Roll For Insight: Talking Tits – It’s Time To Banish Boob Armour
May 10, 2019 by cassn
Lads, it’s time I got something off my chest. While I like to keep abreast of games news, recently something has been really getting on my tits. I don’t want to look like a boob, but I’m just busting to talk about this. Alright, enough puns (they’re udderly terrible anyway), let’s get down to business and have a serious chat about boob armour. Nipple.
If you are a woman working or playing in the gaming industry, it’s inevitable that you’re going to end up talking about what a female miniature is wearing at least once a week. And for every one you talk about, there have been five others you didn’t bother to mention because, well, that’s just the type of miniature that company makes. You’re used to it. You’re sick of complaining. People have started giving you that ‘who put a quid in the angry feminist?’ look when you point out that boobs just don’t do the anti-gravity thing. They just don’t care.
A Negative Body Image
And why should you? After all, in a world where Commissar Yarrick is levying his forces against your Ork armies, policing women’s bodies seems pretty pointless (hehe). But representation matters, especially in an industry which is actively trying to expand and become more inclusive.
A recent study concerning images on Instagram has proven what people have known for years; if people are consistently exposed to unrealistic body images, they start to believe their body is the problem. And, with 90% of young girls in the UK stating that they don’t like their bodies, maybe it’s time we stopped pretending that "bad representation is better than no representation" is a good compromise.
Yet this particular angry feminist comes up against regular resistance for seemingly obvious arguments for better representation. And since you can’t win every battle, I choose carefully. Rather than point out follies in stereotyping female roles and female bodies (the buxom bar wench springs to mind), instead I just try to point out the ones which are overtly impractical.
Going into a gun battle wearing only your underwear, for example, seems like a silly idea. Indeed, none of the male infantry are doing it. But - you know us women - we’re always after that perfect bikini body selfie, even under heavy fire.
I’m being hyperbolic, of course, but I feel it’s an absurd position to have to try and defend. I’ve had gamer guys tell me that these half-dressed women are fine - it’s a uniform. That I’m overreacting - it’s only a game, after all. However, you show me the soldier that’s happy to go into battle with more skin showing than a beached Kardashian, and I’ll show you a guy whose miniature paint fumes have gone to his head.
(Side note: saying it’s ‘only’ a game is another pet peeve of mine. We’re a gaming community. Gaming matters for us)
“But what about Conan?” “What about Hero Quest?”
Alright, keep your loincloth on guys - I’m aware some men go into battle with nothing but their sword and, one must assume, a sense of muscular pride. But comparing knights and barbarians is like comparing apples and...well, barbarians. They’re different eras, different universes, different weapons, different armor (or lack of). And I think we all understand how women are treated in Howard’s Hyborian Age - let’s just say Conan never read much Simone De Beauvoir in college.
However, for those pedants who insist on comparing the two scenarios, I would direct your attention to the ongoing argument in comics, film, and gaming which debates whether these stripped, muscle-bound gym bros are, in fact, male power fantasies. There are, of course, two sides in that debate, with many men stating they have never wanted to look overtly muscular, and women who like that type of body. However, the sparce research which has been done so far suggests the opposite is true in the majority of cases. Indeed, the fact that these hyper-hench images originally existed in an industry once targeted to an almost exclusively male audience confirms that these men were not designed to appeal to the female gaze.
But it isn’t all hopeless, and there are people in the field who are trying to make a difference. Annie Norman, one of our Women to Watch for 2019, founded the Believable Female Miniatures project, which seeks to get women out of the bikini and into well-fitting, useful armour. However, the fact that her tireless work is considered niche and pioneering speaks volumes about how much more still needs to be done in the gaming industry to promote inclusion.
The Dreaded Boob Armour
Take boob armour, for example - my own personal hatred. It’s ridiculous, impractical, and sometimes the only protection offered to these women (I have no doubt representations of the boob armour bikini will seriously confuse the archaeologists of the future). Despite its impracticality, I regularly hear the defence of its use in the gaming industry. Indeed, Greek Hoplites and Roman soldiers wore muscular cuirasses, so it would make sense to represent the body through metalwork. But let’s look closer at that argument.
First of all, historical artefacts tell us that these highly detailed cuirasses were rarely used, with the few that have actual battle damage being much more limited in ornateness. Furthermore, these cuirasses were developed during the bronze age - at a point when the most extreme armour piercing weapon was an axe (and perhaps a few Roman maces). My point is this - when the hardest weapons you face are spears and swords, you can smith all the nipples you want and it doesn’t really matter.
However, a lot of these female miniatures are in the middle of firefights, and I sincerely doubt that each breast, divided and cupped into individual metal holders is going to protect anyone in that situation. Indeed, in history, by the time the late medieval period rolls around, armour had already changed from flat or bell-shaped to an outward crease in the front (which would eventually turn into the full peascod style) to cope with a range of heavy shock weaponry, lances, pollaxes, and guns.
It seems obvious, but these outward creases allowed central hits to angle outward - a pretty important and life-saving advantage. Chest blows would naturally angle downward and out, hopefully allowing you to battle another day (although sometimes the fauld would be pierced or, less often, the neck). So by changing the crease to an inward, boob-separating format, you’re pretty much committing yourself to getting maced in the mammaries. Not to mention the fact that one heavy blow, even if it doesn't pierce through, is going to almost immediately damage the sternum with the impact.
That’s just the science of armour, but it’s also important to remember that, from a fashion perspective, women didn’t even wear bras until the 19th century, so the idea of parting the ladies up and out for battle makes little sense. There are no records of shaped female armour in medieval times. So let’s just dispel the myth for once and for all. There is no practical, historical, or social reason for boob armour. It’s a fantasy object.
Changing The Status Quo
So why is it on the tabletop? I can only speculate, but I would argue that for designers, sculptors and companies, they feel that they are still targeting a majority of their products to young adolescent males or men who have grown up with these figures and are comfortable with their design. After all, the gaming industry is a free market, and a valuable one at that. These designers have a right to create what they believe will be a profitable income source. To an extent I understand this thinking, but we’re never going to get the diversity and change we want to see in gaming if we don’t begin to adapt to new markets.
Step into any gaming shop, look at the female figures on offer, and count the seconds until you come across boob armour - I guarantee it will be less than a minute. In fact, you’ll have a hard time to try and find a lady who hasn’t gone to Ann Summers the Blacksmith for her battle garb.
