Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Reelya]

But if it's the expected norm for that genre how can it be "service"? since service is defined as something "extra"?

[scriver]

Which lead to "You are sexist" which is usually a sign that the conversation has completely broke down.

I did not call you sexist, Neon. I was talking back st your insinuations that I couldn't see women as anything but sexual objects.

(penises onscreen are a big deal and almost never seen outside of hardcore porn)

You should come to Sweden. Just recently, in the pretty good series "Never wipe tears without gloves" (about the arrival of hiv/aids to Stockholm) there were even several gay penises dangling in and out of view in one scene. The horror!

[Neonivek]

But if it's the expected norm for that genre how can it be "service"? since service is defined as something "extra"?

Because of the downplay also existing too. Though you are right we cannot just look at something and go "Fanservice" without knowing what the norm really is.

Just because something is extremely sexual to us it doesn't nessisarily mean it is extremely sexual within its own sphere or culture.

As well we also have to apply the filter that these are going to be "Idealised" and "Exagerated" characters as well.

You can also see if the sexualisation is part of the character or plot, or if it plays against the character or plot.

Finally we also have to apply what I call "Natural sexualisation" which is the sexualisation that results simply by having an exagerated idealised character.

For example people are quick to write off Superman inspite the fact that he is muscle clad with ever single muscle showing and even having quite the butt. Superman by all means if we looked at it objectively is clearly a "Sexual character" given that he has exagerated sexually attractive features. Yet when we apply the filters we see that he is clearly not. (To anyone who argues... LOOK AT SUPERMAN's BUTT! It tends to be a very exageratedly sexy butt)

Thus through this process we have the ability to have a sexy woman who isn't "Sexual for sex sake" and who isn't "unnessisarily sexualised".

which is really what I am trying to get across... The possibilty for a sexy woman to exist outside of fanservice... and NOT because the artist "Had to make the woman sexy or else people would be mad"

[Max White]

Just out of interest, Neonivek, could you give another example, similar to Superman, but with a female character?

[Neonivek]

Just out of interest, Neonivek, could you give another example, similar to Superman, but with a female character?

With a really great ass?

Or a Sexy woman who is sexy for purely non-fanservice reasons?

[Max White]

Who technically qualifies as extremely attractive, but is often as you say 'written off'.

[Neonivek]

Who technically qualifies as extremely attractive, but is often as you say 'written off'.

Goodness is this going to be a tough character to pick out.

Since you are asking for a very attractive woman who people are quick to instantly consider non-fanservice.

Or do you mean the opposite? Women who people usually write off as fanservice who is actually not so?

Which is also tough as not all examples are accepted.

ohh goodness... let me see Is this JUST for Western Comics?

[Max White]

The first one. And I don't see any reason to limit yourself to a single genera if you don't want to. I'm just wondering if I feel the same way when the character in question is of the gender that I would find attractive.
It is easy for me to not see Superman as fan service because for me, it isn't. I wonder the same thing works for somebody that could be.

[Neonivek]

Ok then let me just jump into female mediums.

How about Jem: High heels, modest boobs, tight clothing, shows off her legs, low cut.

It is probably a bad example but that is the best I can do at such short notice

I'd include Pizzazz (her rival) since she wears even less and has even larger breasts then Jem by a significant margin... but the fact that she is sexyier may have been intentional. MIND YOU I don't think she is meant to be fanservice either given the target audiance.

(I also checked Google Images for pictures on Tiana, the frog princess, and noticed that most images of her include her puffing her chest out in a way that does show off her rack. Add in that her waistline is IMPOSSIBLY small)

Err wait... >_< I am confused as to what I was supposed to do.

[Ogdibus]

Why is this taking so long?  What specifically, is the question, again?

[SalmonGod]

I don't know... I tried to make some sense of it, but I guess I failed.

[Neonivek]

Right now we are trying to get examples of clearly sexual appearing women who are quickly written off as non-fanservice.

In the same way that Superman, inspite having a great ass, is written off as not fanservice.

[Ogdibus]

.

[Vattic]

Sometimes you get female non-human characters in cartoons that are animated in such a way to suggest they are supposed to be sexy or at least attractive. Often this is done by giving them idealised female traits. I really doubt this is for fanservice but because their beauty is part of their character and helps them fit their gender.

[Reelya]

I seem to remember female transformers with robot boobs, they would count as that.