/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

also i know the discussion alone wont keep this thread alive because nobody on /ic/ actually likes to discuss art

so lets post some hilariously bad "fixes" too while were here

>>6755797
> EZ views
> self validation
> virtue clout
These people don't make money from doing art, anon. They're e-celeb wannabees, best to filter them from your feed.

>>6755812
but this isnt just about this particular person
people do this all the time online, people with no channels who dont get views or earn money
its just something mediocre artists feel the overwhelming need to do

>>6755797
Sometimes the image will be good except for a certain feature. It’s fun to try and match the style while also making the edit believable. I do edits on request for people on here as well. I don’t do it for “moral” reasons though.

I also do decensoring and clean ups on scanlation teams so it reminds me of that.

I'm starting to think /ic/ is the lowest IQ board on this whole website, because every time I see someone on here ask a general question and provide one example, people only ever reply directly in regard to the example and are incapable of fathoming the question at large

>>6755828
I imagine there are plenty of people who do it for genuine reasons, and yet I also know artists, so I definitely feel this desire to give your personal 2 cents on everything
It's kinda the same drive that pushes people to do art memes, it's not always just for popularity or money, that's a very easy answer but non-artists can't quite understand that that's not the only reason. Artists really do have this need to be involved in absolutely everything, to have *their* personal take on the matter, art is such a large part of a person's identity that when someone doesn't have much of an identity beyond their art, they use it as a replacement for one

Remind me, what's the argument about sexualizing female characters being a bad thing? and what is the counterargument? At this time and age I just forgot both sides of the argument.

Also, is fixing someone else's art for the sake of it a bad thing? Like there's a draw from a certain game I look at and I just have a massive urge to redline it and correct it.

>>6755797
I very rarely get the desire to do that but if it is something as simple as moving something ond/or addint 2 lines. Sure

>>6755842
if you dont know neither the argument nor the counterargument, then why do you care? if youre not a part of the discussion, just ignore it and do whatever makes your heart and your dick happy

>is fixing someone else's art for the sake of it a bad thing?
i dont think the behavior itself is bad, but i think its often done in bad faith

if anyone itt has to ask "but i do that, is that baaaad? ):" then they clearly didnt read the OP and understood why its bad, if they did they'd know the difference in intent
either that, or they actually DO do it out of bad intent and are looking to be personally validated

>>6755842
>what's the argument about sexualizing female characters being a bad thing?
wah wah it makes me upset and insecure
>and what is the counterargument?
pic rel

>>6755849
>if you dont know neither the argument nor the counterargument, then why do you care?
While you do have a point, I simply forgot and want to be reminded, simple curiosity.
>i dont think the behavior itself is bad, but i think its often done in bad faith
Makes sense, at the end it all goes down to intent, even if you publicly voice it, as long as the intention is good and your wording supplies the idea it shouldnt cause trouble.

Honestly I wouldnt voice about that one draw I would correct unless I had room to do so (like discussing the game itself)... and if I actually manage to prove my point and correct it lmao

>>6755873
i think it can be argued that fixing something in a game you play is different to fixing the work of an individual artist on several levels
for one, a game is a product, especially if its made by a team of people from whom a level of professionalism is expected
and secondly a game is something thats made for an audience and that you consume, and if youre correcting something in it youre presumably doing it for the sake of yourself and the game's fans who are also consuming it, as opposed to the work of an individual independent artist

>>6755842
>is fixing someone else's art for the sake of it a bad thing?

People find it annoying when someone gives unsolicited corrections to their work. It's like when you're taking to someone and your grammar gets picked apart and your message gets lost. Fixing someone else's art isn't bad tho so long as you keep it to yourself.

>>6755797
IHATEWOMENIHATEWOMENIHATEWOMEN

>>6755885
I think this comes down to not being an idiot too. Don't post it directly to the artist. Artists can be very volatile to people touching their work and by posting it directly to them it's like you are intentionally fanning flames.

>>6755886
alright anon settle down

>>6755816
same reason why there are people tweeting at the void about how [current popular thing] is problematic; they are losers with nothing to offer who need to feel like they are special

>is fixing someone else's art for the sake of it a bad thing?

i personally dont mind my work being corrected if there appears to be something wrong with it, but i'd like to believe that the person doing it has honest intentions in mind and is purely coming from a place of judging aesthetic, as opposed to airing out their personal opinions and hangups

if i show someone a drawing of a woman i drew, and they fix it by making the hands look better or the form nicer or something, i can see whether or not thats an improvement and choose to heed their adivce
but if they also take the time to cover up her panties or change her skin color completely (not to a similar color, either... its understandable if they change it by a couple of shades to make it look better in the finished illustration, but if they straight up say "nah you made her white, i want her to be black")...
all that tells me is that the artist doesnt respect my intent and considers my very intentional work to be some kinda mistake. as if im objectively wrong for liking a sexy girl with her undies showing or having light skin. and not only does that insult me personally, but it also muddies the rest of their advice and tells me they dont know what theyre talking about

if someone treats something like a panty slip as an "art mistake", that implies they think theres only one way to make art- the way that abides by their personal morality, and everything stepping outside of said purist morality is downright incorrect

>>6755797
Moralfags and clout. Duh
It's easier to change these insignifcant shit than anything else for that sweet quick dopamine hit

>>6755810
zee fixes is too easy since it was always fake rage bait anyway.

>>6755909
I've never seen a bigger cuck than you before, pathetic or maybe underage/female

>>6756043
no anon, thats just what a real artist looks like
i know youve never seen one before, being an /ic/ regular, but they exist

either explain yourself of fuck off

>>6755797
It's not about art, it's about virtue signaling and the need to feel smug over others.
They are talentless hacks who can't draw on their own, so they need to deface the work of others to feel good about their lack of meaning and purpose.
In other words, parasites and charlatans who don't understand freedom of expression, and cannot think outside their little bubble of reality.

>>6755797
Your really making this rant cause your mad she made the choice to cover her crotch more?

The actual "fixing" is done in a way that helps the piece to adhere to more anatomical and perspective accuracies while not compromising the artist's original vision or intent. It's just some constructive criticism from a professional who both has an expansive portfolio and has previously worked with other major studios.

