I am going to play Devil’s Advocate…

bikiniarmorbattledamage:

blackoutkick:

and question why majority of the “Gaming Feminist” population cry and moan about “Bikini Armor” in World of Warcraft 

But when it comes to representing a male character in cosplay they decide to strip it all down into a “Bikini Armor”… Contradiction at it’s best.

You want to look sexy… Go for it, But don’t point the finger at “sexist pigs”. 

This is why I can’t take none of you social bloggers serious.

Now feel free to read between the lines and tell me about all the irrelevant crap I don’t need to read while you derail from the BASIC point I’m making here.

So… that “basic” point is “feminist who criticize stupid armor bikinis can not EVER want to look sexy or dress scantily out of their own free will”?

That’s why I have no trust for anyone who starts their statement with “I am going to play Devil’s Advocate”.

~Ozzie

After I finished laughing… which took a while.  I decided I would go out looking for this army of social justice warriors in sexy Rule 63 Warcraft cosplay.  Surely there must have been a legion of them to inspire such vitriol.

I found: One woman doing a single sexy WarCraft crossplay… and found no references to Social Justice, social justice issues or “sexist pigs” on any of their profiles (Indeed Google returns no results for their screen name + “sexist pigs”)

So not only did they miss the point – but this argument exists only in their imagination.  That reminds me of something…

– wincenworks

Time to remember why we put the Devil’s Advocate in our FAQ

Post otherwise worth bringing back, because we’re never free of hilariously oversensitive dudebros crying HYPOCRISY at straw feminist SJWs for somehow simultaneously hating bikini armor and… wanting to personally dress up as sexy male characters in said bikinis? Okay. 

image

Which totally happens. With frequency… not. 

And even if that did happen, we have a tags about agency and false equivalence which address such unfair comparisons. Have a good read!

~Ozzie 

Anonymous:

Sometimes when I’m watching a review for a Marvel movie and they start talking about how hot the female lead is, I briefly think “Seriously? Gross pigs”. But then I take a look at my desktop and see screen caps of almost all of Chris Evans’ ass shots from his Marvel movies, and I realize I have absolutely no right to judge. I am no better. That’s not to say nobody else has the right to judge, because they do. Just putting it into perspective so both sides can understand one another better.

bikiniarmorbattledamage:

kissingcullens:

kehinki:

Not really. Who even cares about objectifying Steve Rogers when he gets 3 of his very own movies and there isn’t even a SINGLE movie for ANY female character. Who cares about women on tumblr objectifying him prettyyyy much harmlessly when entertainment shows/sites seen by millions gush about Steve’s character development or Chris’ acting, while the only thing they say about the SOLE woman is her new hair/her weight loss or gain/how hot she looked. Sometimes, women are ONLY put in movies to be the token “eye candy”, (regardless of whether or not she’s underage) and this happens a lot. Look at the massive franchise that is Transformers.

It’s not the same thing… Men objectify women and it leads to real life violence against women—fuelled by already rampant misogyny. Women objectify men and it leads to gifsets of Chris Evans’ ass.

Yuppppp
And no one respects sexy men less for being “objectified” if you can even apply the term the same way to a guy- if anything, being objectified is glorifying for men.  

What’s that thing Joe Mangianello said about how he doesn’t feel like men can be objectified? Cuz women are viewed as sex objects, but men are viewed as power objects?

A guy who takes off his shirt and shows off his buff bod in a movie has power, he’s displaying his value and attractiveness

I mean, the culture isn’t NEARLY the same; I’ve been thinking lately about how no matter how much we “objectify” men, it’s always an empowering thing for the man.  

He’s sexy: it’s an achievement.

 And a lot of our attraction is also about fawning over the man’s personality, his expressions, the nuances of the character he plays- cute jokes about Doritoes…. 

I can go from posting ten close-ups of Chris Evan’s ass (accompanied by praise and self-deprecating jokes)
To a picture of him in a sweater-vest, looking pensive and talking about his love of golden retrievers in the same ten minutes (with commentary about what a darling angel he is)

None of it is demeaning or objectifying in remotely the way female objectification is, and your point about Chris Evans starring in three Cap solo movies is really right on….
…while women can barely scrape past the damn Bechdel test half the time, and half the time are reduced to T&A and get assaulted or fridged or show up in their undies for no reason…

Some wise words about gendered double standards and false equivalence between objectifying male and female characters.

