Female gamers: Characters you find attractive? [Archive]

Terraoblivion

2015-01-20, 03:30 PM

With men cool and handsome are pretty much synonymous, put an ugly guy in pimped out power armor or a thousand dollar suit and he isn't ugly more.

At least not in the eyes of straight men. Who might not be the best at judging the attractiveness of men, neither being attracted to men nor being conditioned to view men in terms of attractiveness the way society conditions us to view women. You really need to talk to straight women, bisexuals of both genders and gay men to learn what is attractive in men. Studies of what women find attractive, generally suggest that big, heavy bodybuilder muscles are a turn-off, for example. Some muscle, sure, but not big, beefy bodybuilders.

For that matter, there are different images of coolness. Speaking as a lesbian who isn't attracted either way, I'd consider a confident, refined bishounen guy cooler than a big, scarred hunk of muscle and machismo. And if you were to ask me who the coolest video game character is, my answer would be to be really torn between Lightning and Fang and end up saying Lightning. In all of fiction, it would be Akemi Homura. There is also the matter of attitude and context. Power armor can mean everything from the special chosen one to a pathetic mook. However, the idea that power armor and the general sense of beefiness it suggests is inherently cool is a culturally situated one. It's predominantly North American, to a lesser degree western in general, and more prevalent among the working and middle class than the upper middle class and upper class and much more pronounced among men than women. There's actual research into this kind of things, after all.

I know plenty of girls that fit his description that weren't "forced" into it by social pressures, and most if not all of them are core gamers.

Social pressure is a subtle thing. You often don't notice when it's exerted unless you're the target and the target might well suppress the realization to fit in. Peer pressure and bullying are merely the crudest, most primitive forms of it. Controlling the discourse, setting the culture of a group and what you praise are examples of more subtle forms of it. And gamer culture has a heavy bias towards expecting and enforcing a specific, strictly male-coded behavior of its members regardless of gender. Girls who fit it do so because that's what the culture expects and rewards. Punishment for people who step outside that culture is often swift and brutal, regardless of how you do it. It's quite well documented just about anywhere people have a discussion about video game culture. Including women and gay men talking about how they fell in line with the culture in the past to be part of the community, even if it meant putting up with jokes they were the butt of.

thethird

2015-01-20, 03:37 PM

I can see that though. I like how Geralt of Rivia looks, but he's older and grizzled with more emphasis placed on how cool he is than how handsome he is. Compare to Triss from the second game, who's a strong woman but younger and designed more to be sexy.

While it is not a wrong point in the novels it discusses why Triss looks the way Triss/Jenneffer/other witches looks specially since as a witch she can look more or less as she wants. She is actively using her looks.

Hiro Protagonest

2015-01-20, 03:47 PM

At least not in the eyes of straight men. Who might not be the best at judging the attractiveness of men, neither being attracted to men nor being conditioned to view men in terms of attractiveness the way society conditions us to view women. You really need to talk to straight women, bisexuals of both genders and gay men to learn what is attractive in men. Studies of what women find attractive, generally suggest that big, heavy bodybuilder muscles are a turn-off, for example. Some muscle, sure, but not big, beefy bodybuilders.

I also don't like overmuscled characters. All male LoL champions besides Ezreal are heavily muscled, but the most overmuscled ones just look bad. Someone like Twisted Fate also has no reason to be as big as he is, although he's not at inhuman levels. Braum gets a pass for ridiculousness because he's supposed to be godly strong (without actually being a god) and his weapon is an indestructible door.

Lamech

2015-01-20, 04:53 PM

I also don't like overmuscled characters. All male LoL champions besides Ezreal are heavily muscled, but the most overmuscled ones just look bad. Someone like Twisted Fate also has no reason to be as big as he is, although he's not at inhuman levels. Braum gets a pass for ridiculousness because he's supposed to be godly strong (without actually being a god) and his weapon is an indestructible door.
LoL takes sense of scale and shoots it in the face. With a gun. Especially if you look at the little trees in the background. And then you realize Cho somehow hides in the grass. Although there are lots of male champs without huge muscles. Like Blitz. Or Thresh. Or Mal. Or Mord. Or Xerath. And so forth. 100% muscle free. No seriously they lack muscles of any kind.

Cassandra from DA: Inquisition. Especially the scars.

SowZ

2015-01-20, 05:23 PM

Hiro Protagonest

2015-01-20, 05:46 PM

LoL takes sense of scale and shoots it in the face. With a gun. Especially if you look at the little trees in the background. And then you realize Cho somehow hides in the grass. Although there are lots of male champs without huge muscles. Like Blitz. Or Thresh. Or Mal. Or Mord. Or Xerath. And so forth. 100% muscle free. No seriously they lack muscles of any kind.

Cassandra from DA: Inquisition. Especially the scars.

Well yes. I should've put the disclaimer that this applied to all the human male champions, and not guys like Nautilus. :smalltongue:

...Cassandra is a girl. >_> Although just change the shape of the mouth a little, rework her body as a guy's with the same measurements (or at least very close, maybe add a bit around the waist?), and that could work.

goto124

2015-01-21, 12:49 AM

...Cassandra is a girl. >_>

I believe she was answering the thread's question of 'who do you find attractive', and isn't limited to males.

Do let me describe a strange thing: I don't watch Attack on Titan, but I've seen the art, and whenever I see a female character (who dresses exactly the same as the males), I tend to think of her as more attractive. I guess I've been conditioned to see feminity = attractive/sexy?

Maryring

2015-01-21, 06:13 AM

Fun thing about desirability is that it can be a curious and fickle thing. Take Tekken. I find Leo and King to both be really nice to look at, but Lee and Craig? They're not "ugly" but... no thanks.

Serpentine

2015-01-21, 06:38 AM

We're talking specifically about game characters? Well then... I had a huge crush on Alistair from Dragon Age, and wanted to touch Zevran's butt. Not sure about other games - guys in games are not generally, shall we say, designed for the female eye. I haven't played many of them, but I suppose the bishie-type characters are generally nice to look at.

Regarding the mention of LoL: I started doing an analysis of the body types of male and female champions. As of about halfway through, there's MUCH more variety among male characters than female ones.

Regarding what basis women choose their characters: Depends on the game for me. In LoL their fighting style is the main reason I pick, although I favour Cassiopeia because, well, look at my username and avatar. In a roleplaying game like Dragon Age or Skyrim, my character is my personal avatar. I'm basically always female, and will usually make them look... Mm... More what I'd like to look like, I suppose. Or, if I have the option, as close as I can to a purple dragon (see: Skyrim), because I can. In the rare case where I replay a game, I might change it up, like playing a male character instead.

-D-

2015-01-21, 07:20 AM

as close as I can to a purple dragon
Spyro must have been your favorite game :)

Posts so far have been pretty interest...

I'ma gonna let you finish but I need to hijack this thread.
------------------------------------------------------------
So, females out there. A person tells you make a game. Any game, something you think you'll enjoy.

What is it? What characters does it have (if any, it can be Peggle or Tetris)?

Soras Teva Gee

2015-01-21, 07:47 AM

Wait, Lightning is a girl.... Hold on a sec, I better check rather than assume.

Oh okay, Lightning is a gir-- y'know what, does it even matter for Final Fantasy characters? :smallconfused:

There is a threshold beyond which "attractive" ceases to be about gender and one's personal perferences and becomes simply about averting idiocy.

I believe she was answering the thread's question of 'who do you find attractive', and isn't limited to males.

Do let me describe a strange thing: I don't watch Attack on Titan, but I've seen the art, and whenever I see a female character (who dresses exactly the same as the males), I tend to think of her as more attractive. I guess I've been conditioned to see feminity = attractive/sexy?

Probably but AoT still breaks all the rules.

The sex symbol of the franchise is the comically short Levi after all, though he's quite nice in that small package. Though there is still a pretty decent contingent for Mikasa... or rather I should say her phenomenal aaabbbbbssss.

Brother Oni

2015-01-21, 07:55 AM

Shirtless overly muscular supermen aren't about sex. They're about power fantasies and wish fulfillment.

Out of curiousity, what would be the female equivalent of a power fantasy character?

Soras Teva Gee

2015-01-21, 09:59 AM

Out of curiousity, what would be the female equivalent of a power fantasy character?

Just my personal observation but there isn't necessarily one because the lines are drawn differently, a power fantasy is still a very strongly masculine concept in Western culture. Compare a heroic narrative to a romantic narrative and who watches which and in what distribution. Not that there aren't exceptions these are very general trends. Volumes could (and have) been written here.

Purely for the visual aspects under discussion....probably fashion.
Especially the stuff you can describe as "really girly" and what not.

Assuming I still have any teeth left after putting my foot in so fast like that... while many men will appreciate a nice dress/outfit, just as women do actually seem to like (www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21576061-womens-expectations-opposite-sex-are-least-unrealistic) that triangular muscle physique, both hit a point of diminishing returns. While I can't prove it I'm expect a lot of guys if not entirely put off by say Pretty Cure's aesthetic (http://static1.wikia.nocookie.net/prettycure/images/b/b5/62_Cures_and_Fairies_Wallpaper.jpg) its not how men generally draw women (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MostCommonSuperPower).

(Incidentially Pretty Cure (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZX2oEc2iuM#t=20) is actually very action based. Magical girl's are the best example maybe? IDK)

Maryring

2015-01-21, 10:30 AM

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-21, 11:03 AM

Hyena

2015-01-21, 11:12 AM

Speaking of skimpy armor, SWTOR has "invisible armor" pieces for boots and chestpieces. It also features awesome things like this:

http://sweet.pp.fi/skimps0612/combo.jpg

http://sweet.pp.fi/randomskimp7swtor.jpg

http://sweet.pp.fi/randomskimp4swtor.jpg

If only I looked that good while showing so much skin.

JadedDM

2015-01-21, 11:47 AM

So, females out there. A person tells you make a game. Any game, something you think you'll enjoy.

Just a heads up, but whenever you call women 'females' I automatically imagine you are a Ferengi.

I really don't like the "male power fantasy" statement, because I feel it often ends up being used as a "you're female. You're not allowed to like Xena because it's a *male* fantasy." If you're not allowed to like female characters because they're "eye-candy for the males" and not allowed to like male characters because they're "male power fantasies" then who am I allowed to like? Velma Dinkley?
I don't think there's any rule anywhere that says only men can like 'male power fantasies' any more than only women can like 'chick flicks.'

Maryring

2015-01-21, 12:08 PM

Velma is pretty awesome, to be fair.
True that. True that.

I don't think there's any rule anywhere that says only men can like 'male power fantasies' any more than only women can like 'chick flicks.'

I was more expressing my frustration that whenever the term "male power fantasy" comes up, it always devolves the discussion into long rants about how there's no true female ideals anywhere in any medium. It bothers me, because people should be able to choose their own ideals and enjoy them for their own reasons. You shouldn't suffer social castigation just because you like Leo from Tekken (Look at how male she looks), or Zelda (what kinda woman needs rescuing all the time) or Xena the warrior princess (because no true woman would wear *that*).

I recognize that there are many flaws in gender representation everywhere, but A, it doesn't happen always, all the time. And B. People should still feel free to to like who they like for whatever reason they want to.

And I realize that I might be the one diverting away from the intended purpose of this thread. Pardon that. I'll be quiet about the issue from now on.

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-21, 12:22 PM

You shouldn't suffer social castigation just because you like Leo from Tekken (Look at how male she looks)

Ah, that reminds me of Smash Brothers. When I first played it, I remember trying Marth (http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7fc89Ug9I1qzyzjto1_400.jpg)and thinking wow, a strong female character from a JRPG? Who saw that coming! She's cool.

Well, how was I supposed to know? I'd never played Fire Emblem before.

BeerMug Paladin

2015-01-21, 12:45 PM

Ah, that reminds me of Smash Brothers. When I first played it, I remember trying Marth (http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7fc89Ug9I1qzyzjto1_400.jpg)and thinking wow, a strong female character from a JRPG? Who saw that coming! She's cool.

Well, how was I supposed to know? I'd never played Fire Emblem before.

There's a character in the new version of that game that looks almost exactly like Marth but actually is a female.

In fact, I read somewhere in the trophies that she cosplayed as Marth for a while during her first appearance. For some reason I found that tidbit of trivia hilarious.

SiuiS

2015-01-21, 12:51 PM

I'm no social justice warrior or raging feminist or anything, but I've noticed there's a distinct lack of male eye candy in games. Male game characters can be ugly or fat or whatever, and can rely on some character development and personality without looking like knockouts as well. Then suddenly Bayonetta. :smalltongue:

Lightning from FF13 would do though, if she could stop angsting constantly. I'm always pleased to see a bit of Ezio Alditore on my screen as well.

And Waluigi's moustache.......*shivers*

Lightning? Lightning wasn't angsty. She was just a jackass.

Now Fang... Mmmm.

Out of curiousity, what would be the female equivalent of a power fantasy character?

We'll let you know when they pull one off instead of tell us they pulled it off. :smalltongue:

True that. True that.

I was more expressing my frustration that whenever the term "male power fantasy" comes up, it always devolves the discussion into long rants about how there's no true female ideals anywhere in any medium. It bothers me, because people should be able to choose their own ideals and enjoy them for their own reasons. You shouldn't suffer social castigation just because you like Leo from Tekken (Look at how male she looks), or Zelda (what kinda woman needs rescuing all the time) or Xena the warrior princess (because no true woman would wear *that*).

It's macro/micro. You are allowed to and supposed to choose your own preferences, but the trends, not only in what you like but in what others expect you to like and why, are part of the larger set of assumptions.

Ah, that reminds me of Smash Brothers. When I first played it, I remember trying Marth (http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7fc89Ug9I1qzyzjto1_400.jpg)and thinking wow, a strong female character from a JRPG? Who saw that coming! She's cool.

Well, how was I supposed to know? I'd never played Fire Emblem before.

I can see it.

Isn't marth's taunt "look at me, I'm so pretty" in japanese? They may have made him feminine intentionally.

Talakeal

2015-01-21, 12:57 PM

Shirtless overly muscular supermen aren't about sex. They're about power fantasies and wish fulfillment.

Tangential question, do you think that if the artists were, for whatever reason, to draw the male characters fully nude, do you think guys like Conan, Batman, Superman, Captain America, Kratos, or any other overly muscled male character, would have overly large genitalia?

Ibrinar

2015-01-21, 03:47 PM

Terraoblivion

2015-01-21, 03:48 PM

Lightning? Lightning wasn't angsty. She was just a jackass.

She's really only a jackass to Serah once and otherwise to Snow. And, well, I think that few people would really be all that supportive or even amused if their teenage sister who they gave up their own teenage years to take care of comes home stating a desire to marry her useless, unemployed boyfriend of a few wees and following it up with saying that they're the Antichrist, but it's okay because said boyfriend supports her. Snapping there seems like a pretty understandable solution. As for being a jackass to Snow...It's Snow. He has it coming, both for the whole useless, unemployed boyfriend thing and for constantly rubbing her loss in early on.

Really, boiling Lightning down to being a jackass or angsty or badass or snarky or whatever is to do the actual complexity of the character a disservice. She definitely has elements of all of those, but she isn't limited to being just one of them. And that's part of why I think she's as cool as she is. There's a real character there, not just a collection of traits that are meant to play up coolness. Which isn't to say that the much simpler Fang isn't incredibly cool as well. Hell, so is Vanille when you get down to it. If anything Vanille is proof that girliness and questionable voice acting choices doesn't stand in the way of being cool. Really, FFXIII is an exceptionally good game for cool women in a mainstream video game.

And to address the original question of which characters from video games I find attractive. Well, Lightning and Fang are tops as far as mainstream, AAA games go. Their general coolness, their sexy voices, the way they move and, yes, their basic visual designs just do it. The dedication they show, how there are things they want which in Fang's case includes protecting her girlfriend above all else, being active and proactive is pretty inherently sexy. It's probably the same reason why they were number 2 and 3 on a vote of sexiest female characters in video games on After Ellen a few years ago. I'll also admit that despite having a lot of cultural artifacts that she desperately needs to unlearn, which is intentional and the core of her arc in the game, *Mute from Analogue: A Hate Story and Hate Plus is very attractive as well. Lucretia Merces from Suikoden V is also quite sexy. Between being a canon lesbian, a snappy dresser and highly intelligent and with a lot of integrity she just really hits it for me. I also consider typical portrayals of Meiling and Sakuya from Touhou Project exceedingly attractive. One is a big, athletic woman who is greatly caring and compassionate and amusingly socially incompetent at times. The other is her smaller counterpart who is controlled, strict and very competent, but with a side of social ineptitude and tendrils of loneliness underlying her. Raiko from Touhou Project is also very attractive in her easygoing, but smart and caring way, and her look of being a smooth criminal is one of the most impressive bits of bifauxnen I've seen.

Outside of video games I really like Satou Sei from MariMite. She's playful, easygoing but also wise and compassionate and generally just all around fun. I also like big, awkward and utterly adorable Maggie from Read or Die, who combines an awkward vulnerability with being badass, reliable and kind. The plain and utter confidence and ability to just own a room of Marika and Jenny from Bodacious Space Pirates is also hard to pass up, between their immense skill and confidence they just exude this incredible charisma. Hachisuka Tomoe from Whispered Words is similar, with a hint of goofiness to The same goes for Holo from Spice and Wolf. The woman is brilliant, playful, slightly full of herself but also self-aware about it.

In general, looking at it I appear to be more attracted to personalities and modes of dress than plain physicality. I like intelligence, confidence and competence, as well as endearing awkwardness and a base vulnerability as long as its backed with competence and at least some self-worth. I also like elaborate period outfits and sexy voices. I also don't mind women being butch as long as they make sure to do it in a stylish way, rather than dressing like a male bum.

As for male power fantasies I've never heard the term used to imply that power fantasies are exclusively male, but rather that some characters are power fantasies for men. Liam Neeson in Taken, for example. I doubt a lot of women find a psychotic murderer depopulating Eastern Europe particularly sexy or can relate strongly to his role of paternal protectiveness. I'd definitely say that Kato Marika or Jenny Doolittle is a power fantasy that is easy to buy into for girls or women. Girls are just that awesome through and through.

-D-

2015-01-21, 04:19 PM

Just a heads up, but whenever you call women 'females' I automatically imagine you are a Ferengi.
I will not stand for this blatant anti-Ferengitism :P

Eh, I don't see much difference and I prefer the most scientific sounding term.

Terraoblivion

2015-01-21, 05:08 PM

SowZ

2015-01-21, 05:19 PM

I really don't like the "male power fantasy" statement, because I feel it often ends up being used as a "you're female. You're not allowed to like Xena because it's a *male* fantasy." If you're not allowed to like female characters because they're "eye-candy for the males" and not allowed to like male characters because they're "male power fantasies" then who am I allowed to like? Velma Dinkley?

You can go there if you'd like, but no one here implied that. Regardless, my point was, I think, a fair one and worth making. Both scantily clad femme fatales and shirtless chiseled heroes are mostly made to appeal to the heterosexual man. Pretending this isn't so doesn't change anything. This is not to say it is immoral to like the femme fatale or male power fantasy archetypes, but it would be wrong to deny that this sort of media disproportionately caters to men.

Tangential question, do you think that if the artists were, for whatever reason, to draw the male characters fully nude, do you think guys like Conan, Batman, Superman, Captain America, Kratos, or any other overly muscled male character, would have overly large genitalia?

The same authors that draw women with absurd breast sizes would likely do the same with ridiculous phallic sizes if made to give their machismo heroes genitalia. Both large breasts and large male anatomy is made mostly to appeal to the male audience. Since a large penis is a cultural sign of masculinity, Conan would be assumed to have one.

Someone asked if there was a female power fantasy. I'm not sure if there is a perfect equivalent, though there are power fantasies for women, too. The core of the uberhunk power fantasy is the desire to push through all the obstacles in ones life and take what you want in a straightforward way. The archetypal hero in this genre doesn't have much in the way of social skills, intellect, and may or may not be desirable to most real world women, (though women in his world will swoon over him regardless,) because it isn't about competence and sexiness. It isn't even about the viewer wishing they could be Conan. These types of heroes are usually tragic, unhappy figures. No, the hero only needs one thing. Strong and bad-ass enough to beat everyone up. He doesn't wade through politics and manners. He just goes for everything in a simple and straightforward way. That's why you turn your brain off for these movies and just enjoy the ride. If Arnold Swarchzennager sat down and thought about how to open the trap door like it were puzzle, it would mess up the entertainment. Instead, he finds a big iron pipe and busts it down.

It's part of why I don't think Indiana Jones and Batman are particularly good examples of this trope.

A female power fantasy would, I'm sure, fill the same role of attaining everything she wanted in life without much fuss. But rather than be a one trick pony like GI Joe, something tells me she would be more generally competent. Just an expert at basically everything she tried, from combat to infiltration to social skills. This is basically a mary sue, probably not a deep character but could also be good for turning off your brain and watching someone be awesome. It's beginning to sound like James Bond, who is a different sort of wish fulfillment altogether. Anyway. Female characters such as this exist, but usually in a latex body suit and with a sultry voice.

Jeff the Green

2015-01-21, 05:24 PM

Shadowscale

2015-01-21, 05:27 PM

Firion http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100909144003/finalfantasy/images/7/7d/Dissidia_Firion.png

Eldan

2015-01-21, 05:28 PM

I don't know, all my personal power fantasies tend to be at least intelligent. Preferably very intelligent.

Eldan

2015-01-21, 05:32 PM

... I mean, discussing whether canis lupus familiaris or felis silvestris catus is superior...

Yes, yes I do.
Because common names are ambiguous as fff... ornication.

SowZ

2015-01-21, 05:32 PM

I don't know, all my personal power fantasies tend to be at least intelligent. Preferably very intelligent.

Which is a different flavor. I'm talking specifically about the appeal of the Kratos/Conan/Gears of War Guy characters. Indiana Jones and Nathan Drake are a different kind of fantasy, as is Batman and Lelouch. I feel like people are gathering that I think all fantasy characters are bad. I don't. I think it is bad that men are the default focus for most entertainment, but that doesn't at all make the stories that are geared towards men bad in and of themselves.

Shadowscale

2015-01-21, 05:41 PM

Is it unusual the more, cruel, calculating, and independent the character the more interested I am. Villains who have a plan and are passionate about ushering it in are just so dreamy.

Fralex

2015-01-21, 06:02 PM

And Waluigi's moustache.......*shivers*

I actually stumbled upon the deviantArt page of somebody who really loved Waluigi! She had drawn fanart of him kissing Daisy. Funny thing was, the way she drew him, he actually did look pretty attractive, in a tall-and-handsome kind of way. In the words of Wirt's little step-brother, "it just goes to show you things!"

Shadowscale

2015-01-21, 06:08 PM

I actually stumbled upon the deviantArt page of somebody who really loved Waluigi! She had drawn fanart of him kissing Daisy. Funny thing was, the way she drew him, he actually did look pretty attractive, in a tall-and-handsome kind of way. In the words of Wirt's little step-brother, "it just goes to show you things!"

Links? Because now I'm just damn curious.

