75mm Sister of Battle (CMoN entry)

[Aqui]

Saw this on Facebook.  It's absolutely fantastic!  If GW do do plastic Minis, for the love of Primus, please can we have 'em like this?!

 

 

[xFallenx]

Looks amazing, the detail is simply stunning.

[Eddie Orlock]

The issue I take with stuff on CMoN is the sheer amount of thinly disguised soft-core porn.

 

I like to think that fantasy art has improved with time and gotten more respectful toward women, but I find flicking though the galleries over there disheartening.

[Dread]

Impressive, well, just impressive.

[xFallenx]

The issue I take with stuff on CMoN is the sheer amount of thinly disguised soft-core porn.

 

I like to think that fantasy art has improved with time and gotten more respectful toward women, but I find flicking though the galleries over there disheartening.

I fail to see the correlation between the original post & your input. The issue is the 75mm model & a hope that if/once plastic kits drop, they do the sisters justice.

[Eddie Orlock]

I fail to see the correlation between the original post & your input. The issue is the 75mm model & a hope that if/once plastic kits drop, they do the sisters justice.

I am magnanimous and forgive your lack of insight. The page linked was CMoN, so I offered commentary on the venue the artist selected to display their work, and the community they choose to associate with. I just prefer to keep the contexts of my hobby as something I wouldn't be ashamed of if my friends six year old daughter saw it.

[Cmdr Shepard]

 

The issue I take with stuff on CMoN is the sheer amount of thinly disguised soft-core porn.

 

I like to think that fantasy art has improved with time and gotten more respectful toward women, but I find flicking though the galleries over there disheartening.

I fail to see the correlation between the original post & your input. The issue is the 75mm model & a hope that if/once plastic kits drop, they do the sisters justice.

 

Beside I even fail to see the reason of the polemics itselself. If I make/paint a miniature of a half naked woman does not mean I don't respect women. The irony is the sociaties who really don't respect women force them to wear clothes that cover all their bodies!

It's not polemics against a given society but a mere matter of fact: those society are less respectful towards women than ours. So classical paintings is de facto misogynist because it depict naked women more often than not?

Lack of respect takes place in the way you deal with a person not in what you do with fantasy creative works. Beside we all know fantasy is not reality.

So every one who walk horror movies or watched the saga of Hannibal Lectre is a serial killer?

 

Sorry if I went a little off topic but the attidude to put labels out of the box to persons just because of the way they paint/build a miniatures disturbs me. I value freedom of thinking even in art. We may agree or disagree but persons have the right to express their creative in a lawful way. And painting/making a miniature is not illegal.

 

Back on the topic: I really hope that if GW will ever make plastic SoB minis they will have a very good levl of detail and quality. I was not very impressed with the recent plastic women High Elves miniatures...

 

EDIT after the above post:

Obviously the "rating" issue is relevant. Namely there is a reason such contents are not suitalbe for minors. But this is another matter. The post I was commenting was about the "lack of respect" issue.

[Eddie Orlock]

Beside I even fail to see the reason of the polemics itselself.

Maybe because a little controversy's more exciting than a page an' a half of gushing? I'd also accept genuine critique and discussion of the techniques used.

If I make/paint a miniature of a half naked woman does not mean I don't respect women. The irony is the sociaties who really don't respect women force them to wear clothes that cover all their bodies!

It's not polemics against a given society but a mere matter of fact: those society are less respectful towards women than ours.

'Fact' is a strong word. By what metric are you measuring a societies respect toward women, and how strong is the correlation between this measure of respect and of rules regarding clothing

So classical paintings is de facto misogynist because it depict naked women more often than not?

No, in the modern era it gets a pass firstly because we shouldn't judge the acts of the past through the lense of the present, and secondly, generally because of how the subjects are portrayed in the material. The second part is only a generalisation, with enough years, sometimes some of one era's pornography gets promoted to art.

Lack of respect takes place in the way you deal with a person not in what you do with fantasy creative works. Beside we all know fantasy is not reality.

