Quote from: Gog to Magog on January 17, 2022, 04:06:57 AMNeither women nor men want to see Conan in 'peril' like Sonja is on that cover, however.

I used to collect the Conan comics and at least in the early issues more oft than not he was shown in a position of peril.







And many many more.

And speaking of Red Sonja. Here she is in a chainmail shirt. Cry your eyes out you prudes.
And god I miss the days when comics were 20c or 25c!

Quote from: Omega on January 17, 2022, 10:49:53 AM

Quote from: Gog to Magog on January 17, 2022, 04:06:57 AM

Quote from: jhkim on January 17, 2022, 04:01:44 AM
My point is ​that Red Sonja is more often portrayed like this:



And Conan isn't portrayed the same way in his covers. Specifically in the case of D&D, the original 1e DMG shows an adventurer in a metal bikini clutched in the arms of the giant efreet. There are very few other illustrations of women adventurers in the original books, and there are no corresponding pictures of beefcake men in such a position.

There's nothing wrong with sexiness. The issue is when sexiness is used as an excuse for women adventurers to be portrayed as victims.

And yet women do not desire to see men in weak positions but do identify and empathize with women in 'victim' positions while feeling greater sense of accomplishment when they recover from that

BTW, if you read classic Conan, he was victimized CONSTANTLY and put in shackles, stripped, etc. It was SUPER common to the point where it was a normal thing.

Neither women nor men want to see Conan in 'peril' like Sonja is on that cover, however.

Meanwhile, psychologically, largely speaking both men and women are fine with women being shown like that.

Crazy but it seems like men and women might have differently wired brains both for how they perceive things AND how they perceive the two sexes

I used to collect the Conan comics and at least in the early issues more oft than not he was shown in a position of peril.

To Omega -- Gog to Magog distinguishes that between being "victimized" versus being "in peril" (bolded above), saying that it's normal for Conan to be "victimized" but no one wants him "in peril". I dunno about the specific wording, but I agree that there is a clear visual difference. Even though Conan is threatened, he isn't illustrated in the same manner as the Red Sonja example. When Conan is in peril, he is illustrated as angrily fighting back - with a focus on his grimacing face or his reaching arms. When Red Sonja is "in peril" as in my example, she has a very different pose and focus and look compared to Conan.

To Gog to Magog --  You claim that both men and women prefer women to be shown more "in peril" and that it is hard-wired into their brains. However, I see major shifts in what is popular in American fantasy illustrations from the 1930s to the 1970s to today. It seems to me that chainmail bikini illustrations are much less popular today with either men or women than they were in the 1970s. I would agree that women have been instrumental in how illustrations work in the past - i.e. it was the culture of both men and women, not just something imposed on women by men. But I don't think it is purely hardwired. Majority taste doesn't mean that it's right either way, but in this case, the majority seem to no longer prefer those tropes - at least to the degree that they did in the 1970s.

Quote from: jhkim on January 17, 2022, 04:01:44 AM
My point is ​that Red Sonja is more often portrayed like this:



And Conan isn't portrayed the same way in his covers. Specifically in the case of D&D, the original 1e DMG shows an adventurer in a metal bikini clutched in the arms of the giant efreet. There are very few other illustrations of women adventurers in the original books, and there are no corresponding pictures of beefcake men in such a position.

There's nothing wrong with sexiness. The issue is when sexiness is used as an excuse for women adventurers to be portrayed as victims.

That's just a flat out fucking lie. Here are the first 15 covers from that run of Red Sonja:

https://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/red-sonja

Literally one (the one you cherry picked) has her in a traditional woman in peril pose. And if you actually look at the picture, you'll notice it's being subverted in that cover, because she's about to stab the flying demon thing with a knife. All the others show her in dynamic action poses. They're clearly sexualized, because she is showing a lot of skin and the poses don't shy away from highlighting her attributes, but if you think she's being portrayed as a victim that's you imposing your own views of women on the pictures.

/shrug

https://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/red-sonja

I dunno - this is pretty Conan<>Sonja in terms of depiction to me. That people actually project that 1) *Red Sonja* is a victim in depiction is highly debatable 2) that *Red Sonja* is an actual victim seems obtuse in the extreme. Anyone that knows Sonja and has read those comics knows she is a card carrying badass that literally could kill 95% of the men she runs into.