For me, this is a massive part of the problem - sheer availability. Morals are noble and important of course, but sometimes you just want to add female infantry to your table without having to research for three weeks first. But the more you ask your FLGS about real female figures, the more they’ll begin to stock them. Change doesn’t happen overnight, but it doesn’t happen at all if you don’t try.
Boob armour is a fantasy object, and that means we can change it. We can choose not to buy another half-naked general because she has a cool gun that makes it okay. We can make real representations of real women. We can put them in actual clothes. And, maybe one day, their breasts won’t be bigger than their heads and their waists smaller than their thighs.
Here’s the thing: that original generation of gamers - we’ve grown up, and most of us have kids of our own now. Little boys and, importantly, little girls. We don’t want our daughters believing that these accentuated bodies are what they should be emulating. My daughter shouldn’t believe that bigger boobs or a smaller waist will give her more value as a person. I don’t want her to believe that women need to look good, even at the cost of their very lives.
I’m raising a warrior, and when she holds aloft the severed head of her enemies, she’s not going to worry about being sexy enough. She’s going to worry about the horrified looks of the other children on the school trip, and how long she’ll spend in prison.
So, my fellow gamers, let’s band together and ask for better breasts from our gaming experience. Conscientious chests. Moral mammaries. Most importantly, let’s keep talking tits.
Tell us your thoughts below...
The response to this article has been overwhelming, and for that I want to thank our OnTabletop/Beasts of War community. Roll for Insight began as a series of editorials designed to talk about the issues which affect and shape the contemporary gaming community. These articles are intended to provoke discussion, challenge our contemporary thinking, and create a stronger community which doesn’t shy away from ‘difficult’ issues. I believe that this article, and the response from the OnTabletop community, has achieved those aims. First of all, I must apologise for my silence over the last few days – I wanted to… Read more »
Ohh I think the dialogue on this topic will go on for a good long while… and you know what… that’s exactly as it should be as only through a civil dialogue can we start to get an understanding for points of view that dont gel with our own. We may never share the same points of view but the more we talk it out the more likely we will gradually find options and compromise. Some folk wonder why I’m always so reluctant to stifle debate and why I’m aghast at the thought of ‘deplatforimg’ – these things are anathema… Read more »
“Some folk wonder why I’m always so reluctant to stifle debate and why I’m aghast at the thought of ‘deplatforimg’ – these things are anathema to me, and the reason is simple…
I grew up in a period in northern Ireland where we had direct censorship, my ‘enemy’s Gerry Adam’s was blocked from having his voice heard on TV etc (they even over dubbed him one time to get around it.
But it wasn’t censorship that ultimately brought a breakthrough here it was dialogue.”
This is a highly refreshing take to see nowadays. Cheers!
“Some folk wonder why I’m always so reluctant to stifle debate and why I’m aghast at the thought of ‘deplatforimg’ – these things are anathema to me”
I think that is commendable, with a caveat where opinions are being platformed that are rooted in disenfranchising, removing, controlling, or outright eliminating people of a certain race, creed, gender, religion, sexuality.
Free speech is not without consequence, and a paradox of defending free speech is that you can end up defending people that which for nothing but the restriction and genocide of others.
It’s not a paradox of free speech it’s a foundation of it. I disagree with what you say but will defend your right to say it and all that. I don’t agree with deplatforming anyone on any grounds other than explicit incitement to violence, no matter how objectionable their opinions. Not only am I reasonably confident that any extremely ideas can be easily countered but also, if you allow any institution the right to censor anyone, they will eventually censor anyone who doesn’t agree with them. Freedom of speech won’t die overnight, it will die slowly and will die from… Read more »
When people say “anyone is welcome at my table” I have always assumed there is an unspoken caveat that says “as long as you’re willing to play what we’re playing”. If I am playing a game you don’t like, you’re welcome to join and give it a try or to find somewhere else to play. I’m not going to force someone to play something they don’t like nor Outright refuse to play with someone without good reason; I don’t expect to have to change my hobby to accommodate anyone else, I would never ask or expect anyone else to do… Read more »
@Cass I do not think you need to apologise, waiting for the discussion to evolve before responding is not a bad idea. Now I have to point out a few things, muscle cuirass was a status symbol and it was used in battle, we do have evidence for it not only in descriptions and art but from actual battle damage, an important indication that these highly important people were in the right flank of the phalanx were the fiercest fight was done (and the king or general was), like the knights, the ancients of wealth and power wanted to be… Read more »
“@warzan here is a weekender topic for you (and a huge can of worms) “the why’s of the hobby” why we joined?, why we thing others joined?, why we stayed?, why we think others stayed?, why we think others do not join?, why we think people leave?”
That could be a really meaty one indeed!
Some very good points but I do have one issue. Archaeologists agree that Muscle Armour was worn in combat it was just toned down and not as gaudy as the Burial finds. On the point of Ab Armour we have to look at the process by which something if found by an archaeologist we can’t write it off just because we don’t have battlefield examples. If you found that on a Battlefield would you leave it there? It’s worth a fortune in scrap metal alone. We know impracticable armour aspects like enlarged codpieces and thin waists were worn in battle… Read more »
soooo many assuumptions.
Classy response Cass. Inspired by your article I was trying to think of some heroines that managed to kick ass, without lingerie based armour!
Can’t figure out how to add a photo here, but Brian of Tarth from GoT in a fantasy genre, and Vasquez from the Aliens Sci-fi movie both sport standard unisex body armour.
Not sure if there are existing models out there of these two characters, if not there’s should be!
Neither Vasquez nor Brienne of Tarth look particularly feminine either and that’s what it really boils down to – whether you want recognisable or practical/sensible female miniatures because the two are mutually exclusive even, it would seem, at 1:1 scale.
To play the devil’s advocate, while there is no historical precedent for boob armour, there would be a historical precedent for female armour that would have accentuated the female form. Take the armoured codpiece, for example. The only reason for having it was to show off and I have no doubt to exaggerate what you were packing in trouser department. The same with the larger belly and narrow waists on some armour, this was because a narrow waist was considered to be a sign of manliness at the time. It is not unreasonable to assume that if women did ever… Read more »
At the expense of being that guy…actually there’s heaps of historical evidence, both archaeological and written evidence of boob armour. Literally tons. Mail made for females is shaped differently than it is for males, as were cuirass’ etc. It’s really only later plate armour that we don’t have much in the way of evidence but by then female combatants and the shape of the armour had changed.
