Guild Wars 2

Kit.3986:

A lot of things

I’m going to (sort of) agree to disagree. I feel that a lot of options you’re giving are a tad too feminine.
It seems that for men sexiness there’s 2 or more different kinds (as if things weren’t already complicated with that) : sexy to be appealing for men, for women or for both. But hey, more options is better !

Except, butt jiggle…If my guardian’s butt jiggles as much as my necromancer breasts when wearing certain tops, I won’t be able to watch him run seriously.

As for corsets, there are two main types for men : mostly a woman corset on a men, or what I really call men corsets. While women corsets aim to give an hourglass shape (small waist, bigger breasts), men corsets aim to give a more muscular look by giving the torso a more define V shape, larger shoulders and a flat stomach.

Maliel.8362:

What i really would like to know is how many of the voters are actually women.

I honestly don’t see why it matters. There are many woman who like dressing their characters “skimpy” and many men who prefer more “practical” looks.

Celestina.2894:

Maliel.8362:

What i really would like to know is how many of the voters are actually women.

I honestly don’t see why it matters. There are many woman who like dressing their characters “skimpy” and many men who prefer more “practical” looks.

Agreed. And there are men who want to see more sexy and less-dressed men too!

I do wonder though if women who wanted to have more clothing options for female avatars would use the word “skimpy” or would prefer something else. I’ve seen “revealing” and “elegant” used, for example. I feel like “skimpy” carries some weird connotations.

Zalyn.9534:

Celestina.2894:

Maliel.8362:

What i really would like to know is how many of the voters are actually women.

I honestly don’t see why it matters. There are many woman who like dressing their characters “skimpy” and many men who prefer more “practical” looks.

Agreed. And there are men who want to see more sexy and less-dressed men too!

I do wonder though if women who wanted to have more clothing options for female avatars would use the word “skimpy” or would prefer something else. I’ve seen “revealing” and “elegant” used, for example. I feel like “skimpy” carries some weird connotations.

Yeah. I don’t like the word skimpy. Sensual? Lol. I don’t know maybe revealing works.

I just want different armors. Everything just seems so contrived at the moment. I would have loved zodiac had they made It less blue. I just want something unique. There’s a thread in fan Gen where a person designed a water armor. She/he made the male version similar enough to the female that I was somewhat blown away. I wish we could get stuff like that.

For reference https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/fangen/Tidal-Armor-Light-Medium-and-Heavy/first#post3982907

Chadramar.8156:

My problem isn’t just the ones that are show a lot of skin. Just barely hiding something or mostly covering it but drawing attention to it via frills or fishnets or boob windows or whatever also plays a part in objectification/sexualization. Plus, there’s the frequently huge difference in theme and design, especially with light armor. Men get the default, the original theme. Women get something that screams “LOOK A FEMALE!” which may end up looking very different or even nothing like the cool original male design.

What’s “offensive” to me, incidentally, is not that sexualized outfits exist or that people use them or how popular they are. It’s the difference in treatment of the genders and the excuses made for it. I’d like people to try to understand how the neverending barrage of female sexualization and the glaring lack of diversity and choice can affect women and society’s opinion and treatment of women — and I’d especially like to make that request from those guys who feel uncomfortable or flat-out revolted by rare cases of actual make sexualization (not muscled power fantasies).

This may kitten you off, but i think the problem with this type of thinking is that its all a matter of perspective. By trying to fight sexualization, you further cement it. You have decided that frills, and highlighting boobs is sexualization. Its really not. A culture can fully cloth and cover women, and then that will become sexualization within that culture. They will talk about the way her clothes hides every bit of her natural form, and accentuates her sexiest features in the face and the eyes. They will say it is masculine to wear nothing, or frills. or whatever. Also male light armor also blatantly screams I AM A MAN.

as far as male sexualization that is in your mind as well. Why is a man being half naked a muscle powered fantasy and a woman being half naked sexualization? its in your own mind. Its not objective. before you can free society from its problems, you first would have to free yourself.

Also you have to ask your self, is sexualization even wrong?

phys.7689:

essentially your biggest opponent right now, is probably not the players, but the bottom line(money aka what sells) Second opponent is the dispositions of the actual designers, even if they tried to make something you like, it may not hit home. I dont think most peoples fashion senses will ever be satisfied until some game formalizes player generated gears. Of course, if that did happen there would be a lot of bad points, as well the good points.

The trouble is that marketing is drowning in sexist ‘facts’ about what does and doesn’t sell. There are publishers out there who still actively rail against female game protagonists because when a game that happens to be female-led doesn’t do as well as expected, that is suddenly evidence that the whole gender is a write-off. This is the kind of marketing “fact” that dictates decisions like not providing male eye candy even if female eye candy is an acceptable thing. Don’t want to make that equally mythical completely straight-male userbase uncomfortable or anything!

I can’t honestly see what we can do better to combat this than to shout out what we want to see, pointing suggestively at our open purses. There is demand for this stuff. Some beautiful posts (and example images hurr) in this thread on the topic, too <3 I’m gonna run out of +1s at this rate. It’s . . . really heartening to see, I can’t lie. The only thing that would make me feel more cheerful about it would be an Anet response.

Zalyn.9534:

phys.7689:

The thing is anet wants to make designs that sell well, and they dont want to make designs that dont. based on their current metrics and expectations, they believe certain things will sell better for male charachters and certain for female charachters. They dont want to do what they see as a waste, and make a phalanx armor that looks the same as male, if people wont buy it. So they create a different looking armor, and give it the same name.

essentially your biggest opponent right now, is probably not the players, but the bottom line(money aka what sells) Second opponent is the dispositions of the actual designers, even if they tried to make something you like, it may not hit home. I dont think most peoples fashion senses will ever be satisfied until some game formalizes player generated gears. Of course, if that did happen there would be a lot of bad points, as well the good points.

Proof, please? When GW2 was in development, ANet made a big deal about how they wanted to give options for everyone and even showcased how there would be covered and skimpy options for male and female avatars. So if you’re going to make claims about ANet’s intentions and financial priorities, would you please give an article?

Part of the problem is that if options are never offered, then there is no way to determine whether people would like them or now. So for the sake of free market values, shouldn’t we have options put out there so that the players can decide and show their support for what they like? It’s likely that new options for revenue will come out of it, so it makes business sense.

anet is pretty stingy with armor, so they are probably going off expectation, and which armors are most popular in game. Some of this may not have to just do with skimpyness, it could be that human female teir 3 just looks better than their alternatives, however they think it does.

I am very certain that if anet thought an item was going to sell well, they would make it. I would applaud more options, but realistically we probably wont get that many different/unique armors, most of them will be model reworks and reskins.

Lilith Ajit.6173:

I just want different armors. Everything just seems so contrived at the moment. I would have loved zodiac had they made It less blue. I just want something unique. There’s a thread in fan Gen where a person designed a water armor. She/he made the male version similar enough to the female that I was somewhat blown away. I wish we could get stuff like that.

For reference https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/fangen/Tidal-Armor-Light-Medium-and-Heavy/first#post3982907

Oh wow! Those are really cool! And it makes sense, thematically, for those to be more revealing – the chest piece on the first woman is evocative of both mermaid “shell-bras” and sea foam clinging after one walks out of the ocean. Beautiful coloration too!

Lilith Ajit.6173:

Zalyn.9534:

Celestina.2894:

Maliel.8362:

What i really would like to know is how many of the voters are actually women.

I honestly don’t see why it matters. There are many woman who like dressing their characters “skimpy” and many men who prefer more “practical” looks.

Agreed. And there are men who want to see more sexy and less-dressed men too!

I do wonder though if women who wanted to have more clothing options for female avatars would use the word “skimpy” or would prefer something else. I’ve seen “revealing” and “elegant” used, for example. I feel like “skimpy” carries some weird connotations.

Yeah. I don’t like the word skimpy. Sensual? Lol. I don’t know maybe revealing works.

I just want different armors. Everything just seems so contrived at the moment. I would have loved zodiac had they made It less blue. I just want something unique. There’s a thread in fan Gen where a person designed a water armor. She/he made the male version similar enough to the female that I was somewhat blown away. I wish we could get stuff like that.

For reference https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/fangen/Tidal-Armor-Light-Medium-and-Heavy/first#post3982907

i wish a game could have more fan generated designs

that said, i personally find the male one to be ehhh, but to each their own.

Zalyn.9534:

Lilith Ajit.6173:

I just want different armors. Everything just seems so contrived at the moment. I would have loved zodiac had they made It less blue. I just want something unique. There’s a thread in fan Gen where a person designed a water armor. She/he made the male version similar enough to the female that I was somewhat blown away. I wish we could get stuff like that.

