What's wrong with the human body? Square and 'sluttiness'

[i90east]

What a sad world we live in.

What's sad is that many girls dress slutty because everyone else does. It's the copy-cat society, and everyone strives be the same and yet claim they're different. I don't get it. Many young people try so hard to look hardcore. They're just fooling themselves, and mature people can see that. When people dress slutty, one thinks "ok, either that person is a slut or a wanna-be slut". In their defense they say "well it's the inside that counts". Well shouldn't the outside be at least some what representative of the inside? This concept applies to Final Fantasy as well, even if I am straying from the original topic of the thread a little bit.

[The Man]

By your logic, people can't wear less clothing simply because they don't like wearing lots of clothing. Or because it's hot outside. Or for any reason except wanting to look like sluts. Which I don't think any of them do. Ever heard of original thought? Some people simply don't like covering their entire bodies. That doesn't make them sluts, and it doesn't make them "wannabe sluts" (what the hell is that sort of thing, anyway? :o)

[Rand Al'Tor]

Originally posted by i90east
What's sad is that many girls dress slutty because everyone else does. It's the copy-cat society, and everyone strives be the same and yet claim they're different.

Okay... THERE I agree. But then the problem is not 'skimpy clothing' or 'sluttiness' but just 'doing what everybody else does. But if a person decides that he or she feels best while 'underdressed' you have no right to make a call like that.

I don't get it. Many young people try so hard to look hardcore. They're just fooling themselves, and mature people can see that.

Hmmm... 'mature' people can overestimate their own knowledge sometimes. SOME people dress Goth, hip, slutty, skater, or whatever for 'fitting in' reasons, but some people just like the clothes they wear.

When people dress slutty, one thinks "ok, either that person is a slut or a wanna-be slut". In their defense they say "well it's the inside that counts". Well shouldn't the outside be at least some what representative of the inside?

Skimpy cothing can represent an inside of someone who is content of her/his own body and doesn't mind showing it off, but is no slut nor wants to be one. Or perhaps just feels most comfortable with less clothing.

Then there is the matter of 'slut' As I see it, it can mean two things.

1: woman desperately wanting to have sex to validate herself, considers it a 'status' thing. That is bad, and it happens way too often.

2: Woman interested in sex, not necessarely within a relation, and actively seeking it for her own pleasure. That is NO bad. Come on, Queen Victoria is dead and the 50's have passed. Women have sexual drives just like the rest of it, don't they? And if they dres skimpy to point out that they wanna have sex and attempt to seduce partners with it, what's the problem with that then?

This concept applies to Final Fantasy as well, even if I am straying from the original topic of the thread a little bit.

Nah, because the Final Fantasy characters are also products, made to sell. And they WERE from the beginning. That is why they get interesting characters, and that is also why they get skimpy outfits. For our viewing pleasure. And for most of us, it DOES give pleasure. Not enough on it's own without characters, but still pleasant

[i90east]

There's a difference between dressing slutty and dressing to be comfortable (innocent clothing). Dressing slutty doesn't just mean showing a lot of skin either. I see girls that wear clothing that looks rather uncomfortable, or clothes that arn't suitable for the weather conditions... just to look sexy. They're going out of their way, dressing in ways that arn't suitable at all. There are clothes that make sense, and there are others that don't.

Women have sexual drives just like the rest of it, don't they? And if they dres skimpy to point out that they wanna have sex and attempt to seduce partners with it, what's the problem with that then?

That's exactly what a slut does. Looking around for sex, that's slutty. Girls who are simply looking for a relationship... well, there is a better way. It's called the inner self. Chances are, a guy that wants a girl because of the way she looks wants her for the wrong reason. If the inside is most important, than the outside should take on a lesser priority. It seems like a lot of people mix that up.

Nah, because the Final Fantasy characters are also products, made to sell. And they WERE from the beginning. That is why they get interesting characters, and that is also why they get skimpy outfits. For our viewing pleasure. And for most of us, it DOES give pleasure. Not enough on it's own without characters, but still pleasant

I just wish Square would stick to pretty characters and not make the switch to slutty. Sluttiness in games just makes things seem so fake, like it's nothing more than a sex show.

[TheAbominatrix]

Yep, must be a total sex show. In fact, all the quests are just about Yuna, Rikku, and Paine looking for hot sweaty sex. [/sarcasm]

You say that sluttiness doesnt neccesarily mean showing skin. That it's a combination of look and attitude, am I right?