@horus500 ‘actually there’s heaps of historical evidence, both archaeological and written evidence of boob armour. Literally tons.’
Can you post sources or links for this, please? I’m unaware of any compelling historical evidence for female warriors, so this would be useful.
Sure, I’ll assuming you’re not an archeologist but you can find most of this stuff in book stores or probably summaries online. For ancient authors try Diodorus of Sicily on Amazons Plutarch-Lives. Probably the best description of amazons Hippocrates talks about Samatian women warriors Herodotus too of course For modern writers Rice, ‘the Scythians’ Sulimirski ‘the Samatians, von Bothmer Amazon’s in Greek Art, For medieval stuff there’s the Anglosaxon chronicles, where you’ll read about Aethelflaed, the Orderic Vitalis, or modern authors like Dornier ‘MercianStudies’ Duff ‘Matilda’, Kelly ‘Eleanor of Aquitaine’, Pernoud Eleanor of Aquitaine. More recently there’s been a number… Read more »
So, only the Sarmatian/Scythian horse archers with any evidence of actual female warriors then… The recently reported Viking female warrior grave is highly suspect, and disputed. See here, for instance:
http://norseandviking.blogspot.com/2017/09/lets-debate-female-viking-warriors-yet.html
The rest you cite are mostly leaders, rather than members of armies.
None of which, as far as I can see, had ‘boob armour’. I’m really not sure that counts as ‘literally tons’ of evidence. I was hoping for some physical evidence that demonstrates the historical validity of ‘boob armour’.
By the way, after leaving the army I became a forensic archaeologist (the money is hopeless). Whether people like it or not armour for women would be a different shape to men. It had to anatomically. As I’ve said elsewhere, it wont be fantasy style ‘Boob armour’ but if you’ve ever worn armour you’ll know there are some styles that don’t move and have to be fitted to the wearer. Women in many cultures became warriors although the evidence suggests that they were often viewed suspiciously, particularly by male dominated cultures (see accounts of Boudica or Zenobia by Roman authors,… Read more »
Actually, I’m wondering if we’re talking at cross-purposes here; I’m more than happy to accept that female armour would be shaped differently, in the same way that armour for different sized / shaped males would be. I *think* what you’re referring to as ‘boob armour’ is simply regular armour, modified where needed for the user… whereas what’s being objected to in this article is armour which specifically models breast shapes as armour, effectively making a point of the wearer’s sex. As for the Viking stuff, yes, there’s been DNA testing to determine a certain set of remains was female, and… Read more »
Also regarding the viking graves, the presence of weapons and armour does not implicitly make the inhabitant a warrior. Such items were more than just the tools of war, they were also status symbols and indicators of wealth, it would not be unusual for an important woman to be buried with weapons, especially swords even if she was not a woman. My understanding of this is that there isn’t a lot of evidence for female soldiers and warriors in any significant numbers in any culture. There are occasional outliers but, especially in a world of melee combat, women would be… Read more »
Ah. This old Chestnut again. The science part isn’t entirely sound. Although it’s true that the boob plate might deflect some blows inwards towards the sternum (although it would deflect an equal amount of blows outward), it’s also true that generally that was the thickest part of the breastplate so deflecting that blow inwards is unlikely to be the fatal injury that people suggest. The initial strike would land on the chest and would absorb the majority of the force and whatever remained would be highly unlikely to be powerful enough to penetrate the armour. We must also assume that… Read more »
Something else that I have also noticed when speaking to female gamers is that while there is a significant breadth of opinion on the matter, the majority of the ones I have spoken to (although not an overwhelming majority) actually prefer the the more sexy looking miniatures and if choosing a miniature to represent themselves in an RPG are far more likely to select one that looks sexy and badass (i.e. boobs, hips, maybe heels) than one that looks sensible. I suspect that is due mostly to the fact that actually we don’t want our miniatures to represent ourselves, we… Read more »
Another point for that is that the only real “boobplate” I know to exist was done for a female larper? (or HEMA?) on her insistence despite her blacksmiths objections, so the precedent of a female warrior choosing “boobplate” exists.
It’s unlikely the sternum on boob armour would be that tough. Coming at this from an entirely material science direction (me being a chemist and working in material science currently) to make armour in the manner would involve either bending metal – and in turn weakening it – or using welds of some form which again would be weak compared to nice sheet metal. Also on the topic of sheer aesthetics sure, some people may have worn armour that was purely decorative, but I think the point here is more about representation of the rank and file female fighters. They… Read more »
Bending the metal… So sort of like helmets and pauldrons then? Metal plate armour is, by design curved. Making boob plate, while arguably more complex than a regular breastplate, would not have been beyond the skills of a medieval armoursmith. We didn’t see it because there was no need for it. Also, Escher Models, even current implementation, have boobs, hips, heels and are complemented by large, recognisably female hair do’s. They’re as exaggerated as Infinity miniatures (incidentally they’re the about the “sexyist” miniatures I have). But that’s good because you can tell from a good distance away that they’re female.… Read more »
By bending I mean severe bends. Not gentle curves. Bending metal to create the pronounced shape in sheet metal will weaken it at that point.
I guess the severity of the curve would depend entirely on the size of the boob being added. And as i already said, the shape of the armour would not be form fitting due to the amount of padding worn underneath the armour so the shape of the “boobplate” would not be linked in any way to the physiology of the wearer. It is even possible that the metal breast may simply be added to the front of an otherwise solid breastplate for no reason other than decoration
The entertainment industry (movies, games etc) as a whole is very ignorant of the amount of padding that was worn under armour. Do people really think that a chainmail coif was really sat on top of the head without padding underneath? But that is a rant for another day.
They don’t even need to be metal in that case, wood would work too.
As an amateur Blacksmith I can tell you it wouldn’t affect the armour. We don’t “Bend Metal” we anneal it to make it soft then we shape it then we harden it again. Any stress on the metal from making the breasts would be just the same as the stress on the metal for making kneecaps or vambraces.
But those are smooth curves, not say ridiculous deep “cleavage” shapes.
The theory is the same. The metal doesn’t change.
