Jimquisition: Anita Sarkeesian - The Monster Gamers Created

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NEXT
 

Moonlight Butterfly:
Rachel in Ninja Gaiden wears PVC and has well over F cup breasts. Do you think any top heavy women would choose to dress like that if she was a warrior?

Realism has nothing to do with Escapism. In a universe with super powered people, would anyone wear a cape? In a universe with fire breathing dragons why would anyone wear metal armour? In a universe with both guns & where Scorpion can rip out your spine, why would you not just snipe him in the head & be done with it.

Becuase escapism has nothing to do with reality.

matthew_lane:
Because we aren't talking about subjectivity: Moonlight is trying to make objective statements that such a thing is objective & self evident, when it is clearly not.

Actually, she is stating her opinion on the issue. If you take them to be objective, it's your error. "Crysis: Warhead is a good game" is a subjective statement. It is an asserted opinion and not a fact. If someone goes on to say that their opinion--here, that Crysis: Warhead is a good game--is a fact, they are wrong. However, simply stating an opinion is not in error. That the information is subjective and opinionated is implicit unless otherwise stated.

Moonlight Butterfly:

runic knight:
snip

I will change it to 'some' my intended meaning was 'not all' But again you cherry picked something to rage over and ignored the meat of what I said. Well done. It's pretty clear when a woman is attractive and when she is pandering eye candy. I think denying that a problem exists is one of the biggest issues.

Then your statement changes from one that is blatantly sexist to one that means nothing. I specifically jumped on that for a reason beyond the offensiveness of it. It was a broad sweeping generalization that ignored that the group was made up of individuals with different mindsets and different reasons and instead lumped a negative reason to a single gender. At its core, it was sexist. That was not cherry picked (as I addressed everything in your short post), that was calling something out as what it was. I am glad you recanted, though the statement of "some" is so vague it loses any meaning.
And no, it is not "obvious" except at extremes. That is the problem, as interpretation is subjective here and just because you can point at extremes of the culture we both share doesn't make the middle any easier to pick a real line on. And if you take in other cultures, extremes are not even easy to pick. This is not denying a problem with portrayal, this is asking how exactly it is a problem to everyone else that your subjective standards have not be adequately met.

Moonlight Butterfly:

Rachel in Ninja Gaiden wears PVC and has well over F cup breasts. Do you think any top heavy women would choose to dress like that if she was a warrior?

My opinion? No. Though my opinion on the male character was that he looked little like a ninja and that a long hanging scarf thing was probably suicidal dangerous too. But my opinion on the matter doesn't make it so, even if other agree with me on it. A trait of "sexiness" doesn't define sexism. I personally am tired of the big breast thing myself but that is different then calling it sexist.

Moonlight Butterfly:

Let's look at Miranda too, she is a good female character yeah but she has no reason to be dressed in skin tight clothing and heels and the camera hovers around her arse. This sends a very clear message about what she is there for and ultimately detracts from her character as your second in command.

Or it is pandering while why she is there is to fill a variety of roles. The problem with your statement above is it removes any value the character has outside of their looks as soon as it becomes mentioned. There is more to the character then just her ass, but she probably has a nice ass (no clue, never played Mass Effect and I am assuming that is the right Miranda from a google search.) Her being sexy doesn't "detract" just for being sexy. It is only when the sole purpose is to be sexy or when the being sexy interferes with the character would it actively detract.

Moonlight Butterfly:

Very good article on the subject.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/173227/Opinion_Video_games_and_Male_Gaze__are_we_men_or_boys.php#.UFQyolGCWmo

Female sexuality isn't inherently negative in media, and I do want to stress that. Sexual dynamics can bring up a lot of interesting mature themes across the board, when treated with intelligence and purpose. But most of the time in games it's treated without any sort of thought, as was the Hitman: Absolution trailer. Most of the time the thought is simply, "well... we have to make the female character sexy, so let's show off her boobs and hips." It is an absolute given that female characters must be somehow sexy. We don't have this same rule for male characters.

Isn't that a little overly simplistic for an industry that can show the horrors of war, the sorrow of losing a child, and other complex scenarios? We can clearly do better. But our views of women are almost always coming from a single perspective; the Male Gaze. When you diminish the female perspective in sexy scenes, and guide the viewer's gaze, they wind up reinforcing stereotypes and tropes that appeal exclusive to heterosexual male sexuality.

There are deeper societal issues at root here, and we can't change all of society. But the fact is we are not all of society. We are an elite group of people that make games that show what we think and feel about the world. We can't change everyone, but we can change our industry, and we can change the depiction of women in our medium. If we do that, we may even influence public opinion.

