you now.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TheGreatDecay

Senior Member

11-16-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gespens View Post
I never assumed anything. I just say it as it is. If you go out in public with a survey and ask people what bothers them the most; Government, portrayal of people in media, or Economy, I assure you that the minority would be the second option. If you wanted samples, it'd mostly be women from 15~30 in the second option.


Because Joan of Arc, Queen Elizabeth and Mary Stuart totally were not educated, skilled, or professional.

Actual history has just as many women as men who are famous.

Media is what it is. And part of that was because women for the most part were not treated well over 50 decades ago for the most part.
You're not saying it as it is because that isn't how it is. Everyone has an opinion.


As for the second part, you're just off. Real women aren't portrayals of women. They are real women.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Gespens

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

Senior Member

11-16-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mindllapse View Post
When I say historically, I mean historically in the media. Joan of Arc, Queen Elizabeth, and Mary Stuart are not in any way prominent in the media, nor do they represent the majority of images being created of women in the media in the history of TV and film.

Actual history has just as many famous women as well as men, but that has very little to do with popular media which is not concerned with portrayals of famous people -- but of the common human being.
And do you know what popular media primarily is?

An exaggeration of real life. In the 40s and such, women in real life were expected to be housewives and the man was supposed to do the work. I agree with the feminist movement then-- I believe in absolute equality.

What I do not agree with, is that 'feminists' today are trying to force their agenda down people's throats and trying to get producers to bend to their wills. this is stifling of creative freedom.

And I know this is a game where story is not a primary concern, but even in other medias it gets annoying.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Icker

Senior Member

11-16-2012

This is one of the only areas in which Riot says one thing and does something completely different, and usually contradictory.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mindllapse

Senior Member

11-16-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gespens View Post
And do you know what popular media primarily is?

An exaggeration of real life. In the 40s and such, women in real life were expected to be housewives and the man was supposed to do the work. I agree with the feminist movement then-- I believe in absolute equality.

What I do not agree with, is that 'feminists' today are trying to force their agenda down people's throats and trying to get producers to bend to their wills. this is stifling of creative freedom.

And I know this is a game where story is not a primary concern, but even in other medias it gets annoying.
If you honestly believe that the exaggeration of female body parts that are specifically designed to tend to male sexual desire, is in anyway artistically creative rather than a grab for profits by targeting teenage males, then I'm afraid that I must say you are quite naive.

This is really like claiming that hardcore pornography is all about artistic creation rather than monetary profit through sexual stimulation.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Shizuhara

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

Senior Member

11-16-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mindllapse View Post
every issue concerning any aspect of gender and its social effects is precisely feminism
Double checked on google since that's all I really have on hand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feminism
The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.
There are no rights at stake here, so that doesn't really apply. There's certainly a term for what's going on here, but we're not doing anyone any favors with mis-definitions.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mindllapse

Senior Member

11-16-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shizuhara View Post
Double checked on google since that's all I really have on hand.



There are no rights at stake here, so that doesn't really apply. There's certainly a term for what's going on here, but we're not doing anyone any favors with mis-definitions.
1) that's the definition of liberal feminism, which is rights-centered, and it is the most dominant form of feminism (as liberalism is the most dominant form of policy and politics). Additionally, that definition along with liberal feminism, is horrendously Western Anglo-centric. Liberal feminism is widely discredited for being inherently racist as well as not actually solving the problems of gender issues and exploitation.

2) even under that definition, "social rights" definitely apply to what is going on in this thread, insofar as the term "social rights" contain aspects of "cultural rights"

3) please do some reading on the history of feminism and the development of feminist philosophy rather than doing a lazy 5 second Google check and you will understand the academic richness contained in feminist studies