Injustice 2 really triggers my feminism. There, I said it.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

So...

Back to the original topic, they just dropped another 5 minute "trailer" for the game; I'm personally not seeing anything out of place when it comes to characterization as it stands for the Injustice alternate universe. The poor writing and silly dialog is to be expected.

Nature Guardian:

KissingSunlight:

maninahat:

For the last ten years, people have been using "sexism" to justify why they don't like a video game. There have been very few examples that would justify that claim. Most of those claims are like the one being made here. This person doesn't understand why Poison Ivy doesn't look like Gorilla Grodd. That is not sexism. That is expressing a preference of character design in a video game.

But that was absolutely NOT what I said.

I said that all the ladies are sexy and that all of them have a form of open and intentional sexualisation. Wherein almost none of the males are sexy and none of them are sexualised.

Sexy female characters can easily be among my preferences. Sexism is what I hate.

Sexual objectification and double standards are good examples of what I mean by "First World Sexism". They are not really problems. They are annoyances. When these issues get addressed, people making those complaints are quick to defend sexual objectification of men and double standards against men. So, these people are not really concerned about gender equality. They just want to make their complaints about what annoys them to seem more important than what they really are.

What is your point here? That I cannot complain about what annoys me unless it is a vital matter of life and death?

I'll start with a quick clarification. You were complaining that Poison Ivy didn't look like The Swamp Thing.

Sexy is subjective. I'm not into men. However, men wearing skintight outfits that feature their bulging muscles, six and eight pack abs, and bulging crotches. I think some people will consider those costumes to be sexy.

My point is about perspective. You can complain that you don't like the character designs in this game. However, how characters look in a videogame is not sexist. It shouldn't "trigger" your feminism.

90% sure OP is rattling bushes.

Even if you aren't, if you don't like the characters, don't buy the game. One internet opinion isn't going to change a massive corporation's character designs.

Sex sells maybe?

silasbufu:
Sex sells maybe?

Shush. Companies aren't allowed to put in things that their target demographic likes. They must bow to the loud minority who don't buy their product.

Look at how well it worked for Marvel comics.

silasbufu:
Sex sells maybe?

Ok, show of hands, who is going to be buying this game purely for T&A?

erttheking:

silasbufu:
Sex sells maybe?

Ok, show of hands, who is going to be buying this game purely for T&A?

I would if it was decent. The T&A I mean. But it's not. The gameplay holds no appeal at all. Also if it was under 20 bucks.

No shame in buying games with your dick.

SirSullymore:
Starfire made me cringe, but other than that it didn't seem any more cheesecakey that the first one to me.

I'd say that out of the many DC heroes, Starfire is one of the most sexualized of them all, bearing in mind she is a model by day.

People need to remember the source material for this game, in many of the DC heroines are incredibly over-sexualized (yes, even pre New 52) and as for Injustice 2, I'd say the only female characters that are portrayed heavily that way (apart from Starfire) are Poison Ivy, Catwoman and maybe Harely Quinn. At least two of those examples are well known for using their looks to their advantage so if nothing else the game portrays them quite well. Even then I'm sure there will be a variety of costumes for each of the characters.

KissingSunlight:

maninahat:
[snip]

I want to address your last point first. It's interesting that you are dismissing how "triggered" was used. If there has been one word that have been "abused and devalued", it's "sexist". (I would also add "racism" have been equally "abused and devalued", but that is a different conversation.)

For the last ten years, people have been using "sexism" to justify why they don't like a video game. There have been very few examples that would justify that claim. Most of those claims are like the one being made here. This person doesn't understand why Poison Ivy doesn't look like Gorilla Grodd. That is not sexism. That is expressing a preference of character design in a video game.

Sexual objectification and double standards are good examples of what I mean by "First World Sexism". They are not really problems. They are annoyances. When these issues get addressed, people making those complaints are quick to defend sexual objectification of men and double standards against men. So, these people are not really concerned about gender equality. They just want to make their complaints about what annoys them to seem more important than what they really are.

When comparing Gorilla Grodd to Poison Ivy, the question is why does a game that's capable of showing a broad range of male characters guys require all the female characters to look sexy? You say it's about preferences, which is true, but it is those specific preferences that are rooted in sexism, and also those assumptions being made about our preferences that can be sexist. This is a game that assumes I (as a heterosexual male player) only want to see sexy female characters. It assumes that I value them for appearance over anything else, and panders to that mentality. It also assumes that anyone who isn't me is insignificant to their game design.

What do I call those decisions that fetishize women in game whilst excluding them in real life, other than sexist? I don't understand why it bothers you to see people use that word to describe the apparent sexual bias going on.

SirSullymore:

Ogoid:
I don't really have a dog in this particular fight, but as far as the American comics industry being "sexist"?

I'd suggest that anyone who actually believes that google certain Italian comic artists, like Guido Crepax, Paolo Eleuteri Serpieri, Milo Manara, Nik Guerra, Giovanna Casotto, Cristina Fabris, Apollonia Saintclair or Rosita Amici, and keep in mind comics in Italy are held in as much respect as any other art form.

*psst* Don't mention Milo Manara to American feminist comic fans.

What about Hugo Pratt?

Also, I like Milo Manara's comics! That doesn't mean his art is appropriate for every comic.

Here Comes Tomorrow:

erttheking:

silasbufu:
Sex sells maybe?

Ok, show of hands, who is going to be buying this game purely for T&A?

I would if it was decent. The T&A I mean. But it's not. The gameplay holds no appeal at all. Also if it was under 20 bucks.

No shame in buying games with your dick.

So you would buy it if there was T&A, good gameplay and a good price? Yeah, stuff like this is why I consider "sex sells" to be an oversimplification.

I see the OP's point but I give this game a bit of a pass for a couple of reasons.

1) These are comic book characters...most of whom are considered to be iconic so that they draw an audience. Given that these characters were created decades ago, we have little realistic choice to change their appearances.

2) The heroic human-looking males are depicted the same way sexually as the woman. They both embody unrealistic physical and beauty stereotypes.

3) Because of the history behind these characters, you have every reason to believe there would be some negative backlash if they took too many liberties on how the character was portrayed. Backlash that could have an immediate negative impact on sales. You have to imagine that as a AAA game, they intend to play things safe.

It's fantastical. I don't see anything wrong with sexy ladies, if I want to look at normal every day life I can always go outside.

An angry feminist is nothing new. :-) Didn't we move on from this debate after the whole gamergate thing? This thread is precisely the reason Japanese companies like Tecmo Koei won't westernise some games. No one in Japan gives a damn, but here sexy is now evil and shameful. I reject that there's anything wrong with sexualising characters. In fact, it's a well considered notion in advertising that "sex sells". If a person is "offended" by sexy characters, vote with your wallet and don't buy the game, move on with life and play a game that doesn't offend.

And that is a perfectly fine thing.

maninahat:
When comparing Gorilla Grodd to Poison Ivy, the question is why does a game that's capable of showing a broad range of male characters guys require all the female characters to look sexy? You say it's about preferences, which is true, but it is those specific preferences that are rooted in sexism, and also those assumptions being made about our preferences that can be sexist. This is a game that assumes I (as a heterosexual male player) only want to see sexy female characters. It assumes that I value them for appearance over anything else, and panders to that mentality. It also assumes that anyone who isn't me is insignificant to their game design.

What do I call those decisions that fetishize women in game whilst excluding them in real life, other than sexist? I don't understand why it bothers you to see people use that word to describe the apparent sexual bias going on.

You don't find Gorilla Grodd sexy? What's wrong with you! I'm kidding. However, that does point out that "sexy" is subjective.

You are assuming that the character designs are being rooted in sexism. Do you actually believe that the creators of this videogame are sexist? I don't. I don't think any rational person will think that either.

Both men and women prefer to look at attractive women. It's not a matter of sexism. Would a game be more interesting if there are monstrous looking women? Sure. Then you do have to understand that the source material is from comic books. The motivation for putting in the female characters that they did weren't sexism. They are the most popular female character from the source material.

I have just one more thought. The Swamp Thing and Gorilla Grodd are two exceptions to the male roster. Most of the male characters look alike as well. Also, it can be argued that the male characters are sexualized as well. It is interesting that an attractive male design is "male power fantasy" and an attractive female design is "sexual objectification".

