This is because if you did wake up tomorrow and wanted to be modest, you don’t have any traditional values to draw from in our own current culure.
The only ‘traditional values’ I know of that dictated some absolute value in appearance were those based on sexism and white supremacy.
So in our culture, you have nothing but your own experience to turn to and hence you have these standards that vary from some thinking a Bikini is modest and others thinking the Islamic dress is probably the only modest dress.
You’re arguing for something that doesn’t exist. Human sight can never be fully trusted. Why do you think people have begun to question the reliability of eye-witnesses?
If you can’t trust your visual senses, then you can’t trust the taste that rises from them to be stable either. People have varying differences on what expresses an abstract concept because there really is nothing that will hold them down indefinitely.
The problem here is that you have probably lived for a very short time and in a culture that does promote immodesty.
Age is irrelevant to truth. Anyone who glances at the history of the world as a whole can easily see that whatever period or culture it is you look to, human tastes, human fashion are just as fickle and based on the non-existent. It’s human taste posing as morality.
Again, same branches of the same shallow tree.
However, in the case of Lightning for an example, the skirt or shorts are indeed a bit short for battle purposes. And yes, I am making this judgement by adopting a traditional value set and you are most likely finding it bizzare as I say this.
Way to dodge the point. Honestly, consider yourself lucky I’m once again wasting my time lecturing somebody on the basics of critique.
Intent in creating is a process separate from analyzing the creation. I only picked these two as examples because I felt so sorry for the likes of you who defend the mentally weak. I’ve seen tons and collected tons of artwork that you would decry as immodest based on your fabricated ‘traditional values’. However, it is so easy to ignore the sexual elements and focus on other more noteworthy elements in design.
Look at Lightning. I like her outfit because one, it is quite functional and at the same time symbolic of her style. Ever seen her fight? She’s a quick-footed swordsman. That naturally makes the outfit suit her. Do I find her outfit sexually stimulating? Not really bcause I’m more focused on something higher than hormonal.
On the other hand, have you seen this girl fight?
A fair contrast. She doesn’t jump around and she blocks more than she dodges. Characters who dress like her are artistically portrayed to rarely jump around and prefer simpler headlong or defensive attacks.
I can also give you some good examples of some other characters from the Final Fantasy series which I am sure many would agree (in some cases the fans themselves) were designed for sex appeal in the way they are dressed. We could discuss the various costume packs that were released for some of these characters to further give some fan service that were more immodest as well. I don’t want to post pictures here because that too can lead some others to temptation. But I am sure you are well aware of what I am referring to.
And I’m here to tell you that if you were to post these images, I would gladly give you a nice little critique for each of them that avoids anything leaning towards your perception. You guys just focus on bare shoulders and legs. There are plenty others like me who focus on something higher. Heck, we go beyond art. We explore the characters externally and
internally.
Intent? Nobody should give a hoot about intent. Whether you’re a literary critic, an artistic one, or a fashion one that’s one school of thought that’s applicable to all three. Author/Creator intent is one of the most easily discarded factors. You want to know what an author can mean? An author is just another interpretation. It just so happens you put the ink paper, paint on canvas, and stitched the outfit. If you think that entitles you to put your interpretation of a creative piece over everyone else then you are pitifully naive. The truth is your aesthetic tastes are just that, the irrational posing as the rational. In the end, you’ll just be left without a word to justify why you like or dislike a certain form/outfit/drawing/whatever. You can’t base a standard on something so fickle and unreliable.
That is very commendable that you have mastered self-control. But as you rightly point out, hormonal influence is something that exists biologically in every human being. You might in fact be someone with a relatively below average hormonal activity when it comes to sexual attraction.
On the contrary, I’m just as weak as every other dude. It just so happens I’m aware of the difference between a perspective influence by my hormones and one that isn’t. In fact, the two often clash in my head almost like two different personalities. However, don’t think the latter thinks anything like you people. Not by a long shot.
If you do take the time to think about your own position, it should be somewhat clear to you that you too are advocating a society without modesty. This is part of the problem as well and a by-product of our current culture.
No I advocate a society where people are more concerned with the internal individual than what they see on the outside. Any form of morality that bases itself on human tastes is what’s really worth discarding when it’s fit.
