---

Originally posted by Sovrath
I have to shiver a bit at your post because I always find it disquieting when someone has recognized the evils of the world and wants to point them out to people, possibly "clucking their tongue" along the way.

My first thought is that we are wired to be "us". And though we try to be better people, in the end we are going to be what we are going to be. Within humanity there is a nature vs nurture battle that is always going on. Still, I don't believe that setting some high bar, a bar that is sort of academic in its conception, is really going to change us from what we are.

In the end, we are animals. We eat and procreate. Our whole drive is about eating and procreating. And though we do incredible things such as land small cars on mars and take sounds or color or words and weave them into something that is greater than the sum of its parts, we are still programmed with "eating and procreating".

It's just that our intelligence also makes us aware of sexuality in a more profound and perhaps complicated way.

Are there people out there who are victims? Are there people out there who don't know better? sure! Are there people out there who need help because they have gotten into situations where they should never be?

of course!

Are there people out there who embrace their sexuality and try ti imbue their lives with as much of it as possible? Because they are wired this way? um, "yea you bet".

I'm for a live and let live enviroment. I'm not for groups of people looking at other groups of people and creating very strict defiitions on what they should be doing, how they should be acting and how they don't know better because they are misguided, they are led astray or they can't let themselves be better and rise above.

Becuase you know what that is?

That's Plato's Republic.

It's the whole idea that mankind will always be lost unless the small group of learned philosophers take over leadership and shows them "the way" despite themselves. That only the philosophers are capapble of leading the unruly masses who can't possibly make good decisions as a society. That only a few are wise enough to lead the many.

And that type of thing just won't do.

Sex sells because it's who we are. We want to be sexual, we want to have it in our lives as much as we can stand. if people want to temper it that's great. More power to them. If people want to indulge and maximize it then that should be ok as well. If that is not to your liking and you want to say that it's because of the chains of society then that's your prerogative. You can hate and avoid the use of sexual images on games, in movies, on TV as much as you like. I'll fully support you in that. But that's where that ends.

---

Not talking about human sexuality. Not 'clucking' anything. Not trying to tell anyone how to think or feel. I'm not targeting any individuals or their behaviors. Of course you are entitled to whatever opinions you may have on any subject matter. I'm not talking about my opinion nor yours. If you'd take a moment to let down your guard, you'd hopefully see that I am not attacking or preaching or trying to manipulate. I'm commenting the society we live in. Thats it.

Originally posted by Deivos

I'm confused where he told you what to think rather than telling you something you could think about.

 

EDIT: Also, did Hurvart just say he doesn't want respect to be a part of games?

No. I respect other peoples opinions. But I also believe in freedom of choice. If someone wants to create games that are politically correct in every way and do everything to not offend anyone its fine. But I will not play them... I think that would be very boring. And if you are killing mobs and other players characters all the time that should be a bigger moral problem than bikinis, IMO.

I think others should respect my opinion.  I respect them and I think I deserve that.  And they should stop attacking games I like or the companies and developers that make them.

---

Originally posted by Hurvart

---

Originally posted by Deivos I'm confused where he told you what to think rather than telling you something you could think about.   EDIT: Also, did Hurvart just say he doesn't want respect to be a part of games?

---

No. I respect other peoples opinions. But I also believe in freedom of choice. If someone wants to create games that are politically correct in every way and do everything to not offend anyone its fine. But I will not play them... I think that would be very boring. And if you are killing mobs and other players characters all the time that should be a bigger moral problem than bikinis, IMO.

I think others should respect my opinion.  I respect them and I think I deserve that.  And they should stop attacking games I like or the companies and developers that make them.

 

---

Are you implying I attacked games and developers that you like? Because I didn't.

The problem isn't the existence, it's the purpose.

Some one wants to call nudity artistic and natural?

Then it has to be displayed in a natural way. Not an overt or engineered way. There is a difference between art and porn and it is in the display as well as intent behind it's existence.

You want freedom of choice for people to make and play games they want. Fine. Not one person has argued against that.

But don't try and pretend it's more or less than what it is.

That seems to be more the point than anything else in Foomerang's rhetoric.

Originally posted by Foomerang

 

---

Originally posted by Hurvart

---

Originally posted by Deivos I'm confused where he told you what to think rather than telling you something you could think about.   EDIT: Also, did Hurvart just say he doesn't want respect to be a part of games?

