Remove sexualized chestpieces and robes

[magistrasa]

On behalf of the artists, please don't take away the clothing options that are fun to draw.

[Evianna]

Agreeing with the many other posts in this thread that just can't understand this PoV.

Frankly, as a woman, seeing this thread just makes me lose another little sliver of hope.

I'd also like very much to take a moment to point out two things;

- that there is zero correlation between what someone chooses to wear and the seductiveness that is either present or not. Some of the most seductive female (and male!) characters my characters have interacted with have had an even split between dressed to distract and in full head to toe suits of armor. Seductiveness is not inherently tied to what someone wears. Some of the skimpiest dressed and most obviously flirtatious PCs have gotten nothing but looks of confusion from my characters - but it's still that person's right to wear what the hell they want.

- whether IRL or IG sometimes people want to show off specific things that make them proud or make them feel more like themselves. perhaps it's tattoos, or perhaps it's scars that they're owning, or perhaps it just makes them feel more confident.

If it bothers you that much that women (or men!) might want to dress like this then I'll have to echo the immortal words of tyler the creator and say,

"just close your eyes".

There's no issue here except yours, friend. Let it go.

[AstralUniverse]

when everyone picks the same character on super smash bros

I am dying here lmao.



on a serious note. I think that some level of sexualization should still exist because it's still a world with character and blood in their veins. We dont RP those sexual interactions but we all know when our characters are involved in something romantic. So we definitely do ok job (at least those who dont get banned) in RPing the sexuality in the world without actually RPing sexual intercourse on anything beyond first base. So I think these more sexual outfit models still contribute more than they harm in this case.

I was in a party in someone's quarter and everyone was wearing bdsm style outfits and it was definitely adding to the dark and sexual vibe. But was anyone actually RPing something sexual and focusing the RP of the scene on sexuality? No, it was just in the atmosphere and that's fine.

[In Sorrow We Trust]

... um. Sexualizing would mean there was no choice between exposed skin and not. There are plenty of options that aren't exposed. It's a choice whether you use them or not.

Removing the choice just removes agency from the player. I don't understand the purpose of censoring the game even further than it is. Some clothing options have been rendered unusable from this.

Believe it or not, some gals like to expose skin.

[D4wN]

I feel this is akin to RL slutshaming? I 100% disagree with this post and as a woman find it insulting to suggest that cleavage, bare legs or as you say 'jiggly boobs' is sexualising women.

[Distant Relation]

In a world that's slowly (and some would say finally) waking up to the power of choice, representation and empowerment, this feels a decade out of touch. I'm sure the original post was made with good intentions, but this isn't a productive avenue in the slightest.

[In Sorrow We Trust]

I feel this is akin to RL slutshaming? I 100% disagree with this post and as a woman find it insulting to suggest that cleavage, bare legs or as you say 'jiggly boobs' is sexualising women.

...well, slutshaming is a pretty strong word for it... but yes.

[Baronze]

One thing that ork does bring up that I agree with is that a -lot- of the female options aren't particularly modest. As someone who likes to play female characters who do lean more on the modest side of things, I kind of struggle with a few clothing options that really fit the image I'm going for.

Seconding this as a serial "fully covered guy" player. I'd like a few more cloth chest options that are less exposing.

[Irongron]

I've said my piece here, and will not be removing clothing options for female characters. While I definitely understand the OP's concern about how this could be viewed as objectifaction, and they did not mean any harm by the suggestion (indeed did so with good intentions), I, and others have said why we personally disagree with that position.

I don't think further debate on this issue will be constructive.