Jimquisition: Solving the Sexism Situation

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NEXT
 

Being fair, after the first one of these I was a bit iffy, but this one made me laugh my sack off... More like this and I'll keep coming back :)

MatsVS:
A different, perhaps more radical, solution:

How 'bout we objectify no one, and only place men or women in revealing clothing when it is tangential to exploring their character and/or fits their cultural/geographical background. You know, as in good storytelling that is inclusive and realistic at the same time.

We can always hope and pray... I'd love to see the day. :(

I see this sorta stuff better presented on The Big Picture. To me Jim is just another obnoxious critic that this industry is already full of. Whilst his arguments have some good points, I don't think enough goes into fleshing them out; everything seems really underdeveloped in this argument. Also the dick jokes are just plain bad, Yahtzee did that sorta thing to death and its not really funny anymore.

MOAR.

He's incredibly crass. I like it.

And you whiny pseudo-intellectuals can slap Duke's ballsack.

Please escapist, take this man off of the website

The thread almost reminds me of baby birds begging their momma for food with Jim as the mom....

@TheEscapist: So you'll fire the Unforgotten Realms guys, you'll "take a break" with Doraleaus and Associates (although that may have been more about them wanting to go make a move), but you'll give basically anyone a schpiel show?

@TheRestOfYouForumerPredictingJim'sDemis: How can you be so certain?

Movie Bob's still here.

He just needs to ditch the camera and he's fine.

hmm...this one was actually somewhat good. Bit odd. But good. It's much more believable then the last one for some reason.

I knew I'd head that, "put fenix in a thong" joke before.
http://thepunchlineismachismo.com/archives/777

The comic handled it better.

I ended up watching this because a lady friend mentioned how bad it was and I wanted to see the train wreck. The video didn't disappoint.

I'd say this should be a podcast because there's absolutely no creative, interesting, or insightful visuals, but that'd assume he actually said something creative, interesting, or insightful to begin with.

It's not even funny. Shock humor got old about two minutes into Robin Williams and that was years ago. The imagery didn't even pretend it was suppose to be funny, so I won't insult us all by saying the humor failed visually too.

There's nothing here but a straight rant that tries to get by on energy alone, blindly taking on an ancient topic from a stupidly misogynistic and counterproductive standpoint.

The only takeaway is for people who believe, or want to believe, that it's okay to pare female characters down until they're nothing but walking boobs as long as we do the same thing to male characters too, or at least do it equally. What a stupid, annoying, insulting future that would be.

Yes, we all like eye candy in games, but the real problem goes far beyond what a character is wearing, which assumes that wardrobe choices even enter into the equation to begin with.

Way to miss the point, add nothing to the discussion, and be creatively bankrupt while doing it. I can't even say that he was maybe going for irony here, because the idea is far, far too stupid for me to entertain.

Xvito:
What the hell? How does this have anything to do with sexism?

This isn't about people being mistreated, discriminated or violated based on their gender; this is about tits and butts in games. People like tits and butts, so they put 'em in games. Nothing sexist about it.

Seriously? How can anyone think this is an important thing to discuss? There is no situation to solve!

But it is sexism, because it adversely affects one gender. Objectification is a serious issue that can't be solved by just putting men into skimpy clothing. The issue with putting women in bikini's is it plays into societal expectations for women to be "sexy" and to be objects of lust. Saying people just like to looks at tits and ass is wrong, they like to look at WOMENS' tits' and asses'. I don't see any real ogling and objectifying of men in the video game industry because let's face it games that focus on jiggle physics and ass shots are made by people who don't respect female gamers. If they did they would maybe start treating female characters with the same care and respect that they do male characters. Oh and last time I bought a game it wasn't because the game had fantastically crafted breasts it was because the game was well made and fun.