That she is "sexual" is a genre conceit of S&S. She is supposed to be super-attractive, that's part of the schtick - because she won't fuck anyone that can't beat her in a fight. Modern feminists should love her - they hate her because she's ACTUALLY feminine in appearance and doesn't deny it.

Edit: LOL beat me to it Pat! /shakes fist!

Quote from: Pat on January 17, 2022, 05:11:37 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 17, 2022, 04:01:44 AM
My point is ​that Red Sonja is more often portrayed like this:



And Conan isn't portrayed the same way in his covers. Specifically in the case of D&D, the original 1e DMG shows an adventurer in a metal bikini clutched in the arms of the giant efreet. There are very few other illustrations of women adventurers in the original books, and there are no corresponding pictures of beefcake men in such a position.

There's nothing wrong with sexiness. The issue is when sexiness is used as an excuse for women adventurers to be portrayed as victims.

That's just a flat out fucking lie. Here are the first 15 covers from that run of Red Sonja:

https://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/red-sonja

Literally one (the one you cherry picked) has her in a traditional woman in peril pose. And if you actually look at the picture, you'll notice it's being subverted in that cover, because she's about to stab the flying demon thing with a knife. All the others show her in dynamic action poses. They're clearly sexualized, because she is showing a lot of skin and the poses don't shy away from highlighting her attributes, but if you think she's being portrayed as a victim that's you imposing your own views of women on the pictures.

I never claimed that Red Sonja was always or typically portrayed this way. What I said is that she was portrayed this way more often than Conan was. You yourself claim that her poses "highlight her attributes" (bolded above). If she is posed looking like she is showing off her attributes, that pose looks less like a fighting hero and more like a supermodel. Taking some of the 14 images that you claim are opposite of the one I cherry-picked, I still see ones like:





Again, while Conan is often portrayed as being in danger, he doesn't look like he is posing this way. I have no problem with Red Sonja as a character, but broadly, outside of the single character of Red Sonja -- illustrations of women in fantasy have often been biased. I like women looking both powerful and sexy. For example, I'm a fan of the original Macho Women With Guns, and have run several one-shots of it. Here's my page on it with some game notes:

https://darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/machowomenwithguns/

Quote from: jhkim on January 17, 2022, 08:45:49 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 17, 2022, 05:11:37 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 17, 2022, 04:01:44 AM
My point is ​that Red Sonja is more often portrayed like this:



And Conan isn't portrayed the same way in his covers. Specifically in the case of D&D, the original 1e DMG shows an adventurer in a metal bikini clutched in the arms of the giant efreet. There are very few other illustrations of women adventurers in the original books, and there are no corresponding pictures of beefcake men in such a position.

There's nothing wrong with sexiness. The issue is when sexiness is used as an excuse for women adventurers to be portrayed as victims.

That's just a flat out fucking lie. Here are the first 15 covers from that run of Red Sonja:

https://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/red-sonja

Literally one (the one you cherry picked) has her in a traditional woman in peril pose. And if you actually look at the picture, you'll notice it's being subverted in that cover, because she's about to stab the flying demon thing with a knife. All the others show her in dynamic action poses. They're clearly sexualized, because she is showing a lot of skin and the poses don't shy away from highlighting her attributes, but if you think she's being portrayed as a victim that's you imposing your own views of women on the pictures.

I never claimed that Red Sonja was always or typically portrayed this way. What I said is that she was portrayed this way more often than Conan was. You yourself claim that her poses "highlight her attributes" (bolded above). If she is posed looking like she is showing off her attributes, that pose looks less like a fighting hero and more like a supermodel. Taking some of the 14 images that you claim are opposite of the one I cherry-picked, I still see ones like:





Again, while Conan is often portrayed as being in danger, he doesn't look like he is posing this way. I have no problem with Red Sonja as a character, but broadly, outside of the single character of Red Sonja -- illustrations of women in fantasy have often been biased. I like women looking both powerful and sexy. For example, I'm a fan of the original Macho Women With Guns, and have run several one-shots of it. Here's my page on it with some game notes:

https://darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/machowomenwithguns/

O RLY





From: https://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/conan-the-barbarian

Lots of highlighting his physical attributes. Lots of the typical man in peril poses.

Turns out it's just your sexism in play.