For reference https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/fangen/Tidal-Armor-Light-Medium-and-Heavy/first#post3982907

Oh wow! Those are really cool! And it makes sense, thematically, for those to be more revealing – the chest piece on the first woman is evocative of both mermaid “shell-bras” and sea foam clinging after one walks out of the ocean. Beautiful coloration too!

Yeah! I also liked the medium female coat, but the side hangy thing might be too close to human t3 they might have a fit again. Lol.

I want more options with the amount of skimpy we have now. People say there are plenty of skimpy armor options for women, especially among light armor designs, but have you ever tried to feature your Sylvari’s bioluminescence?

The Sylvari glow, which is a wonderful element of their design, is found on their arms, legs, and back. Now go try on some of the “skimpy armor”. You’ll find that ArenaNet’s designers seem to have a thing for exposing the midriff, where there is no bioluminescence, while covering the arms with long gloves and sleeves, the legs with skirts and long boots. Even on the midriff-exposing designs, there is often material across the back, leaving only the stomach exposed.

As for my male Sylvari, there are two heavy, gladiator-style designs that expose the back, and only a couple of heavy designs that show any leg, and it’s a very small amount. Male light armor has one torso-revealing design, but just like the female designs, it exposes the front, while completely covering the back.

Faowri.4159:

phys.7689:

essentially your biggest opponent right now, is probably not the players, but the bottom line(money aka what sells) Second opponent is the dispositions of the actual designers, even if they tried to make something you like, it may not hit home. I dont think most peoples fashion senses will ever be satisfied until some game formalizes player generated gears. Of course, if that did happen there would be a lot of bad points, as well the good points.

The trouble is that marketing is drowning in sexist ‘facts’ about what does and doesn’t sell. There are publishers out there who still actively rail against female game protagonists because when a game that happens to be female-led doesn’t do as well as expected, that is suddenly evidence that the whole gender is a write-off. This is the kind of marketing “fact” that dictates decisions like not providing male eye candy even if female eye candy is an acceptable thing. Don’t want to make that equally mythical completely straight-male userbase uncomfortable or anything!

I can’t honestly see what we can do better to combat this than to shout out what we want to see, pointing suggestively at our open purses. There is demand for this stuff. Some beautiful posts (and example images hurr) in this thread on the topic, too <3 I’m gonna run out of +1s at this rate. It’s . . . really heartening to see, I can’t lie. The only thing that would make me feel more cheerful about it would be an Anet response.

Ask anet to add 2 toggle options:

1) to graphic display: show practical armor onlyWhoever is revealing around you, you got your censor, and all you see is fully covered armor.

2) allow an option in character creation: new gender option, female face with man body structure, and can only wear male armor

When the above 2 toggle is added, most of your problem is solved.

No more skimpy female running around, a female can wear male armor

phys.7689:

Lilith Ajit.6173:

Zalyn.9534:

Celestina.2894:

Maliel.8362:

What i really would like to know is how many of the voters are actually women.

I honestly don’t see why it matters. There are many woman who like dressing their characters “skimpy” and many men who prefer more “practical” looks.

Agreed. And there are men who want to see more sexy and less-dressed men too!

I do wonder though if women who wanted to have more clothing options for female avatars would use the word “skimpy” or would prefer something else. I’ve seen “revealing” and “elegant” used, for example. I feel like “skimpy” carries some weird connotations.

Yeah. I don’t like the word skimpy. Sensual? Lol. I don’t know maybe revealing works.

I just want different armors. Everything just seems so contrived at the moment. I would have loved zodiac had they made It less blue. I just want something unique. There’s a thread in fan Gen where a person designed a water armor. She/he made the male version similar enough to the female that I was somewhat blown away. I wish we could get stuff like that.

For reference https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/fangen/Tidal-Armor-Light-Medium-and-Heavy/first#post3982907

i wish a game could have more fan generated designs

that said, i personally find the male one to be ehhh, but to each their own.

For all of the armor weights?

I just liked the concept and how the styles are so similar for both genders. Open chests and that sort of thing.

Faowri.4159:

phys.7689:

essentially your biggest opponent right now, is probably not the players, but the bottom line(money aka what sells) Second opponent is the dispositions of the actual designers, even if they tried to make something you like, it may not hit home. I dont think most peoples fashion senses will ever be satisfied until some game formalizes player generated gears. Of course, if that did happen there would be a lot of bad points, as well the good points.

The trouble is that marketing is drowning in sexist ‘facts’ about what does and doesn’t sell. There are publishers out there who still actively rail against female game protagonists because when a game that happens to be female-led doesn’t do as well as expected, that is suddenly evidence that the whole gender is a write-off. This is the kind of marketing “fact” that dictates decisions like not providing male eye candy even if female eye candy is an acceptable thing. Don’t want to make that equally mythical completely straight-male userbase uncomfortable or anything!

I can’t honestly see what we can do better to combat this than to shout out what we want to see, pointing suggestively at our open purses. There is demand for this stuff. Some beautiful posts (and example images hurr) in this thread on the topic, too <3 I’m gonna run out of +1s at this rate. It’s . . . really heartening to see, I can’t lie. The only thing that would make me feel more cheerful about it would be an Anet response.

well i think you should shout out things, but i dont think shouting that this armor shouldnt exist is the best bet, the best bet is shouting out what armor should exist. And even better bet, is probably shouting for more variety and more unique armor designs.
However unique is pretty costly, its a lot cheaper to work with clothes that already have similar models/geometry.

Lilith Ajit.6173:

phys.7689:

Lilith Ajit.6173:

Zalyn.9534:

Celestina.2894:

Maliel.8362:

What i really would like to know is how many of the voters are actually women.

I honestly don’t see why it matters. There are many woman who like dressing their characters “skimpy” and many men who prefer more “practical” looks.

Agreed. And there are men who want to see more sexy and less-dressed men too!

I do wonder though if women who wanted to have more clothing options for female avatars would use the word “skimpy” or would prefer something else. I’ve seen “revealing” and “elegant” used, for example. I feel like “skimpy” carries some weird connotations.

Yeah. I don’t like the word skimpy. Sensual? Lol. I don’t know maybe revealing works.

I just want different armors. Everything just seems so contrived at the moment. I would have loved zodiac had they made It less blue. I just want something unique. There’s a thread in fan Gen where a person designed a water armor. She/he made the male version similar enough to the female that I was somewhat blown away. I wish we could get stuff like that.

For reference https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/fangen/Tidal-Armor-Light-Medium-and-Heavy/first#post3982907

i wish a game could have more fan generated designs

that said, i personally find the male one to be ehhh, but to each their own.

For all of the armor weights?

I just liked the concept and how the styles are so similar for both genders. Open chests and that sort of thing.

ah i didnt see the heavy male, id prefer no chest to the one she has, but its ok. Anyhow even if i dont like it doesnt mean they shouldnt stuff like it, just pointing out what i wouldnt wear.

phys.7689:

This may kitten you off, but i think the problem with this type of thinking is that its all a matter of perspective. By trying to fight sexualization, you further cement it. You have decided that frills, and highlighting boobs is sexualization. Its really not. A culture can fully cloth and cover women, and then that will become sexualization within that culture. They will talk about the way her clothes hides every bit of her natural form, and accentuates her sexiest features in the face and the eyes. They will say it is masculine to wear nothing, or frills. or whatever. Also male light armor also blatantly screams I AM A MAN.

as far as male sexualization that is in your mind as well. Why is a man being half naked a muscle powered fantasy and a woman being half naked sexualization? its in your own mind. Its not objective. before you can free society from its problems, you first would have to free yourself.

Also you have to ask your self, is sexualization even wrong?

I find this language a bit offensive – there are so many universals thrown out in this discussion about what is sexy and what isn’t, but when someone presents a different perspective (that is not isolated), you accuse it of all being “in their head.” I’m sure you didn’t intend it, but that type of language has been used a great deal in the past to demean what people, often women, said because they were perceived as stupid, overly emotional, or just not in touch with reality.

Many of the universal claims in this thread from the “majority opinion” also are “in their heads” but rather than argue that, many are just asking for more options across the spectrum without demeaning those who want to look at boobs or female thighs.

Gibson.4036:

I want more options with the amount of skimpy we have now. People say there are plenty of skimpy armor options for women, especially among light armor designs, but have you ever tried to feature your Sylvari’s bioluminescence?

