New Poll - Ecchi Definition 5l1w2l
5 years ago
Posts: 10876
Quote from zarlan 6vg64
Quote from lambchopsil
The next people to respond to this argument gets banned from the forums for a few days. I'm trying to not lock down the entire news post
Ehm... Just to clarify: Does that mean that none of us three are allowed to make any comments, in this thread? Because the argument was about... well about the topic of this thread, so...
That entire mess of you, Transdude1996, and residentgrigo
A just ruler amongst tyrants
5 years ago
Posts: 1143
Warn: Banned
Quote from zarlan
What makes you think that the creator being female, has anything to do with it not being sexual and/or not catering to male sexual titillation?
The fact that attractive female characters deliver the same "power fantasy" for girls that a story of Conan does for guys, and (For some strange reason) female creators happen to get a lot more lewd and personal than their male counter-parts. All that being said, however, where is the problem? It's possible that I misunderstood you, but you made it sound like it was a "terrible thing" that people make content for people who spend money.
5 years ago
Posts: 467
Quote from lambchopsil
That entire mess of you, Transdude1996, and residentgrigo
That did nothing to clarify. In any way. What is "the entire mess"? What does it entail? What are we allowed to post, if anything?
How come you didn't actually answer the question?
5 years ago
Posts: 467
Quote from Transdude1996
The fact that attractive female characters deliver the same "power fantasy" for girls that a story of Conan does for guys
What "power fantasy"? This is about having sexual fan-service. About having things that are there, purely for sexual titillation. None of it has anything to do with power, in any way.
Oh, and if you want to comment about how Conan is "scantily clad"...
That's to show his muscles.
It's all about male power fantasy, and nothing to do being sexually attractive/titillating, to anyone
...not that, that type of body is particularly appealing to most women, anyway.
Some gay men, perhaps, but who paid any heed to them, when Conan was made?
The guys who get voted "sexiest man", or in some other way are shown to be considered sexy, are never people like Arnold Schwarzenegger ...well, some do still have needlessly big muscles, like Jason Momoa for example, but nothing at the level of Conan.
and (For some strange reason) female creators happen to get a lot more lewd and personal than their male counter-parts.
Eh, no. Not particularly, no. (and I'm not going to bother arguing that off topic point, in this thread. Just making it clear that I disagree)
where is the problem?
When/where did I say, or so much as imply, anything about a problem?
I talked about what is sexual or not.
At no point did I say, suggest, or imply, any dislike or disapproval ...or like or approval.
I made no comment, in regards to that.
5 years ago
Posts: 1143
Warn: Banned
Quote from zarlan
Quote from Transdude1996
The fact that attractive female characters deliver the same "power fantasy" for girls that a story of Conan does for guys
What "power fantasy"? This is about having sexual fan-service. About having things that are there, purely for sexual titillation. None of it has anything to do with power, in any way.
You were asking for what other reason a female creator would make a character sexually attractive for any reason than to appeal to guys.
Quote from zarlan
Oh, and if you want to comment about how Conan is "scantily clad"...
That's to show his muscles.
It's all about male power fantasy, and nothing to do being sexually attractive/titillating, to anyone
...not that, that type of body is particularly appealing to most women, anyway.
Some gay men, perhaps, but who paid any heed to them, when Conan was made?
The guys who get voted "sexiest man", or in some other way are shown to be considered sexy, are never people like Arnold Schwarzenegger ...well, some do still have needlessly big muscles, like Jason Momoa for example, but nothing at the level of Conan.
Just decide to look that up because I'm curious about who were the winners are. For the first decade (Which started back in '85), it was Mad Max, then "the bad doctor", then it was Perseus, then the son of the president, then James "Aged like fine wine" Bond, then the manlet who does his own stunts, the the dirty dancer from action films, then a former model turned actor, then Cindy Crawford and her husband, then Ted "Theodore" Logan, and then the precursor to Edward Cullen. Though, you are right, the guys were fit, but none of them were completely jacked like mid-80's Arnold, with the except of The Rock when he won in 2016.
However, even Arnold was more buff than Conan was suppose to be. Here is how Conan was depicted back in 1932 when he debuted (Linking because the images are too big horizontally), here he is a few months later in 1933, and then over a year later in 1934.
Quote from zarlan
where is the problem?
When/where did I say, or so much as imply, anything about a problem?
I talked about what is sexual or not.
At no point did I say, suggest, or imply, any dislike or disapproval ...or like or approval.
I made no comment, in regards to that.
Okay, that was a misunderstanding on my part then. Most of the time, whenever people talk about series appealing to "horny young teen boys", they trying to use it as a criticism as if it's a "crime against nature" that people make content for a market that exists. I assumed that you were doing the same, which is where I made my error.
5 years ago
Posts: 467
Quote from Transdude1996
You were asking for what other reason a female creator would make a character sexually attractive for any reason than to appeal to guys.
