Matt Taylor's shirt

[Sethala]

I got it from your inclusion of the shirts on:

a list of sexist activities.  If you don't see a problem with the shirt, why include it on that list?  I'm confused as to your posiion.

Orders of magnitutde, mostly.  Let's assume that I found such a shirt distasteful and mildly offensive.  If I went to a gathering where one person was wearing the shirt, I'd probably roll my eyes at it, possibly gossip a bit about it, maybe crack a few jokes at his expense, but it would likely roll off as either something I forget in a few days or something I remember as a joke and laugh about (i.e. "Hey, remember that guy at that one party, with the shirt?").  However, if I ended up talking with him and he seemed a genuinely nice guy - that is, accepted that yeah, he gets some flak for his choice of fashion, maybe joked about it, and made it seem that yeah, he wouldn't be any source of problem if a woman joined the team, I'd be able to look past it, primarily because there's enough "other stuff" there for me to focus on and ignore something I don't like.

However, if I went to that same gathering, and everyone there was wearing the same kind of shirt, every wall had posters of pin-up girls, the furniture and fixtures were carved in the shape of attractive women... then yeah, there's a problem, because that definitely means the entire team has a certain outlook, not just one person.  I suppose my point is that I think a shirt itself isn't sexist, but it could be a sign that there's a larger problem that is sexist at work - emphasis on the word "could" - and having a lot more similar things pushes that "could" into "probably".

Yes, your team tolerates and accepts this.  That's...that's kinda my point.  As per above it appears you think the shirt is sexist.  Per this argument the team "tolerates and accepts".  Therefore: problem.

This is the second time you've talked in terms of "encouraging" ("But an office that allows aloha shirts doesn't necessarily encourage wearing them. ") - I'm not sure why.  It's not something I - or anyone else - is claiming.  It's not clear what you're arguing against here, not me certainly.

[...]

are you getting "encourages" from me talking about how clothing helps set the environment?  I guess I can see that.  But if you are, then you're wrong.  Do you think your sexy anime sleeves make it more or less likely that someone else in your group will use them?  They're clearly not objectionable to your group (accepts and tolerates) so thinking that someone who hadn't seen them before would say "Hey, Sethala, where did you get them from?  I like them" and get something similar is kinda not really a stretch.  Accepted and tolerated behaviour must necessarily encourage similar behaviour if that's what you meant by "encourage"

I apologize, I'm not really sure where I got the word "encourage" from, but yes, it's what I inferred from what you said about clothing setting the environment.  Now yes, I will say that if one person in an office is allowed to wear a tacky, casual shirt, it probably means that the rest of the office is allowed to wear tacky, casual clothing, and probably does so, to varying degrees.  The analogy kind of stops there, however; you wouldn't say that because one person wears a tacky Star Wars shirt that the whole team is Star Wars fans, for instance.  It could easily be that this one person is the only Star Wars fan on the team.  Now yes, someone else could ask him where he got his shirt from, or that neat Han Solo figure he's got next to his computer, and that person might get something similar for themselves, but chances are that person was already a Star Wars fan to begin with.  Similarly, in my example of my Magic group, I have had someone ask where I got the sleeves from, and he may end up getting something similar for himself, but that's because anime-style art is already something he's interested in.

I apologize if this is getting rambly, it's been a bit of a long day out of town for me and I'm about to go to bed, so my thoughts aren't entirely coherent right now...

[Kythia]

Orders of magnitutde, mostly.  Let's assume that I found such a shirt distasteful and mildly offensive.  If I went to a gathering where one person was wearing the shirt, I'd probably roll my eyes at it, possibly gossip a bit about it, maybe crack a few jokes at his expense, but it would likely roll off as either something I forget in a few days or something I remember as a joke and laugh about (i.e. "Hey, remember that guy at that one party, with the shirt?").  However, if I ended up talking with him and he seemed a genuinely nice guy - that is, accepted that yeah, he gets some flak for his choice of fashion, maybe joked about it, and made it seem that yeah, he wouldn't be any source of problem if a woman joined the team, I'd be able to look past it, primarily because there's enough "other stuff" there for me to focus on and ignore something I don't like.

