Overtly Sexual Miniatures

Post a reply

This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
:D :) :( :o :shock: :? 8) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :froth: :loopy: :| :mrgreen: :demonic: 0:) 0;) :argue: :wry:
View more smilies
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review

Expand view Topic review: Overtly Sexual Miniatures

Post by Bodhi » Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:26 am

I'm a great fan of erotic sculptures, but they don't exactly belong in the toy miniatures world and are seldom done very well in that small niche. So we might as well go without. "sexy ladies" (or men - we?re a bit short on them?) I wouldn?t even consider dirty or erotic. Sometimes they?re silly when boobs are out for exactly NO sensible reason at all.

Post by Vermis » Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:55 pm

Rev Nice wrote:Got no problem with any depravity

I think the poll automatically takes that into account.

Post by ALizardInCrimson » Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:12 pm

an example of a "sexy" mini that annoys me

Post by Rev Nice » Sun Oct 30, 2011 10:24 pm

Fuck the prudes and all that bollocks.
Got no problem with any depravity represented in mini form (except for that boob guillotine thing and that's only because whilst my Witch Elves would no doubt relish it for prisoners, I happen to love and adore boobies and couldn't stand to see them cut off even in toy soldier form).

Having said that, I doubt I could be bothered to buy a mini purely because it had its norks out. It normally has to fit in with the greater scheme of things. (Eg: that really rather poor piece of 70's or 80's sculpting that serves as my sacrificial offering to everything from Cthulhu to Carrotox the evil cuntish dark lord of carrots.)

Post by Old Tomnoddy » Sun Oct 30, 2011 10:06 pm

I voted ?Absolutely Not? ? the use of the term ?tasteful? is very subjective and I?m not entirely sure that wargamers/dolly collectors, as a peer group, have the best grasp of this anyway.

The fact that a lot of people seem to be equating nudity with sexuality would tend to support my caution.

Post by Ramshackle_Curtis » Sun Oct 30, 2011 3:20 pm

What about the "dont care either way" option?

Post by Bergil » Sun Oct 30, 2011 1:41 pm

I reckon you could make a mind selling furries fucking one another, as IMP sort of pointed out.

Other than that I don't care... Wild men charging into battle with their willies flopping about everywhere, topless sci fi babes being milked to fuel an alien breeding pit.

Not saying I'd buy these things, just saying I couldn't give a toss if they were sold or used in games.

Post by Inso » Sun Oct 30, 2011 10:20 am

I like to buy minis that look like they could be soldiers/fighters. I don't have any need for naked ladies...or men for that matter because I don't build dioramas or scenery. I have little need for civilians as well.

I would never buy an overtly sexualized miniature because they don't appeal to me and they are hardly a wargaming mini.

Post by freakinacage » Sun Oct 30, 2011 10:07 am

TheImp wrote:So what is tasteful? A coy posture? Nipslip? Bare tits? Bondage gear? Strapons? Implied bestiality? Actual bestiality?

Anything that is out of context, I don't mind the ?celtos mini that la posted, but I wouldn't buy it. It's crap like female assassins with their tits out or the kabuki marine women with tons of leg armour and a tiny tee which they are lifting up in order to distract the enemy?

Post by Ancient Apprentice » Sun Oct 30, 2011 4:46 am

Who could not love painting the magnificent naked ladies by Kev White?
That is, as soon as I can work out a suitable palette for so much bare flesh!
Now tracking THAT down can be fairly dangerous - "Honestly Honey. It's for research!!" :wink: