Sexism in Gaming

[Scowling Dragon]

I just wanted to discuss my thoughts about sexism in gaming.

Call me crazy but I don't think skimpy clothing is sexism.

Its pathetic, low, and makes games look bad, and kind of degrading, but not sexist.

Sexism is prejudice against a gender, and promoting hurtful stereotypes about it.

This is none of those. Let me repeat: I find skimpy clothing and the whole ordeal kind of pathetic. And it makes gaming look bad, and unmature in the public eye (Which after all these years it still isn't :smallsigh:).

Its not hurtful, and not made with hurtful intent (Just intent for more money). It may make people uncomfortable, but thats about it.

I have heard arguments that when skimpy arm gives higher bonuses it suggests that in order to succeed you must wear skimpy clothing.....Thats ludacrist. Its like saying that Mario suggests that I hit bricks with my hand, or jump on turtles in order to succeed.

If anybody is actualy that stupid to think that less clothing= more protection then thats just darwinism for you and its doing the world a favor.

An actual sexist game in my opinion is something like Metroid: Other M.

Explained in depth here (http://moonbase.rydia.net/mental/blog/gaming/metroid-other-m-the-elephant/article.html), but basicaly, it makes out Samus to be a pathetic MAAYHN dependent weakling that can't do anything unless authorized by a male figure, and ALWAYS blabbing about "THE BABY" with kind of crazy devotion.

THAT promotes a stupid stereotype: Women are dependent on men, and are nothing but uteruses on legs.

Team ninja lovingly looking at Samuses rear at every opportunity again wasn't sexist but the cherry on top of the sunday in my opinion.

[Yawgmoth]

*pops popcorn*
*reclines chair*
*bookmarks thread*

Okay, I'm ready. Ready for this thread to happen.

[Triscuitable]

*Applies contact lenses*
*Pulls out kindle*
*Sets office chair to recline*

Same here. Go crazy, kiddos.

[Scowling Dragon]

*Lays on couch
*Checks computer again


Im actually waiting for this thread to happen too. I can't wait to gain new perspectives and knowledge.

[revolver kobold]

Ok, I'll go first then.

Skimpy and revealing clothing plays directly into the male gaze (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_gaze). This shows that the prime market for games is males, and sends a rather strong message to any women playing the game that "this is not for you".

Which is pretty sexist.

[Surrealistik]

*pops popcorn*
*reclines chair*
*bookmarks thread*

Okay, I'm ready. Ready for this thread to happen.

Likewise. 10char

[Scowling Dragon]

There is that. True. It scares away female gamers (Though thats debatable in a way. I don't know any young female person that didn't play games because of skimpy clothing. It scared away people who already wouldn't want to play games).

But again I disagree that its sexist. Its a bad image sure, but its not hurting anybody.

Its something else.

[Dragonus45]

I'm just going to weigh in with my whole opinion then run for my life in the hopes that when this thread goes up in flames i only get merely signed. Sexism in games is a serious issue and im kind of tired of seeing it get devalued by people uncomfortable with facing it. However im also getting tired of hearing the term "Male Gaze". Sexism in games is a problem, but i dont think it is THE problem. Its more of a symptom. THE problem is that the gaming industry is scared and unable to escape the rut of design by committee syndrome. Women are constantly placed in positions of the damsel in distress, the shallow love interest, the soulless fan service machine and many other demeaning positions because at some point in time a person wrote a game where everyone was fleshed out and it worked in context and no one wants to break what worked no matter how hard they try to "get outside the box" Women keep wearing less and less clothes, and its frankly insulting to everyone of every gender involved, being a man i can say with certainty that im less likely to buy a game like ninja dude man or super awesome fighter five when i see some scantily clad school girl with a katana because its just plain lazy. And they keep pushing it and pushing it because when you refuse to try and go outside of "the formula" then you have to try and be more over the top to beat out the competition. In not even sure where my point disappeared to in all of this mess so i'll see if i can dig it out. The problem with sexism in gaming isn't from the people making them, they are just a bunch of lazy layabouts coasting along with no care for the precedent they set since at the end of the day we but it anyways. The sexism is coming from us, we refuse to allow any discussion on the matter because so many of us cant stand the idea that we let it slip by in the first place. I think very very few people are genuinely sexist, we want to think of our self as conscientious and modern and understanding. But way to many of us are getting angrier and angrier mostly in response to anger aimed at us under the idea that we are trying to actively partake in it. I seem to keep drifting on what im trying to say so im gonna give it a rest now.

[Scowling Dragon]

THAT is sexist. We need to make better female characters.

[Logic]

MovieBob (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5950-Tropes-vs-MovieBob) seems to have said it better (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5436-Not-Okay) than I was able.

[Scowling Dragon]

Again: Constantly skimpy clothing is bad. Its just not sexist.

[revolver kobold]

There is that. True. It scares away female gamers (Though thats debatable in a way. I don't know any young female person that didn't play games because of skimpy clothing. It scared away people who already wouldn't want to play games).

But again I disagree that its sexist. Its a bad image sure, but its not hurting anybody.

Its something else.

It is hurting people. Its hurting women. Its hurting men. It hurts society.

It promotes an unhealthy body image. It promotes unhealthy attitudes towards women.

It is sexist, and it is harmful. If you can't see this, or you disagree with this, you need to check your priviledge.

[Scowling Dragon]

So thats to do with unreasonable body expectations then. Therefore it hurts both genders equally.

No game has an ugly protagonist (Unless its about that.)

Im not saying women get it better in the clothing department, but unreasonable body and looks expectations are pushed pretty evenly I think.

And how does it promote an unhealthy attitude to women?

[Dragonus45]

So thats to do with unreasonable body expectations then. Therefore it hurts both genders equally.

No game has an ugly protagonist (Unless its about that.)

Im not saying women get it better in the clothing department, but unreasonable body and looks expectations are pushed pretty evenly I think.

And how does it promote an unhealthy attitude to women?

There is a difference, unrealistic men are meant to be a self image fantasy.

That said i think that in media outside of games the way men are portrayed can be and often is equally out of place insulting. But not so much in games, we are still the main demographic.

[Scowling Dragon]

There is a difference, unrealistic men are meant to be a self image fantasy.


Sort of. On one side men are portrayed as fit. I do want to be fit. Women are usually portrayed as thin and not fit but im not sure. But they are portrayed with an unrealistic body figure that they can never achieve without surgery.

But on the other hand Im talking about handsomeness. There are constant male portrayals of what a perfect face looks like that I will never achieve without surgery. It just doesn't bother me.

[Dragonus45]

Sort of. On one side men are portrayed as fit. I do want to be fit. Women are usually portrayed as thin and not fit but im not sure. But they are portrayed with an unrealistic body figure that they can never achieve without surgery.

But on the other hand Im talking about handsomeness. There are constant male portrayals of what a perfect face looks like that I will never achieve without surgery. It just doesn't bother me.

That's because men are often portrayed in a wide array of body types other then unrealistically perfect. I agree that its not exactly sexism when women are shown wearing not all that much in the way of clothes but its not exactly zero sexism either.


It is hurting people. Its hurting women. Its hurting men. It hurts society.

It promotes an unhealthy body image. It promotes unhealthy attitudes towards women.

It is sexist, and it is harmful. If you can't see this, or you disagree with this, you need to check your priviledge privilege.

What exactly do you mean by privilege? It's a phrase that's right up there with male gaze on my "list".

[Cespenar]

Trying to define the exact boundaries of a term, especially if you consider the relative nature of semantics and how sexism is a heated issue in today's society, is really not that efficient an idea.

I mean, of course, feel free to speak your thoughts and argue, but in the end, it's all about where you draw the line of sexism, and where he or she does. And since it's a heated issue, no one will compromise to the other's interpretation.

Oh, also, before I go, I need at least one person to yell at me for trying to end a discussion. Please? :smalltongue:

[Trazoi]

Again: Constantly skimpy clothing is bad. Its just not sexist.
Then why aren't there equal numbers of near-naked sexy dudes?

[Dragonus45]

Then why aren't there equal numbers of near-naked sexy dudes?

There are, its just not considered to be as sexist since most men don't consider it an insult.

[Domochevsky]

There are, its just not considered to be as sexist since most men don't consider it an insult.

Where? And how many of those are gruff power fantasies instead of luscious sexual fantasies with plenty of Miranda shots? (Important distinction, that.) >_>

[slavegirl420]

{{Scrubbed}}

[Dragonus45]

Where? And how many of those are gruff power fantasies instead of luscious sexual fantasies with plenty of Miranda shots? (Important distinction, that.) >_>

That was my point earlier, that is its meant to be a fulfillment fantasy means that it means less on the insulting dar. That (http://trueslant.com/fruzsinaeordogh/files/2010/04/prince-of-persia-the-sands-of-time-character-art.jpg) said (http://trueslant.com/fruzsinaeordogh/files/2010/04/devil_may_cry3_2.jpg) i (http://www.shufflingdead.com/Articles/Games/Marcus-Fenix-2.jpg) can (http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/ga/buzz/feature/vg17/gow3_600x463.jpg) find a few examples of unrealistic body portrayal of men with one quick google search of what i mean.


As a girl who enjoys video games as much as the next person, I can't help but feel compelled to try and share some perspectives with all of you. Firstly, women only have 60 to 80 percent of the muscle mass of men. Once puberty kicks in, men develop increased levels of testosterone, resulting in broader frames and increased muscle mass. Women, however, experience higher levels of estrogen, which results in more body fat, less muscle and bone mass, and lighter total weight than men. All of these factors equate to less absolute strength and muscle mass for women than men. It's not just me saying this, it's science. The sooner we accept this the sooner we can move on.

2nd, because of the undeniable fact that most women are weaker than men, this is largely why women in video-games often possess ridiculous abilities such as being able to tote around giant assault rifles, the ability to beat men in hand to hand combat thanks to the magic of button prompts, and never, ever, ever have to take time off from a mission because they're on their cycle. Men don't have anything to slow them down, that's why they're portrayed as being superior. It's all based on nature.

And C: The whole reason video games even exist is to let us glimpse into another world, even take control of someone influential to further impact that immersion and make us feel rewarded. Sure it might seem real, but it's all pretend, no matter how hard some of you might wish otherwise. As far as women being objectified and society being threatened? That's just silly. Video games aren't about WOEMYN'S RIGHTS being stuffed down people's throats, they're usually about rad dudes beating up the bad dudes, or vice-versa. Just because you see a bunch of pixels resembling the likeness of a damsel in distress doesn't mean you need to freak out.

Just saying.

I feel you do your gender a disservice, while men have more innate advantage in the body building department any woman who wants too is more than capable of kicking as much ass as any man with the right effort.

[slavegirl420]

That was my point earlier, that is its meant to be a fulfillment fantasy means that it means less on the insulting dar. That (http://trueslant.com/fruzsinaeordogh/files/2010/04/prince-of-persia-the-sands-of-time-character-art.jpg) said (http://trueslant.com/fruzsinaeordogh/files/2010/04/devil_may_cry3_2.jpg) i (http://www.shufflingdead.com/Articles/Games/Marcus-Fenix-2.jpg) can (http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/ga/buzz/feature/vg17/gow3_600x463.jpg) find a few examples of unrealistic body portrayal of men with one quick google search of what i mean.



I feel you do your gender a disservice, while men have more innate advantage in the body building department any woman who wants too is more than capable of kicking as much ass as any man with the right effort.



Except for men who are legitimately bigger, stronger, tougher and more resilient because of their denser bone structure. Female skulls tend to be softer, and our tits are glaring weak points.

[Logic]

I feel you do your gender a disservice, while men have more innate advantage in the body building department any woman who wants too is more than capable of kicking as much ass as any man with the right effort.

While it is possible for a woman to be just as competitive in body building, genetics forces them to work harder to achieve the same results. MUCH HARDER.

[TheLaughingMan]

As a girl who enjoys video games as much as the next person, I can't help but feel compelled to try and share some perspectives with all of you. Firstly, women only have 60 to 80 percent of the muscle mass of men. Once puberty kicks in, men develop increased levels of testosterone, resulting in broader frames and increased muscle mass. Women, however, experience higher levels of estrogen, which results in more body fat, less muscle and bone mass, and lighter total weight than men. All of these factors equate to less absolute strength and muscle mass for women than men. It's not just me saying this, it's science. The sooner we accept this the sooner we can move on.

2nd, because of the undeniable fact that most women are weaker than men, this is largely why women in video-games often possess ridiculous abilities such as being able to tote around giant assault rifles, the ability to beat men in hand to hand combat thanks to the magic of button prompts, and never, ever, ever have to take time off from a mission because they're on their cycle. Men don't have anything to slow them down, that's why they're portrayed as being superior. It's all based on nature.

And C: The whole reason video games even exist is to let us glimpse into another world, even take control of someone influential to further impact that immersion and make us feel rewarded. Sure it might seem real, but it's all pretend, no matter how hard some of you might wish otherwise. As far as women being objectified and society being threatened? That's just silly. Video games aren't about WOEMYN'S RIGHTS being stuffed down people's throats, they're usually about rad dudes beating up the bad dudes, or vice-versa. Just because you see a bunch of pixels resembling the likeness of a damsel in distress doesn't mean you need to freak out.

Just saying.

So, to translate into me-terms, it's a bit like "seeing Conan the barbarian does not make me feel inadequate in my role as a stick-person, because the stories are already escapism anyways?" Intriguing!

And on a side-note, upon mental review, I can scarcely remember a time where an internet advocate for women's rights in videogames was actually, you know, a woman. Or at least was not grossly outnumbered by such types. Not meaning to make any statement on that, just found it interesting. :smalltongue:


I feel you do your gender a disservice, while men have more innate advantage in the body building department any woman who wants too is more than capable of kicking as much ass as any man with the right effort.

Hate to burst your bubble man, but in pure sciencey-terms, men do have a capacity to be stronger than women. That's not an opinion, that's just a fact. A woman can certainly be as or more competent than a man, and I know a good many women who could beat the tar out of me, but physically they have a lower cap.

[The Extinguisher]

The problem isn't that people are being objectified (okay it is, but bare with me), but it's who they're being objectified for.

Objectification of males and females in video games are done for the sole benefit of the male player. Guys are big and beefy and heroic, girls are small and fragile and sex symbols. One is empowering, the other is demeaning. Yes, they're both objectification, and they're both bad things that we should be able to move on from, but it's clearly sexism.

We need to move on from "Strong Female Characters (http://harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=311)." Or, if we're going to have women be objects, at least make them objects that will actually empower women.

[slavegirl420]

You're also forgetting a major factor in all of this. For as many men who enjoy the concept of being this strong, powerful person in fantasy games or iconic culture, there's just as many women who are completely fine with the roles some women in these fantasy mediums tend to encompass, even if they might seem sexist or wrong to some of you.

[Lord Seth]

Ok, I'll go first then.

Skimpy and revealing clothing plays directly into the male gaze (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_gaze). This shows that the prime market for games is males,Which it is. And that is no more wrong than the fact that prime market for romance novels is females.
and sends a rather strong message to any women playing the game that "this is not for you".

Which is pretty sexist.So are romance novels sexist if they attempt to appeal to their prime demographic?

[Avilan the Grey]

I have no problem with male gaze, but I wish there were more female gaze. And I say that as a straight male. Maybe it's because I am a scorpio :smalltongue: but I ENJOY a sexualized atmosphere.

What bothers me are the emotional tropes, things like the Metroid Prime game mentioned above, or the intro for the new Tombraider game for example. Chainmail bikinis only work if the woman wearing it kicks ass and takes names.

[Maryring]

Trying to define the exact boundaries of a term, especially if you consider the relative nature of semantics and how sexism is a heated issue in today's society, is really not that efficient an idea.

I mean, of course, feel free to speak your thoughts and argue, but in the end, it's all about where you draw the line of sexism, and where he or she does. And since it's a heated issue, no one will compromise to the other's interpretation.

Oh, also, before I go, I need at least one person to yell at me for trying to end a discussion. Please? :smalltongue:

You mean something like...

Curse you Cespenar the Butler Imp for trying to end this discussion!

Anyway, the way I view define Sexism is that it ends up being your gender that defines your primary characteristics. Scantily clad women aren't a problem in itself. It is the reason behind it. It's because they're there to say that "hey boys, since you're stupid horny buggers, enjoy" and "hey girls, here's what you gotta do to be worthwhile on the screen".

The act itself isn't bad. It's the statement and intent behind it.

[The Succubus]

As far as women being objectified and society being threatened? That's just silly. Video games aren't about WOEMYN'S RIGHTS being stuffed down people's throats, they're usually about rad dudes beating up the bad dudes, or vice-versa. Just because you see a bunch of pixels resembling the likeness of a damsel in distress doesn't mean you need to freak out.

Just saying.

And with that, the thread is won. There are times when under-dressed women prancing about for male entertainment is degrading and bad but it's stupid to try and bring it into a piece of escapism. If anything, it pisses people off with the issue and then when the issue crops up in an important case, people refuse to hear it because they've had it rammed down their throats elsewhere.

That said, I'm really not keen on gratuitous fan service. A good example of this is Aya Brea from the Parasite Eve series. In PE:II, she was a police officer with special abilities and quite the scary array of firepower. Yet aside from this, she was a remarkably human individual and her colleagues addressed her in a way that saw her as neither a weak stereotype or lust interest. It was a good game with a good character.

Then 3rd Birthday came out (aka PE:III). Whoever developed it should be metaphorically shot. They took the human and well represented character of Aya from PE:II and instead turned her into a shrieking bimbo, whose armour, and I kid ye not, gets "battle damaged" - increasing ripped and torn and skimpier. *THAT* I do have an issue with - not because of any particularly sexist overtones but gutting a character's development and personality for the sake of fanservice. :smallannoyed:

[slavegirl420]

You mean something like...

Curse you Cespenar the Butler Imp for trying to end this discussion!

Anyway, the way I view define Sexism is that it ends up being your gender that defines your primary characteristics. Scantily clad women aren't a problem in itself. It is the reason behind it. It's because they're there to say that "hey boys, since you're stupid horny buggers, enjoy" and "hey girls, here's what you gotta do to be worthwhile on the screen".

The act itself isn't bad. It's the statement and intent behind it.

Or it could just mean that some people like seeing women show off their bodies. I don't think it's a requirement for the target audience to be stupid and horny. Just like it isn't a be-all end-all requirement for girls to have no other choice than to shake their asses in a g-string. And you're forgetting that a lot of people, both men and women, are probably very comfortable with that sort of setup. Not just in games but in life.

Also they're just pixels who gives a **** what they think.

[MLai]

Statement taken from wikipedia definition on sexism:

"Sexist attitudes are frequently based on beliefs in traditional stereotypes of gender roles."
So, a female character wearing skimpy clothing and doing every action under male gaze falls under the sexist stereotyping of women -- No matter what your role in the story/situation, you are really only here for the titillation of men, our target demographic.

This is harmful outside of the game because it's an insidious viewpoint. It is a common viewpoint shared by sexist men: No matter what the female's role in the situation/job/activity, her prime role as far as he's concerned is for his titillation or similar amusement. Case in point from our little corner of the world: Sexual Harassment On Cross Assault (search Youtube).
===============================

@ Succubus:
You're contradicting yourself.

[Astrella]

You're also forgetting a major factor in all of this. For as many men who enjoy the concept of being this strong, powerful person in fantasy games or iconic culture, there's just as many women who are completely fine with the roles some women in these fantasy mediums tend to encompass, even if they might seem sexist or wrong to some of you.

There are; but there also plenty of people who aren't. And video games don't really do their job as escapism well if it's only escapism for a group of people. Which is why variety is key. A healthy mix of all sorts of personalities / appearance for characters of any gender is the best way to be inclusive.


And with that, the thread is won. There are times when under-dressed women prancing about for male entertainment is degrading and bad but it's stupid to try and bring it into a piece of escapism. If anything, it pisses people off with the issue and then when the issue crops up in an important case, people refuse to hear it because they've had it rammed down their throats elsewhere.

An issue is an issue. And frankly, I think it's rather rude for you to say that people shouldn't talk about an issue that's bothering them because it might annoy other people.

And please don't downplay the importance of media. Social attitudes and perceptions aren't innate; they are thought. Bigotry and negative attitudes are thought; not innate. Which is why it's important that media tries to represent a balanced view (note, balanced; this is not saying get rid of all sexy characters etc...).

Sidestep to trans issues to illustrate: trans* portrayal is media is horrible. And because of trans* invisibility people have very little to base their opinions on, so they reach to media. Which would be okay; if media portrayal wasn't mostly "She's really a man" Jerry Springer stuff. (And harmful attitudes like that kill and have killed people.) I'd be so happy if there was a decent trans* character in a game for once. I don't know if you've heard of the flash game dys4ia (http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/591565)? Read the comments on that. A simple little minimalistic game opened up so many people's eyes and made them a lot more understanding. Games have a lot of power; and to downplay that is to frankly insult games as a medium and art form.

[slavegirl420]

{{Scrubbed}}

[VanBuren]

So, to translate into me-terms, it's a bit like "seeing Conan the barbarian does not make me feel inadequate in my role as a stick-person, because the stories are already escapism anyways?" Intriguing!

And on a side-note, upon mental review, I can scarcely remember a time where an internet advocate for women's rights in videogames was actually, you know, a woman. Or at least was not grossly outnumbered by such types. Not meaning to make any statement on that, just found it interesting. :smalltongue:



Hate to burst your bubble man, but in pure sciencey-terms, men do have a capacity to be stronger than women. That's not an opinion, that's just a fact. A woman can certainly be as or more competent than a man, and I know a good many women who could beat the tar out of me, but physically they have a lower cap.

And yet I've never found myself in a situation where my "higher potential" was anywhere near as important as actual realized strength. No statement, just something interesting.

[Astrella]

The other thing is, you can usually tell who gay people are when they're out, and most of the time you can spot the gay in people before they realize it themselves.

I think you might be going a bit into Toupee fallacy here. You can't really "spot the gay", sure, it might work sometimes but that's because society conflates feminine guy / butch girl with being gay.


Because of this, that leaves the transpeople who don't blend in too well as the only source of reference when it comes to culture. The transperson is a walking punchline. Think of Silence of the Lambs' character Buffalo Bill. Got turned down by 6 different gender therapists so he finally just snapped and decided to make a girl suit out of human skin. Ace Ventura 1, Ray Finkle had a sex change so he could get closer to his victim and murder them discreetly. The list goes on.

