IronStylus says he's a feminist.

Lowvyr·Jul 24, 2015·80 votes·8,898 views

So why in the actual fuck did you butcher Fiora? Is it because she was young and beautiful and that was "objectifying" her? Is she not allowed to be what she is? Before she looks like a proud, young, strong, beautiful duelist. That's what she is. Now she looks like Joan Rivers cosplaying reincarnated Michael Jackson on meth. If anything, this is more objectifying than it was before. Is fair to the players that you can decide to butcher a character, and remove what big part of her design defined who she was simply because of your own thoughts? You can be a feminist, I don't care about that, but when your ideals get in the way of a character that people love and you change them because of how YOU think, it's gone too far. Do our worst? Give the Fiora players that bought her skins and hate her VU their money back. People complained about Sledgehammer nerfing DLC guns in Advanced Warfare, the difference between this and those skins? Even after taking mild nerfs, those DLC guns are still the same. It's still what the player paid for. This Fiora rework? This is NOT what players paid for. They paid for a skin for a young duelist that made her look badass, not some old bitch that's hooked on meth. She's barely the same person anymore. "We don't want to change the identities of champions. They are who they are." Well good fucking job. Fiora isn' even Fiora anymore. Please for the love of God, listen to your players for once. Please. I hated Fioras kit before, and I hate it even more now, but I always loved her visuals. I LOVED her art. Now, I hate everything about her. She was at least appealing enough visually for me to play before, but now, I don't even want to touch her. I tried to play her once on the PBE but I couldn't get past 15 minutes with her. She was so ugly and her kit felt so clunky and overly difficult to be able to use correctly that I just didn't even want to play her. Please Listen To Us

Please

86 Comments

hoganftwJul 24, 201548 votes

A feminist shouldn't be afraid or intimidated by a beautiful, gorgeous, sexy, and elegant woman like Fiora.

The thing about these feminists in name only is that they're not here to bridge the gap between men and women and create an egalitarian society, they're here desperately seeking attention. IronStylus is changing Fiora not because of feminist reasons, but because he wants to appeal to feminists in such a way that it would make him seem like a feminist hero or icon. Sadly, he just looks like your average beta male putting women on a pedestal and half-assing the feminist act in order to get Phreak's sexy secretary to notice him.

@IronStylus You're not helping anyone by pretending to be a feminist. You do feminists a disservice by claiming to be a feminist because in reality you're just here to restrict the ability for women to be beautiful and kick ass at the same time. You're creating a gender rule and it just sickens me how you don't see the discord betwen your actions vs your beliefs.

DesideriumJul 25, 20153 votes

{quoted}

A feminist shouldn't be afraid or intimidated by a beautiful, gorgeous, sexy, and elegant woman like Fiora.

The thing about these feminists in name only is that they're not here to bridge the gap between men and women and create an egalitarian society, they're here desperately seeking attention. IronStylus is changing Fiora not because of feminist reasons, but because he wants to appeal to feminists in such a way that it would make him seem like a feminist hero or icon. Sadly, he just looks like your average beta male putting women on a pedestal and half-assing the feminist act in order to get Phreak's sexy secretary to notice him.

@IronStylus You're not helping anyone by pretending to be a feminist. You do feminists a disservice by claiming to be a feminist because in reality you're just here to restrict the ability for women to be beautiful and kick ass at the same time. You're creating a gender rule and it just sickens me how you don't see the discord betwen your actions vs your beliefs.

You said EVERYTHING I hate about Ironstylus as a person.

I love you.

TonnenJul 25, 20152 votes

Yeah, I don't see how giving fiora METH face is fitting the feminist agenda. Now its saying that all powerful women are ugly?

Fiora item 3070

HupsisJul 25, 20157 votes

I'd say that feminists would oppose of having a game where every female human champion is sexualized in a similar manner.

Feminists are not afraid of having individualism amongst women. Women should be proud of what they are and nobody has the right to force them to appear as sex objects. Freedom in looks and no discrimination.

Stop being so criticising towards female champions. Variety is power. There's plenty of beatiful and powerful female champions. No need to make everyone the same.

hoganftwJul 25, 20156 votes

{quoted}

I'd say that feminists would oppose of having a game where every female human champion is sexualized in a similar manner.

