Results 451 to 480 of 1321
Thread: Armor designs for females?
-
2017-07-24, 10:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Location
- Somewhere Warm
Re: Armor designs for females?
I wasn't certain if I wanted to take part in this discussion, but I just wanted to highlight this post. Just to let it sink in that this is in fact a statement made by someone on this forum.
I may comb through the thread and make one of those bingo tables for "Women's Fantasy Armor Debates". That seems like a constructive use of my time.On a quest to marry Asmodeus, lord of the Nine Hells, or die trying.
-
2017-07-24, 10:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
- Location
- The Lakes
Re: Armor designs for females?
That's part of the problem.
Don't try to "convey" something, show me what the character is supposed to look like. Especially for written fiction -- show me who and what I'm supposed to be picturing in my imagination as I read about the character.
Seriously, to hell with symbolism.
Which really doesn't have anything to do with how badly you've misrepresented what I actually said.
Indeed. Pretty ironic, given the context.
So here's a rather egregious example of "armor" worn by a female character. Setting aside the basic flaws in the anatomy... why would anyone ever wear that into combat?
(To be clear, there's nothing I've found in the context of this character or getup that justifies or lampshades the horrible design.)Last edited by Max_Killjoy; 2017-07-24 at 10:39 PM.
It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.
Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.
The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.
The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.
-
2017-07-24, 10:41 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
Re: Armor designs for females?
-
2017-07-24, 10:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
Re: Armor designs for females?
Within the initial confines of the discussion (that is, female adventurer armor in fantasy artwork) it's actually a valid defense. It's the equivalent of pointing out that of course none of the slaughtered men at the foot of the BBEGs throne are wearing useful armor, they were peasants/slaves/prisoners, not adventurers.
But given that the discussion has expanded to generally be about sexist portrayals of women in fantasy artwork, it is indeed a terrible defense of the image.
-
2017-07-24, 10:51 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Gender
Re: Armor designs for females?
......I got a bingo on the rhetoric version. Entire Fourth row down.
what do I win? I want my prize Max.
@ Donnadogsoth:
REALLY?
JUST.
REALLY.
1. "their" women? as if they own them?
2. princesses? the medieval title literally meant to do nothing but make babies?
3. damsels in distress, the very problematic trope that got this whole vast conversation way before this thread or the threads before it ever existed, started in the first place?
Just no.
No.
I'm just a little ABSOLUTELY LIVID right now.
-
2017-07-24, 10:51 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
- Location
- The Lakes
Re: Armor designs for females?
One, because there's a lot of overlap with these issues when it comes to cover art.
Two, because written fiction and RPGs are both largely works of written language, that is, books (despite some company's efforts to cram 1/3 of every page with full color artwork that the text has to wrap around strangely...)
Three, because one thing RPGs and written fiction actually do have in common is that the action takes place within the players' / readers' imagination. How they visualize what's going on is to some degree affected by the art. This is perhaps even more important in an RPG where the mental space has to in a way be shared and similar enough that there's not total disconnect between what the players are picturing.
If my GM shows me a picture of an NPC enemy and they have a big hole in their armor right over their chest or abdomen, where do you think I'm aiming/calling my shots? (Don't presume magic armor, here...)
Purple monkey dishwater manatee north?Last edited by Max_Killjoy; 2017-07-24 at 10:55 PM.
It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.
Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.
The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.
The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.
-
2017-07-24, 10:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Location
- Somewhere Warm
Re: Armor designs for females?
Side note: Intent is still important in visual art. When making choices about how to dress a character in something, it shows what the artist is trying to convey about them.
Part of the problem is that women get place disproportionately in outfits that are designed just so the artist can convey that they are, in fact, hot babes.
Yes, but the slaughtered men are unlikely to be wearing thongs and be twisted into poses that show off their shapely behinds and nice abs. Women tend to be put in weirdly sexual poses in fantasy art and comics in a way that men aren't.
(The rebuttal to my statement is to point out things like Conan, but there's a difference between the rugged, shirtless barbarian and the women dangling off him in bikinis. It's about portrayal, position and focus as much as level of undress. It's very possible to draw a man being sexualized in the same manner, but just taking his shirt off isn't enough.)On a quest to marry Asmodeus, lord of the Nine Hells, or die trying.
-
2017-07-24, 11:05 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- Laughing with the sinners
- Gender
Re: Armor designs for females?
I never said the whole game was defined by sexist art.
I pointed out an image that appears ON THE COVER of one of the most important core books --which is wicked sexist-- when you asked for examples of sexist art.