So, by that logic, the girls showing skin shouldnt make them slutty, because their personalities arent. Right? And none of them look at all out of place or uncomfortable in their new outfits. It was shocking at first, but it's no more shocking than when someone gets a new haircut or a dye. You're a bit shocked and then you get over it.

And as for how 'sad' it is as to the way Square dresses their characters... I find it far sadder that people will make such a fuss over it. If it was a book, or a text based adventure, it wouldnt matter. I fit was SNES graphics, it wouldnt matter. But because the graphics are so rich and detailed, it's time to pitch a fit.

If people are going to buy games just for eye candy, they'll buy games like Dead or Alive: Extereme Beach Volleyball, or any of the numerous sexual games on the market. Sex is not the only thing selling X-2 (in fact it seems like a rather small factor, a 'bonus' for those that like such things).

But of course, Square is evil for straying away from their basic formula. Square is terrible for dressing characters as they more or less always have because the graphics are better now.

[eternalshiva]

bah Square-Enix is just experimenting with its fan base. if they see that it doesn't work then I am sure some person who doesn't have its brains in its pants will change the formula again. they've been around for over a decade sheesh, even Disney made their characters a bit "risque" with the Little Mermaid. Who cares. This argument is starting to get pointless.

[Rand Al'Tor]

Originally posted by i90east
There's a difference between dressing slutty and dressing to be comfortable (innocent clothing). Dressing slutty doesn't just mean showing a lot of skin either. I see girls that wear clothing that looks rather uncomfortable, or clothes that arn't suitable for the weather conditions... just to look sexy. They're going out of their way, dressing in ways that arn't suitable at all. There are clothes that make sense, and there are others that don't.

That's exactly what a slut does. Looking around for sex, that's slutty. Girls who are simply looking for a relationship... well, there is a better way. It's called the inner self. Chances are, a guy that wants a girl because of the way she looks wants her for the wrong reason. If the inside is most important, than the outside should take on a lesser priority. It seems like a lot of people mix that up.

But the problem with the inside is that it is on the INSIDE. As in, not visible on first look, usually. If I have to choose being in a relationship between a so-so looking but wonderful person and a beautiful bitch, I'll take the first option. But when I am faced with a woman whose looks attract me and a woman whose looks don't attract me, and I don't KNOW anything of their personalities, hey, I LIKE beauty.

Then there are facts that women (and men) may want to dress sexy because they LIKE to dress sexy, not because they want to attract people. People can pcik clothing for OTHER reasons then 'looking for sex'

And I would like to mention once again that there is NOTHING wrong with looking for sex and clothing yourself for said purpose, as long as you do it because YOU want to.


[uote] I just wish Square would stick to pretty characters and not make the switch to slutty. Sluttiness in games just makes things seem so fake, like it's nothing more than a sex show.

Sex-shows don't have wonderful music, enticing plots, interesting characters, etc. etc. As long as Square keeps THOSE things up, clothing doesn't matter much.

Also, 'switch'? As I have said before, SS has been speaking to the testosteron (and the oustrogen for the ladies) since forever. HELOOO.... Terra became NAKED when she went into Esper mode! If anything the graphics forced Squaresoft to MAKE some limits.

[The Man]

this is true... you certainly wouldn't see naked terra on playstation 2 without eleventy billion people pitching a fit as they're doing now with half-naked women >(

hell... she got through UNCENSORED back in the days when nintendo was trying to remove all references to sex out of their videogames in america... that's pretty impressive imo!

And for anyone who thinks this is anything new for Square, just look at the Japanese form of Goddess in FF6:



Or the Japanese form of Chadarnook:



Or Barbariccia/Valvalis:




I rest my freaking case.

[i90east]

I rest my freaking case.

Hah! You wish. Let me explain. Gods and goddeses are often depicted as being nude or semi-nude. Just look at art. You see it all the time. Is it anything sexual? No. This applies to Terra as well. Nowhere does the game hint at sexual tendencies for Terra. I mean heck, Terra was in esper mode in front of a bunch of kids. Do you think Square was thinking sex? There's nothing wrong with the human body until it turns into a sex act. I guess your perception is too shallow to see that.

But when I am faced with a woman whose looks attract me and a woman whose looks don't attract me, and I don't KNOW anything of their personalities, hey, I LIKE beauty.

What does sluttiness have to do with beauty?