Feminists are not afraid of having individualism amongst women. Women should be proud of what they are and nobody has the right to force them to appear as sex objects. Freedom in looks and no discrimination.

Stop being so criticising towards female champions. Variety is power. There's plenty of beatiful and powerful female champions. No need to make everyone the same.

There's no need to change pre-existing champions that already have established fanbases to add variety. If they want variety, they can always make a new champion vs completely change an old one to fit their quota of diverse champs.

VeraJul 24, 201534 votes

His brand of "feminism" is unnervingly similar to the prevalent attitude towards women found in places like Saudi Arabia.

It's that condescending, "I know what's best for you", "women need to be protected...from themselves" type of stuff that's downright offensive.

Battle GoatJul 24, 201527 votes

He's a tumblr feminist. Actual feminism is no longer needed in the western world. Tumblr feminsm is basically insecure women projecting those insecurities onto anything that makes them feel uncomfortable and seeking to censor or change it. The men who support them are beta maxes who were deprived of female attention when younger and will do anything for it.

It's disgusting.

LowvyrJul 24, 201513 votes

I can not stress how much I agree with this.

missinggraveJul 25, 20152 votes

=w=;; < General message solid, though execution was a bit on the harsh side. Though as I use Tumblr, I can second that the site is known to bring issues to light that aren't problems in the first place. While it's entirely dependent on who you follow in the first place to see this content, that doesn't mean there's not a large community who is known to cause such issues as Suspicious Goat describes. I wouldn't be surprised if IronStylus is following such ill guided logic.

OrangesilkJul 25, 20158 votes

And you sir are exactly what I was expecting from this thread.

The gaming community is a sad thing indeed, and you stand as a brilliant example of them.

Exactly the kind of neckbeard to rage around in forums about Gamergate or some such shit. The fact that feminist is being thrown around almost as a slur is telling enough, but this post gets the gold. (I mean, Beta maxes?, insecure women?, omfg, you should tattoo this shit on your dorito-stained belly and see how ashamed you are in ten years when you read that stuff).

YpsitheFlntsiderJul 25, 20154 votes

Whoa there, Mr. If It Isn't About Me, I Don't Like It. This isn't permission to air out your misogynist viewpoints for attention.

SincarnationJul 25, 201520 votes

If you wont play a champ because they are "ugly" you are shallow.
Fiora before was young arrogant french eye candy, now she is slightly older and less focused on eye candy. Sexiness however was never a part of her personality, and she was only sexy for the sake of being a girl in a skin tight bodysuit. So there really was no reason for her to remain sexy, it wasnt even what defined her as a champion. At her core, she is still an arrogant french duelist. Making her more distinct has nothing to do with Ironstylus being a feminist.
Kit complaints are more valid. Her kit is balls hard to play, but it is also oh so satisfying to play correctly. Riot did an excellent job giving her the feel of a duelist by rewarding you for precise strikes. They made her much harder to play but much more rewarding.

@goat Feminism is needed less in the western world, there are still issues of how we treat victims of sexual assault (male and female), policing of people's bodies (male and female), and gender roles (men and women). Original feminism was very egalitarian and many of them are working on issues that help both sexes and all genders. My support for them isn't because I'm a "beta max", its because I'm someone educated enough on the subject to know that not all feminists are tumblr feminists and that each wave of feminism had different tones that left strange impressions on uneducated people. To say all feminsts are tumblr feminists is the equivalent of saying all conservatives are tea baggers or all liberals are marxists.

AutoreactiveCD4Jul 25, 20159 votes

Oh my god someone is being reasonable here. Thank the lord. I feel bad for legitimate and reasonable feminists cause they tend to get a really bad name from the stupid and loud ones, just because they both are referred to as feminists. It makes the work they do so much more difficult than it should be.

GallowgrimJul 25, 20152 votes

{quoted}

Oh my god someone is being reasonable here. Thank the lord. I feel bad for legitimate and reasonable feminists cause they tend to get a really bad name from the stupid and loud ones, just because they both are referred to as feminists. It makes the work they do so much more difficult than it should be.

They do no favors to progressives in general, either.