By representing women in this mono-dimensional manner, both in games and at industry events, we show, subtly or overtly, that we think women are nothing more than boobs and butts. Simultaneously, we males represent ourselves as nothing more than a cock and balls. As males, through our depiction of women in media, and how we treat them in the industry and community, the message we're pushing hardest is the one Katie Williams unfortunately stumbled into; "I would or would not have sex with you."

I could get into a deeper discussion concerning the battle of the human psyche between cultural ideas that are inherited from a dominating religious world view that is and was heavily anti sex and a strong natural drive that is striving solely for sex. It might better help address some of the points mentioned here concerning culture and this issue of the "male gaze". But I know I am limited in both ability to present ideas and knowledge on the full breadth of the topic itself.
I will say that the article quote here seems really quite shallow a look at the topic. From missing out on the aspect that everyone is beautiful except when it is a character trait that you aren't, to the idea that gamers only think of themselves as their genitals, what I read here leaves a lot to be desired on the topic.

matthew_lane:

Moonlight Butterfly:
Rachel in Ninja Gaiden wears PVC and has well over F cup breasts. Do you think any top heavy women would choose to dress like that if she was a warrior?

Realism has nothing to do with Escapism. In a universe with super powered people, would anyone wear a cape? In a usinverse with fire breathing dragons would anyone wear metal armour? In a universe wiht guns & where scorpion can rip out your spine, why would you not just sniper him in the head & be done with it.

Becuase escapism has nothing to do with reality.

So as long as the escapism is geared towards you, you don't care if it's sexist? right?

It's amusing when guys use this defence when they will defend the lack of women in COD or sexism in medieval based games to the hilt BECAUSE ITS REALISTIC. derp.

Dump people giving other dumb people money, they'll make dumb things.

Surprise surprise.

Moonlight Butterfly:
Becuase escapism has nothing to do with reality.

So as long as the escapism is geared towards you, you don't care if it's sexist? right?[/quote]

But its not all geared towards me. Womens magazines, romantic comedies, female romance novels & any number of other products aren't geared towards my escapis (50 shades of grey for instance). But i see no problem in those things existing because there is a legitimate audience for them.

I suppose i would have an issue with it if aqn entire medium was geared towards it, but luckily such is not the case. An luckily for you, such is not the case with computer games either.

Moonlight Butterfly:
So as long as the escapism is geared towards you, you don't care if it's sexist? right?

It's amusing when guys use this defence when they will defend the lack of women in COD or sexism in medieval based games to the hilt BECAUSE ITS REALISTIC. derp.

thats not realism, its versimilitude: The appearance of realism within the confines of a narrative construct. For instance, in a fantasy game you don't suddenly have laser guns turn up. In a game about the 100 year was, we don't suddenly bring in wizards.

Versimiltude, is not realism. Its the appearance of realism within the narrative formula.

runic knight:
snip

Again all you fall back on is the 'I like looking at sexy women so everything is okay' Women can be attractive without be sexualised so why defend it so much?

It's sexist because it implies that women are there for male pleasure and not as a character in their own right.

Check out Moviebob's gender games video he explains it rather well.

matthew_lane:

But its not all geared towards me. Womens magazines, romantic comedies, female romance novels & any number of other products aren't geared towards my escapis (50 shades of grey for instance). But i see no problem in those things existing because there is a legitimate audience for them.

I suppose i would have an issue with it if aqn entire medium was geared towards it, but luckily such is not the case. An luckily for you, such is not the case with computer games either.

Again attractive =/= sexualised.

I'm not sure why you can't understand that.

Triple A gaming seems pretty much geared towards it.

matthew_lane:
snip

And yet COD allows you to survive a mine to the face and regenerate your health by hiding behind a wall. Seems legit. And most medieval games have monsters and magic in yet we have to have sexism because realism...

Selective realism. Sigh.

Moonlight Butterfly:
Again attractive =/= sexualised.

I'm not sure why you can't understand that.

Moonlight you are jumping around all over the place. You are like 4 fleas on 8 dogs right now. You are correct that attractive is not sexualised, but lets be honest, the three things i already mentioned are all about sexualisation & there is nothing wrong with that. Heck one of the aforementioned genres is literally about nothing but sex & is 100% geared towards a female demographic.

So again we are back to square one, where you stand here with nothing but a presupposition that its all sexism.

Moonlight Butterfly:
Triple A gaming seems pretty much geared towards it.

No it really doesn't. Heck triple A gaming isn't geared to any one group, because triple a gaming is not a genre, or even a medium. Again this is your attempt to make huge over generalizations.

