Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Bikini Witch thread, season 2: Because why the fuck not

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Bikini Witch thread, season 2: Because why the fuck not

    This is a place for bikini witches. You like bikini witches? You don't like bikini witches? You don't know what a bikini witch is? Right here.

  • silverwinglie
    replied
    Originally posted by amechra View Post
    It seems we have forgotten about this.

    (snip)

    I will drop it off.
    Well hey now, if you're gonna post that, at least post the "after" image of when it was demanded that I, quote, "embiggen his higgens"!

    Leave a comment:


  • Isator Levi
    replied
    Originally posted by Fansibubbles View Post
    One of the points I often see overlooked is....

    Well this shit isn't exactly universally sexy is it? Hyper-Sexualised pictures of women in impractical revealing Armour is pretty much the industry standard and it's just kind of juvenile and played out. I mean I'm not going to deny people find it hot, because they clearly do, but it's not something we're short on.

    'Sexy' isn't restricted to impossibly curvy women showing off their tits and even if it was, I've seen it done a lot better elsewhere and unless you really go for it it's just going to look boilerplate.

    You can be sexy without a boob window or turning all leather Armour into corsets. In fact nothing ruins a good looking outfit for me more than something as fucking stupid as that.
    Yes, for my part I find a lot of that kind of cheesecake ultimately off-putting either because it comes across as trying too hard or aiming for doing it ironically, and neither actually seems conductive to being genuinely arousing and is otherwise puerile.

    Like, I've seen forms of those kinds of pictures that I have actually found sexy, so it's not as if the composition is incapable of doing anything for me. Whether it's a context in which I care to find something sexy is a separate, but related issue.

    But so much of stuff that seems like it's trying to be sexy (really, really trying) just seems so artless and incompetent, so all it manages to do is create something both offensive and off-putting for no gain whatsoever.

    It's the definition of gratuitous.

    (This is on top of the fact that I would really like a greater variety in presentations for body types, not even just for political purposes; there are just so many forms that a sexy person can take, and it's a pity and a waste to neglect so much of it)

    Leave a comment:


  • Inqy
    replied
    Originally posted by Fansibubbles View Post
    One of the points I often see overlooked is....

    Well this shit isn't exactly universally sexy is it? Hyper-Sexualised pictures of women in impractical revealing Armour is pretty much the industry standard and it's just kind of juvenile and played out. I mean I'm not going to deny people find it hot, because they clearly do, but it's not something we're short on.

    'Sexy' isn't restricted to impossibly curvy women showing off their tits and even if it was, I've seen it done a lot better elsewhere and unless you really go for it it's just going to look boilerplate.

    You can be sexy without a boob window or turning all leather Armour into corsets. In fact nothing ruins a good looking outfit for me more than something as fucking stupid as that.
    Is it wrong that the first alternative from past Exalted art I thought of was Ross Campell's particular style of bald women? (and occasionally men too) Probably.

    Leave a comment:


  • Weimann
    replied
    Originally posted by Fansibubbles View Post
    One of the points I often see overlooked is....

    Well this shit isn't exactly universally sexy is it? Hyper-Sexualised pictures of women in impractical revealing Armour is pretty much the industry standard and it's just kind of juvenile and played out. I mean I'm not going to deny people find it hot, because they clearly do, but it's not something we're short on.

    'Sexy' isn't restricted to impossibly curvy women showing off their tits and even if it was, I've seen it done a lot better elsewhere and unless you really go for it it's just going to look boilerplate.

    You can be sexy without a boob window or turning all leather Armour into corsets. In fact nothing ruins a good looking outfit for me more than something as fucking stupid as that.
    Yeah, exactly! This is my point in its entirety. The problem with the images of women today isn't strictly that they're sexy; everyone wants their books to contain attractive people, more people will buy it then. The problem is that female attractiveness is described in such a narrow way, leaving no room for more nuanced types. I agree 100%, as I hope my previous posts will show. If they don't, please call me out on it.

    Leave a comment:


  • hippokrene
    replied
    Originally posted by MrInsecure View Post
    Well, I don't agree with his presentation, but the sentiment more or less stands: someone being nude doesn't necessarily connote a sexual or objectified message. It is how that nudity is presented that is a problem. I don't really think this has been in contest through the thread, has it?
    The post before mine is a discussion about whether or not a work is problematic simply because there's female nudity.

    I was agreeing with Isator and Zironic.

    Even if I were making the comment apropos of nothing, it still fits within the topic of the thread. I'm not seeing a problem with saying that female nudity isn't inherently problematic. I think popular arts, in general, would benefit from more non-sexual nudity.
    Last edited by hippokrene; 11-20-2013, 06:35 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fansibubbles
    replied
    One of the points I often see overlooked is....

