Layperson’s perspective and criticism credentials

“Newbies should be seen and not heard”

Our long-time reader @red-queen-on-the-heathen-throne recently brought up important point we never put to words on BABD. It’s related to the “You never played/saw/read this (so shut up)!” rhetoric.
Namely, it’s the fact that perspective of someone who never consumed media in question is just as (if not more!) valid as the fans who knows all the lore, including Thermian arguments which supposedly justify bad design  decisions. 

image

If a design isn’t good enough to communicate its narrative purpose to someone completely unfamiliar with the story behind it

(so each and every bikini armor falls under this), it fails as a design. As Red Queen puts it:

It’s not the player’s job to figure out what the designer is trying to actually tell them, as opposed to taking what is being communicated through this image at face value, before the game even begins.

And continues:

If this is what the game chooses to present to people who don’t know anything about the game yet, maybe don’t be quite so flippant about it when people get the wrong idea. Because then it actually matters that they don’t know anything about the game. 

So truly, insight of someone who doesn’t know yet how an element that looks ridiculous is explained in-universe (or even by the creators, in some additional material), is quite valuable, as it sheds light on potentially problematic things that lore-savvy fans and creators aren’t capable of noticing. 

Also please remember that parody/satire needs to keep their intent even more clear than stuff that plays the same tropes straight, otherwise Poe’s Law and “ironic” reproduction happens instead of insightful criticism.

image

“Hand me your geek card!”

We’re often accused by detractors of not having credentials to talk about (usually) a game we’re criticizing, because we supposedly never played it. 
Putting aside a fact that with three of us being huge nerds and pop media consumers, at least one would be somewhat familiar (unless the product is super obscure) – why would that be relevant? No matter if we know the title well or just superficially, our criticism of female visual representation is always the same.

In-depth familiarity of a story behind combat lingerie hasn’t yet once made us ashamed of our words and deeds. If anything, the more we know about any particular Thermian argument, the better we are at picking it apart.
So asking us to “do our homework” before we comment will make the commentary far more critical, not more lenient.

image

Whether or not we actually do comprehensive research for any particular piece of media depends on many factors, like: 

  • how influential versus obscure the media in question is
  • how interesting the excuses for skimpy female costumes in it are
  • if we’re already familiar with it beforehand
  • if there’s a Wiki for it
  • if a submitter provided some info
  • how much time we have at the moment

So while we try to at least look up everything we talk about, the amount of lore-heavy commentary (and its relative accuracy) varies from post to post.

Because, again, as we put it in our FAQ, this is not a full review blog, but one discussing character and costume design in the very specific context of in-story combat and meta-level sexism.
Finishing a game or knowing a TV/comic series full storyline isn’t necessary for us to point at a fictional lady who goes sword fighting in two pasties and a chainmail thong next to dudes in heavy plate armor and say this is an absurd image. It just is. 

~Ozzie 

Comic-only rebloggable post HERE

What do you think of the argument that women can be “sexy and badarse at the same time”

bikiniarmorbattledamage:

It all depends on the larger conversation and the overall motive behind the argument really.

If someone argues that say, women are complicated people and thus capable being many things and showcasing it as the situation requires – thus one may be still sexy when in full armor and badarse down to her bones.

image

If someone uses it as an attempt to silence criticism regarding character design by claiming that since the character is doing badarse things, having her always dressed in sexy lingerie makes it more impressive and empowering?

image

– wincenworks

This week’s throwback: a valid argument in favor of complex female characters that is easily warped into excuse for all the “weaponized feminity” of the Fighting F*cktoys/“strong” female characters in media. 

Again, character being sexy while fighting and/or in armor are not mutually exclusive (sexyness can be conveyed in many ways), but character and her armor being overtly sexualized while fighting is at best inherently silly and never really justifiable if played straight. Especially when the only kind of character this happens to is women.

~Ozzie

purplepuffle:

What do you think of the argument that women can be “sexy and badarse at the same time”

bikiniarmorbattledamage:

It all depends on the larger conversation and the overall motive behind the argument really.

If someone argues that say, women are complicated people and thus capable being many things and showcasing it as the situation requires – thus one may be still sexy when in full armor and badarse down to her bones.

image

If someone uses it as an attempt to silence criticism regarding character design by claiming that since the character is doing badarse things, having her always dressed in sexy lingerie makes it more impressive and empowering?

image

– wincenworks

This week’s throwback: a valid argument in favor of complex female characters that is easily warped into excuse for all the “weaponized feminity” of the Fighting F*cktoys/“strong” female characters in media. 

Again, character being sexy while fighting and/or in armor are not mutually exclusive (sexyness can be conveyed in many ways), but character and her armor being overtly sexualized while fighting is at best inherently silly and never really justifiable if played straight. Especially when the only kind of character this happens to is women.