If I'm a woman thinking about playing D&D, and my first image on the cover of the books is two reasonably dressed male characters and a naked, captive, very sexually displayed woman, what do you think my first impression will be?
If you never get past the cover, the art inside really doesn't matter.
-
2017-07-24, 11:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
- Location
- The Lakes
Re: Armor designs for females?
The funny thing about this is, my core objections are about
1) armor and clothing as functional items -- and the disconnect between that functionality and how they're often presented in artwork for RPGs and the related "overgenre" of speculative fiction.
2) how that disconnect can rob the artwork of its ability to show an accurate depiction of the character and setting
Issues of gender, sex, sexuality, etc, enter into it for me largely because one of the first defenses offered up for much of the artwork I'm taking issue with, is that "sexy" is more important, that people want to look at "sexy" characters, etc. So there's a bit of irony there, in that immediately calling on that defense brings in the issue of whether the characters are being presented simply as objects, which might even be a deeper hole.It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.
Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.
The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.
The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.
-
2017-07-24, 11:39 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
Re: Armor designs for females?
I'll be honest, I always figured the cover was aiming to be an homage to King Kong, so I'm not sure there was much intent other than aping (pun partially intended) imagery that everyone would know.
Yes, but the slaughtered men are unlikely to be wearing thongs and be twisted into poses that show off their shapely behinds and nice abs. Women tend to be put in weirdly sexual poses in fantasy art and comics in a way that men aren't.
(The rebuttal to my statement is to point out things like Conan, but there's a difference between the rugged, shirtless barbarian and the women dangling off him in bikinis. It's about portrayal, position and focus as much as level of undress. It's very possible to draw a man being sexualized in the same manner, but just taking his shirt off isn't enough.)
I asked for examples of games where the balance of the art was mostly women as sex objects and men as power fantasies. I know there are individual art pieces that meet the definition, that much was established in the first handful of pages of this thread (by myself even). I was objecting to the idea I'd seen multiple times that the games as a whole are doing this. Although looking back now I admit that your post that I quoted does talk about art individually (I had mentally grouped you with another poster talking about whole games) and that my own post on the same subject was not sufficiently clear, so my apologies on that.
If I'm a woman thinking about playing D&D, and my first image on the cover of the books is two reasonably dressed male characters and a naked, captive, very sexually displayed woman, what do you think my first impression will be?
If you never get past the cover, the art inside really doesn't matter.
-
2017-07-25, 12:15 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Location
- San Francisco Bay area
- Gender
Re: Armor designs for females?
So, something like this?:
Ah yes, helmet horns.
*shudder*
I told myself that "I already have all the D&D rules I need", and "Unearthed Arcana was awful, I don't want more like that!", but really it was the mid 1980's and later art that I didn't like (too bad too, as a recent peak shows me that up until '99 the rules didn't change much, but did become more clearly written, my loss).
Stuff like this:
The weird thing is I saw both Conan the Barbarian and Conan the Destroyer, and enjoyed them.
We all have lines.
Speaking of which, out of some art that @Ashiel posted:
The first two show more skin, but really don't seem sillier than the third picture (despite that he is going to fall, and she's in heels), because they're not in armor, but the "Knight", has both the "window", and ridiculous shoulder metal, but still not as silly as helmet horns.
I would assume that it was ceremonial armor. History does have armor made as much for style as for protection (and they're certainly been military uniforms that don't look as if they were made for combat).
A lot depends on tone. Seeing images from the Osprey books alongside WarHammer stuff feels off, but disparate treatment is noticeable.
If a man is pictured in "armor" with giant oversize spiky pauldrons, and a plunging v-neck collar, or something like this:
(which seems more "gladiator" than "soldier")
would make "armor" with bare midriffs worn by ladies less jarring.
But apparently for video games you need to go this far to balance:
-
2017-07-25, 01:28 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
-
2017-07-25, 02:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
Re: Armor designs for females?
Ok, let's discuss the examples. Comments in red :
Bored now, i'll skp the rest.
Soo far that have all been cases of either reasonable armor or no armor at all.
I hate to brake it to you, but people not actually wearing any armor are not unrealistic. Neither does anyone here argue that skipping armor for more comfortable clothing in contexts outside of battlefields is somehow suicidal.
Seriously, why are you linking lots of pictures with people in everyday clothing in a thread about unrealistic armor ? What is that supposed to be a proof for ? That not everyone all the time wears armor including people who actually own some ?Last edited by Satinavian; 2017-07-25 at 02:36 AM.
-
2017-07-25, 05:16 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2016
Re: Armor designs for females?