Talakeal

2015-01-21, 06:31 PM

The same authors that draw women with absurd breast sizes would likely do the same with ridiculous phallic sizes if made to give their machismo heroes genitalia. Both large breasts and large male anatomy is made mostly to appeal to the male audience. Since a large penis is a cultural sign of masculinity, Conan would be assumed to have one.

It seems strange to me that any sort of idealization of men's bodies is seen as an author power fantasy while idealization of women's bodies is sexualization, even when they consist of the almost identical things. It almost verges on circular logic to me.

On a related note, I have noticed that all of the Marvel movies find an excuse to give the male heroes gratioutious topless scenes. I wonder where that falls under the realm of sexualization vs. power fantasy.

As for male power fantasies I've never heard the term used to imply that power fantasies are exclusively male, but rather that some characters are power fantasies for men. Liam Neeson in Taken, for example. I doubt a lot of women find a psychotic murderer depopulating Eastern Europe particularly sexy or can relate strongly to his role of paternal protectiveness. I'd definitely say that Kato Marika or Jenny Doolittle is a power fantasy that is easy to buy into for girls or women. Girls are just that awesome through and through.

I was under the impression that most females were attracted to protective father figures. I have heard several guys say that "Finding Nemo" is a great date movie because the image of a concerned father going on a quest to protect his children really puts women in a romantic mood.

SiuiS

2015-01-21, 07:12 PM

Tangential question, do you think that if the artists were, for whatever reason, to draw the male characters fully nude, do you think guys like Conan, Batman, Superman, Captain America, Kratos, or any other overly muscled male character, would have overly large genitalia?

Perhaps. But a large phallus is less about sexuality and more about masculine virility.

Eh, I don't see much difference and I prefer the most scientific sounding term.

The issue is most discourse is apophatic. Using female instead of woman means that the sole defining criteria of validity is possession of vaginal canal with working uterine system.

Reducing women to their reproductive use (not function, but use) is part of the problem. That people are raised to think the difference is negligible is part of the problem.

Someone asked if there was a female power fantasy. I'm not sure if there is a perfect equivalent, though there are power fantasies for women, too. The core of the uberhunk power fantasy is the desire to push through all the obstacles in ones life and take what you want in a straightforward way. The archetypal hero in this genre doesn't have much in the way of social skills, intellect, and may or may not be desirable to most real world women, (though women in his world will swoon over him regardless,) because it isn't about competence and sexiness. It isn't even about the viewer wishing they could be Conan. These types of heroes are usually tragic, unhappy figures. No, the hero only needs one thing. Strong and bad-ass enough to beat everyone up. He doesn't wade through politics and manners. He just goes for everything in a simple and straightforward way. That's why you turn your brain off for these movies and just enjoy the ride. If Arnold Swarchzennager sat down and thought about how to open the trap door like it were puzzle, it would mess up the entertainment. Instead, he finds a big iron pipe and busts it down.

It's part of why I don't think Indiana Jones and Batman are particularly good examples of this trope.

A female power fantasy would, I'm sure, fill the same role of attaining everything she wanted in life without much fuss. But rather than be a one trick pony like GI Joe, something tells me she would be more generally competent. Just an expert at basically everything she tried, from combat to infiltration to social skills. This is basically a mary sue, probably not a deep character but could also be good for turning off your brain and watching someone be awesome. It's beginning to sound like James Bond, who is a different sort of wish fulfillment altogether. Anyway. Female characters such as this exist, but usually in a latex body suit and with a sultry voice.

The female power fantasy is the Mary Sue, and unlike the male power fantasy is indulged by society for a few years and then you are expected to grow out of it.

There's actually some interesting discourse out there on the necessity of the Mary Sue; broadly speaking, self indulgent fiction designed to give you your dreams and ambitions and say you're awesome and deserve things is a pathological buttress against the sudden onslaught of negativity and aggression a woman begins to face come puberty.

I don't know, all my personal power fantasies tend to be at least intelligent. Preferably very intelligent.

Overcoming everything with how awesomely strong your brain is, isn't much different. Just like having magical powers and fireballing everything on your road to victory is still a power fantasy, or becoming a king and getting everything you want including revenge is a power fantasy.

If it's a fantasy of competence because of a Raw trait or ability such as leadership savvy, tactical genius, general brilliance, martial arts skill, bulk muscle force, etc., it qualifies.

Obviously, this is so broad we have to say that power fantasies are not inherently bad; the breakdown is that socially motivated use and implementation specifically of the cissexual heterosexual male power fantasy in western society is unhealthy. Not on the individual scale, but the macro level where you're told that fantasy is legitimate enough that everyone has it and that it has shaped society.

It seems strange to me that any sort of idealization of men's bodies is seen as an author power fantasy while idealization of women's bodies is sexualization, even when they consist of the almost identical things. It almost verges on circular logic to me.

It seems strange to me that you don't notice all those authors are male.

Women who idealize women's bodies don't go for wasp-waists and tits that can sink the titanic. They don't go for heels or the shortened calf muscles which come from wearing heels.

Show me a woman, drawn or authored, with the broad waist of a lifter, the hard core of a fighter, a Glasgow smile and scarred knuckles from learning proper boxig form. And I'll show you a very happy lesbian. I'll also likely show you an illustrator/author who is aware of the culture that surrounds the work they a re doing and made these conscious choices not to perpetuate trends but to add thoughtful and mindful data to the world.

On a related note, I have noticed that all of the Marvel movies find an excuse to give the male heroes gratioutious topless scenes. I wonder where that falls under the realm of sexualization vs. power fantasy.

Depends. Marvel movies have been doing a good job of not doing what the comics themselves trend doing. But then, I know several men who like these scenes because it gives them a benchmark. "I've got hawk-eye abs", etc.

The biggest issue right here though is trying to flatten the discussion to a soundbyte to get it over with. Is fully possible for those scenes to be both beefcake for women and also power fantasies for men. That it serves a good purpose (or no bad one) does not negate that it also serves a bad purpose, just like getting calories from ramen to keep you alive doesn't negate the health issues or the utility and emergency ability of prepaid money cards doesn't negate that they predominantly get used for money laundering and the drug trade.

"It seems strange to me that any sort of idealization of men's bodies is seen as an author power fantasy while idealization of women's bodies is sexualization" is a very good line of inquiry if one is truly interested. It is terrible and contributes to the problem as an argument however. This is not something one should say and then drop their mic, confident they have struck some sort of blow against the opposition.

I was under the impression that most females were attracted to protective father figures. I have heard several guys say that "Finding Nemo" is a great date movie because the image of a concerned father going on a quest to protect his children really puts women in a romantic mood.

Some women do want that. Some women are conditioned to want that. Some some. Say they want that because if they don't, well, the proud nail gets the hammer.

What bothers me? I know A Lot of men who want a protective lover, someone who can give them security and let them relax their vigil. There are numerous complexes involved, ranging from 'no woman offers that, I guess I'll suffer on as is my manly lot' to 'but I can't beig myself to accept it because it makes me Less Of A Man', and that's pretty damn terrible.

Impressions get spread with absolutely. No. Data. to back them up all the time. This is called Doxa, and is the background current of culture that people learn from birth through osmosis. When someone does something, everyone around them picks up on what they did, how others reacted, and fold that in to their total experiences and learn right and wrong thereby. I refer to it as the background radiation of our lives. It infects us, irradiates us, and can blind is to data that contradicts it.

What is accurate for a subset is not always accurate for a group. I guarantee I can find fifty women out of sixty in my home city who feel as you do. I can also guarantee they are not the usual consensus (or that I can find a much larger pool that disagrees; the distinction is moot at the individual level).

Fralex

2015-01-21, 07:32 PM

Links? Because now I'm just damn curious.

After putting a lot of strange things into my search history, I managed to find the piece of art (http://porcelain-requiem.deviantart.com/art/Chocolate-Kisses-261960121) again (I misremembered; he's actually kissing Princess Eclair). I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but there's actually a fair number of people who are fans of Waluigi.

Hiro Protagonest

2015-01-21, 07:35 PM

(I misremembered; he's actually kissing Princess Eclair)

Is there actually canon artwork of her? I just remember her from Luigi's story in Paper Mario 2 (I could type out the long subtitle but I'd rather just call it 2 and write this disclaimer :smalltongue:).

Please tell me this means Paper Luigi is a thing

-D-

2015-01-21, 07:36 PM

You must have a lot of trouble communicating with people if you always use scientific terms. I mean, discussing whether canis lupus familiaris or felis silvestris catus is superior or how you hurt hallux by hitting it against the doorframe is bound to make people pause for a bit to figure out what you're saying.
I tried, but people give me the weird looks, when I ask for natrium chloride or the flesh of a dead Gallus gallus domesticus. So I tone it down one notch. Originally I was gonna go with "female humanoid".

Jokes aside; I'm not native so words that sound normal to me often appear confusing or wrong in English. Besides, didn't the thread start with female gamers?

Perhaps. But a large phallus is less about sexuality and more about masculine virility.
Depends on the times. Greeks preferred depicting a smaller phallus. It's probably just cultural.

The issue is most discourse is apophatic. Using female instead of woman means that the sole defining criteria of validity is possession of vaginal canal with working uterine system.

Eh, to be honest I'm not native (in my language female = woman) and I'm not too interested in the gender vs sex lecture. Too theoretical. I'll revise my previous statement, since it obviously didn't convey the intended meaning.

--------------------------------------------

So a for women posters (readers? who cares) - If you are given a chance to make whatever game you want what is it? And if it has a main character who or what (it could be a glowing triangle) is that character?

Terraoblivion

2015-01-21, 07:44 PM

Show me a woman, drawn or authored, with the broad waist of a lifter, the hard core of a fighter, a Glasgow smile and scarred knuckles from learning proper boxig form. And I'll show you a very happy lesbian. I'll also likely show you an illustrator/author who is aware of the culture that surrounds the work they a re doing and made these conscious choices not to perpetuate trends but to add thoughtful and mindful data to the world.

Personally I find the lesbian community's exaltation of the butch almost as problematic as mainstream society's portrayals of women. It is ultimately just another confining ideal that few people instinctively live up to or physically fulfill without a lot of effort, making it no less harmful than the current hegemonic views of femininity should it achieve a position of cultural dominance. Not just that, the traits you just listed are pretty much a wholesale adoption of a social discourse favoring displays of violent masculinity. A violent fistfighter with a psychotic smile is not exactly a good rolemodel for men, it shouldn't be for women either. But beyond that it plays into a wider social discourse that devalues that which is coded female, reinforcing that or women to be worthy they need to become more like men. It also serves to stereotype and self-ghettoize lesbians to cleave too strongly to this ideal as it plays into existing views and puts a clear cultural barrier between lesbians and society at large, reinforcing the idea that lesbians are somehow abnormal or deviant from the normal people.

That is not to say that women who are like that should be shunned as unfeminine, though depending on how much they engage in maladaptive behavior they might need attempts to pull them away from violence just like a violent man needs, nor that characters like that are illegitimate. It means that the ideal should be increased diversity rather than a set of strict ideals whatever they are, as well as less stereotyping to make room for people who cross traditionally perceived barriers. This especially needs to neither fetishize nor denigrate traditional female-coded behavior or feminine appearances.

Which is not the same as saying that superheroes in bikinis, high heels and with impossibly exaggerated secondary sexual characteristics are particularly okay as a default or even a common things. Not only do they stray into the impossible, they do so specifically to cater to specific ways culture tells men to view women. It also tends to come with a lot of flat, stereotyped behavior for the same purpose of titillation instead of creating rounded characters. They're also uniformly sexual, but never in a way that suggests real agency or control of it. Often it doesn't even extend to an actual sexuality of their own, but rather that the sexual is just something that clings about them for the sake of the presumed straight, male audience. Which is really at the heart of it all, the characters are created to serve male needs without regard for women or for being complex, well-rounded characters in their own regard.

Beyond avoiding female characters created purely for titillation as a common feature of mainstream entertainment, I find it troubling to try to set too strict limits on what female characters can or can't be. The limits more than the sexualization itself is the main difference between male and female characters in most mainstream works of fiction. Men can be everything except objects of female lust, there is still a fight before women can be that without anybody contesting it or the impulse to also make them objects of male lust. And so I consider it to not be much of a step forward to simply change the ideal, even ignoring the questions of adopting masculine as the norm for good when talking about female gender presentation. I truly, genuinely think that accepting the Vanilles or Yukiko Amagis of fiction is important if we are to move on from simple pinups and male as the default.

Fralex

2015-01-21, 08:25 PM

Is there actually canon artwork of her? I just remember her from Luigi's story in Paper Mario 2 (I could type out the long subtitle but I'd rather just call it 2 and write this disclaimer :smalltongue:).

Please tell me this means Paper Luigi is a thing

I don't know, I haven't, um, finished Paper Mario 2 yet. Look, I just really want to complete the game after getting whatever treasure is at the bottom of the Pit of 100 Trials, OK? I'm working on it!

...wow, I'm sort of derailing things now. In the interests of staying on-topic, I will also add this:
I remember back when Nintendo Power was still running, one girl wrote in expressing disappointment that in the new Legend of Zelda game, Link wore pants instead of his usual kilt. She said she liked the kilt because it was one of the few pieces of eye candy for female gamers to enjoy, and signed her name, "SheMissesTheKilt." So at least one person found pantsless Link attractive.

Tvtyrant

2015-01-21, 08:38 PM

OTOH large genitals were considered comical and unmanly in ancient Greece, which was otherwise all about giant power fantasy muscles. I'm not sure where the difference comes from honestly.

SiuiS

2015-01-21, 09:13 PM

Jokes aside; I'm not native so words that sound normal to me often appear confusing or wrong in English. Besides, didn't the thread start with female gamers?

That makes sense. Okay.

Depends on the times. Greeks preferred depicting a smaller phallus. It's probably just cultural.

Of course it's cultural. We are talking about current cultural trends.

Eh, to be honest I'm not native (in my language female = woman) and I'm not too interested in the gender vs sex lecture. Too theoretical. I'll revise my previous statement, since it obviously didn't convey the intended meaning.

It's not theory for some of us, otherwise I would agree.
I think your point was made, but the method uses was a good springboard for someone else's point.

Personally I find the lesbian community's exaltation of the butch almost as problematic as mainstream society's portrayals of women.

Oh, I wasn't going for butch, exactly. I was going for physically capable. And I meant me, specifically. I find that hot attractive. Like, mentally and emotionally engaging, not just physically tittilating. Although of the two, I would pick Vanille as my example. She's not in any way less proficient for her girliness; she just happens to be a badass thief, emotional manipulator and saboteur par excellence as her base chassis, with a lot of cute pink on top. She's a much better love interest; my interest in Fang is as self insert.

But that's because that fit me, about two years ago (maybe more? I let myself go recently-ish). And I wouldn't say I'm necessarily butch, nor want butch. I stand by the idea that 'a lady should be able to take care of herself, she just shouldn't have to' in the physical sense. Ability and willingness to take a few Knicks and knocks is a good thing in my book. But I find the idea of a comrade in arms, an equal, someone I can stand back to back with while holding a knife and take on all comers, a very romantic thought.

I assume this makes me distinct. Maybe not an outlier, but individual enough that I don't try to pass off my preferences as propagated by any level of any community in part of. ^^

A violent fistfighter with a psychotic smile is not exactly a good rolemodel for men, it shouldn't be for women either.

I think the traits I listed – wider waist, strong core, scarred knuckles specifically – have different values for the two of us. The first two are construction worker traits, nothing psychotic there. Just skill at the homestead; someone who can help me able hay, build a loft, pull me from a burning wreck if needed. Physically proficient.

Only the knuckles are violent at all, and they're just as indicative of disciplined makiwara work or drills on the wing chun dummy as they are violence and fighting. Discipline, the will to enact your ideas on the world, and the bodily tokens of earning what you have instead of simply buying or lucking into them. It's very crass and blue collar of me, sure, but between two karateka, the one with hands that look like they've seen practice gets more respect from me than the one who does glove sparring and kata forever and that's it.

But beyond that it plays into a wider social discourse that devalues that which is coded female, reinforcing that or women to be worthy they need to become more like men.

It's also relevant that problem is not with things that are coded masculine but with the coding itself. I value certain things, regardless of their coding. Physical proficiency and strength are empowering traits, generally. That they are also coded masculine does not diminish this; the problem is with the trend of coding everything powerful as masculine, because this makes people think the reverse is true, and everything masculine is powerful.

Oh. And the Glasgow smile (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Y7Rpqy-9vV8/UggNUjqx7tI/AAAAAAAAbOw/uDyTqBI4H7M/s640/tommy+flanagan.jpg)is a personal like. Like Chibs from Sons of Anarchy? hawt. :smallredface:

That is not to say that women who are like that should be shunned as unfeminine, though depending on how much they engage in maladaptive behavior they might need attempts to pull them away from violence just like a violent man needs,

Aye. I just personally happen to fit into a category that, in the macro sense, is unfortunate.

That's interesting. I've never heard of nor considered attempts to pull folks away from violence. Or at least, not in the form your words provide me a mental picture of.

I've cut this up a bit for formatting, rambling, and because some of my responses were needlessly defensive. If anything comes off as poorly phrased or I'm missing some key assumption, that may be why. I've had to redo several things I didn't mean to cut <_<

Terraoblivion

2015-01-21, 09:47 PM

I'm sorry I misunderstood what you meant. I've had some bad experiences with the lesbian community devaluing traditionally feminine traits.

SiuiS

2015-01-21, 11:33 PM

OTOH large genitals were considered comical and unmanly in ancient Greece, which was otherwise all about giant power fantasy muscles. I'm not sure where the difference comes from honestly.

And weird feet! They seem to glamourize Morton's Foot Structure, with long middle (or was it index?) toes that, frankly, would vastly impede the person's ability to be a prime athlete, let alone walk. But hey, statuary doesn't need to be realistic in all ways!

I'm sorry I misunderstood what you meant. I've had some bad experiences with the lesbian community devaluing traditionally feminine traits.

No problem. I understand it's an issue, I just forget because it's not one I deal with much. I'd rather default to explanation of my stance than aggression. Even if sometimes I default to aggression anyway, still growing ^^'

Terraoblivion

2015-01-21, 11:48 PM

SowZ

2015-01-21, 11:53 PM

It seems strange to me that any sort of idealization of men's bodies is seen as an author power fantasy while idealization of women's bodies is sexualization, even when they consist of the almost identical things. It almost verges on circular logic to me.

On a related note, I have noticed that all of the Marvel movies find an excuse to give the male heroes gratioutious topless scenes. I wonder where that falls under the realm of sexualization vs. power fantasy.

I was under the impression that most females were attracted to protective father figures. I have heard several guys say that "Finding Nemo" is a great date movie because the image of a concerned father going on a quest to protect his children really puts women in a romantic mood.

They aren't identical, though. The female character is designed to appeal to what men like. The male power fantasy is also designed to appeal to men's taste with little regard for what women find attractive.

Marvel has gone out of its way to choose male actors that women find attractive, as opposed to Hulk Hogan type actors.

BeerMug Paladin

2015-01-22, 02:24 AM

I'm surprised nobody's suggested this as an example of female power fantasy, but I will.

Twilight. Honestly, I know very little about the series, other than lots of people obsessively hate it.

But to support my conjecture, I submit the hordes of young fangirls as evidence. There has to be a reason for that, right?

Oh, and in general, mary/gary/sues/stus are power fantasies. So if you notice one, you're likely looking at a power fantasy character. This of course isn't always true, as sometimes the character exists for another reason. (Like to serve a different kind of fantasy.)

Anyway, lots of good discussion about gender representation and identity in here. It's always nice to see that.

SiuiS

2015-01-22, 02:44 AM

Twilight is indeed a fantasy, but power? I don't think "young girls like it" indicates specificity at all, myself.

You're dead on about Mary Sues though.

Peebles

2015-01-22, 05:10 AM

So, females out there. A person tells you make a game. Any game, something you think you'll enjoy.

What is it? What characters does it have (if any, it can be Peggle or Tetris)?

Sandbox RPG with a customisable main character would do for me. Mass Effect came close, I liked that you could make Shepard any way you wanted, and how my girl Shepard actually felt, you know, a bit feminine, rather than a male character with a different skin tacked on. It might have been just that, but I felt they hid it well if that's the case.

I actually stumbled upon the deviantArt page of somebody who really loved Waluigi!

Well, well, who's a handsome fellow? :smallamused:

I'm surprised nobody's suggested this as an example of female power fantasy, but I will.

Twilight. Honestly, I know very little about the series, other than lots of people obsessively hate it.

But to support my conjecture, I submit the hordes of young fangirls as evidence. There has to be a reason for that, right?

Hmmm, not sure it's a power fantasy, but it is pretty dire. :smalltongue:

There's something to be said of the amount of sway and power Bella has over the sparkly man-vampire though, even if she gains it by being a simpering moron. If it's a power fantasy, it's sending out some poor messages.

goto124

2015-01-22, 05:11 AM

I was under the impression Twilight had the perfect boyfriend fantasy, which appeals to teenage girls. And then again, my impression.

If we can go beyond games, I watched Justin and the Knights of Valour, and really liked how the barmaid Talia was portrayed. Sure there is fanservice, but she's just as good and competent in combat as the male main character Justin. The movie also touches on how Talia is treated as no more than a sex object by the other male characters, and has to constantly (and literally) fight them off. Including Especially the bouncers of the inn she worked at. The movie took the time to show the combat scenes involving Talia and the bouncers/customers.

I didn't watch the whole movie, but Wikipedia says she helps Justin with a rescue towards the end, which probably involves a lot of fighting and intelligence for both people. I was hoping Talia would become a knight by then :P

I could complain about how Talia is still 'love interest of male protagonist', but to me that's nitpicky when talking about a single movie instead of a general trend.

Kato

2015-01-22, 06:10 AM

Well, I didn't expect there would be women actually commenting. I assumed the thread would just die with little attention.

Though, so far not so many actual answers to the initial question, more discussion about the general idea.

And not that anyone would care but I'm disappointed nobody mentioned MGS' Big Boss/Solid Snake yet. But then that might just be my personal preference in men :smalltongue:

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-22, 06:42 AM

Twilight is indeed a fantasy, but power? I don't think "young girls like it" indicates specificity at all, myself.

You're dead on about Mary Sues though.

It's possibly worth remembering or considering that, at least as far as I've heard, there are people put there who dispute the whole concept of the "male power fantasy". Something along the lines of believing it to be little more than an argument trick, a way to shut down certain viewpoints and to frame the narrative a particular way.

I can't say I've exactly come down on either side of that particular debate, at least partially because I try to actively avoid it on account of how toxic the surrounding issues are. However, as a viewpoint, it would explain why it's so difficult to define a satisfying "female power fantasy".

FemShep was definitely best Shep. Stellar voice acting is most of the reason for the difference, but then it was a very dialogue driven series of games, so that's no small thing I think. She just managed to inject so much personality and authenticity into the performance, really made the character come alive. Really showed how flawed the idea of it being easier to identify with a silent protagonist is, to my mind.

