But I like “sexualized, scantily clad heroines” in my gaming entertainment.

[Lord Fyre]

This is actually a branch off of the Tropes vs Women in Video Games Kickstarter thread. I was going to put it there, but I think it would be too much of a derail.

Still, I want to ask What are they “men” that so violently threatened Anita Sarkeesian so violently afraid of? Perhaps I am just too naive, but I do not understand.

If change is not inevitable, then what are they worried about?

If change is going to come, would it not be better to be honest about what one wants in order to try to influence that change. They might very well be shocked that even most feminists would not be automatically hostile to their viewpoint.

[Nymian Harthing]

On first glance, I've got to admit I was worried this was a flamebait post. Thank you for the catchy title but the honest question. I don't have an absolute answer for you on this, but I'm grateful for the opportunity for a serious and respectful discussion on the topic.

An off the cuff guess or two: Maybe it's the loss of perceived social power? The feeling of a threat to their standing, somehow? The rise of power of one social group feeling like a reduction in power in a different social group? Some sort of misguided territorialism combined with a really nasty case of entitlement thinking and societally acceptable cues that allow women to be perceived as acceptable targets for threats of not only violation of their bodies but of their existence?

Personally I don't get it either. But then again, my experience has been that those folks who are in some way biased against a specific gender are often biased against other things too about perfectly nice people (sexual "preference", ethnic makeup, socioeconomic standing...). YMMV.

[LazarX]

Nymian Harthing wrote:

On first glance, I've got to admit I was worried this was a flamebait post. Thank you for the catchy title but the honest question. I don't have an absolute answer for you on this, but I'm grateful for the opportunity for a serious and respectful discussion on the topic.

An off the cuff guess or two: Maybe it's the loss of perceived social power? The feeling of a threat to their standing, somehow? The rise of power of one social group feeling like a reduction in power in a different social group? Some sort of misguided territorialism combined with a really nasty case of entitlement thinking and societally acceptable cues that allow women to be perceived as acceptable targets for threats of not only violation of their bodies but of their existence?

Personally I don't get it either. But then again, my experience has been that those folks who are in some way biased against a specific gender are often biased against other things too about perfectly nice people (sexual "preference", ethnic makeup, socioeconomic standing...). YMMV.

Men, especially in the modern age don't have a ritual which confirms your manhood for all time. Instead they are pressured to reaffirm it on a frequent basis, as perceived levels of machismo establish a social pecking order. And one of the ways they do so is through the objectification of women, and employing power over women and other men. (BTW, don't ever let anyone sell you on the idea of rape as a sexual crime. It is a crime borne out of the motivation of power over someone whether that someone is a woman or a man.

IT's a double edged sword. Men who don't continually press their sexuality are questioned by other men and are seen as a threat if their "anti-male" qualities are allowed to contaminate other men. That's why homophobia is generally more violently expressed against men, as women are not perceived to have any manliness to lose, although a powerful woman may very well weaken a man's perceived image of his self machismo.

So in short, the answer is all of the above. Combined with the growing media ideal that violence is the acceptable answer to conflict resolution, and torture an acceptable means to acheive a desired end.

So when you have a society in which one's status is constantly being evaluated, add to that growing ambiguities about sexual roles, toss in a volatile social situation, and a growing acceptance of violent means to acheive ends... heat it up for a bit with cultural and financial stress, and you have our present day situation.

[GeraintElberion]

It is interesting that men often act out anti-female self-definition from pre-pubescent ages.

Which heavily interacts with homophobic self-positioning.

I find it fascinating that most teenagers regard manliness as comprising: stubborn-ness, self-confidence, physical strength and anti-intellectualism.

My adult conception of manliness is connected with taking responsibility, supporting friends and family, paying my way and being an organiser.

Which are really concepts of adulthood.

[LazarX]

GeraintElberion wrote:

I find it fascinating that most teenagers regard manliness as comprising: stubborn-ness, self-confidence, physical strength and anti-intellectualism.

Most adults too. that's the only reason I can find that Big Ban Theory is so popular as opposed to Community, which isn't nearly as anti-intellectual.

[Samurai]

I really think you need to separate Anita Sarkeesian from the question. She basically said "Some women in video games have boobs and look sexy, so give me money." And when that didn't get her enough money, she baited some trolls and they rose to the occasion (if they were even real trolls at all and not just friends/allies of hers posing as trolls to help her make her point...). Then it became "Some women in video games have boobs and look sexy, and some people on the internet were mean to me, so give me money." And lo, that did the trick.