...and your proposed reason, is utterly wrong, as I pointed out.
They do not deliver any form of power fantasy, but rather sexual titillation.
Not in adition to power fantasy. Just sexual titillation.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Hence your argument is void.
...and yeah, there's quite a difference between book (i.e. real original) Conan, and movie Conan.
Also a lot of the people generally considered sexy, aren't necessarily that "fit". Just healthy and non-fat. A bit of muscles can maybe be a plus, but is hardly required.
Most of the time, whenever people talk about series appealing to "horny young teen boys", they trying to use it as a criticism
Oh yeah, good point. That's quite true. Thanks for pointing that out.
Hence your error was quite understandable.
Indeed, I'd say I should have been more careful of the connotations of my phrasing.
Sorry, my bad.
Hell, it is also true of how I, myself, usually talk about series that appeal to "horny young teen boys" (and how, for example, I utterly diss pretty much anything by Akamatsu Ken, as trash without any value), and I do disapprove of most fan-service (sexual fan-service especially, but also non-sexual) ...though that's to do with how it's used, including how it distracts from the story (except in series where the story is just the excuse for the fan-service, which I especially despise), rather than how sexual the content is.
My mention of it, in regards to Ranma, however, was purely to point out how extremely ridiculous it is, to think that the nudity in the series, was about anything other than sexual fan-service, rather than being any comment on the series, itself.
5 years ago
Posts: 399
I think anyone who says that, is deluding themselves.
You're literally mansplaining boobs to a woman. That's hilarious.
5 years ago
Posts: 1143
Warn: Banned
Did you just assume Zarlan's gender? That's very sexist of you.
5 years ago
Posts: 467
Sorry for the slight delay in reply, but I hadn't expected to see any, as these threads tend to die out, once the next poll comes along. (also, I've had some computer problems to deal with, for about a week now, which has finally gotten settled down, now)
Quote from HikaruYami
You're literally mansplaining boobs to a woman. That's hilarious.
Mansplaining, is about explaining something you know less about, than the person you are talking to.
(mainly when a man does so, to a woman. Especially about women's issues)
That is clearly not the case here.
A woman doesn't know more knowledgeable about what is sexual about the female body, or not, just because they are a woman. (in particularly, sexual TO MEN, which is something you'd assume that men, if anyone, would have a better intuitive knowledge of ...not that I'm saying that boobs aren't sexual to women, mind you)
Hell, you don't necessarily know more about how the female body works, just because you're a woman! What with how there are cases of mothers who thought they gave birth through the anus, women who have no idea that they pee through a separate hole, who think that the vagina only lubricates if you like the person you are with... (which was their argument for why it is physically harmful to be in IRL porn ...which, utter ignorance of biology aside, shows a shocking ignorance of the existence of lube. Though the biological ignorance is far worse, of course)
...and I'm stating undeniable and clearly demonstrable facts.
You have no counter-argument, so you stoop to labeling my comment, as "mansplaining", to dismiss it.
That is an ad hominem, a bad attempt at a argument from fallacy, and just generally weak and dishonest.
@Transdude1996 I'd say my name sounds like it's male ...and he/she may have seen a comment of mine, where I state/imply my male gender.
5 years ago
Posts: 1143
Warn: Banned
Quote from zarlan
@Transdude1996 I'd say my name sounds like it's male ...and he/she may have seen a comment of mine, where I state/imply my male gender.
Oh, I thought that you were a girl. Never really saw anything proving otherwise. That being said, my comment was in jest regardless.
Also, to add on your point about the post being an ad hominem, there's also the fact that this is the internet, where you're sex/race/nationality/etc. doesn't really matter since you can create your own identity. Personal attacks are futile effort because you have no idea if the person on the otherside of the screen is lying or putting up a front (And to what extent). It's one of the reasons why "Tits or GTFO" gained traction, because it was a way for s force discussion to be based on actual points rather than manipulation and ad hominems (And, be, as intended, a degrading act for those failing to contribute to the discussion since they have to resort to exposing their real identity in order to make a "valid point" ).
5 years ago
Posts: 467
Quote from Transdude1996
Oh, I thought that you were a girl.
...because I argue against bigotry, and find it intolerable?
That's very sexist, indeed. Against men.
Personal attacks are futile effort
If only.
It's one of the reasons why "Tits or GTFO" gained traction, because it was a way for s force discussion to be based on actual points
LOL! The preposterous irony of that statement is priceless.
How you haven't been banned, ages ago...
5 years ago
Posts: 1143
Warn: Banned
Quote from zarlan
...because I argue against bigotry, and find it intolerable?
That, and because of your style of writing, and because it seems like there are a lot more girls that are active in the forums than guys (And, how I came to that conclusion was wondering why there were so many yaoi requests on the front page, and checking profile pages answered my question).