Peebles

2015-01-22, 06:58 AM

FemShep was definitely best Shep. Stellar voice acting is most of the reason for the difference, but then it was a very dialogue driven series of games, so that's no small thing I think. She just managed to inject so much personality and authenticity into the performance, really made the character come alive. Really showed how flawed the idea of it being easier to identify with a silent protagonist is, to my mind.

That's true, actually, the female voice acting was tremendous. I've never heard the male version to compare though.

Interesting 'apparently' fact: The first piece of concept art for Shepard was female - Made me smile. :smalltongue:

Eldan

2015-01-22, 07:06 AM

Weimann

2015-01-22, 07:42 AM

On a side note, it's been very interesting to read the discussion between SiuiS and terraoblivion in this thread. Thanks for letting me. :smallsmile:

Frozen_Feet

2015-01-22, 08:40 AM

It should be noted that being sexually appealing can itself be power fantasy, as having appeal to other people can net you influence over them. As noted by SiuS regarding male shirtless scenes, they're not mutually exclusive - one man's sexual fantasy can be some woman's power fantasy, and vice versa. There's also potential of fringe appeal - for any character designed for mass appeal, there's going to be a noticeable crowd of fans outside the intended audience who find the character really cool for their own reasons. EDIT: It's also worth noting that sexiness / prettiness are an element in the social competition between women, so being the prettiest girl at prom (etc.) can have elements of power fantasy because it means other women are going to look up to or be envious of you.

Now, as far as the title question goes, based on my observations the only example readily coming to mind is Link, more precisely the teenaged / young adult versions from Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess. Link's also pretty popular with LGBT-folks.

I could name a score of other characters women like, just not from videogames specifically. My facebook page is full of my friends gushing about Doctor Who / Dave Tennant, Thorin from The Hobbit, Dean Winchester and the like. And of course, Tony Stark is a stable.

HandofShadows

2015-01-22, 09:08 AM

Peebles

2015-01-22, 09:11 AM

Booker DeWitt from Bioshock Infinite maybe?

Not really for Booker, but his voice actor, Troy Baker? Yes please. :smallamused:

Closet_Skeleton

2015-01-22, 10:08 AM

I hate posting in 'ask women questions' threads but whatever, I typed this out already.

They aren't identical, though. The female character is designed to appeal to what men like. The male power fantasy is also designed to appeal to men's taste with little regard for what women find attractive.

Female characters are designed to appeal to either the author or an imagined demographic. Usually they appeal to the artist's desire that they should be easy to draw before any demographic considerations are actually taken into account.

If female characters were really aimed at men in general and not just the creative team there would be a wide variety of body types on show to cover all the areas.

All characters are designed to provoke a reaction from the audience, you're not going to escape that with any amount of diversity.

The male power fantasy isn't designed to appeal to men, its designed to appeal to the broadest group of men possible.

If someone tries to tell me that Lara Croft or femShep can't be male power fantasies, only sexual fantasies, I won't be able to agree. For some men being a short cute girl who beats up lots of enemies is more of a power fantasy than doing that with a male avatar would be. I don't agree that men only identify with men and only look at women sexually, sometimes identifying with a woman is more sexual than objectifying them. Some people just like staring at female avatars asses in 3rd person games sure, but that doesn't mean others aren't actually identifying with them. Some men think Dante is cool and like telling him to kill demons but don't ever actually identify with him. I often switch between identifying and not identifying several times when playing games, sometimes I'll say "I died" and sometimes I'll say "Shepard just got herself killed" and then go back round to "I've died a lot in this section". In Skyrim I've abrubtly jumped between "I stole the gem" and "my character's rank in the Thief's Guild has risen". Sometimes I'll put on skimpy clothes because I want to oggle them for a while and then put on something else because I feel silly dressed like that.

Booker is a white guilt fantasy, he's not supposed to be appealing to men or women. He's utterly despicable. You're supposed to hate him and identify with him because he makes you hate yourself. Or something.

HandofShadows

2015-01-22, 10:43 AM

Booker is a white guilt fantasy, he's not supposed to be appealing to men or women. He's utterly despicable. You're supposed to hate him and identify with him because he makes you hate yourself. Or something.

I have no idea were you get that we are supposed to hate Booker. A great many people like him despite his flaws, for some it is because he is trying to do better. Some people like him in part *because* of his flaws. And I think the "white guilt fantasy" is wrong because Booker has an indian heritage and even speaks Sioux. Opps. The one you are supposed to hate is Comstock, not Booker.

Eldan

2015-01-22, 10:47 AM

Jeff the Green

2015-01-22, 11:03 AM

I could name a score of other characters women like, just not from videogames specifically. My facebook page is full of my friends gushing about Doctor Who / Dave Tennant, Thorin from The Hobbit, Dean Winchester and the like. And of course, Tony Stark is a stable.

Viggo Mortensen and David Boreanaz (generally as Booth rather than Angel) have come up repeatedly among my female friends. Actually, I've had a couple of first dates where we ended up gushing about how hot we both found one or the other. :smallredface:

BeerMug Paladin

2015-01-22, 11:41 AM

Hmmm, not sure it's a power fantasy, but it is pretty dire. :smalltongue:

There's something to be said of the amount of sway and power Bella has over the sparkly man-vampire though, even if she gains it by being a simpering moron. If it's a power fantasy, it's sending out some poor messages.
Having no personality makes it easier to be an audience insert character.

But what I was thinking of is that despite such things, she's instantly liked by all, has multiple people vying for her attention, and is described as being beautiful and charming to all. People generally do what she wants and nobody really dislikes her.

I've never read or watched it, so I don't know if that sort of thing is really in there. But power fantasy is as much about having power just outright handed to you as much as it is about using powerful skills or abilities.

As for sending poor messages, well, serial killing and violence aren't good messages either. Power fantasies aren't generally vehicles for good moral lessons. That's almost kind of the point of them. They're just supposed to be carefree and fun.

SiuiS

2015-01-22, 02:19 PM

Sandbox RPG with a customisable main character would do for me. Mass Effect came close, I liked that you could make Shepard any way you wanted, and how my girl Shepard actually felt, you know, a bit feminine, rather than a male character with a different skin tacked on. It might have been just that, but I felt they hid it well if that's the case.

Femshep in the first game had her own movement chains and idle forms. It wasn't until later in the series they removed the female specific stuff and made femshep male shep with lipo and boob job.

Well, I didn't expect there would be women actually commenting. I assumed the thread would just die with little attention.

Though, so far not so many actual answers to the initial question, more discussion about the general idea.

I don't really feel like I'm your target audience. When someone says "let's ask the women what they think!" There's a cissexual heterosexual Caucasian well-off monogamous implication.

It's possibly worth remembering or considering that, at least as far as I've heard, there are people put there who dispute the whole concept of the "male power fantasy". Something along the lines of believing it to be little more than an argument trick, a way to shut down certain viewpoints and to frame the narrative a particular way.

Well, male-specific power fantasy wasn't part of that. It was just power fantasy. That's not a nonexistent argumentative technique (though dismissing something for being a fantasy of power for men is). As has been mentioned, there's nothing inherently wrong with a power fantasy. When we have problems with it, we have those problems because of the cultural undertones that come along with it's use, execution and promulgation.

It's an issue of scale, often. If I'm a cashier at a store, say, and. Homeless person comes in and asks for some free food, that's an isolated incident. When it happens fifty or sixty times in a week, that's a trend – still made of isolated incidents. That vagrant leaves upset that I couldn't make an exception for him, because to him it was that one time, what's my damage?! But to me. It's just another data pip in an ongoing trend that is eroding my bottom line.

I have no problem with power fantasies. I even encourage them! But I don't like how there are certain groups who get more clout than others, and the societal effects of those fantasies being tacitly supported by society and this encouraged.

I can't say I've exactly come down on either side of that particular debate, at least partially because I try to actively avoid it on account of how toxic the surrounding issues are. However, as a viewpoint, it would explain why it's so difficult to define a satisfying "female power fantasy".

I think you're right. It's like pornography, I can call it when I see it, but definitions are elusive. A female power fantasy is supposed to be one men don't share; it's the side of the power fantasy venndiagram that is unique to women.

That's probably a bum category though. I think we only really focus on it because of the andronormative bits of our culture; normal stuff is considered male by default. That's exclusionary enough on the surface to make folks look elsewhere for feminine fulfillment. But should it be?

On a side note, it's been very interesting to read the discussion between SiuiS and terraoblivion in this thread. Thanks for letting me. :smallsmile:

^^

It should be noted that being sexually appealing can itself be power fantasy, as having appeal to other people can net you influence over them. As noted by SiuS regarding male shirtless scenes, they're not mutually exclusive - one man's sexual fantasy can be some woman's power fantasy, and vice versa. There's also potential of fringe appeal - for any character designed for mass appeal, there's going to be a noticeable crowd of fans outside the intended audience who find the character really cool for their own reasons. EDIT: It's also worth noting that sexiness / prettiness are an element in the social competition between women, so being the prettiest girl at prom (etc.) can have elements of power fantasy because it means other women are going to look up to or be envious of you.

The issue with "girls like to be pretty" is that it is used to silence girls who want more than prettiness, or who don't want to stick to their own kiddie table and only be competitive with other girls who also want to be pretty.

It is completely true that good looks or sex appeal are ideals for some. It's when you say "sorry, ten percent of women find being pretty to be empowering, the other ninety percent of you need to suck it up" that there's a problem.

Booker DeWitt from Bioshock Infinite maybe?

Ooh, yeah. Booker was cool. I was more interested in Elizabeth though >_>

I hate posting in 'ask women questions' threads but whatever, I typed this out already.

Me either!

All characters are designed to provoke a reaction from the audience, you're not going to escape that with any amount of diversity.

The reaction they are designed to provoke is the issue, not that they provoke them. :)

Viggo Mortensen and David Boreanaz (generally as Booth rather than Angel) have come up repeatedly among my female friends. Actually, I've had a couple of first dates where we ended up gushing about how hot we both found one or the other. :smallredface:

Booth was Angel?!

As for sending poor messages, well, serial killing and violence aren't good messages either. Power fantasies aren't generally vehicles for good moral lessons. That's almost kind of the point of them. They're just supposed to be carefree and fun.

That's very true. Good catch.

VincentTakeda

2015-01-22, 03:12 PM

Ravian

2015-01-22, 03:20 PM

Ooh, yeah. Booker was cool. I was more interested in Elizabeth though >_>

I think most of us can agree Elizabeth was a far more interesting character than Booker. Booker's just too... protagonisty. If that makes sense. He's only really focused on the same goal as the player, which doesn't really leave room for much personality. Obviously there's a reason for that. (the game doesn't really work if the protagonist and the player have different goals. Also he's supposed to be sort of a pawn in the whole thing.) Still would have been interesting to see more of Booker, beyond the stoic protagonist.

For example I would have liked to see more of Comstock in him. Just to be able to understand where that sort of ambition and zeal could have developed, would have been nice.

LordHavelock

2015-01-22, 03:22 PM

Having no personality makes it easier to be an audience insert character.

But what I was thinking of is that despite such things, she's instantly liked by all, has multiple people vying for her attention, and is described as being beautiful and charming to all. People generally do what she wants and nobody really dislikes her.

I've never read or watched it, so I don't know if that sort of thing is really in there. But power fantasy is as much about having power just outright handed to you as much as it is about using powerful skills or abilities.

As for sending poor messages, well, serial killing and violence aren't good messages either. Power fantasies aren't generally vehicles for good moral lessons. That's almost kind of the point of them. They're just supposed to be carefree and fun.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there. Bella Swan is a skin that any given teenage girl whose ever felt awkward or uncomfortable about themselves can slip on to feel better. Everyone likes Bella, but there's never a true justification offered for it, but the implication is that everyone sees past her social awkwardness to see the extra special snowflake that she is on the inside (she just happens to be pretty on the outside a little too, but that's not what's most important). This is especially apparent if you watch the movies with a particular trio of comedians offering a sort of farcical director's commentary, as they highlight how everyone at school seems to go out of their way to be nice to Bella on her first day at school, talk to her, flirt with her, even later in the movie, but she doesn't really respond to them or offer anything to them that would resemble friendship (but they keep liking her anyway). I read the books more or less exclusively for the point of critiquing them and I really consider Bella to fall short of being a Mary Sue. She's more like a plot device, like a super cliche chivalric romance told from the perspective of the damsel in distress, especially when you take into consideration that Bella never does anything. She lets things happen around her, to her, and just keeps loving Edward, but never really takes steps to put that love (or her fate) on her terms.

Bella doesn't have power, she is the power, and whoever has her, has it.

VincentTakeda

2015-01-22, 03:26 PM

That's funny. Bella isnt the end zone. Bella is the football. I like that point of view though.

I never really noticed before how everyone in the show just immediately likes her despite being for all intents and purposes an unresponsive cold dead corpse of a person to begin with.

The idea that her charisma score is so high that it negates the fact that her level of human interaction is on the level of trees...

That's pretty funny.

Ravian

2015-01-22, 03:39 PM

I've always found it amusing that in a book series about vampires, it's the human character that acts the most like a moving corpse. :smalltongue:

Talakeal

2015-01-22, 03:44 PM

It doesn't affect me that much personally. But it does come up a lot in criticism of fiction or implicit disapproval of finding the kind of women I find attractive to be attractive. As well as the general sense of judging people is not something I'm capable of not noticing.

I am not going to continue my argument about depictions as it is going to derail the thread. But I will say that I very much agree with the above statement and was going to say something very similar (albeit from a straight male point of view).

Ibrinar

2015-01-22, 04:07 PM

I think you're right. It's like pornography, I can call it when I see it, but definitions are elusive. A female power fantasy is supposed to be one men don't share; it's the side of the power fantasy venndiagram that is unique to women.

That's probably a bum category though. I think we only really focus on it because of the andronormative bits of our culture; normal stuff is considered male by default. That's exclusionary enough on the surface to make folks look elsewhere for feminine fulfillment. But should it be?

I think power fantasies are pretty universal particular ones might be more appealing to one group than the other but I think any category is really gender exclusive. Political power, martial prowess, magical power, financial power, great charisma, a genius intellect. I think anything that can give you power is appealing to some men and some women.
And I don't think the male part is usually essential in "male power fantasy" arguments. Take the argument about the bodybuilder hero design being about power not sex appeal aimed at woman. The power fantasy bit is the thing important to contrast an use for fanservice. The male part is about it being targeted at a male audience but isn't essential to the argument imo.
Though of course I only know a subset of arguments involving the term.

especially when you take into consideration that Bella never does anything.

Now that goes to far, she does jump from that cliff to hallucinate Edward better. She just doesn't do anything useful or for reasons beside Edward.

PS: I think Viggo Mortensen looks good as Aragorn but looking through other google image search pictures I don't always like his looks. Partly he is starting to look old but it also varies strongly depending on his hairstyle, facial expression and status of facial hair. Though as hetero sexual man I have probably different standards for good looks in man.

LordHavelock

2015-01-22, 04:56 PM

Femshep in the first game had her own movement chains and idle forms. It wasn't until later in the series they removed the female specific stuff and made femshep male shep with lipo and boob job.

I don't really feel like I'm your target audience. When someone says "let's ask the women what they think!" There's a cissexual heterosexual Caucasian well-off monogamous implication.

There's a game that's all over the map even at the same time it's a fulfillment of that straight/male bias. Most of the male characters in the game are idealized chauvinist stereotypes or derivations/foils thereof (and let's not even get started on the Asari). Interestingly though, the strongest reaction to a Mass Effect character in terms of attraction I've seen is one of my friends who has an absolute hangup on Urdnot Wrex. She loves the Krogan, and Urdnot in particular as "everything a man should be."

Now that goes to far, she does jump from that cliff to hallucinate Edward better. She just doesn't do anything useful or for reasons beside Edward.

PS: I think Viggo Mortensen looks good as Aragorn but looking through other google image search pictures I don't always like his looks. Partly he is starting to look old but it also varies strongly depending on his hairstyle, facial expression and status of facial hair. Though as hetero sexual man I have probably different standards for good looks in man.

I had almost forgotten about that. Do you think Stepanie Meyer was purposefully trying to invoke chivalric romance with that particular device? I can't count how many damsels and princesses wind up throwing themselves off cliffs in Romantic literature.

If you're not sure you like Viggo Mortensen, try watching Hidalgo. Great adventure movie, and he does a lot of the horsemanship himself.

SiuiS

2015-01-22, 06:54 PM

While David Tennant and Dean Winchester and Cumberbatch and Tony Stark are easy wins for this category, they're essentially the real life bishounen boys... Deep down I was really hoping someone would say Ron Swanson...

I find I'm less interested in the answers so much as I'm interested in the answers I wouldn't expect.

Cucumber patch loses out for me for being weird to look at, being a sort of terrible human being (may be mixing arguments here; may just always play terrible human beings as characters), and being the antagonist from the Goofy movies.

Bradley Uppercrust? Total Benedict pumpersnatch.

I've never been so glad my phone hates a word before. You go, iPhone!

I think most of us can agree Elizabeth was a far more interesting character than Booker. Booker's just too... protagonisty. If that makes sense. He's only really focused on the same goal as the player, which doesn't really leave room for much personality. Obviously there's a reason for that. (the game doesn't really work if the protagonist and the player have different goals. Also he's supposed to be sort of a pawn in the whole thing.) Still would have been interesting to see more of Booker, beyond the stoic protagonist.

For example I would have liked to see more of Comstock in him. Just to be able to understand where that sort of ambition and zeal could have developed, would have been nice.

Hmm. I meant for attraction. Booker is a good self insert. Maybe it takes perspective? I've been in his sort of guilt-shoes. He's easier for me to see depths in.

But really, my perspective is weird. Bioshock*Infinite was to me, a fairy tale love story using BDSM as it's primary vehicle. That's different enough that I just can't easily correlate my views to the standard.

That's funny. Bella isnt the end zone. Bella is the football. I like that point of view though.

I never really noticed before how everyone in the show just immediately likes her despite being for all intents and purposes an unresponsive cold dead corpse of a person to begin with.

The idea that her charisma score is so high that it negates the fact that her level of human interaction is on the level of trees...

That's pretty funny.

I only watched the last one for the werewolf vampire battle royale. I was not dissapointed by getting that. :)

I am not going to continue my argument about depictions as it is going to derail the thread. But I will say that I very much agree with the above statement and was going to say something very similar (albeit from a straight male point of view).

... You don't want to argue, but you were going to say that the implicit judgement of what you as a straight male find attractive is hurtful? :smallconfused:

I think power fantasies are pretty universal. Particular ones might be more appealing to one group than another, but I (don't?) think any category is really gender exclusive. Political power, martial prowess, magical power, financial power, great charisma, a genius intellect. I think anything that can give you power is appealing to some men and some women.

Okay.

And I don't think the male part is usually essential in "male power fantasy" arguments. Take the argument about the bodybuilder hero design being about power not sex appeal aimed at woman. The power fantasy bit is the thing important to contrast an use for fanservice. The male part is about it being targeted at a male audience but isn't essential to the argument imo.

This I cannot make heads or tails of.

Are you saying that a male character being designed for men to feel good about themselves, not for women to lust after, does not mean that it is focused at men? Do you believe some women are supposed to feel like they identify with this male character?

The male part being targeted at a male audience is very much essential to the argument. The argument is "male characters are targeted at men, and female characters are also targeted at men; one to make them feel powerful and one to make them feel titilated/rewarded. There are no male characters or female characters targeted at women. There are only a Handful with token effort to try and make us stop complaining."

This argument has a scientific basis, actually. In our society, unless gender is specified, masculine is the default. For this reason, laws and regulations dealing with sexual assault are written specifically from a feminine point of view; because it is widely recognized that unless effort is actively made to consider women, they will just be assumed to want what men want.

Does that clear anything up for you?

PS: I think Viggo Mortensen looks good as Aragorn but looking through other google image search pictures I don't always like his looks. Partly he is starting to look old but it also varies strongly depending on his hairstyle, facial expression and status of facial hair. Though as hetero sexual man I have probably different standards for good looks in man.

Vigo was the best satan EVER! Check out his role in the prophecy. :)

There's a game that's all over the map even at the same time it's a fulfillment of that straight/male bias. Most of the male characters in the game are idealized chauvinist stereotypes or derivations/foils thereof (and let's not even get started on the Asari). Interestingly though, the strongest reaction to a Mass Effect character in terms of attraction I've seen is one of my friends who has an absolute hangup on Urdnot Wrex. She loves the Krogan, and Urdnot in particular as "everything a man should be."

How do you mean chauvinist stereotypes?

The thought that men should be krogan is terrifying to me. The krogan as a whole, without a single immortal generic mutant sovereign to force them away from their last millennia of culture, are sociopathic. They epitomize everything terrifying about masculinity, and about human progress; might makes right, the ends justify the means, the weak should serve or be good for the strong, only respect those who can and have destroy others for personal gain, personal dynasties and glory are all, end all problems with fire and steel, outbreed, outgun and outfight anything that stands against you.

Heeeelllllllll no. :smalleek:

Urdnot Wrex is a throwback to when krogans had culture. But they are now, quote literally, genetically predisposed to be murderers. Once, their blood rage was seen as a mental illness. Now every krogan has it. And have you listened to grunt speak about how he would lead the krogan? If not for Shepard being there and moderating that, and for Wrex surviving so his bloodline doesn't reach full ascendency...

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-22, 07:17 PM

So, two thoughts.
Firstly, yeah. Other than here, I've only ever heard of Male Power Fantasy in the context of being a fantasy of Male Power.

Secondly, Haha, no. I meant what I said, this whole extended subject is not one I'm getting drawn on, it is a topic I want nothing in particular to do with, thank you very much. :smallsmile:

Oh, and for the record the Twilight Werewolves were, at least in the trailers, the most hilarious and fluffy of giant Andrex doggy things I have ever seen and I can't look at them without having the urge to giggle uncontrollably. But then what can you expect of Werewolves with smooth, hairlessly waxed chests.

SiuiS

2015-01-22, 07:53 PM

If you don't want to discuss something, why are you continuing to discuss it? My response wasn't just to you. It was for the thread at large.

Fantasies of male power get quickly into 'what even is male, anyway?' Territory, as TerraOblivion handled. I stand by the idea I've presented throughout; fantasies of male power or fantasies of power aimed at males do not need to be universally bad or wrong for 'that is a male power fantasy to be a valid criticism. Likewise, 'that is a male power fantasy' may be the start of a criticism but it is not universally an argument, not an argument on it's own at all.

We must avoid trying to condense discussion by using tropes. The point of discussion is the discussion; bypassing that is, well, pointless.

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-22, 07:56 PM

If you don't want to discuss something, why are you continuing to discuss it? My response wasn't just to you. It was for the thread at large.

It wasn't not to me, though. Least, as far as I read it. So, I mean, even if my response is "Ah, no thanks, pass on this one.", surely I have a right to express that? And that was after all only one of three sub-topics in my post.

Talakeal

2015-01-22, 08:49 PM

I didn't say I didn't want to argue, I said I didn't want to derail the thread as we are talking about what females find attractive, and me coming in as a male talking about what males find attractive is off topic. If someone wants to start a new thread on the topic I will happily continue over there.