The metal is the same material, but the stress tensors in areas that display sharp angles cause fractures. This is why windows in early aircraft made from aluminium had to be redesigned, the square angles at the corners allowed for cracks to develop, and so they were changed to have gentler curves.
Most boobplate doesn’t have any cleavage. The breasts are quite separate.
I think we’re also in agreement to admit that some models are designed for a male audience. I haven’t disputed that, which is why I said that really this just boils down to preference and none of us really have the right to police any preferences other than our own. We don’t need to publicly justify those preferences and generally people who do are actually trying to police other people’s preferences. It’s ok to not like sexy models. It’s ok to like them. It’s not ok to tell anyone else what they should like – that’s what I take issue… Read more »
Agreed that we should do away with the boob armour in miniatures; it exists purely because sex sells, not because it makes a good miniature. And even then I’d say it qualification as ‘sexy’ is up for debate; take the new Slaanesh minis for example – personally I find the more restrained look of the new KoS more attractive than if it had a mass of boobs hanging out. And to be honest, outside of things like Slaanesh, there’s not really any need for most female minis to hang on attractiveness; we think nothing of male minis having battle scars… Read more »
As a man, I kinda like sexy models. I do have to say though, that there’s a fine line between sexy and cheesecake.
Boobplate exists so you can tell the occupant is female. Females are sculpted with exaggerated features so that you can tell the miniatur is female. On a miniature that is only an inch or so in height, it’s not really possible to identify it as male or female without exaggerating physical characteristics. I think the Joan of Arc miniature above proves it – it looks like a man.
Except classical depictions of Joan of Arc do not use boobplates to differentiate her gender. Even the painters of romantic era tended to avoid painting her with boob armour. And that must have hurt for them, as they never usually passed up the chance to paint a tit (see above image of a Valkery with steel-bending nipples). I found a grand total of three paintings of her with boob armour. Two from the mid-Victorian period, and one a cubist piece from 1912. All others depict her with more appropriate plate armour, yet there is no doubt she is the Maid… Read more »
It is likely that Joan of Arc wore armour more suited to a man simply because manufacture of female armour was largely unheard of and Blacksmiths of the day simply worked with the designs they knew. The fact that Joan of Arc wore what would be best described as male armour doesn’t really change anything. The point being made is that in an alternative historical timeline (or fantasy setting) where women DID/DO fight in large numbers it is probable that female plate armour would exist in a form that better showed the physique of the female occupant and which emphasised… Read more »
It’s also worth noting that in the early 1400’s platemail was at the proto design stage where it resembled a round shape. Google some images and you’ll realise that unless Joan of Arc was a particularly busty girl, she would have been able to wear a males breastplate and fit everything in.
The main issue here is as always the belief combat armour through the ages is above all practical and at no point was used to enhance the sexual features of the wearer according to the period even if it is detrimental to the wearers health, the actual full plate shown is a fine example of a male combat armour with sexualised features, the wasp waist that was thought in the period to be a prime feature of beauty for the males and a fine funnel for weapons to hit a vulnerable point of the armour (and a lower breast dome… Read more »
Sex sells. Always has and always will. Who’re the vast majority of players? Men. And what do men like? Beautiful women. It’s called catering to your target audience. As others have already pointed out, had women been as active on the battlefield as men we would very likely had seen examples of armours that emphasised and exeagerate the female shape. And why is only the female body a problem? What about men in body hugging spandex with impossibly buff bodies and a truly impressive package between their legs? What about super-heroic men, of course with the aforementioned buff bodies, who… Read more »
The Joan of Arc miniature above also looks like a boy
The point with the Commissar is that you shouldn’t need to know it’s a female miniature – she’s a soldier so it shouldn’t matter about her gender etc.
That being said I think they did a great job making her feel female without having to resort to pushing the traditional ideas.
@brennon – yes, absolutely, 100% agree
The point with the commissar does not exist in my opinion, for all terms and purposes her model looks like a slim male to anybody not invested in the lore (as it has been predicted for all “realistic” female miniatures, they look like a slim, maybe shorter, male in full battle gear). There is no statement that this is a strong, female leader, leading the soldiers to battle, for all terms and purposes her model might as well be a male as most will be assumed it to be a male, no point, no statement, no representation, nothing, for a… Read more »
Therein lies the quandry. If you don’t need to know it’s female, why even bother to make a female? The truth is that people who argue for female miniatures DO need to know it’s a female.
If you can’t see that she’s female, what’s the point of the model?
The model is supposed to show a strong woman in realistic armour. And that’s certainly fair enough. The problem is that she doesn’t look female at all – she looks like a young boy. A young commissar cadet, rather than a full grown woman.
And that goes back to my point about emphasising and exaggerating the model. You need to be able to tell that the model represents a female. If you can’t… Well… Once again: what’s the point?
I agree especially with the point about younger gamers. Education and the availability of female minis in suitable gear is priority regarding this issue. I still cringe when I see miniatures of scantily clad females, feels a bit pervy and stereotypical of the genre (comic book guy as the best example). However I also think the pinup with boob armour and the barbarian with muscles on his muscles belong in fantasy and gaming as a throwback. They were like the archetype of an era. Classic fantasy art is full of these depictions and I think there’s still a market for… Read more »
I agree, like many a 1970’s sitcom/comedian the big fake tits pin style models, computer games etc hark back to a past time that can be incredibly cringed viewed with modern eyes. Yes there will was be bit of “meh” to conversation from blokes as we don’t tend to be as sexualised in the same manner as women (yeah ok this may be a sweeping generalisation but you get the drift), so perhaps we are not aware of the true upset it can cause. I will say that the big boobed look does play into the whole gamers = unwashed… Read more »
Totally agree especially with the “meh” from guys. I know myself and my pals were never bothered by Conan types we just saw it as cool and it hasn’t affected us the way body image can impact on others, especially younger females getting into the hobby. Also with the inclusivity, I think the wargaming community has done a good job this year alone in standing up and saying anyone and everyones welcome at the table. Now it’s time to get miniatures for those players and bring them to the table too
Perhaps we should also highlight good examples of Miniatures which have more realistic female body proportions.