I am gonna be that guy than, I am opposite, Female Superheroes should be hot and sexy. Much more interesting and recognizable than bland generic everyday looking Woman.

Same with Male Superhero characters.

But than again I only think it should be like this for animation and comic books themselves.

You can cast whoever you want in live action.

KingsGambit:
An angry feminist is nothing new. :-) Didn't we move on from this debate after the whole gamergate thing? This thread is precisely the reason Japanese companies like Tecmo Koei won't westernise some games. No one in Japan gives a damn, but here sexy is now evil and shameful. I reject that there's anything wrong with sexualising characters. In fact, it's a well considered notion in advertising that "sex sells". If a person is "offended" by sexy characters, vote with your wallet and don't buy the game, move on with life and play a game that doesn't offend.

Nah, Koei Tecmo (sorry the way you said it was amusing, like calling Square Enix, Enix Square) have always been fuckwits about localizing and importing especially Tecmo before their merger in 2009, although Koei has quite a few properties they never bothered to localize too, the shenanigans they pulled back in the 90's went on long before the West started complaining about sexualization. They haven't actually changed, just found a new excuse, something they've been doing for the last 3 decades. They were well known for being putzes and completely inferior to the likes of Square about localization long before Extreme Beach Volleyball came along.

They just now have a convenient excuse that will piss off Western Otakus and get them a few extra sales from import companies without actually having to spend any extra money, like Dead Space 2's "your mom will hate this game" advertising campaign, they don't actually give two shits what Westerners complain about as long as the game sells enough.

Notice how that excuse flies out the window when the game is actually part of one of their major series or something they've sunk a lot of budget in to and not a spin off budget title, i.e. their Ninja Gaiden games and Nioh, both full of sexualized female characters, both received plenty of complaints from "Western feminists", but mysteriously Koei Tecmo suddenly doesn't give a shit about Western sensibilities and controversies when it comes to their big budget stuff, they don't even pull a Nintendo and change stuff for the localization, they leave in all the skimpy outfits and posing, because just like EA doesn't actually give a shit about what mom's thought of Dead Space 2, KT doesn't actually care what Western Feminists think of their games, its just an easy way to get some free controversy advertising for a game they never had any intention of localizing.

KissingSunlight:
It is interesting that an attractive male design is "male power fantasy" and an attractive female design is "sexual objectification".

I find this argument is also the same one people use when they say that you can't be racist against white people.

It's a bullshit double standard that people use to make weak, phony-ass, arguments.

CritialGaming:

KissingSunlight:
It is interesting that an attractive male design is "male power fantasy" and an attractive female design is "sexual objectification".

I find this argument is also the same one people use when they say that you can't be racist against white people.

It's a bullshit double standard that people use to make weak, phony-ass, arguments.

How so? Would you say it's inaccurate that female characters are judged on their appearance more than male characters?

We're you not here for the Andromeda hubbabaloo where even though everyone had ugly face textures only female characters were called ugly and they tried to claim feminist ruined the game?

As usual, the issue is that some people think that hating sexism means hating sexy women. They think my complaint means I don't want sexy female characters.

Look at the gentleman with the sexy female gif avatar. He gets it. He figured out nobody wants or cares about limiting his rightful and natural desire to look at hot women.

maninahat:

KissingSunlight:

maninahat:
[snip]

I want to address your last point first. It's interesting that you are dismissing how "triggered" was used. If there has been one word that have been "abused and devalued", it's "sexist". (I would also add "racism" have been equally "abused and devalued", but that is a different conversation.)

For the last ten years, people have been using "sexism" to justify why they don't like a video game. There have been very few examples that would justify that claim. Most of those claims are like the one being made here. This person doesn't understand why Poison Ivy doesn't look like Gorilla Grodd. That is not sexism. That is expressing a preference of character design in a video game.

Sexual objectification and double standards are good examples of what I mean by "First World Sexism". They are not really problems. They are annoyances. When these issues get addressed, people making those complaints are quick to defend sexual objectification of men and double standards against men. So, these people are not really concerned about gender equality. They just want to make their complaints about what annoys them to seem more important than what they really are.