Shekinah

2015-01-22, 10:12 PM

Probably Archie. Those thighs could crack a walnut.

goto124

2015-01-23, 01:44 AM

Does it count if you took a minor character from a storybook or text-based game, formed your own conclusion of her appearance based on what few words is spent describing her, and spinning off your own version of her backstory and personality with only tangential relation to the original plot?

While finding her attractive?

MLai

2015-01-23, 01:57 AM

And not that anyone would care but I'm disappointed nobody mentioned MGS' Big Boss/Solid Snake yet. But then that might just be my personal preference in men :smalltongue:
My mom likes Snake a lot. He's about the ONLY video game character she knows by name; I'm not sure if she even knows what Pac-man is called.
She got to know Snake by occasionally watching me play as she passed by the TV or was ironing next to it.

Ibrinar

2015-01-23, 07:41 AM

Okay.

This I cannot make heads or tails of.

Are you saying that a male character being designed for men to feel good about themselves, not for women to lust after, does not mean that it is focused at men? Do you believe some women are supposed to feel like they identify with this male character?

The male part being targeted at a male audience is very much essential to the argument. The argument is "male characters are targeted at men, and female characters are also targeted at men; one to make them feel powerful and one to make them feel titilated/rewarded. There are no male characters or female characters targeted at women. There are only a Handful with token effort to try and make us stop complaining."

This argument has a scientific basis, actually. In our society, unless gender is specified, masculine is the default. For this reason, laws and regulations dealing with sexual assault are written specifically from a feminine point of view; because it is widely recognized that unless effort is actively made to consider women, they will just be assumed to want what men want.

Does that clear anything up for you?

And I would consider that a separate argument. With a power fantasy targeted at man the male part in "male power fantasy" is a extra modifier specifying the target demographic of the character design it does not mean "power fantasy unique to males". When following that logic what makes something a female power fantasy when it's a power fantasy character and the character is targeted at woman.
In contrast with "male power fantasy"= types of power fantasies only appealing to man
and "female power fantasy"= types of power fantasies only appealing to woman
I'm arguing that it is the first reading not the second.

I consider "not designed for woman to lust after it's part of a power fantasy" as a separate argument from "and it's designed to appeal to man". The second argument uses the first one but the first one can stand alone. And with this interpretation I don't consider male a intrinsic part of "male power fantasy", but an extra modifier belonging to an bigger argument about characters being targeted at man.
(And yes it would be quite hard to get my full argument out of my last post.)

Anyway I think I will bow out since I don't have anything to contribute to the original topic.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2015-01-23, 09:49 AM

My girlfriend says Ezio Auditore from Assassins Creed, specifically before he gets a beard. But she has a thing for Italian men. And also our FemShep (she has mad cheekbones). And Lara Croft.

Vitruviansquid

2015-01-23, 12:17 PM

Trying not to enter spoiler territory too much, or politics territory too much, despite this being a spoileriffic game about politics... Booker is supposed to be very very easy to self-insert into. The game makes you decide whether or not to throw that baseball in the beginning so if you are an idealistic player, you can have an idealistic Booker and if you are a down-to-earth player, you can have a down-to-earth Booker. You liking Booker at the beginning of the game is vital to what the game ends up having to say about American imperialism, the patriarchy, the nature of bigotry and oppression, and whatnot. Now to your regularly scheduled programming...

Whenever I see this discussion spring up, I think about a poor concept artist of whatever gender at some unnamed game company.

The publisher bigwigs swing by and say "Artist, we got blasted yet again by the gaming journalists for our last game, 'Dudebros In Boob City,' so this time, we need you to concept up a strong female character that can prove we're not sexist pigs."

So Artist draws a picture resembling Kitana from Mortal Kombat, and at the next meeting the bigwigs say, "you idiot! That's a male sex fantasy! Women don't want to be Kitana - she looks just like a stripper! Cover her up, you pig!"

So the Artist goes back to the drawing board and comes back with something looking like one of the more recent Lara Crofts. The bigwigs: "Okay, she's more covered, but... I dunno, her breasts are still unrealistically large, and she's got that thin supermodel frame... I just think that's not really realistic, y'know? Like, she wouldn't be in a world karate tournament or shooting up terrorists with a chaingun. Realistically, she'd have back problems and probably not be physically fit."

So the artist goes back again and makes the character a little stouter, a little more muscular, like a female orc in World of Warcraft. "Nope, the polls are in - women don't want to play characters that are ugly just like how men don't want to play as weak-looking male characters. You can't manage to... y'know, pretty her up a bit? Like make her a female Nathan Drake or a female Cloud Strife?"

So the artist takes that female orc drawing and puts Ellen Page's face on it, and it comes back, "Okay, the face checks out... but if you have a covered female body that looks kinda fat... why don't we take off some of the clothes to show that she's got muscle there? Muscle is power, right?"

So the artist goes back and draws something like Sonya from Heroes of the Storm, or Sgt. Hammer. "Wow... okay, now that just looks like we're trying to appeal to dudes with muscle fetishes. We gotta cover her up again and... I know! Why not do some kinda... armor so that people just know she's a geared up kick ass woman, and they don't have the opportunity to ogle her at the same time? Oh, and don't give her boob-plate, everyone knows that's bad."

So the artist goes and draws Samus in her armor, and the execs reject it once again, "Nahhh, now it's just like a unisex character, and people will accuse us of making a cheap grab for the female demographic by just making a genderless character have a feminine voice... We don't want to half-ass this, we're trying to make the dream game feminists have demanded since the start of gaming. Can't you look at any established female artists and see what they've drawn?"

"I've looked at Mari Shimazaki's designs."

"Christ, we're gonna be here a long time."

SiuiS

2015-01-23, 02:48 PM

It wasn't not to me, though. Least, as far as I read it. So, I mean, even if my response is "Ah, no thanks, pass on this one.", surely I have a right to express that? And that was after all only one of three sub-topics in my post.

Oh. Sure. You can certainly say you don't want to have the conversation. The reading I got was that it should have been obvious retrospectively you didn't want conversation, though, and I was bad for trying and should feel bad. If it's just "I'll get off here, thanks", that's cool. :smallsmile:

I didn't say I didn't want to argue, I said I didn't want to derail the thread as we are talking about what females find attractive, and me coming in as a male talking about what males find attractive is off topic. If someone wants to start a new thread on the topic I will happily continue over there.

Ah.

Probably Archie. Those thighs could crack a walnut.

Who?

And I would consider that a separate argument. With a power fantasy targeted at man the male part in "male power fantasy" is a extra modifier specifying the target demographic of the character design it does not mean "power fantasy unique to males". When following that logic what makes something a female power fantasy when it's a power fantasy character and the character is targeted at woman.

This makes no sense. If someone targets a power fantasy at women it would indeed be an attempt at a woman's power fantasy. How is that strange?

I consider "not designed for woman to lust after, it's part of a power fantasy" as a separate argument from "and it's designed to appeal to man".

Sorry, but that opinion is probably wrong. If something is not designed for women specifically, then it is tacitly designed for men. That's an actual thing, not just my opinion on how things work.

Anyway I think I will bow out since I don't have anything to contribute to the original topic.

Probably best for me, too. I'm just sorta indulging on the topic.

Sith_Happens

2015-01-23, 02:54 PM

(not quite on topic: any mmorpgs that lets your male char go shirtless? there's got to be a barbarian somewhere)

I was going to say SW:TOR but someone beat me to it:

Speaking of skimpy armor, SWTOR has "invisible armor" pieces for boots and chestpieces. It also features awesome things like this:

http://sweet.pp.fi/skimps0612/combo.jpg

http://sweet.pp.fi/randomskimp7swtor.jpg

http://sweet.pp.fi/randomskimp4swtor.jpg

If only I looked that good while showing so much skin.

Though I will add that the two above are just the tip of the iceberg.

Out of curiousity, what would be the female equivalent of a power fantasy character?

Sort of parallel to an actual answer to this, but Erza Scarlet from Fairy Tail (more often than not) shows skin the same way her male co-stars do: In direct proportion to how much ass she's kicking or about to kick.

It seems strange to me that any sort of idealization of men's bodies is seen as an author power fantasy while idealization of women's bodies is sexualization, even when they consist of the almost identical things. It almost verges on circular logic to me.

I've been thinking for a while now that a big part of this is actually just the lack of male secondary sex characteristics in action. Because if there were some rough male equivalent to breasts you can't tell me that artists and directors the world over wouldn't be all over that.:smalltongue:

On a less divergent note from normal human thought, I read a while back that women have been found in scientific studies to have much greater variance in what they find physically attractive than men do. Which makes the question of what exactly an "idealization of men's bodies" looks like in the first place even less answerable than it was already.

Ibrinar

2015-01-23, 03:10 PM

This makes no sense. If someone targets a power fantasy at women it would indeed be an attempt at a woman's power fantasy. How is that strange?

Which is why that is exactly what I argued for? I think you misread my meaning a bit.^^

*looks back at own post* Did the "following that logic" phrase lead you to believe I was arguing against that interpretation? I guess it could since it's often used that way but I just used it literaly.

Maryring

2015-01-23, 03:17 PM

Sorry, but that opinion is probably wrong. If something is not designed for women specifically, then it is tacitly designed for men. That's an actual thing, not just my opinion on how things work.

Pardon to pull you back in if you were intending to back out, but can you clarify/back up that statement?

Way I see it, there's plenty ways to not design something for women, and still not be intentionally designing it for men. There are tons of factors that goes into any professional design progress, and gender does not have to be part of this progress. Income levels, education, age and other objects that constitute a cultural background. In fact, it's been my design-experience that these other cultural elements weigh a *lot* heavier in the decision-making progress than gender itself. A good, proper design should be as gender-neutral as possible, because why appeal to only men or only women when you can appeal to both?

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-23, 03:53 PM

There's a degree of reiteration there, Siuis. The trick is, ironically enough, that I was kind of not just talking to you.

See, I'm not avoiding that discussion because I'm not interested in the subject, or because I am unaware of the wider context, or because I think it shouldn't be discussed at all. No, the trouble is I find it fascinating and your earnest desire to discuss it is the cheese in a trap not of your making. I am a moth to this topic's flame, only that flame is burning up friendships, careers and safety. I'd be hesitant to discuss it at all, I'm more wary about discussing it online, and I don't honestly think I would be at all comfortable even attempting to discuss it on a forum like this outside of a specifically created thread (preferably one which has had the topic officially cleared by the mods). And even then, I suspect the sensible course of action would be for me to politely decline.

I was reiterating for effect, and to warn myself off. You are of course perfectly welcome to continue without or at least around me. :smallsmile:

SowZ

2015-01-23, 03:55 PM

Pardon to pull you back in if you were intending to back out, but can you clarify/back up that statement?

Way I see it, there's plenty ways to not design something for women, and still not be intentionally designing it for men. There are tons of factors that goes into any professional design progress, and gender does not have to be part of this progress. Income levels, education, age and other objects that constitute a cultural background. In fact, it's been my design-experience that these other cultural elements weigh a *lot* heavier in the decision-making progress than gender itself. A good, proper design should be as gender-neutral as possible, because why appeal to only men or only women when you can appeal to both?

http://dylbs6e8mhm2w.cloudfront.net/productimages/500x500/171715.JPG

Psyren

2015-01-23, 04:03 PM

Can gay dudes comment too? I really like Monkey from Enslaved...

And I very proudly wear the monikers "feminist" and "social justice warrior" - I do not see them as pejorative at all.

SowZ

2015-01-23, 05:01 PM

Can gay dudes comment too? I really like Monkey from Enslaved...

And I very proudly wear the monikers "feminist" and "social justice warrior" - I do not see them as pejorative at all.

I consider myself a feminist, too, though I more often see SJW being used as an insult.

Icewraith

2015-01-23, 07:00 PM

http://dylbs6e8mhm2w.cloudfront.net/productimages/500x500/171715.JPG

I believe the statement was "does not have to be", not "is never". You have to admit that even this sort of thing is taking a step in the right direction- at least there are only hints of pink and purple, and there's no obvious features that indicate the designer expects women will have a harder time using the device compared to men.
Some sarcasm here.

Jeff the Green

2015-01-23, 08:11 PM

If you're not sure you like Viggo Mortensen, try watching Hidalgo. Great adventure movie, and he does a lot of the horsemanship himself.

I've been trying to get a hold of Alatriste. Aside from liking Spanish history and wanting to get better at understanding spoken Spanish, he seems to rock the mustache (at least based on the promotional material).

Also, he speaks fluent (an apparently accent-less) English, Danish, and Spanish, can manage French, Italian, Swedish, and Norwegian, is a horseman, writes music and poetry, paints (and it's abstract expressionism too!), is an awesome photgrapher, and likes A People's History of the United States. I'm like a 1 on the Kinsey scale, but... damn.

I consider myself a feminist, too, though I more often see SJW being used as an insult.

Well, yeah, but it's a horrible insult. Social Justice Warrior means you fight for social justice. Which is really hard to twist into a bad thing. :smallconfused:

MLai

2015-01-23, 09:04 PM

In fact, it's been my design-experience that these other cultural elements weigh a *lot* heavier in the decision-making progress than gender itself. A good, proper design should be as gender-neutral as possible, because why appeal to only men or only women when you can appeal to both?
+1 to this. Gender in the self-insert character is much less important to me than the ethnic culture or subculture that the said self-insert is representing. If I don't like the subculture heshe's representing (based on hisher clothing choice, behavior, and backstory) I'm much less likely to play the game no matter the gender.

Psyren

2015-01-24, 12:22 AM

I consider myself a feminist, too, though I more often see SJW being used as an insult.

Hmm...

Society: Yeah, I care about that.
Justice: Care about that too.
Warrior: Willing to fight for both, and acknowledges that fighting continues to be necessary.

I know it's meant to be an insult, but it doesn't seem to have much impact.

Well, yeah, but it's a horrible insult. Social Justice Warrior means you fight for social justice. Which is really hard to twist into a bad thing. :smallconfused:

Yep.

I believe the statement was "does not have to be", not "is never". You have to admit that even this sort of thing is taking a step in the right direction- at least there are only hints of pink and purple, and there's no obvious features that indicate the designer expects women will have a harder time using the device compared to men.
Some sarcasm here.

Sarcasm aside, this thing is insulting because it implies that women might have trouble with standard pens just because they are women. If they want to make a pen with a sleeker or more curvy design, they can just make and call it that; they don't have to target it as being "for" one gender or another.

(not quite on topic: any mmorpgs that lets your male char go shirtless? there's got to be a barbarian somewhere)

Generally this sort of thing relies on mods, which MMOs frown on. In offline RPGs it tends to be one of the first things modders go for, especially if there is a shirtless model in the game already, and you're lucky if they stop at the shirts half the time.

In Diablo 3 this is doable with vanishing dye on your chest piece, letting you keep the stats while airing out the pecs.

Maryring

2015-01-24, 12:23 AM

http://dylbs6e8mhm2w.cloudfront.net/productimages/500x500/171715.JPG

I also feel that objects like that are far from universal. I've never once seen any art supply store, from the specialized to the mass produced cheap stuff, market any of their pens, pencils, or anything else as being gender-specific. Might be an "American" thing, but I know for sure that it's not a Norwegian thing.

MLai

2015-01-24, 12:46 AM

The BIC pens are not an insult. It's a marketing ploy to make said demographic feel more special and pampered. As in "We make standard pens for everybody, but for Discerning Ladies we also make special pens just for you!"

It would be an insult if BIC makes standard non-delineated pens, and then "BIC For Him" pens, and then nothing for the ladies. So at this time I am insulted that I don't have "BIC For Him" pens which come with attached flamethrowers.

Jeff the Green

2015-01-24, 01:02 AM

Sarcasm aside, this thing is insulting because it implies that women might have trouble with standard pens just because they are women. If they want to make a pen with a sleeker or more curvy design, they can just make and call it that; they don't have to target it as being "for" one gender or another.

Either that or there's some quirk of hormonal activity that makes women need a slightly different shaped writing instrument, meaning that for the last 6000 years we've been making pens that made women have to work much harder to write than men. This explains why women authors didn't get published—they had to spend so much energy and attention on the physical act of writing that it left little for coming up with good ideas and sentence structure—and why woman-authorship picked up about the same time that typewriters became common. Probably there's still a slight disadvantage in QWERTY keyboards that explains the current imbalance. To rectify this schools should teach DVORAK alongside QWERTY.

The BIC pens are not an insult. It's a marketing ploy to make said demographic feel more special and pampered. As in "We make standard pens for everybody, but for Discerning Ladies we also make special pens just for you!"

It would be an insult if BIC makes standard non-delineated pens, and then "BIC For Him" pens, and then nothing for the ladies. So at this time I am insulted that I don't have "BIC For Him" pens which come with attached flamethrowers.

So they're insulting women by implying that they're easily duped by stupid marketing techniques while men (who don't get special pens) aren't.

The truth is that it's very difficult, if not impossible, to treat men and women at all differently for reasons not strictly related to biology and not insult large factions of one gender or the other.

SowZ

2015-01-24, 01:55 AM

BiC for her evidences that when a gender neutral product is on the market and has never seemed to have a bias for men or women, the corporate big wigs have passively assumed that men are the default audience.

Unless of course it is a cleaning or cooking product, or child care related.

Jeff the Green

2015-01-24, 02:21 AM

Unless of course it is a cleaning or cooking product, or child care related.

Except for cleaning cars or cooking meat on a grill. Those are strongly coded masculine.

Anyway, it's similar to why Korra was just about the first cartoon with a female protagonist: execs assumed boys wouldn't watch such a show because they couldn't identify with the protagonist but girls would watch shows with male protagonists because they could identify with them. (It was, unfortunately, not an entirely bad hypothesis. One of the aspects of male privilege is not being forced by culture to take a female perspective, while girls and women are forced to take a male perspective. Fortunately it was proven wrong, both leading to an awesome show and somewhat restoring my faith that we're getting better generation by generation.)

Psyren

2015-01-24, 03:12 AM

Except for cleaning cars or cooking meat on a grill. Those are strongly coded masculine.

Anyway, it's similar to why Korra was just about the first cartoon with a female protagonist: execs assumed boys wouldn't watch such a show because they couldn't identify with the protagonist but girls would watch shows with male protagonists because they could identify with them. (It was, unfortunately, not an entirely bad hypothesis. One of the aspects of male privilege is not being forced by culture to take a female perspective, while girls and women are forced to take a male perspective. Fortunately it was proven wrong, both leading to an awesome show and somewhat restoring my faith that we're getting better generation by generation.)

Korra was just about the first cartoon with a female protagonist

....The first what now? So can I assume you skipped Jem, She-Ra, Daria, Kim Possible, MLP, any Disney princess movie, any magical girl series ever...

Jeff the Green

2015-01-24, 03:26 AM

....The first what now? So can I assume you skipped Jem, She-Ra, Daria, Kim Possible, MLP, any Disney princess movie, any magical girl series ever...

Sorry, first mainstream western cartoon not specifically marketed to girls. Or at least one of the first.

I'm not generally a cartoon person and so I'm running off of other peoples' arguments. Which means I sometimes mess them up by leaving important things out. :smallredface:

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-24, 03:31 AM

http://dylbs6e8mhm2w.cloudfront.net/productimages/500x500/171715.JPG

Sarcasm aside, this thing is insulting because it implies that women might have trouble with standard pens just because they are women. If they want to make a pen with a sleeker or more curvy design, they can just make and call it that; they don't have to target it as being "for" one gender or another.

BiC for her evidences that when a gender neutral product is on the market and has never seemed to have a bias for men or women, the corporate big wigs have passively assumed that men are the default audience.

Unless of course it is a cleaning or cooking product, or child care related.

Now this, this I feel I can comment on, though I'll do so only briefly right now by linking to this video, which I remember being quite thorough.
Gendered Marketing. (http://youtu.be/3JDmb_f3E2c)

It's a lot simpler than you guys seem to think, and a lot less political.

EDIT - But still pretty terrible.

SowZ

2015-01-24, 03:45 AM

Now this, this I feel I can comment on, though I'll do so only briefly right now by linking to this video, which I remember being quite thorough.
Gendered Marketing. (http://youtu.be/3JDmb_f3E2c)

It's a lot simpler than you guys seem to think, and a lot less political.

EDIT - But still pretty terrible.

Although the default assumption of male normativity is still a problem. There was no, "BiC for him." That they split the market by making 'BiC for Her' and allowing the standard BiC to be for men, they admit that men are normal.

Having a 'For Him' or 'For Her' brand is very common, and when a brand previously associated with one gender tries to branch out, I understand it. But BiC never had a gender association. There was no bias or public perception one way or the other.

Jeff the Green

2015-01-24, 03:45 AM

It's a lot simpler than you guys seem to think, and a lot less political.

EDIT - But still pretty terrible.

You do realize that that's almost exactly what we're arguing, right? We're just focusing on some of the unconscious biases and unwarranted assumptions that shape marketing strategy within each subdivision and the unfortunate implications of the strategies.

(Also, I kind of like some of the features of that laptop they mention. As a guitar player I wish they'd gone further than just making the latch fingernail-friendly and redesigned the keyboard and trackpad.)

Psyren

2015-01-24, 05:23 AM

Triaxx

2015-01-24, 07:50 AM

I always find it very curious, when some one brings up the Power Fantasy, that the first thing that happens is it becomes a 'Male Power Fantasy', especially by females (Term used here in place of the more specific girls/women) who have just been complaining about everything being male-centric. The reason that's weird is because they are essentially self-devaluing that women don't have fantasies of getting what they want, or even desires at all. Which is stupid.

But the idea that a power fantasy is having the strength/power/whatever to overcome obstacles in the path being inherently a male thing is really strange. It's not actually male vs. female. It's physicality vs. intelligence. Yes, there are a lot of characters out there who see a locked door, and smash it open. Have you ever tried to pick a lock? Even under normal, low stress constraints, it takes a while.

Also I really liked the BiC for Her because they eliminated that stupid ridge at the juncture between the soft grip and the barrel of the pen.

SowZ

2015-01-24, 11:07 AM

Triaxx

2015-01-24, 12:17 PM

Gotta establish a baseline somewhere. But what I was getting at was that the moment someone brought it up, it was pushed aside as being a male thing only.

Psyren

2015-01-24, 12:17 PM

Sorry, first mainstream western cartoon not specifically marketed to girls. Or at least one of the first.

Daria (and for that matter Kim Possible) still beat it by decades :smalltongue: They were not marketed to any specific gender.

You are missing the point completely. It isn't that women don't have power fantasies, it is that the media caters far more to men and reinforces the subconscious attitude that the 30s white male is the normal person, and everyone else is a variation on the norm.

Indeed.

Also I really liked the BiC for Her because they eliminated that stupid ridge at the juncture between the soft grip and the barrel of the pen.

You're kind of proving the point. I assume you're a guy since you've identified as one, and you like the pen even though BiC has decided it's not "for you." Which makes the marketing kinda stupid, as most gendered marketing ends up being.

Jeff the Green

2015-01-24, 01:27 PM

You are missing the point completely. It isn't that women don't have power fantasies, it is that the media caters far more to men and reinforces the subconscious attitude that the 30s white male is the normal person, and everyone else is a variation on the norm.