So every one who walk horror movies or watched the saga of Hannibal Lectre is a serial killer?

Art reflects life as much as life reflects art.

Sorry if I went a little off topic but the attidude to put labels out of the box to persons just because of the way they paint/build a miniatures disturbs me. I value freedom of thinking even in art. We may agree or disagree but persons have the right to express their creative in a lawful way. And painting/making a miniature is not illegal.

I've nothing against freedom of expression, they should be as free to paint their figures how they like as I should be as free to comment and catagorise them as I like. Freedom of speech must be something approaching a two way street.

... EDIT after the above post:

Obviously the "rating" issue is relevant. Namely there is a reason such contents are not suitalbe for minors. But this is another matter. The post I was commenting was about the "lack of respect" issue.

So, censorship for some, but not for others? Maybe we do need a change in society where a woman bust is not considered inappropriate and in need of concealment? Perhaps the current breast feeding movement will, over the long run, make western women as a group more comfortable with themselves while leading the menfolk to the understanding that they're not always sexualised. I don't think I'll see this come to fruition in my lifetime though, my puritan cultural heritage still runs strong.

[Cmdr Shepard]

@ Orlock

I haven't neither the time nor the desire to indulge is a quarrel about strereotypes and prejudices. I have a strong respect for women and I also like to see a model in bikini. This is does not make me a misogynist. In fact I'm the contrary. I despise sexism both the one coming from men, both the one coming from women. I value equality and I don't tolerate discrimination, including reserse discrimination.

And for the record I wasn't using clothes as a parameter I just quoted a FACT: one of the culture with less respect for the women is the one that forces them to wear a garment that covers the women whole body and has a screen that covers their faces as well. I didn't say that's the reason they didn't respect women. I said they didn't respect women (a given FACT) and they force them to wear that garment (another FACT). How the two are connected is not a argument for a forum about miniatures.

I simply posted a reply because I feel the stereotypes and prejudices you were talking not polite, for using an euphemism. You are entititled of your opinion but I others persons have the right to not being considered male chauvinists only because they painted a miniature of an half naked women.

That's the real lack of respect!

I apology with the mods for the off topic posts. I want just to tell I posted for a matter of principle. I consider myself of paladin of civil rights and thet prejudice I read about made me to intervene. Not to justify who actually painted those minis but to protect a principle, that principle of freedom of thinking who is the essence of democracy.

I resepct EVERYONE, not just a single category while I discriminate/offend the others.

Sorry, again, Mods.... forgive my little crusade in the name of principles

EDIT:

Art reflects life as much as life reflects art.

psychologists, psychiatrists and profilers say Fantasy is different from Reality. Namely those who watch horrors movies, and for the records I'm not a huge fan of the genre, are not serial killer just because they watch them

Just read some essay or watch some TV serie a la Criminal Minds to expand your knowledge before putting labels out of the boxes

I've nothing against freedom of expression, they should be as free to paint their figures how they like as I should be as free to comment and catagorise them as I like. Freedom of speech must be something approaching a two way street.

You accused them to not respect women which is like saying they are racists. You are offending them while they never attack you. Criticism does not me offend. One thing is saying "I don't like it for x,y,z, reasons" other thing is saying" you don't respect women" which is a accusation and you had not clue about their "guilt" a part your own prejudices.

2nd Edit:

I'm abandoning this conversation because it adds nothing to the hobby discussion. I just shows how several persons do not respect different opinions and think their own opionions should be the only parameters to use to discern right from wrong. Even it this means violating the civil rights of other individuals.

[Fibonacci]

Pass the popcorn!  This is better than Otawa vs Montreal.

[Eddie Orlock]

@ Orlock

I haven't neither the time nor the desire to indulge is a quarrel about strereotypes and prejudices. ... forgive my little crusade in the name of principles

For someone with little inclination, you've sure thrown up quite a wall of vehemence. This is good, your passion gives us something to work with.

