Categories
boobs creepy

Star Wars Fans Possibly Really Really Obsessed With Breasts

Apparent;ly this Jedi mind trick works all too well
Apparent;ly this Jedi mind trick works all too well

Ok, so I’m not exactly the most dedicated Star Wars fan out there. I mean, yeah, I’ve seen most of the films, and I might possibly have owned a plastic light saber at one point, but now I’m beginning to wonder if I ever really understood Star Wars at all.

For example, I had no idea about the plants with boobs.

Last night, you see, I ran across a link to the Wookiepedia — the Wikipedia for all things Star Warsy. Specifically, it was a link to the Wookiepedia page on “Breast.” Not breasts, just Breast, though it turns out that there are up to six of them. But I’m getting ahead of myself here.

The Wookipedia page on Breast starts off with a brief yet still baffling overview:

Breasts were the mammary glands of mammalian species and some reptomammals, and were normally a distinguishing feature of the female of the species. Males did have breasts, but they were far less developed than their female counterparts due to the sexual dimorphism.

Reptomammals!? And what’s with the past tense? Breasts “were?” I’m pretty sure that breasts still are.

Every sentence in the “Breast” entry raises more questions than it answers. In the “Biological role” section, the Wookipedians explain that

In some cultures, sentient females nursed their own young. This was true of both primitive planetary societies like Dathomir, where the warrior-women of the Singing Mountain Clan would feed their children even during solemn councils of war,[1] and high-tech interstellar civilization.

What the hell is a Dathomir, and why are its Mountain Clans singing? How on earth, sorry, Dathomir, do we know that these singing Mountain-warrior clanswomen are breastfeeding at the war councils? In the Star Wars movies I’ve seen there wasn’t any breastfeeding. (Nor was there a Dathomir. but never mind.) Are there like a dozen secret Star Wars movies out there I haven’t seen that focus mostly on breastfeeding?

Even Tenel Ka Djo, Queen Mother of the Hapes Consortium, nursed her daughter Allana herself.[4]

You guys are just making all this shit up, right?

Alternative techniques of feeding infants did exist, as the TDL nanny droid could store up to two liters of milk internally.[5]

Ok, even if TDL nanny droids are a real thing in some expanded Star Wars universe, why do you know the specific amount of milk they can store internally?

Other sentient species retained strong breastfeeding traditions as well: female Wookiees had six breasts, which they used to nurse their litters of cubs.[6] Askajian females also had six breasts,[7] while Gran females had three.[8]

HOW IS IT THAT YOU CAN FOOTNOTE ALL OF THIS. WHY ARE THERE DOCUMENTS THAT SPECIFY THE NUMBERS OF BOOBS THAT IMAGINARY STAR WARS ALIENS HAVE. WHY DO THOSE DOCUMENTS EXIST.

And then there’s a weirdly long and detailed discussion of the breasts of imaginary alien males. From it we learn that Anakin Skywalker — you know, the future Darth Vader — liked showing off his man boobs (not to be confused with the former name of this blog).

As male individuals were not biologically meant to nurse their offsprings, they sported much smaller breasts and produced no milk. Mandalore the Lesser (then a gladiator),[9] Aron Peacebringer (a planetary leader)[10], and Anakin Skywalker (in certain circumstances, such as on Nelvaan) would freely exhibit them.

So fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to dudes taking off their shirts.

Also, whoever came up with the name “Aron Peacebringer,” fire yourself. I mean, what the hell, that is some seriously low effort work on your part.

Some males, such as Anakin Skywalker[16] and Corran Horn would also sleep barechested for comfort, though it should be noted that Horn undressed completely to sleep as opposed to simply going barechested.[17]

Damn, whoever wrote this section is perhaps a little too interested in figuring out when Anakin Skywalker goes shirtless.

Onward. In the “Cultural significance” section we learn, among other things, that

Female patients in bacta tanks could have their breasts covered,[21] but in some cases they chose not to.[22] Leia Organa seemed unperturbed by the sight of Shen breastfeeding in public on Dathomir [1] 

I don’t know who Shen is or what bacta tanks are, and I’m sort of thinking that I’m better off for not knowing.