Here is my nomination for the categoy “Modern Warfare Miniatures”:
Harlequin by Kev White at Hasslefree
https://www.hfminis.co.uk/shop?product=harlequin~hfa120&category=modern-%26post%252dapoc~modern-troopers
The interesting thing about Kev White is how he sculpts. He makes a naked dolly, which he then dresses (in putty) in the outfit he wants on it. If the naked dolly doesn’t look realistic, he’ll change it until it does. While he does make female warriors with large breasts (and sometimes they don’t get covered) the proportions look right. He is definitely worth a follow on facebook to see the stuff he is sculpting.
As nice as that figure is, and except for the “softness” of the jawline and face, I’d be hard pressed to tell the alleged gender either way when it would be seen at its tabletop size, not blown up 5-10x.
Maybe part of the reason why female minitatures tend to be *ahem* oversized in certain areas is because it is difficult to make one (that looks good) ? The ‘classic’ sculptors may not have had the materials and techniques … However … techniques have evolved, new materials and tools are available. As such the challenge is to convince customers that women can look cool without all of the added bits. I think the game ‘HATE’ by CMON did a pretty good job, but then it had the advantage of being based on a comic … 40k has a real problem,… Read more »
Check out the daily rushes from Warhammer Fest for a SoB figure.
Here’s the thing … I think GW isn’t that offensive (to me) and the ‘oversized’ figurines would fit within their setting.
I’ve seen much worse …
Great article … but not enough puns. 😉
Body shape is not just a tabletop gaming thing, but extends to other media like computer games, comics, TV and movies.
Avengers Endgame has been criticised with regard the appearance of Thor (I’ll leave it at that to avoid spoilers)…
Gravity does not apply females in comic books.
In the world of magazines… men’s magazine portray woman as objects of desire and women’s magazines seem to encourage women to become that desire.
In short… some things will never change no matter how many people talk about it.
I’m not an expert in comics because I hate superheroes but it is my understanding that gravity is not the only area of physics that doesn’t apply to superheroes.
Physics does not apply to fantasy, or science fiction either… physics is replaced by the plot device in most cases.
In which it’s not an issue that gravity doesn’t apply in some circumstances, right?
Bugger! i had a twitcher glee moment thinking it was birds being discussed…….
Nah, that’s the next Burrows & Badgers article by Ben.
?
I wrote out a whole rant and then thought better of it. I don’t want to cause offence and so I have deleted it.
I will simply say. This is my hobby, and anyone telling me what I am or am not allowed to enjoy in it will be studiously ignored.
No one’s telling you what to do. There should just be more room made for ‘Sensible Shoes’ and interesting alternative takes of doing female miniatures
I disagree completely disagree with you there @brennon , I think the article is absolutely trying to tell people what to do. Here’s a few select quotes: “But the more you ask your FLGS about real female figures, the more they’ll begin to stock them” “We can choose not to buy another half-naked general because she has a cool gun that makes it okay. We can make real representations of real women. We can put them in actual clothes. ” “So, my fellow gamers, let’s band together and ask for better breasts from our gaming experience” Each one of those is… Read more »
OTT both the Team and the Community are a broad church 🙂 If we only publish stuff everyone agrees with the schedule would become quite light lol (and they may never let me back on the show) As you well know I’m pretty open to ideas and debates taking place on the condition that there is a well reasoned argument behind it. When it comes to opinion pieces there is no right or wrong often, so it’s important to have an adequate amount of detail behind the piece. I’m actually not sure where I stand exactly on the issue myself… Read more »
@warzan I find really strange this feeling of exclusion reported in the past decade, I am not doubting you at all, I am wondering though if it is something artificial injected in our society or something that is surfacing now, because when I was at her age I remember the girls who played with the boys having no issue playing with army men who were all male (I clearly remember my sister never said she wanted a female royal guard, but she always wanted the royal guard and be the hero defending the mansion), maybe back then only the more… Read more »
Hi mate I think you are correct that view points are perhaps shifting. But it might also be a case of as our type of hobby becomes more mainstream we will see the effects of things we have just taken for granted more often. Cass made a point about the original generation of gamers now being parents and wanting to introduce our children to the things we loved (that also includes movies and comics etc) Well roughly half of those children are going to be female so there is certainly going to be an added pressure from that. It doesn’t… Read more »
I fully agree the media and to an extension the big companies that echo them have created a really troubling environment that does not help such discussions to be had at all, the forced entrenchment and the inability to accept either middle ground or coexistence of ideas and ideologies has hurt the ability to discuss such topics a lot.
I am really glad we are having this discussion here like humans used to do.
Agreed mate In an era where discussion is being shut down and everything is hysterics I hope we can all take time to consider and just talk stuff out 🙂 Because having constructive opinions etc in the open helps everyone get a feel for where the land lies. We all have to be aware though that all our perspectives are relative. And my perspectives have changed over the years, in many different ways. I’ll give you an example, I would probably have been considered more of a feminist in my 20s than I am today on some aspect but not… Read more »
My own stance is that while I do love Infinity miniatures, even the females, I am not so attached that if they changed I would be upset and stop buying them. But nor do I feel strongly enough that I will be changing buying habits any time soon. I don’t personally like pinup miniatures in my games, like Kingdom Death (although I do like pinup art), but I have no problem with them existing nor do I worry about my daughter’s wellbeing as a result of sexy miniatures and artwork. I also have absolutely no issue with Cass having her… Read more »
We may have to agree to disagree. I dont expect any team member to take responsibility for my opinions or those of any other team member.
I say what I say on the shows as me, not Ben, Justin or Gerry.
Your welcome to bundle us all into the same barrel but you’ve been around long enough that I’d prefer you didn’t 🙂
Because Justin doesn’t deserve to be held accountable for my opinions 😉
It’s about how and where you voice those opinions. If this were a forum topic that would not be the same as a news article. Similarly when you discuss something with Justin on a video that’s not the same as publishing an article. On the other hand if you posted a video of you doing a monologue about something that would absolutely look like the opinion of BoW. It’s about context and from the context of the videos like the weekender and CLBS, there are multiple opinions on display and none necessarily represents BoW so therefore they must be personal… Read more »
I know your a man who likes the last word mate so yes I get your point 🙂
Personally I don’t think it is any different from any opinion piece in any newspaper and when reading it I never considered it to be the the opinion of Beasts of War, just the opinion of the person who wrote it. Do you think Jeremy Clarkson’s opinion is considered the opinion of The Times newspaper just because they publish it every Sunday? Publishing an opinion piece, which this is obviously is, does not necessary mean its opinion of the publisher. Perhaps BoW should put a disclaimer stating the obvious.