I can see how it's possible to reconcile respect for women as a whole with a desire to view them in scanty garmentry, it's simply a question of how the latter are presented.

With regard to your alleged 'fact' I'm not disputing it, I'm mearly looking for your supporting evidence. You're currently leveling a mysogynistic charge at an entier people, and I've heard it put that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So, if you had some metric to use to measure 'respect' toward women in a society, perhaps something like gender disparity in average number of years of education, or even something like the compositions of the states teams in the last Olympics we could correlate it with, I dunno, the depiction of women in media marketed to those countries and if that was strong we could support your postulate.

I'm struggling with how someone can have a right to control what I think of them. In our puttative example they've crafted something that I think objectifies women, and being the only evidence I have of this persons character, I'm not allowed to even think they might be a bit, as you've put it, 'chauvinist'? This would trample on my dearly held freedom of conscious.

I confess a certain level of amusement that we've both hoisted the banner of freedom of conscious. How do you rank the principles you support when they inevitably come into conflict with each other?

With regard to art imitating life, it's not so much what you consume that speaks volumes about you, but what you produce. Watching a show about serial killers doesn't make you a serial killer, but being able to write a good show about serial killers at least requires the author to model serial killer behaviour in his mind in a credible way, to be able to think like a serial killer. To create an objectifiying image of a woman requires a fair amout of deliberate act.

[Cmdr Shepard]

 

For someone with little inclination, you've sure thrown up quite a wall of vehemence. This is good, your passion gives us something to work with.

Actually I'd call it "indignation". I'm not trying to boost the polemics, actually I'd like to cool it down... if possible ;), but I perceived your statements based on prejudices and that made me to activate the "paladin of civil rights" mode.

 

 

I can see how it's possible to reconcile respect for women as a whole with a desire to view them in scanty garmentry, it's simply a question of how the latter are presented.

As I said above my posts was about the principle not the specifica case. Namely the tendency to put labels on persons based on prejudices or steroetypes.

 

 

With regard to art imitating life, it's not so much what you consume that speaks volumes about you, but what you produce. Watching a show about serial killers doesn't make you a serial killer, but being able to write a good show about serial killers at least requires the author to model serial killer behaviour in his mind in a credible way, to be able to think like a serial killer.

False. There is a thing known as "research". You want to produce a TV show about serial killers and you look through FBI archives and study real cases.

Your attitude of making swift judgements basinig them on stereotypes was the reason of my "indignation".

Also the "obejectification" issue is a matter we should leave to sociologists. I mean we can talk about it now but I suppose the mods will like to see a threat to go so much off topic.

Just to spend few words: exploitations tooks place with everything. It's the current market who tries to make highest possible profits from everything and that's include both genders, tragic events etc...

Beside it's more likely to objectification consider a woman a sort of house worker and a way to procreate ofsprings than admring the aesthetic pleasantness of her body.

In the first case she is used as tool in the second she is actually appreciated. Obviously there are persons who do it with respect and others with lack of it but they are specific cases varying from individual to individual.

However the first option (house worker etc) is always an objectification.

Consider me a "liberal" but not one who not respect women because in all my life I always showed a profound respect for them and I do not deserve such treatment.

[Eddie Orlock]

 

With regard to art imitating life, it's not so much what you consume that speaks volumes about you, but what you produce. Watching a show about serial killers doesn't make you a serial killer, but being able to write a good show about serial killers at least requires the author to model serial killer behaviour in his mind in a credible way, to be able to think like a serial killer.

False. There is a thing known as "research". You want to produce a TV show about serial killers and you look through FBI archives and study real cases.

Okay, so being able to credibly model the thinking of murderers can be a learned skill. It may also depend on the nature of the show and how long you want the series to last.

... I mean we can talk about it now but I suppose the mods will like to see a threat to go so much off topic.

I've generally found them to be fairly lenient around here with topic deviations if we can remain, if not constructive, at least civil to each other.