---

No. I respect other peoples opinions. But I also believe in freedom of choice. If someone wants to create games that are politically correct in every way and do everything to not offend anyone its fine. But I will not play them... I think that would be very boring. And if you are killing mobs and other players characters all the time that should be a bigger moral problem than bikinis, IMO.

 

I think others should respect my opinion.  I respect them and I think I deserve that.  And they should stop attacking games I like or the companies and developers that make them.

 

---

 

Are you implying I attacked games and developers that you like? Because I didn't.

It was not my intention to single you out. In general I think people complaning about sexy women in video games want developers to listen to them and stop creating games like that. They think it is a problem and want change... Because that would help to create a society with less objectification of women.  Trying to convince developers this would be the right thing to do is probably often the reason they complain. From my POV this means attacking the developers. Because I dont agree with the ideology and I dont want to recognize the problem.

If a developer listened to such advice and decided to change the games it would not be good from my POV. And I want to try to prevent it.

Originally posted by Foomerang

 

---

---

 

Not talking about human sexuality. Not 'clucking' anything. Not trying to tell anyone how to think or feel. I'm not targeting any individuals or their behaviors. Of course you are entitled to whatever opinions you may have on any subject matter. I'm not talking about my opinion nor yours. If you'd take a moment to let down your guard, you'd hopefully see that I am not attacking or preaching or trying to manipulate. I'm commenting the society we live in. Thats it.

Except your commentary comes across as disaproving.

But ok, sure,  let's back up.

Perhaps it is more about, as I mentioned above, how we are wired.

Getting slightly more on topic, the depiction of women in the Trion advertisment is very much like a pulp fiction rendition of women. A John Carter of Mars cover in the 60's. That whole Conan thing. The argument being that those covers, those types of stories are written by men and they depict women in a less flattering light.

I would argue that in some ways they depict women in an incredibly flattering if not raw and adolescent light. It's essentially men opening up their ID and expressing an appreciation for women, albeit in a very clumsy and faltering way.

As I said above, we are sexual beings. We eat and procreate. Regardless of whether we want families or not we have this built in biological imperative to continue the species. If we didn't have it we might not realy be here. All species have it. It's just that we, with our intellgience, attach "other things" to this because not only must we have sex, but we like sex. And we like being sexuallly attracted/attractive to people.

It's an explosion of appreciation that isn't tempered by our intelligence so much as it's just a "wow moment". And perhaps, because of our intelligence and all the things that go with it, it's a way for men to control the idea of women if not controlling women. And for heterosexual women they want to be attractive to men because they are built to make the babies. They have to attract a suitor. At least on a very fundamental biological level.

Now, having said that, in no way does this mean that men get to behave like asses and women have to have unwanted attention or be thought of as "less than".

They aren't objects, they are women. and heterosexual men want women. It's in our programming. So men reach down deeply and indulge that primitive part of their minds and create these very raw images that stem from that dark place that modern man doesn't like to acknowledge.

But again there is a difference between expressing this drive, this primitive expression and directly shoving it down someone's throat. I say directly because we in a society need to find our boundaries. I think it's an expression of our most primitive and fundamental nature and it's something to be celebrated by humanity, not looked at as women being viewed as slaves and men are controlling bastards.

as long as we acknowledge that this is a part of us and not everything that we are, that we acknowledge that it can be a good thing but something that must always be monitored lest we insult someone then it can be freeing and incredible.

So you know, "know your audience". for my tastes, anything that indulges in the sexuality of humanity, in all its forms, as long as everyone is consenting adults, is a good thing. In any case, I'm just shooting from the hip, I don't study this stuff it's more my observations of how things are.

It's a fair notion, but you have to account for history to realize a few flaws.

The first and foremost flaw being perception of beauty. If you want to rail on the depiction of 'beautiful women' then you have to acknowledge what aspects are actually biological and what are artificial and superficial constructs.

That woman posted in the op? Not only is that form at best mediocre on the health spectrum, the only thing going for it is potential hip ratio as a biological reason they might be attractive. Every other aspect is at this point a cultural value and imposition, in spite of real effects on health, that have nothign to do with their actual ability to survive or procreate.

So sure, there's base instinct driving that to some degree, but it's a whole lot of bogus fantasy driven into our skulls piled on top of it.

Point being that you can appreciate that picture all you want, but that appreciation is not (or there is only the inkling of) going towards anything natural.