I don’t particularly like “opinion pieces” full stop and I don’t really want to see BoW heading too far down that road.
I think they’re important to a healthy and diverse community. Considering that this viewpoint Cass put forth is one that is gaining more traction both in wargaming and the wider tabletop gaming community I think it’s worth talking about and sharing an opinion from someone embedded within that world.
I think our hobby community is quite healthy and diverse as it is, since it is expanding without any noticeable change and most importantly humans by their nature are diverse. I would argue thought that this viewpoint is not getting traction in wargaming and wider gaming community, it is discussed a lot by opinion article writers so it shows there are individuals pushing for this viewpoint, but initiatives to this direction get either modest response or fail, so the actual response does not back up the idea that this viewpoint gets traction. My opinion is that a big part of… Read more »
Agreed the numbers may just not stack up on this issue, so putting pressure on there having to be supply before demand. It may well be something that shakes out given time. Either way it’s a complex issue with a lot of viewpoints and I’ve appreciated reading them. Acutely aware though that unless I’m mistaken we’ve been entirely men commenting. Which leaves me under no illusions that this comment thread has painted the full picture, but and I want to be very clear about this no one is under any obligation to comment on topics like this or even have… Read more »
That probably is because the vast majority of the customer base is male, so while it may not be a complete picture it probably is a representative picture, this may never change because of the nature of the hobby, or it may need decades to organically change, so the children of our children may be the first generation to be born in a hobby that has a more mixed population as far as male and female gamers go. And we may need to be prepared for the eventuality that the gaming population may never change, many traditionally female hobbies have… Read more »
Articles that present both sides of an argument are healthy. One sided opinion pieces like this are very divisive and are absolutely not healthy. I would say looking at the comments here you have definitely divided opinion. It’s also interesting to hear that you think the opinion is gaining traction because this is what I think. There’s a very small and vocal number of people who think this way. There’s also an equally small number of people at the other end of the spectrum who don’t want change. Then there’s the enormous silent majority in the middle who actually don’t… Read more »
A call to action within an opinion piece isn’t a blanket ban on a particular subject. It’s just calling for a change. Doesn’t mean you have to change…no-one makes anyone do that…but for me, personally, I’d love to see that happen across the spectrum with companies offering up not realistic portrayals of men and women, as ‘heroic’ as our games might be, whilst also offering up options that cater to other tastes.
@brennon and here we disagree, I do not want the industry to change and it does not need to change and does not have to change, the industry can expand with new companies created to fill the demand and can diversify with new companies created to fill a demand and these companies can succeed or fail according to the demand actually existing and if the demand exists and it of sufficient quantity maybe the established industry may take a look. Asking for the established industry to take the risk and change from their known and established revenue to chase a… Read more »
The call to action is to stop buying female miniatures with emphasised or exaggerated sexual characteristics. If people stop buying them that represents a drop in demand which in turn will lead to a drop in supply. So while it’s not calling for a ban (which I didn’t actually say) it is definitely an attempt to push people to put pressure on miniatures makers to cease making sexy female miniatures through economic means.
It then couples this message by suggesting that we should all stop buying sexy miniatures because won’t someone think of the children.
If there is evidence that children are being negatively effected by ‘something’ then for some of us it perhaps is somthing we want to consider. There is certainly no expectation for you to consider them though mate. I’m not sure how body image is affecting my children, Cass though has a girl in the teenage years so she may well have more insight into this than I do. I do however see a number of things that I consider to be negatively affecting my children (mostly some of the shallow crap on youtube) The thing is it’s never just one… Read more »
If children are being negatively affected by something, don’t expose them to it. You wouldn’t (shouldn’t?) let your children watch Game of Thrones but that doesn’t mean nobody can watch it.
I don’t know if my little girl is going to grow up to want to play Wargames (and right now getting her into gaming isn’t exactly top priority) but I am reasonably certain that if she does I will be able to find a game to play that doesn’t involve pinups and boobplate.
There’s plenty of room in the current market for “sensible shoes”. They sell as many miniatures as there is demand for. When demand increases, so will supply.
I think you really need to remember that the overwhelming majority of people actually don’t give a toss either way. They neither support nor oppose boobplate.
I disagree…this article is 100% trying to tell you what to do in banishing female Armour and DD tits.
As it happens I don’t have many boob-armoured models, actually come to think of it I probably don’t have any! The point is though if I want to buy an army of them then its an issue between me and the company who makes them and no one else. End of. I have no problem with anyone disliking them but please, please lets not have any of this fashionable, pervasive politically correct, interfering bossiness around our hobby. I get the point and I don’t object to the point of view. Particularly as I have a 20 year old daughter I… Read more »
I don’t give a single flying fart about “realism” in my fantasy or sci-fi games. It’s escapism, fun and exaggeration. “Representation matters” – no it doesn’t, sorry, reality says you’re wrong. And you’ve never seen Catachans. Go have a look at all the companies that have done their absolute best to pull in more female customers through “representation”, like Marvel (comics), Valiant etc. They’re failing, hard. Malifaux and other tabletop brands have tried hard as well. The results – still a sausage fest. What keeps you from playing a Guard army with a head swap from, for example, Andrea Miniatures?… Read more »
The tales of sexual harassment of women in the industry, at stores, and at Cons indicate that gamers/nerds may not be the paragons you seem to think they are.
And I have met a number of female gamers who I would not wish to spend much time with.
The hobby has a majority of great folks, and some serious oddballs of both sexes.