As I've stated before, Jim's approach to sexism in gaming is inherently sexist. Indiscriminate objectification doesn't solve to issue; many people have already pointed this out. Several people have suggested the alternative of eliminating objectification, which IS the proper response to this issue in that it eliminates the dehumanization of the characters and players on the basis of their sexuality. I think the argument could be made that Jim Sterling was attempting, through his advocation for to former option, to actually endorse the second option. But he does not do it well. He does it very, very badly, so badly that it drags up all the negative stereotypes that exist about gamers in society at large and damages our reputation as a sub-community.

The issue at hand is that Jim's approach is, holistically, rooted in heterosexual male privilege. Society is constructed in such a way that heterosexual males are considered a "default" or "norm" and homosexuals, transsexuals, asexuals, bisexuals, and women are alternatives to this norm. His comment that "men like tits" and his argument that sex sells so its fine are rooted in a world-view that strips an individual of all meaning except that which can be attached to their sex. This is what ZP, EC, and MB have argued is a MAJOR PROBLEM with gaming. We ALL know its a major problem with gaming. Women are frequently not well characterized and instead their value exists only in how attractive they are for the viewer.

Maybe I can't appreciate that the "irony [is] that they're making themselves look like some proper ignorant cunts." By "themselves," I assume he means individuals like myself who take issue with his assumptions about sexuality. Frankly, resorting to name-calling is just childish and unprofessional. And as I've said before, gaming does NOT need that sort of personality representing it as a community.

Thought I'd check out what the fuss was about. Turns out I have no strong feelings about it either way. He's a real dissapointment as a video maker, he's very poor at delivering his message verbally. He just comes off like some amateur making YouTubes. His articles are way better and funnier. Proof that just because you can write and think doesn't mean you are also going to be a gifted public speaker.

He's not interesting or insightful with his comments/ranting, and it definitely should not be a video as it's just him stood in a bad suit for 5 minutes.

I know it has created all this attention now (which it was no doubt intended to), but I think this feature will die very quickly.

We can justify with reasons, we're all capable of that and a lot have.

but what really matters to the escapist is that

"I am not entertained by this man, he puts my back up, he makes me feel uncomfortable, I do not laugh, I like the subject he is talking about so I expect better, I am disappointed twice now."

Will not watch a third, despite his high billing on the right sidebar.

Is this 18 pages of "I don't like this guy?" I skimmed a few spaced out, and that's all I saw. o_o

Tom Hill:
We can justify with reasons, we're all capable of that and a lot have.

but what really matters to the escapist is that

"I am not entertained by this man, he puts my back up, he makes me feel uncomfortable, I do not laugh, I like the subject he is talking about so I expect better, I am disappointed twice now."

Will not watch a third, despite his high billing on the right sidebar.

Actually, what should matter to the Escapist is the fact that people who have seen this guy, and been offended by him (either due to his content, or the fact he's happily insulting us all on Twitter behind our backs) will spread the word.

According to a commonly-quoted rule of marketing, people will tell three friends about a good experience, and ten about a bad one. Count up how many people are pissed off about Jim, and then work out what kind of damage that is going to do to the Escapist's reputation. "Oh, you want to know about The Escapist? It's a site with some fat bigot spouting sexist crap and insulting anyone who doesn't agree with his world view."

Yeah... Escapist, do you REALLY want that to be your website slogan?

Seriously people, if you do not like this guy and want him gone, SEND AN OFFICIAL COMPLAINT.

Perhaps people are right and it would be better as a column but I'm not convinced of that.

it was better than last week but I say that in the same way that, when i used to be a lifeguard, finding a solid turd in the pool is better than a loose, runny one...

I decided that I woudn't dismiss this after one episode but know I have watched another I'm probably going to give Jim a miss.

He, and anyone who agrees with him are missing the point.