And that is incredibly harmful. It's not hard to include minority characters without having to resort to making them a walking joke or a token. It does a lot of damage trying to come to terms with being trans* when basically everything that talks about trans* people in society makes us out to be freaks or abominations. Ace Ventura (http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed/2012/05/18/ace-ventura-het-perspective/) basically makes it out to be okay to physically abuse and humiliate a trans woman... and that's a freakin' joke!


With all that being said I think there's plenty worse things happening all around us, things that are realistically a lot more dangerous than Miranda Lawson's fat ass or Triskha's (From Bulletstorm) penis envy. Also I don't remember the last time video games bashed trannies. The only thing I can think of is Resident Evil: Dead Aim where the main antagonist injected himself with the virus and sex changed into a female tyrant with high-heel bone structures in her heels.

People can focus on multiple issues at once though. If someone wants to talk about this, they can talk about it; and whether there's worse stuff happening isn't really relevant. Devoting time to this doesn't mean you can't devote time to other stuff either. (And imho, the best way to get rid of bigotry is to ensure that there's is a balanced array of portrayals around. Again, sexism is thought, not innate.)

For trans* portrayals; there's the bit in Dragon Age with the transgender sex worker being played for jokes. There's Poison from Final Fight, who was initially only made trans* outside of Japan because it's bad to beat up women and a trans woman isn't a real woman anyway so that makes it okay.

Also, could you not use the T-word? It's sorta an offensive slur. You can use trans people instead.

[Elagune]

Then 3rd Birthday came out (aka PE:III). Whoever developed it should be metaphorically shot. They took the human and well represented character of Aya from PE:II and instead turned her into a shrieking bimbo, whose armour, and I kid ye not, gets "battle damaged" - increasing ripped and torn and skimpier. *THAT* I do have an issue with - not because of any particularly sexist overtones but gutting a character's development and personality for the sake of fanservice. :smallannoyed:

Having never played the third game, yet having read the summary, Ii'm pretty sure you discover halfway through the game that the Aya in the third game is a completely different character with a case of mistaken identity. Or possession, or some sort of weird deal. She's definitely not the same character, though.

That'd probably lessen the dissonance a little bit?

[Strawberries]

Okay, I'm another female gamer speaking, and I can offer only my limited anecdotical evidence, so take it for what it's worth.


There is that. True. It scares away female gamers

I've personally never been "scared away" from games by portrayals of female in skimpy clothes. Irritated, yes. Bored, absolutely. But "scared away" is too strong a term. I can deal with stereotyped female characters. I'm not going to be happy, of course, but I will probably just laugh at the idiocy of it all. And male characters get stereotyped a lot too, in most games. I think I can confidently say that what annoys me in games or in other media are bland characters without personality. That they are male or female is, frankly, irrelevant.

EDIT



Also, could you not use the T-word? It's sorta an offensive slur. You can use trans people instead.

Astrella, sorry to ask, but could you clarify what the T-word is? I'm Italian, and sometimes the intricacies of English language escape me. I don't want to offend people because of my ignorance.

[VanBuren]

Okay, I'm another female gamer speaking, and I can offer only my limited anecdotical evidence, so take it for what it's worth.



I've personally never been "scared away" from games by portrayals of female in skimpy clothes. Irritated, yes. Bored, absolutely. But "scared away" is too strong a term. I can deal with stereotyped female characters. I'm not going to be happy, of course, but I will probably just laugh at the idiocy of it all. And male characters get stereotyped a lot too, in most games. I think I can confidently say that what annoys me in games or in other media are bland characters without personality. That they are male or female is, frankly, irrelevant.

EDIT



Astrella, sorry to ask, but could you clarify what the T-word is? I'm Italian, and sometimes the intricacies of English language escape me. I don't want to offend people because of my ignorance.

In this case it was "trannies", I think...?

[Strawberries]

In this case it was "trannies", I think...?

Gotcha. It had escaped me in the rest of the post.

[Astrella]

Gotcha. It had escaped me in the rest of the post.

Yes, that's it. I should bold it out in the quote I think.

[Brother Oni]

I feel you do your gender a disservice, while men have more innate advantage in the body building department any woman who wants too is more than capable of kicking as much ass as any man with the right effort.

Up to a point though.

As others have said, women simply have a physical disadvantage which sometimes no amount of attitude or mental fortitude can overcome.

For example, women are not permitted in front line combat roles simply because there will be times where sheer physical strength is going to be an issue. This is aside from reported instances (from the Israelis when they trialled mixed infantry), where an entire unit tends to stop fighting and disengage from combat when a female member became a casualty.

I don't think this is sexist, but just plain statement of fact - saying that women don't belong in the military would be sexist though.

[The Succubus]

An issue is an issue. And frankly, I think it's rather rude for you to say that people shouldn't talk about an issue that's bothering them because it might annoy other people.

And please don't downplay the importance of media. Social attitudes and perceptions aren't innate; they are thought. Bigotry and negative attitudes are thought; not innate. Which is why it's important that media tries to represent a balanced view (note, balanced; this is not saying get rid of all sexy characters etc...).

Sidestep to trans issues to illustrate: trans* portrayal is media is horrible. And because of trans* invisibility people have very little to base their opinions on, so they reach to media. Which would be okay; if media portrayal wasn't mostly "She's really a man" Jerry Springer stuff. (And harmful attitudes like that kill and have killed people.) I'd be so happy if there was a decent trans* character in a game for once. I don't know if you've heard of the flash game dys4ia (http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/591565)? Read the comments on that. A simple little minimalistic game opened up so many people's eyes and made them a lot more understanding. Games have a lot of power; and to downplay that is to frankly insult games as a medium and art form.

I think I'm going to steer clear of discussions like these in the future because I never manage to say something that doesn't end up upsetting *somebody*.

[Astrella]

I think I'm going to steer clear of discussions like these in the future because I never manage to say something that doesn't end up upsetting *somebody*.

I'm sorry if I worded it a bit strongly. I just don't really think that having a specific thread for "sexism in gaming" is really stuffing things down people's throats. :/ Also I wasn't really upset, just a bit bothered by that statement. :c

[danzibr]

No game has an ugly protagonist (Unless its about that.)
I think Nier might be an exception here.

[The Succubus]

Perhaps if madame would follow me to the LGBT thread, I might be able to explain my concerns a little more clearly?

[Astrella]

Perhaps if madame would follow me to the LGBT thread, I might be able to explain my concerns a little more clearly?

Sure? Hide hide hide the invisible text.

[Strawberries]

No game has an ugly protagonist


I think Nier might be an exception here.

Planescpe: torment? Soul Reaver? God of War?

And Max Payne, now that I think about it. :smalltongue:

[Arachu]

I never saw how "male power fantasies" are less sexist than "male gaze" - not all men want to be walking battering rams. But when every character in everything is either that, omnipotent, absurdly skilled, or perfectly average and therefore not bad at anything... People end up with just a handful of utterly unrealistic characters to identify with. It's fine to have a Big Guy here, a Hot Chick there - but not when everyone's a walking caricature.


On Dragon Age: The first one had two (as they put it) "Female" prostitutes, while the second had one named example (I think). They all had female body models, male faces with a bit of stubble and really deep voices, though...


On RE Dead Aim: ... That was actually more transphobic than I thought... He used a combination of the T-Virus, which makes dead things sort of alive again... And the G-Virus, which makes mutants. Called the TG-Virus. Gah. :smalleek: :smallannoyed:


On ugly protagonists: There is Frank West. Granted DR has some pretty sexist female characters (read: all of them, and incredibly), but he managed to get through without looking perfect or advancing any romance beyond undertones. There was that photo thing with the Raincoat survivor, but that was just creepy with the other survivors in the room. >.>


On bone density and boobs: Wear a helmet and torso armor.


~Bianca

[Zelkon]

You're also forgetting a major factor in all of this. For as many men who enjoy the concept of being this strong, powerful person in fantasy games or iconic culture, there's just as many women who are completely fine with the roles some women in these fantasy mediums tend to encompass, even if they might seem sexist or wrong to some of you.

Which is, by default, a product of a Patriarchal Society (purposeful caps). While there are differing limits on physical strength between men and woman, it only happens at the very top of the spectrum. Even in the military, the difference isn't too noticeable, and easily fixed, anyway, considering the number of military jobs that don't require pique fitness, but instead focus more on ability, skill, and knowledge (which favors both genders equally).

[The Succubus]

Planescpe: torment? Soul Reaver? God of War?

And Max Payne, now that I think about it. :smalltongue:

Oh please hun. I'm almost completely straight and I find Kain to be sexy. :smallbiggrin: It's that voice mainly. It tingles me. :smallredface:

[danzibr]

Planescpe: torment? Soul Reaver? God of War?

And Max Payne, now that I think about it. :smalltongue:
Oh yeah, totes with the Planescape: Torment. I think Max Payne is alright... and haven't played the others.

Oh please hun. I'm almost completely straight and I find Kain to be sexy. :smallbiggrin: It's that voice mainly. It tingles me. :smallredface:
He does indeed have a nice voice. I was going off of appearances though. He's buff, but when he gets that mask...

[Astrella]

I never saw how "male power fantasies" are less sexist than "male gaze" - not all men want to be walking battering rams. But when every character in everything is either that, omnipotent, absurdly skilled, or perfectly average and therefore not bad at anything... People end up with just a handful of utterly unrealistic characters to identify with. It's fine to have a Big Guy here, a Hot Chick there - but not when everyone's a walking caricature.

Hm hm, stereotypes in general are a sorta bad thing. Male characters do tend to have a bit more variety then female characters do. But that probably has to do with the whole "default human is male" deal. Like, for a lot of character what gender they are doesn't really play a big role; so an easy way to create a bit more of a balance is to mix it up a bit and go for an even division of genders.

And I think that's still the best way to be inclusive; just have characters who are minorities, but aren't just minorities. Yes, minorities have to deal with specific issues which are interesting to explore in a character; but that shouldn't be the only type of character there is. Because then there's a very big risk of tokenizing. And that's something say Mass Effect does pretty well with regards to queer relationships. Just mention it and don't make a deal about it.

[Brother Oni]

I think Nier might be an exception here.

Well Nier Gesalt anyway. Nier Replicant, not so much.

For further 'ugly' protagonists, there's Kratos and probably about half of the males in the various Dynasty Warriors games.


Even in the military, the difference isn't too noticeable, and easily fixed, anyway, considering the number of military jobs that don't require pique fitness, but instead focus more on ability, skill, and knowledge (which favors both genders equally).

It depends - outside of actual combat arms, I'd agree with you. If, for whatever reason, a woman wanted to get into the actual killing of the enemy, then she's pretty much out of luck unless she's flying an aircraft or in charge of a ship.

[Strawberries]

Oh please hun. I'm almost completely straight and I find Kain to be sexy. :smallbiggrin: It's that voice mainly. It tingles me. :smallredface:

I was talking about Raziel, actually. Kain is sexy. (Not that Raziel's voice is bad, either, but "undead jawless wraith" has never been really my type. :smalltongue:

[endoperez]

Re: OP. Good call. Skimpy clothing is an issue, but on its own, not sexism.

I guess presenting a woman as sexy isn't sexism, either, for pretty much the same reasons.

Dead or Alive series, which is ridiculed for its boob physics and skimpy clothing, doesn't actually seem to be that bad about women being helpless, passive, and/or needing to be saved by men. I only skimmed through the story of one female character, Kasumi, but she's said to be one of the main protagonists of the series, is captured several times but either escapes or is helped to escape. Her motivations are her friendships and relationships to different men and women.

Funny as it seems, DoA might not be sexist.

I glimpsed at Tekken's story, too, and the character of Jun seems to be a pretty generic damsel.
"Jun Kazama comes to the stunning realization that Kazuya's supernatural strength stems from Devil. But she cannot help being drawn to him, propelled by a mystic force beyond her control. "
"As Kazuya's body burns, the Devil appears before the pregnant Jun Kazama in a bid to enter the soul of the new life beating within her. But in a desperate struggle for the future of her child, Jun defeats Devil and retires to desolate Yakushima so as to raise Kazuya's son, Jin, alone."
"Jun Kazama instinctively picks up on the dark power encroaching on her life. She has no understanding of what it is, but senses that she has become a target. Accepting her destiny, she tells Jin everything she knows of their haunted past to prepare him for the fateful day she now feels is imminent."

(my source (http://www.angelfire.com/co2/danielchilds/story.html) for these sucks though)


So, yeah. I'm not sure if DoA really is less sexist than Tekken, for example, but it's a really good eye-opener and reminder.

[Dragonus45]

The act itself isn't bad. It's the statement and intent behind it.

Honestly I think that goes back to my earlier statement about the industry being a lot more lazy than it is sexist. Team ninja is never included on that statement tho. They ate just plain sexist.

[MCerberus]

There's some sort of bias going on that pervades not just games but gaming society. Just recently the DLC character for Borderlands 2 was revealed to have one of their trees be "girlfriend mode". This was a poor choice of words.


On the plus-side, gamer society is starting to reject these sort of things, in a relatively civil manner for things on the internet.

[Traab]

Honestly? While at times it gets taken to extremes, I dont find skimpy clothing to be an issue. Maybe its because I have lost track of how many shirtless barbarian male hero type characters I have played as, most of the time, male or female, the characters are drawn to fit an ideal. Whether its the musclebound clod, the bishounen look, or the rough around the edges rogue type, all of the male characters are also designed in a very stereotypical way. Just the same as women. The main issue, I think, is that the "ideal" woman look has less variance than the male sexy look, so it comes off as more cookie cutter and the variance is mainly around clothing. And when going for a new sexy look, there are only so many places you can leave cloth gaps before it turns into a porno, so it tends to be mainly smaller is better.

Costumes and body designs aside, I find the sexism is far less pronounced now than it used to be. There is less "rescue the helpless princess" and more save the world. There are female characters that run the gamut of personalities from frail waif, to strong warrior queen. And guys arent any different. You have cowardly losers, to strong heroic leaders. For every screaming girl I have to rescue from the bandits, there are just as many cowering male peasants I have to protect from attacks. Does sexism exist in games? Im sure it does. I am also sure it goes both ways at times, but I think it has diminished a great deal. Lets face it, if the worst example of standard sexism in videogames is to complain about the armor choices, that really isnt all that bad.

[Psyren]

The problem with games in a nutshell:

The scantily clad females are sex symbols for the straight male audience.
The scantily clad males are power fantasies for the straight male audience.

It's not so much the fact that there is cake on display - women like cake too - rather, it's the unspoken assumption of who the work is "for" that causes this marginalization.


MovieBob (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5950-Tropes-vs-MovieBob) seems to have said it better (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5436-Not-Okay) than I was able.

Yeah, he very frequently nails this stuff.

And while we're on the subject, one of my favorite illustrations of the problem:

http://www.vh1.com/celebrity/bwe/images/2012/05/Avengers-Posing-Like-Girls-1336494685.jpg

[Zelkon]

Ideally, you shouldn't even notice gender, you should notice character. Gender is really only good for reproduction.

[Zelkon]

http://www.vh1.com/celebrity/bwe/images/2012/05/Avengers-Posing-Like-Girls-1336494685.jpg

Sorry for the double post, but this is a brilliant example of the problem. It's really ridiculous.

[BRC]

As has been pointed out, I think a big part of it is the Male Privilege.

The Default Character (in American games anyway) is a White Heterosexual Male. Any deviations from this formula is usually seen as a big deal to some extent or another (OMG GUYZ SAMUS IS A GIRL and all that).

Sexy=Sexism is an issue, not because skimpy outfits are inherently sexist, but because of the cultural context around them. Let's look at Lara Croft.

Lara Croft stars in her own game series, kicks hefty amounts of ass, and while I'm not super familiar with the Tomb Raider storylines, I've never seen her depicted as subservient to or dependent on a male character in any way.
As wardrobes go, her's is actually fairly restrained. While the Short-Shorts and Tank-top combo is not optimal for somebody who expects to climb through deadly ruins getting into gunfights, it's not impractical. Yes she's having firefights in it, but unless she's going to put on some proper body armor no one outfit is going to be much protection against a bullet or a tiger's teeth than another. Unlike the infamous Chainmail Bikini, which is clearly supposed to be Armor, while not actually protecting very much.


And yet, Lara DOES represent a problem, not because of anything about her, as has been said many times here, there is nothing wrong with having good-looking ladies in video games. It's because of the cultural context surrounding her character design. She is clearly supposed to represent a male fantasy. It's Sexist because clearly the design team had "Somebody a heterosexual male player would very, very much like to have sex with" on the top of their list of priorities.
Now, as the Male Privilege gradually goes away, Lara's character design will become more acceptable. Right now she's problematic because she represents the same design philosophy that led to characters like Ivy from Soul Caliber (Although Ivy is a bit of a joke at this point) Or Street Fighter's famously Pantsless Cami. Eventually people will look at Lara Croft's character design the same way they look at a director deciding to cast Brad Pitt in a movie. People want to look at good-looking people.

This is in the same way that it's problematic every time a female character is in danger must be rescued by a male character of theoretically equal skill. People rescue each other, that's something that happens in dangerous situations like those encountered in many video games. It's only problematic because we're still dealing with the cultural aftereffects of the Damsel in Distress, which casts the useless Female character as both objective, and reward, for the heroic, capable Male. We need to escape the idea of Female Characters existing as eye-candy for male audiences before scantily-clad ladies become truly acceptable.


Concerning "Girlfriend Mode", it's not actually a game mode. One character has a certain build that makes them very forgiving for people unfamiliar with FPS's. Some developer just referred to it as "Girlfriend Mode". He could just as easily have called it "Younger Sibling Mode" or "New Player Mode" or "Guest Mode" or "Easy Mode". That he chose the term "Girlfriend Mode" is less the fault of the Game (Which, remember, dosn't actually have it as a "mode" so much as a character build), and says more about him, and perhaps the design team if that's the term they've been using. It shows that the Male Privilege is still going strong for both Characters and Gamers. They create this one build tree so that people less skilled at the game can still have fun playing it alongside their more talented friends. It just so happens that the first situation this guy thought of was "A guy wants to play with his girlfriend, but she sucks because, as well all know, gaming skill is carried along the Y Chromosome".

[MCerberus]

It just so happens that the first situation this guy thought of was "A guy wants to play with his girlfriend, but she sucks because, as well all know, gaming skill is carried along the Y Chromosome".

You have to remember these are the people making the game, so that bias is going to make it into design unless other voices win out. So I'd argue that this way of thinking needs to be called out for in a respectful way.


If you'll go back with me a few years to some dev diaries for Bulletstorm, a female dev on the team thought that their promo time talking about the female character needed a sidetrack explaining that the male devs wanted to make her a giant T&A eyecandy girl. You lose some subtext on how much it was a joke not knowing these people, but it's that sort of cultural expectations about your audience that cause some of these issues.

[slavegirl420]

Which is, by default, a product of a Patriarchal Society (purposeful caps). While there are differing limits on physical strength between men and woman, it only happens at the very top of the spectrum. Even in the military, the difference isn't too noticeable, and easily fixed, anyway, considering the number of military jobs that don't require pique fitness, but instead focus more on ability, skill, and knowledge (which favors both genders equally).

You're also forgetting about the demographic of women who like being objectified for their own reasons, not just because of what THE MEN AND THEIR GAZE have "enforced upon the female gender". You're acting like the things men do is this evil thing that has to constantly be combatted.

[Astrella]

You're also forgetting about the demographic of women who like being objectified for their own reasons, not just because of what THE MEN AND THEIR GAZE have "enforced upon the female gender". You're acting like the things men do is this evil thing that has to constantly be combatted.

It something that happens, but that's mostly due to societal attitudes and expectations. A lot of bad things happen or are tolerated because they're deemed acceptable or expected.

And yes, some women like being objectified; but that doesn't mean it should be the standard. (And objectification and attention aren't the same thing.)

[Opperhapsen]

"A guy wants to play with his girlfriend, but she sucks because, as well all know, gaming skill is carried along the Y Chromosome".
That's not what he meant, and I'm getting quite annoyed with people's annoyance over "Girlfriend mode".

All requests for "Games to introduce someone to gaming!" has been about someone's girlfriend (sorry, once it was a boyfriend), I've seen dozens of people saying their boyfriend introduced them to gaming, and the vast majority of gamers are male.

[Astrella]

That's not what he meant, and I'm getting quite annoyed with people's annoyance over "Girlfriend mode".

All requests for "Games to introduce someone to gaming!" has been about someone's girlfriend (sorry, once it was a boyfriend), I've seen dozens of people saying their boyfriend introduced them to gaming, and the vast majority of gamers are male.

Actually about 40% of people who play games these days are women though.

[Opperhapsen]

Actually about 40% of people who play games these days are women though.
That's still 20% more males. :smallannoyed:

[Astrella]

Yes, but I wouldn't really call that "the vast majority". :smallconfused:

[Opperhapsen]

Yes, but I wouldn't really call that "the vast majority". :smallconfused:

Your 40% also includes the casual crowd.

Honestly even if women were not a minority in their market the stereotypical person to be introduced to gaming is still your partner.
He's a dude.

[BRC]

Which provides an Explanation, not a Justification. Shouldn't the Games industry be trying to discourage objectification and sexism regardless of who their audiences are? Isn't it just as important to have men see women as equals as it is to have Women see themselves as equal to men.

[Eurus]

Your 40% also includes the casual crowd.

Honestly even if women were not a minority in their market the stereotypical person to be introduced to gaming is still your partner.
He's a dude.

And that's partly because of this "girlfriend mode"-type problem. Games are marketed to men, so of course men play them more.

[Opperhapsen]

Which provides an Explanation, not a Justification. Shouldn't the Games industry be trying to discourage objectification and sexism regardless of who their audiences are? Isn't it just as important to have men see women as equals as it is to have Women see themselves as equal to men.
How...how is it objectification?
How is it sexism?
You're looking for things to get offended about.

[Maxios]

Just a few ugly male protagonists:
Niko Bellic
John Marston
Frank West (already mentioned, but still, for a guy in his late thirties, he looks older then my father)
Max Payne
The default "canon" appearance of the Courier

[Opperhapsen]

And that's partly because of this "girlfriend mode"-type problem. Games are marketed to men, so of course men play them more.

No.
Games are marketed towards the people who buy them.
If these people are male so be it.
If women were an equal audience they'd be equally marketed towards.

AND JUST TO BE CLEAR:
What do you mean "Marketed towards men"?
Should Gears of war adds feature flowers and pink?

[BRC]

How...how is it objectification?
How is it sexism?
You're looking for things to get offended about.

Right, sorry, my terms got cross-pollinated from the main discussion over to the "Girlfriend Mode" discussion. Yeah, neither Sexist nor Objectifying, but still a problem.