The Sylvari glow, which is a wonderful element of their design, is found on their arms, legs, and back. Now go try on some of the “skimpy armor”. You’ll find that ArenaNet’s designers seem to have a thing for exposing the midriff, where there is no bioluminescence, while covering the arms with long gloves and sleeves, the legs with skirts and long boots. Even on the midriff-exposing designs, there is often material across the back, leaving only the stomach exposed.

As for my male Sylvari, there are two heavy, gladiator-style designs that expose the back, and only a couple of heavy designs that show any leg, and it’s a very small amount. Male light armor has one torso-revealing design, but just like the female designs, it exposes the front, while completely covering the back.

This is a good example of how revealing gear absolutely makes sense, and that it should be designed in a way that showcases cool features like the Sylvari bioluminescence – and who knows, maybe in Sylvari culture, forearms are super-sexy?

Zalyn.9534:

phys.7689:

This may kitten you off, but i think the problem with this type of thinking is that its all a matter of perspective. By trying to fight sexualization, you further cement it. You have decided that frills, and highlighting boobs is sexualization. Its really not. A culture can fully cloth and cover women, and then that will become sexualization within that culture. They will talk about the way her clothes hides every bit of her natural form, and accentuates her sexiest features in the face and the eyes. They will say it is masculine to wear nothing, or frills. or whatever. Also male light armor also blatantly screams I AM A MAN.

as far as male sexualization that is in your mind as well. Why is a man being half naked a muscle powered fantasy and a woman being half naked sexualization? its in your own mind. Its not objective. before you can free society from its problems, you first would have to free yourself.

Also you have to ask your self, is sexualization even wrong?

I find this language a bit offensive – there are so many universals thrown out in this discussion about what is sexy and what isn’t, but when someone presents a different perspective (that is not isolated), you accuse it of all being “in their head.” I’m sure you didn’t intend it, but that type of language has been used a great deal in the past to demean what people, often women, said because they were perceived as stupid, overly emotional, or just not in touch with reality.

Many of the universal claims in this thread from the “majority opinion” also are “in their heads” but rather than argue that, many are just asking for more options across the spectrum without demeaning those who want to look at boobs or female thighs.

All in your head isnt dismissive. The things that are in your head are the hardest to deal with. I also agree that many peoples other idea are in their head. But that poster is trying to fight a battle of ideas, of freedom, and equality. However, the poster is less tolerant than many of the people they are fighting against. Many people who want “sexy” armor arent against non sexy armor existing, or putting labels or negativity on people who arent following their style choices. If a player wants to wear boob tkitteno be it (male or female) if they want to wear an all consuming cloak, so be it. But i dont see the benefit of villifying an appearance.

phys.7689:

well i think you should shout out things, but i dont think shouting that this armor shouldnt exist is the best bet, the best bet is shouting out what armor should exist.

That’s exactly what I do. I’ve never, ever asked for armour to be removed from the game. I’ve never, ever said “don’t make this armour available to people anymore because I personally don’t like it”. Even my sig thread just says “If the female/male versions are so different they don’t look alike, turn it into two sets instead of one gender-imbalanced one”.

My stance is this: I respect people’s preferences, so if they want to wear conservative armour, that’s cool. If they want to wear revealing armour, that’s cool. But they should never be forced into extremes, particularly revealing armour (see: female scholar starting armour), and these options should not be dependent on gender (e.g. revealing armour being only/mostly available to female characters).

So my complaints pretty much every time new gemstore armour is release tend to be “The female version is nice, too bad I can’t wear it on my male character” or vice versa. It’s frustrating and it has kept my money from reaching Anet on a multitude of occasions. Ridiculous toggles (female head on a male body, seriously? That’s an answer? 9_9 ) are not the solution. More intelligent and thoughtful armour design is.

Gibson.4036:

I want more options with the amount of skimpy we have now. People say there are plenty of skimpy armor options for women, especially among light armor designs, but have you ever tried to feature your Sylvari’s bioluminescence?

The Sylvari glow, which is a wonderful element of their design, is found on their arms, legs, and back. Now go try on some of the “skimpy armor”. You’ll find that ArenaNet’s designers seem to have a thing for exposing the midriff, where there is no bioluminescence, while covering the arms with long gloves and sleeves, the legs with skirts and long boots. Even on the midriff-exposing designs, there is often material across the back, leaving only the stomach exposed.

As for my male Sylvari, there are two heavy, gladiator-style designs that expose the back, and only a couple of heavy designs that show any leg, and it’s a very small amount. Male light armor has one torso-revealing design, but just like the female designs, it exposes the front, while completely covering the back.

i think charr as well need some more options with less clothes, designed around their charachter, they have fur/designs, and mostly they throw themselves in useless human focused gears which tend to make them look odd, instead of designs which accentuate their strengths.

phys.7689:

All in your head isnt dismissive. The things that are in your head are the hardest to deal with. I also agree that many peoples other idea are in their head. But that poster is trying to fight a battle of ideas, of freedom, and equality. However, the poster is less tolerant than many of the people they are fighting against. Many people who want “sexy” armor arent against non sexy armor existing, or putting labels or negativity on people who arent following their style choices. If a player wants to wear boob tkitteno be it (male or female) if they want to wear an all consuming cloak, so be it. But i dont see the benefit of villifying an appearance.

But they didn’t put negativity on sexy armor. I quote:

What’s “offensive” to me, incidentally, is not that sexualized outfits exist or that people use them or how popular they are. It’s the difference in treatment of the genders and the excuses made for it.

They specifically want more tolerance and options, not fewer, as do I and some others.

Faowri.4159:

phys.7689:

well i think you should shout out things, but i dont think shouting that this armor shouldnt exist is the best bet, the best bet is shouting out what armor should exist.

That’s exactly what I do. I’ve never, ever asked for armour to be removed from the game. I’ve never, ever said “don’t make this armour available to people anymore because I personally don’t like it”. Even my sig thread just says “If the female/male versions are so different they don’t look alike, turn it into two sets instead of one gender-imbalanced one”.

My stance is this: I respect people’s preferences, so if they want to wear conservative armour, that’s cool. If they want to wear revealing armour, that’s cool. But they should never be forced into extremes, particularly revealing armour (see: female scholar starting armour), and these options should not be dependent on gender (e.g. revealing armour being only/mostly available to female characters).

So my complaints pretty much every time new gemstore armour is release tend to be “The female version is nice, too bad I can’t wear it on my male character” or vice versa. It’s frustrating and it has kept my money from reaching Anet on a multitude of occasions. Ridiculous toggles (female head on a male body, seriously? That’s an answer? 9_9 ) are not the solution. More intelligent and thoughtful armour design is.

best answer is probably more designers (every designer has their own biases) and more armors. But thats pretty expensive so unfortunately we wont see it.
Unlesss… Perhaps…

game companies began selling graphic design developers the ability to make gear for their games and profit.
say a designer could get a royalty for every sold piece.
i wonder if it would be profitable for the designers/modelers…

phys.7689:

i think charr as well need some more options with less clothes, designed around their charachter, they have fur/designs, and mostly they throw themselves in useless human focused gears which tend to make them look odd, instead of designs which accentuate their strengths.

I think Charrs are the most frustrating. You spent time carefully creating your character, only to have nearly every armor set cover all of your choices. At least for other races you have some sort of acceptable options. But for Charr…not only do you have to find something a least a bit revealing, but also something that fits with a Charr.
And so far, well I’m glad I only have 1 Charr because I can’t even find something for him.

It’s not just Sylvari that could use revealing armor. The same goes for Charr.
It’s impossible to find revealing light armor for Charr. The best one I found for my female Charr ele was a cultural armor and I hid the shoulders for that to show the arms. The torso and legs are always completely covered in light (male) armor.

If they made revealing male armor I would buy it in a minute for my female Charr and my male Sylvari ranger, who might was well have no bioluminesce below the neck.

Zalyn.9534:

phys.7689:

All in your head isnt dismissive. The things that are in your head are the hardest to deal with. I also agree that many peoples other idea are in their head. But that poster is trying to fight a battle of ideas, of freedom, and equality. However, the poster is less tolerant than many of the people they are fighting against. Many people who want “sexy” armor arent against non sexy armor existing, or putting labels or negativity on people who arent following their style choices. If a player wants to wear boob tkitteno be it (male or female) if they want to wear an all consuming cloak, so be it. But i dont see the benefit of villifying an appearance.

But they didn’t put negativity on sexy armor. I quote:

What’s “offensive” to me, incidentally, is not that sexualized outfits exist or that people use them or how popular they are. It’s the difference in treatment of the genders and the excuses made for it.

They specifically want more tolerance and options, not fewer, as do I and some others.