But crucially, the oddballs are not representative of the majority of gamers
“The tales of sexual harassment of women in the industry, at stores, and at Cons indicate that gamers/nerds may not be the paragons you seem to think they are.” Sorry, but I don’t take that seriously, at all. Just last year there was this huge hubbub at GenCon. Guess what, the woman lied. One after the other male feminists turn out to be sexual predators of the worst kind, current example ProJared (lol, reset the clock!). Nuance and context is of course also a thing. Socially awkward people, which are to a greater extent into nerdy hobbies, can get really… Read more »
“What keeps you from playing a Guard army with a head swap from, for example, Andrea Miniatures?” Just on this point, GW stops you as in many events and stores you are not allowed to participate with other companies bits etc. (Some are more strict than others) I’m also not sure that sticking Female heads on Male bodies is going to really do it justice. I suppose it comes down to can you tell the difference between a Male and female soldier in full battle fatigues. I generally think I can as generally there is a difference in the frame.… Read more »
I’d say you’d probably be hard pressed to notice the difference with the Cadian minis. Look at (I think it is) Artel W’s Arbites-like female squad. Really hard to tell they’re female. I hear you on the GW thing with third party stuff. I’ve never had problems with just head swaps or weapons, but then I’m also not interested in the tournament scene. Parts sellers can provide GW female heads and parts to avoid that though, I think. Now that gave me ideas and I want to see how I can mix up Sisters of Silence and SM scouts. When… Read more »
Have to say I dont believe I have any boob armour in my board game mini collection, I do have Conan so I probably have loads of overtly sexualised content, but no actual boob armour. Not having any goofy games workshop stuff probably helps in this regard aswell and looking through my collection of Dust and CMON minis the female arour when present seems respectably realistic (in terms of boobs). Is there some definable split between what is produced for board games vs table top wargames? It’s also worth noting that ridgid steel bikini tops are in fact near usless.… Read more »
Well thought out article.
Although there is no such thing as “bad hobby” it is important to be inclusive. For me, I would rather encourage more products like the Frostgrave female soldiers, a lot of the newer Reaper female figures, Victoria miniatures SF soldiers etc where they are clearly female, not wearing sacks, but also not turning up yo Hoth Or Felstad in a chain mail tanktop. “Will you not be cold Nora?” “No No, look, I have long gloves, long boots and a chain mail bikini…” There is a place for cheesecake (showing men and women), and Elmore barbarians, Red Sonja, tight costumes… Read more »
Supposedly, North Star are working on a female wizard set now, which is great news!
Looking forward to that!
welcome to 2019, the year free speech died and telling a joke gets you a longer jail time then selling drugs.. and now this…. “people” trying to change the world or playing with toys to be more “correct”… Next it be not enough lesbian warriors on the table, or wheres the dark skinned folk, why all the fresh coloured paint… Yes its early saturday morning with half a cup of tea.. not awake fully.. so don`t mind me…. Just…. its a slippy slop.. look at Pc games on sexy woman, like MC11 the attacks on the people that have made… Read more »
I don’t think it’s an issue of ‘correct’ rather to be respectful and inclusive for the benefit of all.
I agree Brennon… i`m not a troll..!!! or a Orc.. Just it can be all one sided, Thor got fat in the new film and next it be fat shaming of Thor… Body image its a tough one……
Ps… had my cup of tea and now feel better….
@brennon Is it inclusive though? There is nothing inclusive in demanding, softly or not, for the world to change in ones worldview, moral, political, or aesthetic, it is by definition exclusive. Frankly inclusive would be new things to be created in a new direction and nobody care about them exist and this has been the case for decades, for example, nobody cared that a new KS started last year with more “realistic” women figures and nobody demanded to be changed to more sexy versions, that is inclusive, demanding established products to change on the other hand is exclusive and will… Read more »
@brennon inclusive means to have options that will bring in all walks of gamers. This articles talks about eliminating aspects of modeling…that is the opposite of inclusive.
For the benefit of people who don’t like current depictions of women. It has zero benefit for anyone who likes sexy female miniatures and fantasy artwork
Agree fully with the text. I want to introduce my daughter into the hobby and it is not easy finding even acceptable sculpts of females… Hopefully the new Sisters from GW will continue the path they seem to have taken and set the new standard.
I think it’s also incorrect to say that muscle cuirasses were rarely used in combat. The historical evidence suggests that they were widely used by the Greeks and used by officers and other VIPs in the Roman military even into the Byzantine era. There’s a significant body of evidence that points at armour being used to emphasise the desired aesthetic of the day all the way through the ancient/classical and medieval periods. Not everyone would wear such armour, normally only the wealthy elites, but it was certainly quite common. So in a fantasy setting where women fight alongside the men,… Read more »
I can’t say I have ever thought that much about overt sexualisation in my mini collection. I know there are examples of it in some brands but then again there are examples of more balanced representation in others. I think it’s easy to notice the figures that offend and pass over the ones that do not and it’s important to avoid confirmation bias. Thinking on my own collection I have a couple of positive examples; Star Wars Legion by FFG represents female and male characters in much the same way. The Leia model is almost disappointingly androgynous and all of… Read more »
the problem with ‘voting with your wallet’ is that the alternatives need to be a viable option.
And as @cassn says it does get tiresome if you run into the same situation often enough.
I do think that it isn’t as bad as it used to be.
I just hope that there continues to be room for both the ‘realistic’ and the ‘fantastic’ variant.
I agree to some extent but no one is forcing anyone to buy miniatures and simply not participating in games that do not conform with ones idea of ‘acceptable’ is a viable option.
If you feel a company like GW weren’t doing due service to the female gamers out there (and I’m not saying that is the case), then don’t support them by playing their games and buying their product.
‘force’ is tricky … GW are such a big company that not buying effectively means that you don’t get a chance to be part of a (great) local community. I also wouldn’t want to speak for what anyone else wants, especially if they are a different gender/ethnic group/species/etc. If things make me feel awkward then I don’t buy/play, but there are times I’d rather support an unpopular opinion whenever I feel the creators are unjustly treated by their opponents. And that sort of thing does unfortunately happens as creators have been threatened and harassed because they dared to produce content… Read more »
I agree whole heartedly with this sentiment, and creators should have their freedom to create protected too. GW I have some personal expectations of them purely because their current marketing is very gender and race neutral (their booklets have very specific imagery of diverse young people) So I hope they push to live up to that sentiment and build in more diversity into the range etc. (Carefully and expertly of course – although they cant please everyone) Otherwise the advertising looks like box ticking and lip service. But as a market leader and with the incredible talent pool they have,… Read more »
I think context is important. And where that context is flexible, it can be respectful or at least egalitarian. Barbaric, medieval, historic, some fantasy the mistreatment of women is contextual. For some games like Conan, if you want that flavour you pretty much have to accept the package it comes in. I own Conan. For Kingdom Death I was completely turned off by the portrayal of women. A beautiful game I passed on. But I defer to critisize the designer in part because it came across to me as ‘his art’. I don’t really know what that means other than… Read more »
Body Image: Men in war gaming are just as badly represented in body image as women…this article is really a flat argument and doesn’t hold weight. How many “Barbarians” in our games have a beer gut and are 25% body fat? Men are just as unrealistically modeled as women. Armour: Both genders in games, for the most part, exaggerate that genders form. Either massive unrealistic biceps and pecs….or DD tits…no real difference. Just because those parts are accentuated…doesn’t mean it is being sexualized or demeaning to that gender. I am 5’11 230 lbs and about 26% body fat….i don’t feel… Read more »
To put your mind at ease on the Infinity stuff, our big work is scheduled for later in the year with some big launches 🙂
So worry not on that front:)
And GW dont subsidise here (we wouldn’t meet the demands they expected)
We fund pretty much as we always have trying to create a balance of revenue streams (none earth shattering) to give us what we need to try and cover the Bills this all generates.
