Introducing . . . Miss Susie Thurston

Post by **hue of fuzzpaws** » Sun Oct 04, 2009 12:56 pm

Mark 1

Post by **drew** » Sun Oct 04, 2009 1:49 pm

uhhhh..

Hold on a minute.

Post by **hue of fuzzpaws** » Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:44 pm

Post by **Blackhawk** » Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:11 pm

I think you got the description right.. I just listened to this scene recently and everything looks right (dont recall the clothing in the scene

) but she needs dark circles under her eyes not too much but enough to make her look like she wasnt sleeping well or she is going through a breakup.....she looks waifish enough and her expression fits.

Post by **wayfriend** » Mon Oct 05, 2009 1:35 pm

HA! You did it ... too amazing.

Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:04 pm

Nice work! I imagine her being a bit older and more worn than this, more '70s showbiz-cheesy.

Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:26 am

Regarding the pictures posted on this site by some members:

I have a serious question for persons whom post women's pictures on this website. I would like to know why it is that all of the pictures thus far of women warriors must wear little clothing and be dressed scantily. I realize that this might be how some visualize the women who fight in these books, but I do not believe in my own personal opinion that I or many members of my sex would be caught dead fighting in something that looks as if it is lingerie. I think it would be more realistic and sensible to have the women dressed appropriately in pictures and in visions.

Ladies am I wrong? I do not go into a fight, if the occasion arises, in my lingerie underwear because I do not want all seen by the world during said fight.

Please consider this statement, I mean really, can't they be semi dressed? I agree that women who carry swords and fight are not going to be in sweat pants and long shirts, but black leather that reveals most of their body??????????

Just my thoughts on the pics posted on this discussion and a few others.

Wheelwash Whitecap Mate

Post by **Thorhammerhand** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:44 am

I agree with the sentiment, in principle. The Warward picture for instance could, (and IMHO SHOULD), be dressed better, more, completely, decently (whatever you want to call it).

However in this case, Miss Susie Thurston, I believe that this picture is a very reasonable representation of the character in IEW.

Post by **hue of fuzzpaws** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:55 am

Post by **Thorhammerhand** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:05 am

Thanks hue.

Cheered me up no end.

Post by **hpty603** » Thu Dec 03, 2009 4:07 am

I think the picture of the soldier was a bit of a joke, Hue was just having fun and not being serious. Maybe just seeing what he could make. And hey, I'm not complaining, keep up the good work

Post by **Thorhammerhand** » Thu Dec 03, 2009 7:55 am

However I had just finished a bad section of work and needed a laugh

Fri Dec 04, 2009 10:42 am

Ha Ha very funny. But it must be said that the outfit is at least something that I could see her kicking butt in. It would at least protect her...imagine that armor protects warriors.

WWM

Post by **peter** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 1:02 pm

Wheelwash Whitecap Mate wrote:Ha Ha very funny. But it must be said that the outfit is at least something that I could see her kicking butt in.

Yes - I agree that the armour is way wore suitable for the purpouse, but if we're going to get into the issue of the portrayal of women as (sex?) objects in male dominated culture, then whyfore the need for them to 'kick butt' at all. Not to suggest that women are all sweetness and candy (or should be) , but few women could be happy to see the children they laboured so hard over being sent to war, let alone want to participate in it - and the very sensible predisposition for women to 'jaw jaw' before they 'war war' is not one that should be lightly cast aside in a misguided attempt to make literary female charachter's ape their more brutish male counterparts.

Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:45 pm

whyfore the need for them to 'kick butt' at all. ...few women could be happy to see the children they laboured so hard over being sent to war, let alone want to participate in it.

The need to "kick butt in a war" should not be sexist at all. Women, men, and their children should be willing to fight for freedom, civil liberties, and other things that they believe in. Yes, I as a mother of a couple of children, would worry about my children if they went to war, but their safety and freedom should not be more secure because of someone else's fighting then mine should be. If the need arises I am going to protect what is mine and my loved ones by talking or force if necessary. My blood and fighting and that of my families is no more or less valuable then any other families and will be used if called upon to protect and defend what I find precious and valuable to me and my family. However, I will be dressed in appropriate attire as I am trying to fight not have sex or distract them.

WWM

Post by **Thorhammerhand** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 8:57 am

Spoiler

That is the attitude of the giants WWM, keep it up

Mon Dec 14, 2009 8:18 pm

Thank you! I take that as a very big compliment. The Giants in the books that I have read thus far have shown that they are courageous, kind, hard working, and enduring when it comes to what they believe in and I strive to be that way at all times. I would find no better joy then to be in the company of such great persons or in this case Giants.

Anita W.

Post by **Thorhammerhand** » Tue Dec 15, 2009 8:07 am

Spoiler

Giants in the LC especially FR

Post by **peter** » Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:08 am

Wheelwash Whitecap Mate wrote:
My blood and fighting and that of my families is no more or less valuable then any other families and will be used if called upon to protect and defend what I find precious and valuable to me and my family. However, I will be dressed in appropriate attire as I am trying to fight not have sex or distract them.

WWM
Yes, that is fine (and completely sensible) - but the pictures here are not for real, they're just fun, not meant to be taken seriously and certainly not as an affront to the dignity of women any more than hulking male warriors like Conan were supposed to imply that all men were thick, brutish and violent.

Post by **Thorhammerhand** » Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:02 am

Good point peter, but I (a man) feel that there should be a certain amount of respect for women, even in these forums.

Kevin's Watch

Kevin's Watch