“but drawing attention to it via frills or fishnets or boob windows or whatever also plays a part in objectification/sexualization. Plus, there’s the frequently huge difference in theme and design, especially with light armor. Men get the default, the original theme. Women get something that screams “LOOK A FEMALE!” which may end up looking very different or even nothing like the cool original male design.”

this implies, boob windows, and frills are bad, and are objectification/sexualization

implies something is wrong with gear that screams “LOOK A FEMALE” (why is this bad?)

implies “cool original male design” that the male designs are some how cooler due to them not being too “female” frilly.

Even though the poster says, they dont mind, they are also saying the do mind, they dont want to see all of these clothes they find to be too sexualized/frilly/feminine. They talk about a lack of choice, but there is a lot of choice in that regard.

i understand wanting more options you like, but they make it seem like some options are socially wrong and dangerous.

phys.7689:

“but drawing attention to it via frills or fishnets or boob windows or whatever also plays a part in objectification/sexualization. Plus, there’s the frequently huge difference in theme and design, especially with light armor. [b]Men get the default, the original theme. Women get something that screams “LOOK A FEMALE!” which may end up looking very different or even nothing like the cool original male design.”[/b]

this implies, boob windows, and frills are bad, and are objectification/sexualization

implies something is wrong with gear that screams “LOOK A FEMALE” (why is this bad?)

implies “cool original male design” that the male designs are some how cooler due to them not being too “female” frilly.

I disagree with your interpretation. The quoted poster is consistent with the concern about different treatment and gives specific examples of what bothers them. The default armor for males does not scream “I’M A MAN”; it focuses on a particular theme. Some players of female avatars would like to have something focusing on the theme rather than on sexual characteristics (and I mean this biologically, as in sex, vs gender) of the avatar. See examples of Halloween costumes for an illustration of this effect: http://www.pleated-jeans.com/2012/10/11/comparing-male-and-female-halloween-costumes-22-pics/

The boob windows and fishnets are used as a way to signal femininity and sexual availability – as argued by some earlier, those are specifically feminine clothing styles that are “weird” on men’s bodies. When those are just added to a theme, they disrupt the continuity of the theme. Meanwhile, in the above example of the water-themed armor, literal fish nets could be entirely appropriate and have a place on both the male and female versions – those would not be using fish nets as indicators of sexuality, but instead would support the theme of the ocean.

phys.7689:

Even though the poster says, they dont mind, they are also saying the do mind, they dont want to see all of these clothes they find to be too sexualized/frilly/feminine. They talk about a lack of choice, but there is a lot of choice in that regard.

i understand wanting more options you like, but they make it seem like some options are socially wrong and dangerous.

They are pointing to these as evidence of their primary concern, that female and male gear differs so much that they don’t feel like the same gear, and that the reasons given claim objectivity but are actually demonstrating a particular conception of what makes female bodies and how they should be indicated/flagged. It is reasonable to feel excluded from some content that is supposed to be equal (gender isn’t supposed to have an impact on play other than a few dialogue differences, which I really enjoyed seeing) but that isn’t. If anything, that is the socially dangerous and upsetting factor, not the mere existence of costumes someone can (and probably would) just decline to use.

Also, I have seen quite a few people (you too, I recall) claim that wanting to include more revealing and sexy outfits for males is dangerous and socially wrong and detrimental to the game without any reason other than “it costs more” and “I think it’s grody.”

Zalyn.9534:

phys.7689:

“but drawing attention to it via frills or fishnets or boob windows or whatever also plays a part in objectification/sexualization. Plus, there’s the frequently huge difference in theme and design, especially with light armor. [b]Men get the default, the original theme. Women get something that screams “LOOK A FEMALE!” which may end up looking very different or even nothing like the cool original male design.”[/b]

this implies, boob windows, and frills are bad, and are objectification/sexualization

implies something is wrong with gear that screams “LOOK A FEMALE” (why is this bad?)

implies “cool original male design” that the male designs are some how cooler due to them not being too “female” frilly.

I disagree with your interpretation. The quoted poster is consistent with the concern about different treatment and gives specific examples of what bothers them. The default armor for males does not scream “I’M A MAN”; it focuses on a particular theme. Some players of female avatars would like to have something focusing on the theme rather than on sexual characteristics (and I mean this biologically, as in sex, vs gender) of the avatar. See examples of Halloween costumes for an illustration of this effect: http://www.pleated-jeans.com/2012/10/11/comparing-male-and-female-halloween-costumes-22-pics/

The boob windows and fishnets are used as a way to signal femininity and sexual availability – as argued by some earlier, those are specifically feminine clothing styles that are “weird” on men’s bodies. When those are just added to a theme, they disrupt the continuity of the theme. Meanwhile, in the above example of the water-themed armor, literal fish nets could be entirely appropriate and have a place on both the male and female versions – those would not be using fish nets as indicators of sexuality, but instead would support the theme of the ocean.

phys.7689:

Even though the poster says, they dont mind, they are also saying the do mind, they dont want to see all of these clothes they find to be too sexualized/frilly/feminine. They talk about a lack of choice, but there is a lot of choice in that regard.

i understand wanting more options you like, but they make it seem like some options are socially wrong and dangerous.

They are pointing to these as evidence of their primary concern, that female and male gear differs so much that they don’t feel like the same gear, and that the reasons given claim objectivity but are actually demonstrating a particular conception of what makes female bodies and how they should be indicated/flagged. It is reasonable to feel excluded from some content that is supposed to be equal (gender isn’t supposed to have an impact on play other than a few dialogue differences, which I really enjoyed seeing) but that isn’t. If anything, that is the socially dangerous and upsetting factor, not the mere existence of costumes someone can (and probably would) just decline to use.

Also, I have seen quite a few people (you too, I recall) claim that wanting to include more revealing and sexy outfits for males is dangerous and socially wrong and detrimental to the game without any reason other than “it costs more” and “I think it’s grody.”

i dont think sexy outfits for males are dangerous and socialy wrong, i just think its important to draw distinctions between skimpy and things that go against the culture. While i dont oppose going against the culture either, i think its a different argument.

As far as the money issue, i dont say it as a justification, i m just saying the reality is they apparently are really tight with the armor. People have suggested more armor for fractals, content, etc, and they always say things like:
Armor is really development intensive, and we cant justify those costs. The implication is that they wont do much armor unless they think the game demands it, or they think people will spend a lot of money on it.

anyhow, if im interpreting the user incorrectly that fine, i just hope they dont run around shaming charachters based on how they look, or seeking to erase peoples choices to be overly frilly/feminine sexualized if they desire it.

A big part of the problem with this discussion is people keep mis-framing anatomy. A female’s breasts are NOT the equivalent of a male’s butt or junk – they’re most comparable to a male’s chest, except with an additional taboo. Likewise, the male’s crotch is only comparable to the female’s crotch, with the added complication of additional bulk.

And – there are three values to skimpy – Sensuality, Power, and Attitude, as I mentioned earlier. I’d love to be able to wear the Orrian female version of the armor on my male and charr characters, because a bit more exposed skin and the ramshackle appearance would make it stand out a lot more than as “Just another noisy suit of plate.”

And – making new, good-looking armor will probably bring them more money than they lose, because it would A: Offer gem store prices (And each armor skin goes for 25% of the price of the game, and the game launched with more than 4 armor skins!), dramatically improve gem store sales of gem-store exclusive armor, and 3) Have people spend more on Gems for Gems-to-Gold to buy armors they want but can’t afford yet.

phys.7689:

i dont think sexy outfits for males are dangerous and socialy wrong, i just think its important to draw distinctions between skimpy and things that go against the culture. While i dont oppose going against the culture either, i think its a different argument.
[…]

To be honest, though, skimpy male armor would go against the predominant cultural mores that, at least, the US has. The fact that it does is really stupid, but some of the things that do affect cultural norms and unspoken rules in society is the media — the stories read and enjoyed, the TV programs watched, radio stations listened to, what is reported on and how it’s reported on (paying particular attention to the vernacular), the games we play and so on and so forth. Essentially, what’s championed in media becomes championed in society (of course there are other influences, there are many other nuances and intricacies, but this particular facet of the entire thing fits best within the confines of this discussion).

