<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Killing Us Softly in 4E</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dovearrow.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/killing-us-softly-4e/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dovearrow.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/killing-us-softly-4e/</link>
	<description>Contained in this blog are my thoughts, essays, and ramblings about feminism and how it relates to roleplaying games. Updates on weekends about every two weeks.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 20:56:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: dovearrow</title>
		<link>http://dovearrow.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/killing-us-softly-4e/#comment-104</link>
		<dc:creator>dovearrow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2008 23:39:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dovearrow.wordpress.com/?p=26#comment-104</guid>
		<description>Thank you for commenting on my blog. I am actually quite familiar with the original cover planned for the &lt;em&gt;Player&#039;s Handbook&lt;/em&gt;. I also know quite a few people who think that the current image is better. Personally, though, I prefer the previous cover, because while it may not be the epitome of female power, at least the female character in that image looks strong and ready to kick ass. That said, I would never argue that just because one image might be marginally better than the other that it makes the one image good. I think both images have problems, and I think that&#039;s something that should be discussed.

Incidentally, it is my understanding that the reason Wizards changed the cover artwork had nothing to do with the female character. Rather, it was changed because several European distributors thought the male tiefling would bring up old stereotypes about the game being associated with devil worship. As such, I think it&#039;s difficult to argue Wizards was trying to appease those offended by the portrayal of the female character in the original cover artwork, since that wasn&#039;t the reason they changed the artwork in the first place.

As far as your comment about the female character on the front cover of the PHB not being white, I should like to point out that neither is the image on the front cover of Mirabella magazine. That image was created from the features of six models from a variety of ethnic backgrounds. Nevertheless, I think you would find that if you gave either woman blonde hair, blue eyes, and fair skin, they would not look at all out of place. 

In any event, the primary focus of my blog entry isn&#039;t about the character&#039;s ethnic background (whatever that may be). Rather, the primary focus is on the portrayal of women in Dungeons &amp; Dragons fantasy artwork as a whole, and how that portrayal resonates with the points raised in Jean Kilbourne&#039;s movie. If you think that the exclusive portrayal of women that only represent 5% of the population in media and advertising isn&#039;t a problem, or that the sexualization of violence towards women in media and advertising is fine, or that portraying women of color as animals in media and advertising isn&#039;t a societal comment on their supposed lack of humanity, then I would say we have something we can legitimately disagree on. However, let&#039;s just be clear on what it is that we&#039;re disagreeing about. That&#039;s all I&#039;m saying. :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for commenting on my blog. I am actually quite familiar with the original cover planned for the <em>Player&#8217;s Handbook</em>. I also know quite a few people who think that the current image is better. Personally, though, I prefer the previous cover, because while it may not be the epitome of female power, at least the female character in that image looks strong and ready to kick ass. That said, I would never argue that just because one image might be marginally better than the other that it makes the one image good. I think both images have problems, and I think that&#8217;s something that should be discussed.</p>
<p>Incidentally, it is my understanding that the reason Wizards changed the cover artwork had nothing to do with the female character. Rather, it was changed because several European distributors thought the male tiefling would bring up old stereotypes about the game being associated with devil worship. As such, I think it&#8217;s difficult to argue Wizards was trying to appease those offended by the portrayal of the female character in the original cover artwork, since that wasn&#8217;t the reason they changed the artwork in the first place.</p>
<p>As far as your comment about the female character on the front cover of the PHB not being white, I should like to point out that neither is the image on the front cover of Mirabella magazine. That image was created from the features of six models from a variety of ethnic backgrounds. Nevertheless, I think you would find that if you gave either woman blonde hair, blue eyes, and fair skin, they would not look at all out of place. </p>
<p>In any event, the primary focus of my blog entry isn&#8217;t about the character&#8217;s ethnic background (whatever that may be). Rather, the primary focus is on the portrayal of women in Dungeons &amp; Dragons fantasy artwork as a whole, and how that portrayal resonates with the points raised in Jean Kilbourne&#8217;s movie. If you think that the exclusive portrayal of women that only represent 5% of the population in media and advertising isn&#8217;t a problem, or that the sexualization of violence towards women in media and advertising is fine, or that portraying women of color as animals in media and advertising isn&#8217;t a societal comment on their supposed lack of humanity, then I would say we have something we can legitimately disagree on. However, let&#8217;s just be clear on what it is that we&#8217;re disagreeing about. That&#8217;s all I&#8217;m saying. <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lollerkeet</title>
		<link>http://dovearrow.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/killing-us-softly-4e/#comment-103</link>
		<dc:creator>lollerkeet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2008 14:54:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dovearrow.wordpress.com/?p=26#comment-103</guid>
		<description>You seem to be desperately reaching for something to be offended by. To correct some points about the PHB cover:
- She isn&#039;t white. Had you looked at the woman, you would notice she is mixed anglo-african.
- She wouldn&#039;t have been hit had the dragonborn swung his sword. She would have been knocked behind him be his arm (she is beside him, which is different to in front).
- There is nothing to suggest that the dragonborn isn&#039;t also female.