We are also provided with this handy graphic:

starwardsboobs

And then we arrive at the section devoted to “Non-mammals with breasts,” and that’s when things get really weird.

First we learn that “[a] number of females belonging to non-mammalian species were known to have had breasts.”

And then we get to the shape-shifting, boob-having plants.

T’ra Saa, who was a shape-shifting Neti—a sentient species of plants— had breasts in her pseudo-Human form.[27]

In case you have trouble picturing a sentient plant with huge knockers, the Wookipedians provide a helpful illustration.

treeboob2

Apparently, there’s nothing in the Star Wars universe that can’t have boobs. Humans, wookies, robots, lizards, houseplants — you name it, and whoever is involved with that little facet of the extended Star Wars universe has probably put boobs on it, anywhere from two to six of them.

Actually, that’s not completely true. In the section of “Breast” devoted to developments  “Behind the scenes,” we learn that

During the development of Star Wars Galaxies, the team worked with Lucasfilm to determine the female Mon Calamari’s physiology. Because Mon Calamari were not mammals, early concepts showing Mon Calamari with breasts were eventually rejected.[29]

Congratulations, Star Wars Galaxies creators! I award you the first annual We Hunted the Mammoth Award for Restraint in Putting Boobs on Things.

H/T — Zoe Quinn on the Tweeter.

EDIT: I figured out where I found the link to the page, and added a blurry picture of a tree with boobs.

187 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tyra Lith
Tyra Lith
8 years ago

Unrelatedly, do the Asari from Mass Effect skeeve anyone else out? The designated “sexy” race is monogendered and it’s a total coincidence that gender is for all intents and purposes female, I’m sure…

Yes. Had a loooong discussion about this with my partner, because he can’t see how weird and kinda sexist it is.

Tyra Lith
Tyra Lith
8 years ago

It’s true that women get harassed all the time and I agree that it’s ridiculous that normally there isn’t much media coverage. but I think this case is considered especially newsworthy because it seems that the men acted organised… and that is new in this dimension and it frightens people. I think it’s important not to minimize this.

Button
Button
8 years ago

but there’s definitely sexism at play here, particularly when it comes to the whole “putting boobs on everything” issue. I mean, seriously, a tree with boobs?

It’s not like the writers of the Wookieepedia page designed the aliens. That sexism is on the writers of the novels etc., who as far as we know aren’t the same people as the writers of the page.

“Fantasy and sci-fi authors putting boobs on ridiculous things” would be a great subject for a post – hell, for a recurring feature!

Kale
8 years ago

I just realized that every depiction of an anthropormophized reptile female with breasts the media has sold me is a lie

kupo
kupo
8 years ago

@nparker

I don’t see any of this supposed racism at all. The article reports that there has been many attacks, and some suspects have been possibly identified as Arab or North African. That’s all. It even reports warnings not to link this to asylum seekers. The facts have been reported here, not much else. The article is certainly not ‘blatantly racist.’ Its a balanced fair article.

After that quote, they go on to say,

What is particularly disturbing is that the attacks appear to have been organised. Around 1,000 young men arrived in large groups, seemingly with the specific intention of carrying out attacks on women.

This doesn’t seem to be backed up by anything other than the fact that there were a large number of incidents. Later, they also say,

Germany saw a record influx of migrants in 2015, which provoked an intense debate on immigration and marches by the anti-Islam Pegida movement.

Sure, it’s a fact, but is it relevant or necessary in this story? Then there’s this:

A policeman who was outside Cologne station during the New Year’s Eve trouble told the city’s Express news website that he had detained eight suspects. “They were all asylum seekers, carrying copies of their residence certificates,” he said.
However, there was no official confirmation that asylum seekers had been involved in the violence. Commentators in Germany were quick to urge people not to jump to conclusions.