QuortJul 25, 20152 votes

Saying that someone is shallow because they don't want to play a Champion they find ugly isn't a fair assertion. Physical attraction is a large part of any relationship, even those between people in real life. Its the reason why I won't play Gragas, or Taric, or Ekko, etc... Can you really call me shallow because I have tastes and preferences in what I want to play? I dont care to play as a fat, drunk man. Taric's model and splash art is hideous. I really dont like Ekko's hair and face paint. But just because I dont care for how they look, doesnt mean I dont like other things about them. Gragas is undoubtedly a strong Champion that brings a lot to a game. Taric has an awesome targetted stun and some useful auras (though I find him really boring). Ekko's gameplay seems interesting and he can definitely make plays. But I dont want to play them.

Is that wrong? Does that make me lesser in any way? Im not discounting them as Champions simply based on appearances and I accept that there are people who love those Champions, but I dont.

Fiora was designed as arrogant French Eye Candy... There is now a fanbase attached to that fantasy. Changing it to something that hardly resembles the original sexy, sassy, powerful Fiora, is a slap in the face. Its just not Fiora anymore.

SincarnationJul 26, 20153 votes

{quoted}

Saying that someone is shallow because they don't want to play a Champion they find ugly isn't a fair assertion. Physical attraction is a large part of any relationship, even those between people in real life. Its the reason why I won't play Gragas, or Taric, or Ekko, etc... Can you really call me shallow because I have tastes and preferences in what I want to play? I dont care to play as a fat, drunk man. Taric's model and splash art is hideous. I really dont like Ekko's hair and face paint. But just because I dont care for how they look, doesnt mean I dont like other things about them. Gragas is undoubtedly a strong Champion that brings a lot to a game. Taric has an awesome targetted stun and some useful auras (though I find him really boring). Ekko's gameplay seems interesting and he can definitely make plays. But I dont want to play them.

Is that wrong? Does that make me lesser in any way? Im not discounting them as Champions simply based on appearances and I accept that there are people who love those Champions, but I dont.

Fiora was designed as arrogant French Eye Candy... There is now a fanbase attached to that fantasy. Changing it to something that hardly resembles the original sexy, sassy, powerful Fiora, is a slap in the face. Its just not Fiora anymore.

Not visually liking a champion is a shallow reason to not play a champion. I don't like how urgot looks, but if I know how to use his kit and he is a strong pick against the enemy I'm going to play him. Putting your team at a disadvantage by refusing to play champs because of their appearance is shallow and selfish.

She wasn't designed as eye candy, that was just the old riot default for women. She was designed as an arrogant duelist, nothing in her personality or lines references her physical appearance, grace yes but her looks no. Hell her lore never even mentions she was known for her looks and skill. This is just people baby-raging about change.

QuortJul 26, 20153 votes

It is not shallow and selfish, it is a part of having fun which is the main point of a game! An aspect of League that Rioters commonly bring up is how Champions are designed to fulfill certain fantasies around which a Champion's aesthetics and gameplay is tailored. They will often make changes to help players fulfill that fantasy or provide skins and chromas that allow players to further customize their experience.

Since you used Urgot as an example, I will talk about him. Urgot is hideous. He's a disgusting monster. But that's good. That's what Urgot is. He's the person you play if you're looking to play an undead horror. That is something I like to play as!

Taric, which is my example, represents a pompous, outrageous, handsome, and famous gem knight with a host of admirers. But his models and splash are are terrible; I don't feel like the idea when I play him. I feel like a colorful midget with pizza-feet, bad hair, and a face that looks like I was just sucking on a lemon. That's not something I want to play.

Nor do I want to play as the fat, drunken man Gragas; it's simply not something I want to identify with.

Why do people buy skins? Because they want their Champion to look a certain way. Riot's entire business model is centered on what you would call being "shallow." It's not shallow that I absolutely love Battlecast skins and have them for my Vel'Koz and Kog'Maw... I have those skins and play those Chamions because that's the kind of fantasy I enjoy, that I play this game for.

Putting your team at a disadvantage because you refuse to play a Champion based on looks is only a valid complaint in Ranked play in which case I would agree with you, it is selfish and shallow. However that's not what I was saying. In my first post I recognized that certain Champions that I don't like have certain strengths. But, in Normal play my main goal is FUN! And Im not having fun if Im forced to play a Champion I don't like. I don't mind filling any role or picking a Champin with certain traits to make a solid team; I usually fill anyway. But I'd much rather play Hecarim than Gragas, or Vel'Koz than Ziggs, or Nautilus than Taric. They fulfill similar roles for the team but allow me to have fun because Im enjoying the fantasy I was looking for.