So, cutting her scam out of the question leaves us with "are men worried about losing power?" First, men have lost a huge amount of power, and have been for decades. Men have absolutely no reproductive rights, for example, only responsibilities. Women can choose whether to have an abortion or not, whether to give the baby up for adoption or not, even whether to simply drop it off at a hospital, no questions asked (which was done to try and stop them from leaving babies in dumpsters). Choice after choice, and the law supports every one of them, whichever way she decides. Men have no choices. And if she keeps the child, he's on the hook for up to 60% of his income for the next 18 years, with no choice in the matter. And there are not even reasonable exclusions to this... there have been multiple cases where much older women raped an underage boy, got pregnant, and the victim was forced to them pay child support to his rapist for 2 decades. Or where women have lied about using birth control, or even stole a used condom and impregnated herself with it, he still must pay. A sperm donor for a lesbian couple was forced to pay. And the laws says that once you've been named the father you must continue to pay, even if later DNA tests PROVE the kid isn't yours, and the mother admits she lied, it doesn't matter, the man must still pay! And visitation rights for fathers are almost never enforced, not like support payments are anyway. Oh yeah, lotta "privilege" there.

Women are graduating from all levels of school at higher rates than men. Young, childless women earn significantly more than their male counterparts. The whole "women earn less" myth has been debunked and shown to be a matter of choices, such as men work far more overtime than women, and do more dangerous jobs. 93% of all workplace fatalities are men.

Women receive far less jail time (even none at all) compared to men charged with identical crimes.

90% of the homeless are men. If women lose their home there are many shelters and places for them to stay, but men are not allowed in most of them. In fact, if a woman in a shelter has a son that is 18, he's not allowed to stay there with her, even if he lived in her home before... he must go live in the streets or find somewhere else. Daughters are allowed to stay no matter their age, of course. The vast majority of domestic violence shelters also don't allow men to stay, even if they were the victim of domestic violence from an abusive spouse (and studies show half of all domestic violence is committed by women).

Women have massive advantages and preferences in divorce cases, as everyone knows.

I could go on and on and on with more examples, but if you are interested, I suggest looking up Men's Rights.

So, when someone with all these advantages and more, living in one of the wealthiest and most free countries in the world complains about how very, very terrible things are, and blames all men as some conglomerate "patriarchy", as if the very few rich men on top cared 1 bit about the vast majority of poor men on the bottom, men can get a little angry sometimes. They might be living with their parents because half their wages are being garnished to pay for a kid they are not allowed to see, are passed over for jobs and promotions because they are a male, are shown to be idiots and fools compared to women in most TV shows and commercials (just watch, when you look for that, you'll see it everywhere!), and then some woman wants to stop him from even being able to enjoy video games with good-looking women in them? The vast, vast majority of men have already lost their power, and are still losing more and more of it. And that is not a good thing, no matter what some may think.

[Shadowborn]

Another thing to consider is that the vehemence of some of the reactions to Anita Sarkeesian's project is facilitated by the supposed anonymity of the internet. How many of the folks that spewed hatred at her would have done so publicly to her face? My educated guess is not very many at all. Whether these haters are simply trolling for the joy of doing so or actually feel threatened by her project is something to consider. Many areas of the 'net that have a comment section are filled with similar spewing. These are likely people that haven't matured. They're defining their world view through over-exaggerated caricatures drawn from popular culture.

Also, look at the level of intellect displayed in the samples. Not much. The problem is not really these people. The problem will be the silent ones who may actually feel the same way and have the intelligence to block what she's trying to do. Misogyny is a definite problem, and men will take steps to ensure that they feel powerful and in control. All the hate-spewing that can be done on a comment page is nothing compared to a business world where women continue to be marginalized by bosses that refuse to acknowledge their potential and ability.

I'm going a bit off-topic, I suppose, but then perhaps Ms. Sarkeesian's project will help. Since video games are popular culture, a change there is a change somewhere, at least.

[Laithoron]

Ah, back to the whole "you say that this is happening but I think you're making it up" argument. Gotta love it.

Speaking of women being 'allowed' to get abortions, there are more than a few states in the USA that would actually dispute that claim. Hell, we've even got one state whose politicians have decided women are 'pregnant' pretty much from the time they start ovulating until they hit menopause. If that doesn't send a clear signal that some areas still try to officially treat women as 2nd-class citizens then I don't know what more proof you would need.

[LazarX]

Samurai wrote:

I really think you need to separate Anita Sarkeesian from the question. She basically said "Some women in video games have boobs and look sexy, so give me money." And when that didn't get her enough money, she baited some trolls and they rose to the occasion (if they were even real trolls at all and not just friends/allies of hers posing as trolls to help her make her point...). Then it became "Some women in video games have boobs and look sexy, and some people on the internet were mean to me, so give me money." And lo, that did the trick.