Generally speaking, sexualized male imagery does get a lot of random backlash by certain organizations I’m not going to get into (completely different topic), whereas female presentations (be it even more sexualized, or the same) are rarely considered the same level of inappropriate. Now, I’m not here to argue what is and isn’t appropriate to put on display, but I am saying that sexualized men do get undeserved backlash (usually by men, usually straight men), whereas sexualized females are splattered everywhere (and in such a manner where it creates unhealthy expectations, body image and self esteem issues etc… but that’s a different topic)

However, if Guild Wars 2 wants to have sexy, skimpy outfits for the female sex then I do think they really should put forth the same thing for the male sex regardless of cultural mores. Let the armor sets fit more universally (what the male characters got with the Phoenix set still makes me so, so incredibly sad) without developing two different sets of armor and sex-locking them — the “Cool, not-sexualized” male version and the “Cute/Sexy” female version. At least that way they’re not just treating one side as eye candy, both sides are being treated as eye candy under that particular set of armor (and that armor could even be classified as a general “wear this if you want to look revealing and sexy”). But one thing GW2 does not lack at this moment are skimpy, sexualized female armor sets… but the male counterparts to those are very much lacking, which does create an aesthetic imbalance that isn’t fair to those people who play female characters and want them to look cool and BA (since there’s considerably less options, due to many armor sets being altered to appear “sexy” on females whereas they don’t on males), and it’s also not fair to players who want their male character to look sexy, cute and so forth as their options are cut whenever a Cute/Sexy design for females comes out and it’s remade to look modest and hideous on the male frame (I’m still complaining about Phoenix Armor here >.>)

I sort of do have hope with Anet more so than other companies (besides for Square Enix’s FFXIV, considering the amount of armor sets they have and how little the two deviate between sexes), since Anet seems open to catering to more groups of gamers than previous games have — especially with having a primarily pansexual species (sylvari) and featuring multiple female leads (last season LS… well, is the Marjory/Kasmeer stuff last season yet?), along with featuring same-sex attractions within the stories (even between prominent story characters and not turning them into stereotypes). These added themes also still makes me hope they open up non-sex specific armor sets… as that would alone make so much sense with sylvari as they lack all the cultural mores that humans developed and aren’t particularly fixated upon gender, and they lack gender roles in their fictional society. It just sits weirdly with me that they still sex-lock armor designs as much as they do, when there’s an entire species that would naturally not care one way or the other if they were in heavy spiky plate, or wearing a frilly short skirt and quoting the equivalent of Tyria’s Sailor Moon.

phys.7689:

By trying to fight sexualization, you further cement it.

So opposing a problem is always the same as supporting it, or does it only apply when the problem is aimed at women?

You have decided that frills, and highlighting boobs is sexualization. Its really not.

In our current culture, yes it is.

Also male light armor also blatantly screams I AM A MAN.

No. You could put just about any male armor in this game on a woman with no adjustments at all and it would look perfectly fine and normal and awesome. These outfits are essentially unisex, nothing in them is male-coded while petticoats, heels, garters, lace, etc. are heavily female-coded. Not to mention the panty shots, the boob windows, side boob, underboob …

Why is a man being half naked a muscle powered fantasy and a woman being half naked sexualization?

If you’re quoting me, please quote me properly. I’m was talking about the difference in design and presentation between a muscular guy who maybe only has his shirt off on one hand and a scrawny girl with inflated breasts and a bikini on the other. That difference exists and it is huge. Which character signifies strength, competence, power, potency? The guy. Which character is designed to be impressive and kickarse, respected and maybe even feared? The guy. He can also be sexually appealing if muscles are your thing and if he shows enough skin, but that’s not all there is to him.

Also you have to ask your self, is sexualization even wrong?

Yes when it is unequal.
Yes when it targets minors.
Yes when all other traits or features pale in comparison, are flat-out ignored, or actively dismissed.
Yes when it is forced.
Yes when there is so little choice or such heavy social pressure that it might as well be forced.
Doubly and triply yes when the only group of people whom it is essentially forced on are shamed for it at the same time by the people for whose “benefit” they are sexualized.

RedStar.4218:

I’m going to (sort of) agree to disagree. I feel that a lot of options you’re giving are a tad too feminine.

I really do think this is due to the fact that “sexy” is so heavily female-coded for no good reason. People are simply not used to seeing this sort of thing on men.

Except, butt jiggle…If my guardian’s butt jiggles as much as my necromancer breasts when wearing certain tops, I won’t be able to watch him run seriously.

That’s how some of us feel about those boobs, too. :p

Zalyn.9534:

I find this language a bit offensive – there are so many universals thrown out in this discussion about what is sexy and what isn’t, but when someone presents a different perspective (that is not isolated), you accuse it of all being “in their head.” I’m sure you didn’t intend it, but that type of language has been used a great deal in the past to demean what people, often women, said because they were perceived as stupid, overly emotional, or just not in touch with reality.

Very much this. This sort of language may not have been intended to dismiss or silence in this case, but there are too many instances in which it is (AKA gaslighting).

Also, I too would like to see more armor — non-gendered — that allow sylvari or charr characters to show off their awesome colours and patterns. They have the best customization options in the game, but on male sylvari or charr of either gender, you can’t really see much of it.

I really have to wonder sometimes. People keep trying to equate the sexes as being equal, and that they should also appear equal. What is good for one is not good for the other, and this is true for the reverse.

Okay lets try that social experiment, for those that feel argumentative. Ladies from now on you have 10 minutes or less to get ready when you are “going out”. As this is generally the time it takes for the male equivalent. Go ahead, let us know know how that date / bar scene goes.

My wife can’t even do her hair in 10 minutes, much less anything else lady wise, so I’m gonna ere on the side of caution and say most of the females here can’t either, at least not where they feel comfortable with themselves to be in public. (How you like that run on sentence).

Bottom line the sexes are different, and what is considered “beautiful” on each of those sexes varies greatly. Women complain when they don’t look like Barbie, or that they feel they should have to look like that instead of being comfortable with themselves, but all too often they forget that men typically don’t look like He-Man either. The difference is, most men don’t even try.

On a side note, my thief wears:
Head: Magnus’ Left Eye Patch
Chest: Human T3
Shoulders: Human t3
Arms: Human T3
Pants/Skirt: Magitech Leggings
Shoes: Whisper’s Secret Boots

Of all my characters, my wife thinks this is the “prettiest” and my daughter who’s 4 years old says “cutest” character I have. My thanks to the GW2 team for making a skirt that has multiple color palettes on it. Now if other armor types could also have such selections.

Xovian.8572:

I really have to wonder sometimes. People keep trying to equate the sexes as being equal, and that they should also appear equal. What is good for one is not good for the other, and this is true for the reverse.

Okay lets try that social experiment, for those that feel argumentative. Ladies from now on you have 10 minutes or less to get ready when you are “going out”. As this is generally the time it takes for the male equivalent. Go ahead, let us know know how that date / bar scene goes.

My wife can’t even do her hair in 10 minutes, much less anything else lady wise, so I’m gonna ere on the side of caution and say most of the females here can’t either, at least not where they feel comfortable with themselves to be in public. (How you like that run on sentence).

Bottom line the sexes are different, and what is considered “beautiful” on each of those sexes varies greatly. Women complain when they don’t look like Barbie, or that they feel they should have to look like that instead of being comfortable with themselves, but all too often they forget that men typically don’t look like He-Man either. The difference is, most men don’t even try.

There is sex, which usually has to do with biological factors, and gender, which involves social roles and expectations. You are talking about differences in gendered expectations and grooming practices, but in grossly generalizing ways. I don’t see what your examples have to do with the discussion about allowing more options for armor types for both male and female avatars. I don’t see any of my avatars needing to get ready to go out, whether for the purposes of hooking up (as you assume all women do) or for some other, more common reason.

Yes, standards vary a lot, so shouldn’t there be more variety and options so more people can choose what they like?

Interesting experiment, Xovian. <smile> I can do my makeup in 2 minutes, and my hair in 2 or less (having children will do that to you LOL). You’re quite correct, the sexes are different. – Was trying to teach my SO to play (he’s since quit playing), and his responses over what armor he wore, were always “I don’t care”. ::sigh::

The T3 Cultural human chestpiece is what I wear on my thief, and I love it. Most medium armors are trenchcoats which I despise. I’m a woman, my toons are all female, and I want them to look like female, eos. Your wife and daughter have good taste <smile>

Chadramar.8156:

phys.7689:

By trying to fight sexualization, you further cement it.

So opposing a problem is always the same as supporting it, or does it only apply when the problem is aimed at women?

You have decided that frills, and highlighting boobs is sexualization. Its really not.

In our current culture, yes it is.

Why is a man being half naked a muscle powered fantasy and a woman being half naked sexualization?

If you’re quoting me, please quote me properly. I’m was talking about the difference in design and presentation between a muscular guy who maybe only has his shirt off on one hand and a scrawny girl with inflated breasts and a bikini on the other. That difference exists and it is huge. Which character signifies strength, competence, power, potency? The guy. Which character is designed to be impressive and kickarse, respected and maybe even feared? The guy. He can also be sexually appealing if muscles are your thing and if he shows enough skin, but that’s not all there is to him.