Fiora may just be sexy because that was the norm when she was made, but she has a fan base that cares immensely about her appearance as part of who she is. They invested time and money on a Champion that now is now receiving aesthetic changes that most of them agree were unnecessary. The recent changes they made did a lot to put her more in line with traditional Fiora at least.

Spizzle9000Jul 27, 20151 votes

{quoted}

It is not shallow and selfish, it is a part of having fun which is the main point of a game! An aspect of League that Rioters commonly bring up is how Champions are designed to fulfill certain fantasies around which a Champion's aesthetics and gameplay is tailored. They will often make changes to help players fulfill that fantasy or provide skins and chromas that allow players to further customize their experience.

Since you used Urgot as an example, I will talk about him. Urgot is hideous. He's a disgusting monster. But that's good. That's what Urgot is. He's the person you play if you're looking to play an undead horror. That is something I like to play as!

Taric, which is my example, represents a pompous, outrageous, handsome, and famous gem knight with a host of admirers. But his models and splash are are terrible; I don't feel like the idea when I play him. I feel like a colorful midget with pizza-feet, bad hair, and a face that looks like I was just sucking on a lemon. That's not something I want to play.

Nor do I want to play as the fat, drunken man Gragas; it's simply not something I want to identify with.

Why do people buy skins? Because they want their Champion to look a certain way. Riot's entire business model is centered on what you would call being "shallow." It's not shallow that I absolutely love Battlecast skins and have them for my Vel'Koz and Kog'Maw... I have those skins and play those Chamions because that's the kind of fantasy I enjoy, that I play this game for.

Putting your team at a disadvantage because you refuse to play a Champion based on looks is only a valid complaint in Ranked play in which case I would agree with you, it is selfish and shallow. However that's not what I was saying. In my first post I recognized that certain Champions that I don't like have certain strengths. But, in Normal play my main goal is FUN! And Im not having fun if Im forced to play a Champion I don't like. I don't mind filling any role or picking a Champin with certain traits to make a solid team; I usually fill anyway. But I'd much rather play Hecarim than Gragas, or Vel'Koz than Ziggs, or Nautilus than Taric. They fulfill similar roles for the team but allow me to have fun because Im enjoying the fantasy I was looking for.

Fiora may just be sexy because that was the norm when she was made, but she has a fan base that cares immensely about her appearance as part of who she is. They invested time and money on a Champion that now is now receiving aesthetic changes that most of them agree were unnecessary. The recent changes they made did a lot to put her more in line with traditional Fiora at least.

Very valid points. I really think Fiora's old look was just fine. Sexy, but with a bit of a refined look to her. I play a good few of my champions largely because of their look and ability particles. Take Soulstealer or Blood Lord Vladimir, for example. Soulstealer feels very mysterious and esoteric, while Blood Lord's voice over and look just oozes power and tyranny. Aatrox has a brutal, violent, yet precise feeling about him.

CriomhthannJul 24, 201519 votes

Feminism doesn't fundamentally require poor design (quite the opposite), so it follows that a poorly drawn face has little to do with his feminism.

There is also amusement to be found with people claiming to be all in favor of artistic freedom except when the product of that freedom is not ideologically pleasing to them.

Lastly, "Choice Feminism" is not Feminism. It's exactly the fucking equivalent of saying "Liberal Marxist" or "Anarchist Capitalist" or "Communist Capitalist" or "Square Circle" or "Atheist Theist" or etc etc etc. Logically meaningless gibberish for people who don't understand that you can't reject everything that makes a position what it is and still maintain that you follow that position. You don't get to reject the identity of Indiscernibles simply because it's inconvenient to you.

LowvyrJul 24, 20152 votes

You could almost argue that an Atheist Theist is quite close to an Agnostic, unless I am understanding any of those terms wrong (I'm Agnostic myself, by the way)

CriomhthannJul 24, 201510 votes

Not really. If we use Atheism to mean a framework where God concepts are rejected and Theist as a framework where God concepts are embraced, the two become mutually exclusive.

It's not just about an epistemic claim but a metaphysical requirement within the conceptual scheme.