All of this is incredibly true, and this is indeed a problem of the people, not the art... But. One thing I feel should be added to this is that if there is anything that might encourage these people to seek out roleplaying communities, and to make them think their views are in any way acceptable there, that is an issue that might deserve a look.
And if the art we use for our games does, in the eyes of those creeps and predators, reinforce their worldviews, by stating sexy as an important aspect of quite a lot of female characters, going so far as to impede on logic/versimilitude for a lot of people, in a way that the male counterparts don't do nearly so frequent - then changing the artwork won't make these guys any less creepy or predatorial (Nor keeping the artwork perfectly nice guys into creeps). But the change might just make it so that they don't feel like "this is the community for me".
Creeps getting the wrong message about their behaviour is a sideeffect of cheesecake pictures, not the main intention, obviously. Not a very strong one, probably. You can try to argue that the benefit of cheesecake pics is larger than the negative sideeffects (Probably would need studies that don't exist to corroborate either side. Or a way to weigh the two against each other). I will side-eye you if you do that, but that is rooted in the way I weigh these things.
And, yes, TTRPGs do have quite a lot of good counterexamples. The problem is not one exclusive to them, nor the most pronounced there - CRPGs, especially MMOs are often far worse offenders. But many women who game aren't just confronted exclusively with the ones from TRPG books.
Now imagine: For someone with the drive to play these games, it being stronger than the turnoff of the armor. The armor maybe slightly lessening the enjoyment, but hey, what can you do. Now turning to a medium of more freedom, more imagination - only to find in the examples, the ones supposed to stoke you imagination and to tell you how this, strange, different world is... have the same problems of design, if not as bad, still... not good.
Then I think a certain frustration might be acceptable. And they probably aren't gonna see this as an issue of TRPG art exclusively. Trying to argue that it is, seems... dishonest. All of this is part of the same culture, and of quite intervowen subcultures that grew from each other no less.
(Another thing is, a handful of examples of Armor more suited to a catwalk than a fight might just be enough to make a person that wants realistic armor roll their eyes, groan, and be turned off. A handful of examples of functional, realistic armor are, I think, very unlikely to have the same effect on people that enjoy the sexy ones.
With the forseeable result that, no, people who want functional armor do not have all of the opportunity to look at their stuff, when even the stuff that is generally good about these things insists on throwing in a handful of cheesecake pictures. RPG illustrations generally don't come in packs of one inside the books.)
-
2017-07-25, 05:56 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: Armor designs for females?
This thread is an excellent example of the fallout caused by stating opinion as objective fact, especially when doing so condescendingly or rudely.
Turns out that people become defensive when you call their preference objectively bad and imply they are bad people for enjoying it. Shocker.
Turns out people respond to snark and condescension with snark and condescension. Shocker.
So maybe, maybe, state preferences as preferences and don't expect the reader to dig for your real meaning due to laziness. Just say you opinion is an opinion. There are many ways to do so. Allow me to demonstrate:
"I feel that...."
"In my opinion...."
"I think that...."
"In my personal experience, I have found that...."
"It seems to me...."
I swear, part of me want to stalk this discussion and translate opinions stated as truths back into opinions. But that would be maximum snark and I might get in trouble.
Long story short,
Responsibility lies with the SPEAKER/WRITER to communicate clearly, NOT on the LISTENER to interpret correctly.
-
2017-07-25, 06:18 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Location
- San Francisco Bay area
- Gender
-
2017-07-25, 07:44 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
-
2017-07-25, 07:57 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Gender
Re: Armor designs for females?
-
2017-07-25, 08:23 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
- Location
- The Lakes
Re: Armor designs for females?
It would appear that he/she is spamming the thread with that stuff because I made some disparaging remarks about artwork showing characters going into combat (or similar) in useless armor... and he/she strawmanned that position into "anyone not in armor is committing suicide". So now he/she is trying to sell the claim that all these pictures are a rebuttal.
The ignore function is a blessing when that sort of thing goes on.Last edited by Max_Killjoy; 2017-07-25 at 08:28 AM.
It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.
Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.
The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.
The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.
-
2017-07-25, 08:24 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
- Location
- The Lakes
Re: Armor designs for females?
It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.
Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.
The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.
The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.
-
2017-07-25, 08:25 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
- Location
- Right behind you!
- Gender
-
2017-07-25, 09:41 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- Laughing with the sinners
- Gender
Re: Armor designs for females?
OK, now I'm annoyed.
I think I've been a voice of moderation in this increasingly heated thread. My point has been "Art is subjective. Like what you want, but understand some people think the unrealistic armor is silly, breaks immersion and can be sexist."