They imply that the refugees detained were suspects in this case but don’t actually say what they’re being detained for, and the fact that there was no official confirmation tells me their end goal in including that line is to imply those individuals were involved.

They’re stirring up racial tensions by painting this as an organized attack by refugees against women, when in reality it appears only one individual stated that POC were involved and we don’t know how many that was, the violence wad mostly robberies but we don’t know if any men were targeted, and the media never reports on cases of groping during, say, a riot by a bunch of white guys after a sporting event.

Freemage
Freemage
8 years ago

I’ll admit, my eyes passed over some of the more troubling paragraphs in that article–a combination of skimming and privilege. Thank you to the folks who took the time to lay it out–like one of those 3D cross-eye pictures, now that I’ve seen it once, the racism is pretty blatant.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

@ kupo

That all sounds rather like exposition, and guessing of alternative motives, to me.

They really aren’t ‘stirring up racial tensions.’ The majority of the media would just outright state their belief. This article didn’t do anything close to that.

Bernardo Soares
Bernardo Soares
8 years ago

@nparker

I have to say, I’m really tired of this kind of sophistry. “well, if you interpret it that way” is, to me, on a level with “that’s just, like, your opinion, man.” Especially since kupo has clearly laid out how the BBC story makes the unwarranted connection between this incident and the refugees.

This is a huge topic in media ethics, and most journalists have been taught that they should be careful about making such spurious connections. One can expect them to be especially sensitive with this, and the BBC (as many other outlets) wasn’t.

The police have since denied the rumours about suspects having asylum documents in them. They have also made clear that while there were around 1 000 people on the plaza, those are not one huge group of perpetrators. Around 90 official reports have been filed to date. The speculation and outright falsehoods in the article are racist, unwarranted and, in the current climate, u
irresponsible.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

@ Bernardo Soares

Well, I’m really tired of my points being misrepresented. Its happened elsewhere on the net and now its happening too. This is not about ‘interpretation’- this is about what I believe to be correct and what kupo believed to be correct. See, I disagree with what kupo said, but I’m not going to start claiming that they are wrong simply because they have declared my point to be only an interpretation, which you have done. That’s because that is not kupo’s point, and neither was it mine.

Especially since kupo has clearly laid out how the BBC story makes the unwarranted connection between this incident and the refugees.

I don’t have to agree with what kupo said just because it was ‘clearly laid out.’ Their view was, but that doesn’t mean I have to agree. I made the point that kupo’s clear points were, in my mind, looking at things that simply were not there. Maybe you need me to expand?

After that quote, they go on to say,

I believe that quote by kupo was overreaching. I believe it to be some form of association fallacy, akin to ‘they reported this, then that, therefore they are saying there is a link,’ which I believe to be wrong.

I’m going to respond to kupo in a comment addressed to kupo now, (its a bit like talking behind a person’s back otherwise if I list my other objections, I feel.)

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

@ Bernado Soares

Also, please don’t splain media ethics to me. I consider that quite belittling, tbh.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

@ kupo

Germany saw a record influx of migrants in 2015, which provoked an intense debate on immigration and marches by the anti-Islam Pegida movement.

Sure, it’s a fact, but is it relevant or necessary in this story? Then there’s this:

When a person has gone on record warning not to jump to conclusions of migrants being involved, and a policeman has (most likely) misrepresented the truth about some suspects’ having asylum seeker papers, yes. It is relevant in my mind.

What is particularly disturbing is that the attacks appear to have been organised. Around 1,000 young men arrived in large groups, seemingly with the specific intention of carrying out attacks on women.

This doesn’t seem to be backed up by anything other than the fact that there were a large number of incidents.

There has been an influx of attacks, occasionally by large groups, at the time of the New Year (a very busy time), so the idea that they have come specifically to attack women isn’t exactly an overreach. If we were talking about pickpocketing (a far lesser crime, of course) numbers jumping when tourist season approaches, say, London, previous incidents would suggest that yes, it is quite likely that they have arrived specifically to pickpocket. I don’t think its unjustified to state that it is a likely cause for a lot of crimes.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

They imply that the refugees detained were suspects in this case but don’t actually say what they’re being detained for, and the fact that there was no official confirmation tells me their end goal in including that line is to imply those individuals were involved.