>>6756163
>not compromising the artist's original vision or intent
>covering the crotch, thus compromising the artist's original vision or intent
let me guess, a puritan?

look! boobies! ( . )( . )
BOO!

>>6755909
>honest intentions in mind and is purely coming from a place of judging aesthetic, as opposed to airing out their personal opinions and hangups
in art classes i have had since middle school, they teach you that this is how you are supposed to critique art

>>6756078
based
>>6755909
>if someone treats something like a panty slip as an "art mistake", that implies they think theres only one way to make art- the way that abides by their personal morality, and everything stepping outside of said purist morality is downright incorrect
never thought about it too hard but that makes sense

>>6756183
Nooooo stop, it's too scary. I'm jus a wittle boy

>>6755842
>argument against
Drawing women as sexy upholds beauty standards and makes men believe that women are there to be objectified.
>counterargument
A. People can separate fact from fiction. You aren't actually going to go outside and see a clussy with a hime cut just because you're browsing it all day, even everyone browsing porn knows you'll go outside and you'll see just regular women with regular bodies that dont have huge badonkers and slut attitude, they're just women.
B. Lotta women love being objectified, even just look at Aella_Girl's twitter polls, women like looking sexy and feeling sexy and being viewed as sexy, there's validation and feelings of self in it, if you don't, maybe it's just not for you, the same way tumblr fat black women artwork isn't for everyone(and these guys generally love it).

This is why "fixing" is so cringe >>6755810, you're taking something that appeals to a specific community, making it appeal to yours and denouncing theirs, and acting like you made it better for everyone, and not just blatantly against theirs and for you.

>>6755842
>I like sexxoo
>I draw sexxo
What argument?

>>6755797
People see a problem and want to fix it. Isn't that how most products we use today came to be?

That being said though, the person did ask for their art to be 'roasted' so the fact that they got kind of feedback shouldn't be that big of an issue. Which is why I am not sure why this thread is asking this question. The real question is WHY people feel the need to ask these artists for feedback in the first place.

When you ask for an artist's critique or opinions you ARE going to get feedback that is riddled with the artist's politics, because art and politics go hand in hand. You can tell the artists' politics by their art, so it shouldn't be that big of a surprise that the artist in the OP got that kind of response. This isn't to say that the artist can't be 'wrong' or give you the kind of advice that doesn't work for you, but you have to be aware it's going to happen. That's the risk you take when you seek out feedback, especially from someone whose politics differ greatly from yours.

>>6755852
>>6756372
Weird to me that the counterargument isn't just "because that's how humans reproduce". Seems like people are getting baited into accepting to a dumb premise somewhere on the way to the argument.

>>6755810
>westerner sees beautiful girl
>"corrects" her by making her ugly
Tale as old as tumblr.

>>6756243
Art teachers have the biggest faggots alive, they're the type of people that screech at someone for wanting to learn how to draw Goku but then slobber praise and essays all over spackles of paint color thrown on a canvas. Art teachers that try to impose anything other than sheer technical skill such as perspective, lighting, anatomy etc. are just opinionated cunts.

>>6755886
faggot detected

>>6756183
You're not edgy being a coomer
FYI, anyone could kill you easy. Being a coomer doesn't make you a real man.

>>6755797
>what drives a person to see a piece of art and instantly feel the need to "fix" it?
Mental illness.

Idea: pic related comic but it's "How did you guys get so good at drawing this quickly?" and they're pointing at >>6755810

>>6758799
if only anything could inspire the average /ic/ user

>>6757450
They're both wack.
Though >>6756372 A and C are big points. No sane person actually thinks Dragon's Crown (some elements of caricature) pushes unrealistic body standards.
My first impression of bottom left >>6755810 is that it looks like dogshit, malformed vaguely human figure, not to mention painted on clothes, and that anyone who actually thinks that's beautifully sexy is pornsick. Maybe he wants women to look like that irl.
"Sexualization of a minor" isn't something that actively comes to my mind unless it's preteen pedo shit.
Getsuyoubi no Tawawa doesn't raise my suspicion. So what is it that I have a problem with? Dogshit drawings. And tit and asscheek (singular) twice the size of the head are generally going to look dogshit.

However, I went off-topic as I never said a thing about the topic of "fixing art" and simply said I don't like dogshit drawings, which is semi subjective.
Like >>6755816 says, the art fixes we make fun of are mostly literally who "fixing" literally who.
Good artists aren't wasting their time "fixing" garbage. "Draw an X and two circles" is kinda wack but anyone can just pull up fanart and artists aren't going to scream "look I draw it sexier than the mangaka" every time they draw it.

Once again I went off-topic as OP is about "respecting women" and moralfagetry which I haven't addressed yet, outing myself as low IQ.

>>6757443
this
people have a hard time noticing that without at least SOME amount of objectification of the other, there's no sex. Objectification got an extremely bad rep (understandable) so even mentioning it brings up only negative connotations and imply malice

>>6755797
I sometimes get intrusive thoughts to """fix""" something somebody else made but only because I know I can do it way better and it's just an ego trip. Imo you should sooner feel ashamed of that and never admit to it than actually doing something like that. Nobody cares to see it lol

>>6761977
the word 'objectification' is largely worthless when it comes to illustration because sometimes, the person being drawn really is nothing more than an object
theyre the center of the piece made specifically to focus on their beauty or sex appeal and nothing else
in this particular instance, they are the object in the piece

also, as is the case with most internet vernacular, people no longer know what the words they say mean
people dont know the difference between a character being "sexualIZED"
and just "sexual" or "sexy"

>>6762660
I agree. Tho we both know people love projecting themselves onto pretty things so they take it personally if somebody openly admits to viewing a character as an object or just a vessel for something more important. They always wanna talk in "what if the character was a real person" mindset. I'm assuming just because of the fear that the people they are talking to would apply that logic to real people irl somehow

However you turn it, it's fucking dumb and we can't talk about it objectively without somebody getting all personal and subjective about it

>>6762688
>people love projecting themselves
i think this is the biggest issue behind today's discourse- people cant distinguish fiction from reality, they view everything as a statement, a lesson to them and them alone, something being said about them specifically

if, say, a woman gets objectified, the person will say "thats me, thats MY body youre objectifying. i put so much of my self worth in my status as a woman, that i see MYSELF on that screen"
if a single gay character gets portrayed as dumb or something, it might just be a character who happens to be dumb, and also happens to be gay. but a person who believes the world revolves around them will go "what are you saying about AAALL gay people? are implying were all like this?"