When comparing Gorilla Grodd to Poison Ivy, the question is why does a game that's capable of showing a broad range of male characters guys require all the female characters to look sexy? You say it's about preferences, which is true, but it is those specific preferences that are rooted in sexism, and also those assumptions being made about our preferences that can be sexist. This is a game that assumes I (as a heterosexual male player) only want to see sexy female characters. It assumes that I value them for appearance over anything else, and panders to that mentality. It also assumes that anyone who isn't me is insignificant to their game design.

What do I call those decisions that fetishize women in game whilst excluding them in real life, other than sexist? I don't understand why it bothers you to see people use that word to describe the apparent sexual bias going on.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

It's depressing when someone brings the "anything that isn't catered to a very specific type of white straight male is only stuff for minorities".

Even among white straight males, most of them aren't so desperate they can't look at a female character unless she's supersexy.

And for the last time, I thought in 2017 we finally learnt that it's not true that sex (aimed only at a very specific demographic) sells.

Samtemdo8:
I am gonna be that guy than, I am opposite, Female Superheroes should be hot and sexy. Much more interesting and recognizable than bland generic everyday looking Woman.

Same with Male Superhero characters.

But than again I only think it should be like this for animation and comic books themselves.

You can cast whoever you want in live action.

It actually makes sense, and I agree. The problem is that the females are hot and sexy, the males are strong and powerful. That's the issue.

Well... from a comics perspective, all the New 52 redesigns of the female characters were widely criticized for being far to sexualized.
The New 52 started in November 2011, iirc. That phase in DC comics is over and now they're sliding back into many of the classic DC archetypes.
Catwoman in New 52 was banging Batman from issue 1, then they decided she was a lesbian. Kathy Kane (Batwoman) focused a bit more on her being a lesbian. But the biggest complaints were how Starfire went from an ingenue to a sexpot which was very out of character.

Black Canary has always had a Bayonetta kind of sexuality. Wonder Woman has a troubled history of sexuality in comics, especially with her creator who put her in a lot of bondage situations. But she became a strong symbol for female empowerment so it kind of makes sense that Cheeta, one of WW's baddies would be kind of the opposite of the regal and stern Diana.
Supergirl should not be sexualized at all, IMO, she's an ingenue, however Powergirl embraces all her powers, including her looks. Poison Ivy also uses her powers over men. Harley Quinn on the other hand probably has no regards for how people see her with the exception of Mr J.

They do seem to lean on the most sexualized DC characters. It's not like they're putting in Amanda Waller even though she is an all-caps C--- and I would love to hear her dialog and see her in a game since she is such a schemer and plotter, even if she's not playable. But it'd be fun if she were playable and called in airstrikes in her combos, etc.

As a mild DC comics fan, I only ever played Injustice for the story to compare it to the comics and I'm not sure I would go back to that world. I didn't really enjoy most of the fighting mechanics, especially Batman's, who was a core character in the story.

EternallyBored:
snip

Yeah, no. It seems like you're the one who isn't up to date on how Koei operates. They are still localising musous on the Vita with 100$ collectors editions. Games that, if you combine all versions (PS4, PS3, Vita, PC depending) of the games, in both NA and EU you'd get maybe 30000 units sold.

Games that sell like absolute garbage, where the descriptor 'tepid' would be a 270% improvement in sales figures, are still being localised by Tecmo. The average Omega Force musou is lucky to hit 30k sales in NA. Guess what? Both Xtreme 1 and 2 have sold more than a 100k each in NA alone. These numbers would literally make it rival mainline Dynasty Warriors games, and would make this DoA spin-off their 4th or 5th highest selling series per release in the west. (These are all specifically referring to launch window, LTD are a far harder number to get.)

So don't propagate this nonsense about them not bringing Xtreme 3 over due to bad sales, when it's blatant that you aren't in any way aware of anything related to sales and how low the bar is for Koei games. The 'puritan' angle is farfetched, but the 'bad sales' angle is literally an ignorant lie.

erttheking:

Here Comes Tomorrow:

erttheking:

Ok, show of hands, who is going to be buying this game purely for T&A?

I would if it was decent. The T&A I mean. But it's not. The gameplay holds no appeal at all. Also if it was under 20 bucks.

No shame in buying games with your dick.

So you would buy it if there was T&A, good gameplay and a good price? Yeah, stuff like this is why I consider "sex sells" to be an oversimplification.