Why are there (usually middle aged) people in suits in Lexus commercials? Maybe because they're catering to the majority of their (intended) audience.
Why are there people in their 20's (mostly male) in Subaru commercials? Maybe because they're catering to the majority of their (intended) audience.
Why are there men in American truck commercials? Maybe because they're catering to the majority of their (intended) audience.
Why are sexy girls on Bud Lite posters? Maybe because they're catering to the majority of their (intended) audience.
Why do strip clubs feature ladies (and some feature dudes)? Maybe because they're catering to the majority of their (intended) audience.

Now, let me ask an equally important question. Why are more viruses programmed for Windows then Linux and Apple? Oh.... Windows has the largest (computer ignorant) user base of any OS. Might as well shoot for one with the biggest numbers when you're working the probability angle. Yes, I run Linux. Don't give me that more secure crap. Make an operating system more.... more anything and the human race will find a way to retard through it. It'll also find a way to exploit it. Sony, Iphone, Driod etc. (Sorry for the side rant.)

Why is there sex in games? Males are largest part of the player base who buy and play these games.

People market to their intended audience. It's how sales works. Sex is a part of our lives. It's something that at least seems to work in advertising. In games , sexy characters are arrows pointed at their target.
This version of the player base, the human male, was released a long time ago. It's a little late to change. There is some variety in limited quantity available, but if you're looking to hit the largest audience, guess what you're aiming for.

Is putting variety in a game worth it? I'd guess that there are people who crunch numbers on stuff like this. Something like trying to make 'Extra Time * Money in less then or equal to Profit'. Some will make this with gender and sex equation work for them. Some will side step it completely.

Think about it.... and if need be, grow up, or at least complain about something equally as important.... like the sky being blue. Maybe some people would rather it be orange, or neon pink. Sorry though, this version of Earth has already been released. Some things are the way they are for a reason. Feel free to complain about it though. This issue is just as problematic and important as sex in games.

Haven't been able to make it through either of these shows. It's not the content, it's the delivery method.

Watched the first one, thought it was terrible.
Second one, thought it was slightly better than terrible.

Third times the charm? Will watch one more.

loodmoney:

It's also worth remembering just how qualified Sterling to talk about sexism:
http://gomakemeasandwich.blogspot.com/2011/02/in-his-words-why-jim-sterling-is-in.html

*stares in horror*

Jesus Christ, he actually said all that stuff? Like seriously? That's got to be some of the most arrogant misogenistic things I've ever read in my life. I can't believe he thinks he can get away with it, I can't believe he'd consider this humorous.
This kind of stuff isn't satire or comedy, it's just being mean.
God bless that woman for making that post mocking him though, seriously.

So yeah, after reading well... that I now find it hard to take anything Jim says in regards to sexism seriously. Not only is the guy not funny and not inciteful or thought provoking or interesting to watch, but now he's also an egotistical sexist creep.
I'm repulsed by this, seriously.

So yeah, I am not watching anymore of these. I could handle the fact that his jokes were mediocre but after seeing what kind of a person he is on the web, I just can't stand to think about him.

Is there a vote 0 option?

MatsVS:
A different, perhaps more radical, solution:

How 'bout we objectify no one, and only place men or women in revealing clothing when it is tangential to exploring their character and/or fits their cultural/geographical background. You know, as in good storytelling that is inclusive and realistic at the same time.

True, it would be preferable for games to become less like porn, not more.

I don't usually comment on videos. I thought about what to say for a while. To quote Vegeta *His stupidity is beyond belief*.

8bitlove2a03:
First of all, this is me voting for the Escapist NOT to kill this show. If that even matters. Secondly, Jim's right. Nobody makes men sexy in gaming, and when they do they make them more than just a nice body. It's like how in Dragon Age 2 Isabella is nothing but a two-dimensional character with big breasts, while Anders has his whole "sexy tortured look" with an interesting story and complex personality.

So, two step plan for developers:
1) make all game characters foxy
2) give everyone deep personalities and amazing storylines.
3) figure out where to keep all your GotY awards

1) Rufus :P

2) Merilyn from Dragon Age 2... Holy...