Also, the phrase "male power fantasy" doesn't refer so much to the fantasy itself as its expression in media. Women fantasize about power (though they might be culturally conditioned to do so less/sublimate it more), but those fantasies are rarely given voice in media.

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-24, 01:58 PM

Although the default assumption of male normativity is still a problem. There was no, "BiC for him." That they split the market by making 'BiC for Her' and allowing the standard BiC to be for men, they admit that men are normal.

Having a 'For Him' or 'For Her' brand is very common, and when a brand previously associated with one gender tries to branch out, I understand it. But BiC never had a gender association. There was no bias or public perception one way or the other.

I'm no pen expert, can't say I've ever knowingly bought a BiC pen, though I've probably had one or two over the years. But pens are very, very frequently gendered in terms of marketing. It's just that it's usually a matter of colour-palette, shape and texture. The BiC For Her incident is simply a very obvious and very publically failed effort at more of what pen manufacturers have been doing for decades. Just like most other manufacturers. There are plenty of honestly non-gendered pens and pen packaging, but there's also plenty of pens that are either noticeably pink and stereotypically girly and plenty of pens that are all hard lines, black silver and red, Tactical or Extreme. And I bet you that more often than not, these gendered pens will both be more expensive than the ungendered ones, as well as functionally identical.

Just like the products in the video. It's not about who is or isn't normal or default. It's about arbitrarily separating out the market in order to push up prices. Gender simply happens to be a simple way to do that that keys in pretty directly to our cultural hangups and the general human urge to conform. It happens often enough in terms of other arbitrary subgroups. Most of the time when you see a product that may or may not be relevant to a particular culture or lifestyle being targeted at it, this is exactly what's happening.

You do realize that that's almost exactly what we're arguing, right? We're just focusing on some of the unconscious biases and unwarranted assumptions that shape marketing strategy within each subdivision and the unfortunate implications of the strategies.

(Also, I kind of like some of the features of that laptop they mention. As a guitar player I wish they'd gone further than just making the latch fingernail-friendly and redesigned the keyboard and trackpad.)

What I'm saying is that the angle you are discussing it from simply isn't relevant to the particular instance (regardless of your opinions on the wider issue which I'm avoiding), because it's a distinct and specific thing at work there and the only motivation is dollar. You could perhaps argue about the particular ways in which they marketed the failed Bic-for-her pens, or the way in which such products are tailored in order to appeal to the specific demographic, but the motivation for it and so on really do not go deeper than that, loathsome as that kind of lizard-eyed capitalist avarice is.

Symptom, not root cause.
Unrelated issue, meaningless to original claim of there being no gain to designing a character to appeal to one demographic and not the other. In terms of marketing things like that, there is a very specific gain to doing so because it allows you to manipulate the market and control pricing to your benefit at all of our expense.

Hiro Protagonest

2015-01-24, 02:15 PM

Korra

an awesome show

A what now? I quit once they started focusing on the love triangle with Asami (the one with Bolin I could kinda stand as Bolin was actually a decent character).

Surrealistik

2015-01-24, 03:00 PM

She's really only a jackass to Serah once and otherwise to Snow. And, well, I think that few people would really be all that supportive or even amused if their teenage sister who they gave up their own teenage years to take care of comes home stating a desire to marry her useless, unemployed boyfriend of a few wees and following it up with saying that they're the Antichrist, but it's okay because said boyfriend supports her. Snapping there seems like a pretty understandable solution. As for being a jackass to Snow...It's Snow. He has it coming, both for the whole useless, unemployed boyfriend thing and for constantly rubbing her loss in early on.

Haha, based on your repeatedly bitter depiction of Snow, I don't suppose this situation in any way parallels your personal experience?

Also this has gotten marvelously off topic, though I suppose that should be expected given the particular combination of this forum and the subject matter. :smalltongue:

While we're at it though, I've some experience with market research, and it is astonishing how much work and deliberate, thorough, meticulous study goes into something as simple as box art for the marketing materials of large companies, nevermind product aesthetics; most of the time the goal of this is naturally to maximize its appeal to a key target demographic/audience. Though I'm not familiar with BIC's own marketing campaigns, given the size and longevity of the company I would be honestly surprised if the pen designs and the packaging weren't both systemically tailored to its intended demographic, including through several stages of direct customer sourcing/feedback like surveys and focus groups. That having been said, I am absolutely baffled how this mode of presentation somehow made it through all of these checkpoints they no doubt employed, such that BIC's marketing staff and subcontractors collectively failed to detect, at any point from concept to distribution, that the gendering would be so obnoxiously overt (I'm assuming this is the reason for the product line's failure) as to alienate women.

Psyren

2015-01-24, 03:19 PM

A what now? I quit once they started focusing on the love triangle with Asami (the one with Bolin I could kinda stand as Bolin was actually a decent character).

Err... without spoiling anything, Korra's love triangle is very much resolved.

Unrelated issue, meaningless to original claim of there being no gain to designing a character to appeal to one demographic and not the other. In terms of marketing things like that, there is a very specific gain to doing so because it allows you to manipulate the market and control pricing to your benefit at all of our expense.

I know very well that businesses benefit from perpetuating these stereotypes through marketing. That doesn't make it moral/ethical to do so, or such practices unworthy of discussion or above criticism.

Hiro Protagonest

2015-01-24, 03:44 PM

Err... without spoiling anything, Korra's love triangle is very much resolved.

Yeah I know.

Mako is still a bland character and Korra doesn't grow at all.

GPuzzle

2015-01-24, 04:07 PM

I just wanna point out that this thread started out by being a question on which characters did female gamers find attractive, be them male or female, and we ended up on a discussion about the marketing of BiC pens.

The Internet seems to have no rails whatsoever.

Jeff the Green

2015-01-24, 04:07 PM

What I'm saying is that the angle you are discussing it from simply isn't relevant to the particular instance (regardless of your opinions on the wider issue which I'm avoiding), because it's a distinct and specific thing at work there and the only motivation is dollar. You could perhaps argue about the particular ways in which they marketed the failed Bic-for-her pens, or the way in which such products are tailored in order to appeal to the specific demographic, but the motivation for it and so on really do not go deeper than that, loathsome as that kind of lizard-eyed capitalist avarice is.

You're assuming that marketers are rational actors untainted by society's bigotry and biases. This is not remotely the case, and it's compounded by the fact that they're primarily middle-class-to-rich white dudes.

A what now? I quit once they started focusing on the love triangle with Asami (the one with Bolin I could kinda stand as Bolin was actually a decent character).

I suck at arguing about the merits of pop culture (as opposed to rhetorical strategies and tropes) and am not particularly interested in having this argument here, so I'll just say that I dislike Bolin, think Korra did show minor but appreciable character growth, and like Korrasami, on both aesthetic and political grounds. :smalltongue:

Hiro Protagonest

2015-01-24, 04:10 PM

and like Korrasami, on both aesthetic and political grounds. :smalltongue:

...Maybe I should've said Love V. >_> :smalltongue:

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-24, 08:20 PM

I know very well that businesses benefit from perpetuating these stereotypes through marketing. That doesn't make it moral/ethical to do so, or such practices unworthy of discussion or above criticism.

I didn't say it does and I wouldn't dream of suggesting that such practices are unworthy of discussion, let alone that they were above criticism. I just hold that the particular case is a separate issue to the one that was previously being discussed.

Both of which are tangents to the original topic, of course. :smallsmile: Gendered marketing could totally support a thread on it's own, I'm sure.

You're assuming that marketers are rational actors untainted by society's bigotry and biases. This is not remotely the case, and it's compounded by the fact that they're primarily middle-class-to-rich white dudes.

Uh... I can't say that I am actually. In fact, whether they are or are not is kind of irrelevant to the specific point I was making.

Rodin

2015-01-25, 03:35 AM

....The first what now? So can I assume you skipped Jem, She-Ra, Daria, Kim Possible, MLP, any Disney princess movie, any magical girl series ever...

And just like that, I'm transported back to whe I was in second or third grade and found one of my older sister's She-Ra audio tapes with the tape all twisted and mangled. Being geeky even at that tender age, I spent the afternoon re-spooling the tape and figuring out how it worked, testing my success by playing the tape on the family stereo set.

Of course, it was during one of these test phases that my sister happened to come in, and mock me mercilessly for listening to She-Ra. Because it was a girl's cartoon, not a manly boy's cartoon like He-Man. There was a deep sense of shame at having been "caught" listening to a girly show, even though I was only listening to it as part of the "manly" activity of electronics repair.

This stuff gets ingrained at a really young age - some shows are for girls, others for boys, and God forbid you should like something on the other side of the aisle...

Frozen_Feet

2015-01-25, 12:05 PM

Well, yeah, but it's a horrible insult. Social Justice Warrior means you fight for social justice. Which is really hard to twist into a bad thing. :smallconfused:

Not hard at all. It's a really basic example of sarcastic ambivalence, where a seemingly-positive descriptor is actually used to point out a person's complete inability to stand up to it. The fact that "social justice warrior" is used to proclaim someone is anti-social, unjust fake-activist by nearly everyone who does not identify as one should give you a stop.

Ibrinar

2015-01-25, 01:28 PM

Jeff the Green

2015-01-25, 02:01 PM

Yeah it's sarcastic. It's however not unprecedented to take insults and use them yourself as positive descriptions. It's called Reappropriation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reappropriation). Nerd for instance is now often used as positive self identifier.

An it's only barely reappropriation when the targets hear the insult for the first time and say "yeah, that's pretty much accurate", and the people who aren't actively opposing them roll their eyes.

I wouldn't do it with sjw since I think the warrior part makes it hard for the term not to sound silly, but ymmv.

I tend to agree, but I'll adopt a silly name to tweak a GamerGater or ally any day. :smalltongue:

SiuiS

2015-01-25, 02:37 PM

I've been thinking for a while now that a big part of this is actually just the lack of male secondary sex characteristics in action. Because if there were some rough male equivalent to breasts you can't tell me that artists and directors the world over wouldn't be all over that.:smalltongue:

Actually, the triangular torso and musculature with bulky bellies is a male secondary sex characteristic. I think. Maybe tertiary? I'm not sure where the differences lie. But it's definitely a male trait.

On a less divergent note from normal human thought, I read a while back that women have been found in scientific studies to have much greater variance in what they find physically attractive than men do. Which makes the question of what exactly an "idealization of men's bodies" looks like in the first place even less answerable than it was already.

Maybe. Maybe.

Which is why that is exactly what I argued for? I think you misread my meaning a bit.^^

Okay then. That's my faux pas. I keep getting to your poss when tired and can't parse the grammar. Sorry.

Pardon to pull you back in if you were intending to back out, but can you clarify/back up that statement?

I always do a bad job of it, but it's a given in legal and judicial circles, and the explanation given is that there's enough science behind it that it's a good idea. I get the explanation but I can't word it right, and I don't know where any of the specific sources to cite are. You can ask around and more folks will tell you that yes, it's a thing, but so far no one can provide studies specifically.

The least political explanation I have is involving sexual harassment law as it pertains to labor union contracts. Sexual harassment is judged by arbiters from a female perspective because if not explicitly told to, they default to a male perspective and it skews results; when asking if you believe someone would feel threatened in any given situation, we assume tall muscular male would feel less threatened than movie model female.

See, I'm not avoiding that discussion because I'm not interested in the subject, or because I am unaware of the wider context, or because I think it shouldn't be discussed at all. No, the trouble is I find it fascinating and your earnest desire to discuss it is the cheese in a trap not of your making. I am a moth to this topic's flame, only that flame is burning up friendships, careers and safety.

Okay.

And I very proudly wear the monikers "feminist" and "social justice warrior" - I do not see them as pejorative at all.

Heh. Social justice warrior was created as a pejorative, too. Before that we were just called 'activists'.

I consider myself a feminist, too, though I more often see SJW being used as an insult.

^.

The BIC pens are not an insult. It's a marketing ploy to make said demographic feel more special and pampered. As in "We make standard pens for everybody, but for Discerning Ladies we also make special pens just for you!"

It would be an insult if BIC makes standard non-delineated pens, and then "BIC For Him" pens, and then nothing for the ladies. So at this time I am insulted that I don't have "BIC For Him" pens which come with attached flamethrowers.

Heh.
It's sadly effective, really. Take normal product, add frills or gunmetal, market to specific sex, get more sales.

Either that or there's some quirk of hormonal activity that makes women need a slightly different shaped writing instrument, meaning that for the last 6000 years we've been making pens that made women have to work much harder to write than men. This explains why women authors didn't get published—they had to spend so much energy and attention on the physical act of writing that it left little for coming up with good ideas and sentence structure—and why woman-authorship picked up about the same time that typewriters became common. Probably there's still a slight disadvantage in QWERTY keyboards that explains the current imbalance. To rectify this schools should teach DVORAK alongside QWERTY.

... Is this serious? :smallconfused:

So they're insulting women by implying that they're easily duped by stupid marketing techniques while men (who don't get special pens) aren't.

Men do get special pens. And it's just as stupid for them.

The truth is that it's very difficult, if not impossible, to treat men and women at all differently for reasons not strictly related to biology and not insult large factions of one gender or the other.

That's the problem, aye.

I always find it very curious, when some one brings up the Power Fantasy, that the first thing that happens is it becomes a 'Male Power Fantasy', especially by females (Term used here in place of the more specific girls/women) who have just been complaining about everything being male-centric.

The reason that's weird is because they are essentially self-devaluing that women don't have fantasies of getting what they want, or even desires at all. Which is stupid.

The trick here, is there is no societally reinforced female power fantasy. And that's the big thing about racism, sexism, etc., is from an anthropological perspective, only one has hard coded societal norms that enforce them; yes, it's possible for black people to be racist against white people on a personal scale, because any bigoted action based on race is racism. But there is no societal force that makes life difficult for white people for being white, so at that level, it's not a thing. (Bad explanation was bad, but hit the broad strokes...)

Society at large in the west glorifies the components of this whole male power fantasy thing, separate from any actual individual trying to make it so. And while the specific concept of a male power fantasy as a concrete thing may be less cut and dry, the idea that society has a lot of baggage that self-reinforces gender roles in ways that are harmful is much less opinion.

But the idea that a power fantasy is having the strength/power/whatever to overcome obstacles in the path being inherently a male thing is really strange.

That's not what is being discussed, though. It's not that it's inherently masculine to want power, it's the specific formats and the social fallout that's being directly told "men do this" and "punish women who try to so this" that's the issue. Any google search for "the kitchen is that way" will confirm that this exists and is an actual problem.

Gotta establish a baseline somewhere. But what I was getting at was that the moment someone brought it up, it was pushed aside as being a male thing only.

It really wasn't, though. I personally corrected that at least three times, and others have as well.
E: I'm responding in part to your tone I think. It's frustrating because a lot of your concerns have already been addressed, but I feel it's rude just to go quote the relevant bits at you. Feels preachy, not like a discussion.

Jeff the Green

2015-01-25, 03:16 PM

Actually, the triangular torso and musculature with bulky bellies is a male secondary sex characteristic. I think. Maybe tertiary? I'm not sure where the differences lie. But it's definitely a male trait.

Yes, it's secondary. Primary is differences in reproductive systems, secondary is physical/behavioral differences that appear during puberty, and tertiary is behavioral differences we associate with different sexes that aren't actually caused by them. (It's somewhat difficult to figure out exactly what behaviors are secondary in humans. Mating dances in birds are a good example of secondary, though, and skirts in humans are a good example of tertiary.)

... Is this serious? :smallconfused:

...no. I've probably been watching too many BAH Fest talks over the last week.

Men do get special pens. And it's just as stupid for them.

One of my favorite comedy bits is Dara O'Briain ranting (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPre1TtvTqk) about razors.

(Also, I don't think I've seen male-specific pens. Examples?)

Avilan the Grey

2015-01-25, 03:36 PM

Female gamers have the same priorities as male gamers when choosing a character to play- pretty much purely mechanical stuff. Not much time to admire your character when in the middle of battle anyway :P.

Well I guess I am genderless then, since I pick my character in ALL GAMES no matter what genre, at least 50% depending on looks and attitude.

Hiro Protagonest

2015-01-25, 03:39 PM

Well I guess I am genderless then, since I pick my character in ALL GAMES no matter what genre, at least 50% depending on looks and attitude.

Same. I am a strong believer in Saint's Row level of character customization (although having the character actually look good takes precedent; see Dark Souls which has plenty of sliders but you can never make an attractive character) and think every RPG should have an item transformation option.

SowZ

2015-01-25, 04:04 PM

I didn't say it does and I wouldn't dream of suggesting that such practices are unworthy of discussion, let alone that they were above criticism. I just hold that the particular case is a separate issue to the one that was previously being discussed.

Both of which are tangents to the original topic, of course. :smallsmile: Gendered marketing could totally support a thread on it's own, I'm sure.

Uh... I can't say that I am actually. In fact, whether they are or are not is kind of irrelevant to the specific point I was making.

Whether or not the market is just doing what makes the most money or not doesn't mean it isn't immoral. The most profitable thing is often to utilize pseudo-slave labor, (or sometimes real slave labor,) and companies do it all the time. That doesn't excuse it.

It's like those email leaks where a Hollywood producer said that he would like to hire a specific black actor for X role, that he was the best man for the job, but they've hit their quota for movies with black actors that year and therefore a white actor will be more profitable. Whether or not that is true, it doesn't remove the moral weight of discrimination from Sony.

And as for the question: Is the market just reacting to prejudices already extant in the market and trying to maximize profits from them, or are those same companies partly responsible for those prejudices, the answer is yes.

Maryring

2015-01-25, 04:31 PM

I always do a bad job of it, but it's a given in legal and judicial circles, and the explanation given is that there's enough science behind it that it's a good idea. I get the explanation but I can't word it right, and I don't know where any of the specific sources to cite are. You can ask around and more folks will tell you that yes, it's a thing, but so far no one can provide studies specifically.

The least political explanation I have is involving sexual harassment law as it pertains to labor union contracts. Sexual harassment is judged by arbiters from a female perspective because if not explicitly told to, they default to a male perspective and it skews results; when asking if you believe someone would feel threatened in any given situation, we assume tall muscular male would feel less threatened than movie model female.

No, I think I get what you're saying now. It does raise an interesting question regarding what differences would crop up in the design process 'f it was done with active effort to look at it from a male/female perspective. The designs I've worked on have been as part of multigendered groups, so it may not be all too different in either direction, but now I wanna see that.

Thanks for clarifying.

Avilan the Grey

2015-01-25, 04:36 PM

Jeff the Green

2015-01-25, 05:00 PM

I am (as a man, and as a person) confused with the restrictions on women and female characters.

A beautiful woman is a male fantasy.
An ugly woman is well... deliberately ugly to belittle women.
A (physically) strong woman is masculine and therefore yet another way to force male ideals on women.
A butch lesbian even more so.
A LIPSTICK lesbian is a male porno fantasy.
An intelligent woman just shows that women aren't good at sports.

...and so on.

Is there any kind of female character, at all, that is "acceptable"?

Few woman characters are in se objectionable. It's patterns and tropes that are objectionable. Strong women are fine; the fact that physically strong women tend also to adopt all other tertiary male sex characteristics is a problem. Lipstick lesbians are fine; the fact that they're almost exclusively used to titilate is a problem. Even the most suspect tropes (e.g. femmes fatales, damsels in distress, amazons suddenly going weak-kneed for the hero) wouldn't be a problem if they weren't pervasive.

Basically, to write a female character that wouldn't face objections from feminists, make them actual characters and not just collections of tropes. And if you want to use one of the suspect tropes try to make sure they don't make up the entire character and they're not the only female characters in your work. (Work being broadly defined. You'll get the benefit of the doubt for having your only two female characters in a book be a damsel in distress and an amazon if your other books demonstrate a wider variety.)

Tvtyrant

2015-01-25, 05:19 PM

Basically, to write a female character that wouldn't face objections from feminists, make them actual characters and not just collections of tropes.

I could not disagree more. Gone Girl has been recieved as being both pro and anti-feminist, and it doesn't follow the normal tropes involved with kidnapping and murder, or even a female characters in general. I believe this is because the term Feminist is too open to make any sort of blanket statement about. So yes, any depiction is going to get some negative reaction from individuals who consider themselves Feminist because Feminists are not homogenous.

Heck, the whole discussion is like asking what white men want because every movie gets criticized by a decent portion of white men. "First White Men criticize Superhero movies for being shallow action movies, then they complain Opera is too cerebral." The discussion misses the point and conflates a lot of people's opinions.

Avilan the Grey

2015-01-25, 05:26 PM

Few woman characters are in se objectionable. It's patterns and tropes that are objectionable. Strong women are fine; the fact that physically strong women tend also to adopt all other tertiary male sex characteristics is a problem. Lipstick lesbians are fine; the fact that they're almost exclusively used to titilate is a problem. Even the most suspect tropes (e.g. femmes fatales, damsels in distress, amazons suddenly going weak-kneed for the hero) wouldn't be a problem if they weren't pervasive.

Basically, to write a female character that wouldn't face objections from feminists, make them actual characters and not just collections of tropes. And if you want to use one of the suspect tropes try to make sure they don't make up the entire character and they're not the only female characters in your work. (Work being broadly defined. You'll get the benefit of the doubt for having your only two female characters in a book be a damsel in distress and an amazon if your other books demonstrate a wider variety.)

(Emphasis mine)
But this is the point, it is impossible. Always, there is at least a few that will argue that whatever the circumstances it is always something wrong with the character. ANY character.
My only possible conclusion is that for that/those individual(s) only a female character that is EXACTLY like they are, is acceptable. It's the same with the amount of skin a woman can show without being objectified. The woman doing the commenting is always equaling themselves as the ideal, and every woman dressed more conservatively than her or her group is always oppressed, and every woman dressing more provocatively than her or her group is always objectified.

(No, the YOU in the text below is not specifically you, and I know most feminists are not like this)

As for your first point though, I call horsehockey, because it an obvious double standard. A male character showing "feminine" traits is good. A female character showing "masculine" traits is bad according to this.
I'm sorry, but to me it sounds like either an obvious double standard, extreme hypocrisy OR a method to enforce certain gender roles consciously or subconsciously (aka "you claim you don't want girly-girl characters, but if they are not conforming to a feminine ideal, they are "wrong").
Basically that is intolerance and sexism and again, a very narrow minded attitude towards gender roles.

Anyway, I am sorry for sidetracking this and will now shut up about it.

GPuzzle

2015-01-25, 05:29 PM

It goes both ways, really. A great character isn't defined by its gender or skin color or anything - a great character is defined by being a great character in and of itself, regardless of any physical characteristics.

In fact, the only way that would be important is if it's necessary for a secondary condition, so in an historical piece, for example, a character that is a slave in pre-Aboliton Southern US, or heck, just one struggling against the racism before the racial movement is black, but that's not why it's a great character - in fact, if the story set somewhere in Africa, for example, where having slaves was common for basically any tribe, kingdom, and basically everyone, the main definition of the character is something social, not a skin color.

That's why I disagree with the idea that "we need to be more inclusive and add minorities". If you're adding token minorities to media for the sake of doing so and being "inclusive", you're not getting great characters, and a great character is great regardless of it unless it's absolutely necessary due to how the world reacts to it, not for the character simply being so.