Right, this here might be where our disagreement is.  To my mind - if the shirt is offensive then its offensive and having multiple people wearing it doesn't make each individual instance more offensive.  Its not some sort of magic fabric that gains power from having duplicates nearby.  I suspect he is a nice guy, but that doesn't mean you get a free pass on things.

I apologize, I'm not really sure where I got the word "encourage" from, but yes, it's what I inferred from what you said about clothing setting the environment.  Now yes, I will say that if one person in an office is allowed to wear a tacky, casual shirt, it probably means that the rest of the office is allowed to wear tacky, casual clothing, and probably does so, to varying degrees.  The analogy kind of stops there, however; you wouldn't say that because one person wears a tacky Star Wars shirt that the whole team is Star Wars fans, for instance.  It could easily be that this one person is the only Star Wars fan on the team.  Now yes, someone else could ask him where he got his shirt from, or that neat Han Solo figure he's got next to his computer, and that person might get something similar for themselves, but chances are that person was already a Star Wars fan to begin with.  Similarly, in my example of my Magic group, I have had someone ask where I got the sleeves from, and he may end up getting something similar for himself, but that's because anime-style art is already something he's interested in.

No, it certainly doesn't mean everyone there is a Star Wars fan, and thats not what I'm claiming.  It does, however, mean that Star Wars is accepted and tolerated.  Matt Taylor wearing a sexist shirt doesn't make everyone at ESA sexist, it does make sexism accepted and tolerated (which could be argued to mean they are sexist, but thats a different conversation).

[Sethala]

Took some time away from the thread to think about my position a bit more, and I think I still need to take some time to examine my own thoughts on it.

I will say that part of the reason I pulled away from agreeing out of hand that the shirt was sexist was this post, though:

So you agree the shirt is sexist and you agree that clothing choices are a good reflection of thr nature of an organisation. Honestly,  even just the first would seem to be enough to make complaints about it valid [...] Sexist shirt bad, sexist shirt unchallenged in work environment worse.

Normally, if you asked me if I thought the shirt was sexist, I would probably say "Yeah, but what's the problem with that?"  To me, something being sexist isn't necessarily a bad thing by itself; I would probably say that porn and harem anime are also sexist, but that doesn't make them a bad thing that shouldn't exist, just something that some people don't like looking at.  Regardless, I felt that our definitions of what "sexist" meant wasn't the same, so I didn't agree to what you said, and I apologize for not saying anything about it earlier.

That being said, I do have three questions for you about this.

First, what would you say if you found out that their policy was along the lines of "You can wear that, unless someone complains about it.  Then you have to take it off and stop wearing it to work."  Assume as well that he had the sense to not wear it during a broadcasted interview and that everyone who worked with him knew it would be gone if they spoke up about it.  Would it still be a problem just being there, even if no one who regularly associates with him is themselves offended by it?

Second, we can both agree that there is an issue with sexism in the science fields, even if we disagree to the severity and causes.  If there were no issues of sexist preferences, everyone was treated equally regardless of gender, etc, would there be an issue if someone wore a possibly sexist shirt like this?

Third, what other areas would we need to be wary of offending people?  For example, let's say that another person in the team likes Harry Potter and has a few posters from the movies next to his computer and wears Harry Potter shirts.  Would there be a problem if someone spoke up and said that their religion believes that Harry Potter is evil, reading it is satan-worship and practicing witchcraft, etc?  Essentially, where would the line be drawn?

[Shjade]

First, what would you say if you found out that their policy was along the lines of "You can wear that, unless someone complains about it.  Then you have to take it off and stop wearing it to work."  Assume as well that he had the sense to not wear it during a broadcasted interview and that everyone who worked with him knew it would be gone if they spoke up about it.  Would it still be a problem just being there, even if no one who regularly associates with him is themselves offended by it?

Generally speaking, policies that require someone to voice a complaint for any change to happen put that person in the position of then being viewed in a negative light by their peers for being a "buzzkill" or similar. Probably would have an impact on the environment regardless, maybe even a worse one.