3) It's in... Oh...
-----------------------------------------------------

On a serious note, Isabella is a little more than 2D. She doesn't get into relationships because she's been hurt in the past, but once she's in one, she'll stay with you practically forever until you damage it for her. She's just more subtle than Aveline, who is damn close to a knight templar without being one.

Yay, I actually agreed to his big picture! However, did anyone else notice pubic hair in his naked man slide show?

I just hate those stupid sunglasses....

Dear Lord, how many videos are going to talk about this? Jim, good attempt with pathetic scare tactics in equal sexism. Duke Nukem is a game aimed at men. Yes, I may be sexist, but the came is catered to men. Hell, if there is a game where apparently women can fondle men's junk, then point me in the direction so that I can run in the opposite direction. You are correct with saying that it is unfair to put women in bikinis and expect them to fight and win against a guy in armor. But there are quite a few fighting games that feature men in revealing outfits. Hell, I look for games that don't have the men's shirts torn off after a quick struggle. Ahh, I rolled on the ground, better take off my ripped shirt.

CORE CONCEPT: IF I HAVE TO LOOK AT A SHIRT-LESS GUY ON MY XBOX DO FLIPS AND JUMPS WHILE I STARE AT HIS ASS, THEN I SHOULD GET THE SAME FROM A FEMALE CHARACTER!

BEHOLD, your argument is invalid.

YouEatLard:
He, and anyone who agrees with him are missing the point.

Strange that you should take Sterling at face value. Nevertheless, you don't appear to be trolling, and you do seem to hold some rather erroneous beliefs that are easily disproved, so let me respond in kind:

Now, let me ask an equally important question. Why are more viruses programmed for Windows then Linux and Apple? Oh.... Windows has the largest (computer ignorant) user base of any OS. Might as well shoot for one with the biggest numbers when you're working the probability angle. Yes, I run Linux. Don't give me that more secure crap. Make an operating system more.... more anything and the human race will find a way to retard through it. It'll also find a way to exploit it. Sony, Iphone, Driod etc. (Sorry for the side rant.)

Okay, this is true. It is also where you invalidate the rest of your post. What if lots of people started buying & installing Linux and Apple? More viruses would be programmed for these systems. So, when you say--

Why is there sex in games? Males are largest part of the player base who buy and play these games.People market to their intended audience. It's how sales works. Sex is a part of our lives. It's something that at least seems to work in advertising. In games , sexy characters are arrows pointed at their target.

--imagine what would happen if a larger part of the player base were to be female? More games would cater to females.

This version of the player base, the human male, was released a long time ago. It's a little late to change.

Why? Do women not have money to spend on games? Are there laws that prevent them from buying games? Does their physiology make them unable to pick up a controller or use a keyboard? Shit no! If developers at large wanted to reach this market, there is absolutely nothing stopping them. Save, of course, tradition (read: "ingrained sexism") and short-sightedness.

Think about it.... and if need be, grow up, or at least complain about something equally as important.... like the sky being blue. Maybe some people would rather it be orange, or neon pink. Sorry though, this version of Earth has already been released. Some things are the way they are for a reason. Feel free to complain about it though. This issue is just as problematic and important as sex in games.

I had more to say, but I think the virus/operating system analogy should be enough to show how totally wrong this is.

And feel free to not confuse economic issues with moral ones.

I am not really impressed here. I don't know what it is, I guess as has been said before: Other people *COUGHEXTRACREDITCOUGH* have stated the same thing, just more coherently.

I will give it one more go though on his third Vid. That said: I haven't finished a single one of his Vids yet without throwing my back out with sighs.

I don't think this video was all bad. I mean, okay, he's no Yahtzee, but no Lisa Foiles, either.

On a scale of Top 5 with Lisa Foiles up to Zero Punctuation, I'd say he's somewhere around the Name Game.

Video Game Show What I Done was so much funnier than this. I like Jim Sterling; he's a good critic and a funny ranter, but not a face for video.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here