The point is, even if this mode IS mainly going to be used by male gamers to introduce their girlfriends to the game, calling it "Girlfriend Mode" carries several implications, implications that are harmful, both socially, and to the industry.

[Astrella]

Your 40% also includes the casual crowd.

Honestly even if women were not a minority in their market the stereotypical person to be introduced to gaming is still your partner.
He's a dude.

Those are gamers too. And you are being awfully assuming in that the majority of women would only get into gaming via their boyfriend.


No.
Games are marketed towards the people who buy them.
If these people are male so be it.
If women were an equal audience they'd be equally marketed towards.

That's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you make a product that turns off certain people off course they won't buy it.


AND JUST TO BE CLEAR:
What do you mean "Marketed towards men"?
Should Gears of war adds feature flowers and pink?

...
Do you really think that (all) women are about that?

-----

Also, what's the harm in having more diverse (female) character portrayals? That isn't something that's going to turn away people from games.

[Sholos]

There's some sort of bias going on that pervades not just games but gaming society. Just recently the DLC character for Borderlands 2 was revealed to have one of their trees be "girlfriend mode". This was a poor choice of words.


Concerning "Girlfriend Mode", it's not actually a game mode. One character has a certain build that makes them very forgiving for people unfamiliar with FPS's. Some developer just referred to it as "Girlfriend Mode". He could just as easily have called it "Younger Sibling Mode" or "New Player Mode" or "Guest Mode" or "Easy Mode". That he chose the term "Girlfriend Mode" is less the fault of the Game (Which, remember, dosn't actually have it as a "mode" so much as a character build), and says more about him, and perhaps the design team if that's the term they've been using. It shows that the Male Privilege is still going strong for both Characters and Gamers. They create this one build tree so that people less skilled at the game can still have fun playing it alongside their more talented friends. It just so happens that the first situation this guy thought of was "A guy wants to play with his girlfriend, but she sucks because, as well all know, gaming skill is carried along the Y Chromosome".

This, plus anyone taking anything in Borderlands seriously is missing the point of the game. The game is basically one big send-up of everything. And if that's not the actual name of the tree and just the dev's comment, then it's even less of an issue.

[Spiryt]

Which provides an Explanation, not a Justification. Shouldn't the Games industry be trying to discourage objectification and sexism regardless of who their audiences are? Isn't it just as important to have men see women as equals as it is to have Women see themselves as equal to men.

Games industry should sell gamers games they want to buy, without breaking the law and withing boundaries of minimally 'decent' taste, I hope.

Last thing we really need is random things like games industry trying to save /change the world, indoctrinate people to something, no matter how "good" or whatever somebody dubs it....

[Opperhapsen]

Those are gamers too. And you are being awfully assuming in that the majority of women would only get into gaming via their boyfriend.
I have never, ever, ever, said that.
I said a majority of the cries for help to introduce someone to gaming has been someone wanting to game with their partner, and this partner is usually a "Female".

And yes casual gamers also play games, but they're not his audience.


...
Do you really think that (all) women are about that?

I honestly can't tell if you're kidding with that question.

[Astrella]

Games industry should sell gamers games they want to buy, without breaking the law and withing boundaries of minimally 'decent' taste, I hope.

Last thing we really need is random things like games industry trying to save /change the world, indoctrinate people to something, no matter how "good" or whatever somebody dubs it....

Yes, they perfectly are. But media does influence people, that's something you can't avoid. And we as customers and gamers are perfectly allowed to voice our opinions and criticism.

[Spiryt]

Yes, they perfectly are. But media does influence people, that's something you can't avoid. And we as customers and gamers are perfectly allowed to voice our opinions and criticism.

They influence people by shamelessly stuffing people with moralization, weird ideas and agenda's and generally doing weird stuff instead of concentrating on what they should do.

If someone wants to avoid it, (s)he doesn't buy their stuff, and don't bother with their antics.

At the end of the day, somebody may enjoy their dumb, "sexist", generally facepalm worthy game too. :smallconfused::smallmad:


His right and nothing to do about it.

[Misery Esquire]

I've personally never been "scared away" from games by portrayals of female in skimpy clothes.

Hell, several (I hate that word, it never looks like it's been spelt correctly) of the girl gamers I know have more interest in the scantily clad women than I do. Maybe it's my attraction to more ordinary, less overtly revealing, clothes. And people with internal organs.

[BRC]

They influence people by shamelessly stuffing people with moralization, weird ideas and agenda's and generally doing weird stuff instead of concentrating on what they should do.

If someone wants to avoid it, (s)he doesn't buy their stuff, and don't bother with their antics.

At the end of the day, somebody may enjoy their dumb, "sexist", generally facepalm worthy game too. :smallconfused::smallmad:


His right and nothing to do about it.
I'm not saying that all Games should turn into ten-hour lectures on the importance of gender equality. I'm just saying they should give Cami some pants.

Actually, at this point her outfit is Iconic and changing it would lead to Nerd Rage. But still.

[The Succubus]

Internal organs aren't really a problem here - it's the external ones and their state of revalation that is. :smalltongue:

[Dublock]

This reminds me when Diablo 3 came out. On their official forums (A truly scary place if you don't know) there was a big thread complaining about how the female barbarian looks because of various reasons like to much muscle, to tall, to big, etc.

Really? *shakes head* the various forms of media needs to do more like that to help out. There isn't (to my knowledge) any really bad example of sexist things in games but rather it is the collective whole and the collective of all the small things that adds up.

When we (as a whole) sees and plays the sexist is can and does subtly affect all of us, how it affect us does depend on the person and I hope I am more sensitive to it.

An example of my line of thinking is violence and vulgar language. Look at the movies made back in the 1930s and then go and watch the new Batman (I saw it last night, why its on my mind) there is a lot more, and not just because of the graphics (which does add to it). It has been a slow and study increase over the years. We are now more desensitized to the violence and I don't want sexism to get such a hold.

Over the years we (again as a whole) have gotten better with rights and such but we need to work on it still. I never want to sit down and talk to the kids I will have or grand-kids I may have and explain why women rights have stalled, or homosexual rights have stalled (or never even gain...), or why transgendered people are still segregated from the majority of the community.

Ideally there will be more games marketed to women now it is a big enough and broad enough market that you can't just make one game and be done with it. Also include things that break the stereotype and make it a good game. Its not going to make an impact if it goes straight into the bargain bin.

[Astrella]

They influence people by shamelessly stuffing people with moralization, weird ideas and agenda's and generally doing weird stuff instead of concentrating on what they should do.

If someone wants to avoid it, (s)he doesn't buy their stuff, and don't bother with their antics.

At the end of the day, somebody may enjoy their dumb, "sexist", generally facepalm worthy game too. :smallconfused::smallmad:


His right and nothing to do about it.

No-one is telling anyone what they can enjoy and can't enjoy. All I've been arguing for is variety. I'm also curious about what you think game developers should do?

[Spiryt]

I'm not saying that all Games should turn into ten-hour lectures on the importance of gender equality. I'm just saying they should give Cami some pants.

Actually, at this point her outfit is Iconic and changing it would lead to Nerd Rage. But still.

Why, exactly though?

not really familiar with SF, but her outfit doesn't seem much more ridiculous than everyone else.

Women wear stuff like that for Yoga and some other gymnastic/exercise stuff. May as well wear it for fictional swinging legs around on the street.



No-one is telling anyone what they can enjoy and can't enjoy. All I've been arguing for is variety. I'm also curious about what you think game developers should do?

What they want. So (un)fortunately what sells, in the end.

I would love to see some more variety in games as well, but it's not happening, tough ...... I guess. :smallfrown:

Promoting equality or whatever else is rather low on my list of wishes, though. :smallwink:

[Lord Seth]

That's a self-fulfilling prophecy.Only if it wasn't true to begin with. If a particular kind of product is far more popular among a particular demographic, then it makes a lot of sense to target it towards that demographic.

For example, do you honestly think that, short of changing it so much it wouldn't even be recognizable with the original, Twilight would have ever been particularly popular among the male gender?
If you make a product that turns off certain people off course they won't buy it.Do you have any actual evidence to back up the idea that these are turning off these "certain people" in any noticeable quantity outside of isolated claims? For example, market research or studies?

[Astrella]

Only if it wasn't true to begin with. If a particular kind of product is far more popular among a particular demographic, then it makes a lot of sense to target it towards that demographic.

Yes, but being inclusive to more people is always better form a business point of view.


For example, do you honestly think that, short of changing it so much it wouldn't even be recognizable with the original, Twilight would have ever been particularly popular among the male gender?Do you have any actual evidence to back up the idea that these are turning off these "certain people" in any noticeable quantity outside of isolated claims? For example, market research or studies?

Mass Effect for example. Mass Effect has pretty decent characters for all genders and is inclusive on other fields as well.

[Knaight]

Its not hurtful, and not made with hurtful intent (Just intent for more money).

The effect things have, and the consequences of their being are largely disconnected from intent. A hurtful intent makes things worse, sure, but it is by no means required. Moreover, the way people try to use intent as a get out of jail free card is just ridiculous - picture it in other situations. Responding to "Hey, you're kind of stepping on my foot" with "I never intended to step on your foot! How dare you call me a foot-stepper-onner! How can you complain about me stepping on your foot when it is an accident!" makes you look like you're a colossal jerk. "Oh, I'm sorry" followed by moving your foot doesn't, and this takes into account that yes, you did something you should be sorry about, even if it was by accident.

[Opperhapsen]

Mass Effect for example. Mass Effect has pretty decent characters for all genders and is inclusive on other fields as well.
That's not relevant, not correct.

[Weezer]

That's not relevant, not correct.

And why not? I'm not necessarially disagreeing, haven't played them myself, but from what I've heard they were above average, though not amazing, in terms of gender role representation.

[Lord Seth]

Yes, but being inclusive to more people is always better form a business point of view.That's not really addressing the point I was making.

You were claiming that the reason video games were more popular among males was the fact that they were more marketed towards them. I was pointing out that they were more marketed towards them because they were more popular among them to begin with. You're essentially changing the subject.

Let's take another example. The Magic: the Gathering playerbase is overwhelmingly male, even more so among the top players. I looked at each Grand Prix's Top 8 for this year and found one female among all of them; for reference, there were 27 Grand Prix (Grand Prixs?), so that's 1 out of 216 players. Even assuming I missed several (darn foreign names that are androgynous to me!), that's extremely low.

But unless I'm missing something, I don't see that much in the Magic: the Gathering game itself that's honestly slanted towards a particular gender. And yet the playerbase is overwhelming male. What self-fulfilling prophecy is there here?
Mass Effect for example. Mass Effect has pretty decent characters for all genders and is inclusive on other fields as well.And that answers my question...how?

I asked you to provide proof of your claim that these game elements you were complaining about were legitimately driving people away, and you responded by...pointing to a game and not actually answering the question. You seem to be trying to argue some kind of "Mass Effect was balanced and it was popular!" but you didn't actually draw any connection between those. Show me evidence that that was such a big reason the game was popular. Otherwise you're essentially arguing the reason Super Mario Bros. was popular was because people think plumbers are cool.

[Astrella]

That's not relevant, not correct.

Mass Effect was the first example I could think of a well selling game that illustrated my point.

[Zen Master]

I'm gonna come straight out and say what no one (unless I missed something) has thus far been willing to say.


It is hurting people. Its hurting women. Its hurting men. It hurts society.

It promotes an unhealthy body image. It promotes unhealthy attitudes towards women.

It is sexist, and it is harmful. If you can't see this, or you disagree with this, you need to check your priviledge.

No.

No, it isn't bad. No, it doesn't hurt anyone. In fact, is business as usual in all ways.

Now ... wait a second before you freak out. There is, after all, a reason why I say this. Not that I think you'll agree with me. But at least understand the argument, and adress that, rather than just going for my throat.

Sex is a large part of games. And of movies, litterature, marketing and commercials, and every aspect of Real Life. And it goes both ways.

Also, it doesn't have to do with clothing.

Even in the military, attractive men are far more likely to be promoted than unattractive men - entirely without any relation to their qualifications.

So ... maybe sex is a problem. I don't think it is, but some certainly do. It is, however, not a problem of the gaming industry, or the community, or whatever.

So here's what it really boils down to: Games - in the most general of terms - depict heroes and heroines. Our mental image of such is not the same in any way as our mental image of say ... a matronly housewife.

For this reason, game heroines will not resemble matronly housewives in any way. And even if they did, we wouldn't see them as heroines - we'd see them as matronly housewives. It'd change the narrative. We would no longer get it.

Now. I'd like to point out that I'm not sexist. Nor racist, nor any other kind of unpleasant bigot. But when addressing a problem, I like to address the actual problem.

I box, I work out, I grow a beard, I wear clothing that shows and compliments that image of manliness I aim for.

That isn't sexist. But it's certainly sex.

If a woman does something to emphasize her feminine attractiveness - it would be sexist to deny her every right to do exactly what I also do.

It would also be less sexy. Which would be a shame.

[Astrella]

People aren't arguing against sexyness. They're arguing against objectification and lack of diversity in female characters. And I really don't know where you're getting the "every female character should be a housewife" from.

[VanBuren]

Up to a point though.

As others have said, women simply have a physical disadvantage which sometimes no amount of attitude or mental fortitude can overcome.

For example, women are not permitted in front line combat roles simply because there will be times where sheer physical strength is going to be an issue. This is aside from reported instances (from the Israelis when they trialled mixed infantry), where an entire unit tends to stop fighting and disengage from combat when a female member became a casualty.

I don't think this is sexist, but just plain statement of fact - saying that women don't belong in the military would be sexist though.

Here's my issue with that, then. If the sticking point with having women in front-line combat has to do with strength, then it makes more sense to have to requirement be based on strength rather than on what kind of genitals you have.

There are always going to be outliers from every generalization.

[Dragonus45]

No-one is telling anyone what they can enjoy and can't enjoy. All I've been arguing for is variety. I'm also curious about what you think game developers should do?

Stop fearing the loss of sales that the fear will come from attempting to make something that doesn't fit into the pre established mold that every genre seems to have. That alone would eliminate a large number of the issues with stereotypes.

[Misery Esquire]

Stop fearing the loss of sales that the fear will come from attempting to make something that doesn't fit into the pre established mold that every genre seems to have. That alone would eliminate a large number of the issues with stereotypes.

... The first sentence includes the anwser on why it won't happen. Because no company wants (the possibility) to tank.

[Spiryt]

Here's my issue with that, then. If the sticking point with having women in front-line combat has to do with strength, then it makes more sense to have to requirement be based on strength rather than on what kind of genitals you have.

There are always going to be outliers from every generalization.

Well, issue of women in front line is in large part based exactly on what genitals do you have.

A lot of testosterone + some other hormones cocktail from testes is pretty crucial in combat situations and general body structure.

I'm pretty sure that no game has any stats built that realistically and elaborately, so that's not the issue, but genitals are important here, and there's no reason to forget it.

Humans are highly adaptable, and, at least with some talents that are hard to define, there are excellent women soldiers, firefighters and so on, as well as great male kindergarten teachers, but genitals make difference here.

[VanBuren]

Well, issue of women in front line is in large part based exactly on what genitals do you have.

A lot of testosterone + some other hormones cocktail from testes is pretty crucial in combat situations and general body structure.

I'm pretty sure that no game has any stats built that realistically and elaborately, so that's not the issue, but genitals are important here, and there's no reason to forget it.

Humans are highly adaptable, and, at least with some talents that are hard to define, there are excellent women soldiers, firefighters and so on, as well as great male kindergarten teachers, but genitals make difference here.

In other words, the fact that I have testosterone is more important than my actual level of ability or competence?

Source, plz.

[The_Jackal]

Gaming isn't any more or less sexist than many other more established parts of our society. Beer commercials, pornography, most mainstream films, most organized religions all contain objectifying or patriarchal themes and images. It just receives more criticism because it's the function of the old to abhor the culture of the generation they've spawned.

Let's ask a different question? What's MORE damaging to the equality of women in our culture? Duke Nukem Forever? Fundamentalist religions? Pay inequity? The legal constraints applied to reproductive rights? Next to the tangible issues of discrimination, the aesthetic sexism of erotic/suggestive imagery fades into insignificance.

Also, FWIW, you can find erotic and suggestive imagery of men, to say nothing of an entire industry of female-targeted romance literature (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlequin_Enterprises), they're just not as financially successful as their male-targeted equivalents.

[BRC]

For this reason, game heroines will not resemble matronly housewives in any way. And even if they did, we wouldn't see them as heroines - we'd see them as matronly housewives. It'd change the narrative. We would no longer get it.

Now. I'd like to point out that I'm not sexist. Nor racist, nor any other kind of unpleasant bigot. But when addressing a problem, I like to address the actual problem.

I box, I work out, I grow a beard, I wear clothing that shows and compliments that image of manliness I aim for.

That isn't sexist. But it's certainly sex.

If a woman does something to emphasize her feminine attractiveness - it would be sexist to deny her every right to do exactly what I also do.

It would also be less sexy. Which would be a shame.
We're not saying that Game Heroines should look like matronly housewives any more than we're saying Game Heroes should look like accountants. If we're told that a character is a world-class martial artist/Commando, they should look, act, and dress like one, regardless of gender.
People do attempt to make themselves look attractive to the opposite gender. That's to be expected, it's a part of society.
Many of the features that make somebody physically attractive are also signs of peak physical condition. Video Game heroes are supposed to be extraordinary individuals, so it stands to reason they'll be in good shape.

We're not saying a Female character can't wear makeup or do something with her hair. We're also not saying that they can't wear a dress every so often.

Here, you know what, Let's talk about Shepard.

http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2011/08/Mass-Effect-3-the-real-female-shepard.jpg
Shepard is a tricky character in these discussions. Femshep avoids most of the tropes about female characters, but that's because Shepard is written to be either Male or Female. However, lets say Shepard was always female. Were that the case, Shepard is a perfect example of what we're talking about.

Look at Shepard up there. The player can alter her appearance quite a bit, but things are always fairly constant. Shepard is in good shape, she should be, she's an elite special forces operative. Shepard may wear makeup, or do a variety of things with her hair, as she should be able to. When attending a formal party, FemShep wears this.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/silentkyrie/Miscellaneous/me2-sexy-new-dress-omg.jpg
It's certainly a nice dress. It's hardly scandalous but it dosn't exactly attempt to hide much.
But here is the important thing. Shepard dosn't wear that into battle. She dosn't wear that when wandering around the ship (Well, she can, but it's not default). In battle she wears armor. On the ship she usually wears an all-purpose outfit similar to that of her crew. While infiltrating a lavish party thrown by an evil arms dealer, she wears the above dress.

Now, let's look at another character from the same game who gets a lot of flack. Miranda

http://www.thirdraildesignlab.com/rimages1202/mirandasample.jpeg

Miranda is a problem, because that outfit, the skintight (and the game gives you plenty of ass shots to make sure you know) space-latex jumpsuit is a problem. Not just because she wears it around the ship, that could be fine, maybe she just likes to show off. It's problematic because it's what she wears into battle. While Shepard dons a suit of armor, Miranda apparently prioritizes looking good over not getting shot.


It should be noted that Miranda is not the best example, as other characters (Including a man) go into battle similarly unprotected, and her physical features are supposed to be the result of genetic modification. However, even without those, Miranda would perfectly fit the trend we're talking about. Guys get to fight while looking tough and wearing armor, girls get to look pretty and wear space-latex.

[Zorg]

Let's ask a different question? What's MORE damaging to the equality of women in our culture? Duke Nukem Forever? Fundamentalist religions? Pay inequity? The legal constraints applied to reproductive rights? Next to the tangible issues of discrimination, the aesthetic sexism of erotic/suggestive imagery fades into insignificance.

So because there's a worse problem we shouldn't worry about 'minor' ones?

No more feeding the homeless then, people; there's a war in the middle east going on!

[Spiryt]

In other words, the fact that I have testosterone is more important than my actual level of ability or competence?

Source, plz.

Well, source on what exactly?

I've never said it's more important, because saying so, or that it's not so, is probably topic for books.

What's important is that it matters a lot.

Men are all around more athletically able than women due to higher levels of testosterone and other hormones due to pretty much all their life.

Women have their hormones doing other stuff.

All kinds of high level sportsmen use a lot forms of testosterone, among othe PEDs, and a lot of women athletes acquire visible masculine traits as "pay" for it.


http://graneyandthepig.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/tammythomas.jpg


This is in fact Mrs. yes.


Outside of sheer athletic/aggression/combat situation importance of hormones and gender is also huge, though much more complicated and debatable, obviously. Don't really feel knowledgeable.

The thing is that genitals matters, and it's pretty much common knowledge.

[Brother Oni]

Here's my issue with that, then. If the sticking point with having women in front-line combat has to do with strength, then it makes more sense to have to requirement be based on strength rather than on what kind of genitals you have.

There are always going to be outliers from every generalization.

That's just one of the issues, but I believe the strength requirement is high enough that the vast majority of women fail the requirements and there are insufficient outliers to influence a policy change.
When the average infantryman is carrying at least 60lbs worth of gear (http://thedonovan.com/archives/modernwarriorload/ModernWarriorsCombatLoadReport.pdf) into combat, would a similarly burdened female soldier be able to pull an injured squadmate to safety?

Personally I think the tactical and morale issue to be far more serious, which seems to be backed up by various reports on the issue (wikipedia link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_combat)).

[Avilan the Grey]

There are a lot of issues here. Some I agree with, others I don't.

The whole Gender vs Sex issue is extremely controversial here (Sweden) and one of the reason why a majority of young women won't call themselves feminists; they don't want anything to do with the Gender theories.

I prefer my women sexy. I also prefer them realistic. This means for example that I love the female characters from Diablo III where the one who's skills are based of strength looks pretty damn strong. AND sexy.

Also, the whole situation which keeps coming up about "men being power fantasies for men" is really irritating, because it paints games (and other media) in a corner I don't want it to be: The one where the ONLY correct way is to remove anything sexy from both genders, since if you try to make a man look sexy, it's "just a power fantasy" for some damn reason.

(Oh and one more thing: the "Default Courier" face is not "ugly", it's "as good as you can get with a horrible graphical engine". BIG difference).

[VanBuren]

The thing is that genitals matters, and it's pretty much common knowledge.

Another word for "common knowledge" is anecdotal evidence, and that happens to be of very little value in an argument.

@Brother Oni: I have to leave for work in a little bit here, but I'll respond tonight after I get off work.

[The_Jackal]

The 'combat will make men respect women' argument is a rabbit hole. Why on earth should serving in a front-line military unit be a pre-requisite to being treated respectfully? More women have died in childbirth than men have died in battle, and what they're doing is far, far more important to the health and future of societies than the vast majority of wars.