Moonlight Butterfly:
And yet COD allows you to survive a mine to the face and regenerate your health by hiding behind a wall. Seems legit. And most medieval games have monsters and magic in yet we have to have sexism because realism...

Selective realism. Sigh.

not at all. thats versimilitude to the rules of a sub genre of gaming. Kind of like "ammo dumps" & "keys" sitting around are.

matthew_lane:
snip

There is something wrong with sexualisation because it demeans female characters and excludes female gamers from enjoying the 'escapism'

I don't want my camera wedged up Miranda's arse thanks.

It's sexist because it's fostering conditions, attitudes and stereotypes of social roles based on sex.

Not least of which is the fact that apparently gamers can only be horny 15 year old boys.

matthew_lane:

Moonlight Butterfly:
And yet COD allows you to survive a mine to the face and regenerate your health by hiding behind a wall. Seems legit. And most medieval games have monsters and magic in yet we have to have sexism because realism...

Selective realism. Sigh.

not at all. thats versimilitude to the rules of a sub genre of gaming. Kind of like "ammo dumps" & "keys" sitting around are.

Oh so that's allowed but female soldiers aren't just to allow me to play a character of my own sex...because it would irreparably damage the non existent 'realism' of the game.

It's such a bullshit distinction.

matthew_lane:

runic knight:
Aren't things of that nature, specifically the use of gender specifically to fit certain roles, exactly the sort repeated behavior and repeated matching of traits that signifies a stereotype?

Not really. This is not a case of life imitating art, but art imitating life. Women have always been attirubted with more value, because we are only a few hundred years away from a time period before socialised medicine allowed both men & women to step out of there previous biologically determined roles.

Its still ingrained at a fuyndemental level. We still attribute great value in women and children: Hence resucing a woman or a child is given greater social significants then resucuing a man... And rescuing a girl child is given the most relevence.

But with the advent of communication technology, we've seen that this is not the case in practice. Men are just as likely to be victims as women & i think this has been reflected in our media, especially in computer games. The only thing is that some people Anita among them will still see a woman in trouble as sexism, while simulataneously ignoring the male disposibality aspects of the same game.

I had a friend like that, who did the same thing with movies: He was that guy who would always say "black guy dies first" when ever a black character would die... We could sit through an entire movie where every white guy in the darn movie would be killed & then in the last 20 seconds of that same movie a black guy would die & he'd immediatelly say "see, black guy dies first."

He was a great guy, but he just had this giant blind spot, where he'd only notice things he thought he already knew. Anita did the same thing with her femminist frequency video about Women in Refridgerators, when she mentioned the Death of Big Barda.

A.S went on this big spiel about how Big Barda was killed in this comic, to facilitate action by her male husband, Scott Free. An how it was made worse because it didn't look like she fought back & how it inspired a new narrative, at which point she showed a cover page for a Scott Free comic.

What she fialed to mention was that the comic book in question was called "death of the new gods" had 3 other new god characters killed off in that first issue before we see the death of Big Barda (all killed in an identical fashion & all male) & was part of an on going arc, in which we see 3 other new gods be killed & are told of the death of dozens of others.

But those didn't apparently rate a mention on A.S's video. Because Anita didn't recognize the death of a non female character as an issue. An neither does larger society as a whole, unfortunately. Of course the death of the new gods while being a poor writing descision by DC was not at all sexist.

CAPTCHA: Hammer Time. Damn right Captcha, you can't touch this.

I don't doubt Anita's intellectual dishonesty at all. In fact, I just made a thread comparing the topic of tropes and games to a meal but anita's discussions to fast food, in terms of value, in terms of damage they can do and in terms of how predominant her videos and arguments were in comparison to a good "meal" on the topic itself. And I know she flubbed the Barda bit bad. I laughed at that and the whole "refrigerators" vid as it ignored that support characters and secondary characters are little more then kindling at times, especially whenever poor writers want to create unearned gravity and drama. Think the DC crossovers, like infinite crisis events are sort of notorious for killing scores of characters to either thin the lines of support characters, foster the next line of books or just rewrite the stories. Linkara's foaming at the mouth rage about Lian Harper demonstrates how it is often more a sign of very very poor writing (though surprised she didn't end up on the list of refrigerator ladies, since she is a little girl and all)

I do understand where the idea of more value in women and children stems from. Women give birth and children grow into the future. But isn't this idea of greater value of women, an admitted leftover of biologically regimented sexism, also a stereotype in its nature? Women aren't bound to being mothers anymore, so shouldn't their added value be diminished as they are less likely to give birth to the next generation? And that says nothing about how more people isn't always a good thing anymore.
Still, you have a trait of a bigone era that is no longer as applicable being used solely for the emotional resonance in culture. This trait is defined by gender and is often grasp at for the emotional response it creates. It is a pattern repeatedly used. Is it not a stereotype?