Yes and no. I don't like the fighting game genre as a whole but I still buy DoA games. I don't really like the gameplay of Senran Kagura either but I still buy them. I'll play basiclly any shitty game if it has pretty girls I can dress up.

This game just doesn't appeal to me. Also I find the combat style super slow and rigid. I prefer fast paced and fluid even if its shit it at least looks fancy.

Nature Guardian:
As usual, the issue is that some people think that hating sexism means hating sexy women. They think my complaint means I don't want sexy female characters.

Look at the gentleman with the sexy female gif avatar. He gets it. He figured out nobody wants or cares about limiting his rightful and natural desire to look at hot women.

maninahat:

KissingSunlight:
I want to address your last point first. It's interesting that you are dismissing how "triggered" was used. If there has been one word that have been "abused and devalued", it's "sexist". (I would also add "racism" have been equally "abused and devalued", but that is a different conversation.)

For the last ten years, people have been using "sexism" to justify why they don't like a video game. There have been very few examples that would justify that claim. Most of those claims are like the one being made here. This person doesn't understand why Poison Ivy doesn't look like Gorilla Grodd. That is not sexism. That is expressing a preference of character design in a video game.

Sexual objectification and double standards are good examples of what I mean by "First World Sexism". They are not really problems. They are annoyances. When these issues get addressed, people making those complaints are quick to defend sexual objectification of men and double standards against men. So, these people are not really concerned about gender equality. They just want to make their complaints about what annoys them to seem more important than what they really are.

When comparing Gorilla Grodd to Poison Ivy, the question is why does a game that's capable of showing a broad range of male characters guys require all the female characters to look sexy? You say it's about preferences, which is true, but it is those specific preferences that are rooted in sexism, and also those assumptions being made about our preferences that can be sexist. This is a game that assumes I (as a heterosexual male player) only want to see sexy female characters. It assumes that I value them for appearance over anything else, and panders to that mentality. It also assumes that anyone who isn't me is insignificant to their game design.

What do I call those decisions that fetishize women in game whilst excluding them in real life, other than sexist? I don't understand why it bothers you to see people use that word to describe the apparent sexual bias going on.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

It's depressing when someone brings the "anything that isn't catered to a very specific type of white straight male is only stuff for minorities".

Even among white straight males, most of them aren't so desperate they can't look at a female character unless she's supersexy.

And for the last time, I thought in 2017 we finally learnt that it's not true that sex (aimed only at a very specific demographic) sells.

I noticed you ignored my response to the post I made to maninahat.

I won't cut and paste it here. Briefly sum up what I said: You are making a false assumption about sexism. Also, you are guilty of using double standards against men. If it's anyone who is guilty of complaining of "not being catered to" is you. Most people don't think that this game is sexist. It is you who claimed to be "triggered".

erttheking:

silasbufu:
Sex sells maybe?

Ok, show of hands, who is going to be buying this game purely for T&A?

Depends on how you view it. Watching the trailers showing off the variety of armour variants kinda of makes me want to get this just to play dress ups. Like, I'm not really a fan of fighters. But that looks like some sweet dress ups.

So, technically, my interest in purchasing it is purely for the aesthetics of the game, does that count?

(I probably wont buy it unless its super duper cheap one day tho)

undeadsuitor:

CritialGaming:

KissingSunlight:
It is interesting that an attractive male design is "male power fantasy" and an attractive female design is "sexual objectification".

I find this argument is also the same one people use when they say that you can't be racist against white people.

It's a bullshit double standard that people use to make weak, phony-ass, arguments.

How so? Would you say it's inaccurate that female characters are judged on their appearance more than male characters?

We're you not here for the Andromeda hubbabaloo where even though everyone had ugly face textures only female characters were called ugly and they tried to claim feminist ruined the game?

No I wouldn't. I would say all characters are judged first on their appearance, then on their abilities, and lastly on their personality (should that be relevant in the game).

When given the option to create an avatar, very few players will go out of their way to make a ugly character. Regardless of the character being male or female. People are genuinely more interested in attractive people, gender makes no difference. But the difference is labeled that Female characters are being used for sexual fantasy, while male characters are Power fantasy. This is regardless of the amount of clothing a character wears.

