Females unleashed -is it appropriate?

I do not agree with anyone says it ain't appropriate...it is ...Would you rather have the MOVIE version or CENSORED version?... I'll take the movie version. There is nothing we can do to stop it and if i was younger and wanted to see part of a butt...watch MTV or HBO chances are you will see one. I'd really hate to have any of you, who think that the Leia is not appropriate, as parents...life would be Hell.

 

Back to the topic-

I really don't see how its inapropiriate. Barbie has more cleavge than Leia. Its not as if they're exagerating her proportions to make her "sexy".

The figure's depicted as Leia looks in the movie.

The only figure I had a problem with was the X-Men movie Jean Grey. Not because of it being risque; but beacuse Jean didn't wear her hair down in costume, nor did she have it un-zipped in the film. If she had, then the toy would have been accurate, as the subsequent correction was. I prefer acuracy over "coolnes".

 

Here's my opinion on the whole matter (though, none of you asked, heh): sexy figurines... for the record, I think there's a certain age (which varies from child to child) when parents (key word being "parents") teach their children about the wonders and joys of sex. Too often the kids "learn" for themselves by a friend showing them a naughty magazine or a friend's dad having a naughty channel. And there's very little that can be done to stop that, UNLESS the parents make sure they know what their kid is up to the majority of the time.

Now, I'm not saying that the kids will "learn" about sex from these scantily clad figurines, but they might see Slave Leia's much rounder booty and wonder why her's is different than their's. If the kid is 11 or 12, then the time might be right, but too much younger than that and I just don't think the child is ready to comprehend it.

And just to let you all know, I speak from experience about kids learning about sex in an inappropriate way. I discovered a Playboy in my Uncle's bathroom once when I was 5 or 6. My parents caught me staring in disbelief, and immediately tried to set me right, and did for the most part. But it ended up instilling in me a fear of girls and what they would become for years and years, and it took me a VERY long time to overcome it.

--t.toe

P.S. I guess I'm one of those Christians in the 5% that DON'T think sex is evil. It is a gift. But I do think it's a gift best saved for the person you spend the rest of your life with.

 

Should this "sexy" (but accurate move depiction) figure be sold at family stores? I think its okay. I mean they sell multiple heads, intenstines unleashed, legless, bloddy stumped figures there already. Whats more harmful? Something as violent and offensive or the natural beauty of the female body. It's not like its anything the kid hasn't see in Return of the Jedi. Its not like anything the kid probably hasn't seen on TV at the age of three. I'd rather this figure be sold, then some of the spawn or other stuff like that.

 

Hey! caliman has a point... if the toy in question is an accurate depiction of the character in the movie, and the movie was rated PG... why on Earth shouldn't the toy be available to children?

 

I think it all comes down to yourself..only YOU can decide whether or not these are right for people to buy, beause there really is no rigid set of Morals or rules.




If this doesn't sound sensible, it's cause i'm writing at 10:00 at night

 

How many of you would like to see an Unleashed Oola?

 

She was already unleased in ROTJ.

 

I am wondering...

Since religion, politics and censorship have entered into this discussion...

Shouldn't most religious depictions of Jesus being crucified be changed?
He is essentially naked except for a "loincloth". I'm sure he could have had robes on, maybe someone "misinterpreted" a line in the translation of the Bible. (Besides, do you really think that he looked like that? Nobody knows, it's all a human artists' interpretation, essentially, it is imperfect.)

If a male child could be "influenced" by Leia's glut, then why can't a female child be "influenced" by the muscular upper body portrayed in a statue, etc. of Jesus on a cross, etc.?
(Why is it acceptable to have a man show his breast but not for a woman to show her's?
They are essentially the same thing, the big cosmetic difference is some fat is more prominent on one then the other. If anything a woman's chest should be more "acceptable" since it is responsible for providing life giving nourshment.)

I suppose that any of the old Greek, Roman, etc. statues/paintings should be destroyed because of their depictions of the human form.
Michelangelo's David needs some boxers, because it's responsible for the rise of teen pregancies and AIDS.

If anything, I would think that those that are religious should realize that man is reponsible for it's own failings, these failings predated movies, books, t.v. or videogames, I would think that their own individual religious texts would bear this out, and that these failings will not be eliminated until their chosen diety decides to eliminate them.
Man will never be able to accomplish this... man is imperfect, man is so imperfect, that he & she can't even agree on what IS perfect.