No, the policeman implied this. They are simply reporting this.

They’re stirring up racial tensions by painting this as an organized attack by refugees against women, when in reality it appears only one individual stated that POC were involved and we don’t know how many that was, the violence wad mostly robberies but we don’t know if any men were targeted,

They are not painting this as anything. They have reported what has been said, including by the policeman. They have stated that one individual has said this, and they have also stated more people decrying jumping to conclusions.

and the media never reports on cases of groping during, say, a riot by a bunch of white guys after a sporting event.

The BBC does.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/34921372/these-young-women-are-fighting-against-groping-at-gigs

(not sports, but festivals and concerts)

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

Sorry, split it in two to make the blockquote mammoth seem less ugly.

Freemage
Freemage
8 years ago

nparker: Here’s what you’re missing:

The original article repeated the claims by a random, unnamed police officer that there were 8 suspects arrested who had papers on them. There’s a reason that the use of unnamed sources is problematic, and this is it. The choice of which quotes to use, and how much effort you put into confirming them, is key into how the story comes across.

Maybe the officer was telling the truth, maybe he wasn’t, but we can’t know because his reputation wasn’t put on the line. And if it turns out later that the attackers were just a bunch of random drunken louts who got together at a bar and then launched a grab-and-grope spree, the people who read about a band of asylum-seekers who were assaulting local women may miss the less sensationalized follow-up story.

The BBC chose to use the quote not because it gave a solid fact, but because it was sensationalist and fit the ‘refugees might be dangerous’ narrative. If they weren’t being racist, then they were being lazy, shitty journalists.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

I too believe the quoting of the policeman was a really stupid move.

I’m not sure it can be said to be sensationalist when the article also included many quotes that state not to jump to conclusions.

kupo
kupo
8 years ago

@nparker
I’m obviously not going to change your mind, so I don’t see the need to respond to your points, but I do hope that you took a second look at the article to try and understand my perspective. I did re-read it after your post to see if I may have jumped to conclusions, and I was able to see how it could be interpreted differently, and maybe it’s because I’m in the US where racist media is common, but I still feel like it was racist.

=8)-DX
=8)-DX
8 years ago

“And what’s with the past tense?”
Hint: A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away…

It’s a funny thing to see someone discover the SW Extended Universe for the first time (there are hundreds of novels, comics, computer games and other media expanding the SW franchise. This is why ep. 1-3 were so long awaited and also why everyone was so disappointed with them).

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

@ Kupo

Rest assured I read it a couple more times, and did attempt to see your perspective. I came away deciding it was a badly written article, but no more than that.

Still, even the BBC isn’t perfect- I consider them very much an ally as they attempt to be as neutral as possible (well, they legally are meant to.) I’ve noticed problems occasionally before, but not here in this article. I usually love their coverage as the impartiality thing almost always works- its refreshing in this day and age, and its the only news source I really trust. The neutrality sometimes falters, so I’m not saying it works all the time, but I simply disagreed with the assessment of the article in discussion.

However, I respect your opinion (and am kind of glad you said we could end it there, because I didn’t particularly want Orange Tango Drinker to derail the discussion on this page any longer.)

mockingbird
mockingbird
8 years ago
Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
8 years ago

@ Mockingbird

At least Lady Vastra is a vaguely humanoid animal. Remember the sexy lass who was in fact a tree?

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
8 years ago

@orange tango drinker:
You were possibly thinking of a different link. That link leads to this very page.

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

@ EJ (The Other One)

You were possibly thinking of a different link. That link leads to this very page.

Pfff. Laughing heartily now. Can’t. Stop.

Why are trolls so often really this- silly?

nparker
nparker
8 years ago

Yes, but what are you saying about it, or what do you want to know about it? We’re not performing monkeys- you can’t just give us a discussion topic, then leave and not contribute yourself, you know.