Gamer guys wonder why girls don't play MMOs could it possible having something to do with

http://spinksville.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/riftcenturions.jpg

my girlfriend play fantasy games for the same reason any guy would, she wants to feel like shes in another world. I don't get why she as a female must walk out and be eye candy for all the guys in the world, and to boot it all she can get stabbed right in the stomach.

Originally posted by Deivos

It's a fair notion, but you have to account for history to realize a few flaws.

 

The first and foremost flaw being perception of beauty. If you want to rail on the depiction of 'beautiful women' then you have to acknowledge what aspects are actually biological and what are artificial and superficial constructs.

 

That woman posted in the op? Not only is that form at best mediocre on the health spectrum, the only thing going for it is potential hip ratio as a biological reason they might be attractive. Every other aspect is at this point a cultural value and imposition, in spite of real effects on health, that have nothign to do with their actual ability to survive or procreate.

 

So sure, there's base instinct driving that to some degree, but it's a whole lot of bogus fantasy driven into our skulls piled on top of it.

 

Point being that you can appreciate that picture all you want, but that appreciation is not (or there is only thr inkling of) going towards anything natural.

I sort of agree but also disagree.

You say that the woman in the picture is medicore on the health spectrum? As far a procreation is my assumption.

I would say to early man "yes, you are correct". They probably would pass on her and go toward something shaped like this:

However, in light of modern advancements in medicine as well as an increase in our intelligence, those proportions aren't important anymore. I would say that the desire for women or desire to be attractive to men as well as some deep down desire to procreate is still there as strong as ever. However, because we have broadened our taste for what is considered beautiful and desireable, then we should consider that primitive drive as the engine and it's subtely changed due to intelligence and perception of beauty as well as evolving cultural ideas of beauty and desireability.

Our bodies, our genes know very little from one type of person to another. The informing instrucions are "procreate". We are just viewing possible mates through altered and expanded lenses. It's as if our head is sitting on an ancient machine that is powering us and yet that head heeds the instructions in a way  that makes sense to our modern minds.

---

Originally posted by Sovrath

---

Originally posted by Foomerang  

---

---

  Not talking about human sexuality. Not 'clucking' anything. Not trying to tell anyone how to think or feel. I'm not targeting any individuals or their behaviors. Of course you are entitled to whatever opinions you may have on any subject matter. I'm not talking about my opinion nor yours. If you'd take a moment to let down your guard, you'd hopefully see that I am not attacking or preaching or trying to manipulate. I'm commenting the society we live in. Thats it.

---

Except your commentary comes across as disaproving.

But ok, sure,  let's back up.

Perhaps it is more about, as I mentioned above, how we are wired.

Getting slightly more on topic, the depiction of women in the Trion advertisment is very much like a pulp fiction rendition of women. A John Carter of Mars cover in the 60's. That whole Conan thing. The argument being that those covers, those types of stories are written by men and they depict women in a less flattering light.

I would argue that in some ways they depict women in an incredibly flattering if not raw and adolescent light. It's essentially men opening up their ID and expressing an appreciation for women, albeit in a very clumsy and faltering way.

As I said above, we are sexual beings. We eat and procreate. Regardless of whether we want families or not we have this built in biological imperative to continue the species. If we didn't have it we might not realy be here. All species have it. It's just that we, with our intellgience, attach "other things" to this because not only must we have sex, but we like sex. And we like being sexuallly attracted/attractive to people.

It's an explosion of appreciation that isn't tempered by our intelligence so much as it's just a "wow moment". And perhaps, because of our intelligence and all the things that go with it, it's a way for men to control the idea of women if not controlling women. And for heterosexual women they want to be attractive to men because they are built to make the babies. They have to attract a suitor. At least on a very fundamental biological level.

Now, having said that, in no way does this mean that men get to behave like asses and women have to have unwanted attention or be thought of as "less than".

They aren't objects, they are women. and heterosexual men want women. It's in our programming. So men reach down deeply and indulge that primitive part of their minds and create these very raw images that stem from that dark place that modern man doesn't like to acknowledge.

But again there is a difference between expressing this drive, this primitive expression and directly shoving it down someone's throat. I say directly because we in a society need to find our boundaries. I think it's an expression of our most primitive and fundamental nature and it's something to be celebrated by humanity, not looked at as women being viewed as slaves and men are controlling bastards.

as long as we acknowledge that this is a part of us and not everything that we are, that we acknowledge that it can be a good thing but something that must always be monitored lest we insult someone then it can be freeing and incredible.