[Spiryt]

Another word for "common knowledge" is anecdotal evidence, and that happens to be of very little value in an argument.



If you're insisting that male genitals and so on being huge advantage at least in athletic activities, despite all evidence in the world, is "anecdotal evidence".... Then there's not much I can add here. :smallconfused:

It's about biological diference quite simply, not just "strenght".

Woman world record at 5000 m run is 14:11:15, for example - time easily achieved by 'local grade' pro male runners.

And it's hard to find less "strenght" dependant competition.

[Zen Master]

We're not saying that Game Heroines should look like matronly housewives any more than we're saying Game Heroes should look like accountants. If we're told that a character is a world-class martial artist/Commando, they should look, act, and dress like one, regardless of gender.
People do attempt to make themselves look attractive to the opposite gender. That's to be expected, it's a part of society.
Many of the features that make somebody physically attractive are also signs of peak physical condition. Video Game heroes are supposed to be extraordinary individuals, so it stands to reason they'll be in good shape.

We're not saying a Female character can't wear makeup or do something with her hair. We're also not saying that they can't wear a dress every so often.

So what are you trying to say?

Naturally, I'm not saying that heroines should be portrayed as matronly housewives. That's the problem with examples - somehow, there is always someone who is willing to take them literally, even when it's painfully obvious that isn't the point.

No, I use 'matronly housewife' to give an example of a different sort of feminine figure. If you don't want the sexy heroine, what sort of heroine is it you want? This is all story telling. We do not want boring characters - male or female. And a large part of being interesting is being sexy.

Also, I think both fem-shep and Miranda look boring and sexless. Neither has anything that would turn my eye in the street or at a party.

EDIT: I wanted to add a note on Miranda.

I think the skin tight thing IS her armor. I think she values agility over absorbtion, and that's that. Just like ... you know ... a ninja? Irrespective of gender, front-line ninjas are armored in ... cloth.

And darkness, of course. And awesome.

But ... it's not a problem. It's narrative.

[jaybird]

I lol'd.

Works targeted primarily at women do the exact same thing - even worse, at times. Nora Roberts, for example (me and my girlfriend have both read her books), can literally only write one type of male lead in all of her romance novels. Tall, thin, dark-haired, old scars, bad-boy past. So what if works targeted primarily at men do the same thing?

[Astrella]

*sigh*

There being "worse" issues is irrelevant.

And so is "women do it too so it's okay".

Discuss the issue at hand instead of trying to derail a bunch. No-one is forcing you to discuss this. If you think it's not worth discussing, don't post.

[Zorg]

@ Jaybird - because in literature there are other options if one wants to enjoy a story with non-sexist portrayals of women or men.
In gaming (and nerd culture in general) there is often a sense that there are few non-sexist options available.


Cheesecake isn't bad, as long as it isn't the only thing on the menu.

[Dublock]

Also, I think both fem-shep and Miranda look boring and sexless. Neither has anything that would turn my eye in the street or at a party.


Same for me. But they do try to make it the most mainstream common attractive traits.

Miranda's clothing I always just assumed she liked to move around to avoid melee or hide until her powers are up, use thme then go back into hiding until they are finished recharging, pop out, use one and repeat :p (At least thats how I always played her :p)

Authors do tend to have common threads about their stories or their characters. It can be hard (apparently) to have a wide assortment, Nora Roberts isn't the only one. Actors usually have this problem too.

[Dragonus45]

Same for me. But they do try to make it the most mainstream common attractive traits.

Miranda's clothing I always just assumed she liked to move around to avoid melee or hide until her powers are up, use thme then go back into hiding until they are finished recharging, pop out, use one and repeat :p (At least thats how I always played her :p)

Authors do tend to have common threads about their stories or their characters. It can be hard (apparently) to have a wide assortment, Nora Roberts isn't the only one. Actors usually have this problem too.

I think that biotics use armor made out of psychic powers instead of a shield. Not that that counts for anything when Biotic femshep still wears armor.

[Avilan the Grey]

Also, I think both fem-shep and Miranda look boring and sexless. Neither has anything that would turn my eye in the street or at a party.

Fem!Shep is a weird example due to the fact that you design her. The ones I have designed? Definitely my type of girl. A lot of it has to do with the Ladette thing though, I would go as far as to claim it being a fetish of mine.
(Which is why I hate that they gave her unique animations in ME3).

Miranda suffers from Uncanny Valley.

[Astrella]

Femshep is a good thing, because it allows people to make the character they want. Again, variety makes sure that everyone can identify with characters.

[factotum]

I think that biotics use armor made out of psychic powers instead of a shield. Not that that counts for anything when Biotic femshep still wears armor.

In her case the armour is also a combat uniform, so she wears it because she's a soldier. Miranda (and Jack, who is another example even though nobody mentioned her) are *not* soldiers and thus wear whatever is comfortable for them.

I don't think Miranda is a good example of sexism in video games, though. Yes, she is almost cartoonishly sexualised, but that's because she was genetically engineered by her father to look that way--and she certainly doesn't *act* anything close to the way she looks.

[Zorg]

See, they give her all the character to make her outfit make sense, make the player see her as a complex person who isn't just about looks... then do stuff like this:

http://www.awkwardzombie.com/charisma.jpg


:smallsigh:

[jaybird]

Discuss the issue at hand instead of trying to derail a bunch. No-one is forcing you to discuss this. If you think it's not worth discussing, don't post.

OP:
I just wanted to discuss my thoughts about sexism in gaming.

Call me crazy but I don't think skimpy clothing is sexism.

I'm saying that I agree with the OP, because you can't really call it discrimination if it goes both ways. Seems like you just don't like hearing about view you don't agree with.



@ Jaybird - because in literature there are other options if one wants to enjoy a story with non-sexist portrayals of women or men.
In gaming (and nerd culture in general) there is often a sense that there are few non-sexist options available.


Cheesecake isn't bad, as long as it isn't the only thing on the menu.

You're right, the non-sexualized options in other media aren't as present in video games. However, I still dispute the charge of sexism - how many guys really look like this?

http://cghub.com/files/Image/211001-212000/211097/878_max.jpg

Cause damn, I've been working out all summer and I still wish I looked nearly as good as him.

It's more reasonable in my opinion to say that bodies in video games are idealized and sexualized in general - which makes sense. There's a whole bunch of studies indicating that humans have a better reaction to more attractive individuals.

[Avilan the Grey]

See, they give her all the character to make her outfit make sense, make the player see her as a complex person who isn't just about looks... then do stuff like this:

http://www.awkwardzombie.com/charisma.jpg

Deliberately. It is not sexism. It might be lampshading, or irony, but not sexism.

[Strawberries]

http://cghub.com/files/Image/211001-212000/211097/878_max.jpg

Cause damn, I've been working out all summer and I still wish I looked nearly as good as him.


:smalleek:

That's not good looking. :smallsigh: At least not to me it isn't.

[Zorg]

Bioware based everything about Vega's character off my life :smallcool:









That may be a complete lie in every sense.




I think part of the problem with this thread is that the OP's statement is somewhat true - clothing is not inherently sexist. But the clothing is often a very real symptom of other isses prevalent in gaming that are sexist, so people are arguing at cross purposes here a bit.

To take Vega and Mass Effect. Yeah, few guys look like him - but there's a lot of different looking guys in ME. Just like there are a lot of different looking girls of varying ages. So while ME does go overboard on the cheesecake sometimes (see my Miranda pic above), I don't think it's a good example of sexism personally.
I think it's a good example of being able to be sexy (on both sides - I'd go straight for Kaidan if I wasn't totally gay for Laira, lol), but still treat the characters as people (or whatever they are).

Something like Other M, where Samus literally has to ask permission from a man (who is not her CO, and has no authority over her) to use her abilities is, in my opinion, sexist. It makes a female character dependant on a male one in a completely illogical way, not just going by our modern day standards but by what is presented in the game itself moments earlier.



Edit: Avilan - true, but my not very clear point was that the outfit alone doesn't determine sexism, the whole package contributes (hopefully made a better point above).

[Astrella]

That's true, Zorg, but I thought the discussion had evolved beyond that. Or at least, it's the point I've made repeatedly throughout the thread.

[jaybird]

:smalleek:

That's not good looking. :smallsigh: At least not to me it isn't.

Fine, have a Kaiden :smalltongue: I'd at least consider going bi for him if my girlfriend would be okay with it. Same point, though - all video game characters are sexualized/idealized, it isn't just women.

[Zorg]

I thought it had to but a few people who are in the 'it ain't so bad' camp seem to be focussing solely on the appearance side of things, so am hoping that illuminating that it isn't the sole issue will make things clearer (especially as you've had a go at saying it multiple times so it obviously wasn't sticking) :smallsmile:

[endoperez]

Factotum - providing an in-game example of sexism doesn't make that example not-sexist in the real world.

A male creating the perfect, sexual woman to be cartoonishly sexual is sexist. It is possible that the game is using it to make a point about sexism, but as I haven't played the games, I don't know. I won't argue this further since I'll likely play ME games sometime in the future, and a wiki binge won't help me enjoy them.



Any way, what are some of the LEAST sexist games you can think of? By that I mean a game made in such a way that it avoided all the kinds of pitfalls people keep bringing up.
Also, if it has any faults, bring them up too!

Let's leave out games like Pong or Bejeweled, where there's no characters at all. If there was no chance to make a mistake, let's give the creators no points for avoiding it. This kinda counts for games like Age of Empires 1 where the story is that of nations, not individuals.

It could be something like the original Metroid, where there's only one human character and her gender has no effect in the game.

It could be something that allows for main character customization and avoids it that way.

Or it could be something that just happened to have well written women.



I haven't played through it, but I think Recettear could be a good example. The protagonists are both female, they are hard-working and non-sexualized. While the characters are based on stereotypes, they do have their unique features as well. For example, Recette keeps talking about food, all the time ("Yepperoni! Easy as pie!")...
The sterotypes it relies on could be interpreted as a bad thing if one really wanted to, though. Women like shoes and haggle a lot, while men like weapons and have more money. Then again, the adventurers mix this up quite a lot, and the old men (who like hats) are quite cheap as well...

Portal is another good one. It has two female protagonists, but neither is in an way limited by their gender.
If you wanted to dig up something bad from it, you could perhaps put it in the context of other games. Male FPS heroes shoot and destroy things, so we can't make the protagonist male, no, this pansy character who has to puzzle things out must be female.


Beyond Good & Evil I'd say has some clear faults. The female protagonist is proactive, heroic, defender of little children, etc. It's not that bad from the female side, despite the "you're like a mother to them" thing, but it shows the males in a pretty bad light. That's sexist, too! :smalltongue:

The main ally for most of the game is, literally, a farting, smelly pig. Fat, too. And his double-jump is powered by farts. He likes machines, building machines, driving machines, drinking in a bar and reads the Play Pig magazine.
The other ally is an obviously male, big, burly, stupid agent who disguised himself as an enemy. He has a large chin. He was in the army. He likes quoting the army rules. According to his official profile, the armor he wears makes him feel more masculine and powerful.
The government is the obviously male Alpha Section, who hires biggest, burliest and stupidest men to be their guards. Alpha Section lies to the public, claiming to keep them safe from the DomZ while actually helping the enemy.

Beyond Good & Evil is, in fact, a pretty good inversion of the basic action game. If all games were like this men would have reason to complain, but since this was a rare exception, I'd like to applaud it instead.

[illyrus]

Maybe I missed it being brought up before but I'm always brought back to Alien/Aliens when I read something like this thread. The star character is a female who is:
A. Badass
B. Not a supermodel
C. Uses cunning and determination against stronger foes to win the day
D. Is independent

Scientifically speaking men tend to be stronger than women. Then again tigers and bears tend to be stronger than humans yet humans are capable of far more than tigers and bears thanks our mind.

I'd much rather see the badass female portrayed more like Ripley than a female Conan or a some scantily clad vixen.

*Edit - And lets face it, a male being portrayed as Conan is equally unrealistic.

[Psyren]

Fine, have a Kaiden :smalltongue: I'd at least consider going bi for him if my girlfriend would be okay with it. Same point, though - all video game characters are sexualized/idealized, it isn't just women.

I already addressed this point though. When male video game characters are sexualized (rippling abs, bulging pecs etc.) it isn't to give women something to look at (though that could certainly be a side-effect.) No, the real reason is to indulge male power fantasies.

There are, for instance, women out there who would consider Marcus Fenix attractive. But it's irrelevant because his character design wasn't for them - he wasn't given the build of a linebacker and a neck thicker than a tree trunk for their benefit - it's for the males that would be playing him and imagining themselves chainsawing through sinewy mutant... things.

When both the guys and the girls are being designed for the benefit of the guys, there is a problem.

[snoopy13a]

OP:

I'm saying that I agree with the OP, because you can't really call it discrimination if it goes both ways. Seems like you just don't like hearing about view you don't agree with.




You're right, the non-sexualized options in other media aren't as present in video games. However, I still dispute the charge of sexism - how many guys really look like this?

http://cghub.com/files/Image/211001-212000/211097/878_max.jpg

Cause damn, I've been working out all summer and I still wish I looked nearly as good as him.

It's more reasonable in my opinion to say that bodies in video games are idealized and sexualized in general - which makes sense. There's a whole bunch of studies indicating that humans have a better reaction to more attractive individuals.

I used to look like that. Before I started working out, that is. :smallsmile:

[Spiryt]

I already addressed this point though. When male video game characters are sexualized (rippling abs, bulging pecs etc.) it isn't to give women something to look at (though that could certainly be a side-effect.) No, the real reason is to indulge male power fantasies.

There are, for instance, women out there who would consider Marcus Fenix attractive. But it's irrelevant because his character design wasn't for them - he wasn't given the build of a linebacker and a neck thicker than a tree trunk for their benefit - it's for the males that would be playing him and imagining themselves chainsawing through sinewy mutant... things.

When both the guys and the girls are being designed for the benefit of the guys, there is a problem.

Eh, what gives?

I mean how can you state that it's "for boys, not for girls"? :smallconfused:

Gamers are still probably in like 90% guys, many of who probably spend way too much time in such power fantasies, yes, but that's deeper 'problem'....

[Zorg]

Most studies have shown women are around 30-50% of gamers (http://www.themarysue.com/gaming-statistics/), depending on which one you believe.

[Psyren]

Eh, what gives?

I mean how can you state that it's "for boys, not for girls"? :smallconfused:

Simply put - the appeal to female gamers is largely incidental to male character design in most games. The primary purpose is fulfilling power fantasies.

Look at a character like Kratos. Runs around in a loincloth, rippling with muscles - yeah it's possible that he would be appealing, but the way he's posed make it clear that's not the intended purpose behind him looking that way. Rather, he's half-naked and muscular because that makes him look more badass; it's at once a highly impractical way of fighting, and emphasizes his physique. Everything, from the stark color contrast of his war paint to his default facial expressions (not inviting, like most female characters, but brutal and vicious) is meant to emphasize his intended role as killing machine rather than sexual object.

Or look at the Avengers picture I posted a page or so back. The male characters are by and large attractive and muscular, but their poses were meant to convey power and mastery - any sex appeal that results is tangential. Meanwhile, the female character is artfully twisted so her boobs and butt both have equal screen-time.

[Spiryt]

Most studies have shown women are around 30-50% of gamers (http://www.themarysue.com/gaming-statistics/), depending on which one you believe.

If so, how does one conclude that male characters, pretty much always as 'perfect' like women (like in most media, generally) are for "power fantasies" and not just for the sake of it? :smallconfused:

I guess that percentage of women among games developers might be interesting too....

[danzibr]

Cause damn, I've been working out all summer and I still wish I looked nearly as good as him.
Oh man I feel ya. I've been working out for years and don't look like that. I'm quite thin and have some decent tone, but... without juicin' up or much more work out time than I can spare, I don't think it's going to happen.

Anyway, I think this is the issue (and sorry if someone's said this). Is objectification sexism? Or rather, does objectification fall under the category of sexism? If so, then I'd say the rampant skimpy/tight clothes count at sexism, but otherwise no.

[endoperez]

Most studies have shown women are around 30-50% of gamers (http://www.themarysue.com/gaming-statistics/), depending on which one you believe.

And that's probably WITHOUT taking net poker players and such into account. Way before Facebook, the single biggest demographic of online gamers was middle-aged women who played Flash games, online poker or something similar to pass time.

The study above is about video game industry, so those numbers are the most relevant to this discussion.

edit:


I guess that percentage of women among games developers might be interesting too....

http://icould.com/article/career-opportunities-for-women-in-the-video-gaming-industry/

2005, for example fewer than 10%
The latest research (2011) 15% worldwide

Also, I'd wager that the percentage of female programmers is much, much lower than that, with comparatively more women working as artists.

Percentage of young people wanting to get into game development is different, though - in my experience based on a tiny pool, above 40 %. I've been studying game dev for ~4 years now, and almost half of my classmates have been women. Mostly on the artist side, 2D or 3D.

[snoopy13a]

If so, how does one conclude that male characters, pretty much always as 'perfect' like women (like in most media, generally) are for "power fantasies" and not just for the sake of it? :smallconfused:

I guess that percentage of women among games developers might be interesting too....

A "gamer" is usually defined as a person who plays any video game. So, while 30-50% of people who play video games are female, it doesn't necessarily mean that 30-50% of people who play Game X or even Genre X are female.

[Astrella]

Also this comic is sorta relevant I guess. (http://www.shortpacked.com/2011/comic/book-13/05-the-death-of-snkrs/falseequivalence/)

[Psyren]

Also this comic is sorta relevant I guess. (http://www.shortpacked.com/2011/comic/book-13/05-the-death-of-snkrs/falseequivalence/)

This, exactly.

[Dragonus45]

Also this comic is sorta relevant I guess. (http://www.shortpacked.com/2011/comic/book-13/05-the-death-of-snkrs/falseequivalence/)

That comic makes a lot of assumptions about what "women" find attractive, or what men find uncomfortable.

[Astrella]

Do read the comment section; it has a lot of interesting stuff about this exact discussion.

[Spiryt]

That comic makes a lot of assumptions about what "women" find attractive, or what men find uncomfortable.

Can't say I've ever heard a girl talking about "dexterity not power" whatever it might mean....

[Psyren]

That comic makes a lot of assumptions about what "women" find attractive, or what men find uncomfortable.

Missing the point. The idea was to highlight the fallacy inherent in guys claiming objectification equivalence because "the male characters have huge muscles."

Second, the character in question explicitly says that is what SHE would find attractive in Batman - not all women. Nor does the male claim that all men would find such a Batman uncomfortable.

[Astrella]

Okay, another line of thought; compare the percentage of male characters who are flirty, seducy and such with the percentage of female characters. Behaviour and clothing go together in that regard.

Edit; and male characters have a lot more variety than muscle-hunk.

[snoopy13a]

That comic makes a lot of assumptions about what "women" find attractive, or what men find uncomfortable.

It just states what one woman finds attractive and what one man finds uncomfortable. But there really aren't too many "pretty-boy" superheroes. Most tend to be "manly-men."

I don't really care, because as a pretty-boy, manly-man, I'm both :smallbiggrin:

[Tebryn]

That comic makes a lot of assumptions about what "women" find attractive, or what men find uncomfortable.

It also makes an assumption that it somehow being a "Male Power Fantasy" isn't sexist towards men either. I certainly don't find it a power fantasy when all my male PC's are Hard Butted Space Marines. It's still objectifying men. Just for men in a non-sexual way. If you don't look like you could bench a thousand pounds you're not a real man. Sexism only exists against women though.

[The_Jackal]

So because there's a worse problem we shouldn't worry about 'minor' ones?

No more feeding the homeless then, people; there's a war in the middle east going on!

Yeah, because having skantily clad women in a video game is clearly on the same plane of import as starving people.

[Astrella]

It also makes an assumption that it somehow being a "Male Power Fantasy" isn't sexist towards men either. I certainly don't find it a power fantasy when all my male PC's are Hard Butted Space Marines. It's still objectifying men. Just for men in a non-sexual way. If you don't look like you could bench a thousand pounds you're not a real man. Sexism only exists against women though.

No-one said that. The main argument here is that a lot of female portrayals tend to come from a male-centered position. Like, it's aimed at guys, that doesn't mean it can't be objectifying or sexist. (And again, more variety in portrayals. Some people like to play muscled characters, and that's okay. But there's more alternatives around for male characters as alternatives than for female characters.) A good example is League of Legends, there's a far larger variety in archetypes and body types for male characters than female characters. (I can go into more detail if you want.)

Something all flowery being aimed at women is also sexist for example, despite being targeted at women because it's based on horrible stereotypes.



Yeah, because having skantily clad women in a video game is clearly on the same plane of import as starving people.

The fourth one. (http://mlkshk.com/r/9FOI)

[Sholos]

Now, let's look at another character from the same game who gets a lot of flack. Miranda
*snip*
Miranda is a problem, because that outfit, the skintight (and the game gives you plenty of ass shots to make sure you know) space-latex jumpsuit is a problem. Not just because she wears it around the ship, that could be fine, maybe she just likes to show off. It's problematic because it's what she wears into battle. While Shepard dons a suit of armor, Miranda apparently prioritizes looking good over not getting shot.
Actually, she doesn't, because biotics in ME2 use barriers instead of shields to protect themselves. That's why if you run into Ashley, she's wearing armor, as are other random female soldiers.


It should be noted that Miranda is not the best example, as other characters (Including a man) go into battle similarly unprotected, and her physical features are supposed to be the result of genetic modification. However, even without those, Miranda would perfectly fit the trend we're talking about. Guys get to fight while looking tough and wearing armor, girls get to look pretty and wear space-latex.
It is also remarked that she is very aware of how good her looks are and that she uses them to her advantage.


Factotum - providing an in-game example of sexism doesn't make that example not-sexist in the real world.

A male creating the perfect, sexual woman to be cartoonishly sexual is sexist. It is possible that the game is using it to make a point about sexism, but as I haven't played the games, I don't know. I won't argue this further since I'll likely play ME games sometime in the future, and a wiki binge won't help me enjoy them.
Yes, it is ridiculously sexist. It's also presented as a horrible thing and it's clear that it's had a lasting and huge impact (mostly negative) on Miranda's life and even her thoughts about herself. Heck, she even considers herself only a tool because of it. Part of the dialogue with her can be getting her to realize that she is, in fact, a whole person.