So, cutting her scam out of the question leaves us with "are men worried about losing power?" First, men have lost a huge amount of power, and have been for decades.

and a bunch of other male victimisation screed

Lets talk about reality here. When families break up, or men just plain skip, it's women who generally who get thrown under the poverty line, because they're stuck with the kids, and have a lot of difficulty finding paid work and have to arrange baby sitting for the kids. And what work they do get is lower paid on the average.

If you've walked on the streets of New York as much as I have, the idea that women aren't a significant population of the homeless, gets walked on it's face.

And by the way, the Kickstarter was no scam. The project is exactly what she promised it would be, the creation of a series of advocacy videos. If you thought it was something else, you must have been watching a different web page. The fact that you have problems with the very idea of women's advocacy does not make it a scam.

And as far as reproductive rights go, a woman's right to a safe abortion has never been under as much attack as it has been now. Only the Right is making it a two pronged approach, when they can't outlaw it outright, they make it impossible for an abortion clinic to operate it. They've even gone as far as to attack birth control programs and contraception as well. Women today are facing a major backlash from what little progress that has been made, as the declining population of Angry White Males has gone into full circle the wagons mode.

It takes a major amount of denial to have watched the video and conclude that it was nothing but a "scam". But in a culture where "What I Want" is king, such denial is to be found in abundance.

[Samurai]

I didn't say the video was a scam, I said the kickstarter was. "Some bad stuff in the world, so give me money"-type kickstarters are all scams IMO, no matter what that bad stuff is. Her videos aren't going to stop the "bad stuff", it's all a pity play. It's like someone saying "Baby seals are being clubbed to death! Send me money!" How will that help the baby seals? It won't, but it shows you care, like I do!

[Sean FitzSimon]

@Samurai: I don't disagree with anything you've said so far about Men's Rights. They're alarmingly slim when compared to women, and it's something that makes me kinda glad to be gay. That said, I don't feel like this is a scam at all. I also don't feel that you need to be wrong for what this woman is doing to be right.

She seems to be making an honest effort at education. Whether or not you feel that's useless, I still feel that this is important. Change comes from education, and this will hopefully be another resource to lean on when saying that women suffer unfair portrayals in video games.

Honestly, so do men in a lot of cases. But the fact remains that while the genres of video games (and gaming in general) seem pretty keen on leaning on these stereotypes there are many more examples of male characters breaking a trope than a female doing so.

(edited: for clarity, and because I forgot several words.)

[Irontruth]

Samurai,

You post of facts tells me that you don't actually understand the problem.

sidebar - going to keep posts very short to not get lost in multiple points and having too many of them ignored.

[Alice Margatroid]

oh godddd I said to myself I wouldn't get involved in thissss

A man's right to "terminate parental obligations" exists in his right to decide whether to have sex or not, to use protection or not.

Even protected sex isn't something that should be done with the expectation that nothing could possibly go wrong. If you want to be 100% sure that you won't become a father, I suggest not doing the deed in the first place.

Yes, women have more "chances" to "terminate their parental obligations" (i.e., in the decision to have sex, the decision to use protection, and the decision to terminate a pregnancy) but they also have more at stake (i.e., gestation, birth).

[GeraintElberion]

I don't understand the angry ranting.

It seems to be predicated on a specific, and frankly bizarre, misreading of Sarkesian's project.

It is not a man vs. women thing.

The people who tried to make it a man vs women thing are the trolling men who attacked her.

And Samurai, he is trying to make it a man vs. women thing as well.

But it isn't.

It is a 'look how those with culture power (knowingly or not, she does not seem to be ascribing motivation) control, limit and manipulate both men and women to create specific expectations of women' thing.

Honestly, Samurai, I find deliberately misrepresenting people to be pretty rude.

Maybe I'm wrong though, perhaps you can put us to the man-vs-women element of this video?

[Samurai]

Sean FitzSimon wrote:

@Samurai: I don't disagree with anything you've said so far about Men's Rights. They're alarmingly slim when compared to women, and it's something that makes me kinda glad to be gay. That said, I don't feel like this is a scam at all. I also don't feel that you need to be wrong for what this woman is doing to be right.

She seems to be making an honest effort at education. Whether or not you feel that's useless, I still feel that this is important. Change comes from education, and this will hopefully be another resource to lean on when saying that women suffer unfair portrayals in video games.

Honestly, so do men in a lot of cases. But the fact remains that while the genres of video games (and gaming in general) seem pretty keen on leaning on these stereotypes there are many more examples of male characters breaking a trope than a female doing so.

(edited: for clarity, and because I forgot several words.)

This is a very reasonable answer, thanks Sean.

As I said, my entire reason for calling it a scam is that I disagree with what would most charitably be called "educational efforts" on kickstarter. Take any sympathetic issue, and then say "Send me money because of it, and I'll try to educate people on it!" Sorry, but whatever the issue, that just turns me off, even if it's something I agree with. It reminds me of all those mailings asking for political contributions... "Did you see what the other party just did??? So send us money so we can educate people about how terrible it was!" If you had the money to send this mailing to your own side, you had the money to educate other people about the issue, and I'm not sending you any more.