I won’t say anything on the other points but you’ve been here as long as I have or longer and GW is no friend to OTT. Remember the C&D letters? The channel being deleted? The loss of sponsors? I doubt Warren would hold a grudge but GW has shown itself to not be a friend to places like OTT or MiniWargming.
I actually feel the opposite about the Weekenders. I feel like there is a lot more Historical Gaming content in them than GW stuff.
As this topic has triggered a lot of response (perhaps due to the lack or weekender) it would make sense for the creator of the topic to respond to the some of the points made.
Ahhhh gods. What a great article! Well researched and incredibly well written. You’re entirely right Cass. I think we should expect better of companies and also vote with our wallets when it matters.
Those last couple of paragraphs had me in stiches!
And here is where I get to disagree lol 😉 A purpose of a company is to survive and meet the demand of those who own it. Corporate responsibility extends only so far as the law (wherever they are effected) demands. Any additional moral undertakings are a choice for the company to make, often based on demand. And that is the key (and in fact somthing Cass has been very astute on) it’s about highlighting an opinion and perhaps those who share that opinion will go out and help generate that demand. Putting demands upon creators just impinge on their… Read more »
Shouldn’t you all be drunk at a wedding right now?
and miss an opportunity to discuss boobs! 😉
In my experience there are plenty of boobs at a wedding… and not just drunken men making boobs of themselves…
I would argue that for companies that are de-facto (sp?) monopolies within their field (Facebook and GW to a certain extent) the situation changes quite a bit.
At that stage we should expect more from them.
However forcing creative people to do something they don’t like in order to satisfy a demand that may not be there is counter-productive (to say the least).
Its only a “well written” if you share the point of view of the author. It is scientifically and historically inaccurate when trying to suggest “boobplate” should not exist or would be ineffective. Much of what is said about female armour is speculative. It tries to suggest people compare bikini chain clad female warriors to armoured Knights when they tend exist alongside their loincloth wearing menfolk. It also suggests that the believable female miniatures produced by Bad Squiddo is pioneering. It’s not, Annie simply identified a niche in the market and is exploiting it. There’s absolutely nothing pioneering about it… Read more »
This response…was not well written.
Well, I would point out that I am not a paid writer so I doubt very much that there should be any expectation that my comment should be of the quality becoming of a professionally authored article. However, that said, at least I had a go at summarising why the article was poor, not necessarily poorly written, but that the content itself was lacking in quality. In summary it is a fallacy (appeal to emotion) backed by inaccurate, incomplete and/or weak research data.
Definitely an interesting conversation. I am surprised how little Wyrd and Malifaux have been mentioned in either the article or the comments. Yes, they have their sexy lady models with heftier chests (they also have sexy man models with heftier chests too), but looking across their whole range of models they have one of the widest range of models and artwork for representing women in a wargame. They have ladies of all rankings, from leaders to lackeys with a variety of body shapes too. This is unlike one particular company that (largely) has their female models as either infrequently encountered… Read more »
Warmachine does have a good number of female leaders and solos. You’re right about the rank and file being mostly men… however, in war-games the rank and file are pretty much irrelevant as they tend to be on the table for a very short time… they are cannon fodder to protect the leaders and elites. The major exceptions as far as I recall being Circle Orboros and Cryx, which both have female units. The Circle have Tharn which are basically savages in ragged armour and cloth, not really ‘boob armour’ (although I think chainmail bikini sounds better)… but you can… Read more »
I need to dig out the source for this but I believe there is some evidence I believe that supports the men are interested in things vs women are interested in people argument. (Generally Speaking)
I’m not entirely sure but in recent years the world seems to be trying to move away from generalisations – which is fair enough and honorable in it’s own right. But… (and there is always a but) it makes discussions quite difficult and very protracted for the likes of me atleast. (but again that’s probably outside the scope of all this)
Not sure how you old are @warzan, but I’m part of an older generation where generalisations were more common. Now a generalisation can become an -ism (sexism, racism, etc) if you say it to the wrong person. To see how things have changed, look back to the popular shows of of the 70’s and 80’s where casual comments in sitcoms were the norm. Take Only Fools and Horses as an example, there are lines of dialogue in that which you couldn’t get away with now… you can’t call a corner shop run by an ethnic minority a… well if I… Read more »
In general, as you said, there is as a generalisation on what men and woman like, as long as one understands that this is averaged as a whole and not what each individual does or is supposed to be doing then we are fine.
Moving away from generalisations is fine when we talk on an individual basis, but not holding them when trying to understand a wider group can be detrimental to our understanding and expectations.
agreed 🙂
(we’ve agreed a lot this weekend lol)
It’s not just you, I don’t think it’s possible to talk about demographic groups without generalising. Rather than telling people to stop using generalisations I would rather people accept them as necessary but that it’s ok to fall outside of those generalisations.
People absolutely love generalisations what they hate is negative generalisations or positive generalisations of people they hate. People have no issues with “Oh we need a woman for this job because they bring x,y and z to the table that a man doesn’t” or when people say “Everyone who believes X is Blank-ist and full of hate” it’s only when generalisations are used against someone or for someone they dislike that it becomes an issue. Guide and Ranger positions at National Parks are set aside for Indigenous people because they are supposed to have a deeper understanding and connection to… Read more »
Generally that’t the case @warzan. Studies have been done with newborn babies that show the preference is a biological one and not a learned one.
This isn’t that study but a study showing the same thing.
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-19763-004