[Zen Master]

Also this comic is sorta relevant I guess. (http://www.shortpacked.com/2011/comic/book-13/05-the-death-of-snkrs/falseequivalence/)

It really, really isn't, though. It takes such careful aim, tries so hard to hit the right target - then kills the neighbors cat, ricochets off his car and into his fridge, where is impales an innocent quart of milk.

While not quite 'impossibly muscled' I'm close enough to exemplify, and trust me - women do find that attractive.

Of course some don't. In exactly the same way that I don't find Miranda attractive, however much they pose her ass for that single purpose.

If the argument here was that 'eewww, sex in video games is dusgusting' - then at least we'd all be discussing the same thing. But since we're really discussing sexism, there just isn't a case to be made.

In all forms of story telling, characters are portrayed as sexual ideals - because those are the stories we want. And it's 100% equally true for male and female characters.

And just as there are romantic comedies about weddings and wuzzy englishmen catering to female ideals of men - and action comedies with female ninjas in cat suits catering to male ideals of women ... so there are male and female ideals in video games. And in litterature. And in every magazine you ever open, every tv station you ever watch ... and on the street, surrounding you every minute of every day of your life.

There is a case to be made here - but it's not the case you want.

It's possible to argue that, as a species, we're crude sexual creatures easily manipulated by a few attractive bits bodily real estate.

But that is just sex. It isn't sexism.

Yes, we objectify. But it goes both ways, equally. And it does so because we want it. That's why we watch the movies, play the games, turn our heads in the street.

[Astrella]

Yes, we objectify. But it goes both ways, equally. And it does so because we want it. That's why we watch the movies, play the games, turn our heads in the street.

Oh, I'd argue that all the people here speaking out against it are clearly not wanting it. Or does our opinion not count now?

[Spiryt]

No-one said that. The main argument here is that a lot of female portrayals tend to come from a male-centered position.


That's pretty much the essence of romances, paintings, music, and general inspiration of artist from thousands of years in widely ' our ' culture.

It pretty much same story all over again, and biggest works of art came from the fact that some guy got more or less directly 'enchanted'.

So I don't think it's possible or sensible to change such things, save shaping some Orwell 'new men'.

The point will always be if such portrayals are actually interesting and good art/story/whatever or rubbish.

I generally don't watch/read Avengers and similar stuff, whole superhero part of pop-culture seems to be lost on me, so I can't really talk about it.

[Psyren]

It also makes an assumption that it somehow being a "Male Power Fantasy" isn't sexist towards men either. I certainly don't find it a power fantasy when all my male PC's are Hard Butted Space Marines. It's still objectifying men. Just for men in a non-sexual way. If you don't look like you could bench a thousand pounds you're not a real man. Sexism only exists against women though.

So you wouldn't mind an overweight, wispy or otherwise clearly out-of-shape protagonist?



While not quite 'impossibly muscled' I'm close enough to exemplify, and trust me - women do find that attractive.


:smallsigh:

You're missing the point.

Whether a given woman, or even a huge subset of women, find muscular guys attractive is irrelevant.

Male protagonists do not have muscles for the female observer's benefit. The designers of those characters could care less if women are playing the character or not. THAT is the problem, because the female characters are designed with a completely opposite philosophy in mind. They are designed to be svelte, appealing and inviting for the express purpose of titillating male players.

Again I point to Kratos. Nothing about him is designed to be sexually appealing. He's got a bod you could bounce warheads off of, and that could be great for some women and inconsequential for others. But his designers don't care if anyone sees him that way. None of his poses, movements, or facial expressions convey anything intentionally sexual, inviting, or anything else on that vector.

For his polar opposite in the same genre, look no further than Bayonetta.

[endoperez]

No-one said that. The main argument here is that a lot of female portrayals tend to come from a male-centered position. Like, it's aimed at guys, that doesn't mean it can't be objectifying or sexist.

Would you mind posting some examples of games that don't do these things? For example, a game that has a huge cast of characters that has as much variety in females as in males?

It might very well be a challenge.

Others are free to join in, too. I mean, we could be talking about games that are good and aren't sexist, and not just arguing about the philosophy.

For example, Super Mario is sexist, because Mario has to save the Princess and she can't do anything on her own. The Great Giana Sisters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Giana_Sisters) , a Mario clone, made the main character a girl and the box art was horribly sexist. The remake of Giana (http://www.gamespot.com/project-giana/videos/project-giana-kickstarter-trailer-6389931/) seems to be a great example of non-sexist game. Also a non-sexualized one.

Skullgirls (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRj5x7AaJW8), on the other hand, seems to be sexying up the girls left and right. If it is sexist, it's probably so because all the girls are as sexy as the art style allows... but this kinda goes against the points in the original post.

[Astrella]

Halflife 2 is pretty decent; though I'm not sure if that classifies as having a huge cast. I'll try and think of a few more.

[Spiryt]

Again I point to Kratos. Nothing about him is designed to be sexually appealing. He's got a bod you could bounce warheads off of, and that could be great for some women and inconsequential for others. But his designers don't care if anyone sees him that way. None of his poses, movements, or facial expressions convey anything intentionally sexual, inviting, or anything else on that vector.


And again, how exactly can you state with certainty that nothing is designed like that? :smallconfused:

Where does 'inviting' starts and where it ends.

There's also obvious factor, that with type of "alpha male"/"possessed fiend" or whatever the hell it is, type of sexual object/design, being inviting, intentionally sexual and so on would be pretty much non-fitting...

If you don't have some quotes from designers I find it.... bold to know what were they thinking, to say at least.

[snoopy13a]

Male protagonists do not have muscles for the female observer's benefit. The designers of those characters could care less if women are playing the character or not. THAT is the problem, because the female characters are designed with a completely opposite philosophy in mind. They are designed to be svelte, appealing and inviting for the express purpose of titillating male players.



Ok, I'll be serious.

I agree with you, but what is the solution? Obviously, game developers want to maximize money. So, if they think they can maximize sales by potraying women in a sexist light they will. As long as they bring in more net sales, they will continue the practice.

Perhaps the issue is that most players don't care enough about it to hurt sales. How many of us are going to stop buying Bioware games because of Miranda's butt or Morrigan's skimpy outfit or that the main reason why there are bisexual NPCs is so that men can play female characters and have their cake and eat it too?

[Forbiddenwar]

Is there sexism in games? Yes
Is there more sexism in games than in movies, music, or TV shows? Not really.
Is there sexism in the cultures that creates these mediums? Indubitably

Should Media in general strive to be better than the culture it is created in. Perhaps, but better doesn't sell well. (Except for books perhaps) This isn't an excuse. But boycotts and letter writing won't change the culture of society over night. The best we can do is play good games that don't rely on sexism. And teach others to do the same.

[Zen Master]

:smallsigh:

You're missing the point.

No.


Whether a given woman, or even a huge subset of women, find muscular guys attractive is irrelevant.

Male protagonists do not have muscles for the female observer's benefit. The designers of those characters could care less if women are playing the character or not. THAT is the problem, because the female characters are designed with a completely opposite philosophy in mind. They are designed to be svelte, appealing and inviting for the express purpose of titillating male players.

Again I point to Kratos. Nothing about him is designed to be sexually appealing. He's got a bod you could bounce warheads off of, and that could be great for some women and inconsequential for others. But his designers don't care if anyone sees him that way. None of his poses, movements, or facial expressions convey anything intentionally sexual, inviting, or anything else on that vector.

For his polar opposite in the same genre, look no further than Bayonetta.

They are designed to be sexy. End of story.

The overwhelming majority of everyone gets exactly what they want. A small minority cannot have what they want, because if the product were shaped to deliver that, there would be no market for it.

Now, a real argument would be Bechdel test (it's for movies, not games - but serves it's purpose admirably). I'm rather convinced you already know it, but for the benefit of everyone who doesn't:

Are there two named women?
Talking to each other?
Against something besides a man?

This is very real, and very interesting. A huge number of movies do not pass this test.

However, once again, this isn't an expression of sexism. It is a measure of many things, of us and our world and our perception of it.

It is not, however, an expression of how everything needs to be different. No one is doing this to anyone else. And nothing would improve by changing it - arguably.

Yes, we could aim for a world where women in stories weren't plot tools for the male characters in those same stories. Maybe it would even be a good thing. I can't tell, but I somewhat doubt it.

But the real question is: Since hardly anyone really cares, why should we want to?

I've seen movies and read books that try to defeat this ... problem. They are exceedingly dull pieces of extremely poor story telling, products of an intellectual ambition, a gender policy ideal, and utterly useless for their given purpose (in other words - they fail at being interesting stories, however much they may succeed at the other aims).

[Astrella]

Actually enough people do care about it; there's a reason things have been improving.

[Psyren]

And again, how exactly can you state with certainty that nothing is designed like that? :smallconfused:

If he was designed to be sexually appealing, his mannerisms and expressions would show it.

I'll ask you for a counterexample. Outside of fanart, do you see any of Kratos' movements or expressions being like those of Bayonetta? Find one to show me, I'll wait.


Where does 'inviting' starts and where it ends.

By "inviting" I mean "enticing, alluring." A description that is much easier to apply to the expressions of female characters than males. Please, watch the MovieBob video - he goes over all of this stuff in detail.



If you don't have some quotes from designers I find it.... bold to know what were they thinking, to say at least.

You need a quote from the artist to know what the artist was thinking? What then is the point of the art itself? :smallconfused:

I don't need to talk to Bayonetta's creator to know what the goal was in her character design. I similarly don't need to talk to Kratos/Dante/War's creators to know what their goals were. It is self-evident.





The overwhelming majority of everyone gets exactly what they want. A small minority cannot have what they want, because if the product were shaped to deliver that, there would be no market for it.

False. Look at Mass Effect/Dragon Age, and their decision to spend resources on including (potentially) gay protagonists. This is not, and mathematically cannot be, tailored to the majority of their audience, but they did it anyway. Diversity is a goal in and of itself, and there IS a market for it. But more importantly, there is inherent artistic and moral value in taking a stance like this, whether it benefits the "majority" or not.



It is not, however, an expression of how everything needs to be different. No one is doing this to anyone else. And nothing would improve by changing it - arguably.

Yes, we could aim for a world where women in stories weren't plot tools for the male characters in those same stories. Maybe it would even be a good thing. I can't tell, but I somewhat doubt it.

This is perhaps the most unfortunate and pitiable viewpoint I've ever read. Honestly, if you really feel this way there is no value in continuing to discuss anything with you; our viewpoints diverge far too sharply for common ground of any kind.



But the real question is: Since hardly anyone really cares, why should we want to?

No, YOU don't care. (As is apparent by your posts.) And honestly, that's okay - though I wonder what you're even doing in this discussion if that's the way you feel about this.

Suffice to say - I do care, I do think there is value in discussing this, and I do think games can be improved as an artistic medium by addressing these issues. I do think there is a problem, and a pervasive one at that.

[BRC]

EDIT: I wanted to add a note on Miranda.

I think the skin tight thing IS her armor. I think she values agility over absorbtion, and that's that. Just like ... you know ... a ninja? Irrespective of gender, front-line ninjas are armored in ... cloth.

And darkness, of course. And awesome.

But ... it's not a problem. It's narrative.
Except she's not a Ninja. I guest the closest example they could give would be an "Officer".


Actually, she doesn't, because biotics in ME2 use barriers instead of shields to protect themselves. That's why if you run into Ashley, she's wearing armor, as are other random female soldiers.

Including other Biotics, Including other Biotics in the first game. Within the internal logic of the setting Biotics still wear Armor, it's just that Miranda decides to go into battle in Space-Latex.


Yes, it is ridiculously sexist. It's also presented as a horrible thing and it's clear that it's had a lasting and huge impact (mostly negative) on Miranda's life and even her thoughts about herself. Heck, she even considers herself only a tool because of it. Part of the dialogue with her can be getting her to realize that she is, in fact, a whole person.
Hence why I said she's not the best example, because her stuff is justified in-context. However, similar character and costume designs show up in other games without similar justification.

And hte point is how these characters are presented, and the message it sends about the way the game wants you to think about these characters.

Here, let's look at Street Fighter, Specifically Guile and Cammy, because both are supposed to be Soldiers.
here is Guile

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110412213352/streetfighter/images/thumb/3/3f/12_sfxtekken07.jpg/1000px-12_sfxtekken07.jpg
Alright, look at that character design, what does it tell you about him. Well, he's American, He's a Soldier, he's very strong, and he has a terrible barber. He's wearing a Tank Top, a pair of camo pants, and some boots. Even if you know nothing about Street Fighter, you could look at that design and say "yeah, he's probably got something to do with the Millitary".

Now, Cammy is also supposed to be a Soldier. A quick look at the Street Fighter Wiki says she's part of some british commando team, so her character design shouldn't be exactly like GI-Guile up there. Let's see how she looks

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb57887/streetfighter/images/5/5c/07_sfxtart04.jpg
Alright, let's see what we have here. She's Strong, and she really, really wants you to see her legs. She's got a Beret, some sparsely painted camo, and an olive-drab color scheme, which I guess establishes her as having something to do with the Military, and she dosn't get haircuts (Maybe she saw Guile's).

What's she wearing. Well, she's got some Gauntlets, makes sense if she expects to be punching people. Some Boots, that Beret, and what appears to be a one-piece swimsuit.

Now, why am I getting into this, because character designs send a message, they tell us the first thing the game wants us to know about the character.

Guile is a Soldier. We know this because he's wearing Camo pants, Dog tags, and an olive-green tanktop.
Ryu is a martial artist, we know this because he's wearing a Gi.
Balrog is a Boxer, we know this because he's wearing boxing gloves and boxing shorts.
M. Bison is evil, we know this because he dresses like some combination between a Soviet Commissar and a Magneto.

Cammy...Has really nice legs.

Part of what bugs me about all this is that it's so over-the top it's kind of insulting. Can you really say that Cammy would be less attractive if she was wearing some pants? Do you feel you are now more likely to buy Street Fighter because she's not wearing Pants?



I've seen movies and read books that try to defeat this ... problem. They are exceedingly dull pieces of extremely poor story telling, products of an intellectual ambition, a gender policy ideal, and utterly useless for their given purpose (in other words - they fail at being interesting stories, however much they may succeed at the other aims).
There is a Joss Whedon quote that is relevant here. When asked why he keeps writing so many strong female characters, he responded "Because you're still asking that question".

The goal here is not to make sure every game, book, and film contains a strong and clear message about the importance of Gender Equality. It's about having Genders be Equal, and there is a big difference.

I want you to imagine, Cami, or Lara Croft, as they are now, only wearing Pants. Normal, full-length, practical Pants, the type you and most people you know probably own a few pairs of.
Can you really say that would hurt the experience? Do you really think putting these characters in less skimpy outfits is beating us over the head with gender politics?





Yes, we could aim for a world where women in stories weren't plot tools for the male characters in those same stories. Maybe it would even be a good thing. I can't tell, but I somewhat doubt it.

What exactly are you saying here? Are you saying that heavy-handed messages about Gender Equality hurt works of fiction? Or are you saying that it's a good thing female characters exist only as plot tools for male characters.

[Forbiddenwar]

Yes, we could aim for a world where women in stories weren't plot tools for the male characters in those same stories. Maybe it would even be a good thing. I can't tell, but I somewhat doubt it.


You are clearly watching and reading and playing the wrong mediums out there.

There are examples of this done well. There just has to be more of them.

[Zen Master]

Actually enough people do care about it; there's a reason things have been improving.

I really want to see some sort of .... not evidence, just even the slightest hint that that's the case.

I'll grant you that there are games - HL2, ME - that present slightly less low-brow panderings to male sexuality. But ... measured in quantity, against all games released? Highly doubtful that the trend should be positive - no, quite the opposite: I think it has, and will keep getting, worse.

Not that I consider that a bad thing. I have as little a problem with female sex symbols as I do with male ones.

[Forbiddenwar]

I really want to see some sort of .... not evidence, just even the slightest hint that that's the case.


Examples of games with gender equality? Hmm. TV shows have been mentioned, and movies are out there. I will have to think about games. Of course there is little sexism in a game of awesomenauts, as far as I can tell, but is no gender really gender equality?

Derp. Portal and Portal 2, excellent Game of the Year examples of gender equality portayed well in video games. So the main character is a woman, did it matter? No. The gender of a character should have little to no effect to the role that character plays in the story.

[Zen Master]

False. Look at Mass Effect/Dragon Age, and their decision to spend resources on including (potentially) gay protagonists. This is not, and mathematically cannot be, tailored to the majority of their audience, but they did it anyway. Diversity is a goal in and of itself, and there IS a market for it. But more importantly, there is inherent artistic and moral value in taking a stance like this, whether it benefits the "majority" or not.

Well .... in fact, it is. Tailored for the majority.

Here's how that works:

You make a game. You sell it via various means - among others, sex. In this case, specifically, what you sell is a girl-on-girl bisexual fantasy.

Now. That's bound to draw a lot of flak, a lot of controverse. So .... what do you do? You turn it around, and use it as marketing. You include a male bisexual option, call it gay friendly and player choice and whatever other politically correct label you can dream up, and roll with it.

What you're seeing is a dodge. The guy-on-guy is only there to make everyone else accepting of the girl-on-girl.

And once again. It's sex - not sexism.

I'll throw in something else: This is also why the main female characters are so comparatively modestly dressed. It's because of the sex: In order to avoid controversy, they on one hand offer various promiscuous relations - but on the other hand dress (most) of the female characters in tight, but not otherwise revealing clothes.

This is how sexual themes in computer games make it into the main stream. By being clever about it.

[endoperez]

Right... I'll just say that I disagree with that.

[RPGuru1331]

And once again. It's sex - not sexism.
You say that like they're diametrically opposed. Worry not: They go hand in hand quite frequently.

[Maxios]

Derp. Portal and Portal 2, excellent Game of the Year examples of gender equality portayed well in video games. So the main character is a woman, did it matter? No. The gender of a character should have little to no effect to the role that character plays in the story.

True dat holmes.

[slavegirl420]

Ideally, you shouldn't even notice gender, you should notice character. Gender is really only good for reproduction.

Sure, maybe if you're some sort of soulless sociopathic robot who looks at people the same way you look at a toaster or a book. Ideally, people really should notice gender, (and they do) because without noticing the differences in the opposite sex there wouldn't be any sexual attraction. Which would mean there wouldn't be any reproduction because people would be far too consumed with beating off to try and pursue a relationship with another person. You know what I'm talking about.

People don't want to look at Helga the German nurse when it comes to video-game women, unless the plainness and unattractiveness of a woman is part of a gimmick. You really shouldn't foster all of this hatred just because people like to look at attractive women. Without that impulse, none of you would be alive to complain about it because your parents never would have whammed their uglies together and made you.

[Astrella]

Sure, maybe if you're some sort of soulless sociopathic robot who looks at people the same way you look at a toaster or a book. Ideally, people really should notice gender, (and they do) because without noticing the differences in the opposite sex there wouldn't be any sexual attraction. Which would mean there wouldn't be any reproduction because people would be far too consumed with beating off to try and pursue a relationship with another person. You know what I'm talking about.

People don't want to look at Helga the German nurse when it comes to video-game women, unless the plainness and unattractiveness of a woman is part of a gimmick. You really shouldn't foster all of this hatred just because people like to look at attractive women. Without that impulse, none of you would be alive to complain about it because your parents never would have whammed their uglies together and made you.

No-one is arguing against attractive characters.

[slavegirl420]

{{scrubbed}}

[Logic]

No-one is arguing against attractive characters.
Okay. Let's see if I can get my point across without looking like a jerk.

I am a white, heterosexual male in the 18-35 age category. The vast majority of games are specifically marketed to my demographic. I'd even wager that the vast majority of games made are intended to appeal to my demographic.

Do I like to see scantily clad women? Of course I do. Do I think that this should be the status quo for video games? Of course not. I like my video games to have some semblance of realism in them, and treating women as sex objects breaks my immersion, as well as insults my intelligence.

Do males in video games frequently look like Mr Vega of ME3? Yes, indeed they do. This I can support with some amount of logic, as members of the military are usually fit, and some take it to the extreme that Mr Vega does. But for every Vega, we also have a Steve Cortez. You know, a reasonable modeled male character that isn't meant to look like a competitor for Mr Universe.

Now, on the other side of the coin, look at the female characters. Tali, Miranda, Liara and Ashley are all modeled after real world women that are considered attractive.

The picture Shepard receives from Tali shows a beautiful woman in a loose-fitting sweater thing. Not exactly scantily clad, but not doing the genre any favors either.

Miranda "wears swimwear into battle, not armor" (paraphrasing Ashley.)

Liara and Ashley wear reasonable clothing for most of the series, so I guess we'll just have to give Mass Effect a passing rating of a "wash."

And if Mass Effect, which is arguably considered to be one of the trailblazers of bucking trends only gets a passing rating of a wash, then that seems to me that there is a problem here.

[Karoht]

I am a male gamer. I have never said a single unkind word to a female gamer that had anything to do with her gender. I've said unkind words to female gamers, but it had nothing to do with their gender, and in most cases had more to do with their personality, or their attitude towards another gamer. Like my last guild leader for example.

I especially dislike sexism among Gamers. As for video game characters and sexism within a game?

Spoilered for rambly-ness only.


I'm just going to come out and say this.
Soul Caliber 3 and onwards honestly pushed me away from the game. Why? The level of Fanservice for males just got too much. Not only did it break my suspention of disbelief, but I'm just put off by poor female characters. In Soul Caliber it becomes especially disconcerting. I'm sorry, you dressed up as a maid to fight a guy in full plate? Bwah? This paints the impression that the character is either dumb or weak. It's made worse when the female characters are up against 9 foot tall male behemoths who wield axes the size of their female opponents. Oh, and the ladies all seem to have a thing for itsy bitsy teeny little weapons, or weapons of an absurd nature.

I'm a guy who really really dislikes seeing women get hurt. I was the designated shoulder to cry on among my female friends while growing up. I also encountered a rather dispropotionate amount of alpha-douches who decided that it was not only okay to hit women but that it was also okay to do so in a public place, and usually the only male in the room who felt like doing anything about it.
So when I see a 9 foot tall male who has biceps that are twice the mass of the female character who is dressed in remarkably little clothing, and watch the two characters fight, it feels like nothing more than watching some macho jerkwad beating up a stripper at a club.

Maybe I'm projecting (I'm pretty sure I am) but I find the imagery bothersome to the point where I begin to disenjoy playing the game. Hence why I stopped playing Soul Caliber. That doesn't in any way mean that no one else is allowed to like it, I'm not convinced that others should feel bad for enjoying it, this is just my opinion of that particular game franchise. Admittedly I'm picking probably the strongest example I can think of for a game like this, so the arguement doesn't speak for all gaming mind you.