[Sethala]

Generally speaking, policies that require someone to voice a complaint for any change to happen put that person in the position of then being viewed in a negative light by their peers for being a "buzzkill" or similar. Probably would have an impact on the environment regardless, maybe even a worse one.

True, but that's intended to be a hypothetical question as a thought exercise, not an idea of a solution to please everyone.  Assume that no one other than the person making the complaint and the person in charge know who complained and that Matt Taylor would accept the decision without any hard feelings.

My intent with asking it is to find out if it would be acceptable to wear if anyone offended by it could make it go away without any challenge, or is the mere idea that someone could be offended by it enough to say it's not allowed?

[Kythia]

I don't really know what Harem Anime is (besides, yanno, knowing what both of those words mean - I mean I'm not familiar with the genre) so I'll skip that and just address porn.

First, porn isn't inherantly sexist.  Sexist porn is sexist, non-sexist porn isn't.  It's kinda a little worrying that that needs explicitly mentioning.  Second I dont understand - and I suspect I never will, this might be an unsurmountable wall between us - how you can say "Yeah, its sexist but so what".  Are there - and this is intended as a genuine question - things that you think "yeah, they're racist but so what"?  Because, I dunno.  Euw.

Questions:

1)I don't honestly view this as an important line of inquiry - the onus is on (hypothetical) you not to be a pig not on (hypothetical) me to call you on it.  The analogy is with victim blaming, though I'm not suggesting this is anything near the most extreme example of that.

2)Again, I think its the wrong question.  If everyone were treated equally, then noone would be wearing a shirt like that.  I see it as a self-refuting question.

3)Sorry, I'm a little unclear on precisely what this question is.  I'm goning to answer "Where would the line be drawn" as my best guess but if I've misunderstood then sorry. 

I'm always wary of "where is the line" type arguments - they can generally be answered with "the line is drawn in the appropriate place, obvi".  In this case, well, what do you think?  Do you for one second think those two positions are the same?  Is this really a source of confusion?  I'm sorry if I sound incredulous and it was a real and genuine question but it...I dunno.  It really doesn't sound like something you actually see as an issue.

[Sethala]

I don't really know what Harem Anime is (besides, yanno, knowing what both of those words mean - I mean I'm not familiar with the genre) so I'll skip that and just address porn.

First, porn isn't inherantly sexist.  Sexist porn is sexist, non-sexist porn isn't.  It's kinda a little worrying that that needs explicitly mentioning.  Second I dont understand - and I suspect I never will, this might be an unsurmountable wall between us - how you can say "Yeah, its sexist but so what".  Are there - and this is intended as a genuine question - things that you think "yeah, they're racist but so what"?  Because, I dunno.  Euw.

I probably have a poor internal definition of the word "sexist" then, and end up conflating the terms sexist, sexualized, and sexy.  I'll have to come back later on this point once I've thought things through more.

Questions:

1)I don't honestly view this as an important line of inquiry - the onus is on (hypothetical) you not to be a pig not on (hypothetical) me to call you on it.  The analogy is with victim blaming, though I'm not suggesting this is anything near the most extreme example of that.

No, the intent wasn't for this to be victim blaming, the intent was just to set up a hypothetical situation where he could wear the shirt if no one was offended by it, but had to remove it if someone was offended by it.  The thought exercise is basically the idea of, "if this literally does not affect anyone in a negative way, is it still bad?"

2)Again, I think its the wrong question.  If everyone were treated equally, then noone would be wearing a shirt like that.  I see it as a self-refuting question.

I could easily envision a world where women in science fields (and everywhere else, really) are given the same opportunities, the same payment, and the same recognition as men in the same fields, and still see a few people deciding to express themselves by wearing a shirt like this.  Alternatively, if everyone were treated equally, he could be wearing this shirt while a female coworker wears a similar shirt, only with half-naked guys plastered all over it.