Hiro Protagonest

2015-01-25, 05:38 PM

I could not disagree more. Gone Girl has been recieved as being both pro and anti-feminist, and it doesn't follow the normal tropes involved with kidnapping and murder, or even a female characters in general. I believe this is because the term Feminist is too open to make any sort of blanket statement about. So yes, any depiction is going to get some negative reaction from individuals who consider themselves Feminist because Feminists are not homogenous.

Heck, the whole discussion is like asking what white men want because every movie gets criticized by a decent portion of white men. "First White Men criticize Superhero movies for being shallow action movies, then they complain Opera is too cerebral." The discussion misses the point and conflates a lot of people's opinions.

Yeah. I think you can name any character and find someone who dislikes them, regardless of gender. Guy's bulky, power fantasy. Guy's not bulky, too feminine. Guy's passive, manchild (being too passive is a flaw, but it gets flanderized in this case). Guy's assertive, misogynist or social justice warrior. Etc. There are some people who are just overly critical about a particular thing.

Jeff the Green

2015-01-25, 05:50 PM

I could not disagree more. Gone Girl has been recieved as being both pro and anti-feminist, and it doesn't follow the normal tropes involved with kidnapping and murder, or even a female characters in general.

Gone Girl is controversial among feminists because it's a complicated book/movie. Under some interpretations it's a feminist masterpiece, under others it's a big ball of misogynistic "bitches be crazy" tropes. And the reason it's controversial is that both interpretations are supported by the text. It does use some ugly and dangerous stereotypes of women in a way that may perpetuate them, and it is a heterodox statement about female power.

On the other hand, take a character like Liz Lemon or Leslie Knope. They do use some tropes that are problematic in some contexts, but because they're part of a whole character in a generally non-misogynistic context you will rarely find feminists objecting to them. (That is, the characters; there are objections to aspects of plot or individual shows, but not the characters in general.) The fact that feminists never agree on everything doesn't mean they can't agree on some things.

As for your first point though, I call horsehockey, because it an obvious double standard. A male character showing "feminine" traits is good. A female character showing "masculine" traits is bad according to this.
I'm sorry, but to me it sounds like either an obvious double standard, extreme hypocrisy OR a method to enforce certain gender roles consciously or subconsciously (aka "you claim you don't want girly-girl characters, but if they are not conforming to a feminine ideal, they are "wrong").
Basically that is intolerance and sexism and again, a very narrow minded attitude towards gender roles.

Anyway, I am sorry for sidetracking this and will now shut up about it.

I honestly don't see how this follows from what I said, considering that I said that complete characters, who generally have a mix of 'masculine' and 'feminine' traits since few people in real life are actually paragons of hegemonic masculinity/femininity, are generally unobjectionable.

In fact, the only way that would be important is if it's necessary for a secondary condition, so in an historical piece, for example, a character that is a slave in pre-Aboliton Southern US, or heck, just one struggling against the racism before the racial movement is black, but that's not why it's a great character - in fact, if the story set somewhere in Africa, for example, where having slaves was common for basically any tribe, kingdom, and basically everyone, the main definition of the character is something social, not a skin color.

I agree. Most feminists and anti-racists agree. The problem arises when white/male/straight/cis is the default choice, when whiteness isn't a statement but blackness is, when a hero's maleness is assumed but femaleness is remarkable. The problem is not John McClane, the problem is that movies are littered with John McClane clones. Similarly, there's far less objection to stripping Spiderman of his awkward nerdiness and replacing it with geek chic than to giving him more melanin even though the character is defined by the geekiness far more than the whiteness.

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-25, 06:00 PM

Whether or not the market is just doing what makes the most money or not doesn't mean it isn't immoral. The most profitable thing is often to utilize pseudo-slave labor, (or sometimes real slave labor,) and companies do it all the time. That doesn't excuse it.

It's like those email leaks where a Hollywood producer said that he would like the hire a specific black actor for X role, that he was the best man for the job, but they've hit their quota for movies with black actors that year and therefore a white actor will be more profitable. Whether or not that is true, it doesn't remove the moral weight of discrimination from Sony.
SowZ? One of us must be seriously misunderstanding the other here. Because I'm pretty sure I just said specifically that I wasn't saying anything about it being or not being immoral. No one is excusing anything here, or at the very least I can say that I certainly wasn't.

And as for the question: Is the market just reacting to prejudices already extant in the market and trying to maximize profits from them, or are those same companies partly responsible for those prejudices, the answer is yes.

That's a good question. An interesting question. A question worth asking.
It's also a different question to what I was addressing which was a super specific topic; the comparison between the concept of there being no gain in targeting characters in media at a specific demographic to the deliberate exclusion of another (and whether that is or isn't true) and the BiC "Pens for Her" incident. I'm not commenting on either of those in any depth, nor exploring the surrounding issues. I'm just saying, there's a not particularly secret market force at work there which makes it a basically inapplicable example with which to prove or disprove the hypothesis in question. It may even touch upon some inter-related underlying trends, but that's quite beside the point.

My point had a very narrow focus and I feel I've almost certainly stated it clearly and fully enough to satisfy my own need to put it out there. I've done more than enough damage to the chances of the original topic resurfacing already, I think.

Avilan the Grey

2015-01-25, 06:15 PM

I honestly don't see how this follows from what I said, considering that I said that complete characters, who generally have a mix of 'masculine' and 'feminine' traits since few people in real life are actually paragons of hegemonic masculinity/femininity, are generally unobjectionable.

You said that women "adopting other masculine traits" is a problem.
First of all, they might not actually be "adopted" but who she really is, and secon I am not sure why those traits are "troublesome" anyway.

There is an illusive "womanhood" out there that cannot be reached since the perfect woman has to be feminine, but not too feminine, strong, but not actually masculine in any way, smart, but not bookish or introvert, sexually active but not objectified, not too beautiful, not too ugly but definitely not plain and boring, she must be in charge, but not bossy, she must be tender but not soft, etc etc.

To me, it seems, the more "hardcore" feminists have painted themselves into a corner where nothing is good enough, because nothing CAN be good enough.

Jeff the Green

2015-01-25, 06:29 PM

You said that women "adopting other masculine traits" is a problem.
First of all, they might not actually be "adopted" but who she really is, and secon I am not sure why those traits are "troublesome" anyway.

There is an illusive "womanhood" out there that cannot be reached since the perfect woman has to be feminine, but not too feminine, strong, but not actually masculine in any way, smart, but not bookish or introvert, sexually active but not objectified, not too beautiful, not too ugly but definitely not plain and boring, she must be in charge, but not bossy, she must be tender but not soft, etc etc.

To me, it seems, the more "hardcore" feminists have painted themselves into a corner where nothing is good enough, because nothing CAN be good enough.

Sorry, I must have communicated poorly. The problem is not a highly masculine woman*, it's when 'masculine' traits come in a package for many, many characters. There's a common syndrome where physically strong women are portrayed basically as transmen, and while an individual character like that can work, it becomes an issue when it's repeated over and over.

*Some 'feminists' do have a problem with this. They're uncommon and mostly ostracized because it's rather anti-feminist to say "women must be this". These are the 'womyn born womyn' folks who want feminism to be stuck in the '70s, benefiting almost exclusively white cis women.

GPuzzle

2015-01-25, 07:34 PM

Hey, guys, how about this: let's consider everyone ****ing equal. The more you segregate, the more chaos it causes. Yeah, people are different, but people are people and should not be characterized by who they are but rather what they do, taking in consideration the surroundings and history of a person but not using it as an excuse.

Is it that hard?

Jeff the Green

2015-01-25, 07:39 PM

BeerMug Paladin

2015-01-25, 08:09 PM

I think the larger issue with complaints about female characters is mostly about diversity. Women, like men, can be very diverse in personality, beliefs, intelligence, physical capability, appearance, hobbies, etc...

But it's more common for men to directly reflect that broad diversity in media. Women are sometimes an afterthought, so if there's only one woman character who matters, their existence can be offensive if they seem like a flat stereotype. It can be worse if there's only a couple and they all fit into a single broad trend. Like the oft-recognized Most Common Superpower.

Oh, and this isn't quite on the thread's topic, but it ties into my thoughts a bit and is maybe slightly relevant to this thread (because I mention a videogame). There was a PS1 game called Bloody Roar that I liked with an interesting diversity of character designs. Among others, it had a middle-aged, hulking giant of a woman and a crossdressing man as part of the main cast.

The sequel? Swapped those characters out (while retaining the general design aesthetic) with a bandage-wrapped guy and a nearly naked female prostitute. Seriously, their movesets and look were heavily based on those removed characters, respectively. (But one got more changes to the moveset than the other.)

Those changes kind of irked me. Not only because the two removed characters were unique in the media and visually interesting in their general design, but because it was transparently obvious why they were removed. Also, they were probably my favorite characters to use.

Plus, as a fan who had played the original, my best character was suddenly the fanservice prostitute. I don't mind fanservice, but it felt like I was certainly not being serviced there. I was being told I was wrong for enjoying something different.

Anyway, diversity in media representation. Hope that little story makes my viewpoint make sense.

Terraoblivion

2015-01-25, 08:52 PM

You said that women "adopting other masculine traits" is a problem.
First of all, they might not actually be "adopted" but who she really is, and secon I am not sure why those traits are "troublesome" anyway.

There is an illusive "womanhood" out there that cannot be reached since the perfect woman has to be feminine, but not too feminine, strong, but not actually masculine in any way, smart, but not bookish or introvert, sexually active but not objectified, not too beautiful, not too ugly but definitely not plain and boring, she must be in charge, but not bossy, she must be tender but not soft, etc etc.

To me, it seems, the more "hardcore" feminists have painted themselves into a corner where nothing is good enough, because nothing CAN be good enough.

No, it's just a matter of two things. One is that different people hold different opinions and somebody is always going to be angry about anything well enough known that there is any real debate. The other is that without a deep understanding of political complaints, it's easy to end up not seeing any rhyme or reason to them.

goto124

2015-01-25, 10:43 PM

I am (as a man, and as a person) confused with the restrictions on women and female characters.

A beautiful woman is a male fantasy.
An ugly woman is well... deliberately ugly to belittle women.
A (physically) strong woman is masculine and therefore yet another way to force male ideals on women.
A butch lesbian even more so.
A LIPSTICK lesbian is a male porno fantasy.
An intelligent woman just shows that women aren't good at sports.

...and so on.

Is there any kind of female character, at all, that is "acceptable"?

When a character is an woman, or black, or has some other characteristic that 'puts' them in some 'oppressed minority' (women do not make a minority, but the point is there), we expect that character to be potrayed in a non-discrimatory way, and we end up setting impossibly high standards for that person. Every way of potraying them ends up following some sort of sterotype, leading to the above quote. We're overcompensating for prejudice, in a sense.

Why not have a variety of characters? For example, women - masculine and feminine and in-between (it exists!), physically strong and intelligent and balanced, beautiful and ugly and just plain ordinary-looking. It helps to have enough female characters to do this in the first place...

(On-topic if non-video-games allowed: The Property of Hate is a surrealistic webcomic with fantastic art and unusual storyline. RGB, the sharp-dressed main character with a TV head, is strangely attractive, most likely due to the artist's skills in drawing his body expressions, especially the hands. I recommand everyone reads it, and admire the art even if you don't get the storyline. Also, there's a lesbian couple, but since this IS a surrealistic world...)

Terraoblivion

2015-01-25, 10:56 PM

They only end up falling into a stereotype if they're either flat characters or the audience claiming that they do are reductionists. There are lots of characters, male and female, who aren't a stereotype but a complex, fleshed out person in their own right. Sure there are probably aspects that are stereotypical, but reducing them to just those is reductionism rather than just observing what is intrinsic to the character.

Avilan the Grey

2015-01-26, 12:55 AM

There's a common syndrome where physically strong women are portrayed basically as transmen, and while an individual character like that can work, it becomes an issue when it's repeated over and over.

I don't think I have ever seen such a character in anything. I am also very unsure of what you mean with "acting like transmen" because 1. I don't know a stereotypical way "these people" act and 2. even if they "do", why is that a problem? I thought the idea was to get rid of expected gender roles? Thiks whole discussion makes me remember all those gay people who were offended by bi people in the 80s because they "just wouldn't commit to being gay".

As for your second point, this is true on a broader scale:
Just because you are a feminist doesn't mean you can't be a racist.
Just because you're gay doesn't mean you can't be a misogynist.
Just because you're of a minority doesn't mean you can't be intolerant.
Just because you're a transperson doesn't mean you can't be an a-hole.

And so on.

One of the more annoying examples is the realization that the "geek" community these days is large enough that we are no longer underdogs defending ourselves, and therefore are free to be just as much asshats towards one another as any other group in society. For proof see Youtube comments.

Kaptin Keen

2015-01-26, 09:11 AM

Jeff the Green

2015-01-26, 10:14 AM

I don't think I have ever seen such a character in anything.

They exist. They're far less common now than 10-15 years ago, though.

I am also very unsure of what you mean with "acting like transmen" because 1. I don't know a stereotypical way "these people" act and 2. even if they "do", why is that a problem? I thought the idea was to get rid of expected gender roles?

Portrayed as transmen. Basically, the problem is that they're portrayed as though their gender identity were male, as though you couldn't be both strong and aggressive and identify as female.

As for your second point, this is true on a broader scale:
Just because you are a feminist doesn't mean you can't be a racist.
Just because you're gay doesn't mean you can't be a misogynist.
Just because you're of a minority doesn't mean you can't be intolerant.
Just because you're a transperson doesn't mean you can't be an a-hole.

And so on.

One of the more annoying examples is the realization that the "geek" community these days is large enough that we are no longer underdogs defending ourselves, and therefore are free to be just as much asshats towards one another as any other group in society. For proof see Youtube comments.

Well, geeks have always been free to be asshats, just mostly to people lower on the totem pole. One of the nerds rapes a sorority member in Revenge of the Nerds and it's treated as comedy, there's always been a strain of misogyny in geek culture that geek girls have suffered the brunt of, and minority geeks haven't exactly been treated better by their peers than by the culture in general.

(And yeah, racist feminists and misogynist gay men have been pretty significant obstacles—along with transphobic feminists—to developing the coalition of pro-women's rights, pro-gay rights, pro-trans* rights, anti-racist activists that's finally developed in the last decade or so, even though they've all basically been fighting for the same principles for the better part of a century.)

goto124

2015-01-26, 10:23 AM

"Portrayed as transmen. Basically, the problem is that they're portrayed as though their gender identity were male, as though you couldn't be both strong and aggressive and identify as female."

...examples please? How do you tell they don't identify as female?

Frozen_Feet

2015-01-26, 10:27 AM

Basically, to write a female character that wouldn't face objections from feminists, make them actual characters and not just collections of tropes.

In theory, that is. In practice, it is impossible as feminists are internally fractured and often can't agree on what's objectionable or not. Ditto for all other groups of sufficient size. The best you can do is aim for a character who's good enough for the majority of your target audience.

It goes both ways, really. A great character isn't defined by its gender or skin color or anything - a great character is defined by being a great character in and of itself, regardless of any physical characteristics.

I think there's something of a false dichtomy going on in this discussion.

Greatness and being "an actual character" are not opposite to being objectionable. In fact, I'd argue it's the opposite. The greater a character is, the more people will be analyzing them, the more there will be controversy (both real and imagined) surrounding them, and the more vocal both likers and dislikers of the character will be.

Hey, guys, how about this: let's consider everyone ****ing equal. The more you segregate, the more chaos it causes. Yeah, people are different, but people are people and should not be characterized by who they are but rather what they do, taking in consideration the surroundings and history of a person but not using it as an excuse.

Is it that hard?

Yes it is, because the attitude you describe is paradoxical. If people are different, it necessarily follows they can't be exact equals. Defining people by what they do and can do is just as unforgiving as a metric as defining people by who they are, nevermind the fact that what people do and who they are exist in a feedback loop in respect to one another. When I say stuff like "I'm a construction worker", that's a statement of both what I do, and who I am.

This is also why certain debates go on and on. If sexism and anti-sexism were just about what kind of pluming one has, we'd have move past that discussion long ago. It's the insistence that men, as a group, are doing something to women, as a group, keeping it alive.

Ibrinar

2015-01-26, 10:47 AM

Portrayed as transmen. Basically, the problem is that they're portrayed as though their gender identity were male, as though you couldn't be both strong and aggressive and identify as female.

That kinda implies that woman can't act that way without being transmen. I know what you mean, female characters where being tough mean they have to dislike anything associated with femininity and have to be into things associated with masculinity (while being quite macho). But I strongly disagree with the way you are phrasing it.

Surrealistik

2015-01-26, 12:55 PM

Ultimately, dealing/interacting with this movement has been exceedingly frustrating for me given both the considerable level of fragmentation and outright contradiction of its opinions and the sheer vitriol and caustic indignation associated with them; this ongoing back and forth about what is and is not acceptable to feminists is an example of that. I share in much of Avilan's exasperation for many of the same reasons: I'm just sick and tired of the apparent no-win paradoxes, the seemingly endless swath of eggshells to be avoided and minutiae to be considered; interacting on the subject and with people heavily invested in it often feels like treading over a sociological minefield.

In the end, I found that the opportunity cost in time, effort, and resources of advocating on its behalf is just not worth it compared to, in my view, significantly more worthy causes like combating economic disparity, wealth and income inequality and closely related plutocratization/democratic corrosion that materially and directly impacts far more people to a far greater and increasing extent.

Psyren

2015-01-26, 01:31 PM

In the end, I found that the opportunity cost in time, effort, and resources of advocating on its behalf is just not worth it compared to, in my view, significantly more worthy causes like combating economic disparity, wealth and income inequality and closely related plutocratization/democratic corrosion that materially and directly impacts far more people to a far greater and increasing extent.

The problem with this line of thinking is that it's not a compartmentalized vacuum - many of the same social constructs that enable that sort of economic oppression also extend to the sort that occurs across gender and sexuality divides. (Especially since, unfortunately, the same demographic tends to be on the top rung across all of these categories.) By saying "I'll ignore this one and focus on that one" you run the risk of treating only surface issues or symptoms and not the underlying root factors.

I can get that it's frustrating especially when some of the folks you are trying to defend seem at times overly defensive or sensitive. But keep in mind also that most of the genuine proponents of equality understand that it is a journey/learning process for their allies too. Generally if you find someone who is overreacting to such a degree that they even turn off potential allies, chances are they are a troll who is attempting to undermine the discussion from within while nominally claiming to be a member of or identify with the marginalized group even as they make things worse for it/themselves.

But we're drifting into politics I think so I won't say much more than that.

Avilan the Grey

2015-01-26, 01:43 PM

Jeff the Green

2015-01-26, 02:02 PM

Speaking about something else related to the OP's question:
I find it kind of weird how clueless (most) people are about what the opposite sex find attractive.

I know a lot of men shake their heads at say Anime prettyboys or whatnot (including me) but at the same time I have had many conversations with women who straight up ask me how "so and so" could be voted sexiest woman of the year, they are so UGLY (like almost no women I talked to in the late 90's could understand how ANY straight men could find Elizabeth Hurley attractive, at all).

I suspect part of this is due to the fact that there is a mismatch between what's coded 'attractive' by culture and what people actually find sexy—Billie Piper doesn't really check all the boxes for being conventionally attractive, for example, but she's very good at acting sexy, which is equally important. Unless you actually have that sexual attraction it can be hard to pick up on the sexiness and you have to go by the attractiveness, which isn't always a good heuristic.

Surrealistik

2015-01-26, 06:17 PM

The problem with this line of thinking is that it's not a compartmentalized vacuum - many of the same social constructs that enable that sort of economic oppression also extend to the sort that occurs across gender and sexuality divides. (Especially since, unfortunately, the same demographic tends to be on the top rung across all of these categories.) By saying "I'll ignore this one and focus on that one" you run the risk of treating only surface issues or symptoms and not the underlying root factors.

I definitely think there's value in picking your fights and points of focus by way of triage. After all, it is true that some causes are more worthy than others, and that investing in a given cause has a definite opportunity cost which means fewer resources to deploy elsewhere. That said, I don't think one can meaningfully argue against the idea of applying said limited resources in a way that yields the greatest societal benefit. While there's certainly a subjective element to this, it would also be hard to argue I feel, at this point in time, that gender inequality can be accorded with the same severity and averse societal impact as economic inequality. Further, while there tends to be a commonality between these two issues in terms of the offending demographic as well as other interplays/associations, and they have the same root cause (exercise of myopic/anti-social self-interest by entrenched power), I do not believe that ignoring the former consigns one to risk dealing with the latter superficially or in terms of symptoms/surface problems.

To the extent this might be accurate, I can perhaps see it so far as the fight against economic inequality is largely concerned with remedial tax and economic policy, public education on their value and the fallacy of persistent myths like 'Trickle Down Economics' (Supply-side), and mostly abandons the idea of affecting underlying sociological factors (empathy deficits and short term perspectives among the economic elite) that are its true root causes. Ultimately however, employing democratic institutions to directly tackle the issue through fiscal and monetary policy, and educating constituents as to why those policies are in their best interest is probably more efficient at begetting material results that improve people's well-being than lobbying the wealthy to 'play nice' and abandon their current modes of thought, so I can't fault that approach for allocating resources in such a way.

Eldan

2015-01-26, 06:45 PM

Closet_Skeleton

2015-01-26, 06:57 PM

Well, this thread went off topic.

Just had to google her, but... she doesn't look attractive at all? Maybe she looked better when she was younger.

She's attractive in the first Austin Powers film. I don't find her attractive in most paparazzi shots but that's because she just looks like any American model at a publicity event smiling at no one.

Is there any kind of female character, at all, that is "acceptable"?

While I appreciate your frustration this is pretty much a strawman here. I knew someone who had to deal with such a person in real life and I don't think she was even that bad, just confused and over-enthusiastic.

I get annoyed when people complain about characters being 'men with tits' but that's more because I don't understand what it means (apart from the simple anatomical reading which does exist in lots of European painting) than the fact that there are also people who get angry when you do the opposite.

The reaction they are designed to provoke is the issue, not that they provoke them. :)

Intentions don't offend people, readings do.

Are you saying that a male character being designed for men to feel good about themselves, not for women to lust after, does not mean that it is focused at men? Do you believe some women are supposed to feel like they identify with this male character?

Just because its not intended doesn't mean women can't.

But mostly I feel like this is a problem caused by talking about video games (and non-Hidden Object ones I suppose). There's no dispute that there are male characters in Yaoi and Boys Love that are designed for women to identify with them. There are probably female characters in Yuri (which is mostly aimed at men, unlike Girls Love which is less so) who are intended to be identified with by men too.

Though Gay male creators have been hiding objectified characters as self-inserts for straight male audiences for about as long as people have been writing. The intent of the marketing department is not always that of the cinematographer.

I have no idea were you get that we are supposed to hate Booker. A great many people like him despite his flaws, for some it is because he is trying to do better. Some people like him in part *because* of his flaws. And I think the "white guilt fantasy" is wrong because Booker has an indian heritage and even speaks Sioux. Opps. The one you are supposed to hate is Comstock, not Booker.