So you know, "know your audience". for my tastes, anything that indulges in the sexuality of humanity, in all its forms, as long as everyone is consenting adults, is a good thing. In any case, I'm just shooting from the hip, I don't study this stuff it's more my observations of how things are.

---

You make a lot of valid points. However in the context of this thread, I was talking about sexual objectification for the sake of selling a product. It happens in everything: food, cars, video games. Everything that can be bought and sold uses or has used sex as a marketing tool. Because sex feel good and we are hard wired to want it, it is used to associate with products for the sole purpose of monetary gian. And in the process, people are dehumanized and objectified. Whether voluntary or not, that is how it works in our society today. And I feel that is unfortunate.

Neh not really Sovrath. I don't even mean as far back as that either. IT's only recent history where skinny people even became ideal, and at this point we are reigning it back because there has been actual medical problems with the extremes to which that ideal has been taken.

Even on just modern standards you still see some of the initial inclinations though. Our genes actually know quite a lot from one body type to another, and there are plenty of individual case studies that agree to that.Like I mentioned the most apparent is the hips. the waist to hip ratio retains the same in many because even as a stick figure people still perceive the curvy nature of flared hips as being more beneficial, and it is for both procreation and personal health purposes.

It truly is only a very modern notion that people look the way they do, and you can't deny the fact that there is much that is artificial in the ideals. Even the one portrayed in the op is exceptionally artificial, and I'm not just meaning in that it's somewhat stylized to fit the Rift theme.

We haven't boradened our perception of anything, it has shifted as our means to control it has shifted. 

EDIT: I also wanna add a response to Foomerang's last comment.

The most easily notable example being the trend in china of using outright naked women to sell cars at some places for car shows.

You thought the minidresses and skirts here were bad. :p

Originally posted by Deivos

Neh not really Sovrath. I don't even mean as far back as that either. IT's only recent history where skinny people even became ideal, and at this point we are reigning it back because there has been actual medical problems with the extremes to which that ideal has been taken.

 

Even on just modern standards you still see some of the initial inclinations though. Our genes actually know quite a lot from one body type to another, and there are plenty of individual case studies that agree to that.Like I mentioned the most apparent is the hips. the waist to hip ratio retains the same in many because even as a stick figure people still perceive the curvy nature of flared hips as being more beneficial, and it is for both procreation and personal health purposes.

 

It truly is only a very modern notion that people look the way they do, and you can't deny the fact that there is much that is artificial in the ideals. Even the one portrayed in the op is exceptionally artificial, and I'm not just meaning in that it's somewhat stylized to fit the Rift theme.

 

We haven't boradened our perception of anything, it has shifted as our means to control it has shifted. 

 

EDIT: I also wanna add a response to Foomerang's last comment.

 

The most easily notable example being the trend in china of using outright naked women to sell cars at some places for car shows.

 

You thought the minidresses and skirts here were bad. :p

Well, it's true that I'm aware of, in the case of women, curvier being considered more attractive up until the last century (in the examples that come to mind - I'm sure someone could point out a society that doesn't have curvier people - However, Rubens comes to mind for a plumper ideal woman) but I'm convinced that the change in attitudes come from better medical care and as I mentioned, Our intelligence.

If you were to show anyone today a picture of what would be considered a generally beautiful person (on the average) but they were anorexic or incredibly obese, I think you would find more often than not that "most" people would not see them as desirable.

But there is a difference between anorexic and obese and "skinny and curvy".

As I said, our engine is one that is the same. The "deep, deep down" wants to procreate. But we can procreate with people of many different body types and for the most part still have babies and babies that live.

Now, our intelligence as well as our cultural perceptions help color what is desirable. Part of this could be seeing someone who is skinny (not anorexic) and just noting that they are different. Maybe we as a species are programmed to just "try" for the sake of genetic diversity?

Remember, if strong healthy males were only the wanted types of mates we probably wouldn't have evolved to a point where intelligence is a key factor. Could have started off intelligent health males and then the greater the intelligence, regardless of physical attributes, the better at surviving in an evolving society.

I kind of see humanity as a cake. The fundamentla cake is our fundamentl being and the icing, sprinkles, sugar flowers or "whatever" is our intelligence and sum of what happens in an evolving modern society.