PutThe3dgeD0wnJul 25, 201513 votes

Alright. I was hoping to avoid joining into this whole discussion going around right now because of the risk of catching flak, but this bothers me a little.

I'll start with this: I don't even care for Fiora at all, yet I'm still sympathetic to any fans. The new art is an extreme shift from what she was originally, and I saw no reason for her to be given a VU of this nature. Her models could certainly have used improvement in a few areas, but her artwork was perfectly fine.

This problem could be avoided for the fans if they made a Traditional Fiora skin, but my assumption would be that her gameplay and visual rework isn't on the same scale as the other champions that have Traditional skins to warrant one. And on that subject, Riot doesn't seem to want to even continue the Traditional gimmick at all; other than posts they've made about it, any Traditionals besides Lee Sin's (as, I think, that skin was some kind of portrayal of an early design of him or something, and not how he launched; don't quote me on that) are legacy and unavailable (Actually, were they even available at all for RP ever? I think they were only given out to players that owned the champions prior to relaunch and there was no other way to get them.) and they've only happened three times anyway. Riot claims that any future reworks should stay within the general scope of the champion's original design, avoiding the need for them. Opinions vary on whether or not they've kept their word on that one.

I agree that the shift is... probably not directly linked to any feminist agenda. But at the same time, there are a few suspicious things about it. But whatever the case, the bottom line is that they are dramatically changing Fiora's base artwork and champion design outside of the basic premise of her being a fencer. Fans are well within their right to be concerned, because this isn't just yet another new champion released that "isn't fanservice"; it's Riot taking an already-established champion and changing her aesthetic for no discernible reason.

It's especially a concern when this isn't the first time this has happened, champions getting major overhauls in both their kit and their design, with Riot turning a blind eye to all the negative feedback they were getting from the champions' fans that didn't care for the redesign. This also applies for the champions' lore.

But here's what I'm taking offense over:

{quoted}

There is also amusement to be found with people claiming to be all in favor of artistic freedom except when the product of that freedom is not ideologically pleasing to them.

Yeah, this totally doesn't come across as a sweeping and insulting generalization.

As I wrote a few paragraphs above, people are not complaining because this is a new champion release. They're concerned because it's an already-established champion getting a redesign.

Most people that are critical of Riot's new art philosophy aren't anything like what you described; they don't demand every single female be designed the same way. We're not always bashing the likes of Diana, Vi, and others.

We are worried about artistic freedom because that's exactly what the problem here is. IronStylus has made it clear that they will not be going back to any of the more classic, fantasy designs of League's younger days for the foreseeable future. In the name of, um, diversity, or whatever. Now, it's true that we may still get the occasional skin, like Headhunter Akali for a recent example, but in terms of future champions he basically said, "Yeah, they're all going to be as 'progressive' as Classic Leona, Diana, and Vi because you need to 'grow up'."

Call it an exaggeration all you want, but that was basically his tone. He's shown himself to be this condescending art director that shuts out all criticism and has a painfully obvious agenda.

The real irony is that, in all honesty, there really isn't any kind of massive discrepancy between "normal" and "fanservice"-oriented female champions. For every Evelynn, you have a Diana. For every Sivir, you have an Ashe (No. A tank-top, long socks and boots, and a skirt is not "sexualization". You can literally walk outside and find women wearing similar clothes in the real world.). Even the earliest female champions were diverse enough in this way. Yet people (like him) seem to think it's never been enough.

Really, I think we should consider the recent Pool Party skin lineup. Now, admittedly, these are joke skins. But it's still a little suspicious that out of the five they made, three were for champions that are basically monsters, one was for a purple gnome female, and one was for Draven. No normal humanoid females, leaving Leona as the only human female champion with a skin from that theme. The problem: A Rioter actually did answer people when they were asking why this happened. Their reasoning was that they "can't just put a champ in a swimsuit and call it a skin" when that's exactly what Pool Party Graves is. Why does that get a free pass while, say, Sivir in a comparable outfit and throwing life-preservers or whatever is suddenly a problem?

There's a double-standard, and we're calling it out.