>>6755886

Everyone does or should

>>6756372
If you don't like something close the tab or something. The world is full of things someone might not like, if you keep on making everything cater to every single tranny the world would become a very boring and ugly place.

>>6755797
A leech. No good artist will waste their time "fixing" your art. A leech wants to take credit for your work by essentially posting the "correct" version. Just ignore them.

>>6762752
>A leech.
accurate, since not a single person ive ever seen "fix" other people's art has art thats worthy of its own attention
its either simply bad, or perhaps outwardly attractive to the eye yet bland and samey
doodling over someone else's work is a quick way to pretend to be an expert while never having to pyw since most of the work is done for you already

Didn't read thread, but I think there are only one reason:
Spite.

The reason for spite can be multiple, but ultimately you are trying to show either the person who made the art or the people who enjoy the art that they are inferior. It's a competition.

In the case of women being petty, I blame jealousy. They don't have the beautiful features that are craved, so they don't want cartoons to applaud those features.

Then there are ideological ones, like removing LGBT flags or swastikas for more obvious examples, or changing race or culture of a character, case in which it can blend a bit with jealousy: people enjoy white character? BAD! But it has become an ideological pushback, people draw disgusting brownoids and spread it over the Internet for good boy points? BAD! Let me turn them into nazis out of spite.

Then there are the stylistic preferences. Which might overlap with ideology, as you perceive everyone with a Tumblr style to be a Biden-loving tranny Mexican or every animefag as a coomer. But things like erasing Tumblr nose, making hands non-cartoony or what-have-you, those are primarily a visual thing. The artist gets put-off by those marks and has to erase them, call it OCD if you want. But the previous ones, jealousy and ideology, can also cause knee-jerk reactions, at some point we all Pavlov-condition ourselves into thinking BAD! when we see things we don't like.

It just so happens artists have the power to do it because they have honed their craft (to some extent). So instead of just saying words, which are less impactful, they can EDIT the thing and feel like they've won without needing a lengthy discussion about it.

All in all it's just mind AIDS.
I will sometimes edit the faces of people who I find ugly, but just in an attempt to discover what is ugly about them. I only used it to spite ONE girl who was hitting on me, sent a photo, so I fixed her face and messaged her the shopped version. Because I felt disgusted at being hit at.

>>6762752
Unless it's AIshit, then it's ok to fix it with real art.

>>6755797
Minor correction that most people would of overlooked if not pointed out, Could overlook it but since the fixer is a bitch I would re-fix the art to show bush.
>>6755810
Would expand chest in response and add 'implying there isnt people into fat people.'
>>6762970
spite is a good motivator. I remember finding the most disgusting Mini-moon (Sailor moon) Fan-art and decided to fix it myself. I cant find the original and I no-longer have my edit but the original had: Bags under the KIDS eyes, large noses taking up nearly half the face, too much eye-shine on the eyes, the most unappealing freckles ive ever fucking seen. I know irl freckles tend to go from 'cute sparse' to 'holy fuck whats wrong with your skin?' but this was to an obnoxious degree.

My edit was just simply minimizing all of these traits and getting rid of the bags under the eyes because 'what in the god damn?' I even kept the obvious race-swap elements and the background which I only realized later was a 'lgbt adjacent flag' of some sort but as fine with it due to how it matched the girls outfits and theme of the whole piece.

I feel lastly that while spite can carry you, you must find enjoyment in what you do. Can you carry it to actual work you would do? Prove you can do better than what you see around you? etc.

>>6762970
The person asked for their work to be fixed by this artist and there are plenty of genders that do the same thing. Hell, there's a whole redline general and people who ask for redlines. They are the same thing.

>>6762970
ill agree with you that spide is A reason, but i have to disagree that spite is the only reason
its been mentioned before but artists are very self centered people who just need to shove themselves into everything they come across, the whole world has to hear "hey everyone! im an artist, and heres *my* unique take on absolutely everything!"
they need to take up every space in the world and be... involved... in everything

>>6762994
its ok because theres no artist behind AI shit and we must flex our superiority over the machine dirt race

>>6762970
>people draw disgusting brownoids and spread it over the Internet for good boy points
do you know what i think that is?

let me give you a metaphor- youre 12 years old, minding your own business, when suddenly struts in your classmate wearing all black, with hair hair dyed with red streaks and a pair of fake plastic fangs in her mouth. and she says "IM A VAMPIE!"
she then proceeds to get a papercut, put the cut in her mouth to suck the blood, and go "mmm mmmmm this is sooooo tasty! i bet you wouldnt find this tasty, would you, humans? no you wouldnt, but i do! look at me how weird and unusual i am, look how strange im behaving, im so unique it must be proof that im reeeally a vampire."
do you get what im saying?

people who draw those ugly bloated skin-diseased pronounballs are doing exactly that. they dont actually find what they drew beautiful, they find it disgusting, and they want (you) to find it disgusting too, just so they can say "oooh but i actually find it beautiful, because im THAT much of a special, unique, super progressive and unusual individual. youre shocked, arent you? perplexed even, that someone could find such a monstrosity attractive? while i do, cause im the most different super duper person ever!"

TLDR the emperor is naked

>>6763043
That’s a good explanation. I thought something similar when I saw pic related. There’s a clear, ridiculous, thought process at play.
“We need to draw lesbians scissoring for our children’s book!”
“Okay. I used my ugly art to depict that. But it seems lacking.”
“Make them an interracial couple!”
“BRILLIANT! But it still seems lacking.”
“Make one of them an amputee!”
“THAT’s what we needed to be fully woke.”
People don’t naturally keep piling on weird shit to make their work as unappealing as possible. It takes effort to get there. I’m shocked the black girl doesn’t have vitiligo, too. Woke artists love adding that.