Comstock is Booker. That's the ending remember? Being part Indian didn't stop him murdering them for their land, it only makes it worse. Guilt is Booker's defining trait.. That and having to murder hundreds through bad mechanics. Protecting Elizabeth would be another but that's all guilt motivated as well.

Psyren

2015-01-26, 06:59 PM

I never saw the obsession with Billie Piper. Then again my tastes are pretty strange. (My favorite/most lusted-after companion is not even one of the main ones.)

@ Surrealistik: To this I'll just say the important thing is that you fight for something you're passionate about. If income/economic inequality is that thing for you, then I am in your corner, and if adding in causes you're less passionate about would dilute that effort, by all means skip them and laser-focus on what gets you revved up.

Just because its not intended doesn't mean women can't.

The problem isn't that women universally can't though (since, as you noted, some portion of the audience can do so.) The problem is that the creator does not particularly care whether the female audience gets anything out of it, but he absolutely cares if the guys don't and will edit the work if the latter ends up being the case.

goto124

2015-01-26, 08:39 PM

(attempts to talk about Magical Girl Warrior shows, but fails the Knowledge (Anime) check, and leaves it to other people)

MLai

2015-01-27, 06:33 AM

and like Korrasami, on both aesthetic and political grounds. :smalltongue:
The Korrasami romance was in one word, Terrible.

Not because I have some stringent objection to same-sex relationships. It's the fact that the said relationship works as ship tease only, and functions terribly as a valid romance as written.

Why? Because obviously the writers had to tiptoe around the 2 characters lest Nick noticed what they were writing and came down on them with the hammer. So, do you think you'd get a good romance story out of writers tiptoeing around and very obliquely hinting at a possible relationship up until the very last minute of the series? Of course not. And that's why it sucked when viewed objectively on its cinematic merits. If you're not into the shipping subculture, you would have felt nothing as a viewer.

Of course, it was during one of these test phases that my sister happened to come in, and mock me mercilessly for listening to She-Ra. Because it was a girl's cartoon, not a manly boy's cartoon like He-Man. There was a deep sense of shame at having been "caught" listening to a girly show, even though I was only listening to it as part of the "manly" activity of electronics repair....
F that. If you're a true fan of He-man, you watched She-Ra. Because sometimes The Man drops by his sister's planet, and we can't miss that just because his sister's lame.
(That's what you can say, but your true reasons can be anything.)

Psyren

2015-01-27, 11:57 AM

The Korrasami romance was in one word, Terrible.

Not because I have some stringent objection to same-sex relationships. It's the fact that the said relationship works as ship tease only, and functions terribly as a valid romance as written.

Why? Because obviously the writers had to tiptoe around the 2 characters lest Nick noticed what they were writing and came down on them with the hammer. So, do you think you'd get a good romance story out of writers tiptoeing around and very obliquely hinting at a possible relationship up until the very last minute of the series? Of course not. And that's why it sucked when viewed objectively on its cinematic merits. If you're not into the shipping subculture, you would have felt nothing as a viewer.

You can really only speak for what you felt or didn't feel about this. Judging by the comments when the story broke, plenty of people felt emotional impact from this and I doubt all of them are "into the shipping subculture."

huttj509

2015-01-27, 12:35 PM

You can really only speak for what you felt or didn't feel about this. Judging by the comments when the story broke, plenty of people felt emotional impact from this and I doubt all of them are "into the shipping subculture."

I for one found it a more believable and realistic relationship than 95% of the "You're hot, let's kiss" I see on TV. It felt like it developed naturally out of a strong friendship.

BeerMug Paladin

2015-01-27, 05:01 PM

Yeah, I agree with huttj. It's downplayed and subtle, sure. But it made sense to me. Plus there's the whole thing about the hero getting the girl in the end. Nobody else was really suitable for that role!

Jeff the Green

2015-01-27, 05:23 PM

I for one found it a more believable and realistic relationship than 95% of the "You're hot, let's kiss" I see on TV. It felt like it developed naturally out of a strong friendship.

Yeah, I agree with huttj. It's downplayed and subtle, sure. But it made sense to me. Plus there's the whole thing about the hero getting the girl in the end. Nobody else was really suitable for that role!

Yeah, this. I actually had no interaction with the fandom until after I'd binge-watched the entire series a month or two ago, so it'd be pretty hard for me to be into the shipping subculture.

And honestly it's the only pairing that could have worked. It'd already been established that neither Korra nor Asami worked with Mako. Bolin was too happy-go-lucky for either of the two girls who had gone through so much, and none of the supporting cast were remotely suitable. Korra and Asami have worked well together as partners, respect each other's strengths and complement the other's weaknesses, and have been there for each other emotionally when no one else was. As foundations for a romance go, that's a good one.

Shekinah

2015-01-27, 08:36 PM

Who?

Archie from Pokemon Alpha Sapphire.

Also, I thought long and hard about which female character I find attractive and decided on Zelda from Ocarina of Time. She spends seven years evading Ganondorf and training in the fighting/evasion style of a Shiekah. Her disguise is amazingly effective, as I assume she uses magic to alter her appearance for a more masculine build to make sure that doesn't give her away. In the words of Largo from Tales of the Abyss, "Not bad for a princess."

Talakeal

2015-01-28, 03:39 AM

Psyren

2015-01-28, 07:46 AM

So I just happened to see the music video for Katy Perry's Dark Horse (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KSOMA3QBU0). Do you think that if the story it depicts was played straight rather than tongue in cheek it might qualify as a female power fantasy?

You mean this video? :smalltongue:

http://i.imgur.com/317G76p.jpg

But even from a purely power fantasy perspective it's problematic. Yeah it has themes of empowerment and the woman having the right to choose who she wants - which are immediately undermined by the fact that she fries the suitors but always takes their stuff anyway. This reinforces a common stereotype/trope in Hollywood that women are conniving or greedy, and will "take" the goods a man offers her without giving anything in return, when the reality is that the man almost never communicates the stipulation that there is an expectation or string attached to the gift in question. If one truly expects something in return for a gift he should be up front and say so, and simply accept the real possibility that she may turn down the gift if she knows you're wanting... favors... in return.

Tiki Snakes

2015-01-28, 10:11 AM

You mean this video? :smalltongue:

http://i.imgur.com/317G76p.jpg

But even from a purely power fantasy perspective it's problematic. Yeah it has themes of empowerment and the woman having the right to choose who she wants - which are immediately undermined by the fact that she fries the suitors but always takes their stuff anyway. This reinforces a common stereotype/trope in Hollywood that women are conniving or greedy, and will "take" the goods a man offers her without giving anything in return, when the reality is that the man almost never communicates the stipulation that there is an expectation or string attached to the gift in question. If one truly expects something in return for a gift he should be up front and say so, and simply accept the real possibility that she may turn down the gift if she knows you're wanting... favors... in return.
Just wanted to say, because this amused me;
I always assumed the stipulation of "and don't kill me" went without saying. But perhaps your advice is worth considering. :smallwink:

Talakeal

2015-01-28, 01:52 PM

You mean this video? :smalltongue:

http://i.imgur.com/317G76p.jpg

But even from a purely power fantasy perspective it's problematic. Yeah it has themes of empowerment and the woman having the right to choose who she wants - which are immediately undermined by the fact that she fries the suitors but always takes their stuff anyway. This reinforces a common stereotype/trope in Hollywood that women are conniving or greedy, and will "take" the goods a man offers her without giving anything in return, when the reality is that the man almost never communicates the stipulation that there is an expectation or string attached to the gift in question. If one truly expects something in return for a gift he should be up front and say so, and simply accept the real possibility that she may turn down the gift if she knows you're wanting... favors... in return.

I am not sure how being stereotypical or unethical makes it less of a power fantasy. The vast majority of so called male power fantasies involve lots of mindless violence, which is both a stereotypical male trait and an unethical one.

Psyren

2015-01-28, 03:33 PM

I am not sure how being stereotypical or unethical makes it less of a power fantasy. The vast majority of so called male power fantasies involve lots of mindless violence, which is both a stereotypical male trait and an unethical one.

Yeah, but the power fantasy in those cases is reinforced by the stereotypes being perceived as positive. The capacity for violence is seen as desirable in our culture - it is almost always a requirement for most action-based video game, comic book or movie protagonists for example, whether they start the work with said capacity or acquire it over time. It's also typically directed at the deserving - the protagonist is usually defending himself or someone else from an attack when he employs this violence, rather than being the aggressor himself as we see Katy doing in the video.

Greed on the other hand is not, so whatever appeal the video's power fantasy might have ("It would be cool if I could do magic like DH Katy!") is undermined by what she does with that power. ("I can... fry men peacefully bringing me gifts for no reason?")

And yet, the video does not present Katy's character as being somehow uncharacteristically vicious or emotionally unstable despite the extreme actions she takes. She is well-loved by her subjects, has many suitors despite what should surely be a very good reason to avoid her, goes out to have fun etc. The frying suitors thing is portrayed as just part of the routine. Hence, the video is tacitly saying "Hey, this is a risk you take when courting a beautiful woman, she might (metaphorically) vaporize you - break your heart, in other words - and take whatever you offered her without recompense. Better get used to it."

Which is not to say I don't like the song - I do - but there's just as much there to not want to aspire to as there is.

goto124

2015-01-28, 09:19 PM

It is an unusual and often not seen example of a gender-inverted male power fantasy :P

I get your point though.

the OOD

2015-01-28, 10:39 PM

bisexual dude, so not a sample from the requested demographic, but still.
how has no one mentioned FMA? is a jackpot for eyecandy!
Edward Elric: because abs...:smallredface:
Roy Mustang, especially during the scene where he |kills Lust|
that said, the author defaults to making women look curvy, and men ab-alicious and ripped, so if it's not to your taste, not much variety.:smallfrown:

goto124

2015-01-29, 12:20 AM

I googled those guys. Didn't get much in the way of abs, and they look sorta Bishounen to me. I guess they're manly by Japanese standards or something?

I like the mix of masculine and feminine though. They don't have the over-the-top bodybuilder shape, and it's great. Google search seems to disagree with the 'curvy women and abs men' thing, but since you actually watch FMA I would gladly defer to you.

Terraoblivion

2015-01-29, 12:54 AM

The artist definitely thinks it's what she's making at least. She talks about it a lot. I can also definitely confirm that the women are curvy, it's just often hidden under greatcoats and the like but there is a picture of Riza topless from behind and, yeah, she's really curvy. And generally hot, though her personality helps with that too.

And, of course, there is Major Armstrong. He's about as muscley as you're going to find anywhere.

BeerMug Paladin

2015-01-29, 12:57 AM

Try googling Major Armstrong or Sig Curtis. And Riza Hawkeye and Lt. Ross. I thought the cast of FMA was actually pretty diverse in visual appearance. Apart from maybe pretty much everyone being physically fit in general.

Also, I was under the impression the original poster was looking for videogame characters, which would explain why FMA did not come up.

the OOD

2015-01-29, 02:06 AM

there is a picture of Riza topless from behind and, yeah, she's really curvy. And generally hot, though her personality helps withis the best part of that too.

And, of course, there is Major Armstrong. He's about as muscley as you're going to find anywhere.
yes, yes, and yes.:smallredface:
I find armstrong to be kinda excessively muscular. there is a line between athletic/ripped(hot) and absurd(less hot)for me anyways

I was under the impression the original poster was looking for videogame characters, which would explain why FMA did not come up.

huh, so it would seem. I'll stop derailing now.

goto124

2015-01-29, 02:11 AM

Are there special differences in sexiness between video game characters, and... characters from other media? And what happens when movie characters get tuned into video game ones, and vice versa?

Psyren

2015-01-29, 10:11 AM

yes, yes, and yes.:smallredface:
I find armstrong to be kinda excessively muscular. there is a line between athletic/ripped(hot) and absurd(less hot)for me anyways

See, I'm definitely more attracted to Armstrong/Sig than anyone else in the cast myself.

Are there special differences in sexiness between video game characters, and... characters from other media? And what happens when movie characters get tuned into video game ones, and vice versa?

The main difference between games and other media is interactivity, which has all kinds of implications Being able to influence or even directly control characters adds a dimension of emotional attachment - and possibly, eroticism (no, not necessarily like that) - that other media don't have access to.

wobner

2015-01-29, 02:14 PM

Having read the whole thread, I am certain i am rather out of my league participating in this discussion, so i'll apologize from the start, but i have a question that perhaps might bring it slightly back to the original topic.

Skyrim is a heavily modified and played game. there are a number of female players as well as a number of very talented female modders. Before i start, the points below are not meant to alienate any sexual orientation, i'm just pointing out what has been done, hopefully the questions at the bottom illustrate this, but please do not misconstrue. with that in mind...

There is a vast array of female body replacers and slight tweaks to them, there are a scant few(last time i looked, only one) male body replacers.

There are many beautification mods for the women of skyrim(face tweaks), there are not many for men.

There are numerous armor and clothing options for females(including highheels which i understand were a very difficult problem, ultimately cracked by a woman). there are only a few clothing and armor options for men, and they mostly consist of a single outfit for a given character of another franchise.

Physics have been applied to the female body, the same physics, to my knowledge, have never been applied to men.

I am confused as to what conclusion to draw, if any is appropriate. there is no reason the same variety being applied to female characters couldn't also be applied to male characters. The talent to make such variety is obviously there, whether it comes from men or women.

As the point of the thread was female oppinions on game characters, i ask, assuming any female skyrim gamers are lurking about or anyone wants to take a look at the various game play videos. are you happy with how the males look, or ambivilent? Are you happy with the stock female bodies? if not, are you happy with the choices provided in body replacers for women? are you ambivilent? are you happy with the male clothing choices? the male facial appearances? are you happy with the female clothing choices? facial appearances? is this ultimately irrelevant to your enjoyment of the game, you would never find anything in it "attractive"?

if the question is "what characters do you find attractive", and you are a presented with a game you can mod to your hearts content, I can draw only one of two conclusions, that women are happy with the choices offered, or just don't care. assuming you are happy with the choices, and not ambivilent, what are the options you find most appealing? what options would you like to see?

Terraoblivion

2015-01-29, 02:44 PM

Apart from the fact that people are more likely to try to make women provide fanservice, video games that don't sculpt each character individually tends to use a male base for everything which often makes female models uglier and more unnatural than the main ones. For all the good people say about her, the movement of female Shepard in Mass Effect 2, and possibly the other two as well, were based on the movements of a burly man. It looked kinda ridiculous, especially when in the dress for that one DLC. I can't off-hand remember if this is the case in Skyrim as well, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did, especially given how character modeling and animation hasn't exactly been a priority for the Elder Scrolls series.

Psyren

2015-01-29, 03:10 PM

Avilan the Grey

2015-01-29, 03:22 PM

The Ladette is a real thing, though. And I love the fact that Shepard is one.

Terraoblivion

2015-01-29, 09:05 PM

She still shouldn't walk like that. Like, her hips shouldn't have the shape to do it. It's not about confidence or being hard drinking or whatever, it's about the movements being physically inaccurate for what would be a natural or comfortable walk for her. Most men would also find it uncomfortable as well, not to mention culturally wrong.

You only hold your arms out like that if you're either very fat or very muscular too, it's entirely unnecessary effort to stick them out from your sides like that otherwise.

SiuiS

2015-01-30, 03:34 AM

No, I think I get what you're saying now. It does raise an interesting question regarding what differences would crop up in the design process 'f it was done with active effort to look at it from a male/female perspective. The designs I've worked on have been as part of multigendered groups, so it may not be all too different in either direction, but now I wanna see that.

Thanks for clarifying.

Likely, something worse, unfortunately. It selects for people who will tiptoe or be too enthusiastic about their personal vision.

This is why a lot of comments are "just make the character, man". Because if the design process doesn't pick male on purpose for reasons, that comes across even if everything they do is subtly male coded. (I say subtly because if the main character is applying male polish and yelling "bro" and "sweet", that's... Yeah.)

I am (as a man, and as a person) confused with the restrictions on women and female characters.

A beautiful woman is a male fantasy.
An ugly woman is well... deliberately ugly to belittle women.
A (physically) strong woman is masculine and therefore yet another way to force male ideals on women.
A butch lesbian even more so.
A LIPSTICK lesbian is a male porno fantasy.
An intelligent woman just shows that women aren't good at sports.

...and so on.

Is there any kind of female character, at all, that is "acceptable"?

You take that back! I refuse to let you have lipstick lesbians all to yourselves! :smallfurious:
I want some :smallfrown:

:tongue:

Anyway. The point here is simple; "if you try to please everypony, you end up pleasing Nopony". To which most people groan and say "then what is the damn problem?!" And the answer is, y'all always pick the exact same some people to please every time. For example; only #1 and #5 actually matter in this thread. The group, "feminists", would care about those. Other groups would care about other examples. But lumping every demographic together by 'disagrees' is bad sampling.

(Emphasis mine)
But this is the point, it is impossible. Always, there is at least a few that will argue that whatever the circumstances it is always something wrong with the character. ANY character.
My only possible conclusion is that for that/those individual(s) only a female character that is EXACTLY like they are, is acceptable. It's the same with the amount of skin a woman can show without being objectified. The woman doing the commenting is always equaling themselves as the ideal, and every woman dressed more conservatively than her or her group is always oppressed, and every woman dressing more provocatively than her or her group is always objectified.

Mm, no. It feels this way, but only because you're equating all non-agreements. There are however, steps that can be taken that will please everyone on the level being discussed. You have to parse them, but someone being upset a character isn't a redhead is not a valid member to add to the "upset that women are poorly portrayed" camp.

[qute]
As for your first point though, I call horsehockey, because it an obvious double standard. A male character showing "feminine" traits is good. A female character showing "masculine" traits is bad according to this.[/quote]

Disagree. A male character with feminine traits just to have them is bad writing.

Basically that is intolerance and sexism and again, a very narrow minded attitude towards gender roles.

Anyway, I am sorry for sidetracking this and will now shut up about it.

Aye, your example does illustrate that. Its the danger of treating all subgroups in a venndiagram as equally valid on all topics under that venndiagram.

I have a product manager and a Hr manager. I don't consider them equally worth listening to on matters of stock and sales. Same here.

You said that women "adopting other masculine traits" is a problem.
First of all, they might not actually be "adopted" but who she really is, and secon I am not sure why those traits are "troublesome" anyway.

Indeed. The problem is assuming those traits are masculine.

A second problem, which might be difficult for you (non-native English, yes?) is that sometimes, we will establish that we know something, and then speak as if we did not know or in a way that contradicts ourselves as shorthand. I'm sure Jeff the Green knows the issues involved with coding mannerisms at all, the costs and benefits and different ways of looking at where to draw the line. I'm sure Jeff the green does not actually believe certain traits are or should be considered masculine traits.

But I'm also sure Jeff the green expects that you understand which traits he means when he says "masculine traits", and so it's easier to say masculine traits than traits typically coded as masculine In Western media and society that women are expected to refrain from but which are not traits endemic to the male sex or even universally to the male gender, every time.

So you get confusing things like this, where it looks like he contradicts himself. It's very frustrating sometimes, and is why everyone being interested in divining the truth instead of stating the truth is a good way to set up such discussion. It gives a certain freedom to relax and back away when needed.

sexually active but not objectified

Huh? These aren't opposites. Being sexually active and being sexually objectified are two very different things that don't even have to overlap.

To me, it seems, the more "hardcore" feminists have painted themselves into a corner where nothing is good enough, because nothing CAN be good enough.

Which ones? First wave? Second? Third wave? TERF?

Saying "feminists have painted themselves into a corner" is akin to saying "Caucasians have voted Obama best president". Thousands of them who live nowhere near the U.S. Are included just because.

Hey, guys, how about this: let's consider everyone ****ing equal. The more you segregate, the more chaos it causes. Yeah, people are different, but people are people and should not be characterized by who they are but rather what they do, taking in consideration the surroundings and history of a person but not using it as an excuse.

Is it that hard?

Yes. Especially when one considers that statements about treating others equal is used to shut down discussion on how to do so. ;)

When a character is an woman, or black, or has some other characteristic that 'puts' them in some 'oppressed minority' (women do not make a minority, but the point is there), we expect that character to be potrayed in a non-discrimatory way, and we end up setting impossibly high standards for that person. Every way of potraying them ends up following some sort of sterotype, leading to the above quote. We're overcompensating for prejudice, in a sense.

This is not true. It's perfectly possible to have archetypal characters who are not stereotypes. It's a matter of depth and believability though.

I don't think I have ever seen such a character in anything. I am also very unsure of what you mean with "acting like transmen" because 1. I don't know a stereotypical way "these people" act and 2. even if they "do", why is that a problem? I thought the idea was to get rid of expected gender roles? Thiks whole discussion makes me remember all those gay people who were offended by bi people in the 80s because they "just wouldn't commit to being gay".

The problem is saying that any woman who is strong is really just trying to be a man. This is an issue of presentation, because it can be done without doing this. Ergo, when it is not done without doing this, that's a failure of nuance. It's choosing to make that correlation.

And those people still exist.

As for your second point, this is true on a broader scale:
Just because you are a feminist doesn't mean you can't be a racist.
Just because you're gay doesn't mean you can't be a misogynist.
Just because you're of a minority doesn't mean you can't be intolerant.
Just because you're a transperson doesn't mean you can't be an a-hole.

And so on.

"Portrayed as transmen. Basically, the problem is that they're portrayed as though their gender identity were male, as though you couldn't be both strong and aggressive and identify as female."

...examples please? How do you tell they don't identify as female?

It's not about how the character identifies, but how the audience identifies them and perceives the writer as intending them to be identified.

Although I agree, the whole transman statement was weirdly phrased and did not convey what it was intended to, I don't believe.

Speaking about something else related to the OP's question:
I find it kind of weird how clueless (most) people are about what the opposite sex find attractive.

I know a lot of men shake their heads at say Anime prettyboys or whatnot (including me) but at the same time I have had many conversations with women who straight up ask me how "so and so" could be voted sexiest woman of the year, they are so UGLY (like almost no women I talked to in the late 90's could understand how ANY straight men could find Elizabeth Hurley attractive, at all).

Hmm. All I can see are her breasts. Her facial structure is firmly in my "tend not to like" category, I would have to see her in motion.

I feel this way about most attractive women in Media though. They're all blond white chicks with dark eyebrows, no musculature and a look of malnourishment. :-/

Why? Because obviously the writers had to tiptoe around the 2 characters lest Nick noticed what they were writing and came down on them with the hammer. So, do you think you'd get a good romance story out of writers tiptoeing around and very obliquely hinting at a possible relationship up until the very last minute of the series? Of course not. And that's why it sucked when viewed objectively on its cinematic merits. If you're not into the shipping subculture, you would have felt nothing as a viewer.

Actually, yes. I've seen this done well in a short story or two. Not everything needs to be overt.

thorgrim29

2015-01-30, 09:14 AM

Terraoblivion

2015-01-30, 10:51 AM

It was about characters male and female that women find attractive. It also seemed to attract more lesbians than straight women.

