Tidy Up Tuesday #90

Just a quick one this week.

Yes we are aware that a certain YouTuber has made a video giving their predictable “I like it because as a man it doesn’t effect me and I like sexy women” opinion via a video in which they also defend their “men are sexualized too and women are supposed to be sexy while men are supposed to be strong” video.  We’re not going to link to it directly since pretty much it says nothing new and its entire contents can be summed up in one helpful bingo card.

If you’re still unconvinced however, we do highly recommend this video by Ian Laspina (apparently not watched by the YouTuber) on how breastplates are actually designed, along with these comics (1, 2) from years ago explaining some of the realities of the terrible designs.

If you are curious about us addressing a long time existing title of some sort, please do try the search function as odds are good we have and we do try to tag everything as completely as we can.

~Ozzie, – wincenworks & -Icy




It’s bad enough when a sci-fi setting has all the ladies wearing painted-on tights so snug that you can see all the way up their respective buttcracks, but then they go and do it with the armour, too.

Like, it’s armour.

It’s a solid chunk of heavy, rigid material.

How does that work?

How do you walk with a pair of inflexible domes tightly cupping your glutes?

Hell, how do you even stand when you’ve got a quarter-inch durasteel plate wedged so far up your ass you’re tasting metal?

Makes no sense.


While we’re certain skin-tight metal butt armor happens a lot in media (battle thong is by far more popular), the best, most literal examples of it from our blog were those chafiest short shorts ever:


And this full body atrocity (whole thing is arguably NSFW, open link at own risk):


We can also infer from some frontal images when a design probably includes a butt vacuum-sealed in metal, just like it has boobplate/metal boobsocks:


[x] [x]

That said, butts or no butts, armor so snug it looks like shiny bodypaint/metal spandex is a blight on costume design that should be stopped.


As we throwback this nightmare fuel this week, I’d just like to casually remind everyone that, at least when it comes to 3D modeling, giving a character individual butt cheeks and individual boobs is way more work than giving them actual Real Person clothes. So there are still people in the gaming industry who look at their budget, look at their specs, and then decide that, yes, spending that money on individually-modeled boobs and butts is a Good Investment.


That’s not even metal, and even it looks physically painful.



6 RPG Tropes That Need to Die

Dorkly again parodying some obvious absurdities of bikini armors (like double standards and skimpy high level) in fantasy/RPGs… twice in the same comic 🙂 

We always enjoy when skimpy female armor lands on a list of things that games should get rid of once and for all

And, of course, just like in the case of that video list, we recommend steering clear of the comment section, where “Stop complaining about female armors because I like them therefore there’s nothing wrong with them!” dumpster fires are burning.


So, 2018 has come and gone.  Sadly but unsurprisingly, the skimpy female armor and the high level variant did not die as a commonplace trope.  Oh well… maybe 2019 will be the year free of bikini armor! Let’s ask the magic eight-ball…

But you know what popular media? I dare you to make a fool of me.

All you have to do is go a year without ridiculous female armor… that should be easy right?

– wincenworks



The world: [Medieval European setting with knights and castles. Elves live in the forest. Dwarves yelling and drinking. Orcs just green and angry. Dragons. Boob armour.]

The world’s game trailer: [Hot mage girl. Antagonist is either a crusty old man or a sometimes sexy white woman. Fantasy war. British accents. Ugly armour. Robust character creator with multiple fantasy race options but no dark skin tones for humans. Giant spiders. A huge potion making mechanic with hundreds of recipes no one is gonna use. More giant spiders. “Only you can save the world”.]


Anyone: Why the boob armor and no people of color in this fantasy setting? 
Fanboys who preemptively decided to defend the game based on developer’s brand name alone: THAT’S THEIR CREATIVE FREEDOM! ALSO HISTORICAL ACCURACY. SHUT UP AND STOP HATING FUN! 



SYAC – NSFW Context.

