I see the word “sexualisation” and “fetishizing” being thrown around, and I’m curious where you think that idea comes from. Looking alone at the character model, there is nothing “sexualised” about them. They’re garnished with a female form, yes, but they’re doll like in their anatomy. You mention them having nipples, I assume the word you were looking for was areolas, because if they were to resemble a body part, that’s the part it would be. Even still, I don’t see anything inherently wrong with that. Just because of that, or the fact that they’ve been given a rear end (which, any butt would be ‘defined’ and ‘contoured’, I’ve never seen an artistic representation that wasn’t), doesn’t immediately make them sexualised. Because they aren’t given clothing doesn’t make then “nude”, they’re not people, they’re machines, and just because their metal is out for all to see, does not immediately make them sexual objects.
I’m so sad that I live in a time where any depiction of the female form that doesn’t immediately match a certain person’s standards is seen in a negative way, that anything even remotely resembling nudity is seen negatively. We are so body-phobic, that even a positive depiction of women in a fantasy context has to be thrown into the “sexism” pile because they’re character model is to “thin”. Let it be known, for the record, in a real life context, I am just as much against “thin” shaming as I am “fat” shaming -, but this isn’t real life context.
This isn’t a magazine, or a depiction, even a stylised one, of a human, it’s of a robot. If you look at that character model and imagine skin and muscle overlaid on top of those parts, it seems a pretty average size to me. Of course, without skin, and muscle mass, of course it’s thin. If you took all my skin, and muscle and fat off parts of my body missing from the robot, I’d look like that too, albeit a much more gore-y version.
These designs are not, in any way sexual, unless you put them in a sexual light. If you start thinking of them as if they were meant to be sexual objects, then yes, you’re going to see them sexually. I haven’t, and I don’t, funnily enough, because I see them for what they are, not on the inside, just what they are. Robots, with a feminine figure, to which I say, “Awesome!”
I’m not so immediately distained by the sight of a female figure that I have to say, “Good gods, put clothes on it! It’s too thin! Think of the children!” Because that shouldn’t be the thought process, you focus so much on them being too small, without regard for anyone who could be comparatively the same shape in reality (with skin, of course). There are people who are naturally that shape, women come in all shapes and sizes, whose breasts are indeed that perky, butts just as round, and comparatively as thin. Criticizing any shape in any way is inherently negative, and detrimental to any message about positive body image you’re trying to send out. Size should not matter, and I agree every size should be portrayed, but knocking it because it’s not the same shape or size as you, or what you consider the average, is not a healthy message either.
The playable character models have a range of sizes available, and I know someone said they aren’t ugly, but I would tend to disagree. I find some of them quite unattractive, and that’s not a bad thing, that’s a positive thing, in my opinion. Same as having the varying sizes, and if they didn’t allow that, I would criticize, but criticize the NPCs seems nonsensical, to me. Especially when the NPCs in question are mechanical creations, not depictions of people.
I would also note, that they were meant to be created by a woman, and someone who draws, I do tend to draw my idealisation of a female form. Not because it’s the norm, most people would say my designs aren’t “magazine” depictions of women, but because they’re what I like to look at. The same could be said in the context of a woman creating female formed robots, you would make them in a form that resembled yourself, or an idealised version of yourself. There’s nothing wrong with that, and honestly, probably quite realistic in context.
I think the most bothersome thing I’ve read is that they’re “attractive to the male eye”, they’re attractive to me, too. Sure, some of the more immature or lonely are going to look at them in a sexual context, but they’ll do the same to any female character figure, in any amount of clothing, regardless. Some people are just like that, the majority, however, are not. (Continued, since it was too long to post in one.)
