Tag: reblog

Posted on

Ultimately, most things that are offensive are also lazy and unoriginal; because you can’t reach that point of view by looking at the world honestly…You reach that point of view by taking short cuts and by just sort of repeating what someone else told you.

Joseph Fink
Writer from Welcome To Night Vale discussing writing on Citizen Radio 865  (via podquotes)

From now on, this is our universal answer to the supposed “creativity” of skin-revealing armor.

~Ozzie

(via bikiniarmorbattledamage)

Bringing this back as a reminder point not just to the people who insist that something which has the exact same result as before is creative and new, but also for the people who keep insisting that “it was always like this, you can’t complain”.

– wincenworks

Posted on

shattered-earth:

Backstory made to fit a sexualized design vs. a design made to fit a backstory requiring a character to wear minimal clothing.

image

Thank you, shattered-earth! 

It is crucial to understand that a character design has to be informative of who the character is. And that sexualized designs do not inform us of it, just break the immersion.

Quiet’s a mercenary with a fictional condition that requires her to uncover as much skin as possible? Fine, then either make her totally nude or give her minimal clothing that is actually comfortable for her job.

Princess Zelda is royalty and a magic user, so her armor has to be fancy rather than simplistic and practical as Link’s? Sure, then make it gown-like and ornamental, just don’t leave out random patches of skin where she can be conveniently stabbed.

Charlotte is a gold-digging seductress who pretends to be innocent and demure? Then maybe instead of a boob-flaunting bikini give her a child-like costume that matches that persona?

~Ozzie

Posted on

crackingskullz:

shensation:

donthatemecusimbeautiful:

Girl’s Costume Warehouse (X)

ITS BACK

and frog

And don’t forget the warehouse’s special warrior department, presenting:

Sexy barbarian:

image

Sexy assassin:

image

Sexy knight:

image

Sexy archer:

image

Sexy alien superhero: 

image

Sexy evil wizard: 

image

Sexy gladiator:

image

Sexy space soldier:

image

Sexy corpse:

image

Sexy war nun looking for redemption through death:

image

The classic, Sexy little girl transformed into a powerful beast:

image

~Ozzie

And frog:

image

– wincenworks

Posted on

Rule: When analyzing or critiquing media, you can not defend a problematic aspect of media by saying that a character CHOSE to do it, and that people are allowed to CHOSE to do things.

fandomsandfeminism:

Because fictional characters do not have the capacity to make choices. Because they are not REAL people. 

Power Girl and Starfire did not CHOOSE to fight evil in skimpy, revealing outfits. It is not their PERSONAL CHOICE to wear those clothes. They are fictional characters and their wardrobes are under the control of the author and artist.

Dumbledore did not CHOOSE to stay in the closet as a personal and professional choice because that was his right as a person. He is a fictional character. The fact that his sexuality was left at only vague subtext and only revealed through word of god was a deliberate decision made by the author.

Fictional characters are fictional characters. They do not make their own choices.

Addendum to the rule: for the same reasons, you can not argue that criticism “shames” a character for their appearance or behavior.

And just for the record, seeing what kind of responses this post received before we got to reblog it: NO, the fact that fictional characters tend to grow and take a life of their own still does not mean they have agency.

No matter how developed a fictional person is, they’re still written by a real person (or people) who have their own biases and rationalizations. Just because some “choices” feel natural to the author doesn’t mean they’re objectively plausible “choices” for a character to make within the given narrative.

Sometimes the choice, like (in case of what our blog critiques) decision to wear a sexualized costume to battle, can be explained by specific circumstances. But in most circumstances or with other explanations, the same choice can be plain silly and inconsistent with the rest of established story/worldbuilding.

~Ozzie

more about character agency on BABD

Posted on

Rule: When analyzing or critiquing media, you can not defend a problematic aspect of media by saying that a character CHOSE to do it, and that people are allowed to CHOSE to do things.

fandomsandfeminism:

Because fictional characters do not have the capacity to make choices. Because they are not REAL people. 

Power Girl and Starfire did not CHOOSE to fight evil in skimpy, revealing outfits. It is not their PERSONAL CHOICE to wear those clothes. They are fictional characters and their wardrobes are under the control of the author and artist.

Dumbledore did not CHOOSE to stay in the closet as a personal and professional choice because that was his right as a person. He is a fictional character. The fact that his sexuality was left at only vague subtext and only revealed through word of god was a deliberate decision made by the author.

Fictional characters are fictional characters. They do not make their own choices.

Addendum to the rule: for the same reasons, you can not argue that criticism “shames” a character for their appearance or behavior.

And just for the record, seeing what kind of responses this post received before we got to reblog it: NO, the fact that fictional characters tend to grow and take a life of their own still does not mean they have agency.

No matter how developed a fictional person is, they’re still written by a real person (or people) who have their own biases and rationalizations. Just because some “choices” feel natural to the author doesn’t mean they’re objectively plausible “choices” for a character to make within the given narrative.

Sometimes the choice, like (in case of what our blog critiques) decision to wear a sexualized costume to battle, can be explained by specific circumstances. But in most circumstances or with other explanations, the same choice can be plain silly and inconsistent with the rest of established story/worldbuilding.

~Ozzie

more about character agency on BABD