A lot of people who view my feminist leanings as an “act” always point to the fact that I used to draw fetish art a decade ago as some sort of hypocrisy. But the fact of the matter is that just because I don’t draw fetish art anymore and identify as a feminist now doesn’t mean I have some sort of vendetta against it. The problem that arises when feminists clash with comic/game/geek content is because the “context” for the “sexy artwork” either doesn’t exist or is so flimsy it might as well not exist. There is nothing wrong with NSFW artwork, providing the context makes sense (and that includes the WHERE and HOW it’s being published).

Sidenote: I CANNOT recommend “Sunstone” enough to y’all. It’s amazing and you should check it out! Here’s the link to it on AMAZON.

PS: I genuinely don’t care that Quiet is a mute and can’t talk (that’s problematic in and of itself). I just wanted to make a point.

Huh, who knew there is a time and place to make female characters sexy and that time is not “always”?

We’re also more than familiar with the accusation that we are just fun-hating killjoys who hate sexy women and want them always non-sexual and covered head to toe (extra fallacy points if something islamophobic is added to the last part). That’s why it’s a square on the rhetoric bingo



See also: When is it okay to have a female character in less than practical or protective armor? – a helpful presentation by @wincenworks 

Battlefield 1 doesn’t have female soldiers because ‘boys wouldn’t find it believable’

Battlefield 1 doesn’t have female soldiers because ‘boys wouldn’t find it believable’



“One might think this is because women didn’t serve combat roles – which isn’t true – but according to former DICE coder Amandine Coget, it’s because the project leads thought boys wouldn’t find it believable.

…Coget adds that DICE made several decisions for Battlefield 1
which have nothing to do with historical realism – including how tanks
function or the lethality rates of early parachutes – but female
soldiers still wouldn’t appear in multiplayer.”

Heavy sighing. (h/t @cypheroftyr via Twitter.)

What’s a worse argument to not have women in your combat-heavy game than “they’re too hard to animate”“Historically, female warriors are unrealistic”, of course! And how to add to the injury? Insult your intended demographic by saying THEY are the one who won’t believe it! 
It’s not like games have potential to educate and widen the player’s horizons, right?

Considering the developer is so totally concerned with “realism” (as understood by pubescent boys), @pointandclickbait has a great suggestion to what historically accurate thing should be included instead of soldier women:



more warrior women and history on BABD

This week in throwback: Remember how two years ago Battlefield 1 developers insulted their intended audience by basically claiming that boys are too stupid and sexist to accept women in a World War I game? Well who would have thought it, they were right! 

Recently released WWII-based sequel, Battlefield 5 (yeah, I’m not even trying to understand the numeration there) HAS female soldiers in it and the dudebros apparently cryhistorical revisionism!” at that.
Because women on the frontlines of World War II are definitely the most unbelievable part of a game that lets you die and respawn multiple times while reenacting real historical battles. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

And once again @pointandclickbait has the most accurate response to the “controversy”



h/t: @red-queen-on-the-heathen-throne


My beef regarding female characters in an action series who use “seduction” as a means of getting things done can basically be summed up in three points.

The first is: seduction is not a valid strategy. Even if your femme fatale can count on the idea that the vast majority of her opponents are going to be specifically attracted to women, which, she… can’t, there’s no way she can guarantee that she’s everyone’s type, or that everyone will drop what they’re doing to ogle / assist a woman they’re attracted to. A tactic is not a useful tactic if it is rendered totally moot in the event of asexual people, those not attracted to women, happily married monogamous individuals, people who are just not really feelin’ the sexy right this second, anyone of particular ethical fiber, anyone of a cautious or calculating persuasion who thinks to be suspicious of one of the oldest tricks in the book when it comes to coercion, anyone who fights in a manner or environment that makes them unable to discern their opponent, anyone who’s difficult to distract in general, or anyone who fights fast and reflexively and will only realize their opponent is a pretty lady after they’ve thrown all their punches… and that’s not a complete list. Odds are good that the majority of situations any sort of actiony lady encounters are not situations she can seduce herself past.