Moonlight Butterfly:
There is something wrong with sexualisation because it demeans female characters and excludes female gamers from enjoying the 'escapism'

no it really doesn't. Does the existance of dime store romance novels aimed at a female demograpic exlcude men from reading novels? Does the existance of guy on guy gay porn exlcude hetrosexual men from enjoying playboy? Does the existance of shirtless buff teenagers on posters for twilight exclude men from going to the movies?

Of course not.

Moonlight Butterfly:
I don't want my camera wedged up Miranda's arse thanks.

Its your camera, i'm not sure why you wedged it up Mirandas arse, because i played all the way through the first two games & my camera didn't once get stuck up Miranda's arse.... Unlike DCUniverse Online, whic occasionally got the camera wedged up Hal Jordans arse during cut scenes.

Moonlight Butterfly:
It's sexist because it's fostering conditions, attitudes and stereotypes of social roles based on sex.

not only is it not sexist, it also only exists in your head.

matthew_lane:

Its your camera, i'm not sure why you wedged it up Mirandas arse, because i played all the way through the first two games & my camera didn't once get stuck up Miranda's arse....

Yeah it's so not. -.-

image

So one minute you are defending sexist sexualisation as allowable and the next you are denying it exists, make your mind up.

Oh and the thing about books is they are pretty much only their storyline right? Whereas I just want to enjoy the gameplay without have a huge pair of tits in my face.

Is that so much to ask

runic knight:
I do understand where the idea of more value in women and children stems from.

Evolutionary Psychology & basic mathematics.

1 peni + 5 vaginas = 5 potential babies.
5 peni + 1 vagina = 1 potential baby.

Try and guess which gender has more intrinsic worth based on simply existing, in that one simple formula. As sexist as it seems, you've got to keep in mind that we've only had socialised medicine since the 40's & only just. Before that we've had a couple hundred thousand years to develop genetically ingrained modes of belief, based around the concept that a single plague/disease could wipe out an entire population mass & human reproduction resulted in less then a 0.1% increase in global population in a single generation.

It sounds sexist, but it reeally isn't. It only sounds sexist, because people have cultural amnesia & quickly forget that the conditions we have now are actually very experimental & brand spanking new.

Moonlight Butterfly:

runic knight:
snip

Again all you fall back on is the 'I like looking at sexy women so everything is okay' Women can be attractive without be sexualised so why defend it so much?

It's sexist because it implies that women are there for male pleasure and not as a character in their own right.

Check out Moviebob's gender games video he explains it rather well.

Not quite. It falls back to "women can be sexy" just as is. And, indeed, they can or can not for all I care. See, there is an aspect overlooked in this. Why does what they look like have to be for male pleasure? Why can't the appearance be a form of acetic? I think the look of many women in classical art would fit the bill as "sexy" yet that doesn't mean they were chiseled out of stone to be there for my pleasure. I am not so arrogant to deny the intent of the artist nor assume how I enjoy the art is reflective of how others do. Games are art, Assuming the ascetic used is solely for male pleasure is, again, a statement made that generalizes and is not proven. I called you out before in using such statements for men in general and I will do so again for using it about game makers in general. You can not in all honestly make such sweeping claims about the motivations or interpretations of such large amounts of art. doing so is little more then projection, it is dismissive of everyone else in the world and how they would see it and it is dismissive of the artists who make it.
Also, why do you keep referring me to other people? This topic is on a subjective ideal, at the very core it is a debate of opinion and the level of validity within those opinions based on how consistent they are. By design, this should mean you present your own thoughts and ideas, and even those you like should be put in your own words to explain how you internalized them and how they fit.

If you noticed, I am arguing an opposite view with Matt there then I am with you. I am not trying to justify a media because I like to see tits and ass. I am not trying to have mine and deny women theirs in terms of escapism. I am genuinely interested in the media and love discussing it. Women can be attractive without being sexualized, but they can be sexualize without being attractive too. Or they can be both or even neither. I will agree it would be nice to see more variety, but that alone does not mean sexism.

forbidden fruit -captcha, you little devil.

Moonlight Butterfly:
So one minute you are defending sexist sexualisation as allowable and the next you are denying it exists, make your mind up.

No i'm telling you that the sexism you are seeing is only in your head. What you are seeing as sexism isn't.

For example, your upload image is no different then the one i've got of Hal Jordan. Thats not sexism, its a fault that appears with the Camera occasionally. I have the same thing in DC universe online & if i could get photobucket to upload images, i'd show it to you, to prove the point.