>>6755797
>femoids
lmao

>>6763169
no, see, what youre showing is a different phenomena
its woke to appear woke, whereas what im talking about is a lil bit of the same, and a little bit of the opposite- its woke, yes, but not to appeal to woke people, but rather to discuss un-woke people to make them ashamed of themselves

again, to make a comparison, its the equivalent of calling something 'filter' or saying some garbage food is actually incredible and everyone else is a pleb for not getting it

>>6763169
>the penis owner
Lel, don't read the text, I regret it.

>>6763169
i genuinely wanna know if these books ever see the eyes of kids
the only way they would is in a school library, and unless its mandated reading, no kids will ever pick them up
meanwhile, no person who Would buy this shit for their own kids... ever actually has kids

>>6761011
Kim Jung Gi drawing a girl shitting her brains out inspires me. I want to get so good I can draw my degen fetishes and people just have to accept it because I'm that good.

the core problem with "the media sexualizes women to appeal to the male fantasy" is that attractive women dress like whores. this a fact. if anything sexualized women depict reality.

and to any female that is offended by that statement i want you to look me in the eye and tell me that yoga pants aren't the most comfortable thing ever.

because thats why girls wear them. to be comfortable.

>>6765582
the issue isnt really whether or not its realistic either
media is allowed to be unrealistic
the problem is that if someone wishes to portray a certain type of media, who are you to tell em they cant because its unrealistic? unless theyre writing an objective fucking documentary, realism is a non-factor

another thing people get pissy about is titty armor, and yes, titty armor is (as far as we know) not historically realistic, but thats only because we havent discovered it yet, most likely because women historically simply didnt fight with plate armor as often as men did. if women did fight at all, they were usually independent fighters or huntresses who fought for necessity, not glory, and used lighter armor like mail or leather
however theres a difference between "historical realism" and "theoretical realism". while we have no evidence of sexy booby armor existing, theres nothing to suggest it couldnt, or wouldnt. human beings are beauty loving and extravagant beings who love the human form and displaying their best features, and some of the best fighters in history fought either naked/half-naked (this was commonly done in show fights, like boxing matches or colosseum fights, to show off the ideal human form), or clad in some of the most needlessly intricate armor ever, just to show off. we just love beauty.
and guess what some male fighters wore? if you guessed 'armor that was sculpted like chiseled abs' youd be right. some of them even wore codpieces that looked like dicks. why? you may ask? 'why not', they'd say.

every person who "fixes" a female character by redesigning their sexy/intricate/sculpted armor to look flat and boring prides themselves in realism and how fucking huge and throbbing their brain is, but they seem to miss a more important aspect of art- presentation.

>>6755842
It makes ugly women feel insecure that they can't complete with fictional women. So they try to make ugly the fictional standard, instead of just not being ugly.

>>6765636
not to be all ''haha women bad'' or anything, but why is it genuinely mostly women who get offended at beauty? when a guy sees a hot, sexy, oiled up guy in a show he just goes "man that guy is jacked" and goes on about his day, even if its the 10th or 20th sexoguy he saw that day
but women usually view it as some kinda expectation. like, if they see a skinny, prettyfaced chick they go "this is setting a *standard*. this isnt just a sexy girl, this is whats expected of me, personally. this is what i should be, is what im getting from this" and they get so heated.

>>6765643
Everything that doesnt make sense to you about women, will instantly make sense if you remember one thing
Just one

Women are like children

I'm serious, everytime a woman does something that confuses you, ask yourself how you would feel if a kid did it, and you'll find that you're not nearly as confused or offended
That's my life hack for you, view every women as if she has the mind of approx a 12-14 year old girl, up until she's about 50
If you go about life with that mindset, your relationship with women will improve, your self esteem in regard to women will improve, and you'll never again be mad at them or confused by them

>>6765643
Because beauty defines a women's self worth. The same as purpose defines a man's.

>>6765643
>when a guy sees a hot, sexy, oiled up guy in a show he just goes "man that guy is jacked" and goes on about his day, even if its the 10th or 20th sexoguy he saw that day

A lot of women don't find that appealing though. Men do. The fact that is your first thought of what a 'sexy man' is more of a reflection of what YOU consider to be a sexy man versus what a woman might consider to be a 'sexy man.'

That's the difference.

See the kind of men women draw and see if you see those kind of men depicted in media often. If there was more balance then I am pretty certain people wouldn't be complaining as often or much.

>>6765683
ah, the ol "sexy men are for men, sexy women are for men, everything is for men, women dont love anything shut up shut up shut up!" retort

for once in your life take responsibility over something and you wont be so easily offended

>>6765683
>See the kind of men women draw
yup, i never go on any art sharing website and see women draw big, beefy muscular men... nobody does... made up phenomena

>>6765725
>for once in your life take responsibility over something and you wont be so easily offended

>so says the person so offended they have to resort to talking out their ass instead of providing any actual evidence to refute it properly.

>>6765726
Right. Beefy muscular men seem to be really popular with gay and straight men though.

>>6765867
And sexy women are popular with gay women and straight women as a form of wish fullfillment
it's almost like human beings are programmed to want sexy people, and also wanna be sexy people

>>6765872
Right, but what might be considered to be 'sexy' for either of these varies and may not be the same so the point you are trying to make is lacking quite a bit. You can even tell in the way each group of artists draws their 'sexy women' and 'sexy men.'

It's not the same.