To clarify my question though, I'm specifically saying that the hypothetical world isn't necessarily one without sexism between individuals, but it is one free of sexist biases when it comes to main issues such as employment opportunities, wages, and so on.

3)Sorry, I'm a little unclear on precisely what this question is.  I'm goning to answer "Where would the line be drawn" as my best guess but if I've misunderstood then sorry. 

I'm always wary of "where is the line" type arguments - they can generally be answered with "the line is drawn in the appropriate place, obvi".  In this case, well, what do you think?  Do you for one second think those two positions are the same?  Is this really a source of confusion?  I'm sorry if I sound incredulous and it was a real and genuine question but it...I dunno.  It really doesn't sound like something you actually see as an issue.

I know this can be a silly question, but I'm building towards a point here, and I'd really rather not put words in your mouth in order to make that conclusion.  My point is, however, that there can be a lot of shirts, posters, etc that are offensive to a small group.  As I said, a religious person may find offense that their coworker is allowed to wear a Harry Potter shirt, thinking that it marginalizes them.  Heck, the person with the Harry Potter shirt could be atheist, and think that the religious person's cross necklace and shirts with religious messages is offensive to him.  Or heck, if you don't think that's offensive enough to cause problems, what if instead of a Harry Potter shirt, it was a very anti-religion shirt?  Would you say such a shirt is also not appropriate for work, and if not, why not?

One more question that I thought of, though this is going off on a tangent and isn't related to the point I'm working towards with the other three questions.  In some video games, especially MMOs, it's not uncommon for a few pieces of armor to look like normal, full-body plate mail on male characters, but end up incredibly revealing on female characters.  Personally, this is one of those things I'd classify as "sexist, but not a problem", but again, my definition of sexist is probably not right.  However, there is at least one game where the highly-revealing female armor is equally revealing male armor - a chest piece that can be aptly described as "boob plate" on a female character, when worn on a male character, is little more than a few leather straps across his chest connected to a tiny piece of metal "armor" that's only slightly bigger than his fist.  Would you consider such armor sexist, seeing as how it is equally revealing and impractical on both sexes?

[Vorian]

One more question that I thought of, though this is going off on a tangent and isn't related to the point I'm working towards with the other three questions.  In some video games, especially MMOs, it's not uncommon for a few pieces of armor to look like normal, full-body plate mail on male characters, but end up incredibly revealing on female characters.  Personally, this is one of those things I'd classify as "sexist, but not a problem", but again, my definition of sexist is probably not right.  However, there is at least one game where the highly-revealing female armor is equally revealing male armor - a chest piece that can be aptly described as "boob plate" on a female character, when worn on a male character, is little more than a few leather straps across his chest connected to a tiny piece of metal "armor" that's only slightly bigger than his fist.  Would you consider such armor sexist, seeing as how it is equally revealing and impractical on both sexes?

I'd just like to voice my disagreement with the bolded part. I like having sexy armor options when they're applied equally, but that sort of double standard is exactly when and why it is a problem.

[Kythia]

Instead of building to a point, Sethala, would it not be easier just to make it?  As I've said, I don't agree with the premise of your questions, and us debating whether they are valid questions and then me thinking about what I think of them and then me misspeaking and having to clarify and...it all just seems like a colossal waste of time.  Particularly when there is nothing preventing you making your point without this elaborate foreplay. 

[Shjade]

No, the intent wasn't for this to be victim blaming, the intent was just to set up a hypothetical situation where he could wear the shirt if no one was offended by it, but had to remove it if someone was offended by it.  The thought exercise is basically the idea of, "if this literally does not affect anyone in a negative way, is it still bad?"

The answer to that is, "Possibly, yes."

If no one in your workspace thinks the shirt is a bad thing, seeing it being treated normally reinforces the idea that "this is normal, this is fine," which then gives them cause to be even more resistant to the idea that similar circumstances might not actually be fine since "people at the office do X all the time and no one gets upset about it," etc.

Your hypothetical setup is still assuming that sexist material isn't sexist until someone gets offended by it. That's not how it works.