Moonlight Butterfly:
Oh and the thing about books is they are pretty much only their storyline right? Whereas I just want to enjoy the gameplay without have a huge pair of tits in my face.

You already have that.

matthew_lane:

runic knight:
I do understand where the idea of more value in women and children stems from.

Evolutionary Psychology & basic mathematics.

1 peni + 5 vaginas = 5 potential babies.
5 peni + 1 vagina = 1 potential baby.

Try and guess which gender has more intrinsic worth based on simply existing, in that one simple formula. As sexist as it seems, you've got to keep in mind that we've only had socialised medicine since the 40's & only just. Before that we've had a couple hundred thousand years to develop genetically ingrained modes of belief, based around the concept that a single plague/disease could wipe out an entire population mass & human reproduction resulted in less then a 0.1% increase in global population in a single generation.

It sounds sexist, but it reeally isn't. It only sounds sexist, because people have cultural amnesia & quickly forget that the conditions we have now are actually very experimental & brand spanking new.

Fair enough, but the condition of women being baby makers in society, though backed by biology, is also an aspect that was rebelled against as sexist. Women could be but should be restricted to be baby makers.
It also doesn't do much to address the reoccurring patterns, such as more male then female protagonists, and tropes applying more to one gender then another. I do know there is reason for this, both from a history of storytelling aspect that seems rather ingrained into our popular culture as well, as well as self insertion aspects of a mostly male programing base that started games as a whole (and consequently would snowball as those that got success were either sequeled or mimiced). Still, there does exist a bias relating to gender overall. While I would not say use of a trope in general is sexist in any regard (tropes being tool, after all), the pattern itself is one of disproportionate numbers that do reveal a bias in games as a whole. Is this bias not, while not sexist, at least a sign that certain gender/character trait combinations have become commonplace to the point of being a stereotype?

matthew_lane:

Moonlight Butterfly:
Oh and the thing about books is they are pretty much only their storyline right? Whereas I just want to enjoy the gameplay without have a huge pair of tits in my face.

You already have that.

Not in all games.

Women play video games too we shouldn't have to have male pandering shoved down our throat in mainstream triple A games.

Sexualisation is sexist. You can have attractive women without impractical clothing and male gaze.

runic knight:
snip

I refer you to other people because I want to point out that I'm not alone in thinking this. Also Bob makes some very good points.

I'd just like my gender to be treated with a bit more respect than if they are playboy models.
I don't understand why that is difficult for some men to deal with.

Is it such an imposition on men to have female characters where 'sexy' isn't their main identifier. Look at A:TLA it has a good range of female characters and none of them are sexualised but they can be pretty.

Thta is the sort of thing I want in games. Female characters that aren't posing and pandering to the viewer they are just characters in their own right.

Imagine if Nathan Drake suddenly started posing at the screen, flashing his undies and playing to the audience. That would be wierd and stupid right? Then why is it not so for female characters?

runic knight:
Fair enough, but the condition of women being baby makers in society, though backed by biology, is also an aspect that was rebelled against as sexist. Women could be but should be restricted to be baby makers.

Sure, now. But before socialised medicine, where most children died in child birth, sometimes along with the mother, both genders were relegated to there primary roles by survival instincts & a harsh environment. That ended with the invention of socialised medicine.

The idea that women should be prioritised as more important then men, who are disposable is just a social hang on from genetic predisposition... Its right up there with neotony. Neotony is when we see something & say wow thats cute; what makes us consider it cute? Its the pattern seeking part of the human mind seeing biological patterns we see in human babies, in things that are not human babies (large head to body ratio, large eyes, small mouth, etc).

Essentially its a genetically hardwired trick of genetics that prioritises humans not to eat or kill there own off-spring, no matter how annoying they may be.

Same goes for those nights you have where you can't sleep, or you wake in the night thinking there is something in the room with you: These are all genetically hardwired predispositions, that we have kind of outgrown by developing civilisation. Protection of women & children is exactly the same: Its hard-wired & mostly obsolete. Another thousand years & it's likely we'll have shed those traits.

Moonlight Butterfly:
Not in all games.

Sure & i can't read every book without fear of it being a poorly written romance novel... But why would i ever think that i would be able to? how self entitled do you have to be to think that every single product in the world should be targetted at your demographic: That really is sexism

Moonlight Butterfly:
Women play video games too we shouldn't have to have male pandering shoved down our throat in mainstream triple A games.

An men read novels too. We shouldn't have to ever see a shirtless man on a cover of a novel, lest we be offended. /sarcasm

Moonlight Butterfly:
Sexualisation is sexist. You can have attractive women without impractical clothing and male gaze.