1)(with regards to the fight against steroptypes/norms conundrum)
its a common thing, when people seek to break sterotypes/ideas about a people or culture, they sometimes end up creating a similar situation, with a different motivation. you are basically implying that showing boobs/legs/curvy form fitting clothes is some how inferior or wrong. The people who get mad at women and think they are messing up women kind socially by dressing in suggestive ways are duplicating the experience of men telling them not to be sexy and to cover up that was the norm not so long ago. If you are not one of those people, fine, but then dont do it here in game either. sexy clothes are only an option, at most 20% of any armor set.
2)(with regards to frills accents on boobs and other such cultural things)
If you are going to define yourself by your culture, you will always be a slave to what other people see and think. People can force you to live, or rebel against their standards, which is just another means of control. What if the culture start sexualizing blue as a woman’s color, the color of sexual readiness. Would you then abandon blue if its the color you have loved most? the color of your family crest? If the answer is yes, then you are just as much a victim of the culture as the women who feel forced to wear blue to appeal to the culture, because the culture has forced you not to be yourself.
3) the muscle fantasy male and the naked boobed girl.
See here is the difference in perception. You think the dude is powerful strong and kickarse because that what society has conditioned you to think. There is no difference between the dude in speedos and the chick in the bikini other than your perception of what it means. The difference? they have empowered the differences so that they feel good when they see it, where you have not. Muscles, V shaped body types, they make you feel like that is strength competence, power and kickarse. Why is a similarly outrageous female form(neither of these is the norm) not kickarse? not powerful? not capable?
perfect example, the infamous boob plate, its uneccesarry finery that doesnt help in battle, you see it as a negative that it reinforces femaleness, however the same man chestplate, which creates a perfect male, idealized chest was also very popular and just as useless, which they saw as showing might and power.
essentially they celebrate their maleness which empowers them
you want to marginalize femaleness which depowers females.
they have set up the perfect lose lose scenario,

you can only beat it by breaking the paradigm.

dkspins.4670:

Interesting experiment, Xovian. <smile> I can do my makeup in 2 minutes, and my hair in 2 or less (having children will do that to you LOL). You’re quite correct, the sexes are different. – Was trying to teach my SO to play (he’s since quit playing), and his responses over what armor he wore, were always “I don’t care”. ::sigh::

The T3 Cultural human chestpiece is what I wear on my thief, and I love it. Most medium armors are trenchcoats which I despise. I’m a woman, my toons are all female, and I want them to look like female, eos. Your wife and daughter have good taste <smile>

There are always exceptions, not to mention standards of comfort. While your daily routine may take that long, i doubt if you went to a friends wedding, as the maid of honor, the same time frame would occur. Simply put men really don’t care the majority of the time, if he likes something he likes it, if he doesn’t it isn’t going to matter. Women typically do not have the same approach to looks and style.

And I concur, trench coats galore are getting very old, I do agree with other posters that’s why the Human T3 is common, it’s one of the few good looking non trench coat choices. Thus it is also one of the most popular for human female characters. If they added a bit more non trench coats we’d see a bit more diversity. My mesmer who was my main since release up until recently, would have loved to have a non robe full leg length options, or that aren’t “Gothic Lolita” variants, but not seeing any.

I’m not against more options for anyone, more is always a good thing. But styles and what is considered stylish on male and female are very different…period. The t3 human female armor as an example if left with that looks like on a female character, would look significantly out of place on a male character. Not saying that an option for more revealing, sexy, or stylish or the like shouldn’t be possible but trying to fit a square peg through a round hole is a bit pointless. Not to mention a bit odd looking.

TL:DR- More options for everyone male and female…the right way to go. People trying to force equality with style just simply isnt stylish, and often the results are undesirable. Disagree? Lets put Elmer Fud in a Pink TUTU. Tell me you didn’t smile knowing how silly that looks. Cause I’d say your lying if it didn’t give a little giggle.

phys.7689:

2)(with regards to frills accents on boobs and other such cultural things)
If you are going to define yourself by your culture, you will always be a slave to what other people see and think. People can force you to live, or rebel against their standards, which is just another means of control.
[snip]
3) the muscle fantasy male and the naked boobed girl.
See here is the difference in perception. You think the dude is powerful strong and kickarse because that what society has conditioned you to think. There is no difference between the dude in speedos and the chick in the bikini other than your perception of what it means.
[snip]
perfect example, the infamous boob plate, its uneccesarry finery that doesnt help in battle, you see it as a negative that it reinforces femaleness, however the same man chestplate, [snip]

you can only beat it by breaking the paradigm.

(quote abbreviated to fit post length)

Nice try, but you’re still giving more power to certain groups to define standards of beauty, attractiveness, and gendered attire. Why does a woman have to wear things that are deemed “feminine” and a man have to wear things deemed “masculine”? You’ve admitted that those standards change over time; how did they change? Because people changed how they were used.

The reason why boobplate is ridiculous is because it doesn’t actually derive its form from function, unlike the standard (aka “masculine” per you) breastplate, which does have a history of design, function, and use. It is also associate with certain practices that are gendered – chivalry, for example. Boobplate was designed to fit a particular idea of gendering – to emphasize that the wearer has boobs, not to show that she is ready for battle. And I challenge you find a way to prove that if you had two people standing in front of you, one in “normal” armor and one in boobplate, that people would find them both equally serious and capable about going into battle.

There are also differences between the male power fantasy and the female sexualized-objectified body – not just in form but in presentation.

Take these two underwear ads featuring well-chiseled men:
CK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9azs9tt-NM
Beckham: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHSuCsJMrys

Both are in underwear, but the first is presented in a more standard masculine power fantasy style – overlaid images of gears, powerful, action motions, little focus on the face and expressions, and little emotional connection to the model. He is there to do powerful things.

The second is interesting because the camera lingers on Beckham’s body, tracing it in a more sensual way. It also focuses much more on his face, which bears an inviting, almost coy expression. This ad made a lot of dudes uncomfortable because it’s not a common way of portraying men’s bodies and more closely resembles how women are viewed/portrayed.

It is certainly possible to portray women with similar contrasts, but if we also surrender to prevailing ideas about “feminine features” like breasts and big hips, then there is not parity in power and agency – breasts are not associated with strength and do not contribute to physical abilities. A large chest is large because of musculature, and while bodybuilding and weightlifting are different activities, seeing a large chest suggests more strength and has a reasonable correlation. So a man would be strong because of his muscles, but a woman would be strong despite her breasts.

Of course, to even claim that muscles = masculine and breasts = feminine is to accept flawed reasoning and to kowtow to the very social stereotypes you urge people to challenge (everyone has muscles, and everyone has breast tissue, just to different degrees). The problem is the inconsistency that happens to conveniently line up with the status quo and with certain types of male gaze and straight male preferences that dictate 1) what is properly gendered, and 2) what is attractive and therefore allowed.

For more on male power fantasy and the disconnect between aesthetics: http://www.shortpacked.com/2011/comic/book-13/05-the-death-of-snkrs/falseequivalence/

Here is an interesting image of Olympic athletes that emphasizes what real, athletic and trained women look like: http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1470692/original.jpg

In short, please stop dictating to people how they should perform their gender under the guise of being more effective at challenging stereotypes. You are reinforcing a very narrow view of gendering and then telling those who disagree with you to stay in that box you made.

Xovian.8572:

Snip

TL:DR- More options for everyone male and female…the right way to go. People trying to force equality with style just simply isnt stylish, and often the results are undesirable. Disagree? Lets put Elmer Fud in a Pink TUTU. Tell me you didn’t smile knowing how silly that looks. Cause I’d say your lying if it didn’t give a little giggle.

(Shrug)

It’s all expectations. If you are used to seeing men in gowns ( another word for a dress) then it’s normal. If ballet had put men in tutus and not women, you would be used to that and be saying the opposite. Objectively speaking, how is a man in a tutu any less ridiculous than a woman in a tutu? And yes, any short male tubby cartoon character wearing a costume stereotyped only for a fit athletic female dancer will look funny.

I’m all for skimpy and non skimpy I’m the kind that loves armor that exposes some skin but is still classy looks sexy and inspiring at the same time and I think we could use more of that style of armor!

Zalyn.9534:

Of course, to even claim that muscles = masculine and breasts = feminine is to accept flawed reasoning and to kowtow to the very social stereotypes you urge people to challenge (everyone has muscles, and everyone has breast tissue, just to different degrees). The problem is the inconsistency that happens to conveniently line up with the status quo and with certain types of male gaze and straight male preferences that dictate 1) what is properly gendered, and 2) what is attractive and therefore allowed.