[Kythia]

I'm really sorry Sethala, I made a reslly fucking snippy post for reasons unrelated to you, but it was still you who had to put up with it. You deserved and deserve better. Sorry. Took a bad mood out on you.

Shjade is right though, or at a minimum I agree with Shjade.

[Sethala]

No worries Kythia, it happens.

Anyway, the main point I was trying to get at was along these lines: if the shirt is offensive, is it a larger problem because it's being worn in an industry that already has problems with female representation, and would other possibly offensive items (the Harry Potter or atheist examples) also be an issue, even if the demographic the potential offense is directed at isn't being marginalized by the industry as a whole?  Though I am curious about the third question I asked, I assume that you would say someone getting offended by a Harry Potter shirt is rather silly, but I'm curious if you would think a shirt that basically says "I'm an atheist" would be inappropriate for a work environment the same way Matt's shirt is.

Also, what you and Shjade mention does bring up another point I'd like your opinion of.  Obviously, you think this shirt is inappropriate for a workplace.  Would you think the shirt is still a problem if it's, say, only worn by Matt on his days off, when he's lounging around at home or hanging out at a bar?

I'd just like to voice my disagreement with the bolded part. I like having sexy armor options when they're applied equally, but that sort of double standard is exactly when and why it is a problem.

Generally agree, I think that if a game is going to include sexy armor, unless it's already intended to be a fetish-focused game (hello, Scarlet Blade), it should include sexy armor options for both sexes.  Though I do love the recent trend in MMOs to include some kind of armor appearance changing system, that lets you take armor you like the look of and apply it to the armor you're actually wearing because of stats, and I think that this at least makes the skimpy armor more acceptable, even if it's not completely balanced between male and female.

[Oniya]

Just for definitions' sake, 'Harem Anime' is where the male protagonist is pursued by numerous females (sometimes for comic effect).  Two prime examples would be Tenchi Muyo, and to a slightly lesser extent Ranma 1/2.

[Kythia]

Well lets be clear, Sethala, I don't not object to Harry Potter shirts because I think being offended by them is silly.  I do, as it happens, think being offended by them is silly but I would require a pretty exlpicit world wide mandate before I could claim that my likes and dislikes are the metric the entire world should use.  I have no issues with Harry Potter shirts because there is no evidence to suggest anyone is being harmed by them.  If it became clear religious people were being harmed by Harry Potter shirts then I think they are inappropriate.  If it turned out environmentalists are being harmed by crucifixes then I think they are inappropriate.  If it turned out sports fans are being harmed by "Save the Whales" shirts then I think they're inappropriate.  And so forth.  What I think is inappropriate is creating a hostile and unwelcoming atmosphere at work through something so easily changed - everything else is a specific outgrowth of that.

If there is evidence that action X disciminates against demograph y then, all else being equal (which covers a whole host of off topic topics, but I think you get my drift) then action x shouldn't be done at work.

There is and should be different rules for work and hanging around with your friends.  Generally there are too many situations that fall into the classification of "not work" to really give examples but my metric for what's appropriate and what isn't is above.

[Sethala]

Well lets be clear, Sethala, I don't not object to Harry Potter shirts because I think being offended by them is silly.  I do, as it happens, think being offended by them is silly but I would require a pretty exlpicit world wide mandate before I could claim that my likes and dislikes are the metric the entire world should use.  I have no issues with Harry Potter shirts because there is no evidence to suggest anyone is being harmed by them.  If it became clear religious people were being harmed by Harry Potter shirts then I think they are inappropriate.  If it turned out environmentalists are being harmed by crucifixes then I think they are inappropriate.  If it turned out sports fans are being harmed by "Save the Whales" shirts then I think they're inappropriate.  And so forth.  What I think is inappropriate is creating a hostile and unwelcoming atmosphere at work through something so easily changed - everything else is a specific outgrowth of that.

If there is evidence that action X disciminates against demograph y then, all else being equal (which covers a whole host of off topic topics, but I think you get my drift) then action x shouldn't be done at work.

There is and should be different rules for work and hanging around with your friends.  Generally there are too many situations that fall into the classification of "not work" to really give examples but my metric for what's appropriate and what isn't is above.