    Well this shit isn't exactly universally sexy is it? Hyper-Sexualised pictures of women in impractical revealing Armour is pretty much the industry standard and it's just kind of juvenile and played out. I mean I'm not going to deny people find it hot, because they clearly do, but it's not something we're short on.

    'Sexy' isn't restricted to impossibly curvy women showing off their tits and even if it was, I've seen it done a lot better elsewhere and unless you really go for it it's just going to look boilerplate.

    You can be sexy without a boob window or turning all leather Armour into corsets. In fact nothing ruins a good looking outfit for me more than something as fucking stupid as that.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrInsecure
    replied
    Originally posted by hippokrene View Post
    I am unshocked that someone's mind went immediately from 'female nudity' to 'blow me.'
    Well, I don't agree with his presentation, but the sentiment more or less stands: someone being nude doesn't necessarily connote a sexual or objectified message. It is how that nudity is presented that is a problem. I don't really think this has been in contest through the thread, has it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Inqy
    replied
    Originally posted by The MG View Post
    The key is to know to let her run free and when to stop her. First and foremost, she should be stopped when she decides to oversex something that has no business being sexy, which she does almost every chance she gets.

    Also, when she decides that Ligier has four arms, which he does not.
    Honestly, I kind of want Exalted to keep being sexy, nay, even oversexed. Try to remove or minimise outright cheesecake sure, but at the end of the day it's still fun to try and get the feel of schlocky gonzo feel of loincloth/bikini/sandals sword & sorcery if we can tone down the sexism. Basically as long as you can calibrate the majority reaction to *roll eyes* rather than "I feel cheapened as a human being." I think it'll be about right. Dorky sure, but it's a matter of feel I guess.

    Can't say I feel too bad about Ligier having a four-armed form either. I mean I get that symmetry for the sake of symmetry is meh, but the idea that Ligier retains at least one form mimicking the Sun isn't exactly outlandish.

    Edit: Heh. Interesting that whoever grognarded me chose to omit the bits that made my post a response to Kiyo's sexualisation of Ligier. To be fair it's perfectly possible to continue to argue I was in bad taste, but I do resent the implication in the presentation that it was the sexualisation of women alone that prompted this post.
    Last edited by Inqy; 11-21-2013, 09:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • hippokrene
    replied
    Originally posted by SuperG View Post

    ...and the lettes B, L, O, W, M and E are not, in and of themselves, objectionable, but context tends to make it so.
    I am unshocked that someone's mind went immediately from 'female nudity' to 'blow me.'
    Last edited by hippokrene; 11-19-2013, 08:19 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • SuperG
    replied
    Originally posted by hippokrene View Post
    Female nudity is not, in and of itself, problematic because the female body is not, in and of itself, objectionable.
    ...and the lettes B, L, O, W, M and E are not, in and of themselves, objectionable, but context tends to make it so.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fansibubbles
    replied
    Yeah this hobby is really alienating to guys, I wish RPG's would stop pandering to young women so fucking much.

    Leave a comment:


  • hippokrene
    replied
    Female nudity is not, in and of itself, problematic because the female body is not, in and of itself, objectionable.

    Leave a comment:


  • Isator Levi
    replied
    Originally posted by Zironic View Post
    Originally posted by Thrayem
    MILDLY NSFW: http://imgur.com/mo35x9z

    I'd say this is most likely a problematic art piece, in that there's some female nudity depicted. With that said, I'd be very worried about who gets off to this sort of thing. To me, at least, it's not played to titillate. I'd be very worried about who it does titillate :/
    Actually the way most people in this thread looks at things, that picture isn't problematic because... I was about to type that she isn't twisted into some strange pose just to look sexier, but then I noticed she is twisted into a strange pose. The way she has her left leg forward while still having her torso twisted towards the screen is very unnatural.
    It kind of reminds me of a Greek statue.

    I get kind of an impression of her crawling in on herself.

    Though I can't imagine exactly why somebody would be naked while messing around with an Exaltation core.

    Originally posted by Zironic
    Originally posted by Thrayem
    http://imgur.com/R5wp32H

    I actually really like this art piece. The woman depicted is attractive, but she's also eviscerated a bunch of people. I could just as easily see a person of the opposite gender and in a similar state of dress (bared midriff) in that pose and not look ridiculous either.
    Meanwhile that artpiece is the sort of art that people are objecting to because she's standing there as if posing for the camera while having a very vacant expression on her face.
    I see her expression as that kind of upturned cat grin kind of thing, and her stance as a kind of languid "yep, I've just done something mildly tiring".

    I always got a strong impression of "I'm really casual around ultraviolence" which I think is suitable for an Abyssal.

    Leave a comment:


  • haren
    replied
    Just to help people out, Isator Levi, here is http://kiyo.deviantart.com/gallery/25820043 the gallery of Kiyo's Changeling pieces with work that to be SAFE might be considered NSFW. Honestly, I had forgotten that Kiyo did those, but I remembered them well for being tasteful AND sexy.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X