Newer games are starting to set the bar a bit differently. Female characters are starting to fight back, and do so well. Take for example, Jill Valentine. Her outfit has evolved from complete nonsense to well, less nonsense. The character has been a strong female character from the onset, and is listed as one of the best female characters of all time. Metal Gear and Mass Effect give us women in the military, usually in sensible outfits (though I have issues with the Mass Effect female outfits, they aren't the worst thing in the world). Sniper Wolf immediately comes to mind. Still very attractive, still wearing pretty much authentic military gear from head to toe. Lets look at Zoe from Left4Dead. Pretty much average girl but in a zombie film/game.

Then lets look at Princess Peach. Oh man, this character... we could discuss forever. I'll cut to the chase though and go right into the Super Smash series. Peach? Not a bad character. Still being very femine (she's graceful and dainty) but she'll still kick your teeth in. And she's put on the same level as another strong female character, Samus Aran (yes, I pretend that Other M didn't happen). Seriously, Princess who was once a Damsel in Distress on a daily basis, now on par with a Power Armor wearing Deathray Cannon for an arm Space Bounty Hunter. That is kind of special in it's own way.

All in all I think it is starting to even out for the most part. Fans don't seem to want the limp wristed helpless female characters anymore. In fact I think that sort of trope (in any media) is genuinely beginning to annoy more males in the audience than ever before. Fans of both sexes are beginning to demand female characters who are at least as watchable as the male ones, no matter what role we are talking about. And if you think about it, there appears to be some sense in the matter. All the characters in a story (or game) should be characters that are worth paying attention to, not just some of them, otherwise why have them? They become extraneous, much like rescuing the princess used to be. The Damsel was rarely a character, she was an objective.

[Coidzor]

Ideally, you shouldn't even notice gender, you should notice character. Gender is really only good for reproduction.

Whose ideal is that? I've yet to run into even fringe lunatics that claim the name of feminist that claim to want people to not be able to visually discern between the sexes.

[RPGuru1331]

Try to remember that Japan was the country responsible for Street Fighter and it's design, the Japanese are the ones who invented Street Fighter. And it's no secret just how completely screwed up those people treat their women.

League of Legends was made by meriken, and most of the champions are about on par with Cammie and Rose for modesty. Sexism isn't some funny thing only done by weird foreign peoples. Protip, also: To not appear horribly sexist, do not refer to women as possessions (e.g. 'their women').


Whose ideal is that? I've yet to run into even fringe lunatics that claim the name of feminist that claim to want people to not be able to visually discern between the sexes.

I suspect that it was poorly communicated, and that a more proper way to say that would be "Ideally, gender would have no bearing on a character's story."

This is probably the end-goal of eradicating sexism, I suspect, and a useful thing to include in games... but in my opinion, as we're not in an ideal world yet, I'm certainly fine with stories using gender of characters to highlight BS in gender roles in the real world.

[The Glyphstone]

League of Legends was made by meriken, and most of the champions are about on par with Cammie and Rose for modesty. Sexism isn't some funny thing only done by weird foreign peoples. Protip, also: To not appear horribly sexist, do not refer to women as possessions (e.g. 'their women').

That may have been intentional, since he was talking about the Japanese, who culturally often do/did consider women possessions...

[Knaight]

League of Legends was made by meriken, and most of the champions are about on par with Cammie and Rose for modesty. Sexism isn't some funny thing only done by weird foreign peoples. Protip, also: To not appear horribly sexist, do not refer to women as possessions (e.g. 'their women').

And there are worse games made by American studios in this regard anyways, so trying to pin it on Japan is nonsense. Duke Nukem Forever with its "capture the babe" mode stands out in this regard, and then there's the matter of people flaunting various forms of entitlement - the whining that straight gamers are somehow being oppressed because there are also gay romance options in Bioware games stands out, and it's not like heterosexism and sexism are completely unrelated traits in people. Added to that, it seems unlikely that we'd see sexist vitriol in a video game community if there wasn't sexism in gaming, and there is certainly sexist vitriol - see the response to Anita Sarkesian so much as suggesting that there might be sexism within video games in planning to fund Tropes vs. Women at some point in the future.

[RPGuru1331]

That may have been intentional, since he was talking about the Japanese, who culturally often do/did consider women possessions...

Right. That's just a weird foreign habit. Americans didn't de facto and de jeur ban divorce for centuries. Women weren't treated as de jeur possessions for a few generations in the USA. They weren't socially restricted from taking work outside of their limited purviews. The list goes on.

The Japanese are by no means perfect in this regard; the creator of Ico and Shadows of the Colossus, off the absolute top of my head, have said some pretty amazingly sexist things. Variable Geo and Queen's Blade are Japanese, as is Dead or Alive and other franchises, speaking strictly of games. There is a lot of BS they throw at women who live there... but sexism is not some strange custom they alone came up with. The USA has founts of sexism alive and well, many as strong or stronger than what occurs in Japan. I suspect you don't want me to list further examples, and I'm okay with that, but don't treat sexism as a uniquely foreign event, or one wherein the USA (or for that matter, Europe) has achieved some sort of enlightened state, but those uncivilized brutes in Japan, or wherever, are still struggling with basics. It only makes it harder to really face up to the problems in your own society.

[Tono]

Still kind of an unfair point of her to bring up though. Most cultures either did or still do. (Also ignorant and rather insulting, but w/e.)

I don't think removing gender completely from the stories would help any. I think sexism is less about how the characters act as much about how they are perceived and treated, in universe and out.
A princess who was captured just to be a sexual reward for completing the game is different from the princess who was captured, and happened to be the royalty. Are you a bad enough dude to save the princess? I'm not gunna call games like FF9 sexist because they had a 'Save the Princess!' moment/overtone.

[Coidzor]

^: well she at least started to learn how to ostensibly stand "on her own" or at least pull some of her own weight, right?


Protip, also: To not appear horribly sexist, do not refer to women as possessions (e.g. 'their women').

"Their" does not necessarily imply ownership in this case, and is more likely to refer to membership in the culture/nation-state.


I suspect that it was poorly communicated, and that a more proper way to say that would be "Ideally, gender would have no bearing on a character's story."

This is probably the end-goal of eradicating sexism, I suspect, and a useful thing to include in games... but in my opinion, as we're not in an ideal world yet, I'm certainly fine with stories using gender of characters to highlight BS in gender roles in the real world.

If you want to completely rule out romance as something to include in stories. Or reproduction and parent-child relationships. There are stories where gender should have no bearing whatsoever, and there are other stories where it has a place. The issue is that people want to put it in everything and give it undue influence, even where it is a valid influencing factor but merely one of many.

[Psyren]

The guy-on-guy is only there to make everyone else accepting of the girl-on-girl.

Wow. Just wow.



And if Mass Effect, which is arguably considered to be one of the trailblazers of bucking trends only gets a passing rating of a wash, then that seems to me that there is a problem here.

Indeed.

It gets worse - far, far worse - outside the RPG space; shooters and fighting games for instance.

[RPGuru1331]

"Their" does not necessarily imply ownership in this case
No, you're right, it doesn't imply it; it outright states it. It's a possessive pronoun. It's what the word means. A correct way to state membership in the group, rather than ownership, would be adjectives; "It's no secret how screwed up the treatment Japanese women receive is."


If you want to completely rule out romance as something to include in stories.
Because all romances in the history of ever involve a dude pursuer and a pursued lady?


Or reproduction and parent-child relationships
If by this you mean the quasi-mythical state of motherhood as some sort of super-close bond (which of course means mothers must be the ones to actually do the work of raising children) then yes. If by this you mean having children, I'm reasonably certain that two parents are involved in the biological process, and it shouldn't involve gender in an adoptive case.


The issue is that people want to put it in everything and give it undue influence, even where it is a valid influencing factor but merely one of many.
"It's not sexism if it's true", eh? Good luck with that one.

[snoopy13a]

You know, playing a sort of devil's advocate, I don't find Cammie's outfit that outrageous. She is a fighter in a brutal hand-to-hand tournament. If you watched any of Olympic wrestling, the competitors wore skin-tight outfits so their opponents don't have any loose material to grab a hold of. So, Cammie wearing a sort of leotard isn't all that crazy. What doesn't make sense is her hair. Waist-long pigtails? Probably not a good idea.

[Logic]

You know, playing a sort of devil's advocate, I don't find Cammie's outfit that outrageous. She is a fighter in a brutal hand-to-hand tournament. If you watched any of Olympic wrestling, the competitors wore skin-tight outfits so their opponents don't have any loose material to grab a hold of. So, Cammie wearing a sort of leotard isn't all that crazy. What doesn't make sense is her hair. Waist-long pigtails? Probably not a good idea.

Cammie's outfit is on the tamer side. A one piece bathing suit is pretty standard fare for female comic-book superheroes*, (see Ms. Marvel, She-Hulk, Power-Girl actually, the boob window pretty much removes Power Girl right off the "tame costume" list.)

*Comics have been battling the same sexism demons that video gaming has, albeit even longer. Despite this, they unfortunately don't seem to be that much more advanced than gaming.

[slavegirl420]

{{scrubbed}}

[RPGuru1331]

Don't you think it's embarrassing that instead of accepting some facets about life and genders,
Not half as embarrassing as I think it is to accept unsupported cultural myths without critically examining them. And compared to lacking the intestinal fortitude to put my own words to my normal pseudonym, it's not really embarrassing at all.


your only solution is to pitch abstract idea after abstract idea?
You're aware there is a planet outside the internet, yes?


Even if you make every brilliant point you need to, it won't go any further beyond this little message board (laugh).
Because of course, I am actually a chatbot and am confined to only ever posting on this one website. I am not a person in meatspace, I never speak anywhere else, and I do not ever do anything else ever. For that matter, I only communicate with other chatbots.

Plus, I mean, if that's all you think a post on the webbernets could ever do, one would think you'd never post anything at all. It's almost as if you didn't think through the implications of your own post.

[slavegirl420]

{{scrubbed}}

[Tengu_temp]

MovieBob (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5950-Tropes-vs-MovieBob) seems to have said it better (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5436-Not-Okay) than I was able.

Also this, even more on topic:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5950-Tropes-vs-MovieBob

Maybe someone linked this already, I don't know. I haven't read all 7 pages of this argument and I'm sure nobody can blame me.

[Triscuitable]

I think that instead of blindly arguing over whether or not something is sexist, or acting extremely venomous or passive aggressive towards one another, you guys should find a better way to discuss this. For example, point out something in a game that is blatantly sexist (clamoring for sales to the male demographic out of oversexualization of women, and vice-versa). The breast physics (I hate that term) in Dead or Alive are a good example. It's so blatantly obvious who it's being sold to that it blows my mind.

[Tengu_temp]

More Moviebob on this topic:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/4719-Gender-Games

And that's it for now. Watch those three videos. Seriously.

[Coidzor]

No, you're right, it doesn't imply it; it outright states it. It's a possessive pronoun. It's what the word means. A correct way to state membership in the group, rather than ownership, would be adjectives; "It's no secret how screwed up the treatment Japanese women receive is."

Hmm, perhaps Rawhide still has the relevant link to the properly exhaustive, scholarly explanation of why this is not always the case as you argue. Granted, this was in the context of defusing a situation between people complaining about people claiming ownership of the person they were dating by saying "my X" or "someone else's Y" and other people pointing out that using possessives as identifiers for one's parents did not claim ownership of them back in one of the older Relationship threads, but my recollection was that it touched upon the more impersonal their as well.


Because all romances in the history of ever involve a dude pursuer and a pursued lady?

Ok, now I'm just confused, here I thought we were still conflating sex and gender, but I'm not even sure what you mean when you say gender if you think that gay dudes don't want dudes and lesbian ladies don't want ladies. :smallconfused: Last I checked, genderblind variant pansexuals and bisexuals were the exception to the rule, and a minority's minority at that in terms of proportion to the total population.


If by this you mean the quasi-mythical state of motherhood as some sort of super-close bond (which of course means mothers must be the ones to actually do the work of raising children) then yes. If by this you mean having children, I'm reasonably certain that two parents are involved in the biological process, and it shouldn't involve gender in an adoptive case.

I honestly don't even know how you've managed to get here. I was responding to someone claiming that character's sex should be completely unnoticeable and pointed out that there are some places where this should not be the case, because it is not sexist to simply have a mother and a father who had sex which resulted in character X as their offspring. Similarly, I don't know why you're bringing up adoption unless you really want to argue that we should have no more stories that feature biological parents with some sort of relevant connection to their offspring.


"It's not sexism if it's true", eh? Good luck with that one.

Well, if you want to take me out of context and misread me, I certainly can't stop you. Men and women exist. There are tensions and historically have been tensions. Usually but not always they are less dogmatic than people who work in stories want to portray them. To consistently and categorically deny that there are or ever were tensions undermines the legitimacy of feminism, and nothing good ever seems to come from the camp that thinks feminism has accomplished all of its goals.

[Misery Esquire]

To take Vega and Mass Effect. Yeah, few guys look like him - but there's a lot of different looking guys in ME.

Really ME covers the same two (Plus one) basic Male models that every other (action/adventure/RPG) game does ; Skinny Athletic, Thick Athletic, Token Fat Guy.

And Joker, who is Skinny Athletic, but hobbles everywhere.

[Karoht]

Princess Peach
Before, she was an objective. That was it. She wasn't a character, she didn't do anything. She's grown (or the industry has grown) quite well when you think about it.

I'm going to focus on her incarnation in Super Smash. Sure, she's femine. She's a princess. She's dainty. She's a stereotype. But she'll kick your teeth in.
The fact that she stands on par in an action game with Samus Aran is pretty awesome when you think about it. She's on par with the Power Armor Wearing Blaster Cannon for an Arm Space Bounty Hunter who just happens to be a girl.

I think what more gamers are requesting is that all characters in a game be characters. A character shouldn't exist just to be an objective, even taking sex out of the equasion.

[Logic]

Don't you think it's embarrassing that instead of accepting some facets about life and genders, your only solution is to pitch abstract idea after abstract idea? Even if you make every brilliant point you need to, it won't go any further beyond this little message board (laugh).

Context would be helpful. I'm not sure if you are responding to me specifically, or perhaps someone else.


Also this, even more on topic:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5950-Tropes-vs-MovieBob

Maybe someone linked this already, I don't know. I haven't read all 7 pages of this argument and I'm sure nobody can blame me.

Actually, the MovieBob is a link to the one you just linked to, not his identity on the Escapist.


More Moviebob on this topic:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/4719-Gender-Games

And that's it for now. Watch those three videos. Seriously.

And this one I seriously forgot about. Good find.

Oldest (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/4719-Gender-Games)
Middle (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5436-Not-Okay)
Newest (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5950-Tropes-vs-MovieBob)

This man is bright, if not brilliant.

[Libertad]

Anecdotal story: One time I was flipping around channels, and I briefly landed on a Twilight movie. One of the werewolves was lying in bed, dying from a wound. The mood was somber and people were worried. But a bunch of muscular, shirtless men were standing around acting like female eye candy in poses. It felt so stupid and silly because it jarred against the grimness of the scene.

And then I wondered how many "serious" forms of media have women in scantily clad outfits despite verisimilitude or how it may clash with the scenes, and if female audience members sometimes felt the same as I have.

One of my favorite shows, Ghost in the Shell, is a victim of this, where the counter-terrorism policewoman Major Kusanagi wears an outfit totally out of place for her occupation.

http://i.imgur.com/twbvE.jpg?1

I think that most people like to have handsome/beautiful protagonists as a form of power fantasy/escapism, but it can be problem when it results in shallow characters solely meant for sex appeal or grinds against the "mood."

[Zen Master]

Wow. Just wow.


Yea well ....

I wont try very hard to convince you, but I'll ask you this.

IF we're going to attribute a motive to a multi-billion dollar corporation, what would you consider most likely:

A) A motive that has it's foundation in cold, cynical and rampant commercialism?

or

B) A motive based on 'doing right by the minorities'?

I cannot know the real answer. I do not work at the entity in question. However, you'd be hard pressed to find someone more cynical than me. Which is what I feel lets me get the corporate mindset - for corporations are nothing if not single-mindedly cynical, driven by the one absolute ambition of the best possible bottom line.

Oh.

Someone else said 'sex and sexism go hand in hand' - but I forgot to quote it. Hm.

Yes they do, but they are not the same. Sexism must be when someone actively does something hurtful to someone else based on gender. Refusing promotion, paying lower wages - you know the sort of stuff I mean.

Sex is not sexism. Sexualising characters - irrespective of gender - in any form of media is not sexism. However much we may or may not feel cheepened by the exaggerated physiques and suggestive clothing - it is not sexism.

[Avilan the Grey]

I already addressed this point though. When male video game characters are sexualized (rippling abs, bulging pecs etc.) it isn't to give women something to look at (though that could certainly be a side-effect.) No, the real reason is to indulge male power fantasies.

And this is where you are wrong. You are confusing the two; as in your example, SOME muscular men are power fantasies. Others ARE mostly there to be eye-candy for gay men and straight women.

Also, again, your point of view makes the discussion a lose-lose, because no matter what is done, short of replacing all characters with stick figures, it will only be the "heterosexual patriarchy" that makes anything for THEIR benefit, or have "influenced and/or forced" others to do it for their benefit.

If all good looking male characters are male power fantasies for men, and the only other alternative is "fat and ugly ones"... then we are stuck. Really.

(Edit)
The REAL sexism is evident in other things, like the attitudes and writing. I can understand the outrage at the new Tombraider trailer / intro AFTER hearing the developer's comments* (those were exremely moronic sexist foot-in-mouth) but I don't really see the problem BEFORE the comments (yes she almost gets raped, but she fights back and defeats her opponents. As I stated on another forum, the problem there is more lazy writing than sexism* but can you just imagine the opposite? That she DIDN't fight back???).

*...and then, as I said, the designers ruined the argument by not only come out as completely clueless ("No male gamers can identify with a female protagonist") but outright sexist ("...so we had to make them wanting to take care of her"). So, it turns out, the new Tombraider backstory IS sexist, because the developer's intent was, but it wasn't on it's face.

[Arachu]

On Tomb Raider: Lara's outfit is better than some , but she was originally supposed to have much smaller boobs than she ended up with. One of the programmers accidentally glitched them in with a random mouse click and everyone else said to keep them that way.


Which is, by default, a product of a Patriarchal Society (purposeful caps). While there are differing limits on physical strength between men and woman, it only happens at the very top of the spectrum. Even in the military, the difference isn't too noticeable, and easily fixed, anyway, considering the number of military jobs that don't require pique fitness, but instead focus more on ability, skill, and knowledge (which favors both genders equally).

*Nod* Different maximums, even different averages, don't determine everything. There's a vast intermediate range anyone can fall under.


An example of my line of thinking is violence and vulgar language. Look at the movies made back in the 1930s and then go and watch the new Batman (I saw it last night, why its on my mind) there is a lot more, and not just because of the graphics (which does add to it). It has been a slow and study increase over the years. We are now more desensitized to the violence and I don't want sexism to get such a hold.

I dunno about that... At least now we portray it more realistically. Most things at that time showed violence through either menacing poses or harmless-looking slapstick.

Not to mention, in America it used to be legal to beat the tar out of someone for calling you rude names (the phrase "fighting words" was actually in the bill). These days you can get sued for injuring burglars.


The 'combat will make men respect women' argument is a rabbit hole. Why on earth should serving in a front-line military unit be a pre-requisite to being treated respectfully? More women have died in childbirth than men have died in battle, and what they're doing is far, far more important to the health and future of societies than the vast majority of wars.

This is a good point. Well, I'm not sure whether more women died in childbirth... But in any case, being able to fight shouldn't be the sole determinant of worth.


It also makes an assumption that it somehow being a "Male Power Fantasy" isn't sexist towards men either. I certainly don't find it a power fantasy when all my male PC's are Hard Butted Space Marines. It's still objectifying men. Just for men in a non-sexual way. If you don't look like you could bench a thousand pounds you're not a real man. Sexism only exists against women though.

Any discrimination based on sex is sexism. If a man is only considered to be a man under narrow conditions, that's sexism.


~Bianca

[Avilan the Grey]

On Tomb Raider: Lara's outfit is better than some , but she was originally supposed to have much smaller boobs than she ended up with. One of the programmers accidentally glitched them in with a random mouse click and everyone else said to keep them that way.

Yes, she used to have gag boobs, and they were created by mistake. I must point out though that part of the reason they were SO huge is because the graphic limitations of the time: for every instance where a new graphic engine has been used, her boobs have become smaller and smaller (although she is still large-chested, she is not unrealistically so; I know at least 10 women with her size IRL; several of them do sports).

[Astrella]

Don't you think it's embarrassing that instead of accepting some facets about life and genders, your only solution is to pitch abstract idea after abstract idea? Even if you make every brilliant point you need to, it won't go any further beyond this little message board (laugh).

There's no need to be so condescending. Are you afraid that things might actually change since you are apparently so invested in having people not talk about this? :smallannoyed:

[Opperhapsen]

Moviebob thought other M featured a strong female protagonist, and completely misunderstood the problem with "Tropes V Women".
He's hardly an argument.

[Psyren]

However, you'd be hard pressed to find someone more cynical than me.

I won't attempt to dispute this. What's really disturbing to me though is your belief that somehow corporate responsibility and profit are always conflicting motives.


And this is where you are wrong. You are confusing the two; as in your example, SOME muscular men are power fantasies. Others ARE mostly there to be eye-candy for gay men and straight women.

The only absolute is that there are none notwithstanding, the first example vastly outweighs the second.

[Trazoi]

(Edit)
The REAL sexism is evident in other things, like the attitudes and writing. I can understand the outrage at the new Tombraider trailer / intro AFTER hearing the developer's comments* (those were exremely moronic sexist foot-in-mouth) but I don't really see the problem BEFORE the comments
From what I've seen, and take this from someone who has only played a little of the original Tomb Raider: My understanding was that Lara Croft was a female Indiana Jones, someone who loves the thrill of adventure. Young Indiana Jones had the same sort of personality as regular Indiana Jones - brave and adventurous, just not nearly as skilled. But the developers of the reboot are imagining young Lara Croft as a frightened young woman who has terrible situations forced upon her to remake her as a "toughened survivor". For some reason young Lara can't merely want to go adventures.

This wouldn't be so bad in theory with an original character, but when it's an iconic female game character like Lara Croft it has the same issues as what happened to Samus in Metroid: Other M.
(Edit: except Other M's story would still suck even if it was a new IP)

[Gnomish Wanderer]

No game has an ugly protagonist (Unless its about that.)

