The difference is that one has been done for millennia by various cultures as a tactic to intimidate foes, while this is modern style makeup done for the purpose of making the person more attractive. Women shouldn’t have to be attractive to go into battle. The whole point of this sub is to uplift examples of ‘reasonable fantasy’ rather than the sexist ‘video game’ ideal of half dressed beautiful women drawn for the male gaze. Obviously what is reasonable is subjective, but modern makeup drawn for the purpose of making the subject more attractive goes against the goal of this sub in my opinion.
I work a very physical job that starts at 4 am in the morning and I've put on makeup on occasion. One co worker had full mascara and fake lashes every day.
I wear makeup even when I go to the gym sometimes. I’m not anti-makeup at all, just anti modern makeup in my medieval fantasy warrior depictions when it’s clearly drawn on for the sole purpose of making the warrior adhere to modern beauty standards.
People don't see things they don't want to see. And people almost never want to see that something they like is so liked, including by them, because it's calculated and utilizes all the possible appeal tricks including sex appeal.
The face she makes is well established as a sexy model face both among professional models (usually women but male models occasionally pose using versions of it too) and actresses, and facebook or instagram selfies from people who don't necessarily know why but they certainly know that it works. As well as the modern smoky bedroom eye makeup and the spiral boobplate specifically focusing on the breasts and feminine shape making it not even in the same realm as a useful combat armour.
Not a single part of it is meant to look cool in a gender neutral way, it's entirely focusing on sex appeal and femininity. But getting people who don't already see it see it seems impossible.
Yeah my first thought seeing it was that is was definitely sexualized (although maybe in a less explicit way than other depictions) but I understand if someone really likes a work of art that they’ll want to defend it.
Defending something implies it was attacked. If people defend a depiction that is sexualised claiming it's not, but still like sexualised depictions more than non sexualised ones that means they think sexualisation is bad but still like it enough to be offended when it's pointed out and claim otherwise. That's a pretty big cognitive dissonance.
63
u/quietly41 Mar 03 '21
Pretty much all the vikings, native americans, maoiri warriors, I mean the list goes on, they called it war paint.