>>6765884
and yet ultimately it doesnt matter
women like big beefy men, implying its purely a 'male fantasy' is a huge cope because women have a habit of pretending that men dont have a single expectation placed on them by society

>>6756372
>it's just not for you
i've only ever heard women and confrontation-phobic faggots unironically use this to dodge stating the bitter truth to spare some other woman/faggot's feelings and i for one am sick of seeing it used un-ironically as a phrase
consider killing yourself you coward

>>6765683
even when men encounter fujoshit mangas with their bara oiled up fags or say hoity toity smooth talker rich fags from female oriented fiction they simply shrug and walk away maybe take a pot shot at the wierd aspects of it but its not a marked trend for men to go about and "le epic fix" female oriented erotica and make the character/art noticably worse
meanwhile its a marked trend amongst soon wall approaching mid femcels/ immature coke'd up on woke culture females to seek out male targetted media and then "le fixed" it to desexualize it

its like how the study lego did on male and female children revealed boys have a tendency to project their toys on themselves (ie billy will want to be batman) when playing with lego batman meanwhile cindy will project herself on her toy (ie make batman go shopping/dressup or go to prom) outliers exist on both sides but the majority trend persists
women have a habit to want things to change to accomodate them rather than adapt themselves look up a men's self help book terms like "you must/you will/you have to" will be very frequent meanwhile one for women will have words like "you deserve" will be a lot more frequent than they have any right to be

tldr: women ruin everything (even themelves) if given the chance and don't deserve any agency in anyone's life (especially their own)

>>6766029
the thing is, the phrase IS true, not everything needs to be for everyone
the problem is that the people who use it the most, are ironically the ones who need to hear it the most

idk why its never people who make cool niche art that say "not everything needs to be for you", idk why we cant just reclaim it
because its absolutely a valid phrase yet 99% of the time its used by people who cry when something isnt for them

>>6766053
>boys have a tendency to project their toys on themselves (ie billy will want to be batman) when playing with lego batman meanwhile cindy will project herself on her toy (ie make batman go shopping/dressup or go to prom)
yknow, that actually explains the phenomena of women who make stories that they promise will focus on fun adventure or fantasy or some shit, and end up being coffee shop dressup AUs...
i always wonder why they make stuff like

>>6763169
Are we implying the right don't do this?
Hetrosexual acts are as availability as gay sex is, it's called the internet, especially in places like Youtube.

>>6765643
A better argument is
>When a black guy with a BBC is shown in your vasinity
What do you think will happen? "Man that guy is hung" and goes on about his day? Topkek

You no damn well just how hard men seethe over bigger men, the phrase "dick measuring contest" exists for a reason. All men care abotu is sex adn the dick is the only useful part of th eman for that. Menawhile the entire female body is for sex and thus all of it has to be "perfection" so that means far more to seethe over by other women that need to compete.

You're all full of shit acting like men don't do what women do, I know boomers especially are pathetic as shit with that mindset. It's just that men only have one thing of worth for sexiness, while the roided out body is more of a recent invention and was actively done to shame other men via social status rather than body acceptance. A guy with a built frame likely is into sports, unlike the nerd that's into books or geeks with games. But again, this is a recent thing, as before the late 1900s the average body of man was neither fat (unless your were rich) or skinny and underdefined (because every male that worked worked in physically tasking fields). If you weren't fit, you weren't even a man yet, you were a boy still. Which is why this stereotyping only came during the era where teens started thinking they were adults all because they entered puberty and they bodies starting filling out.

>>6765643
A better argument is
>When a black guy with a BBC is shown in your vicinity
What do you think will happen? "Man that guy is hung" and goes on about his day? Topkek

You know damn well just how hard men seethe over bigger men, the phrase "dick measuring contest" exists for a reason. All men care about is sex and the dick is the only useful part of the man for that. Meanwhile the entire female body is for sex and thus all of it has to be "perfection" so that means far more to seethe over by other women that need to compete.

You're all full of shit acting like men don't do what women do, I know boomers especially are pathetic as shit with that mindset. It's just that men only have one thing of worth for sexiness, while the roided out body is more of a recent invention and was actively done to shame other men via social status rather than body acceptance. A guy with a built frame likely is into sports, unlike the nerd that's into books or geeks with games. But again, this is a recent thing, as before the late 1900s the average body of man was neither fat (unless your were rich) or skinny and underdefined (because every male that worked worked in physically tasking fields). If you weren't fit, you weren't even a man yet, you were a boy still. Which is why this stereotyping only came during the era where teens started thinking they were adults all because they entered puberty and they bodies starting filling out.

>>6766620
>A better argument is
>>When a black guy with a BBC is shown in your vicinity
>What do you think will happen? "Man that guy is hung" and goes on about his day? Topkek
1. not look at cock cause im not a faggot
2. if i catch a glimpse of cock, ignore cock cause im not an insecure little bitch
seriously, you cant compare the two for one reason and one reason only- men are adults, not eternal jealous children like women

>>6766620
>the roided out body is more of a recent invention
literal
retard

>inb4 she goes into semantics and said "uhh uhhhh thats not teeechnically correct because theyre not on steroids and i obviously meant it literally even tho we both know i meant it figuritively"

>>6766625
>Post a figure of times of physical labor and war
Based retardbro.

>"yknow guys have constant standards of beauty placed on them too-"
>every vagina haver in a 500 mile radius climbing out of the bushes: "SOURCE? SOURCE? THATS NOT TRUE THATS NOT TRUE DONT SAY THAT! WE HAVE A MONOPOLY ON ALLL THE OPPRESHUNS!"

>>6766678
ahh yes, that’s why all the ukrainians and russians are juicy as fuark

>>6766620
>black guy with a BBC
now you've done it and outed yourself as a leftist degenerate male or a libcuck female
no man ever see "le gigantic bee bee see" content and takes it seriously and as amything but a massive cope from irl butthurt blacks and wierd basedcuck jew/whites (its a niche noone outside your echo chamber likes it and its major proponents on 4chan aka gif saw a direct decline in bbc posting when israel was being bombed make of that what you will lmao)

the average man will never get into a dick measuring cotest unless hes a closet fag or an unironic incel
men don't go into female targetted erotica and "le fix" female oriented media of "general" consumption
neither do normal men feel insecure when confronted with an ideal image of masculinity (take the rise of the chad meme for example and the severe lack of a female equivalent amongst wome)
men can look at a character like goku (an asian whose power is turning blonde white) and say "he's literally me"
meanwhile women will complain about how any of the female focused fiction's protagonist like isabella from twilight or Ana from 50 shades of grey aren't enough like them (not brown or not obese etc) and push for lowering of beauty standards
men want to *attain* the ideal while women want the ideal to *be* them

you and your specific cadre of people don't care about achieving an ideal of promoting the peak of anything, no you want everything lowered down to your level so you don't have to feel bad at the opportunity cost you put on yourself by being lazy/willfully ignorant (there won't be any winners if we're all "winners" there can't be any pretty people if we're all "pretty")

you're motivited bya profound and deep-seated spite and envy of those better than you much more than any desire to feel yourself reaffirmed
you don't want to be loved so much so as you want those better than you to be hated
you are the idealogical version of acid spiteful and full ofhatred coroding anything of beauty or worth