In closing, there's a Deviantart post written by someone that claims to be an artist that was working on a video game, but was confronted by censorship and forced to have their creative vision changed for the sake of political correctness. It might be worth a read:

http://orogion.deviantart.com/journal/Save-the-Boob-plate-380891149

(Please pardon the... straightforward wording of the article title)

Rune OcarinaJul 25, 20158 votes

This was a well put together post and I too am worried about champs like Caitlyn who Ironstylus has said he definitely wants to get rid of her miniskirt. No one complained about Vi or Kalista. Making new champs under Riot's new art direction is ok, but don't go messing with the already established champs like Caitlyn.

AnnapiiJul 25, 20154 votes

{quoted}

The real irony is that, in all honesty, there really isn't any kind of massive discrepancy between "normal" and "fanservice"-oriented female champions. For every Evelynn, you have a Diana. For every Sivir, you have an Ashe (No. A tank-top, long socks and boots, and a skirt is not "sexualization". You can literally walk outside and find women wearing similar clothes in the real world.). Even the earliest female champions were diverse enough in this way. Yet people (like him) seem to think it's never been enough.

Really, I think we should consider the recent Pool Party skin lineup. Now, admittedly, these are joke skins. But it's still a little suspicious that out of the five they made, three were for champions that are basically monsters, one was for a purple gnome female, and one was for Draven. No normal humanoid females, leaving Leona as the only human female champion with a skin from that theme. The problem: A Rioter actually did answer people when they were asking why this happened. Their reasoning was that they "can't just put a champ in a swimsuit and call it a skin" when that's exactly what Pool Party Graves is. Why does that get a free pass while, say, Sivir in a comparable outfit and throwing life-preservers or whatever is suddenly a problem?

There's a double-standard, and we're calling it out.

There is a double-standard. But it definitely favors male players, not female players.

I'm a firm believer in "form follows function" champion design.

Zyra was not very well-designed. She's a carnivorous flower come to life, but she looks like a sexy woman with green leaves taped to her breasts and crotch. Compare Zyra to Maokai- Maokai is well-designed. He is definitely a tree come to life, not a sexy, chiseled man with abs, firm buttcheeks, and a single banana leaf taped to his dick.

Riot does have a lot of diversity in its female cast. But it feels like when Riot gets a cool idea for a new champion or a new skin, when they sit down to design them, it feels like they've had different approaches for male and female champions. For male champions, they start with a blank slate. For female champions, they start with a blank, attractive female body.

Other examples include Orianna (compare to Blitzcrank), Nami (compare to Fizz), Cowgirl Miss Fortune (compare to High Noon Twisted Fate), and Red Card Katarina (compare to Red Card Twisted Fate). I understand there are lore-related reasons for these female champions to be obviously female or sexy and playful. But its hard to see the diversity when every female champion has a lore-related reason to have a very feminine body or a sexy and playful attitude for sexy and playful skins, even if the lore-related reason is different every time.

I don't want Riot to take away from pre-existing characters. But this is why I celebrate releases like Diana, Vi, and Rek'sai. They're the ones that actually feel diverse to me.

On the subject of the recent Pool Party line up- I'd like you to look at some of the past event skin line ups.

SNOWDOWN 2009: Snowbunny Nidalee, Workshop Nunu, Happy Elf Teemo, Old Saint Zilean

There are three "creatures", one old man, and one sexy woman.

SNOWDOWN 2010: Regifted Amumu, Santa Gragas, Reindeer Kog'maw, Candycane Miss Fortune, Ragdoll Poppy, Nutcracko, Silent Night Sona

There are three "creatures, one fat man, one creepy clown (I almost counted him as a creature tbh.), and two sexy women.

SNOWDOWN 2011: Toy Solider Gankplank, Snowmerdinger, Mistletoe Leblanc, Festive Maokai

There are two "creatures", one toy man, and one sexy woman.

SNOWDOWN 2012: Slay Belle Katarina, Dark Candy Fiddlesticks, Bad Santa Veigar, Snow Day Ziggs

There are three creatures and one sexy woman.

HARROWING 2010: Mundo Mundo, Pumpkinhead Fiddlesticks, Kitty Katarina, Lollipoppy, Nose-whatever Vladimir

There is one large purple steroids man, one "creature", one FUCKING NIGHTMARE FUEL, one bald vampire man, and one sexy woman.

I could go on. But I don't think its necessary.