Quote from: tenbones on January 17, 2022, 05:13:12 PM
/shrug

https://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/red-sonja

I dunno - this is pretty Conan<>Sonja in terms of depiction to me. That people actually project that 1) *Red Sonja* is a victim in depiction is highly debatable 2) that *Red Sonja* is an actual victim seems obtuse in the extreme. Anyone that knows Sonja and has read those comics knows she is a card carrying badass that literally could kill 95% of the men she runs into.

That she is "sexual" is a genre conceit of S&S. She is supposed to be super-attractive, that's part of the schtick - because she won't fuck anyone that can't beat her in a fight. Modern feminists should love her - they hate her because she's ACTUALLY feminine in appearance and doesn't deny it.

Edit: LOL beat me to it Pat! /shakes fist!

That site must pop up easily in searches. But you phrased it well. The hero (she or he) in pulp fiction is frequently shown in dire straights, and the sword & sorcery visual motifs are heavily biased toward sexually attractive men and women with exaggerated characteristics, wearing very little. There are some differences in how the genders are portrayed -- men tend to be more ripply, and there are a hell of a lot more Conan covers featuring a (genuinely) helpless female than than are Red Sonja covers. But that's because the strong man protecting an attractive woman is an archetype. Red Sonja's archetype is more independent. But this idea that Red Sonja herself is portrayed as helpless more than Conan is simply not there in the pictures. The only place it exists in the minds of people with some serious pre-existing biases.

The thread title says that Wizards announces a new "Evolved" D&D revision.

The word evolved, denotes an improvement over what has come before.  Let me be the first to call BS, on that.  They want to destroy the past.  Destroy the roots of the game.  That sounds like de-evolution, or demolition, to me.

Quote from: Pat on January 17, 2022, 09:18:42 PM
But this idea that Red Sonja herself is portrayed as helpless more than Conan is simply not there in the pictures.

There are some 'heroine' characters who are frequently portrayed as helpless for purposes of titillation, but Red Sonja was a really bad example to pick!

Quote from: jhkim on January 17, 2022, 04:53:27 PMTo Omega -- Gog to Magog distinguishes that between being "victimized" versus being "in peril" (bolded above), saying that it's normal for Conan to be "victimized" but no one wants him "in peril". I dunno about the specific wording, but I agree that there is a clear visual difference. Even though Conan is threatened, he isn't illustrated in the same manner as the Red Sonja example. When Conan is in peril, he is illustrated as angrily fighting back - with a focus on his grimacing face or his reaching arms. When Red Sonja is "in peril" as in my example, she has a very different pose and focus and look compared to Conan.

Yes exactly. Thank you for that Exactly right.

QuoteTo Gog to Magog --  You claim that both men and women prefer women to be shown more "in peril" and that it is hard-wired into their brains. However, I see major shifts in what is popular in American fantasy illustrations from the 1930s to the 1970s to today.

Not monolithic in that preference, but generally speaking yes. That is brain-wiring. What is 'popular' is entirely manufactured in many ways nowadays. Hollywood just released a "GO GIRL!" super uber awesome bad ass woman spy movie about how they're the REAL cool ass-kickers and the men need their help...

It utterly bombed.

Is it "popular" because Hollywood put millions of dollars into it and released it into the zeitgeist? Or is its utter failure proof of my contention?

Rey is fairly reviled as a main character but Kylo Ren is shipped HEAVILY with her because of (surprise surprise) the threat & peril he presents to Rey including intruding on her mind. The "bad boy" that imperils the heroine is FAR MORE popular than the heroine in her own story. Hilarious.

Loki was arguably the most popular male character with female viewers of the MCU...and yet there's been A LOT of negativity around the Loki series from women because Loki is portrayed as constantly emasculated, in peril and in need of help from strong-female-Loki that women seem to dislike. Quite literally every woman I know that is into the MCU has stated outright disdain for the Loki show exactly because of how it reverses Loki into a 'weak' male. Of course, prior to this Loki was a perpetual loser in the MCU that got his ass handed to him...but he sneered and took it with gusto, always ready to fight back. As soon as the Loki show made him a sniveling crybaby begging for forgiveness and fawning over a woman, women seem to have really turned against him.

"Pop-culture" and "popular" can seem VERY similar...but are quite different.