Humanity takes itself too seriously.
In the end, it's only a FIGURE/REPRESENTATION of a partally clothed or naked human being, not REALLY a partally clothed or naked human being. No more than a Playboy pin-up is the same as a real naked being, it's just ink on paper.

I think the latter is the real temptation.
The former is only a icon or symbol, it doesn't create the "sin", the person viewing it provides that.

Think about that.


My more on topic take:
I feel it is up to the parent to decide whether or not something is appropriate. Since most parents are aware of the content of the SW films and the films have been rated on, I don't think it is too much. Then again, young children aren't the intended demographic.
I could see complaining about a Slave Leia figure (no complaints I'm aware of yet), since she has a rear end as well and is meant for kids 3 and up. Paint the Slave Leia action figure's rear flesh and there's a controversy, paint it maroon and it's okay.

 

Punisher, Your my New hero!
Seriously though, Really Excellent points!
I agree with everything

BTW this... "Michelangelo's David needs some boxers, because it's responsible for the rise of teen pregancies and AIDS." is Hysterical!!
Nothing wrong with a little butt cheek... or a big butt cheek for that matter

 

"Why is it acceptable to have a man show his breast but not for a woman to show her's?"


LMAO! That's society; that's the way we are. I mean, heck, why don't we all just go naked? After all, then it should be perfectly acceptable, right?


\\rollseyes\\

 

I saw Nightline friday, Dec. 20. They had a "Give me a Break" segment, where some reporter complains about something, for example, unfair tax. It was about action figures, but mostly scantly clad female wrestlers. One parent, with kids, was saying bout one figure, "looks like she forgot to zip up" (something like that) And they showed a Barbie, collectors item for 14 and up, in a teddy-bear negligee. And they showed the Barbie at a teacher convention, and one teacher said it look like a hooker.

They then showed a Padme figure, and she had a slightly bigger breast then Natalie Portman has, and they thought it was too much. They even showed a clip from the arena fight in AotC, and mention the figure was based on a real person. They should have shown the scene where they were on her ship on Tatooine , considering how the figure was.

I'm with Punisher. I'm surprise no one complain on how muscular male figures are. think of how someone can complain, "my boy started to take steroids so he can be as buff as his He-man action figure." Really depends on the parents to tell kids what is right or wrong with stuff being spoon-fed by the media.

 

I have only seen the Vader and Padme once or twice and didnt get either but I wish I would have. I saw the Anakin one a few times. I dont think that they should only sell them in collector shops....why make it a scalper exclusive?????

 

Big news...Yarna D'al Gargan Unleashed is now in production!

 

Why is toy of the scantily clad Leia inappropriate if a kid can just go and get a copy of ROTJ and see the real thing on the screen?

Carrie Fisher doesn't wear any more clothing in the movie than is shown on the figurine.

Too big a deal is being made of this.

 

Taun We and Aunt Beru unleashed better be next!!

 

Jetster Dexter Unleashed!...with plumber crack hangin' out. Now THAT'S risque!

 

The children who would be young enough to take effect from this figure most likely would not buy it because it would be gross to them just like kissing.

 

I agree with AnakinMoonwalker.

Fortuneately, I'm not one of those kids.

 

Females Unleashed? Oh yes, very appropiate.

Just think of the possiblities:

Aayla Secura
Aurra Sing
Twilek Dancers/Slaves (ROTJ)
Twilek Twins (Episode 1)
Zam Wessell (Leanna Walsmann non alien version)

 

I learned about sex when I was 10 years old

 

8 or 9 for me

 

8 for me......




EDIT: Aurra Sing Unleashed would rock!

 

Alright! Here's my FINAL opinion. Females Unleashed are appropriate. Just not Leia. Okay, as for the 'why did Hasbro do this' question here's my opinion: To attract male collectors. Everyone likes seeing/doing things they shouldn't. It's like a child, they know they're not supposed to do something, but they do. It's the same way with adults. Males like seeing girls in skimpy outfits, showing stuff they shouldn't and exposing themselves.

 

To be honest, I'm buying this. Not because of the buttcheek, but because I think it is the best looking figure to be released.