Beside it's more likely to objectification consider a woman a sort of house worker and a way to procreate ofsprings than admring the aesthetic pleasantness of her body.

In the first case she is used as tool in the second she is actually appreciated. Obviously there are persons who do it with respect and others with lack of it but they are specific cases varying from individual to individual.

I dunno if it's fair to be definitive like that, you're using what I think may be a bit of an extreme example. I don't think that being a homemaker should be anymore proscribed than it is prescribed. I think the answer lies in education and empowerment. With employable skills they have the opportunity to work outside the home. If some choose not to, that's quite acceptable. Maybe that's the key right there, was a choice with genuine options presented and made.

 

In a previous post, I suggested the possibility to researching various measures by which we might grade a societies 'respect' for its women. Maybe we could look into employment statistics as a measure of opportunity and oppression?

[Sabathiel]

Well I for one think the model looks awesome, 12/10.

[Cmdr Shepard]

Okay, so being able to credibly model the thinking of murderers can be a learned skill.

It's very known trait of human learning. You should be thankful to it since that's why real persons can investigate real crimes and bring the criminals to justice. How can identify them if you cannot comprehed their behaviour. Honestly I'm surprised you think such things cannot be learned and you have to be one of them to understand them... C'mon we are 40K fans and not every Inquisitor has to be choas corrupted to understand and fight it and chaos is more subtle than a mere human behaviour.

I've generally found them to be fairly lenient around here with topic deviations if we can remain, if not constructive, at least civil to each other.

Nevertheless we went quite off topic

I dunno if it's fair to be definitive like that, you're using what I think may be a bit of an extreme example. I don't think that being a homemaker should be anymore proscribed than it is prescribed. I think the answer lies in education and empowerment. With employable skills they have the opportunity to work outside the home. If some choose not to, that's quite acceptable. Maybe that's the key right there, was a choice with genuine options presented and made.

In a previous post, I suggested the possibility to researching various measures by which we might grade a societies 'respect' for its women. Maybe we could look into employment statistics as a measure of opportunity and oppression?

Perhaps I didn't made my post clear enough (I'm not a native English speaker so sometimes language issue may rise )

I was not talking about the choice to become a homemaker; I was talking about that attitude (rather old and hopefully near to extinction) which considered it the woman's main, if not only, role.

Personally I think such behaviour shows an unacceptable lack of respect for the woman and de fact turns her into an object.

I don't think admiring a lingerie model in skympy clothes a lack of respect toward women. I personally believe a woman has the right to show her body if that's what she wants.

Then we may talk on how to preserve minors from view adult content but that's another story.

But he we limit our analysis to the "respect dimesion" I strongly believe we must respect the choice of the model in the example I made.

I'm not so old to claim a total knowledge on how society work but I can tell you in the nearly 28 years of my life I learned something on our society and I can tell you the worst lack of respect toward women does not come from a skympi bikini, an adult/glamour content but from a obsolete mindsets and attitudes which deprived them from the freedom of choice.

If a woman want to show her body, damn she has the right to do it, in the proper settings of course (we must protect minors from adult contents).

It's her choice and I don't see why we shouldn't respect it.

And back of the miniature argument: trust me, it won't be a half naked miniature that will compromise women rights. Personally I find the lack of good female miniatures in GW line more social disturbing than theh half naked minis you were complaing about

Why? Because the half naked minis we are talking about gave importance to subject it depict, because ignore someone/something is most of the times the actual insult

NOTE: I'm not making polemics with GW product line... just a general comment which made use of an example...

EDIT:

Well I for one think the model looks awesome, 12/10.

Finally someone brought us back to topic.. well done

[thade]

The topics of women's rights, respect, and the patriarchy are very important and deserve a lot of time and attention. But since 1. people seem to have spun this into that area "just to see controversy", 2. the angle isn't constructive and 3. it's not really conducive to further conversation about power armor, the most noble Inquisition has deemed it necessary to kill this thread with fire.

For future reference: don't do that kind of thing.