You might have a point here if the reasoning actually was flawed, except male actually DOES = Muscles for every species except Crcocutta Crocutta, and Female = Breasts for kitten Sapiens, thanks to biology and genetics. And, larger breasts can be used to denote greater power as well – Strong pectoral support makes breasts perkier and seem larger. They also indicate maturity and experience. Furthermore, a large-chested woman has greater body volume/mass, which is another visual indicator of strength. They also give an overall “Top-heavy” aesthetic – same for ‘strong’ males. Of course, you can’t make the breasts TOO large, or it starts looking ridiculous – but a woman with a D or E cup tends to look stronger and more capable than one with an A-B cup (Cs are somewhere in the middle). Furthermore – the larger the breasts, the stronger the woman needs to be just to carry and move with them comfortably.

Same thing with hips – a female’s pelvis is differently-shaped from a male’s, muscles anchor themselves differently on it, and fat and muscles also develop differently. Larger/firmer glutes and thighs give greater ‘core power’ to the body.

The rest, though… it’s largely in presentation, as you said. It’s one of the reasons I like Guild Wars 2’s female Charr, even without their breasts (Though I wish the artist had gotten the other result when she made the “None or Six” ultimatum) – though I wish they could wear the skimpier female outfits like Orrian Armor to show off their fur and muscles more.

Zalyn.9534:

In short, please stop dictating to people how they should perform their gender under the guise of being more effective at challenging stereotypes. You are reinforcing a very narrow view of gendering and then telling those who disagree with you to stay in that box you made.

Im not saying how they should perform their gender, im saying they should not depower their sex. see the key here is forget the stereotype, do your own thing. Dont look at one thing and say its wrong. This is not just a gender thing, this is a classic pitfall of all of it.
for example, when you see a game that has an option for black people to have rounder butts, fuller lips, afros, etc, you could get mad that they are stereotyping black people, who dont all have these features, but when you start getting to the point that you cant stand seeing it, and want more options that look like the “cool” whiter options. I think you need to step back and say, hmm is this really healthy?

See if gear that accentuates breasts is bad, you are implying breasts are bad, If gear that accentuates curves is bad, you are implying curves are bad.

Now there is a danger when you start to empower certain features that you make people who dont exemplify those features feel less powerful. So i suggest you empower everyone. The thin lady with boobs is lithe, the thick lady is powerful, comforting, the muscular lady is athletic. Point is, like the skin you are in, don’t hate on other peoples choices, or natures.

and im not trying to trick or win an argument, i am saying this because i find it disturbing when i see people essentially saying its wrong to be something just because of their own foibles. Its all good to ask for options, its another to say certain options are bad.

as for the boobplate male version
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Museo_archeologico_regionale_paolo_orsi%2C_corazza_in_bronzo%2C_da_tomba_5_necropoli_della_fossa%2C_370-340_ac._01.JPG/458px-Museo_archeologico_regionale_paolo_orsi%2C_corazza_in_bronzo%2C_da_tomba_5_necropoli_della_fossa%2C_370-340_ac._01.JPG

this serves absolutely no purpose at all other than to shout i am an idealized male/can afford to make/buy armor like that, much like the female boob armor.

Sartharina.3542:

Zalyn.9534:

Of course, to even claim that muscles = masculine and breasts = feminine is to accept flawed reasoning and to kowtow to the very social stereotypes you urge people to challenge (everyone has muscles, and everyone has breast tissue, just to different degrees). The problem is the inconsistency that happens to conveniently line up with the status quo and with certain types of male gaze and straight male preferences that dictate 1) what is properly gendered, and 2) what is attractive and therefore allowed.

You might have a point here if the reasoning actually was flawed, except male actually DOES = Muscles for every species except Crcocutta Crocutta, and Female = Breasts for kitten Sapiens, thanks to biology and genetics. And, larger breasts can be used to denote greater power as well – Strong pectoral support makes breasts perkier and seem larger. They also indicate maturity and experience. Furthermore, a large-chested woman has greater body volume/mass, which is another visual indicator of strength. They also give an overall “Top-heavy” aesthetic – same for ‘strong’ males. Of course, you can’t make the breasts TOO large, or it starts looking ridiculous – but a woman with a D or E cup tends to look stronger and more capable than one with an A-B cup (Cs are somewhere in the middle). Furthermore – the larger the breasts, the stronger the woman needs to be just to carry and move with them comfortably.

Same thing with hips – a female’s pelvis is differently-shaped from a male’s, muscles anchor themselves differently on it, and fat and muscles also develop differently. Larger/firmer glutes and thighs give greater ‘core power’ to the body.

The rest, though… it’s largely in presentation, as you said. It’s one of the reasons I like Guild Wars 2’s female Charr, even without their breasts (Though I wish the artist had gotten the other result when she made the “None or Six” ultimatum) – though I wish they could wear the skimpier female outfits like Orrian Armor to show off their fur and muscles more.

I’ll assume you meant mammalian species, since in most other animals, females are usually larger (see: Big Old Fat Female Fish – BOFFFF hypothesis). And in pretty much all mammals except humans, breasts are not developed or visible except when nursing – humans are very unusual in physiology and dimorphism.

My point about the flaw in using muscles and breasts to determine/indicate sex is that male and female humans all have muscles and breasts, just to different extents. But there is no absolute minimum/maximum that can be used to determine whether someone is male or female from those features. There are men with larger breasts than women, and there are women with more muscle mass per height than men. In fact, there have been some recent cases where men were getting breast cancer at surprisingly high rates, possible due to location. And the German Wachbattalion has had issues with increased left breast development from drill exercises: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2267631/Germanys-Wachbataillon-soldiers-soldiers-developing-breasts-drill.html

This is a great article talking about how much more similar bodies are than different between sexes: http://www.t-nation.com/readArticle.do?id=1305014

Look at the pictures of the athletes – they don’t have much fatty breast tissue for the most part because their body fat is so low. In fact, they’d probably have trouble fitting many of the female armor styles because their waists are too big and breasts too small proportionate to the idealized proportions for female bodies dictated by common standards assumed by some in this thread. They would fit better in men’s armor – why couldn’t someone play a character like that and choose to wear the “masculine” model of armor if they wanted to? It’s insulting to be told that they’re undermining gender equality because they don’t want their own character to wear something they don’t feel fits their character.

Also, since we’re talking about mammaries – why do non-mammalian species have breasts? They make absolutely no sense except to make the player audience feel more comfortable identifying who is female and who is male. I like the Charr because they don’t go with the “human female-animal hybrid” to indicate sex and instead chose a different characteristic (tails). Kudos on the Charr, but still confused on the Sylvari.

phys.7689:

Im not saying how they should perform their gender, im saying they should not depower their sex.
(snip)
as for the boobplate male version
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Museo_archeologico_regionale_paolo_orsi%2C_corazza_in_bronzo%2C_da_tomba_5_necropoli_della_fossa%2C_370-340_ac._01.JPG/458px-Museo_archeologico_regionale_paolo_orsi%2C_corazza_in_bronzo%2C_da_tomba_5_necropoli_della_fossa%2C_370-340_ac._01.JPG

this serves absolutely no purpose at all other than to shout i am an idealized male/can afford to make/buy armor like that, much like the female boob armor.

Cool. Let’s bring in male nipple plate then. I personally don’t care for it, but I’m sure someone would like it. Thanks for adding it to the stack. Interesting that the presence of nipples makes it vanity plate.

On depowering – again, it can feel insulting to be blamed for this when there is so much structurally done to determine how power is distributed across genders. The point that I and others have advocated has been to ask for more options – for male characters to be able to wear more revealing clothing, and for female characters to have access to the male designs of gear so they can share in the same content.

We should always have the option to opt out of roles prescribed by society – whether a guy wants to wear something frilly and lacy or short and sexy, or a gal wants to wear something that she feels comfortable and proficient in. It’s unfair and demeaning to tell women that they should wear their boob plate and enjoy it and find a way to feel empowered because that is what their gender must do. Why can’t we just support the many types of efforts by people to build the sort of image for themselves that they want instead of hoarding opportunities away?

“Sure (Fred Astaire) was great, but don’t forget that Ginger Rogers did everything he did, …backwards and in high heels.”

It depends really.

Female Asura and Charr light armours are the same male light armours so I guess there is no complain on not wanting skimpy armour (what gives? would people get put off from seeing skimpy light armours on those races?).