So then I was asked, where, pray tell, is this sexist art? Like it was hard to find.
So I presented the COVER of the first edition CORE RULEBOOK of the MOST POULAR fantasy RPG. I didn't find a picture scribbled in the margin of a third party supplement for FATAL. I figured this was a prominent example which was both silly and impractical and sexist.
Now, I never said that means you shouldn't like it. Just that it's a good example of what I don't like, and what people seem to be denying exists.
Liking it is fine. That's a matter of preference. But the defense of it is ridiculous.
I don't care if you "like the picture." Art is subjective. But the whole. "OK, sure, it's the cover, but that's not all the art in the edition. Jeeze." or 'Maybe it's not an example of impractical adventuring gear. Maybe it's one of these much more sexist stereotypes" like that makes it OK, or "this woman I know is OK with it" which is the "I'm not a racist; some of my best friends are black" defense.
I will repeat:
Art is subjective. Like what you want. But impractical clothing or armor can look silly, break immersion and can be sexist.
And if you can't see that the freaking cover of the most important book of the most popular RPG of it's day did all those things, I don't think there's much I can say that would help.
-
2017-07-25, 10:13 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: Armor designs for females?
That someone can twist/misunderstand words is no excuse to not speak clearly and divide between opinion and fact in your words.
In fact, I'm surprised that you're arguing that the possibility of someone misusing your words is reason to speak LESS clearly. This seems as obviously not helpful as using a flamethrower to put out a housefire.
-
2017-07-25, 10:42 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2012
Re: Armor designs for females?
If I say “my father” does that mean I own my father? You're being too touchy.
Saying all princesses do is make babies is like saying all princes do is wage war. I know which I'd rather be doing.
I wish I could not believe that culture has degenerated this far, that the wonderful, perennial “damsels in distress” is a controversial, nigh taboo trope. It's like we want our women to be ravished by monsters now, unless they can defend themselves because they are Super Duper Warriors. My point is friendly male energy has from the beginning of time been dedicated towards defending women from hostile male energy. In our rush to make war seem fun and "equal" in our gaming lives we have lost sight of that basic truth. That we live in a time when it has been perverted in the name of equality is unfortunate, and, for gamers, all the worse that it has bled into gaming as well. It's a war on men and the male libido and aforementioned natural role is what it is.
A caveat: I'm happy to be inclusive of women players and women characters. I even mostly prefer women warriors dressed like they're serious rather than sex-pots (Frank Frazetta aside). Women in serious armour/uniforms can be just as sexy--in some cases moreso, because they convey an attitude of reality to them whereas most cheesecake fantasy art conveys a "Wha? What world does that make sense in?" And of course women (someone mentioned the Scythians a few threads back) have and can participate in war and fighting. So it's not women I take an issue with as such, it's the assumption that because we've reached the modern state of secular enlightenment, that all bets are off and women as a class (not as a tiny subset of women warriors) don't need protecting by men--even in anachronistic fantasy!
-
2017-07-25, 12:28 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
-
2017-07-25, 12:29 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Behind you!
- Gender
Re: Armor designs for females?
You are very terrible at arguing a point. To the point where I'm not really sure what it is your arguing.
For the record I'm on the side of doing whatever makes you and your play group have fun. If that involves realism or selective realism, whatever. (I prefer to go for a more JRPG feel in my games).
Also, for the record, sexualization ≠ objectification.Last edited by Dragonexx; 2017-07-25 at 12:39 PM.
Pokemon Mystery Dungeon D20: A system designed for adventuring in a Pokemon Mystery Dungeon world.
The Review/Analysis Thread: In-depth reviews of various games and RPG products.
The New/Redone Monsters Thread: Taking bad or bland monsters and making them more interesting and challenging.
Yu-Gi-Oh!: Realms of Myth: In the world of monsters, Winda and Wynn go on an "epic" journey to find the legendary Dark Magician.
Keys to the Contract: A crossover between Madoka and Kingdom Hearts.
-
2017-07-25, 01:21 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
Re: Armor designs for females?
Point is, these look like typical adventuring, swashbuckling, D&D-appropriate pictures. They're either wearing little armor or no armor at all. By the large they are no more or no less likely to die than the woman in this picture right here, or this woman right here.
Which simply put means what's good for the goose is good for the gander (or perhaps the other way around in this case). I'm just asking for some honesty through consistency. See, it all comes down to this right here...
Someone claimed that wearing little armor and/or impractical armor in a fantasy setting where they would be expected to do battle meant they were going to die, and that the artists and authors were ignorant, and those who liked it, stupid. However, if that were true, then these individuals would be more or less assumed to be dead as well, since we can clearly see in the images they are prepared for battle, some actively engaging in battle, or otherwise armed and wearing little else beyond a thick coat.
