Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

GO TO BOARDS


Don't ever expect a skin like "French Maid Nidalee" or "Battle Bunny Riven"

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Corey Tud

Senior Member

05-17-2013

I saw a riot post that said Vi was refreshing. It's sad when they delude themselves like that.

the release of Vi is just throwing a bone to the female empowerment crowd. It's cool if that's what you want to do, but don't pretend it isn't. She's a strong independent woman. Big whoop.

Nami would be cool, if anyone played her. Unfortunately being nonviable (either due to being underpowered or being too niche) kills the potential of the champions impact. I'm sure I'd love Nami as a character if i bought her... Which is an incredibly stupid thing to buy unless you have all the decent champions. Quinn is suffers from this as well. Cool champion. Terribly suited for the league. (If the pros can't find a way to work with her, then she's not niche, she's UP as ****). New champs make me sad these days. Used to get interesting AND competitive champs.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Alex3omg

Senior Member

05-17-2013

Quote:
IronStylus:
Hrm.. yeah, not my specialty, but I do appreciate the art! If I hear any murmurings as to what exactly the deal is I'll see what I can stick my face into.



Thanks my doo, as promised here's the diana wallpaper. I don't think it came out as well honestly.

Diana.jpg

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

StationaryObject

Senior Member

05-17-2013

Quote:
davin:
The key distinction here is something can be sexy/attractive/etc. without being objectifying and without just being about secondary (or primary[!]) sexual characteristics. I've talked to IronStylus (and to anyone else who doesn't make me shut up, I'm the worst) a bunch about this, and I think that's one of the more meaningful distinctions.


I bolded/italicized/underlined the main point of this post that really resonated with me personally.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH SEXY.
The problem comes about when all they are is being sexual objects.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

davin

Recruiter

05-17-2013

Quote:
StationaryObject:
I bolded/italicized/underlined the main point of this post that really resonated with me personally.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH SEXY.
The problem comes about when all they are is being sexual objects.


That is basically how I feel Of course, objectification is a tricky thing to put your finger on, especially when you're talking about designed characters rather than actual people. How does creator intent factor in, etc. etc.

Avatars, character design, and representation issues are crazy interesting.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

onechange

Senior Member

05-17-2013

Quote:
IronStylus:
Then you need 4 other characters to get a Ninja Turtle skin.

FULL TEAM COMP.


Well we DO have 4 ninjas in the game AND you can easily pump out a master splinter twitch. So make it happen


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

No name just me

Recruiter

05-17-2013

This is a bird we're talking to
just thought you guys should know
Ironstylus is a bird
How is he even typing posts?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Seracain

Senior Member

05-17-2013

Quote:
SmellslikeCF:
Matter of opinion:

Personally I find "sexualisation" as something which is given non-discreet, purposeful, sexual features for the sake of it.

To give an example - as Riot have pointed out, Elise's personna is seductive/sexy and hence her "look" this is an example of not a "sexualised" character, but one whos looks suit her personality


I don't think sexualisation is a bad thing, if it suits the source. MF or Ahri make more sense to have some sexualisation than say Leona, but a hinted at sunbathing skin would make sense to have some sexualisation, but even then I'd personally expect the level of sexualisation would be less than if it was say Miss Fortune.

My view is go with what fits the character and the situation. And I think that's one way to be respectful too.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

SmellslikeCF

Senior Member

05-17-2013

In all seriousness though... the issue isn't with "sexualisation" or "objectification" it's the concept of male/female itself.

How do you know if something's female? or male? What defines "femininity" or "masculinity"?

Last I recall, according to "human" standards, it's impossible to tell the difference between the sexes in fish. Or Dogs. Or Mammoths.

You can't draw physically neutral characters and draw genitals on them in order to define gender. Sometimes a little sexualisation has to be there, in order to portray gender.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

IronStylus

Sr. Concept Artist

05-17-2013

Quote:
No name just me:
This is a bird we're talking to
just thought you guys should know
Ironstylus is a bird
How is he even typing posts?


This guy has a really good point.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fuzen kuden

Senior Member

05-17-2013

Quote:
IronStylus:
This guy has a really good point.

leona is typing for him