Anyway I voted on the last one and this is coming from a guy. Sure I like sexy skimpy armour like some guys but when it come to playing the actual game, I want realistic armours for my gal character (my female Sylvari Elementist) but in saying so being a light armour does mean being light so I guess I can’t complain (I know what the female armours are like for medium and heavy armour and I don’t liked it from a realistic poin of view).
Granted I don’t blame it solely on Anet (however I will blame them for being bias on light armour designs over heavy armour designs) as many mmo and rpg have this aswell.

I’d like to see skimpy and less skimpy armors all around.

This comes to mind

Zalyn.9534:

phys.7689:

Im not saying how they should perform their gender, im saying they should not depower their sex.
(snip)
as for the boobplate male version
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Museo_archeologico_regionale_paolo_orsi%2C_corazza_in_bronzo%2C_da_tomba_5_necropoli_della_fossa%2C_370-340_ac._01.JPG/458px-Museo_archeologico_regionale_paolo_orsi%2C_corazza_in_bronzo%2C_da_tomba_5_necropoli_della_fossa%2C_370-340_ac._01.JPG

this serves absolutely no purpose at all other than to shout i am an idealized male/can afford to make/buy armor like that, much like the female boob armor.

Cool. Let’s bring in male nipple plate then. I personally don’t care for it, but I’m sure someone would like it. Thanks for adding it to the stack. Interesting that the presence of nipples makes it vanity plate.

On depowering – again, it can feel insulting to be blamed for this when there is so much structurally done to determine how power is distributed across genders. The point that I and others have advocated has been to ask for more options – for male characters to be able to wear more revealing clothing, and for female characters to have access to the male designs of gear so they can share in the same content.

We should always have the option to opt out of roles prescribed by society – whether a guy wants to wear something frilly and lacy or short and sexy, or a gal wants to wear something that she feels comfortable and proficient in. It’s unfair and demeaning to tell women that they should wear their boob plate and enjoy it and find a way to feel empowered because that is what their gender must do. Why can’t we just support the many types of efforts by people to build the sort of image for themselves that they want instead of hoarding opportunities away?

“Sure (Fred Astaire) was great, but don’t forget that Ginger Rogers did everything he did, …backwards and in high heels.”

and as far as the male nipple plate what makes it vanity isnt the nipples, is that none of the contouring and shaping does anything to help prevent dmg to the user. It falls to aesthetics, not to function, it actually increases the cost, and as others have said guides the edges to certain places. Point is, why is vanity chestplate considered powerful, but boobplate considered weak? perception.

like i said, i have no problem with options, I was telling a different poster that saying skimpy/sexual/frilly clothes is not awesome, not cool or detrimental to children is villifying all those things. Im not saying one must wear naked clothes or be a problem, im saying that you shouldnt villify the option to dress/appear a certain way, Especially on things that for some people would be natural.

As far as having options, you do have options, skimpy/sexy clothes are not the norm, they are the exception. you are looking at something like 20-5% of the options available. I agree there could be more options, i personally just want more cool looking stuff, sexy or not. much of what is available doesnt tickle my fancy, its all subjective, so the only real method of giving people more of what they want is more options and greater variation

To be it bit clearer, because when you say “skimpy” people immediately assume “almost naked”.

I want my male mesmer to have exposed arms. How many tops can I choose ?
-From shoulder to wrist : 3 (4 with cultural)
-A little less exposed : 3

I want to be able to see at least part of his neck : 14

Now let’s do it with my female necromancer :
arms : 9 tops. The other 30+ tops cover (or nearly fully cover) the arms.
legs : 16.

I’m not asking for a swim suit. But at least something that doesn’t look like my character is going to die from over heating on a regular summer day…And that looks good on them.

And let’s just give up on medium armor. When you find a top that exposed the arms you have to deal with the coat/skirt that comes with it.

Astral Projections.7320:

It’s all expectations. If you are used to seeing men in gowns ( another word for a dress) then it’s normal. If ballet had put men in tutus and not women, you would be used to that and be saying the opposite. Objectively speaking, how is a man in a tutu any less ridiculous than a woman in a tutu? And yes, any short male tubby cartoon character wearing a costume stereotyped only for a fit athletic female dancer will look funny.

You seem to be missing the point, there’s an obvious reason why men were not put in tutu’s (outside of some fetish or some form of cruel punishment). Lacey and frilly type fashion just isn’t manly. Works for females, some even have a defined grace that flows with it, but it’s hardly the pinnacle of masculinity. It looks cute on my 4 year old daughter. /shrug

So I’ll disagree with your “expectations”. Stereotyped? Perhaps, but by all means lets put the President of the U.S. or the Pope in one and see if they look any less ridiculous then Elmer Fudd. Tutu too much? Fine, have em wear Gothic Lolita. Tabloids would have a blast I’m sure, but your just not gonna see men wearing women’s clothes that have any dignity left, aren’t trying to get in some woman’s pants, or that are not trying to be some kind of special snow flake. Always people out there that want to assign some title to themselves as if it makes them special or that they deserve more attention, when the reality is they are just “different”. Congratulations, they are exactly like the rest of the people on the planet. Everyone’s different.

Simply put the game releases armors and styles based on generalizations of the fantasy norm, as it appeals to the broadest audience and is by and large considered acceptable, whether anyone wants to call it a stereotype or not. Trying to use euphemisms to hide the fact that generalizations that are well known, tested and on a much larger basis “approved” does not need to be changed because some special snow flakes like to complain. I’ve not seen anyone complain about adding more options, more options is always a good thing, and at this point the poll speaks for itself.

RedStar.4218:

And let’s just give up on medium armor. When you find a top that exposed the arms you have to deal with the coat/skirt that comes with it.

Most people have, at least those that don’t like the trench coat look. Thus why people tend to wear just a few different styles as there isn’t a large choice in the matter. Other armor types have way more choices, but even those need to be expanded by quite a margin.

Just a point of note, the options could be there if they’d just allow mixed armor visuals, with the way town clothes now work, there is literally NO REASON for the visuals to be assigned to only one armor type. Clipping issues? Some been in there since beta, not a valid excuse to prevent more options.

I tend to like most of the armor choices available, as far as amount of skin covered or not goes- in general there’s a good range from barely covered to well covered. Although why so much of the light armor comes with ruffles, I dunno. And we could really use some more non-trenchcoat medium armor.

What drive me nuts is that they’ve not made the effort to make culturaly reasonable female armor for the Charr and Asura, just slapped them all in the male armor. Yes, boob windows and cleavage enhancing armor would look silly on creatures with no breasts- so why not make armor that doesn’t have boob windows, but is still obviously feminine?

Just ask Anet to have more variety of armor choice for both side, win win.

Someone claims that there are more skimpy than non skimpy armor, that is a lie or unless somebody cannot properly count. When i am looking at the armor sets, all i can see is well covered armor for every weight class. For skimpy armor, yes, some of them are half naked but it is a rare case.

The armor designs are well following our modern fashion direction, female fashion are more focus on slim cut, tight fit and even boob holes and mini skirts. Why? Because guys love it. In real world, for practical protection gear are not designed with “attractive” in mind. But this is a game, and this is where this kind of fantasy are possible to exist out of real world.

So be productive, stop telling skimpy armor is wrong, instead, suggesting possible walk around solution for the kind like yours.

Xovian.8572:

Astral Projections.7320:

It’s all expectations. If you are used to seeing men in gowns ( another word for a dress) then it’s normal. If ballet had put men in tutus and not women, you would be used to that and be saying the opposite. Objectively speaking, how is a man in a tutu any less ridiculous than a woman in a tutu? And yes, any short male tubby cartoon character wearing a costume stereotyped only for a fit athletic female dancer will look funny.

You seem to be missing the point, there’s an obvious reason why men were not put in tutu’s (outside of some fetish or some form of cruel punishment). Lacey and frilly type fashion just isn’t manly. Works for females, some even have a defined grace that flows with it, but it’s hardly the pinnacle of masculinity. It looks cute on my 4 year old daughter. /shrug

Snip

Expectations, and what you see daily determine what is considered manly. If men wear lace and brocade then that’s normal. If you see men wearing gowns as regular attire, then that’s normal. When you consider that if a woman was wearing a gown it would be called a dress, then a gown on a man is a dress by another name.

What a culture considers normal and manly or feminine changes. It wasn’t very long ago that it was unnatural for women to wear pants, just like it is currently unnatural for men to wear dresses. Women who wore pants were ridiculed and sermons preached against this ungodliness.

Deuteronomy 22:5
“A woman shall not wear a man’s garment, nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.

Yet women do wear pants now. Western culture adjusted and now it’s normal.