If these individuals aren't assured to be pushing up daisies, neither are those barbarian ladies I linked a couple paragraphs ago. If anything, slaughtering your enemies with little regard for your personal safety is a trope unto itself. This is especially true in the context of fantasy, where your flesh can withstand blades (to the point that there are even some game mechanics that specialize in this fact).You are my God.
-
2017-07-25, 01:36 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
Re: Armor designs for females?
Yeah, do you have any idea how fast it gets old referring to my siblings as "the brother who happens to be born to the same mother and father as I, and I sharing a similar kinship. Also the woman, who in sharing a mother and father with us both," as opposed to "my brother and sister"? Yeesh.
Frankly, if the damsel in distress trope ever goes the way of the dodo, it'll be a sad day indeed. It will be the moment when people no longer care. It won't matter if some lady was kidnapped by the dragon, the brigand, the troll. Nobody cares enough about her to go save her anymore. Maybe it'll just be the dude in distress trope from that point forward. The only characters worth saving will be male. Just Mario and Cloud Strife. Screw Princess Peach and the cloud she flew in on.
Because when you get right down to it, the core of the damsel in distress trope is caring. Someone or something took someone you loved and you're driven to dive into the depths of hell itself to rescue them. You do not undertake the hero's journey because some orc kidnapped your mule. You do not fight off dragons and demons to protect your baseball card collection. You do not risk death itself because someone stole your favorite chocolate bar. No, you face the wrath of the satan by putting your life on the line for someone that means so much to you that they are irreplaceable. In other words, someone like your wife, daughter, etc.
"Hunt them down? Find them? Kill them? Pfft, heavens no. My daughter's a modern woman. She'd never want to perpetuate those tired old tropes," said no one ever.You are my God.
-
2017-07-25, 01:41 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
- Gender
Re: Armor designs for females?
The trope in question gets tired easily, and now occupies a space akin to 4chan.
As in, remember when 4chan was good? Trick question, it was never good. The benefits of hindsight. Centuries of hindsight.
It's like we want our women to be ravished by monsters now, unless they can defend themselves because they are Super Duper Warriors.
My point is friendly male energy has from the beginning of time been dedicated towards defending women from hostile male energy.
In our rush to make war seem fun and "equal" in our gaming lives we have lost sight of that basic truth. That we live in a time when it has been perverted in the name of equality is unfortunate, and, for gamers, all the worse that it has bled into gaming as well. It's a war on men and the male libido and aforementioned natural role is what it is.
A caveat: I'm happy to be inclusive of women players and women characters. I even mostly prefer women warriors dressed like they're serious rather than sex-pots (Frank Frazetta aside). Women in serious armour/uniforms can be just as sexy--in some cases moreso, because they convey an attitude of reality to them whereas most cheesecake fantasy art conveys a "Wha? What world does that make sense in?" And of course women (someone mentioned the Scythians a few threads back) have and can participate in war and fighting. So it's not women I take an issue with as such, it's the assumption that because we've reached the modern state of secular enlightenment, that all bets are off and women as a class (not as a tiny subset of women warriors) don't need protecting by men--even in anachronistic fantasy!
-
2017-07-25, 03:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
Re: Armor designs for females?
Part of that's ingrained in our biology, because while there's no mechanical limitation to our games, there are certain facts concerning the physical strength and power of men and women on the average. In fantasy it largely doesn't matter since you can have female barbarians suplexing ogres, or throwing fireballs, and so forth. However, it's very ingrained in the collective consciousness of humanity that women are both worth protecting and more likely to need protecting.
And before anyone flips out, the same is true for men who are venturing further into feminine biology. Male to female transexuals regularly have to deal with the loss of muscle and physical strength as the amount of testosterone in their bodies declines and estrogen escalates. EDIT: The reverse is also true. FtM transexuals who get more testosterone tend to have an easier time building physical strength as well.
So no, they weren't capable of it on a wide scale. Sometimes you find women who are really strong and are ready to kick all manner of ass and might not have gotten kidnapped to begin with, but not only are those women a minority among women but it's largely irrelevant to story telling since the characters in the stories are of some importance outside of being heroes. They're loved ones, or are of some higher purpose than the hero themselves (such as the classic saving the princess, since the princess is traditionally more important than the hero rescuing them, hence putting oneself into danger for the greater good).
EDIT: Also, have some art.Last edited by Ashiel; 2017-07-25 at 04:05 PM.
You are my God.