Most of our event skin line-ups have catered to male players. I think its okay that for once (twice if you count Debonaire Jayce), if an event skin line-up has a sexy man instead of a sexy woman.

Economic MigrantJul 24, 201517 votes

A feminist shouldn't be afraid or intimidated by a beautiful, gorgeous, sexy, and elegant woman like Fiora.

Yet they are.

Thanotos OmegaJul 24, 201513 votes

This isn't really a Feminist thing, Look at her new Pose no feminist would be cool with that kind of needless spine twisting shit, it's just a bad art design being forced on a character whose visuals were fine,

NemeBroJul 24, 201515 votes

[{quoted}](name=Thanotos Omega,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=JQA5bn5K,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2015-07-24T23:22:08.389+0000)

This isn't really a Feminist thing, Look at her new Pose no feminist would be cool with that kind of needless spine twisting shit, it's just a bad art design being forced on a character whose visuals were fine,

Yeah, people trying to make this about the art team forcing feminism are sort of missing the point. If anything the new design is more sexualized.

Progress!

Artty of AlaskaJul 25, 201512 votes

I don't know why riot's going so ham on her VU. Isn't a sensibly dressed proud young woman defined by her skill in a more-masculine sport (I know plenty of female fencers, but I thought in her lore it's was mentioned she was competing against mostly men) a... symbol of feminist ideals? I don't keep up with this stuff, but it seems like Fiora was already in an excellent spot when it came to female characters that weren't just ass-n-titties. Why such a drastic overall?

And I'm sorry for anyone who bought her skins. It's one thing to modify a free product. It's a dick move by Riot to significantly change something customer's have paid for.

SortitioJul 25, 20158 votes

Neo-feminism is not the same as feminism. Fake feminists are the worst kind of feminists.

FailTsukkomiJul 25, 20158 votes

I don't think this change has anything to do with feminism

the Fiora VU is in line with the kind of stuff they've been pushing ever since the new SR. hence Ironstylus' push for their "stylistic goals." I will say the new Fiora looks more "fitting" in the new SR, just like how the new pentakill morde looks more "fitting" in the new SR, it just doesn't change how they also look worse. At least morde looks like the same character though, while Fiora just got utterly butchered.

it just looks worse is all and they need a better reason than stylistic goals if they're going to put out literal trash like the new models. updated splash is okay, but it seriously needs more work or just a flat out revert to the old splash and models with a few texture updates if they're just going to make her look more like the old Fiora (if they're doing that, then why even fucking change it, just scrap this whole godawful mess).

Biff ManlyJul 25, 20157 votes

Does bad art have anything to do with feminism? Apparently I'm misunderstanding one of these terms.

KING OF MASKSJul 25, 20157 votes

If you ask me, this particular brand of gender politics has no place in the current discussion. The last thing anyone wants is for the Fiora VU to turn into a feminist/anti-feminist battleground.

The new models are shitty and there was zero reason to change her design or even update her in the first place. Isn't that enough of a reason to reject the VU? No need to bring politics into it.

BetterNerfRellyJul 25, 20152 votes

He started by saying that influenced him on the needed of diversity in league. It damn clear what that is now. Its a code word for sexy fantasist females are bad and must be removed. Why have we not had an ashe or sivir or sona smexy character in well forever now becuase HE DOES NOT FUCKING WANT IT. Diversity is an excuse for agenda pushing really what league need was varity but not the slow removal it seems of any too sexy female characters. This is league of boobs after all.

This agenda is not what the fans want at all it about someone who only wants to care about his worldview and force when ever he can in to product even if it hurts the OBJECTIVE QUALITY of it. ITs BS and I haved enough of it.

KING OF MASKSJul 25, 20154 votes

But it really shouldn't be that much of an issue, at least in this case. "Sexiness" wasn't a pillar of Fiora's personality or character at all (save for maybe the Headmistress skin). If the VU was pushed out to PBE and the only major thing that was changed was her breast size or the amount of cleavage shown, would there really be the same amount of visceral revulsion from the boards? I doubt it.

If it was Miss Fortune or Ahri then I would understand where you're coming from.

BetterNerfRellyJul 25, 20154 votes

Royal Guard idiot Royal Guard That was total desexyed for most likey SJW reasons. I have seen this shit pulled else where and game company keep doing it even though the FANS THE BLOODY PEOPLE WHO PAY THE BILLS do not want it. It an bloody agenda that should not be influencing game company.