No its not. Human beings are sexual creatures, we want our escapism to be sexy. If sexualisation is sexism & sexism is bad, we should ban all romantic comedies, romance novel & womens magazines too... right?

Of course not: There is a legitimate audinece for those things, so why shouldn't they continue to be supported? They aren't immoral, they aren't against the law & they aren't hurting anyone.

matthew_lane:

runic knight:
Fair enough, but the condition of women being baby makers in society, though backed by biology, is also an aspect that was rebelled against as sexist. Women could be but should be restricted to be baby makers.

Sure, now. But before socialised medicine, where most children died in child birth, sometimes along with the mother, both genders were relegated to there primary roles by survival instincts & a harsh environment. That ended with the invention of socialised medicine.

The idea that women should be prioritised as more important then men, who are disposable is just a social hang on from genetic predisposition... Its right up there with neotony. Neotony is when we see something & say wow thats cute; what makes us consider it cute? Its the pattern seeking part of the human mind seeing biological patterns we see in human babies, in things that are not human babies (large head to body ratio, large eyes, small mouth, etc).

Essentially its a genetically hardwired trick of genetics that prioritises humans not to eat or kill there own off-spring, no matter how annoying they may be.

Same goes for those nights you have where you can't sleep, or you wake in the night thinking there is something in the room with you: These are all genetically hardwired predispositions, that we have kind of outgrown by developing civilisation. Protection of women & children is exactly the same: Its hard-wired & mostly obsolete. Another thousand years & it's likely we'll have shed those traits.

Yes, though games as a media didn't start popping up til long enough after it was established to have have started to fade from public consciousness and be especially absent in minds of the initial target audience. While I understand the presence of women as more valuable, should we foster it or abuse it as we have as a dramatic tool? And again, is not a use of a tool reliant on gender causing it to be a stereotype when it happens as prevailingly as it does? If a role picks a woman as the trait of a prisoner or plot driving secondary character before any other characterization, thereby filling a role based on gender and working around it, is that not sexist?

matthew_lane:
SNIP

Like I said books are different. A book is pretty fixed to only the story whereas one can want to enjoy the gameplay of a game like say The Witcher but be turned away by it's attitude to women.

That's exclusionary and denies some female gamers that experience.

As for sexualisation you don't NEED it in video games. You could just watch porn and we wouldn't have to suffer it and have respectable and relatable female characters not fuck toys.

Moonlight Butterfly:
Like I said books are different. A book is pretty fixed to only the story whereas one can want to enjoy the gameplay of a game like say The Witcher but be turned away by it's attitude to women.

How is a book different? Both are forms of narrative fiction, telling a story. The only difference is that most novels (barring pick your own adventure stories) are completely passive.

Moonlight Butterfly:
That's exclusionary and denies some female gamers that experience.

No it doesn't. No more then buff shirtless guys in cover artwork & poor writing excludes men from reading trashy romance novels. They can if they want to, same holds here. There is nothing stopping any woman from playing say DOA Beach Volleyball: Its there choice.

Moonlight Butterfly:
As for sexualisation you don't NEED it in video games.

You don't need it anything, but as sexual creatures we crave it in our escapism. Always have, always will. We can have movies without sexualisation too, but there go romanitc comedies.

Moonlight Butterfly:
You could just watch porn and we wouldn't have to suffer it and have respectable and relatable female characters not fuck toys.

But you aren't suffering, you can play any game you like: Majority of games already have female characters who are not fuck toys, including Mass Effect 2. Its only your view that she's a fuck toy. Once you get over yourself & realise that you've turned a mole hill into a mountain, the happier you will be.

Personally i think you've lost any obejctivity on this topic, as you are seeing sexism, where sexism is not present.

matthew_lane:

Personally i think you've lost any obejctivity on this topic, as you are seeing sexism, where sexism is not present.

I could say that about you since you are denying sexism where it IS present. I'm not the only person in the world that holds this view and I'm pretty sure Miranda is a sexualised character and the majority of people who play ME would back me up on that. She even wears a skin tight outfit when FemShep wears Armour?!?! Why is that necessary.

Like I said games are separate form books in this matter because of gameplay being separate from story. Not sure why I have to repeat myself :/

I don't want my sex to be reduced to sex objects for male pleasure in a medium that I love and be told 'if you don't like it then leave'

How about you just let us have decent female characters. WHY IS IT SO BAD.

Moonlight Butterfly:

matthew_lane:

Personally i think you've lost any obejctivity on this topic, as you are seeing sexism, where sexism is not present.