Lemme introduce you to Frank West: Journalist (He's covered wars).

There are plenty of ugly protagonists, especially if you count 'faceless' protagonists and build-your-own protagonists.

Other than that, I haven't read through most of this thread and have nothing to add that hasn't surely been said already.

[Avilan the Grey]

From what I've seen, and take this from someone who has only played a little of the original Tomb Raider: My understanding was that Lara Croft was a female Indiana Jones, someone who loves the thrill of adventure. Young Indiana Jones had the same sort of personality as regular Indiana Jones - brave and adventurous, just not nearly as skilled. But the developers of the reboot are imagining young Lara Croft as a frightened young woman who has terrible situations forced upon her to remake her as a "toughened survivor". For some reason young Lara can't merely want to go adventures.

This wouldn't be so bad in theory with an original character, but when it's an iconic female game character like Lara Croft it has the same issues as what happened to Samus in Metroid: Other M.

Yes, and this is what I chalked down to "Lazy Writing". It is a standard concept. It DOES work as a backstory; we never had the full backstory before, but it is "female badass 101 backstory". Rape as backstory has been used what? 1E+20 times?
I was disappointed, but didn't get the outrage, until the developer put their feet in their mouths.

The problem is if we just go with what we already knew about her, she would basically have been a rich brat who had the money to go wherever and do whatever she wanted. There is no real drama in that (Indy was, after all, both rather poor and had other motivations), but one of the key things about Lara is that she is richer than Richard Branson. To just write her backsory as "I felt like taking the private jet to temple xxxx and dig for artifacts" would not be very good either. I UNDERSTAND the temptation of using this backstory, but I don't understand their secondary motivations for doing so (the whole "male games must want to protect her" horsehockey).

[Strawberries]

*...and then, as I said, the designers ruined the argument by not only come out as completely clueless ("No male gamers can identify with a female protagonist") but outright sexist ("...so we had to make them wanting to take care of her"). So, it turns out, the new Tombraider backstory IS sexist, because the developer's intent was, but it wasn't on it's face.

Really, they actually said that? (I stopped playing Tomb Raider after the second title)

That's more offensive towards men than women, I think. If I was a man, I'd be outraged. :smallyuk:

[Brother Oni]

One of my favorite shows, Ghost in the Shell, is a victim of this, where the counter-terrorism policewoman Major Kusanagi wears an outfit totally out of place for her occupation.

In the non-SAC universe there's a very good reason for this - the camouflage technology they have is a very thin sheer material, so she's often in a state of near undress so she can get to it quickly.

There's also the fact that she's a full body cyborg and intentionally chose her body to look like that in order to distract her often male counterparts or targets for information gathering or other espionage work (the second GitS comic series makes specific mention of this, referring to it as 'sleight of leg' as she's wearing a micro-mini skirt at the time).

In addition, because of her entirely artificial body, she's able to perform some absolutely ridiculous physical stunts (wall bouncing off a pair of skyscrapers to get to the roof or pulling the hatch off a tank), something that excessive clothing will hinder (the material may catch on something).

This doesn't detract from the fact that Shirow Masamune can be regarded as sexist, but at least with regard to the good Major, there's a reason for it.

[Avilan the Grey]

Really, they actually said that? (I stopped playing Tomb Raider after the second title)

That's more offensive towards men than women, I think. If I was a man, I'd be outraged. :smallyuk:

Yes. Yes they did. As an attempt to LESSEN the criticism that the "rape survivor" plot was sexist in itself, they opened every can of worms in the room.

[Trazoi]

I was disappointed, but didn't get the outrage, until the developer put their feet in their mouths.
It was weird to hear them describe how they wanted the player to protect her, like she's a completely separate entity from the player. Every 1st or 3rd person game I've played blurs the line between the difference between player and PC - you start thinking like "I need to open this door, get the gold key, run to the exit" rather than "Lara needs to do this". It's never mattered what gender/race/species/whatever the PC is - that's what happens.


The problem is if we just go with what we already knew about her, she would basically have been a rich brat who had the money to go wherever and do whatever she wanted. There is no real drama in that
Doesn't stop Batman or Iron Man. :smalltongue:

[Triscuitable]

Lemme introduce you to Frank West: Journalist (He's covered wars, y'know).

Fix'd.

Also, I thought he was kind of cute. Y'know, in a dorky, lovably quirky kind of way.

[Lord Seth]

The REAL sexism is evident in other things, like the attitudes and writing. I can understand the outrage at the new Tombraider trailer / intro AFTER hearing the developer's comments* (those were exremely moronic sexist foot-in-mouth) but I don't really see the problem BEFORE the comments (yes she almost gets raped, but she fights back and defeats her opponents. As I stated on another forum, the problem there is more lazy writing than sexism* but can you just imagine the opposite? That she DIDN't fight back???).Is it an attempted rape scene? Statements given by different developers flat-out contradict each other on that.


*...and then, as I said, the designers ruined the argument by not only come out as completely clueless ("No male gamers can identify with a female protagonist") but outright sexist ("...so we had to make them wanting to take care of her"). So, it turns out, the new Tombraider backstory IS sexist, because the developer's intent was, but it wasn't on it's face.Source for these quotes? I searched for "so we had to make them wanting to take care of her" on Google and found only this page.

[Tebryn]

So you wouldn't mind an overweight, wispy or otherwise clearly out-of-shape protagonist?

No. No I wouldn't. I don't find muscle bound people in real life attractive either. I don't see why that matters however. Even if it is some form of Male Power Fantasy that doesn't mean it's not objectifying men. And your statement in a manner of speaking proves it. Why can't a protagonist be fat? Or out of shape? Or even wispy? I do it all the time in pen and paper games. I'd love the chance to do it in the video game realm.

[Zen Master]

A good example is League of Legends, there's a far larger variety in archetypes and body types for male characters than female characters. (I can go into more detail if you want.)

Is it, tho? Are there, now? I'm not sure I agree, so I'll just do a count, and be right back.

*muzak*

Ok. Here are the basics of my work.

There are three main categories of champions in League of Legends. Human male, human female and monster. If a champion is not either a human male, or a human male, it is then a monster.

All yordels are thus monsters.
All altered beings (like Urgot) are monsters regardless of their origins.

I admit that other than yordles and the odd bird or robot, the monsters are almost all male-ish. It's the ish part that makes me refuse to place them in either human camp.

60 champions are monsters.
22 are male.
20 are female.

Every human champion - male and female - falls within parameters that could be called sexually attractive.

Every male champion with the exception of Ezreal has exaggerated physiques. They are basically hulking brutes. And Ez.

Every female champion with the exception of Leona and Sejuani is poorly dressed for any kind of combat situation.

Now personally, I feel the numbers perfectly demonstrate my point: Sex sells, but there is no sexism here to rant at.

I wanted to add that a number of characters are ambiguous - in terms of whether they are human or monster.

I've counted Kayle as monster. She has wings and us humans don't. I've counted Kassadin monster, because he didn't come back from the void as human anymore. I've counted Ryze as monster, because blue skin. If it wasn't for the blue skin, he'd join Ez as being of non-exaggerated physique.

There is the thing of most monsters being male-ish. Urgot wouldn't work as a female. Malphite wouldn't. Fiddlesticks wouldn't. Galio. Maokai. Skarner.

So is it bad that we perceive powerful monsters as male-is? Maybe it is. There was this female sorcerer, Immacolata, whose power came from the Menstrual - a form of blood magic, wouldn't you know it. She was tremenduously (spelling?!) cool, and she is the only really convincing female monster I can think of, off hand. I mean, there are lots of vampires, but vampires are just a pop phenomenon that equates sexy immortal human.

I think it's just harder to come up with a female monster. Try, and you end up with Cersei Lannister - who is monstrous only in her paranoid stupidity and utter selfishness.

In folklore, there are many female monsters. But they pretty much all lure men to their deaths with sex, and that leads us right back where we started. And one of the few female monsters in LoL is Ahri - a foxy lady who lures men to their deaths with sex.

There is no sexism here. There is human nature. Good or bad, I don't know - but I'm not out to change it. Not this part, at least. I like the sex.

[Avilan the Grey]

Is it an attempted rape scene? Statements given by different developers flat-out contradict each other on that.

Source for these quotes? I searched for "so we had to make them wanting to take care of her" on Google and found only this page.

I can't find the original source, but I can find pages referring to it:

The Sixth Axis (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&ved=0CFgQFjAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thesixthaxis.com%2F2012%2F06% 2F28%2Ftomb-raider-controversy-quotes-were-misinterpreted%2F&ei=BfQtUMC1JOXzyAGfkIDACw&usg=AFQjCNHCqxuh04Cjgn00dH1xf7ueYv0R6A&sig2=KBm1q6kB_BZEvGKyBci7SA&cad=rjt)

GameReactor (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CFQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gamereactor.eu%2Fnews%2F32821 %2FTomb%2BRaider%2Bcontroversy%2F&ei=BfQtUMC1JOXzyAGfkIDACw&usg=AFQjCNH3k4j905qPc6bPmqi8r4caEpAU7Q&sig2=ssV3QxxeXvKL5Ww5c2sD8A&cad=rjt)

Edit:
FOUND IT:
Original Kotaku interview. (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CEcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fkotaku.com%2F5917400%2Fyoull-want-to-protect-the-new-less-curvy-lara-croft&ei=qvQtUMq2JZOHyQH3wYCICA&usg=AFQjCNHwvFzu4znPYQAw73p4nLLjcvcf7g&sig2=MUW1Omy3nd4C4qBIXwWNYQ)

[Psyren]

Moviebob thought other M featured a strong female protagonist, and completely misunderstood the problem with "Tropes V Women".
He's hardly an argument.

1) He defended Tropes vs. Women, so I'm not sure what your second statement means at all. He didn't have much to say about the hatred on her YT page simply because he used it as a springboard to discuss... well, the exact same topic we're discussing now, actually.

2) @ Other M: That's not what he said at all (and yes, I watched "Heavens to Metroid.") He was simply opining that the backlash was blown out of proportion. Nintendo/Team Ninja weren't actively planning to ruin her character in some way - they just wanted a more interesting way to get the powerups than "randomly finding them in cave X" and settled on Adam as the dispenser. In retrospect, a pretty crappy decision, but there's a good chance there was no actual malice or attempt to undermine Samus behind it.

So no, your attempt to dismiss Bob (which is by the way an ad hominem, and thus logically invalid regardless) falls quite flat.

[Logic]

Moviebob thought other M featured a strong female protagonist, and completely misunderstood the problem with "Tropes V Women".
He's hardly an argument.
I feel the need to ask you to clarify.

If MovieBob misunderstood the problem with tropes V Women, then I failed to understand the issue completely as well. Please give us your take.

Disclaimer: I have not played Metroid: Other M

What was the problem with the characterization of Samus in Metroid: Other M?

EDIT: After re-watching the "Gender Games" video, it seems to me that he was including Samus as another bad example.

Paraphrasing: [The issue] is how female characters are depicted in games, usually framed in visual terms, more so than in regard to gender narrative, though there are some exceptions. *Cuts to boxart of Metroid: Other M.

I could be misinterpreting this, but since he just mentioned visuals over narrative, it seems that the brief shot of Samus at the end is meant to show the narrative exception.

[Zen Master]

I won't attempt to dispute this. What's really disturbing to me though is your belief that somehow corporate responsibility and profit are always conflicting motives.

I have been paid to do a study of corporate social responsibility.

The pattern that emerges is this: Corporations dig deep to find stories that are presentable - cases where they, randomly, had a positive infuence - then market those stories as if they did what they did for the purpose of being good guys.

In 2010, giant rain storms flooded Copenhagen. Today, go to any danish insurance company homepage, find they corporate social responsibility page or policy or whatever, and you will see them pat themselves on their backs for helping clean up after, and helping people rebuild.

They were forced to do this. It was in the policies. They even tried to dodge their responsibility - but when they couldn't, they could at least try to spin it to their benefit.

The sex in Mass Effect is there to sell boxes. It is not there for any other reason.

Having decided to use sex to sell their game, they decided to sprinkle political correctness on it. Lightly.

You think they did that for some reason other than the commercial one?

It is not impossible, I'll grant that. But I just don't see it.

[Astrella]

*snip*

I disagree with labelling Yordles as monsters; they are quite clearly gendered. And monsters are gendered too; otherwise Anivia wouldn't be female.

One thing you have with humanoid male champions that you don't have with female champions is an actual age range. Male champions go from Nunu (if you aren't counting him, Ezreal then.) to Swain. While female humanoid champions all appear to be in their twenties. And it's not like "wizened old crone" isn't a common trope.

Then if you look at body types. For male champions you have slender builds like Master Yi, Ezreal and such, then jumping over the Malzahar, Lee Sin and all the way on to Mundo (Or Jayce / Garen, etc...). And then you also have Zilean and Swain. On female (humanoid) builds the largest diversity you have is Lux to Sejuini, which is so much smaller.

Riot tends to do a decent job half the time though, and then alternates with doing stuff like giving Zyra who is going around barefoot heels. -_-

And if you go by the argument "sex sells", why does it only (mostly) apply to female champions? There isn't really a seducy champion on the male side outside of maybe TF; and very little skins aimed in that direction. While half the female champions at least has one sexualized skin and / or innuendo line.

If you want to argue "sex sells", fine, but at least make it there for all genders.

(Also using "it's human nature" as an argument doesn't really work and doesn't justify any kind of behaviour. A lot of people's values and ideas come from society; and those ideas and values have evolved a lot throughout time. There is very little that's inherent in our nature about how we treat different genders.

[The Succubus]

And if you go by the argument "sex sells", why does it only (mostly) apply to female champions? There isn't really a seducy champion on the male side outside of maybe TF; and very little skins aimed in that direction. While half the female champions at least has one sexualized skin and / or innuendo line.

I know I said I'd stay out of this....but perhaps the reason you don't have a male seducing type is because folks might think it's sexist? If his ability works only on women, the women in question are seen as being "easy" or "airheads". Plus there's a rather creepy rape angle to it which has come up when I've been reading up on succubi.

If the classical female succubus seduces a man for her own ends/pleasure, it's seen as being fun and sexy. However, if a handsome incubus were to try and seduce a woman for his own ends/pleasure....then it has overtones of rape and creepiness.

It's wrong, but it's a curious anomaly none the less.

[Avilan the Grey]

If the classical female succubus seduces a man for her own ends/pleasure, it's seen as being fun and sexy. However, if a handsome incubus were to try and seduce a woman for his own ends/pleasure....then it has overtones of rape and creepiness.

...Unless it is done in a romance novel.

[The Succubus]

Maybe this is the solution then. Instead of repressing things that men find enjoyable and sexy, women should be more expressive about the things that they find sexy instead? :smallsmile:

[endoperez]

I disagree with labelling Yordles as monsters; they are quite clearly gendered. And monsters are gendered too; otherwise Anivia wouldn't be female.

One thing you have with humanoid male champions that you don't have with female champions is an actual age range. Male champions go from Nunu (if you aren't counting him, Ezreal then.) to Swain. While female humanoid champions all appear to be in their twenties. And it's not like "wizened old crone" isn't a common trope.

You forgot Annie. Anivia is pretty much a grandmother in a non-humanoid shape. I agree that they're avoiding the crone / old woman female body type. I agree that about half of the female champs/skins are ridiculous, and a vast majority are in their 20s and have big boobs.

[Logic]

Maybe this is the solution then. Instead of repressing things that men find enjoyable and sexy, women should be more expressive about the things that they find sexy instead? :smallsmile:

While that is a good idea in principle, it is likely to be another excuse for slut-shaming.

[Avilan the Grey]

Maybe this is the solution then. Instead of repressing things that men find enjoyable and sexy, women should be more expressive about the things that they find sexy instead? :smallsmile:

YES. PLEASE.

Seriously, this is the way it is going, at least in part, anyway, and I definitely want it to go that way.

One example is the Man/Man / Slash erotica for women, something that was unheard of 15 years ago and now is a very common fetish among women (meaning of course that they now dare to speak of it).


While that is a good idea in principle, it is likely to be another excuse for slut-shaming.

And? THIS (not your reply, but the phenomenon you comment about) is TRULY sexist.

[Logic]

YES. PLEASE.

Seriously, this is the way it is going, at least in part, anyway, and I definitely want it to go that way.

One example is the Man/Man / Slash erotica for women, something that was unheard of 15 years ago and now is a very common fetish among women (meaning of course that they now dare to speak of it).



And? THIS (not your reply, but the phenomenon you comment about) is TRULY sexist.
Before I had finished reading your entire sentence, I was afraid I had offended you, and made myself out to look like a jerk, again.

Unfortunate, uncomfortable truths do exist. I have gotten myself in trouble in the past for pointing them out because I have been misinterpreted as somehow supporting the negative position.

[Zen Master]

I disagree with labelling Yordles as monsters; they are quite clearly gendered. And monsters are gendered too; otherwise Anivia wouldn't be female.

One thing you have with humanoid male champions that you don't have with female champions is an actual age range. Male champions go from Nunu (if you aren't counting him, Ezreal then.) to Swain. While female humanoid champions all appear to be in their twenties. And it's not like "wizened old crone" isn't a common trope.

Then if you look at body types. For male champions you have slender builds like Master Yi, Ezreal and such, then jumping over the Malzahar, Lee Sin and all the way on to Mundo (Or Jayce / Garen, etc...). And then you also have Zilean and Swain. On female (humanoid) builds the largest diversity you have is Lux to Sejuini, which is so much smaller.

Riot tends to do a decent job half the time though, and then alternates with doing stuff like giving Zyra who is going around barefoot heels. -_-

And if you go by the argument "sex sells", why does it only (mostly) apply to female champions? There isn't really a seducy champion on the male side outside of maybe TF; and very little skins aimed in that direction. While half the female champions at least has one sexualized skin and / or innuendo line.

If you want to argue "sex sells", fine, but at least make it there for all genders.

(Also using "it's human nature" as an argument doesn't really work and doesn't justify any kind of behaviour. A lot of people's values and ideas come from society; and those ideas and values have evolved a lot throughout time. There is very little that's inherent in our nature about how we treat different genders.

Going through your answers point by point.

Anything not human cannot be used as an argument for human sexism. Also, I adressed the monster types at some length.

There are slender males, and muscular males. I'll grant that. Both are types of 'sexually appealing'. Both are found across every type of media you care to mention.

On the female side, I agree with you that - again, across all types of media - slender is the only body type. But that's because huge muscles just are the thing for females. So for both sexes, really, there is just one type - slender - and for males, the added option of huge muscles.

And of course, there is Gragas.

And I wish there was a witch-type champion, ancient and bent. But that's beside the point.

Sex sells. This applies equally to male and female characters. If I need to repeat this, you haven't read a word I say.

I'm fairly sure 'human nature' is a fine argument. If I'm arguing that what you need to change isn't games, but human nature, the yea - that IS an argument. Which is what I'm saying. Across all types of media, we have sexual stereotypes. They are that way because that's what we're buying. If you want to change that - you are not out to change media. You are out to change human nature.

I'm not going to pretend to know what human nature is. I will gladly claim however, that I don't - because no one does.

But I do know that the world is the way it is because we make it that way. Human Nature .... makes it that way. Everything we create is a statement about who and what we are. Look at the world, and you are looking at human nature.

Can we better ourselves? Sure. Usually, when forced. We're not going to save the environment until we have no choice in the matter, for instance.

And then there are other questions. Like - is the fact that men are portrayed as masculine, and women as feminine, a huge problem? Is it something we should change?

I really don't think so. I'd start somewhere else. Fighting greed, for instance, or racial bigotry, or selfishness. Fighting images of attractiveness by gendertype would be incredibly far from the top of my list.

[SiuiS]

As a girl who enjoys video games as much as the next person, I can't help but feel compelled to try and share some perspectives with all of you. Firstly, women only have 60 to 80 percent of the muscle mass of men. Once puberty kicks in, men develop increased levels of testosterone, resulting in broader frames and increased muscle mass. Women, however, experience higher levels of estrogen, which results in more body fat, less muscle and bone mass, and lighter total weight than men. All of these factors equate to less absolute strength and muscle mass for women than men. It's not just me saying this, it's science. The sooner we accept this the sooner we can move on.

Err, no. Science says testosterone promotes muscle. Science says women have less testosterone. That's it. A woman could be just as strong as a man of the same size, if she exercises. A woman's muscle is not inherently weaker than a man's muscle. If you have 50 MU of muscle in your triceps, you punch as hard as the big burly biker bloke who also has 50 MU of muscle in his triceps.

"it's a little bit harder" does not mean you are stuck in the inferior position and new to get used to it.

And while video games are not a place to tout women's rights, they'd re equally not a place to espouse casual sexism.

[Drascin]

I feel the need to ask you to clarify.

If MovieBob misunderstood the problem with tropes V Women, then I failed to understand the issue completely as well. Please give us your take.

Disclaimer: I have not played Metroid: Other M

What was the problem with the characterization of Samus in Metroid: Other M?


Oh boy. Where do we start?

Okay, I really don't have time to go into it point by point, so I'll make a summation.

First, we have a woman who was shown as perfectly willing to put a gun to Adam's head if he tried any bull**** in previous works being completely and utterly dependent on his approval, considering a man that represents all the reasons she left the Federation to be her greatest inspiration and someone whose approval she desperately craves.

First and a half, while we're on that, Adam. Adam centralizes the whole character of Samus. Like three quarters of what Samus does in the whole game is not about her - it's about Adam (the rest is about the Baby, more on that later). Samus had had friends in her time in the Federation. Samus had grown among the Chozo, who treated her like her own daughter. But none of that matters. Samus only cares for the big strong Marty Stu figure. Even when Adam dies, most of Samus's internal dialogue is about Adam, and she attributes her inner strength to "Adam's inspiration", since without him she'd never be able to do all this (I am not making this up, these are lines that happen). She fails the Bechdel test to herself, which has to be like some new record somewhere. The game could have been named "Metroid: Adam Malkovich (guest starring Samus Aran)" and it wouldn't have been a lie. It's Adam who gets to stop the unstoppable metroids and get a "powerful" (theorethically) moving sacrifice scene that saves everyone, while Samus crawls on the ground and cries (after, mind, getting disabled by this same Adam shoots her in the back and lectures her on how silly she is and how he can make more rational decisions, like understanding you have to make sacrifices, which Samus's hot mind would clearly never understand, so he shot her while she was in front of an enemy for her own good).