In terms of games and franchises that does it right. Modern Final Fantasy is actually quite good about it. Persona has some weird, occasional hang-ups but is generally good. Anything by Christine Love or Hanako Games is good, but those are small developers who are explicitly feminist and LGBT oriented so that's unsurprising. Bioware has gotten generally pretty good. Lots of games, far too many to list, do nothing particularly bad and while they could be better they could also be a lot worse. Also, despite general cultural mores over there, I think Japanese developers are generally better about this than western ones.

Kaptin Keen

2015-01-31, 08:53 AM

This entire discussion is completely messed up. Chasing after mostly imaginary monsters, everyone has lost sight of the objective: Equality.

And everyone agrees on that part, right? There are no advocates of inequality among the genders.

I stumbled on a quote on facebook today that - to me - sums up the entire discussion very well. "A well tailored suit is to men, what lingerie is to women."

There is ample material for accusations of sexism in that. But only if you don't get it. If you get it, the truth is very very simple: Female attraction is not the same as male attraction. Female attractiveness is not the same as male attractiveness.

But men are objectified, sexualised, exactly as much as women are. Just differently. We are stereotyped exactly as much as women are.

That's not to say that there are no problems. The famous Bechdel test serves to show that. Not that I'm sure exactly how much of a problem that is - but it's certainly there. Why are stories about men? Most likely because they are often written by men, or targeted by men, or some such.

goto124

2015-01-31, 09:25 AM

Why are stories about men? Most likely because they are often written by men, or targeted by men, or some such.

And why? Why are developers male? Why do developers target their products at men? Assuming this is true?

Terraoblivion

2015-01-31, 10:01 AM

The same can be extended to other media as well. Why are scriptwriters and directors in Hollywood men and the assumed audience male? Why are comic books writers and artists men writing for a presumed male audience?

{scrubbed}

Kaptin Keen

2015-01-31, 08:29 PM

And why? Why are developers male? Why do developers target their products at men? Assuming this is true?

Why are nurses women? Why are soldiers men? Why does the rain fall?

{scrubbed}

The same can be extended to other media as well. Why are scriptwriters and directors in Hollywood men and the assumed audience male? Why are comic books writers and artists men writing for a presumed male audience?

Also, just because people state an ideal of equality doesn't mean it is the case. There are lots of commonly shared ideals that nonetheless aren't fulfilled. I doubt you can find many people who thinks that starvation, illiteracy or civil war are good things, yet the world is full of starvation, illiteracy and civil wars. Everybody also agrees that well-maintained infrastructure is a good thing, yet rail signals that haven't been changed since the 70s, potholes in roads and erosion of bridges are real problems that exist. And that's not even going into how there are large segments who don't believe in equality. {scrubbed}

{scrubbed}

Ibrinar

2015-01-31, 10:37 PM

Why are nurses women? Why are soldiers men? Why does the rain fall?

You know normally that format is supposed to imply that the questions share an answer (or alternatively that the writer doesn't know the answer to any of the questions). But I have trouble figuring out the complex social forces that make it rain. :P

Honestly, if I didn't entirely misunderstand the point you are trying to make in regard to gender distribution in different work fields then you are displaying a lack of knowledge in regard to the topic.
One thing to consider for instance is that the gender distribution in various fields changes over time. (And differ between countries.) Man are a minority for nurses, making up only 9.6 percent (http://blogs.census.gov/2013/02/25/men-in-nursing-occupations/) of Registered Nurses (though 41% of Nurse anesthetists) but considering that there were 2.7% four decades earlier that is a significant shift.
As for game developers, the percentage of woman has apparently doubled since 2009 (http://www.gamespot.com/articles/percentage-of-female-developers-has-more-than-doubled-since-2009/1100-6420680/) according to an IGDA survey. From 11.5% to 22%.
The number of female cops has grown significantly as well over time. And writing books was once quite rare for woman.
For a long time you could also have asked "why are men politicans" and yet today there are much more woman in the government. Even the USA manages 20% (http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm) or so while Sweden has about 45%.

Point is the gender distribution in different fields has changed significantly over time. It does that because there are underlying reasons for the distributions and the reasons are changeable enough that the distributions change significantly over a few decades.

Equating a question about those reasons to "Why does the rain fall?", is simply silly.

NeoVid

2015-02-01, 02:21 AM

(not quite on topic: any mmorpgs that lets your male char go shirtless? there's got to be a barbarian somewhere)

The Secret World has a very popular bare chest cosmetic option in the cash shop. Also, there was the legendary Gender Equality outfit set:

Female version (http://i.imgur.com/8jDgzz6.jpg)

Male version (http://i.imgur.com/OqpvGMA.png)

The Gender Equality outfits were only active in game during the April Fool's weekend last year, sadly. Many of the guys I raid with were complaining about having their mankinis taken away for weeks afterward...

SiuiS

2015-02-01, 02:57 AM

I realize that the original topic was about men in games that woman find attractive, but since it evolved (devolved?) into a discussion of female characters in games I have a question that may have been asked before, and I'm sorry if it has but I don't want to reread the whole 7 pages.

It wasn't about men. It was about characters in general; the assumption that women like men is statistically accurate for the world at large but not for this forum and not for activist-style groups.

What female characters in games and, by extension, what games or franchises, do you girls think do it right? I think the most recent Tomb Raider game is a good example, but I know it got a lot of feminist critiques when it came out. I have a feeling a lot of that comes from people who haven't actually played the game but I may be wrong. Also, Cassandra and Josephine from Dragon Age Inquisition.

Oddly, Bioshock infinite.

This entire discussion is completely messed up. Chasing after mostly imaginary monsters, everyone has lost sight of the objective: Equality.

And everyone agrees on that part, right? There are no advocates of inequality among the genders.

Incorrect. There are many people who oppose gender equality. There are many people who hide behind a 'separate but equal' mentality. There are many people who outright want to be the superior sex and will fight and denigrate others to achieve that.

We are having this conversation because when men relax and stop thinking about this stuff, nothing changes for them. When women relax and stop thinking about this stuff, they're shooed into the kitchen. We are having this conversation because this is the third time someone has said "stop fighting for stuff and just be equal" as a way of saying "shut up".

I stumbled on a quote on facebook today that - to me - sums up the entire discussion very well. "A well tailored suit is to men, what lingerie is to women."

Really hot when on the 'wrong' gender? :smalltongue:

But men are objectified, sexualised, exactly as much as women are. Just differently. We are stereotyped exactly as much as women are.

Incorrect. The specialization of men is not institutionalized.

Why are nurses women?

Flawed premise. Men are nurses quote frequently, although they face additional barriers to success because people try to push them into more "appropriate" jobs.

Why are soldiers men?

Because they won't let us be soldiers. Because they will pressure us to pick a "more appropriate" path. Because they will tell us dirt and fighting and aggression aren't appropriate to our sex and we diminish ourselves by trying to do a man's work.

Why does the rain fall?

Physics.

You aren't trying to say that rainfall and sexism are equally inscrutable are you? Because that's several wrong things, naturalistic fallacy amongst them. And the fact that neither is in any way inscrutable.

Kaptin Keen

2015-02-01, 03:14 AM

Incorrect. There are many people who oppose gender equality.

Who? Give me a single, concrete, example.

goto124

2015-02-01, 04:16 AM

The Secret World has a very popular bare chest cosmetic option in the cash shop. Also, there was the legendary Gender Equality outfit set:

Female version (http://i.imgur.com/8jDgzz6.jpg)

Male version (http://i.imgur.com/OqpvGMA.png)

The Gender Equality outfits were only active in game during the April Fool's weekend last year, sadly. Many of the guys I raid with were complaining about having their mankinis taken away for weeks afterward...

I thought Gender Equality would have both females and males in equally concealing outfits.

Or equally revealing outfits.

The mankinis are hilarous though.

SiuiS

2015-02-01, 04:51 AM

{scrubbed}

It is impolite to ask another playgrounder to break the rules or forfeit discussion.

Seeing as this is now personal to some folks, and requires verboten topics, I'll be on my way. Have a pleasant morning!

Douglas

2015-02-01, 05:01 AM

Also, there was the legendary Gender Equality outfit set:

Female version (http://i.imgur.com/8jDgzz6.jpg)
Ok, seems reasonable, and I guess giving females a completely non-revealing outfit is a bit of gender equality. What makes this legendary, though?

Male version (http://i.imgur.com/OqpvGMA.png)
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!:amused::amused::amused:

I'm still chuckling about that several minutes after clicking the link, dear god it's hilarious. I take it back, "Legendary" is perfect.

The Gender Equality outfits were only active in game during the April Fool's weekend last year, sadly. Many of the guys I raid with were complaining about having their mankinis taken away for weeks afterward...
It really should have been made a permanently available option for people who liked it.:smallamused:

Kaptin Keen

2015-02-01, 05:08 AM

{scrubbed}

Avilan the Grey

2015-02-01, 06:04 AM

{scrubbed}

It is clearly against the rules since it would move the discussion into forbidden areas such as IRL politics.

Morph Bark

2015-02-01, 08:23 AM

And why? Why are developers male? Why do developers target their products at men? Assuming this is true?

I can't offer much in the way of reasons, but I can offer some numbers. It is a bit of a tangent to the main topic here, though.

I study game design and production, and the school also has studies for game programmers and visual artists. In Design, the amount of girls is about 2 per class of 31, coming to about 6%. Programmers? Only 3 females in the entire school. Artists are 50-50. Out of these, a plurality of the artists have even professed that they don't like games, they just like making art for them.

We had a teacher from Australia up until a few months ago, who told us she had been in the industry since the 80s (when almost everyone was both programmer and designer) and that the percentages of women were closer to (but still far off from) being equal than is the case today. On these, I don't have the exact numbers readily available atm.

Maryring

2015-02-01, 08:30 AM

Who? Give me a single, concrete, example.

(...) Since you're Danish, Kaptin Keen I can use the example of Ole Birk Olesen saying that he believes women shouldn't be allowed in positions of power because they have no honor or morals. The Quiverfull movement, complementarians, various other fundamentalist groups, various fascist groups and likely several other groups all explicitly oppose gender equality.

You have already been given your single, concrete example. But yeah, this is skirting the line, so further elaboration will have to be taken elsewhere.

Also yes, suits look *really* nice on girls.

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/tekken/images/9/9a/180px-Leo_-_White---th.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width/104?cb=20110805202029&path-prefix=en

Vitruviansquid

2015-02-01, 09:15 AM

Ibrinar

2015-02-01, 10:24 AM

Psyren

2015-02-01, 12:32 PM

It is impolite to ask another playgrounder to break the rules or forfeit discussion.

It is clearly against the rules since it would move the discussion into forbidden areas such as IRL politics.

You have already been given your single, concrete example. But yeah, this is skirting the line, so further elaboration will have to be taken elsewhere.

Just wanted to extend a heartfelt kudos to the three of you specifically. *applauds*

I can't offer much in the way of reasons, but I can offer some numbers. It is a bit of a tangent to the main topic here, though.

I study game design and production, and the school also has studies for game programmers and visual artists. In Design, the amount of girls is about 2 per class of 31, coming to about 6%. Programmers? Only 3 females in the entire school. Artists are 50-50. Out of these, a plurality of the artists have even professed that they don't like games, they just like making art for them.

We had a teacher from Australia up until a few months ago, who told us she had been in the industry since the 80s (when almost everyone was both programmer and designer) and that the percentages of women were closer to (but still far off from) being equal than is the case today. On these, I don't have the exact numbers readily available atm.

This is sadly a serious problem across STEM subjects in general.

I don't know why (and likely, speculating would run into troublesome areas) but I do recall a great Verizon spot (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP3cyRRAfX0) that points out one insidious yet pervasive potential root cause.

Poison_Fish

2015-02-01, 12:36 PM

I can't offer much in the way of reasons, but I can offer some numbers. It is a bit of a tangent to the main topic here, though.

I study game design and production, and the school also has studies for game programmers and visual artists. In Design, the amount of girls is about 2 per class of 31, coming to about 6%. Programmers? Only 3 females in the entire school. Artists are 50-50. Out of these, a plurality of the artists have even professed that they don't like games, they just like making art for them.

We had a teacher from Australia up until a few months ago, who told us she had been in the industry since the 80s (when almost everyone was both programmer and designer) and that the percentages of women were closer to (but still far off from) being equal than is the case today. On these, I don't have the exact numbers readily available atm.

There are numerous reasons why women are not so strongly represented in the industry despite many other industries now are starting to see parity (and yet, CS in the 80's had some seriously strong growth with women). This NY times article covers (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/business/16digi.html?_r=0) some of the ideas. Some of the others off the top of my head; Other industries attracting women over tech/gaming due to work environment, lack of support at a young age (Intel is putting money to fix this), recent gendered norms against it (again, 70's and 80's it was considered).

I am still working in the industry myself, but more on the art side, so we have a better gender representation (and race too). As for engineering? Still mostly men. To speak to the tech industry/smaller gaming industry divide with an anecdote, I have a friend who was an engineer in gaming for 2 years. She finally decided to leave towards a general tech company because of the environment and the way she was often ignored in meetings. In her words: "I'd rather trade for subtle sexist gestures of the tech business world then for the outright childish brogramer attitudes".

It does also help that the normal tech industry pays its workers far better then anyone in the gaming sphere. Financial security is a concern across genders, but there are also some culturally gendered behaviors on how individuals should approach work. To work in the gaming industry instead of tech or a more traditional? It puts you in a financially weaker position on top of having a high supply of individuals who could replace you. It requires passion or a talent that few others have. I don't think we will see much of a change in gaming until tech goes forward.

Kaptin Keen

2015-02-01, 02:50 PM

{scrubbed}

Surrealistik

2015-02-01, 04:12 PM

Maybe it's because I live in a relatively liberal place, but my experience has been that there are far fewer who would say "women do not deserve as many rights as men, and I think feminists have it wrong" than there are people who would say "I consider myself in favor of feminism and equality" but then are told they can't be because they watch the wrong movies, play the wrong games, use the wrong swear words, or whatever.

This absolutely; very alienating and it happens consistently, IRL, online and otherwise; it's definitely not the exclusive domain of anti-feminist 'trolls' (as Psyren has put it) framing the movement for caustic and counterproductive behaviours.

huttj509

2015-02-01, 05:00 PM

Just wanted to extend a heartfelt kudos to the three of you specifically. *applauds*

This is sadly a serious problem across STEM subjects in general.

I don't know why (and likely, speculating would run into troublesome areas) but I do recall a great Verizon spot (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP3cyRRAfX0) that points out one insidious yet pervasive potential root cause.

A few of my impressions from when I was TAing an intro College Physics Course in California:

People who asked questions tended to do better than those who didn't.
People who came in to office hours saying "I don't understand this" had better improvement than those who came in saying "I can't understand this."

Both of those things felt strongly divided across apparent gender lines.

Ibrinar

2015-02-01, 05:21 PM

About forum rules, is there perhaps an old post or something somewhere which explains what falls under vague rule terms like real world politics? Because I am never really sure what they mean. As an approximation I just assume they are interpreted as broad as possible which seems to mostly work. Because I'm unsure whether I can answer KK or should ignore him? (To be more precise, Answer= link the thing Terraoblivion was probably referring to so that everyone can judge the context for themselves.)

SiuiS

2015-02-01, 05:39 PM

Psyren, Wobner, appreciate the support. :)

This absolutely; very alienating and it happens consistently, IRL, online and otherwise; it's definitely not the exclusive domain of anti-feminist 'trolls' (as Psyren has put it) framing the movement for caustic and counterproductive behaviours.

Of course. We all (groups that is) have our idiots. We actively campaign against them, both by educating said idiots and providing contextual bases for others to be able to see past those idiots, but they exist.

Heck, both Psyren and I have in this thread alone disagreed with and argued against someone making points for "our side", because it's not about any side winning. It's about divining the truth and providing information. That's what I ask to stand on; not your assumptions and understandings of feminism, but what I say, how I say it, and the understanding that I do so because we are mutually seeking betterment. Anyone who is more invested in dogma than data or communication is a potential trouble spot. That's why we learn to sort out those individuals. It's just... Distressing, depressing, that no matter how well spoken, articulate or factual I or terra can be, it's possible to just go "whoops, feminist, sorry. Nothing you say matters because Psycho radfems exist".

About forum rules, is there perhaps an old post or something somewhere which explains what falls under vague rule terms like real world politics?

"When in doubt, don't".

Personal experience suggests this entire tangent should be aborted, but I'm no moderator. Just a chick who is too close to reprimand to take chances.

Terraoblivion

2015-02-01, 05:58 PM

{scrubbed}

Ibrinar

2015-02-01, 06:10 PM

Eh I found the google translate version entirely readable in the relevant parts. Yes for accuracy it's crap and would be useless for anything nuanced but what he says is simple enough that it seems to work here. Of course you can't necessarily tell from the machine translation that it expresses the opposite of the intended message or something.

Kaptin Keen

2015-02-01, 06:30 PM

{scrubbed}

Terraoblivion

2015-02-01, 06:40 PM

{scrubbed}

Kaptin Keen

2015-02-01, 06:43 PM

I'm sure I can invite him to come here and post - see if he, himself, supports me or you.

Want me to try? I'll get right on it, if you want.

Maryring

2015-02-01, 06:49 PM

No. I can support Terra in this. I'm Norwegian, so reading Danish is not a problem.

The intial statement that started this tangent was

And everyone agrees on that part, right? There are no advocates of inequality among the genders.

Where Terra proposes Ole Birk as a counterpoint that no, not everyone agrees on gender equality. That there are advocates for inequality among genders.

And you can proclaim that he made sweeping generalisations and hyperbole to make his point as much as you want, but there are two major problems with this.

First, assuming that it is true, it only adds to the primary problem of sexism being the result of sweeping generalisations. About how all men are X, and how all women are Y. There's no thought given to individual values. People are inherently given particular traits because of their gender, which again gives birth to dangerous stereotypes. Women don't want positions of power. Women are weaker than men and shouldn't be in the military. Women are more nurturing than men.

Second, the assumption that he doesn't mean a thing of what he says is... honestly not supported. If you want to be provocative and witty, then you'll do that in the role of a comedian using hyperbole that feeds into stereotypes in an obvious manner. There's nothing obviously joking about those statements. He gives every appearance of genuinely believing that women are selfish, emotional beings.

In other words. Yes, he *is* sexist, and is against gender equality.

If you want to be critical against radfems, you do it by being critical against radfems and the views they espouse. Not by making sweeping statements about inherent gender qualities.

Radfems exist. They're dangerous and damaging towards the cause of gender equality. But I've yet to see anyone here in this thread argue that they do not exist or should be ignored.

Kaptin Keen

2015-02-01, 06:52 PM

{scrubbed}

Vitruviansquid

2015-02-01, 06:52 PM

I don't know about Surrealistik, but this attitude of "no, we're the good feminists - *they're* the crazy/wrong/stupid/malicious feminists" is exactly what I think is so troublesome.

DISCLAIMER: I am talking about general trends that you can't necessary "prove," so if the world I describe does not seem to match real life to you, consider the following to be the ravings of a madman.

Whenever a question arises of what kind of woman feminists want to see portrayed, I notice the discourse usually attacks this problem from the negative side, as in the responses tend to be "we don't want ___" or "she must not have ______" rather than "we want ____." If the response is formulated as "we want ____," it's usually also followed by a "but without ___." For some examples:

We don't want a character who takes orders from a man
She must not have jiggle physics
We want her to be a gung-ho fighter, but not just a man with breasts

and so on.

And then the factionalizing with the "it's only those sex-positive sellouts who want X" and "it's only the celibate man-haters who want Y" comes out and nothing actually gets done. Why? Because you can't create something by taking away. I think it would be more productive if we start looking at media, characters within media, and so on, from the positive side.

Take Sonya Blade. Sure, she's one of those characters who is often scantily clad in an environment where being scantily clad makes no sense at all, but hey, she's a female character in a male-dominated game. Her role is exactly as important as every other character's, and she's not treated differently under the game's rules just because she's a female.

On the opposite side, take Princess Peach. She is never sexualized for the male audience and it is never implied that she sleeps with Mario because he saves her.

Or one of my personal favorites, American McGee's Alice is very clearly a female character under the thumb of male oppression, but the positive is she's fighting like a devil to get out of it.

As for the "butch," gritty, muscular woman described upthread... she kicks ass and doesn't care for things that are less important than fighting aliens and saving the world (or however you imagined her setting).

And as soon as folks stop talking in the negative and start talking in the positive, the characters they come up with aren't walking propaganda posters any more. They become imperfect, nuanced, and they make you think rather than make you self-congratulate (and as a privileged man, let me tell you there are plenty of characters in games that are designed to make us self-congratulate, and they're largely boring and poorly written. Duke Nuke'em is a thousand times more interesting than Master Chief.)

So instead of nit picking on this or that trait making such a character un-feminist, or only endorsable by crazy/stupid/etc. feminists, it would be a fine thing if we did more creating and less destroying.

Terraoblivion

2015-02-01, 07:02 PM

There are no traits that are inherently bad. Some are harder than others to use productively, but none are bad. In general, it's more in the framing of a character and their situation than the specific traits that are an issue. Reductionism is the enemy of not just feminism, racial inclusivity or other forms of tolerance, but of good writing. Ideally speaking, every character should be portrayed with nuance enough that you can understand them as a person and not just an icon, stereotype or concept. And the framing should be such that that is the focus, not providing eye candy, idealized girlfriends/boyfriends or some stereotypical vision of a "strong woman" or "manly man". If you look at the list of characters I said I found hot, they're a really diverse bunch. One of them even holds absolutely horrible views due to cultural conditioning. But they're all presented in a way to make them more than just a simple idea or stereotype.

Surrealistik

2015-02-01, 07:19 PM

Of course. We all (groups that is) have our idiots. We actively campaign against them, both by educating said idiots and providing contextual bases for others to be able to see past those idiots, but they exist.

Heck, both Psyren and I have in this thread alone disagreed with and argued against someone making points for "our side", because it's not about any side winning. It's about divining the truth and providing information. That's what I ask to stand on; not your assumptions and understandings of feminism, but what I say, how I say it, and the understanding that I do so because we are mutually seeking betterment. Anyone who is more invested in dogma than data or communication is a potential trouble spot. That's why we learn to sort out those individuals. It's just... Distressing, depressing, that no matter how well spoken, articulate or factual I or terra can be, it's possible to just go "whoops, feminist, sorry. Nothing you say matters because Psycho radfems exist".

The thing that's precisely alarming about these people is how common they are, or appear to be; they aren't Valerie Solanas tier radfems/maniacs of the misandrist/trans-hating sort that can be dismissed out of hand, they are people that I encounter with reasonable frequency, particularly among college educated women who hold otherwise reasonable views and explicitly identify themselves as feminists. Granted this is anecdotal and I don't claim on the basis of my personal experience that it definitively reflects any majority or even significant subset (particularly when I consider that it's outliers that tend to be most vocal and confrontational, and the fact that adverse experiences also tend to be the most memorable), but it does seem that the latter is at least implied and it is absolutely discouraging. Logically I know that movement shouldn't be prejudiced against because of their actions, but I have to admit, I've come to reflexively attribute negative associations with it as a direct result of them.