I’d just like to pop in to register my thoughts on the recently instituted rule 5b, hopefully without starting an argument and getting sanctioned/banned:
Thoughts:
- This is a good rule and I hope it will help avoid further controversy.
- I think there’s a sliding scale of suggestive/sexualized MOCs/constructions, and I’d like to propose some benchmarks for the individual bases mentioned in the rule.
I’m guessing no one has a problem with builds on the scale ranging from Gorast to Gali Mata, which encompass less-than-humanoid to humanoid-with-extremely-marginal-suggestions-of-female-shaping. The next entry on the scale is, I think, Roodaka, which some people have problems with and which has already been noted as being subject to the rule:
I personally think that, while Roodaka’s construction is indeed suggestive of certain things, it doesn’t unduly emphasize them and hence is not overly sexualized. Moreover, she’s a canon build and a marketed set. I think MOCs in further contests (if there are any) should thus be allowed to use Roodaka-style chestplates, rear-claw-things, and the like (really, the claw is barely suggestive–it took me ages to consider that it might be meant as female shaping).
Beyond the Roodaka mark, the scale naturally grows more extreme and more divisive. Nevertheless, I think MOCs like this one also fall within the reasonable limit of suggestion/sexualization and should be allowed. Note that that one relies on shaping rather than definitive features. Some MOCs with definitive features are, however (at least in my opinion), also reasonable. This Helryx sports notable features, but the build and posing are classy and not wholly focused on such features. I think it’s an example of including suggestive features without really sexualizing them, and hence upcoming MOCs which may be of the same sort should be allowed. See also this mildly curvier but (if you ask me) wholly reasonable Roodaka revamp.
I readily accept that that Helryx MOC may be as far or farther than some people are willing to go, and I guess I’ll leave that as the cap for what I consider the “reasonable/legal zone” of the scale. Personally, I’d be willing to allow something as far as this MOC, again because the express intent of the build does not seem to be sexualization. I reason that, since Axonn is buff without being obscenely so, a canon female build could be curvy just as a facet of the character’s appearance.
As examples of builds that would be too much/more expressly focused on sexualization and thus would be inappropriate for canon consideration, see this, this, this, and this. (This is not to calumniate any of the builders of any of the four aforementioned MOCs; I personally like them, but I would not want them to be canon.) Those are the farther end of the scale, and since much of the community tends to dislike such MOCs and I’m not sure anyone genuinely wants to introduce such sexualized builds to canon, we can disqualify builds sexualized to these degrees.
EDIT: Sorry for dumping a novel, folks. If you read it all, have a cookie. 