Hey, on that! Second, we have the fact that Samus doesn't actually get to do anything except for killing the Queen Metroid. Seriously, count it. She doesn't get to save her friends - she can only look horrified in a vaguely damsel-like way while they get taken down. She doesn't actually get to discover the Deleter, figure out things, kill Ridley, or take down Mother Brain 2.0. ****, a bunch of Federation men do that for her in the saddest excuse for an ending sequence since I don't know, ever. You only get to watch while a bunch of mooks kill the hyped up boss and then have a random army dude come up and remark how incapable of actually enacting anything you were - only for another man to come up and save the day legally (though at least this time it was Samus's friend, so on its own that would have gotten a pass and actually been pretty cool were it not for the rest of the game). Basically, the simple fact is that for most of the game, things would have basically gone over the same if Samus hadn't been there. She's an extraneous character in a game she supposedly protagonizes.

Third, the baby obsession. Because all women are basically walking uteruses, and when fired up their mother instincts completely override their rational thoughts, of course. Caring for the little thing I understand - the thing just saved her life. It's logical she'd feel indebted to it. And hell, you could actually have gone into a very interesting pathos there - Samus, seeing herself in the baby metroid, only this time Ridley had been herself. But no - instead we get Samus obsessing over the fact it was a baby, and acting like a wooden-acted mother hen, because women clearly go into goo when in front of babies. I'm not what you'd call a huge feminist, but this had me seriously going "for real, people? For real?"

Fourth... argh. I'm starting to rant. Okay, cutting it here. Basically, in Other M Samus gets turned from a powerful but somewhat Byronic hero who is haunted by tragedy, to a little weak and psychologically dependent (not kidding. Samus and Adam here are just a couple notches away from the picture of a psychologically abusive relationship) waifu fodder whose strength is a complete Informed Attribute, whose entire character arc has suddenly taken on some very sexist hues and overtones of the "women are weak, irrational, and ruled by their emotions and mother hormones" variety, and who is relegated to being the damsel a bunch of times to men despite theorethically being the supposed protagonist of the game. And it doesn't help that the game's writer Yoshio Sakamoto refers to the character as a posession of his and he's outright out to make her attractive to him.

I could go into more detail, but I honestly think just giving this game this much thought was already giving it far more head space than it deserves.

[Astrella]

You forgot Annie. Anivia is pretty much a grandmother in a non-humanoid shape. I agree that they're avoiding the crone / old woman female body type. I agree that about half of the female champs/skins are ridiculous, and a vast majority are in their 20s and have big boobs.

Oh, boop. Thanks for pointing out.


One example is the Man/Man / Slash erotica for women, something that was unheard of 15 years ago and now is a very common fetish among women (meaning of course that they now dare to speak of it).And? THIS (not your reply, but the phenomenon you comment about) is TRULY sexist.

That can very objectifying though. But that's true for all erotica / pornography and I don't think this is the right place for a chat about how those spread a lot of unhealthy attitudes. (Some of them though; there's plenty of positive stuff out there too.)


Going through your answers point by point.

Anything not human cannot be used as an argument for human sexism. Also, I adressed the monster types at some length.

I'd argue that anything sufficiently humanoid can be used as an argument for human sexism. Asari are attractive because they look like humans. (with a bit of exotizing on the side of course.)


And then there are other questions. Like - is the fact that men are portrayed as masculine, and women as feminine, a huge problem? Is it something we should change?

I really don't think so. I'd start somewhere else. Fighting greed, for instance, or racial bigotry, or selfishness. Fighting images of attractiveness by gendertype would be incredibly far from the top of my list.

The fact that those two are the only options is a bad thing for several reasons:

1. Not every woman is feminine, nor is every man masculine. Considering a part of gaming is escapism, this means people are getting shut out. I'll be less likely to identify with characters in a game if they're all just so far removed from what I am.

2. Sure, sex sells. But, people's tastes differ a ton. Saying sex sells doesn't mean that every man / woman has to fit a certain stereotype. There are plenty of people who find a muscled woman attractive, so that's not really an argument for not including characters like that.

3. Variety. Limiting yourself to certain gender stereotypes means that there's less character variance which again limits the options you have. More options mean more possible stories to tell which means less repetitiveness and more enjoyment.

-----

Lastly media portrayals play a big part in body image for both genders, which again, is why it's important to have a variety so that everyone feels represented.

Media isn't something that has no influence, the stories we see / read / play have a huge influence on our attitudes and how we feel about ourselves and the rest of the world. Bigotry is taught. Gender stereotypes are taught. And they harm a lot of people. Sure they don't harm the people they are comfortable with; but if a system is hurting people, we get rid of the system. If something causes harm; we change it. Systems serve people; not vice versa. And I'm not arguing for getting rid of sexiness; I'm arguing both for more variety in characters and acknowledging that what is often deemed attractive is only a very small subset of what people actually find attractive. (Also that beauty ideals in part are a social concept; look at how much they've changed throughout history.)

(Also, could people please cut down on the "there's more important stuff" fallacy? If you think something else is more important, sure, go focus on that. But people are free to focus on this if they want, and people can focus on multiple things. Me caring about gender representation in games doesn't preclude me from caring about trans* rights for example.)

Also, I'm a bit puzzled at how apparently this is part of human nature and should be left alone but you consider stuff like greed or selfishness things should be fought which are just as much part of "human nature".

[Werekat]

RL stuff

As a girl who both plays videogames and exercises with a barbell - yeah, I'm a bit weaker than the guys I work out with. In some areas - a lot weaker. In others I have comparable weights or am stronger. And am certainly stronger than the guy whose last encounter with a dumbbell was in highschool P.E.

Things like "realistic strength of women in the military" are solved pretty easily and universally in fire departments - they've got a minimum strength requirement. You make it - you make it in. Yeah, there'll be less women than men, but as long as everyone's judged on ability, not presupposition, it's fine.

What is a lot harder is going against reflex to "protect the woman". But that's a question both solvable in an acting team (if it's actually taken into consideration) and a question the burden of which can be considerably lessened outside of actual team dynamics - through the very stereotypes we're discussing here. Make less girls in the media who need saving and you'll get less guys for whom it's a learned reflex. It'll take a generation or three, but it's doable.


Bioware diverse romances

The idea that the gay romances in Dragon Age are to allow for the lesbian romances is pretty funny. I was under the impression that they were there because plenty of straight girls find guy-on-guy hot - same as guys find girl-on-girl hot. And they're a nod to the LGBT community - a win-win situation!


LoL Argument + general discussion on diversity

Agreed on the whole diversity thing - it's not that there need to be less guy types, there need to be more guy types. My personal vote goes out to white-haired pretty boys, you can never have too many special snowflakes. :D

And girl types. In LoL, it would be nice if even the sexy girls had non-sexy skins, so I don't have to wince looking at the champion I'm playing. Ashe was nice in that regard before they redrew her pictures (the main one and the Frejlord skin) - now they just look terrible.

And weird creepy thing types. For League of Legends - I think a female shadow would be a nicely creepy complement to the current one (forget whatsitsname, the champ w/Paranoia). Female gargoyles work, too - just look at Demona (http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/3/38780/815510-demona.jpg) (she's wearing a loincloth 'cause all of the gargoyles do in that show). Orianna works great as a girl, and would have worked just as well as a creepy little machine boy.

And a lot of the monster-monster's creepiness factor would benefit from them being called 'it' in the description, rather than 'he'. Fiddlesticks comes to mind, Cho'Gath, and other nicely monstrous things.

Ooh! An androgynous champion would be a nice idea. Bonus points for tentacles. :D


Slut-shaming and the importance of the issue at hand

I'd say slut-shaming will get boring pretty soon if it's laughed at. "Pretty soon" is measured in years, but, thanks to the fact that history's been speeding up, not decades.

Greed, racial bigotry, and sexual stereotypes are fruit from the same tree. They're all about seeing the imagined instead of what's real. Fight one, and you help fight the others. Win-win situation, again.

tl:dr Yes please, more bishies. :D And girls. And creepy things. And androgynous things.

[factotum]

The problem is if we just go with what we already knew about her, she would basically have been a rich brat who had the money to go wherever and do whatever she wanted. There is no real drama in that (Indy was, after all, both rather poor and had other motivations), but one of the key things about Lara is that she is richer than Richard Branson.

It's made pretty clear in the late 2000s reboot that Lara's main motivation for getting into archaeology is to try and find out what happened to her mother. The storyline goes, as I recall, that a very young Lara (we're talking maybe 10 years old) is in a plane crash with her mother, and while trying to find their way to civilisation her mother gets zapped by some sort of ancient device and disappears. Lara has a burning desire to solve that mystery, which would be the same however rich she was.

Also, just owning a stately home doesn't necessarily make you rich--quite often it's the opposite, because the old school upper class don't have the money-making ability of the "nouveau riche", and those stately homes cost a ton of money to run!

[Brother Oni]

Err, no. Science says testosterone promotes muscle. Science says women have less testosterone. That's it. A woman could be just as strong as a man of the same size, if she exercises.

Except that the differences between the male and female Olympic weightlifting records (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_records_in_weightlifting) suggest that simple exercise is insufficient.
Looking at the table, it's not until the 75kg weight level that women start to match the men (56kg).

I'm not saying that it's impossible for a woman to be as equally strong as a man her size, but it's going to take some chemical assistance - relying on natural biology and a good training regime isn't going to cut it.

In addition, there are actual differences in how the female and male skeletons are jointed, thus even if you did muscle up a woman, they will still function slightly differently.

I agree that this is just gender difference though (sex, not sexism as somebody else said) and simple fact.

[Zen Master]

I'd argue that anything sufficiently humanoid can be used as an argument for human sexism. Asari are attractive because they look like humans. (with a bit of exotizing on the side of course.)

There can be made an argument, sure. But if we allow every grey zone to become a valid objection to the general point, there is no end to any argument, ever.

Hence, I set a clear and definite basis for my argument - and I shall stick by it. Neither Kayle nor Morgana nor Urgot nor Warwick are included in my portrayal of 'human'.


The fact that those two are the only options is a bad thing for several reasons:

1. Not every woman is feminine, nor is every man masculine. Considering a part of gaming is escapism, this means people are getting shut out. I'll be less likely to identify with characters in a game if they're all just so far removed from what I am.

2. Sure, sex sells. But, people's tastes differ a ton. Saying sex sells doesn't mean that every man / woman has to fit a certain stereotype. There are plenty of people who find a muscled woman attractive, so that's not really an argument for not including characters like that.

3. Variety. Limiting yourself to certain gender stereotypes means that there's less character variance which again limits the options you have. More options mean more possible stories to tell which means less repetitiveness and more enjoyment.

1: Un-feminine females and un-masculine males are simply another way of saying unattractive. Unattractive characters do not sell.

2: See the above. Peoples tastes do not differ a ton. There is reason the things that sell are the things that sell.

Basically, it's all marketing. If you're in the 'differs a ton' segment, you are a fringe market, and will receive fringe offerings.

I'm sorry about that. Being true does not make it very sympathetic, but while unsympathetic, it still remains true.

3: There is as much variety as we want. I've made this point several times: Things are as they are because we make them this way. If our tastes were different, we'd buy different products. The market would swing to adjust. What we're seeing is that it HAS adjusted to what we want.


Lastly media portrayals play a big part in body image for both genders, which again, is why it's important to have a variety so that everyone feels represented.

Media isn't something that has no influence, the stories we see / read / play have a huge influence on our attitudes and how we feel about ourselves and the rest of the world. Bigotry is taught. Gender stereotypes are taught. And they harm a lot of people. Sure they don't harm the people they are comfortable with; but if a system is hurting people, we get rid of the system. If something causes harm; we change it. Systems serve people; not vice versa. And I'm not arguing for getting rid of sexiness; I'm arguing both for more variety in characters and acknowledging that what is often deemed attractive is only a very small subset of what people actually find attractive. (Also that beauty ideals in part are a social concept; look at how much they've changed throughout history.)

(Also, could people please cut down on the "there's more important stuff" fallacy? If you think something else is more important, sure, go focus on that. But people are free to focus on this if they want, and people can focus on multiple things. Me caring about gender representation in games doesn't preclude me from caring about trans* rights for example.)

Also, I'm a bit puzzled at how apparently this is part of human nature and should be left alone but you consider stuff like greed or selfishness things should be fought which are just as much part of "human nature".

I want my ideals as is, thanks.

There are things I'll never be. My build will never allow me to be the slender, somewhat (from my perspective, at least) androgyneous Armani model. Instead, I'm tragically forced into the muscular, bearded, wide-shouldered shape that I have.

I can find peace with that. Professionally (I'm a sales guy), sometimes I wish I could be less ..... physical. People tend to underestimate my intelligence - on the other hand, they tend to overestimate my honesty.

Is this all some gross injustice towards me? Hardly. The are ups and downs to all things.

I like my gender stereotypes. They are (sometimes low brow) ideals to aspire to - or make fun of - or exemplify something - or communicate a concept that is understood and accepted without need of explanation.

Say I tell you 'I am a tough guy.' Two things will happen: Firstly, you wont believe me - because everyone thinks that sort of self-statement means you're really a wanna-be. Secondly, you will know exactly what I mean. I will have communicated via a concept that is already understood.

The 'more important stuff' thing isn't a fallacy. It is an argument you can disagree with - but there is no logical inconsistency. I prioritize. I would start with bigger problems, then work down to lesser ones, and I suggest others do the same. No fallacy there. But you can disagree with the priorities, or with the method.

Gods, there are some long posts.

[Werekat]

Brother Oni: not "her size". "Her size and training level."

Let's do weightlifting. I weigh 70 kilos. Right now (trained, but after being away from the fitness club for a few months) my barbell weighs 25 kilos, about the standard starting weight for a non-trained guy my size. The maximum I've gone is 30, but that's because I have to increase the weight very slowly - eye problems. The maximum I'm allowed to go - 35 - is some 5 kilos below the barbell a guy weighing 87 pulls.

And I'm not a pro. Just a gal who likes to keep in shape and who does that at her leisure.

When we're not at the Olympics, where people push themselves to the max, it doesn't matter as much.

[deuterio12]

Plenty of games promote murder, looting, enslavement, genocide, mugging, extermination and plenty of other unmoral stuff.

That the characters (male or female) wear skimpy clothing and have stereotopyzed body shapes sounds kinda insignificant to me when they're killing everything that can be killed, piling up mountains of bodies and taking everything that isn't nailed down or on fire.

[Astrella]

1: Un-feminine females and un-masculine males are simply another way of saying unattractive. Unattractive characters do not sell.

...
Quotation needed, big time. (aside from how silly it is to make broad generalizations like that about something that is incredibly subjective, namely attractiveness.)

Just a few examples of the top of my head: Justin Bieber (who gets called a girl by people trying to tear him down all the time.), do any European people here remember Tokio Hotel being really popular in 2005-2006? Cause the lead singer (http://www.appelogen.be/wp-content/images/bill-kaulitz-tokio-hotel-make-up.jpg) was / is considered really attractive and isn't really super-masculine either.

But yeah, nice to know that everyone who doesn't follow gender stereotypes is unattractive now.


3: There is as much variety as we want. I've made this point several times: Things are as they are because we make them this way. If our tastes were different, we'd buy different products. The market would swing to adjust. What we're seeing is that it HAS adjusted to what we want.

People complaining shows us that people aren't happy with it. And how does this not apply to any of the other stuff you just said. And no, wanting someone doesn't make it right.


I want my ideals as is, thanks.

There are things I'll never be. My build will never allow me to be the slender, somewhat (from my perspective, at least) androgyneous Armani model. Instead, I'm tragically forced into the muscular, bearded, wide-shouldered shape that I have.

I can find peace with that. Professionally (I'm a sales guy), sometimes I wish I could be less ..... physical. People tend to underestimate my intelligence - on the other hand, they tend to overestimate my honesty.

Is this all some gross injustice towards me? Hardly. The are ups and downs to all things.

I like my gender stereotypes. They are (sometimes low brow) ideals to aspire to - or make fun of - or exemplify something - or communicate a concept that is understood and accepted without need of explanation.

Say I tell you 'I am a tough guy.' Two things will happen: Firstly, you wont believe me - because everyone thinks that sort of self-statement means you're really a wanna-be. Secondly, you will know exactly what I mean. I will have communicated via a concept that is already understood.

Your ideals don't go away cause of more variety. And because something works for you, doesn't mean it works for everyone. A door that's only 5 feet tall will not be a hindrance for people smaller than that, but will be for taller people. Heightening the door helps the tall people but doesn't negatively affect the shorter people. Your trope of though guy will still be around. No-one is arguing getting rid of masculine male representations / feminine female representations, because that would just as much be gender policing. Variety doesn't negatively affect you but positively affects other people, so why would you oppose it?

[Avilan the Grey]

That can very objectifying though. But that's true for all erotica / pornography and I don't think this is the right place for a chat about how those spread a lot of unhealthy attitudes. (Some of them though; there's plenty of positive stuff out there too.)

The point I am making is that women need to take their share of the cake and stand up for what turns them on; this is what I feel should be the core of the debate, not if men are wrong in being turned on by X or Y and how that has shaped reality. In the wild undergrowth of the Internet this is already happening, but unfortunately not yet AFK. This will automatically change all media as well, even if it might take a few years.

(Fifty Shades of Grey, I think it can contribute positively to this end even though all women I know that has read it say they find better stuff online for free).


It's made pretty clear in the late 2000s reboot that Lara's main motivation for getting into archaeology is to try and find out what happened to her mother. The storyline goes, as I recall, that a very young Lara (we're talking maybe 10 years old) is in a plane crash with her mother, and while trying to find their way to civilisation her mother gets zapped by some sort of ancient device and disappears. Lara has a burning desire to solve that mystery, which would be the same however rich she was.

Also, just owning a stately home doesn't necessarily make you rich--quite often it's the opposite, because the old school upper class don't have the money-making ability of the "nouveau riche", and those stately homes cost a ton of money to run!

True, I never played the 2000 reboot.
I DO think it is heavily hinted that she is really rich, though. Both the early games and the movies outright states it, with training robots, butlers, etc etc.

[Astrella]

The point I am making is that women need to take their share of the cake and stand up for what turns them on; this is what I feel should be the core of the debate, not if men are wrong in being turned on by X or Y and how that has shaped reality. In the wild undergrowth of the Internet this is already happening, but unfortunately not yet AFK. This will automatically change all media as well, even if it might take a few years.

(Fifty Shades of Grey, I think it can contribute positively to this end even though all women I know that has read it say they find better stuff online for free).

Hm hm, I agree.

(Fifty Shades of Grey is pretty bad to hold as an ideal though because it's horribly abusive. :/ )

[Avilan the Grey]

Hm hm, I agree.

(Fifty Shades of Grey is pretty bad to hold as an ideal though because it's horribly abusive. :/ )

Really? I haven't read it; I just find the idea that it is being widely talked about and marketed as a huge step forward in itself.

[Astrella]

Oh yes, it's a positive thing, but it's a bit of a shame that it has to do with this book. Nothing wrong with reading it, but I wouldn't get your ideas about a healthy relationship from it (http://lauragt.hubpages.com/hub/Fifty-Shades-of-Grey-Fun-Romantic-Fantasy-or-Harmful-Abuse-Story), is all.

[Avilan the Grey]

Oh yes, it's a positive thing, but it's a bit of a shame that it has to do with this book. Nothing wrong with reading it, but I wouldn't get your ideas about a healthy relationship from it (http://lauragt.hubpages.com/hub/Fifty-Shades-of-Grey-Fun-Romantic-Fantasy-or-Harmful-Abuse-Story), is all.

So it's like Twillight? :smallbiggrin::smalltongue:

[Astrella]

So it's like Twillight? :smallbiggrin::smalltongue:

I suppose, yeah. :smalltongue:

[Trazoi]

So it's like Twillight? :smallbiggrin::smalltongue:

The Fifty Shades trilogy was developed from a Twilight fan fiction originally titled Master of the Universe and published episodically on fan-fiction websites under the pen name "Snowqueen's Icedragon".
So yeah, it's like Twilight. :smalltongue:

[Brother Oni]

Brother Oni: not "her size". "Her size and training level."


You would expect that at the Olympic level, the atheletes are at the height of their training level, so any differences in performance would be mostly due to their physical attributes.



Let's do weightlifting. I weigh 70 kilos. Right now (trained, but after being away from the fitness club for a few months) my barbell weighs 25 kilos, about the standard starting weight for a non-trained guy my size.


Could I ask what exercise with the barbell is this? Regardless, you've highlighted a difference already - by your own admission you're semi-trained and yet an untrained male of your size can already match you.



When we're not at the Olympics, where people push themselves to the max, it doesn't matter as much.

I disagree - outside of the Olympics, the disparity in weight lifted is even clearer due to the differences in training.


With regard to your earlier post, I agree that if a woman can meet the physical requirements of a job, she should be allowed in, barring any other critical requirements.

In specific to the military, it's not that women aren't allowed in, it's that women aren't allowed in direct combat roles. You've suggested that it would be possible to condition men out of the reflex to protect women within a couple generations - given that the Israelis prohibited women in close combat over 60 years ago (1948) and as far as I know, there's no sign of the restriction being lifted, it suggests that the issue is more complex than that.

It's also naive to assume that a captured female soldier would be treated the same as a fellow male soldier by the enemy.

All I'm basically saying is that there are differences between men and women and failing to recognise (but not discriminate on) these differences, is rather foolish.

For example, off the top of my head, there's one role that is absolutely restricted to men with very good reasons - First in Man clinical testing. Drugs are this stage of development have unknown human toxicity and it woud be incredibly reckless to put women at risk with a potential reproductive mutagen.
Again, that's not being sexist, but simple fact.


That the characters (male or female) wear skimpy clothing and have stereotopyzed body shapes sounds kinda insignificant to me when they're killing everything that can be killed, piling up mountains of bodies and taking everything that isn't nailed down or on fire.

I think the issue is the killing, looting and pillaging in games, is quite clearly escapism and is regarded as such by the average player.
Sexism in games, is more subtle and unlike the killing, looting and pillaging isn't always left behind when they turn off the console or computer.

I believe there's been a number of high profile incidents at game tournaments where female competitors have had a number of unflattering comments and abuse thrown at them by other male competitors (and sometimes the commentators).
Whether their behaviour is influenced by sexism in games, or is merely a symptom of a woman being in a traditionally very male dominated environment (not to mention the stereotypes about socially awkward gamers), is debatable but the situation isn't helped by females often being portrayed as over-sexualised and/or helpless in games.

[Spiryt]

Plenty of games promote murder, looting, enslavement, genocide, mugging, extermination and plenty of other unmoral stuff.


This reminds me that apparently, some people were offended by Pulp Fiction due to "ni*** world...

I mean, what in actual.... Seriously?