I could say that about you since you are denying sexism where it IS present. I'm not the only person in the world that holds this view and I'm pretty sure Miranda is a sexualised character and the majority of people who play ME would back me up on that. She even wears a skin tight outfit when FemShep wears Armour?!?! Why is that necessary.

Like I said games are separate form books in this matter because of gameplay being separate from story. Not sure why I have to repeat myself :/

I don't want my sex to be reduced to sex objects for male pleasure in a medium that I love and be told 'if you don't like it then leave'

How about you just let us have decent female characters. WHY IS IT SO BAD.

Because sexually repressed men crave an outlet and objectified women in video games provide one such release.

Moonlight Butterfly:

matthew_lane:

Personally i think you've lost any obejctivity on this topic, as you are seeing sexism, where sexism is not present.

I could say that about you since you are denying sexism where it IS present. I'm not the only person in the world that holds this view and I'm pretty sure Miranda is a sexualised character and the majority of people who play ME would back me up on that. She even wears a skin tight outfit when FemShep wears Armour?!?! Why is that necessary.

Like I said games are separate form books in this matter because of gameplay being separate from story. Not sure why I have to repeat myself :/

I don't want my sex to be reduced to sex objects for male pleasure in a medium that I love and be told 'if you don't like it then leave'

How about you just let us have decent female characters. WHY IS IT SO BAD.

1. As I explained, having an opinion shared by others does not make anything objective. It isn't that you or others hold the view, it is a matter of whither or not that entitles you a right to dictate to others. This is a very important distinction as any force dictating a certain way to do things inherently requires justification and "because I dislike it" has never been a very compelling on. This in turn relates to point 2.

2. No one is preventing you from having them. You keep presenting it as though there is some great wall preventing both. There isn't. I am not saying you can't have games without female characters with tits bigger then her head. I'm not saying you can't have a product you enjoy. Games don't have to have sexy characters, though because of marketing reasons, most often do. I can understand the frustration of wanting certain aspects of a game you play to be different. I can tell you I am sick to death of those damn quicktime event cutscenes. Difference is, I am not trying to stop developers from using them, rather encouraging them not to. Saying something is sexist and trying to force a change will have far far less effective results then rewarding those who do change and letting the others die. This creates demographics with variety in what they want and will result in the equivalent of different genres of books. Part of the reason we have more then just trashy romance novels is not because men are complaining about the number of shirtless guys, it is because there is a clearly defined market response for media that isn't it. When their is less, the numbers cut off and drop. The same principle should apply well to games. Saying a sexy character is sexist doesn't change that people will still buy the game, often in spite of that or indifferent to it. Letting developers know you buy the games they make and enjoy them but want less blatant fanservice is fine. But there is still the artist's desire to make their product and they don't have to listen to you. Saying it is sexist though will not help that any and may hinder things. Saying you enjoy the gameplay but dislike the ascetic is fine, but again, it is up to the creators to decide if they will listen and up to the audience to decide if they should be rewarded. At no point should options be outright restricted because you disagree with what they wish to make. Even movements like the mass effect 3 ending one knew that what they were protesting was still up to the creators to fix if they could be swayed into it. Boycotts, loss of faith in the developer, pleading and the like, but nothing forbidden or forced.

Boudica:

Moonlight Butterfly:

matthew_lane:

Personally i think you've lost any obejctivity on this topic, as you are seeing sexism, where sexism is not present.

I could say that about you since you are denying sexism where it IS present. I'm not the only person in the world that holds this view and I'm pretty sure Miranda is a sexualised character and the majority of people who play ME would back me up on that. She even wears a skin tight outfit when FemShep wears Armour?!?! Why is that necessary.

Like I said games are separate form books in this matter because of gameplay being separate from story. Not sure why I have to repeat myself :/

I don't want my sex to be reduced to sex objects for male pleasure in a medium that I love and be told 'if you don't like it then leave'

How about you just let us have decent female characters. WHY IS IT SO BAD.

Because sexually repressed men crave an outlet and objectified women in video games provide one such release.

Or, you know, instead of vapid sexist generalizations, you could admit you actually don't know the motivation for every male gamer out there, let alone even those arguing against her and that reasons beyond could exist beyond the mentality on display here of "they are horny bastards, lol".
Hell, I have to wonder about even partial credibility to this sort of statement when there is free internet porn throughout much of the civilized world and those seeking "release" would probably waste little time seeking that instead of videogames.

runic knight:
snip

But we ARE trying to encourage them not to but when we do we get rape threats and abuse. I'm not saying there should be a law to prevent this kind of shit just that games devs need to see that it's not pleasant or appropriate. Much like racism.

