Gone Home used a two-pronged approach: it pretended to be a legitimate horror game to earn money while providing pedo masturbatory fantasies to the woke journo / award crowd. Their second game, Tacoma, didn't do nearly as well despite ("despite") having an actually progressive premise and containing no pedobait.
SJWs have no work ethic and the "team" has no money. They've got to take what art each artist can be assed to make for free.
TBH redefining beauty for themselves sounds like a laudable goal:
- troons fap to anime catgirls
- troon out
- can't be pretty, so be ugly instead
- only fuck other degenerate uggos
A. be satisfied with that, sexualize uggos because that's who they're getting IRL sex from, make and play games with uggos
B. harass normal men and women
(A) is not a bad outcome. The problem with that strategy is that, unlike willing IRL sex partners for troons, 2d catgirls aren't going anywhere. SJWs have been drinking their own kool-aid for too long.
I wouldn't be too optimistic about beauty standards, however. They can't be manipulated by ideology because they're already enforced by money. Fat was hot when food was scarce. Tan was ugly when staying inside was privilege; then it was hot, and then tanning beds were invented. Fatties won't be hot as long as food is plentiful in the first world. But trooning out is expensive. I suspect things will get worse before they get better.
Exactly. Beauty standards through time and history have always correlated between wealth and privilege. Why was fat hot? Because if you were fat, that meant you were RICH AS FUCK. It also meant that you were healthier than probably all the skinny peasant girls and could bear more children. This was really only around the time of the dark and middle ages, when agriculture was shit. The world changed a lot after the black death. During the 17-16th centuries, painting yourself like an albino meant that you were rich enough to work inside and was considered attractive. These make-ups also contained arsenic and women used atropine to dilate their pupils. I have no idea why. Weird beauty shit follows every era. But being pale was a status symbol, indicated you were wealthy and desirable. Fat was also long out at this time.
As the ages progressed, this stayed pretty much the same. The insult 'red-neck' refers to someone who has a menial job and are forced to work outside, getting tan. So the pale thing was in vogue until about up to the 1950s. When the 50s hit and air travel became possible, people could travel to exotic locales. So coming back with a tan meant you had enough money and enough time to go someplace exotic, especially in the winter.
Now we have tanning beds and such, but the real reasons became lost, and its seen as 'healthy' now, which is also associated with beauty standards, albeit much less than having cold hard cash and status. Its the same reason everyone wants to be thin. In the modern age, its filled with shitty food and most people are over their BMI. It indicates a definite increase in status when you are thinner than most of the population. Also having a good body takes work, effort, time and money. So it also indicates class. Everyone knows obesity is bad for your health too. So there's the triple threat of status, wealth and health.
No beauty standard has EVER been changed by social morality alone and it NEVER WILL.
There's also another biological component to beauty which I haven't mentioned. Its not healthy. Its symmetry. Everything you learn in science you eventually come to the conclusion that one of the laws of nature is conservation of energy. Conservation of energy means as little waste as possible. Asymmetric chemicals are highly unstable. Our DNA, RNA are both symmetrical. Water, the most common building block of life, is symmetrical. The human body itself, is built symmetrically. The most beautiful people in the world have more symmetrical faces and bodies than the normal population. There have even been studies where animals were presented with human faces who were symmetrical and asymmetrical and they always favored the symmetrical. Same with human babies.
Yes, I'm actually making the argument that beauty standards are created by the very laws of nature itself and are only altered in times of great duress. Just think about it. Obese is as asymmetrical as you can get. So are stretch marks, acne, shitty hair cuts (though some people can get away with it). Think about ugliness and symmetry. And yeah, sure there are the occasional ugly people who have symmetrical faces, but its an exception, not a rule.
So the attempt to alter beauty standards will always, ALWAYS be a completely futile attempt that will never work, because its written into our society, biology and our own perception of what we perceive is attractive. Fighting beauty standards is a futile effort. The only thing you'll ever succeed at is making people not talk to you about them. Then they'll go after whoever they want. I don't care how many articles are written. I don't care how many people you think you can guilt. It will not happen. You can make all female characters in media ugly, people will still be like Wolverine on the bed petting a picture of Scarlett Johansson with huge tits. It will never work and nobody is going to enforce beauty standards out of fear or violence. So lol, have fun fighting against the current.
Also, most obese people will die young. It is an inevitability. You can't put that much strain on every system in your body and expect to be healthy. And those 'Rubinesque' models these fat bitches always tout? It was just one dutch guy who painted them, it was never a movement. And the models were fat men, not women.
Well... at least we have Doki Doki Literature Club.
Can that really be considered 'western' when the entire style is anime?