~Ozzie

Following yesterday’s post about the far-from-perfect female costume designs in MCU, throwing back this week some nice analysis of the asker’s blatant false equivalence in regards to objectifying female vs male movie superheroes

Keep in mind that this post is at least five years old and since then we had barely two mainstream superhero movies with female leads released, one of which was about Wonder Woman in an unmistakably sexualized costume

~Ozzie 

Bikini Armor Battle Damage: marofiron replied to your post: NSWF image under the cut! Although it…

Bikini Armor Battle Damage: marofiron replied to your post: NSWF image under the cut! Although it…

bikiniarmorbattledamage:

edralis:

bikiniarmorbattledamage:

Although it is hilarious to see this, i think it is important to focus on how objectifying either sex is bad rather than how men are finally getting similar objectification treatment.

In the perfect world no-one would be objectified, but since our world is far from perfect the “let’s objectify EVERYONE instead” angle is the tongue-in-cheek alternative for equal treatment.

Yeah, I don’t think anyone should genuinely advocate for treating all people like objects, but we’re absolutely free to make fun of this idea. It’s subversive humor, one of the best coping mechanisms we humans have.

I’ve always wondered the same as marofiron – whether reversing the objectification – or any other oppressive attitude – is a good tactic in solving the problem in the long term.

Particularly if the reverse attitude becomes socially acceptable and hilarious even, whereas the original one becomes taboo.

I’d say it’s not a way of solving the problem rather than exposing it to the public through means of satire.
Sometimes it’s easier to see the wrongs of oppressive societal norms if the problem is shown in reverse to touch the privileged group. Like the little gem right here, for example.
That’s why projects like, for instance, The Liberation of Manfire or The Hawkeye Initiative are needed. They don’t promote turning men into fanservice, they show through contrast how absurd are norms of portraying women. It’s supposed to spark discussion about parodied problem, not to make it taboo (hint: the problem usually IS a taboo by default).

The time has come to restore this post, since there seems to be some small amount of confusion over what the purpose of our most empowering tag is.

Coincidentally, the people confused over it often seem to be the same people who want to argue that Conan is the apex of the sexualized man, but have a very, very negative reaction to actually sexualized men.

Part of the reason they’re shocked is because it turns out society has this weird double standard where it is commonplace for commercial media to have hypersexualized and objectifying depictions of women, but goes well out of its way to avoid the slightest hint of such when depicting men.

(Or if it does depict men as such, it uses it as all kinds of unfortunate shorthands, frequently likening homosexuality to moral degeneracy or being… weird alien monsters)

Thus it helps to remind people that if there is some sort of equality in the balance of depictions, it exists only in the imagination of people who don’t have to deal with the problems the inequality brings.

– wincenworks

Depicting men in the same Empowered is a way to really show how the bikini armor rhetoric is complete nonsense. Sometimes, just explaining that bikini armor is bad can trigger a knee-jerk reaction. People may be attached to a character who’s designed this way, or they just like to look at anime girls, or whatever. They may get defensive about it.

But put a man in that same, or similar, bikini armor, and it’s harder to look past the ridiculousness of it, because of our societal expectations. That’s why we also use the pro-bikini rhetoric language in our Empowered posts, applying it to the men instead. It’s a way to really highlight the double standard, rather than to promote the sexualization of everyone.

-Icy

filipfatalattractionrblog:

caledoniaseries:

rainbow-femme:

So whenever i would watch movies and see The Badass Female Character fighting in various ways, something about it always bugged me. I just assumed it was internalized misogyny that made me dislike characters like black widow and Tauriel and tried to make myself like them.

Then I was rewatching Mad Max Fury Road the other day and I noticed that nothing bothered me about watching Furiosa fight and I realized the problem wasn’t watching women fight in movies that got on my nerves.

Watching the stereotypical Badass Female Character she always has these effortless moves and a cocky, sexy smirk on her face as everything is easy. Watching Furiosa, she grunted and bared her teeth. Her fighting was hard and it took effort and it hurt like fighting is supposed to. For once her fighting style wasn’t supposed to seduce the audience it was to be effective.

I wasn’t disliking these characters because they were women I was disliking that their fighting was meant to remind me they were women. High heels and shapely outfits and not showing effort or discomfort because it’s more attractive to effortlessly lift a long leather clad leg over your head rather than rugby tackle someone.

It’s the same with the Wonder Woman movie too. Fighting is hard and it takes effort, blocking bombs and bullets with a shield makes her grimace and bare her teeth with the effort it takes. She’s not flip kicking bombs she’s yelling and straining, not because she’s weak or bad at fighting but because that’s what it would be like.