Then there are facts that women (and men) may want to dress sexy because they LIKE to dress sexy, not because they want to attract people. People can pcik clothing for OTHER reasons then 'looking for sex'

What reasons are those? You make an interesting proposition. I can't imagine why anyone would want to dress sexy if they don't want to attract people. Very interesting.

Sex-shows don't have wonderful music, enticing plots, interesting characters, etc. etc. As long as Square keeps THOSE things up, clothing doesn't matter much.

Square hasn't kept those things up IMO, but if you think so than I'm glad you get enjoyment out of it.

[The Man]

Originally posted by i90east
Hah! You wish. Let me explain. Gods and goddeses are often depicted as being nude or semi-nude. Just look at art. You see it all the time. Is it anything sexual? No. This applies to Terra as well. Nowhere does the game hint at sexual tendencies for Terra. I mean heck, Terra was in esper mode in front of a bunch of kids. Do you think Square was thinking sex? There's nothing wrong with the human body until it turns into a sex act. I guess your perception is too shallow to see that.

Hardly. Your entire problem with FFX-2 is that the characters wear very little clothing. Where in the game are they involved in sexual acts at all? As far as we're aware, there's absolutely no sex involved. How can you claim their nudity to be "sexual" then?

Chadarnook isn't a goddess. Neither is Barbariccia. In Barbariccia's case, her near-nudity was certainly a very sexual aspect of the game, especially when you consider her relationship with Cain. I guess you're going to have to start hating FFIV for being slutty now too.

[Outsider]

As far as I remember...

Chadarnook was supposed to be Relm's painting possesed by some evil sirit, I guess... And Relm was paiting Starlet, an Esper. So you can be considered a superior being.

And Valvalis (Barbaricia) was the fiend of air in FF4, she was one of the four fiends of elements, so she could be considered a superior being, too. And I don't remember any relationship with Kain.

[The Man]

That's because the relationship with Kain wasn't mentioned in the US versions of the game. J2e's translation, I believe, is the only one who alludes to it.

You could consider both of them superior beings, I suppose, but FFVI's Critic wears no pants in the Japanese version of the game, and there's a boss in FFV which actually wears less clothing than Goddess. I don't think either of them could be considered "superior beings." And then there's the final boss of FFIII, who looks like the image attached to this post. Does she qualify as a "superior being"? I don't think so.

Besides, the western traditions of allowing gods to be painted nude mean practically zilch to the Japanese, even though they've taken in many aspects of Western culture to their society. The fact is, characters have been practically nude in final fantasy games since practically the start of the series. I don't see what's wrong with the presence of sexuality in FF games.

[TheAbominatrix]

Oh, I'm so sure the images we're 'pornographic'. This argument is getting so ridiculously stupid. i90, you ignore any points anyone makes unless you can contend them, and you're constantly contradicting yourself.

You say skin is sexual, dont you? Early FF characters showed skin, so it has to be sexual, by your definition. As I said before, if they redid VI and had Esper Terra in PS2 graphics, completly naked, would it be sexual? I certainly dont think so, but then again I dont see how X-2 is this massive porno game... I must be missing something here.

Edit: Oh, I guess his post was deleted *shrugs*

[i90east]

Amazing TheAbominatrix. My post is up for 10 seconds, and you see it. I deleted it because one of the images didn't show.

Ok now I'm confused. First you say that FF characters are merely showing a little skin, and then you say "I don't see what's wrong with the presence of sexuality in FF games.", acknowledging the fact that there is a sexual presense. You should get your arguments straight before posting. If you're still in denial, try denying this:



The stuff I pulled up on Yuna were so pornographic in nature that I couldn't view it at work (or make this post). Do you think sex everytime you see a nude female? I'm referring to the picture you posted from FF3 now. Have you ever heard of Medusa?

There is nothing sexual in early FF games. Since you know so much about Japanese culture, what do they think gods, goddeses and angels look like? Hmm, this should give you an idea:



They see gods and goddeses the same way everyone else in the world does, and that is evident throughout the FF series. It amazes me that all this time you thought that Square was thinking of sex every time they put a half nude or full nude figure into an FF game. :laugh: That's classic.

[i90east]

Abominatrix, it is you who is ignoring my points. What have I been saying the last 3 posts now? THAT SHOWING SKIN IS NOT SEXUAL. There, it's kinda hard to avoid bold print now isn't it? Get with the program or don't post anything. Thank you.

Now go back and read what I said.