You would be even more upset to see what was planned as the PHB cover (http://1d4chan.org/images/6/6c/4theditionOPHB.jpg). Not only is she neither European or African (there are other races, you know), but she is guarding her male companion. I&#039;ll leave it to you to decide if her breasts are of a politically correct size.

What the PHB cover does imply, and you completely fail to mention, is that rather than standing behind the meat shield, the artist has placed her beside it. A completely out-of-genre situation, which can be explained one of two ways:
1. The artist has taken pains not to offend easily-slighted women by having her in a position no fragile arcane character would ever willingly be (compare to the original cover).
2. She is an idiot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You seem to be desperately reaching for something to be offended by. To correct some points about the PHB cover:<br />
- She isn&#8217;t white. Had you looked at the woman, you would notice she is mixed anglo-african.<br />
- She wouldn&#8217;t have been hit had the dragonborn swung his sword. She would have been knocked behind him be his arm (she is beside him, which is different to in front).<br />
- There is nothing to suggest that the dragonborn isn&#8217;t also female.</p>
<p>You would be even more upset to see what was planned as the PHB cover (<a href="http://1d4chan.org/images/6/6c/4theditionOPHB.jpg)" rel="nofollow">http://1d4chan.org/images/6/6c/4theditionOPHB.jpg)</a>. Not only is she neither European or African (there are other races, you know), but she is guarding her male companion. I&#8217;ll leave it to you to decide if her breasts are of a politically correct size.</p>
<p>What the PHB cover does imply, and you completely fail to mention, is that rather than standing behind the meat shield, the artist has placed her beside it. A completely out-of-genre situation, which can be explained one of two ways:<br />
1. The artist has taken pains not to offend easily-slighted women by having her in a position no fragile arcane character would ever willingly be (compare to the original cover).<br />
2. She is an idiot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dovearrow</title>
		<link>http://dovearrow.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/killing-us-softly-4e/#comment-71</link>
		<dc:creator>dovearrow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 09:44:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dovearrow.wordpress.com/?p=26#comment-71</guid>
		<description>Jiminy Christmas! I did a quick Google search for the image you were referring to, and you&#039;re absolutely right! Wow, that image is creepifying!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jiminy Christmas! I did a quick Google search for the image you were referring to, and you&#8217;re absolutely right! Wow, that image is creepifying!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: necronmancer</title>
		<link>http://dovearrow.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/killing-us-softly-4e/#comment-68</link>
		<dc:creator>necronmancer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 00:31:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dovearrow.wordpress.com/?p=26#comment-68</guid>
		<description>The PHB cover really reminds me of the cover of Vogue with Lebron James pose with a model. And its causing the same controversy. Which is good.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The PHB cover really reminds me of the cover of Vogue with Lebron James pose with a model. And its causing the same controversy. Which is good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