QuoteIt seems to me that chainmail bikini illustrations are much less popular today with either men or women than they were in the 1970s. I would agree that women have been instrumental in how illustrations work in the past - i.e. it was the culture of both men and women, not just something imposed on women by men. But I don't think it is purely hardwired. Majority taste doesn't mean that it's right either way, but in this case, the majority seem to no longer prefer those tropes - at least to the degree that they did in the 1970s.

Or a bunch of these things have been hijacked by ideologues that have made certain portrayals verboten and it is actually doing damage to those brands.

If that were true though we'd see big profit loses in media where this has taken place overtly and openly...

Like comic books
And Star Wars

...hmm

Yet when I look over at romance novels and magazines made for women and by women...

No change.

Fancy that.

Yeah I'm going to keep thinking that human nature developed over millions of years of evolution hasn't changed in the last couple decades and that, instead, a bunch of niche fandoms and hobbies that were vulnerable due to little social power and respect have instead been hijacked by people that act in every way identically to cultists

I don't think anyone would argue that an ideological minority with some amount of power can attempt to suppress popular preferences in the name of "progress".

With varying degrees of success... 

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 18, 2022, 02:00:30 AM
I don't think anyone would argue that an ideological minority with some amount of power can attempt to suppress popular preferences in the name of "progress".

With varying degrees of success... 

Well the thing that really irks me is how much of the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. It taints ALL the efforts with ideology and makes people knee-jerk WAY too fast against ANY kind of change that comes in official works while also sometimes making people WAY too quick to embrace anything that comes from a neutral or opposite direction.

The nuance of quality of changes gets lost

Quote from: Gog to Magog on January 18, 2022, 05:03:40 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 18, 2022, 02:00:30 AM
I don't think anyone would argue that an ideological minority with some amount of power can attempt to suppress popular preferences in the name of "progress".

With varying degrees of success... 

Well the thing that really irks me is how much of the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. It taints ALL the efforts with ideology and makes people knee-jerk WAY too fast against ANY kind of change that comes in official works while also sometimes making people WAY too quick to embrace anything that comes from a neutral or opposite direction.

The nuance of quality of changes gets lost

Agree with that. There are certainly differences in the way men and women have been portrayed in art and sword & sorcery, for instance. Those differences have been discussed for decades, but these days it's very hard to talk about them because of the a priori assumption that everything in the past was horrible and sexist (or racist) and no positive examples exist, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. What it amounts to is the erasure of the entire history of progress (real progress, not progressivism) and its replacement with the idea that the only steps forward have been made in the last 5 minutes, by the latest pundit of outrage. Conversely, the people reacting against the new brigade of hate and historical denial sometimes reflexively defend things they like from legitimate criticism, because it can be hard to distinguish a few grains of wheat from a cultural mountain of chaff.

Quote from: Jam The MF on January 17, 2022, 10:53:19 PM
The thread title says that Wizards announces a new "Evolved" D&D revision.

The word evolved, denotes an improvement over what has come before.  Let me be the first to call BS, on that.  They want to destroy the past.  Destroy the roots of the game.  That sounds like de-evolution, or demolition, to me.

That is because it is really just a typo.

They meant it will be DEvolved D&D. 

Quote from: jhkim on January 17, 2022, 04:53:27 PM
...
I would agree that women have been instrumental in how illustrations work in the past - i.e. it was the culture of both men and women,  not just something imposed on women by men. But I don't think it is purely hardwired. Majority taste doesn't mean that it's right either way, but in this case, the majority seem to no longer prefer those tropes - at least to the degree that they did in the 1970s.

Except that is simply not true at all.

In the case of comics or RPG's it is Just a small subset of "women", who got into positions where they could shame-scold companies from serving their customers and into reducing the amount of what they perceive as "problematic" art.

But when you actually look at what mainstream women still buy...

If I posted some of the European or Asian covers of Elle or Vouge fashion magazines; I would violate the forum policies against nudity.

And these are fashion magazine's made by women, for women; competing with each other for mainstream women's readership.

For kicks you can go to the romance novel section of your local B&N bookstore, and start reading the back cover blurbs: Lots of ladies in peril being saved by masculine bad-boys... 

Still?

Still.

"The majority" of women in places where the wokeoso's have not gotten strong footholds somehow still seem to want the same things that they did 60 years ago...

Funny that.