Fair enough.  I think I'll just have to agree to disagree that such a shirt is actually harmful (although part of that may be my thought that people in general need to grow thicker skin and stop saying that the reason they can't do X is because something offends them).  I do think you have a point that when the environment is already not welcoming towards women, having a shirt like this that can be offensive to someone because they're a woman can magnify the problem, but I think that if there were no real problem and no barriers to entry, having a minor thing like this isn't an issue.

Just for definitions' sake, 'Harem Anime' is where the male protagonist is pursued by numerous females (sometimes for comic effect).  Two prime examples would be Tenchi Muyo, and to a slightly lesser extent Ranma 1/2.

I will say that there's also male harem anime, which is where a female protagonist is pursued by numerous males (and probably some gay/lesbian harem anime out there somewhere), and my mention of it earlier was referring to either type.

[Oniya]

I will say that there's also male harem anime, which is where a female protagonist is pursued by numerous males (and probably some gay/lesbian harem anime out there somewhere), and my mention of it earlier was referring to either type.

Interesting - don't think I've encountered that in the mainstream anime that we get here.  (Which is to say, the stuff that is commonly available dubbed.) 

[Sethala]

It's definitely not as mainstream, at least in the US (no idea how popular it is in Japan).  I have heard of a few, though it's not as interesting as female harem anime to me.  I think I've seen a handful advertised on the anime I've got on DVD, though.

[Sho]

@Sethala

I've seen you make the point that you think there's a good chance that women are less capable than men when it comes to STEM fields (or less genetically geared towards STEM).

That is an absurdly insulting idea, and I've got to say, I haven't seen any proof from you yet (though I may have missed it). Having that general idea in your mind is exactly the problem that feminists are fighting against (leaving aside the shirt, since I do think that I've touched on that point enough); if people think women are less capable when it comes to STEM, they are encouraged not to enter STEM, and thus women don't go into STEM. Short explanation for a major problem.

I'd like to ask you to provide some proof for what you've asserted you think is true - that women are genetically less inclined to enter STEM fields, or that they are somehow hard-wired, on average, to be less capable in those fields. It's a bold claim to make, and saying "I think this, maybe..." doesn't make it any less necessary to provide proof.

[Sethala]

@Sethala

I've seen you make the point that you think there's a good chance that women are less capable than men when it comes to STEM fields (or less genetically geared towards STEM).

That is an absurdly insulting idea, and I've got to say, I haven't seen any proof from you yet (though I may have missed it). Having that general idea in your mind is exactly the problem that feminists are fighting against (leaving aside the shirt, since I do think that I've touched on that point enough); if people think women are less capable when it comes to STEM, they are encouraged not to enter STEM, and thus women don't go into STEM. Short explanation for a major problem.

I'd like to ask you to provide some proof for what you've asserted you think is true - that women are genetically less inclined to enter STEM fields, or that they are somehow hard-wired, on average, to be less capable in those fields. It's a bold claim to make, and saying "I think this, maybe..." doesn't make it any less necessary to provide proof.

I apologize if I was assertive before, but I do not believe this is actually true, merely that it's a possibility.  This is merely an untested and unsubstantiated hypothesis, and I was arguing in a hypothetical sense, not implying that this was the case, though I apologize for making it seem otherwise.  Further, I don't believe that this is in any way a good excuse to say that any one particular woman would be less valuable than a man in these fields.  The only thing that this would matter for is explaining why there are less women than men in STEM fields, not for saying that they don't belong in such fields.

Edit: I went through the thread and found where I jumped in.  My first assertion, and one that I was wrong to make without proper evidence, was that women may be genetically predisposed to not enjoy entering such fields, not that they were less capable of it.  I went off on a minor tangent replying to your initial response, and mentioned that them being less able to work in such fields is possible, but clarified my point that I wasn't talking about capability, rather talking about aptitude.  Someone else picked up on that post and I continued the discussion from there, though I stopped repeating myself that I didn't think this was likely, merely possible.