>>6767579
lol seething dicklet aka republican

>>6766053
>even when men encounter fujoshit mangas with their bara oiled up fags or say hoity toity smooth talker rich fags from female oriented fiction they simply shrug and walk away

No they don't. There are so many threads on /a/ complaining about the current state of male shounen protags and people complaining about how gay the characters are. A long time ago there was an article written by a man complaining about how the guy who just stepped down from playing James Bond was "too good looking and had too nice of a physique." It made him feel bad because he wasn't able to project himself onto the character anymore. Also, it's still taking Hollywood a lot of time to cast younger men in leading roles despite how much money they make. Thinking that men aren't threatened by or affected by these things is wholly unrealistic.

>>6767579
>(take the rise of the chad meme for example and the severe lack of a female equivalent amongst wome)
reminder that men had wojak, aka the original "feelsguy" for literally years and never once felt the need to accessorize him, they only ever edited him to cover very generalized archetypes like blacks of fat guys or something....

like a week after normies discovered the wojak, they immediately created tons of female wojaks and used them like dollmaker dolls

fact is, men can identify with anything, women can only identify with something that looks like them, or looks the way they want to look

>>6767582
and now look how this femcel/literal cuck reverts to female shaming tactics when confronted about their spite for excellence

they'll ignore how dating statistic prove black men are the least desired patners for women of all ethnicities (and thats even coming from the vainest and most fickle women ir dating app users)
or say the saddeningly high STI rates amongst black men
or refuse to acknowledge how Blacked is owned by jewish owners
or how black men also the least sought after sperm donors (even "le enlightened" women avoid blacks like the plague)
(i say this as a man who mostly only feels pity in the face of flambouyant black coping)

nay this a person who's all too familiar with preying on insecure men or trolling incels to have an actual argument to present
now watch as it fails to make any salient points in its defense instead of stooping to playground insults and appeal to mass opinion
watch as it either flees with its tail between its legs or floods the thread with loud and angry seething and know that in it i have already won

the reason why make art ugly is because they feel threatened by beauty. Its childish but that's what women are.

>>6767591
>Pictured, average woman attempting to insult a man without insulting his penis

>>6767579
>the average man will never get into a dick measuring contest unless hes a closet fag or an unironic incel
>neither do normal men feel insecure when confronted with an ideal image of masculinity
Finally, some good fucking common sense in this shithole.

>>6767595
kek, yeah, literally everyone else itt already knew this
but i suppose its not surprising than a woman wouldnt, and her reponse to "women do X publicly (where we can all see them)" is "OH YEAH? WELL YOU MEN DO Y IN PRIVATE, I ASSUME, THATS WHAT MOVIES TOLD ME!"

lil bit of advice, never try and convince a person that they do something that you cant see them do, yet they know they dont
itll never end well, odds are you learned it from questionable sources
stick to stuff thats outwardly evident

>>6767585
>There are so many threads on /a/
>still taking Hollywood
>long time ago there was an article written by a man
/a/ posters/hollywood execs or that one guy who wrote an article yonder ages ago(was prolly neckbearded leftisst atheist type) aren'tt representative or normal men now are they?
are you retarded lmao?
none of this connects or make men hyprocites for pointing out female behaviour in fandom/hobby/media spaces
obvious bad faith argument or dare i say moving the goal-post

>>6767596
Yeah, it's the typical coping mechanism, just like a child getting caught in shit he shouldn't do and trying to shift the attention unto someone else.
>never try and convince a person that they do something that you cant see them do, yet they know they dont
I know, but it is telling how most people on the internet are oh so eager to accuse you of imaginary crimes and tell you your whole life story they made up in their own heads and then call you a schizo or all the other overused buzzwords like cope and seethe.

This stuff cannot be said enough times.

>>6767595
its funny isn't it they'll cry and moan over male centric media over-sexualizing them but when they want to insult a man they immediately pivot and attack his percieved(in their minds) sexual value aka penis size
women like this think that the greatest insult somone can face is calling them of low sexual value hence why they percieve sexually attractive ideal depiction of women as inherent competition rather than fun fulfillment fantasy
it isn't that sexy women in media gives men higher standards to compare irl women to, no it gives *women* higher standards to compare themselves to
they project their latent though process on those around them and get mad when men don't get it (bcuz its obvious to them why sexier women make them insecure)

its a problem all in their own heads and rather than acknowledge that and move on with life these mid femcel wall approaching types take it up with the world to change this percieved wrong doing since they can't possibly be n the wrong no its the world that is out to make them feel terrible about themselves

this is exactly why women need to be gate-kept from fandoms/hobbies
the female equivalent of a nerdy sexless introvert are always ten times as toxic insecure and destructive and any man with the same and/or worse social status

>>6767634
>its funny isn't it they'll cry and moan over male centric media over-sexualizing them but when they want to insult a man they immediately pivot and attack his percieved(in their minds) sexual value aka penis size
people with low IQ also tend to have an inability to perceive the intentions of others, so they just resort to projecting their own intentions onto them

>>6766607
you know you are on some terminally online shit when you think that 'heterosexual porn' being as easily available as 'homosexual porn' is somehow right wing

what kind of breadtuber put these ideas in your head, anon?