Atraction to any human being is chemical. Our society, who we live with, who our siblings are, friends etc help fine tune what our bodies want.

Our bodies want sex. Sex in its most fundamental form is about procreating. Now add our intelligence, the sum of our knowledge, differences in our hormones, etc, and we get all sorts of things that, though driven by that fundamentla urge, is then steered toward other directions.

Being tied up and spanked is not procreating, I'll give you that. Or any other proclivities that humanity has added to its sexual repertoire.

We have this engine that wants sex and then we, as modern men/women have altered the direction of the car. The engine is still pluggin away but our minds, intelligence, advanced emotions then drive that care in unforeseen directions.

I don't see anything wrong here. It wouldn't be the best way to get me sold on a game but, using sex to sell violence sounds fine.

Actually using any mehtod necessary to sell any entertainment product sounds A OK with me. Well, short of the threatening of physical harm.

Games, Tv shows, movies etc... All optional. If there are any issues to be discussed, they should be first addressed at the parental level, then at early schooling because after that, all other influences are superficial, the damage has already been done.

AND considering the state of pornography on the internet, the fact that any of these game ad "models" have any clothes at all says something positive.... I think.

Originally posted by Foomerang

 

---

---

 

You make a lot of valid points. However in the context of this thread, I was talking about sexual objectification for the sake of selling a product. It happens in everything: food, cars, video games. Everything that can be bought and sold uses or has used sex as a marketing tool. Because sex feel good and we are hard wired to want it, it is used to associate with products for the sole purpose of monetary gian. And in the process, people are dehumanized and objectified. Whether voluntary or not, that is how it works in our society today. And I feel that is unfortunate.

But I think that's it, it's more of a glass half full/half empty scenario.

You say taht because sex feels good and that we are hard wired to want it (which it is and which we are) it is used to asociate products for the sole purpose of monetary gain.

Though there is incredible truth to that I would also add that perhaps it's not just a "slap a brawny guy on that product or a scantily clad woman on another product and we'll make millions" but also that we has humans just "have sex on the brain".

We love our sex. In our own way and in our own forms. That in a sense we are voyeurs and exhibitionists. And we look to add sex everywhere simply because we love were it leads us.

Or in another sense, I can give you vanilla ice cream or I can give you that vanilla ice cream with sprinkles. We love our sprinkles so let's just add it!

It allows us to express and view sexuality in a socially acceptable mode. We get to look at, to gaze upon people that we find desirable and we get to be viewed, in public as our glorious and sexual selves with no apologies.

I just think it's who we are as a species. We want to be excited, titillated to be watched, to be the watcher.

And even if it wasn't used to get the attention of consumers (I'm convinced that just because you slap sexually desireable people on a prodcut doesn't mean that product will be successful, it will just get noticed) we would still allow those moments of exhibitionism/voyeurism to exist.

It's our societal pressure valve. It's that balance between our animal selves and our modern logical selves.

ok, will revisit the thread tomorrow... skyrim is calling.

---

Originally posted by Trionicus
I don't see anything wrong here. It wouldn't be the best way to get me sold on a game but, using sex to sell violence sounds fine.

 

Actually using any mehtod necessary to sell any entertainment product sounds A OK with me. Well, short of the threatening of physical harm.

 

Games, Tv shows, movies etc... All optional. If there are any issues to be discussed, they should be first addressed at the parental level, then at early schooling because after that, all other influences are superficial, the damage has already been done.

 

AND considering the state of pornography on the internet, the fact that any of these game ad "models" have any clothes at all says something positive.... I think.

---

That was rather a bit of a sidestep Sovrath. I'm not about to disagree with you on it, but it fails to change the fact that our modern ideals are quitel largely not to do with health and in many ways are actually still damaging to it.

Again as I had already said take a look at the op picture. The only natural aspect goign for it is the hips. It otherwise displays no form of muscle or bodymass beyond what's essentially necerssary to be. And even then it's an impractical stylized ideal packed in a fancy revealing outfit.

You didn't even really say anything fundamentally different than me either, you just used a longer winded version of 'our instinct is there, but we've influenced it greatly by circumventing nature' and attached a "c'est la vie' to it rather than my noting that our modern ideals are not only different, but have been noted to be physically damaging.

