Do you consider Lilith Aensland fans Lolicons?

[LilithSlave]

Oh wait, they are! [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_sex_characteristic#In_humans] There's more to sexuality than boning.

Huge bulging muscles are not common in any humans. They take extreme effort for both men and women. And no, women do not have to rely on steroids anymore than men to get large muscles. The people who act like all female body builders take steroids to get their mass and men don't, are presumptuous liars.

You just linked, a WIKIPEDIA article, like wikipedia is facts and not mostly just random internet opinions. And this isn't nearly as much of a secondary sex characteric, to my understanding, as many other things.

When boys go through puberty, they start getting a deepending voice and their shoulders start becoming a bit broader. Not accumulating ridiculous loads of muscle bulk. Muscles come most of all from exercise, not puberty.

And beside the point, it doesn't matter if both are extreme secondary sex characteristics or whatever, I shouldn't have even brought that up. It'll only serve as a red herring and bs "how can anyone believe you if you're and idiot who things this, argue with me about this" logical fallacy arguments. The fact of the matter is women don't request musculebound dudes in games, dudes do.

Doesn't make it less hyper-sexualization.

Yes, it does. When people say "hypersexualization", they're not talking about secondary sex characteristics.

We're talking, primarily, about the issue of the male gaze. That is, the dominance of heteronormative male sexualization of women and complete unimportance of their own looks in terms of sexual appeal. Heterosexual men set the terms for what is gender and sexually okay in the gaming industry.

 

[wintercoat]

snip

Never said that, just that they're two different things. It's the difference between enjoying the revving of a muscle cars engine and enjoying the body work and paint job. You're enjoying the car, just in two very different ways.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Funny that, you don't even provide a counter-argument

Because I've already done so thousands of times before. It's getting tiresome.

It's also sad and pathetic how something so obvious has to be explained.

Except that your explanation is wrong, and therefor you are wrong, as I've shown in my edited post. Yes, musculature in men is a secondary sexual characteristic, and yes fighting games often blow those up to ridiculous extremes. And that's making a caricature of the male gender, as they do with the female gender.

Actually, they aren't. Those tumor filled men aren't there for the titillation of the female player.

Doesn't make it less hyper-sexualization. It's making a caricature of a gender, which is done in both cases. And I'd say that in both cases it's pretty bad. Not to mention revolting.

But why they are there makes them completely different. Female fighters are hyper sexualized for the titillation of the male player. Male characters are again done to appeal to the male player. So a female player complaining about it is justified.

 

[LilithSlave]

And I fail to see the problem with this.

The problem is that status quo heterosexual men set the gender norms for the video game industry. That has pretty much dictated that men are a badass power fantasy, and women are a weakling sexual fantasy.

You don't see the problem with the typical female or atypical male or female not having a say in video games? You don't see the problem with their desires not mattering?

unreasonable standard.

There's more to things that unreasonable standards. It's what the standards themselves mean.

 

[NikolaiK]

Overly-ripped macho men are the same deal as those voluptuous bimbo's

For the 9001st time, no they're not.

Why not?
When a female character's secondary sexual characteristics are exaggerated to an implausible degree, that is definitely negative sexualisation.
When a male character is portrayed as ridiculously overmuscled, and has no personality beyond macho grunting, that is not stereotyping or sexualisation?
EDIT: LilithSlave, how can you even try to say that female characters are being portrayed as 'weaklings' when they are characters in a fighting game? If all the female characters lost to male characters all the time, then they would be weaklings. As it is, the characters are all able to fight, irrespective of gender.

 

[Cowabungaa]

snip

Oh yes, because Wikipedia is totally worthless when it comes to stuff like this. [http://news.cnet.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html] I could just as well quote my old biology textbook, you're grasping at straws here.

Your argument makes no sense. Of course horrendous tumor-like muscles are not common with people, neither are those insane female proportions. Does that suddenly stop breasts being secondary sexual characteristics? Of course not! Didn't you read my post when I said those games make caricatures of both genders? Didn't you read the words "overblown" and "ridiculous extremes"?

And that caricaturization counts just as well for men as they do for women in those games. Why on earth is that so hard to accept? Both are bad!

The fact of the matter is women don't request musculebound dudes in games, dudes do.

So? Both present unfair and unrealistic bodily images to pander to a certain audience. It's done in the same way and for the same reason. How exactly does that make one caricature any worse than the other?

 

[LilithSlave]

If you dont want to be asked to explain yourself, dont bring something up, its that simple.

I wasn't being asked to explain myself. I was being attacked for not starting out with a gigantic tl;dr explanation to something I've already explained thousands of times before.