[Shjade]

Also, what you and Shjade mention does bring up another point I'd like your opinion of.  Obviously, you think this shirt is inappropriate for a workplace.  Would you think the shirt is still a problem if it's, say, only worn by Matt on his days off, when he's lounging around at home or hanging out at a bar?

At home: no. That's your personal business, whatever. Is it still a sexist shirt? Probably. Should that matter to anyone if you're just enjoying it by yourself at home? No.

I mean hell, I do all kinds of things that have horrible implications on my own time, in my own space. I don't take it out with me where it might have an impact on someone.

Still, you shouldn't be surprised if, upon inviting a guest over, you discover they're not thrilled by what you decided to wear to greet them. Not that they have a right to dictate what you wear, but you can't really demand they feel okay about it, either.

As for hanging out at a bar: *shrugs* Depends on the bar, I guess? I don't go to bars.

Addendum: it's fair to say this pretty much covers all the bases.

[Kythia]

Addendum: it's fair to say this pretty much covers all the bases.

Nice find, shjade

[Shjade]

And I only found it 6 days late. ;p

[Ephiral]

Left the discussion for a while because, frankly, I was not in top form, and others were making the point better.

That article was awesome, Shjade. linked from it and worthy of highlighting in its own right was this. Can we please drive a stake through the heart of the "horrible feminist backlash" meme now? (Probably not.)

And the sort of consent mainstream feminism is focused on, particularly the sort of consent that led to California SB 967 and the general "ongoing affirmative/enthusiastic consent", turns almost all forms of consensual BDSM play into sexual assault. Much like with the anti-science micro-aggressions within feminism (and I think that terminology fits remarkably well) the puritanical anti-aggressions which lead to consensual BDSM becoming sexual assault and lead to images of "pinup" style women being self-evidently wrong are worth looking at.

Left this untouched earlier in my step back, but I really want to address it, because seriously?

Have you actually read SB 967? Because... well, it doesn't remotely do what you're claiming. In fact, I learned about affirmative consent as defined there from, and continue to find the greatest support for it in, BDSM circles. The concept is actually really, really simple: Only have sex with people who have agreed to it in ways they've agreed to. I'm involved in relationships with a fairly strong D/s element right now that are built on that foundation. So... no, this is pretty blatantly false.

[Vorian]

Generally agree, I think that if a game is going to include sexy armor, unless it's already intended to be a fetish-focused game (hello, Scarlet Blade), it should include sexy armor options for both sexes.  Though I do love the recent trend in MMOs to include some kind of armor appearance changing system, that lets you take armor you like the look of and apply it to the armor you're actually wearing because of stats, and I think that this at least makes the skimpy armor more acceptable, even if it's not completely balanced between male and female.

While that does allow for greater control over a character's appearance, in this case it's a band-aid over the problem at best. There's still a very obvious and pervasive double standard in the available options, or at least there was back when I played. Outside of leather armors women were almost entirely limited to bikini cut gear and dresses, while men lacked sexy or revealing armors entirely to the best of my recollection. That has to change on both ends for the extra appearance customization to mean anything. (I also have mixed feelings about it on account of roleplaying disconnect, but that's a separate and much less important consideration.)

[Sethala]

While that does allow for greater control over a character's appearance, in this case it's a band-aid over the problem at best. There's still a very obvious and pervasive double standard in the available options, or at least there was back when I played. Outside of leather armors women were almost entirely limited to bikini cut gear and dresses, while men lacked sexy or revealing armors entirely to the best of my recollection. That has to change on both ends for the extra appearance customization to mean anything. (I also have mixed feelings about it on account of roleplaying disconnect, but that's a separate and much less important consideration.)

Oh certainly, given the choice I would say that any game that makes sexy armor for female characters should have equally sexy armor on males, in addition to an appearance-changing system to let people avoid sexy armor if they don't like it (or, in my case, keep the look of sexy armor even if it doesn't have good stats).  That's not to say that every single piece of armor has to look the same on males and females, but it shouldn't look like full-body plate armor on guys and metal bikinis on girls.