Keep reading

Piece of interesting commentary from the creator of Medina, one of the last month’s positive examples

The idea of female character using seduction as a tactic to disarm whoever she’s fighting is something we often touched upon in our distraction bonus tag, most extensively in this post by wincenworks. Assumption that sexualized appearance and/or behavior somehow will warrant advantage over every (cishet male) opponent is beyond ridiculous. 

The closest similar example of strategy which shatters suspension of disbelief this spectacularly is “she’s so great at dodging that she doesn’t need actual armor in gladiatorial combat”. Both are tactics based solely on the idea that, despite all odds, failure is not an option. To have them make any sort of sense, even

as Thermian Arguments,

you have to literally present a world populated exclusively by people literally too incompetent to live… plus your one overly competent, yet super objectified female character.

Back to the topic of seduction, though, femme fatale warrior is quite an insulting, gender-exclusionary trope. We’ve heard it used as an excuse for quite a few characters, especially ones that fall under “evil is sexy” category and one particular video game character who everyone assumes counts as a femme fatale because of vague black widow spider theme, one undercover assassination and impossibly deep cleavage. Even though she’s a sniper assassin who never uses her sexual wiles in combat

So yeah, not only there’s a prevailing (and obviously wrong) idea of female sex appeal as a valid battle strategy, it is so ingrained in our culture’s collective consciousness that even characters not meant to use use it in combat are designed to look as if they do. 


The above post is pretty long, but we should really highlight this part:

…if seduction is a useful combat advantage (which it isn’t), there is a glaring lack of male characters that use it.

We’ve said this before, but Agent 47 from the Hitman series still has all his suit buttons done even in the latest game. Why isn’t his default suit Fabio-esque, surely that would help him get close to his targets?

Probably because “distraction” is a shitty excuse to put lady characters in revealing outfits.


Tidy Up #86

More notices that wouldn’t make up individual posts, but are worth sharing wholesale here!

We’re sorry to inform our alleged readers that the previous Tidy Up Tuesday post requires to come in with basic reading comprehension. As does the entirety of our blog. Keep that in mind next time before responding.

We were sad to learn that not just Battleborn, but every other game we mentioned as a positive in our last throwback, is either dead (Gigantic), discontinued from further development (Dirty Bomb) or practically dead due to near-zero player engagement (Battleborn). 

Makes it even worse that the only successful diverse mainstream hero shooter multiplayer out there is Overwatch, which seems to have concluded that they already met their melanin and body type variety quota

Overwatch fans, please push Blizzard to actually do women better and to stop releasing more


skinny conventionally attractive female characters! Have Overwatch take responsibility for what it set out to do!

Praising media creators for doing things they should have been doing for a long time, let alone the bare minimum of it, won’t get us anywhere. There’s a difference between actual progress and finally getting to something that should be a given, like decent representation

There’s a reason we have both an “improvement” and “improvement?” tags.

Addressed before: 

~Ozzie, – wincenworks & -Icy


if your female character doesn’t look like she has lived the life she leads and you can’t get a sense for her actual personality by looking at her because you’re too focused on making her pretty and perfect and palatable it’s bad character design and you should feel bad

It’s worth noting that, generally speaking – this is why concept artists want to be concept artists. They want to convey feelings, story and inspire the imagination. It’s not uncommon for concept artists to do staggering amounts of research in order to find ways to convey a type of character in a type of time period.

So, if you come across a product created by a major studio where they have extensive executive and production staff – it’s safe to say that any aggressively boring female character designs are done at the behest of a particular type of individual pushing a ridiculous myth to try to seem like a genius.

It is important to call out this kind of absurdity, not just to try to reduce the amount of gratuitous objectification in media – but to also spare these poor artists the indignity of having a guy try to convince them he invented anime tiddy.

– wincenworks