I really hope we’re moving into an era of women having fighting styles designed for realism and not how hot it looks for the men in the audience.

THIS.

@bikiniarmorbattledamage

The visual framing of women in media, especially female warriors, is something we talk about a lot. For obvious reasons. 

image

And even before I started this blog, it’s gotten to the point when the phrase “Strong Female Character” lost all of its meaning and is used ironically as a synonym to “Fighting F*cktoy”.
Same goes for “weaponized femininity”, which I personally feel never had any real meaning beyond “we need to constantly assert that this character is indeed female and fuckable to cishet men, even when putting herself in mortal danger!”. 

We as well hope that more media gets away from those tropes and starts portraying women fighters as just that – people who fight, with no pretense that their precious femininity needs to be preserved at all times. Especially when male characters are treated completely seriously.

~Ozzie

Gotta love the “creativity” of web ads presenting just another grizzled military dude as an equivalent to a generic pretty girl with long flowing hair, cleavage and belly out. Totally legit and “equal” soldier designs! Especially for a game that apparently takes place during WW2? 

Um, is that supposed to be some sort of parallel universe? Because other than USSR imagery slapped on like an afterthought, even the guy doesn’t look anything close to a soldier from the 1940s…

~Ozzie 

bikiniarmorbattledamage:

doctorsanity:

I think the biggest thing gamers fail to recognize when discussing sexism in video games is presentation. This is the biggest reason why I can never see characters like Zangief even be remotely equivalent to female characters. Disregarding every other difference that sets them apart, when was the last time you saw the camera creepily do a pan across Zangief sensually massaging his breasts and ending on his stuck out ass? His walk cycle isn’t him wildly shaking his hips. None of his animations flaunt his body in the sense that you’re supposed to be attracted to him. And to top it all off I know that, if this actually happened, it would be done as a joke.

image

Thank you for this post! It’s a nice concise explanation

on why male power fantasy is not the same as female sexualization.

It’s tedious at this point when we see someone claim that characters like Conan/Kratos/Zangief are equally “empowered” as their boob-flaunting female peers (because bare chests?). Hope this helps.

~Ozzie

more about false equivalence on BABD

Weekly throwback for today: one of the biggest factors of double standard design conveniently ignored by the false equivalence rhetoric: the presentation. 

Even if we somehow agreed that a bare-chested dude in a speedo/loincloth is the direct male counterpart to a lady in a physically impossible non-costume (consult our bingo archive for examples) – which we don’t agree with – it still wouldn’t take into account the differences in body language, camera angles and other factors that frame a character as an object instead of a person. 

~Ozzie

Presentation is also how you get woman characters who may be fully clothed, but are still objectified. Miranda from Mass Effect may not score very high on the bingo, but when her ass is the only part of her in a shot of her talking to Shepard…

image

Yeah. 

-Icy

bikiniarmorbattledamage:

doctorsanity:

I think the biggest thing gamers fail to recognize when discussing sexism in video games is presentation. This is the biggest reason why I can never see characters like Zangief even be remotely equivalent to female characters. Disregarding every other difference that sets them apart, when was the last time you saw the camera creepily do a pan across Zangief sensually massaging his breasts and ending on his stuck out ass? His walk cycle isn’t him wildly shaking his hips. None of his animations flaunt his body in the sense that you’re supposed to be attracted to him. And to top it all off I know that, if this actually happened, it would be done as a joke.

image

Thank you for this post! It’s a nice concise explanation

on why male power fantasy is not the same as female sexualization.

It’s tedious at this point when we see someone claim that characters like Conan/Kratos/Zangief are equally “empowered” as their boob-flaunting female peers (because bare chests?). Hope this helps.

~Ozzie

more about false equivalence on BABD

Weekly throwback for today: one of the biggest factors of double standard design conveniently ignored by the false equivalence rhetoric: the presentation. 

Even if we somehow agreed that a bare-chested dude in a speedo/loincloth is the direct male counterpart to a lady in a physically impossible non-costume (consult our bingo archive for examples) – which we don’t agree with – it still wouldn’t take into account the differences in body language, camera angles and other factors that frame a character as an object instead of a person. 

~Ozzie

Presentation is also how you get woman characters who may be fully clothed, but are still objectified. Miranda from Mass Effect may not score very high on the bingo, but when her ass is the only part of her in a shot of her talking to Shepard…

image

Yeah. 

-Icy