~Ozzie

bikiniarmorbattledamage:

Let’s take a closer look at Sylvanas Windrunner, Queen of the Forsaken, as revealed in official Heroes of the Storm art. First though, to address one issue: 

mitulita​​ replied to your photo: “For the people who rushed to tell us we should never doubt Blizzard’s…”:

The Sylvanas design is not new, though. It has been exactly like this in World of Warcraft for years. They are just repeating an old mistake there…

Which still totally proves our point that Blizzard is NOT trying to improve. They had a perfect opportunity to update the design and did basically nothing.

While her official model for some reason wears a thong over nice pants, lots of popular Sylvanas fanart depicts her as pantless and Blizzard seem to be pretty okay with that.

~Ozzie

more Female Armor Bingos | more World of Warcraft | more Blizzard

Since Blizzard fandom still seems to think that “You shouldn’t criticize this outfit used in Heroes of the Storm, because it originates from another game!”, we thought it’s time to bring back this HotS Sylvanas bingo. Along with the commentary that just because something existed in an older franchise from the same company, it doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be redesigned and improved

Like… how does rhetoric make even the slightest bit of sense? 

Bad, sexist design is just that, no matter how well established it is.

If Quiet somehow reappeared in a future MGS game, still dressed in a handkerchief bikini and torn tights, would you really expect us to stop making Breathing Through Her Skin jokes?

~Ozzie

So besides the fact that Blizzard has redesigned a lot of their characters over the years, promising to improve on a problematic aspect of your game, and then blatantly recycling those same old aspects, that’s not improvement. That’s the kind of behavior that gets you ridiculed by us.

-Icy

It’s funny how when you have a female character who has magical or supernatural protection, and thus can “wear whatever she wants”, that “whatever” always turns out to be lingerie.

Glock H. Palin, Esq.

Yeah, funny that… It’s almost as if Thermian Argument and false assessment of agency had an ugly baby. And that baby kept turning up everywhere.

~Ozzie

10 Stupid Arguments People Use To Defend Comic Book Sexism

10 Stupid Arguments People Use To Defend Comic Book Sexism

bikiniarmorbattledamage:

An article from 2014 that is no less relevant today. Not surprisingly, all the arguments listed have their place on the Female Armor Rhetoric Bingo.

Here’s one of the summarizing paragraphs of the list which I find most important:

If people only “lose their minds” when the comics industry objectifies women or ignores its female audience, that’s because it’s not happening the other way around. Male readers are not being ignored, and female readers are not being pandered to at the cost of men’s dignity.

~Ozzie

more debunking of pro-sexualization rhetoric on BABD  

Given that there’s currently an issue with an editor at Marvel being harassed for existing posting a selfie with coworkers, it’s probably a good time to bring back this core point that there’s a demographic that’s definitely intent on trying to keep women (among others) out of the mediums like comics or games.

And on the topic of these despicable individuals blaming women (and diversity in general) for Marvel’s reduced sales, there’s also an a great thread by Kurt Busiek talking about how comic’s decline can be linked to the industry actively focusing on only the straight white cis male demographic.

– wincenworks

Every time I see someone say, “Who cares?” about either my own posts or those of other tumblrs on the subject of female representation in comics, I want to point out to them the over 5000 people who’ve subscribed to lesstitsnass (holy crap over 5000?!), the other thousands and thousands of people who follow eschergirls, all the other blogs that do redlines, The Hawkeye Initiative’s slew of participants, the multitudes of articles and comments on all the online magazines that discuss the subject, and say, “Them. They care. There’s a whole lot of them. So get your head out of your butt and try to see what they see.”

Karine at lesstitsnass (via lesstitsnass)

As we said before, there are so many levels of wrong with the “who cares?” argument against feminist criticism. And one of counter-arguments is, of course, the massive communities that form around such critique. 

Not to mention how people who ask “who cares?” usually care a whole lot, because facing differing opinions intimidates them – it’s just easier to dismiss someone else’s ideas:

image

As we’re on the subject, we’re definitely adding @lesstitsnass​ to our related sites, even though it’s been inactive for a couple of years.

~Ozzie

cheezbuckets:

lindira:

Fantasy does NOT have to follow real world rules. Fantasy does NOT have to relate to some real world event, country, concept, law, or history. Fantasy does NOT have to mirror any particular time period or country, even if you’re basing your world on a real world one. There is NO SUCH THING as “historical accuracy” in fantasy as it relates to the real world.

THE ONLY THING Fantasy has to do to be believable is follow the established rules OF ITS OWN WORLD. Fantasy can literally be anything you imagine it to be.

If your fantasy world excludes people of color or those belonging to the LGBT+ community, if it’s grossly misogynistic and white cis-male centric, that’s because YOU made it that way. Stop blaming “historical accuracy” or “believability”. It’s not the genre; it’s YOU.

@bikiniarmorbattledamage I believe this is highly relevant to the rhetoric you guys often combat.

image

Indeed all of this relates to all the stuff we talk about on BABD.

In the same vein, “that’s how this particular fantasy setting works” is just as bad excuse for gross in-story stuff as “that’s the way real world was once”

Ultimately, no matter the justifying rhetoric, it’s the creative decisions that will be under scrutiny, not some superficially “objective” rules regarding a fictional setting.

~Ozzie