Kratos from God of War for example is mostly naked the entire game. His body a chiseled work of art. Yet it is okay for him to be mostly naked because it is power fantasy not sexual fantasy. Why? Surely he is a good looking man, far better looking than most men can ever hope to achieve. And surely that muscled body is surely sexy to women right? I mean every fucking Calvin Klein ad, or cologne add has some perfect 8=pack ab-ed dude in it. Why is that? It surely can't be power fantasy because there is no power there.

At the same time look at female characters in gaming. I never once saw Lara Croft naked. I never even saw a nipple, or ass cheek. Elena from Uncharted doesn't even have cleavage. That girl from Heavenly Sword, shows off nothing.

Hell even OT here, the comic book characters are mostly completely clothed. The problem the OP had was they way they posed, highlighting their sexual characteristics. But that falls under character, it frankly it happens a lot more rarely that the feminist groups would like you to think.

Feminism likes to make excuses for their points. They twist information, or purposefully take offense on things just for the sake of it, where no reason to take offense truly lies.

As for the Mass Effect thing. That's just another example of people being stupid. The character problems in Mass Effect where broken animation issues and had nothing to do with character design. None of the female characters in the original trilogy where all that good look if you ask me....well except Miranda but she was specifically designed to be perfect in everyway which includes appearance, but Ashley and Jack, where fugly.

Ryder is not a beautiful goddess, but she isn't an ugly character either. Unless you go into the editor and fuck her shit all up.

It's all very simple, really.

All of the female characters in the game are attractive; more than half of them are also heavily sexualized.

Not all of the male characters are attractive; none of them is heavily sexualized.

This is not an opinion but a FACT. If you're going to argue that Aquaman showing his chest is on the same level of what happens with the female characters of the game, or that the male characters are totally sexualized just because they have a toned body, we can't discuss.

And I am sure someone is going to deny the facts because those facts hurt.

Even though my problem is not with the sexy ladies, but with the different treatment.

Nature Guardian:
It's all very simple, really.

All of the female characters in the game are attractive; more than half of them are also heavily sexualized.

Not all of the male characters are attractive; none of them is heavily sexualized.

This is not an opinion but a FACT. If you're going to argue that Aquaman showing his chest is on the same level of what happens with the female characters of the game, or that the male characters are totally sexualized just because they have a toned body, we can't discuss.

And I am sure someone is going to deny the facts because those facts hurt.

Even though my problem is not with the sexy ladies, but with the different treatment.

I mean, Aquaman gets me pretty wet.

Elijin:

Nature Guardian:
It's all very simple, really.

All of the female characters in the game are attractive; more than half of them are also heavily sexualized.

Not all of the male characters are attractive; none of them is heavily sexualized.

This is not an opinion but a FACT. If you're going to argue that Aquaman showing his chest is on the same level of what happens with the female characters of the game, or that the male characters are totally sexualized just because they have a toned body, we can't discuss.

And I am sure someone is going to deny the facts because those facts hurt.

Even though my problem is not with the sexy ladies, but with the different treatment.

I mean, Aquaman gets me pretty wet.

image

Nature Guardian:
It's all very simple, really.

All of the female characters in the game are attractive; more than half of them are also heavily sexualized.

Not all of the male characters are attractive; none of them is heavily sexualized.

This is not an opinion but a FACT. If you're going to argue that Aquaman showing his chest is on the same level of what happens with the female characters of the game, or that the male characters are totally sexualized just because they have a toned body, we can't discuss.

And I am sure someone is going to deny the facts because those facts hurt.

Even though my problem is not with the sexy ladies, but with the different treatment.

Again, then, it seems your problem is with the source material rather than the game. What is different from the source material about how these characters are handled should be the part that becomes troubling. Even when it comes to the posing and animations, from what I've seen, they are aping comic poses; bringing us back to the problem you are having being with the source material.

More succinctly, and to clarify what the discussion is actually about: what is Injustice 2 doing different from the source material that bothers you?

Also: would all of this bother you less if they had included Orca (female killer whale monster)?

Nature Guardian:
It's all very simple, really.

All of the female characters in the game are attractive; more than half of them are also heavily sexualized.

Not all of the male characters are attractive; none of them is heavily sexualized.