I'm going to wander down a tangent, and link a little something about The Big Bang Theory.

For those of you who don't want to read all that (though you should, it's pretty insightful, methinks), the long and the short of it is this:

The Big Bang Theory is sold to audiences as a show about nerds, for nerds. But, in reality, if you stop and consider what is being said, how the characters in that show are depicted, you may easily come to the conclusion that it is a show about mocking nerds, for people who aren't nerds but want to feel superior towards them. It is a valid interpretation and a valid criticism.

Will all people agree? No. But there is evidence that supports that conclusion, and it makes the blogger who posted it extremely uncomfortable watching the show, because it is presenting his particular group of people in a singularly two-dimensional way, demeaning them and their identity in order to entertain a different, more 'mainstream' part of the culture.

Sound familiar? It should. This is how many women feel about the way they are presented in games and gaming culture.

When your specific subset of the population is being grossly misrepresented to pander to a different subset of the population, it's perfectly understandable that you would hate that, and want to see it changed. It's perfectly understandable that you would speak out about how much it needs to change, and level criticism against the attitudes that brought that skewed position about.

And what is the response to this? In the case of women in gaming, the response is a vast onslaught of hate and vitriol, cries of 'suck it up' and 'your opinion doesn't matter' and other misogynistic bullshit espoused by some of the more troglodytic of this forum's membership. Ultimately, this just fuels rage and turns the whole thing into a shitstorm instead of a viable debate - because the anti-feminists by and large don't want viable debate. They occupy and indefensible position, and they are forced to defend it by being belligerent and turning the debate into an ad hominem slugfest. Like they do with Miss Sarkeesian.

runic knight:
you could admit you actually don't know the motivation for every male gamer out there

Well it's a good thing I didn't say anything about "every male gamer out there," then, isn't it!

Because sexually repressed men crave an outlet and objectified women in video games provide one such release.

Because sexually repressed men crave an outlet

Sexually repressed men

So, are you arguing that sexually repressed men don't crave an outlet? Or that "every male gamer" is a sexually repressed man? Because, using your exact words, those are your only two options.

Moonlight Butterfly:
I could say that about you since you are denying sexism where it IS present.

Sure you could, but that would be a presuppositional statement & if you did that i would have to point & laugh at you.

Moonlight Butterfly:
I'm not the only person in the world that holds this view

I agree, you are not the only person to hold that view. Fortunately the validity of a claim is not measured by the amount of people who believe it. Thats a logical fallacy called appeal to majority. Its an attempt to circumvent a lgoci discussion, by appealing to the opinion of an amount of people.

Moonlight Butterfly:
and I'm pretty sure Miranda is a sexualised character and the majority of people who play ME would back me up on that.

This is more of the same kind of appeal to motive, but you've actually made it worse, by attempting to turn it into an unfounded appeal to motiv,e in the form of a positive assertion.

Moonlight Butterfly:
She even wears a skin tight outfit when FemShep wears Armour?!?! Why is that necessary.

Why do you wear high heels, when i wear flats... Personal choice.

Moonlight Butterfly:
Like I said games are separate form books in this matter because of gameplay being separate from story. Not sure why I have to repeat myself :/

You need to repeat it, because its wrong. Majority of games are narrative forms, with action involved. The only real difference between a computer game & a books is that the computer game is an acitve form of narrative story telling, where as a books is predominately not. In this way the book & the computer game are exactly the same: They both hold narrative, which the viewer enjoys by absorbing the narrative.

Moonlight Butterfly:
I don't want my sex to be reduced to sex objects for male pleasure

They aren't

Moonlight Butterfly:
in a medium that I love and be told 'if you don't like it then leave'

No one told you to like it or leave it: You were told to stop being so self entitled & expecting all material to conform to your wishes. In fact you are not a fan of the medium at all: You are a fan of specific products within a medium. Me personally i'm a fan of DC comics, but that doesn't make me a fan of all comics... Manga for instance, i have no interest in.

Moonlight Butterfly:
How about you just let us have decent female characters. WHY IS IT SO BAD.

You already have decent female characters, you always have. What you are talking about is essentially removing anything that does not comply to your personal interests & that is sexist, bigoted, facism. You don't get to dictate what others can & cannot enjoy.

matthew_lane:
Sure you could, but that would be a presuppositional statement & if you did that i would have to point & laugh at you.

I don't think it's a fantastic idea to suggest you would point and laugh at someone for any form of argument when you yourself continually fail to capitalize words and letters (ironically, you do capitalize words after a colon, one place you need not) and use "&" in sentences. It'd strike me as odd for one to mock another while making obvious errors time and time again, see.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 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