KING OF MASKSJul 25, 20153 votes

Except that I don't care that it's been "desexy'd," I care that it just looks worse.

I think overall quality should be prioritized higher than cleavage count.

Xsoteric Ronin Jul 25, 20157 votes

sadly I'm convinced rito is hell bent on changing every sexy charcter.

watch them rework ahri next: " We felt that making her too foxy was just unnecessary,, so we gave her a suit like leona"

MaltuserJul 25, 20156 votes

is he a feminist or a "tumblr style feminist", the one that whines for no good reason and try to force their ideas down your throat?

Scarlet ShamanJul 25, 20155 votes

Excuse my noobiness, but where did he declare this? Was it an interview of sorts, or a comment related to the recent VUs?

PapaGreg21Jul 25, 20155 votes

[deleted]

Ancestor007Jul 25, 20153 votes

It's ok if they are male, but god forbid for a female character to be half naked. (kappa)

NommyPancakeJul 25, 20154 votes

By Feminist Standard, We should change every single overly-sexy champion in the game:

Caitlyn No one would wear a skirt and go to battle, we objectify her

Leblanc No one would wear such exposed clothing and go to battle, we objectify her

Varus No one would wear nothing and go to battle, we objectify...

I hate to say it, if he really said he changed it because he's a feminist, it sounds like an excuse...

Ryu the firstJul 25, 20155 votes

{quoted}

By Feminist Standard, We should change every single overly-sexy champion in the game:

No one would wear a skirt and go to battle, we objectify her

No one would wear such exposed clothing and go to battle, we objectify her

No one would wear nothing and go to battle, we objectify...

I hate to say it, if he really said he changed it because he's a feminist, it sounds like an excuse...

lol about the Varus one, they wouldn't give a shit because he's male. They'd say that reverse objectification is justified and leads to an egalitarian society, even as they try to prevent female objectification.

AzteryzJul 25, 20153 votes

if you have a problem with the new fiora visuals then say you have a problem with it

dont use feminism as an excuse like he did this on purpose for that reason

its like saying "hey this guy is an asshole its probably because is black" no its not he just an asshole that happens to be black

Icestar1186Jul 25, 20153 votes

Arguably, what you are saying is technically accurate. However, it is blown way out of proportion. Does the model look bad? Yeah. Will they fix it? Probably. Will she look that different by the end of it? Not really. I don't get where feminism fits in, though. Is it feminist or not feminist to redraw a character in a slightly different style? It's neither.

WakamuneJul 25, 20153 votes

The issue is bad design and nostalgia. We're used to the old Fiora and attatching qualities of personality onto her old face design.

If this is a new character, then there should be no issue with a plain face girl, providing people are not being careless about feminism/egalitarianism.

Spizzle9000Jul 25, 20152 votes

Now, I can understand why this irritates so many people. Women can be attractive and dangerous at the same time.

But, I do believe it could've potentially been an honest mistake. League of Legends has gotten criticism for the all of the extremely sexualized female characters, such as Ahri, Miss Fortune, etc. The problem is that no matter what he does in this case, someone will be angry at him. Some feminists will think that if Fiora's too attractive, she's being objectified, and if she isn't attractive enough, she's just being made less beautiful to put women down.

TonnenJul 25, 20152 votes

I agree with all of the VU things, but the gameplay is actually pretty fun and creative. I just want to keep old fiora looks, but I LOVE the new gameplay, if you haven't played it yet don't say its bad.

MaratsuneJul 25, 20152 votes

I'm confused. When did Fiora's new splash become a feminist thing? Her new splash looks more sexualized than her old one imo... And as long as Varus continues to be sexualized, I have no qualms about female characters being sexualized. shrug

Salt Miner 49 ErJul 26, 20152 votes

IronStylus isn't a feminist. He's a pre-apologetic. He's just riding the whole Joss Whedon schtick of "I'm progressive and hip!" when all he's doing is showing how much of a self-important pretentious artist he is.

One quote for example "We didn't want Gangplank to be so Piratey McPirate".

He's GODDAMNED HECTOR BARBOSSA NOW. THE MOST 'PIRATEY MCPIRATE' to ever exist.