Women and Armor!

[Amused]

It's strange to me that people consider revealing armor to be "objectifying" when they themselves are the only ones treating the characters wearing it as objects. To me, it really just sounds like "stop liking this thing that I don't like" all while attempting to take the moral high ground too.

[Aegis]

It's strange to me that people consider revealing armor to be "objectifying" when they themselves are the only ones treating the characters wearing it as objects. To me, it really just sounds like "stop liking this thing that I don't like" all while attempting to take the moral high ground too.

Your post essentially comes off as "It's sexist to notice sexism". There is gear that is made more revealing on one single criteria: the gender of the person wearing it. There is literally no other factor in play. Calling that out as sexist is not rocket science.

It's not wearing the armour that is objectification. It's designing and implementing it: the designer has made a nice piece of gear and then, when adapting it for females has thought "This gear needs to show some ass/boob/panties".

The person playing the female character no longer has the option to wear that nice piece of gear without looking revealing. The female character is seen as eye candy, but the male isn't. That's objectification.

I hope that's made the point a bit clearer. As far as I recall, no-one has called anyone out for wearing the gear, it's the unfairness in making serious male gear into more revealing female gear that draws criticism.

To make an analogy: If a business implemented a preferred dress code that was plain, utilitarian for male employees, but micro-skirts, stockings and a boob tube for female employees that employer would be seen as objectifying their female employees. But the female employees themselves wouldn't draw criticism (at least not from the people posting in this thread).

[Akamu_Aniketos]

If any of you ladies/lady wannabees feel like the female version of armor is too objectifying or just not as "cool" as the male armors; here's a solution for you:

Use a fantasia and change into a male miqo'te. You get the armor styles in a non-sexy fashion, and you're still lady like.

[Amused]

Your post essentially comes off as "It's sexist to notice sexism". There is gear that is made more revealing on one single criteria: the gender of the person wearing it. There is literally no other factor in play. Calling that out as sexist is not rocket science.

Why do they all need to be the same? It would be boring if they were.

The fact that you consider showing skin to be objectifying of women is sexist in itself. It's essentially saying that all women who decide to show off their body are making themselves into objects. A woman choosing to dress in revealing attire is no different than a man creating a woman character dressed in revealing attire as part of his artistic vision.

If they dislike the piece of gear for being revealing, there are multitudes of other options for them to use. The gear being revealing is how it was designed to look. To ask for anything else is essentially asking to change it from what the artist had originally envisioned, which is censorship.

Your analogy is horrible because the women are being forced to dress like that, and are allowed nothing else. These women are real people too, compared to the fictional ones we play in this game. Nobody is forced to wear skimpy armor in this game. Not like there are many armors that are skimpy to begin with, but even for those that are, glamours exists and easily solves the problem of "being forced" to wear it.

[Aegis]

The fact that you consider showing skin to be objectifying of women is sexist in itself.

It's not wearing the armour that is objectification. It's designing and implementing it: the designer has made a nice piece of gear and then, when adapting it for females has thought "This gear needs to show some ass/boob/panties".

The person playing the female character no longer has the option to wear that nice piece of gear without looking revealing. The female character is seen as eye candy, but the male isn't. That's objectification.

It's essentially saying that all women who decide to show off their body are making themselves into objects.

No, no it's not. This has been covered in this thread a hundred times, I'm not doing it again for you.

If they dislike the piece of gear for being revealing, there are multitudes of other options for them to use. The gear being revealing is how it was designed to look. To ask for anything else is essentially asking to change it from what the artist had originally envisioned, which is censorship.

Show me the Dragoon AF a woman character can wear that doesn't look like she forgot to finished getting dressed.

Your analogy is horrible because the women are being forced to dress like that, and are allowed nothing else. These women are real people too, compared to the fictional ones we play in this game. Nobody is forced to wear skimpy armor in this game. Not like there are many armors that are skimpy to begin with, but even for those that are, glamours exists and easily solves the problem of "being forced" to wear it.

1: In my analogy no-one was forced. It was 'preferred'. Read it again.
2: Even if it were force in my analogy they wouldn't be forced to be employed there. They can quit, which is the equivalent of saying "If you don't like the gear, wear something else". "If you don't like the job, work somewhere else"

Pleas at least attempt to read and understand any of the posts in this thread before coming across as wilfully obtuse as you are.

[NozomiKei]

Aegis, at this point I'm starting to think Remilia is related to the other person on the forums that looks quite similar; both ignore and deliberately mis-understand most evidence presented to them and keep bringing up the same arguments. Btw, Remilia, Feminism is about equality. Just because some people you see are doing it wrong doesn't make Feminism wrong.

I also believe there should be a choice, both ways. Girl characters should be able to choose a more practical/protected version of a given piece of armor or clothing if they for whatever reason feel like wearing the less practical/revealing armor or clothing, and male characters should be able to choose a more revealing/less practical version if they for whatever reason don't feel like wearing the more practical/protected stuff. I am a girl and I want my guy character to look sexy, but I understand that a lot of people with guy characters want them to not dress skimpily. Skimpy shouldn't be the only option for girl characters. As far as the Noct abs go, just give them abs more accurate to a muscular female than a bodybuilder male.

For things like the Dragoon AF they can add /altbody and it would switch between the belly window and covered version for both genders. Same with other gear that has a significantly different versions; /altlegs, /altfeet, etc.

It can't be too much extra work to adjust the meshes; they design stuff for Lalas and Roes.

[Teryaani]

1: In my analogy no-one was forced. It was 'preferred'. Read it again.
2: Even if it were force in my analogy they wouldn't be forced to be employed there. They can quit, which is the equivalent of saying "If you don't like the gear, wear something else". "If you don't like the job, work somewhere else"

Pleas at least attempt to read and understand any of the posts in this thread before coming across as wilfully obtuse as you are.

I get where you're coming from, I think (have both options (revealing and not) available for gear sets for both genders - that is what you're saying right?) , but that is a terrible analogy for two reasons. No business has a "preferred" dress code. Dress code is policy. Also, saying they have the option not to work in a place offers a non alternative (work in a small or company town and you'll understand what I mean).

[Ageofwar]

Never understood why Dragoon AF was so fleshy (beyond just the belly window) on female characters it's like SE miss out all the chain mail on the female version.
even if SE add back the chain mail into the female version it would still look quite sexy due to the tight cut of the armor any way on male or female.

in terms of objectifying females I think SE's crimes go way beyond player armor, some of the female NPC armor is quite bad too examples being Garuda, Siren and Shiva.

There does seem to be a demand for sexy outfits for female with all the bikini-tanks and bikini-healers I have screenshots of, so bad i could create a thread on "Age Ofwar's 100 sexiest females of 2014"

The main reason behind it all i suspect is to appease the large male player base (yes, i know females play FFXIV too)

[Remilia_Nightfall]

Aegis, at this point I'm starting to think Remilia is related to the other person on the forums that looks quite similar

What the hell are you talking about?

Also, if feminism is about equality, just call it "equalitism" then, not FEMINism. Just sayin'.

[Remilia_Nightfall]

in terms of objectifying females I think SE's crimes go way beyond player armor, some of the female NPC armor is quite bad too examples being Garuda, Siren and Shiva.

What

Titan only wears a loincloth, bro

Are you serious? Are we discussing sexism with Primals, now? Awesome.