And I am doing it again, I just didn't do it in that post.

Sometimes there a part where you just have to facepalm for a second before you get your thousands together. Like when a Creationist comes in asks people to prove evolution. And all the sound minded folks have to roll their eyes again and thing about how annoying to have to explain obvious science yet again.

 

[Therumancer]

I'd say you have nothing to worry about, Lilith Aensland is not a Loli character even remotely. In general "loli" requires a little girl, and Lilith is not that. Lilith is physically a young woman, not a little girl. Her not having gigantic breasts and so on has nothing to do with whether something is Loli or not.

Lilith's big schtick is that she's a divided portion of Morrigan's soul. Morrigan looks like the typical sex bomb succubus, and acts like a total sex bomb harlot most of the time, but is actually fairly noble and one of the "good guys" when you get down to the bottom line. Lilith is exactly the opposite in that she's attractive but has a more lithe build, acts innocent and naive (though is still a succubus so throws out some odd contridictions to that demeanor) and when you get down to it is outright evil.

In that universe there *IS* a "loli" character in the form of B.B. Hood/Buletta, who is supposed to look like an innocent little girl, even if she's a hardened mercenary. Allowing for the stylization of the artwork you can look at her to see what "girl" looks like compared to "young woman".

Now yes, Lilith is a cheesecake character, there is no doubt about that, the same can be said of most female fighting game characters, but she's hardly the most disturbing one I can think of.

I'll also say that when your considering "lolicon" and your reaction to SOME things that fall under that umbrella that there isn't that much to be worried about or ashamed of. The term "Jailbait" exists for a reason, and you'll notice that "teen experience" movies and such sell really well, things like Porky's, American Pie, and other similar works. The bottom line is that teenagers are expected to be attracted to other teenagers, and biological impulses don't suddenly vanish when you turn 18. It's just that adults are expected to have the self control to not bang kids, because of the potential fallout from children unable to deal with that. The way you think and act as an adult is FAR differant from when you were a teenager.

In general when lolicon gets disturbing is when it features REALLY little kids, pre-sexual humans as opposed to teenagers, who by all measures are sexually active in amongst themselves (and nothing will change that, which is why I am a supporter of school condom distribution rather than trying to force abstinance... adults should stay away from teens regardless however).

Basically if your wary about a relationship (or just sex) with someone who seems too young or "innocent" then kudos for you, that just means your responsible. An appreciation for a character like Lilith if you go for the style of art is pretty normal. Someone who say wants to bang Sasami/Pretty Sammy from Tenchi Muyo... well that's when you start getting into the creeptastic.

At the same time, I'll also say that when dealing with pure fantasy a lot of the regular rules don't apply. A character like Buffy The Vampire Slayer getting it on with Angel.. basically a 30 year old dude physically who is actually centuries old with a 16-17 year old girl (not sure of Buffy's actual age, but this happened before she graduated High School so she definatly wasn't legal) more or less gets a pass, and even has been shown on mainstream TV because it's pure fantasy. Real laws and protections weren't written with things like super heroes and vampires in mind given that they do not exist.

I think "Piers Anthony" who is a pretty mainstream author (or has been) probably takes the cake for pushing the whole "alternative sexual morality in fantasy" thing over the years.

In short I don't care, and I doubt many other people do. Lilith isn't even that ambigious overall, and it's not like your having issues with wanting to seduce 11 year olds or whatever.

My personal guideline for when something is going too far is when you have characters younger than 14 (High School Freshman) involved in any kind of sexual action. Largely because you can justify 14 in the catagory of "teen romance", anything younger than that is pretty much pre-sexual, and you really shouldn't be going there... at all. Really though a lot of it just comes down to the simple belief that it would be ridiculous to ban every movie or story that has the basic plot of "stupid freshmen try and get with hot senior girls, and succeed... but all this screwed up stuff happens on the way" which is a plotline that more or less defines hundreds of movies of the kind people find funny... or perhaps even relevent if they happen to be of the age in question.

 

[the_pleasure_is_mine]

Spoiler: To make your WTF-o-meter explode, I give you Etna.

She's 1470 years old, about 4'10", ~80-90 lbs.

I regret never spending more time searching for Disgaea back when I first saw it advertised in PS2 magazines.

 

[Cowabungaa]

But why they are there makes them completely different. Female fighters are hyper sexualized for the titillation of the male player. Male characters are again done to appeal to the male player. So a female player complaining about it is justified.

I never said it wasn't justified, I said it wasn't any more justified than a man complaining about his gender being hyper-sexualized as well.