And even when you look at modern examples of what you'd call an actually healthy female, like for example one that works out, it;s rarely if ever an expression of favor that's given. If we really expanded our horizons then women with muscle mass shouldn't be branded as speficialyl masculine as they tend to be. Yes, there are extremes, but even a female with visually toned legs is typpically knocked down the scale of attraction compared to one that's lacking muscle.

Again, note that it's as such in the op picture. Hell, any picture of a warrior girl outside of a berserker themed character seems to end up with that effect.

You can talk as much about how we do stuff as you want, but like I said before...

"Don't try and pretend it's more or less than what it is."

This is a highly idealized and unrealistic concept engineered to one end, attracting people who wanna see more of it. This isn't an intellectual thing. You could effectively say the advertisement is calling you a chump and that you are willing to chase something for a single base purpose are more willing to rationalize that action rather than use the capacity to think and find a new conclusion.

EDIT: Guess this just falls to the old saying "It's easier to justify..."

---

Originally posted by Sovrath

---

Originally posted by Foomerang  

---

---

  You make a lot of valid points. However in the context of this thread, I was talking about sexual objectification for the sake of selling a product. It happens in everything: food, cars, video games. Everything that can be bought and sold uses or has used sex as a marketing tool. Because sex feel good and we are hard wired to want it, it is used to associate with products for the sole purpose of monetary gian. And in the process, people are dehumanized and objectified. Whether voluntary or not, that is how it works in our society today. And I feel that is unfortunate.

---

But I think that's it, it's more of a glass half full/half empty scenario.

You say taht because sex feels good and that we are hard wired to want it (which it is and which we are) it is used to asociate products for the sole purpose of monetary gain.

Though there is incredible truth to that I would also add that perhaps it's not just a "slap a brawny guy on that product or a scantily clad woman on another product and we'll make millions" but also that we has humans just "have sex on the brain".

We love our sex. In our own way and in our own forms. That in a sense we are voyeurs and exhibitionists. And we look to add sex everywhere simply because we love were it leads us.

Or in another sense, I can give you vanilla ice cream or I can give you that vanilla ice cream with sprinkles. We love our sprinkles so let's just add it!

It allows us to express and view sexuality in a socially acceptable mode. We get to look at, to gaze upon people that we find desirable and we get to be viewed, in public as our glorious and sexual selves with no apologies.

I just think it's who we are as a species. We want to be excited, titillated to be watched, to be the watcher.

And even if it wasn't used to get the attention of consumers (I'm convinced that just because you slap sexually desireable people on a prodcut doesn't mean that product will be successful, it will just get noticed) we would still allow those moments of exhibitionism/voyeurism to exist.

It's our societal pressure valve. It's that balance between our animal selves and our modern logical selves.

ok, will revisit the thread tomorrow... skyrim is calling.

---

I can see where you are coming from. However, through mass media and advertising, we have become oversexed to the point that it is completely saturated in everything around us. It is literally in everything. We as a society, are sex obsessed through outside influence. Death and sex dominate the majority of what we see and hear all around us. It comes in waves throughout human history, eras of extreme indulgence in primal fears and desires.

anyway, see you tomorrow. have fun in skyrim! :)

Originally posted by Deivos

 

This is a highly idealized and unrealistic concept engineered to one end, attracting people who wanna see more of it. This isn't an intellectual thing. You could effectively say the advertisement is calling you a chump and that you are willing to chase something for a single base purpose are more willing to rationalize that action rather than use the capacity to think and find a new conclusion.

 

EDIT: Guess this just falls to the old saying "It's easier to justify..."

I think that's a very cynical way of looking at it.

You call it a justification and I call it "how we are wired".

regardless of how a man or woman is presented, if people want to look at these images then I say "good".

Because in the end you are saying, at least from what I gather, that imbuing people with sexuality is a bad thing. no? I say MORE SEX.

I'd rather have more sex than violence. And I dont' find the added images of beautiful people a bad thing as it speaks to what I want.

But perhaps I'm wired to be a bit more of a Libertine (in certain definitions).

It doesn't matter that it's highly idealized. That's part of  what art is. All it does is play upon our base instinct but additiionally tantalize our intellect. And it IS an intellect thing. Animals don't fantasize about sexual partners in a way that is far beyond what is natural. But we humans do.

Originally posted by HellSings
She's Hot

Is she!? I figured in that outfit she would be rather chilly.