This is not an opinion but a FACT. If you're going to argue that Aquaman showing his chest is on the same level of what happens with the female characters of the game, or that the male characters are totally sexualized just because they have a toned body, we can't discuss.

And I am sure someone is going to deny the facts because those facts hurt.

Even though my problem is not with the sexy ladies, but with the different treatment.

Citation needed for your "FACT". What you are talking about is subjectivity. I made a joke earlier about Gorilla Grodd being sexy. Who's to say that someone might find that character sexy or "heavily sexualized"? What you are talking about is your preferences. You are bothered by characters that turns you on sexually. That's all there is to it. There is no way that these characters that you are complaining about is anyway harmful to women. Therefore, these characters are not sexist. Sexism is a serious issue. You are not helping to combat this problem by trivializing it like you are doing right now.

oRevanchisto:

To add on. It should be noted that male characters are rarely sexualized and I hate when idiots try to bring this up as a counter point. Yes, males are often perfect physical specimens but sexualization goes beyond mere physical attributes. Aquaman is ripped as hell and doesn't understand the concepts of shirts, but he doesn't sexualize this, he isn't flaunting his figure in your face. Imagine a male character shaking their ass to the camera, shoving their crotches in your face, grabbing their crotches, and every word that comes out of their mouth is some kind of dick joke. You'd probably say, "woah, get your junk out of my face. I don't need to see all that." That is the difference.

This is an argument that gets frequently repeated on this forum, and it used to do so a long time ago as well, way before I had an account, in the early days of discussion on the topic of skimpy outfits.

What this argument fails to take into consideration, however, is that male and female sexualization are not equivalent. You are making a faulty comparison between the two.

Let's just assume that such a game existed: where females were pretty, but had nothing of the sort of sexualization we see in games nowadays (no butt cam, no cleavage, no skintight outfits). Males on the other hand are all dressed in skimpy outfits with leather straps covering their nippes (or not at all), codpieces, bikinis, rippling lean muscles, underwear shaped like dicks that they would enthusiastically helicopter around, and butt cams galore.

Do you think this would be a hit with the women's demographic? If yes: why does reality seem to disagree?

There are movies, games and books out there that are designed exclusively, exclusively, to milk as much money out of the 18-34 FEMALE demographic as possible. If there is one element of these that would consistently gain a 0.1% in sales, they would have it. And yet, none of them have such exaggerated sexualization. Could it be that this is not a case of "every single creator of movies, games, and books out there is part of a conspiracy to keep women from enjoying themselves" but rather that women want another kind of sexualization from their media?

Case study: the anime Jojo's Bizarre Adventure features few women and plenty of half-naked men in poses other men find exceedingly feminine and outright homosexual. Yet it doesn't seem to be a hit with women at all - exceptions aside, of course, the anime's demographic is overwhelmingly male.

Another case study: there was an MMO a while back (I forget its name) that locked you out of playing a male character, yet the female characters you could play were all excessively sexualized, like only the Koreans can do it. You would think this would turn most women away, yet the amount of women playing the game was excessive. A quick scan I did of a forum thread (hundreds of pages long) where people posted mugshots of their faces revealed about a 50:50 split of male to female.

The reality is this: women don't want men shoving their crotches into their faces. Exceptions aside, speaking generally, if there was a demographic for that, then there would be products like that. Nearly all media aimed at women focuses on the social side of relationships and love, with men being suave and mysterious more than sex-starved and having huge cocks. Sexualization happens, sure, if you take Twilight as an example, but the movie/book's themes are strongly focused on the main character's relationship with none of the male characters doing anything remotely close to what's in the quote above.

So to end this almost-thesis, I posit that the argument for the presence of equivalent sexualization is not grounded in reality and makes no sense to what media is actually designed for: age and gender demographics. Men and women simply want something else out of eachother. Men want boobs and ass, women want emotional depth, sharp features and the guarantee of safety.

As for the OP: I watched the features trailer and I don't see how they're more sexualized than Mortal Kombat. I think you're overreacting.

Ravenbom:

Wonder Woman has a troubled history of sexuality in comics, especially with her creator who put her in a lot of bondage situations. But she became a strong symbol for female empowerment

Question: What's troubling about bondage? Empowered women can't be into it (or at least not in the position of sub)?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 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