>>6767634
Women are unable to function like real human beans, because they are used to being coddled by their parents during childhood and validated by their peers and older men when they grow up, hence they don't mentally mature beyond 16 years.
So, of course, if something, anything really, is directly pandering to them, it becomes "problematic".
For creatures that do nothing but open their legs to win at life, they have such insane inflated egos, even the most fucked up disgusting women have egos the size of a planet, just to hide their galaxy size insecurities.
The real problem is that they never work on their issues, but always push it on others and never take accountability for their actions, hence why they demand beauty standards to be lowered.
The critical issue is that such women make up a (loud) majority and no sane individual can come out alive from trying to challenge their insanity, mostly also because other sane individuals see that shit and want to have nothing to do with that.
>this is exactly why women need to be gate-kept from fandoms/hobbies
Exactly. All they do is fuck shit up to profit themselves, either for attention or money.
Art is in its current state because it is mostly women active in it.
They claim to want equality but every action they take contradicts what they say, thus the saying;
>"never listen to what a woman says, only pay attention to what she does"
In general, women are incredibly terrible people and if women don't at least develop some actual sane reasoning or genuine interests instead of chasing highs like junkies, everything they touch will turn to shit.

>>6767600
>/a/ posters/hollywood execs or that one guy who wrote an article yonder ages ago(was prolly neckbearded leftisst atheist type) aren'tt representative or normal men now are they?
But Tumblrina dykes are representative of normal women?

>>6767600
But who are you using as your examples? Women on Twitter and Tumblr involved in fangroups or your average woman who barely goes on line and watches Sex in the City or another type of woman is doesn't do either?

Also:
>article yonder ages ago(was prolly neckbearded leftisst atheist type)
No, he was a White older conservative critic.

isn't this an art board

>>6768120
yes, go make another twitter thread about how to farm likes or some drama

hurry up

>>6767988
yes unironically they represent what women who call for "le fixing" of legacy media for "current times"
tumblerite women represent what women become when given unchecked power
i was pretty specific i believe so it aint my fault i insulted that specific demograph and you felt personally called out
sounds like a "you" problem

>>6767997
>White older conservative critic.
aka irrelevant to actual art discourse idk why it even compares to modern women ruining shit because it makes them insecure
anime tiddies come to mind but lets not forget the cringe wokification of "official" subtitles/dubs """western""" localizers get their hands on
men will at most complain and/or make their own thing with aspect they want changed but it takes the capacity for spite and hate inherent to women to reach across the wall and ruin specifically male-oriented fantasy for their own agenda

women ruin everything if given the chance, period (pun intended lmao)
now scamper away you unlovable scamp
noone takes you seriously and your dad was probably completely right about you

>>6765646
NTA but this advice has helped me be a lot more understanding, thanks anon

>>6767662
all this cope comming from the sex that commits 98% of crimes. Also both of those are hideous and they should kill themselves. Kill yourself.

>>6765643
>when a guy sees a hot, sexy, oiled up guy in a show he just goes "man that guy is jacked"
nigger, men were the ones who started the justing bieber gay meme and now they call kpop guys gay. Stop pretending you are better when men have been shitting at male boybands for decades.

>>6767591
>watch as it either flees with its tail between its legs or floods the thread with loud and angry seething and know that in it i have already won
holy shit boy did you call it

>>6768252
masculine men = good times
effeminate men = bad times
>Stop pretending you are better
That is a typical effeminate projection.
How did you even draw to the conclusion that that anon must personally feel and think himself as a superior being?
You might want to stop using such accusatory phrases or no one irl will take you seriously when you'll speak.

Too many words, I want pictures

>>6768268
anon you aren't replying to a person
thats a spiteful femcel who feels called out
she will try to bait any and all anons to muddy the waters and ensure the original point is lost
women are spiteful and childish like that
don't reply let her seethe in the fact that she has been stripped of all power and agency

let our righteous silence rub the fact in harder
she was objectively wrong we were objecively right
cheers : D

>>6768268
he said so himself. It's like men forget they are actually the sex that commits all the violent crimes, rapes, and wars as soon as a woman does something cringe-worthy. The lack of self-awareness is really pathetic.

the seething continues and escalates to same-fagging
stay winning fellow men

where is my facts and logic now? men are scared of statistics out of nowhere? what does it feel like to be the niggers of gender? lol rumao

>>6755886
but you sure do love cocks

>>6755797
Pretty sure it's just virtue signalling. There might be a degree of envy in it for some people but it always just looks to me like an attempt to make the fixer look morally superior in some way. Just a modern pillar biter.

>>6755797
Same reason most people talk about anything on the internet especially if they start moralising. It's to assume a position of intellectual and moral authority, the act more important than their nonexistent substance so they can feel important or gain some tangible benefit.

is there a single board on 4chan that actually prefers to talk about the board's topic more than seething about identity politics?
no, pornboards dont count

>>6768645
We used to quarantine them on /pol/, but those were the moot days. Just ignore them and they'll have to crawl back to their shithole board to get the attention they want.

>>6755797
Sexual content isn't bad, but unless your story is aiming to be just porn, characters should have more depth than just being a walking pair of tits.

>>6763169
What a strange, strange time to be alive.

>>6767586
>Art board
>Mocks women for having creativity and expressing themselves for fun
There's a reason why 14 year old girls mog you guys... you take pride in being soulless NPCs kek

>>6765502
Stop, anon. You're not allowed to point out the obvious here. You're supposed to believe everything you see on the internet.

>>6770386
>being literally unable to relate to something meant to express human emotion unless its conventionally attractive
>not NPC behavior
id wager that approx 70% of men are normies, and 99% of women

>>6770395
im guessing you're using my post to suggest that because kids incidentally dont see this stuff, then its ok
no its not
im just wondering what the purpose of them is, i still think they dont belong in schools

a horse dildo doesnt belong in your teacher's desk drawer, even if theres only a small chance a child will see that as well....

>>6770408
No, you're not stopping kids from incidentally seeing this or any other of the absolutely depraved shit you can find on the internet. That's the job of a parent. What I'm saying is just because someone saw a screenshot of that book and an angry tweet doesn't mean it's actually sitting in any school, or that anybody will ever buy or read it. There isn't a single fucking school that wouldn't immediately fire and report a teacher with a horse dildo in their desk.

>>6770418
but it IS sitting in schools, that's an objective fact. hell, some schools in America even have online lists of books they carry you can check
the thing im saying is that it seems like no kid would wanna read it of their own accord
youre treating this like a black n white issue, "either this is literal cancer levels of travesty, or its aaaaaall peachy" no it's just shit. it could've been worse shit, it could've been better, but at it's current state its just plain ol shit.