The why is also not any different, at least not when you get down to the gist of things. Both genders are being made caricatures off, both are done so in the same way; by blowing up secundary sexual characteristics, and both are done so for the same reason; to appeal to the same audience so the game company sells more games.

Sometimes there a part where you just have to facepalm for a second before you get your thousands together. Like when a Creationist comes in asks people to prove evolution. And all the sound minded folks have to roll their eyes again and thing about how annoying to have to explain obvious science yet again.

Funny that, coming from you, as because if someone is the analogue of the Creationist here, it's you, ignoring simple biology. You really need to get off that high horse of yours, you're rather difficult to have a discussion with, ignoring arguments and just going all "Nuh-uh" and stuff.

 

[LilithSlave]

Both are bad!

True, but both are bad for different reasons.

They both exist due to the prominence of the male gaze. The former is to make women sexually interesting to men, largely by making them weak(large breasts in reality, makes women physically weak). While huge muscles is largely to make men seem physically capable.

The tendencies in video games often eerily resemble an Aryan twist on the ubermensch philosophy. That white heterosexual males are the peak of humanity and competition. That the best and worthiest men impregnate many women. That white men are the most physically capable, mentally capable, and morally capable, and are the ones who deserve to survive and have their genes passed on.

That is, the whole thing, while both are bad, it basically tries to send a certain message: Men are better than women and their desires are more important.

Boo fucking hoo. Some games pander to males. What a terrible thing.

Not some games. The status quo of the gaming industry itself.

 

[NikolaiK]

I wasn't being asked to explain myself. I was being attacked for not starting out with a gigantic tl;dr explanation to something I've already explained thousands of times before.

And I am doing it again, I just didn't do it in that post.

Sometimes there a part where you just have to facepalm for a second before you get your thousands together. Like when a Creationist comes in asks people to prove evolution. And all the sound minded folks have to roll their eyes again and thing about how annoying to have to explain obvious science yet again.

Yes, I am sure that thousands of times you have definitively and irrefutably proved your point. However, for the benefit of the rest of us shamefully primitive Cro-Magnons, would you mind copy-pasting this argument from somewhere, so we can all gaze in awe at it's amazing tautological beauty.
EDIT: Wild Godwin appeared! Fighting games are actually neo-nazi indoctrination!

 

[Cowabungaa]

True, but both are bad for different reasons.

They both exist due to the prominence of the male gaze. The former is to make women sexually interesting to men, largely by making them weak(large breasts in reality, makes women physically weak). While huge muscles is largely to make men seem physically capable.

The tendencies in video games often eerily resemble an Aryan twist on the ubermensch philosophy. That white heterosexual males are the peak of humanity and competition. That the best and worthiest men impregnate many women. That white men are the most physically capable, mentally capable, and morally capable, and are the ones who deserve to survive and have their genes passed on.

That is, the whole thing, while both are bad, it basically tries to send a certain message: Men are better than women and their desires are more important.

You're really reading too much into it. We're talking about caricatures aimed at teenage boys, the reason is so much simpler; they just want to sell lots of videogames and get rich.

Does that stem from a sexually unequal image? Yes. Does that have anything to do with some kind of ubermensch philosophy? No, not really. It's just that thousands upon thousands of generations of living with rather fixed gender roles isn't somehow taken out of humanity's collective psyche in a mere 50 years. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try, but don't expect miracles and don't bother with silly Aryan power fantasy theories. The truth is a lot simpler.

Not to mention that even hyper-sexualized females in fighting games are pretty badass, considering how much ass they kick. Doesn't really fit with that message.

Also, it must be said, at least this post of yours isn't a simple "No." Kudo's. And no that wasn't sarcastic.

 

[LilithSlave]

I mean, shit. Why does EVERYTHING suddenly have to appeal to women?

Another strawman argument directed at criticism of male privilege.

Why can't women's desires, gay people's desires, black people's desires, matter in the gaming industry? Why can the majority of games only appeal to heterosexual men?

 

[Paragon Fury]

Overly-ripped macho men are the same deal as those voluptuous bimbo's

For the 9001st time, no they're not.

Yes they are.

Female sexuality has to do with their hips and waist mainly, and their chest can play and important part as well.

Male sexuality has to do with appearances of strength or physical ability, and later in human history heightened mental ability could play a role as well, but not as much a physical appearance.

For either gender, sexuality has little to do with the actual vagina or penis; because so long as these parts are present and actually functional their full purpose has been fulfilled. The previously mentioned things are far more important because they are direct indicators of a female/male's sexual viability and health.