>>6770418
>It's not happening
>It should be happening
>Ok it's happening a little bit >>> (you) are here
>It's happening and it's a good thing!

>>6755886
based. women should be necked on sight.

I was scrolling thru Instagram the other way hoping to see some nice art, but all I saw was shitty female "art"
You know the drill, tacky unskilled crafts, a whole lot of those 'galaxy painting for a dark figure in the foreground' instant trash. badly doodled mspaint drawings of lumpy women giving the middle finger about muh beauty standards, and tons, TONS, of shitty #relatable comics about periods or boobs or something. Approx one genuinely beautiful or unique drawings or sculpture, per hundreds of samey shallow nonsense.

And I thought to myself "Women should have some kinda mandated containment forum where theyre allowed to post their art, there they can throw around their shallow nothing-art for other women to see and engage in like a buncha CPUs talking to eachother in a now abandoned childrens game. And only once one of them has shown agency, the ability to think like a real artist and now like a woman who has simply figured out how to draw shapes somewhat decently, they may be allowed to leave their containment and join the rest of us on the internet to produce real art."

Then I came to realize that, I guess, in a way, that containment IS Instagram, and I'm the fool for thinking otherwise.
I just wish it could be made mandatory.

>>6765646
This is solid advice.

t.polyamorous bro with two loyal girlfriends, got them by applying that logic.

>>6770462
There you go my man

>>6770464
Thank you. It has also helped me greatly to rationalize my mothers mistakes and has helped me get over them. Understanding that has seriously changed my life and sometimes I hear my brother and my childhood guy friend talk and complain about their lives and it’s sad really. They still think their wives are their equal when they’re not, they never will, this is why women are women and men are men.
I speak to a teenage girl, the same way I speak to a 50 year old, there’s no difference, women will never go past the age of 16-18 in logic and common sense.

>>6770468
Once you're out of the first step of recognizing the pattern, you can move onto the next step of understanding the exceptions that prove the pattern
There are absolutely women who are equal to men, just like there are immature and retarded men who behave like women. I personally know a couple in my life who I would genuinely treat the same way I'd treat a man. Once you notice it, it's easier to tell them apart from the rest. Respect those particular women, they're far and few between.

>>6765646
>Everything that doesnt make sense to you about women, will instantly make sense if you remember one thing
>Just one
>Women are like children
>I'm serious, everytime a woman does something that confuses you, ask yourself how you would feel if a kid did it, and you'll find that you're not nearly as confused or offended
>That's my life hack for you, view every women as if she has the mind of approx a 12-14 year old girl, up until she's about 50
>If you go about life with that mindset, your relationship with women will improve, your self esteem in regard to women will improve, and you'll never again be mad at them or confused by them
>>6768171
>>6770462
>>6770468
>>6770471
This advice is fucking retarded, and you are stupid for believing it.
All the men and women I've met in my life are overall equally moronic.

I've never met an adult woman (or man for that matter) who acts like a 12 year old. Even the most immature of them.

>>6763169
>>6770408
>>6770424
>>6770418
Whats wrong with (books on) sex-ed?
Sex ed should be mandatory.
it genuinely helps prevent sex-abuse, since most of the time its parents or relatives raping/molesting kids.

If kids know whats going on, and they know how to report it, it's a good thing.

>>6758799
HAES is wackky, but im pretty sure this poster is a strawman.

>>6762721
>>people love projecting themselves
>i think this is the biggest issue behind today's discourse- people cant distinguish fiction from reality, they view everything as a statement, a lesson to them and them alone, something being said about them specifically
>if, say, a woman gets objectified, the person will say "thats me, thats MY body youre objectifying. i put so much of my self worth in my status as a woman, that i see MYSELF on that screen"
>if a single gay character gets portrayed as dumb or something, it might just be a character who happens to be dumb, and also happens to be gay. but a person who believes the world revolves around them will go "what are you saying about AAALL gay people? are implying were all like this?"

If you make a black character who steals tvs, eats watermelon and fried chicken and is a deadbeat father, people will assume you are a racist.

Same principle applies. People assume you are trying to use some cruel stereotype.

>>6765646
>That's my life hack for you, view every women as if she has the mind of approx a 12-14 year old girl, up until she's about 50
>>6770468
>I speak to a teenage girl, the same way I speak to a 50 year old, there’s no difference, women will never go past the age of 16-18 in logic and common sense.
Why would I believe this? The red pill has always seemed a little silly to me. They make a massive generalization and expect me to just believe it without evidence.

And it blunty contradicts my personal experience. I've met plenty of women who are mature. Like people are college educated and in stem fields.

>>6771615
>>6771617
>>6771621
>>6771625
>Very similar comments in very similar typing styles, in response to old posts itt, all within typing time of one another
Ok, first of all, one guy....
Secondly who cares? Who do you have to respond to every single individual itt and debooonk them? Fucking relax, have one conversation with someone, walking around through town square trying to fistfight everyone in a row won't do ya any good

>>6766620
I forget how many trannies we have on this site.

>>6772183
>Who do you have to respond to every single individual itt and debooonk them?
Habit carried over from using /pol/

when I saw this thread I thought it was going to be fixing and redraw thread because I thought its fun thing to do.

>>6768645
/a/. No, just that at this point, because they actually have mods. /vr/ used to be alright but then they let the autistic era of gaming (Gamecube) be allowed on /vr/ for no reason, and ever since it's been slowly becoming /v/ 2.

You aren't a real man unless you look and dress like this.

>>6755810
people still talk about this fat cunt? she was obvious bait

>>6755797
I've seen this short and she never said that. Why lie on the internet for no reason lol

>>6770462
How did you actually do this?

>>6768645
>>6773257
/ic/ is still better than other boards.

>>6774258
nobody does, i just googled shitty tumblr art fixes and posted the first result to start the convo going

>>6774261
wtf do you mean "she never said that" she literally put her own words onscreen
thats not my edit, she's one of those 'tiktok' folx that likes to add what she writes in big scrolling letters

or should i say... (you) are one of those people, ms fixalot?