I don't believe they are real efforts at education, but rather ploys to get money. As you said, men are unfairly portrayed in games too... when was the last time you saw the hero of the game was a doughy neck-bearded type with glasses? No, the guys are always rippling with muscles and seldom have vision problems. So why only focus on how women are portrayed? Limiting it creates a false sense of the issue, and hints that only women are unrealistically portrayed. And if unrealistic portrayals in games is harmful (I don't feel it is, personally), then it is hinting only women are being harmed by focusing only on women. Similarly, a video series on how women suffer because of, say, fires, floods, or other natural disasters and completely ignored the men that are harmed would leave most people scratching their heads saying "Wait a minute, that doesn't just affect women..."

[Alice Margatroid]

Her Kickstarter was to gain funding to create a web-series looking at sexism in video games.This is no different to a Kickstarter to gain funding to create a movie or documentary or other video art.

Education is a side issue that will hopefully flow. But fundamentally, there's nothing "scammy" about what she did. For example, I chipped in to a documentary about children raised by gay parents. If people's views change from it, that would be great, but the Kickstarter goal is simply creation, not what comes from there.

Also, there was a group who tried to look at sexist tropes against men - but we haven't heard much out of them for a while...

Oh, and this isn't a zero sum game. There are problems with the depictions of men. Correct! That doesn't mean that we shouldn't look at the problems with depictions of women. It's a matter of scope, of personal interest of Sarkeesian, perceived severity by herself and her backers, etc.

[Lyingbastard]

I think the original Mass Effect did a great job with male and female armor being equivalent. Shepard, M or F, wore serious equipment, as did Ashley and Kaidan. The sequels, maybe not so much, but at least all the more scantily clad characters could be excused as using their biotics as their main form of protection.

Honestly, I don't mind scantily clad heroines as long as it doesn't break immersion. But it should be optional, and it should go for both genders. Want your female paladin to wear a battle-thong instead of plate? Fine, choose that option. Want her to wear sensible armor? Choose the instead. But the same should be an option for those who play as males. Personally, I think it would be hilarious to see a hulking Orc with a greataxe chasing down elves while wearing a "War-speedo". Disturbing, but hilarious.

[Talonhawke]

Ah okay well that's better. I can understand some feelings of sexism towards some mods out there.

Though it bothers me the best choice for better looking males uses its erect version as the default.

[The 8th Dwarf]

Talonhawke wrote:

Ah okay well that's better. I can understand some feelings of sexism towards some mods out there.

Though it bothers me the best choice for better looking males uses its erect version as the default.

Aww crap I swore I would stay out of this thread.

The mods are a choice .....people know what they are getting when they down load them. They are called things like "sexy armor".

Also they are fan made... So they game company has nothing to do with them.

What people do in their own time has nothing to do with this.

I think that calling sexism on Skyrim is a red herring.

[Fergie]

I think if you are wondering why people on the internet threaten violence upon those who present no harm to them, the answer is; because they are idiots.

There may be reasons they are idiots, but I don't think your are going to get a rational justification for the threats.

I think there is a valid debate about the place of sexualized images of women (not to mention men, cars, shakeweights, etc.) in media, but it is difficult to keep on track, and the whole kickstarter incident is going to be an even more difficult base.

My last comment would be that you can't fix hundreds or thousands of years of inequality against any group by just declaring a fresh start and playing it forward as equals with no distinctions made. This stuff runs DEEP and it takes a long long time for it to get settled into something that is generally considered tolerable by both sides.

[Talonhawke]

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

Talonhawke wrote:

Ah okay well that's better. I can understand some feelings of sexism towards some mods out there.

Though it bothers me the best choice for better looking males uses its erect version as the default.

Aww crap I swore I would stay out of this thread.

The mods are a choice .....people know what they are getting when they down load them. They are called things like "sexy armor".

Also they are fan made... So they game company has nothing to do with them.

What people do in their own time has nothing to do with this.

I think that calling sexism on Skyrim is a red herring.

Yeah I agree man that's why I said feelings towards the mods. It's not any indication if Bethesdas feelings. And the make mod bothers more due to unexpected pics on the front page than the mod itself. The author did at least include an clothed version.

[pres man]

I have no idea why someone would threaten anyone in that fashion.

As to the video produced, I wasn't overly impressed. The big issue is that women aren't often the main hero. Complaining that a woman NPC doesn't escape on her own is a stupid issue, given that male NPC don't escape on their own. If they did, that would be basically programmer masturbation. Sort of like when a GM just runs adventures for the NPCs and ignores the PCs.

No the issue is that the main characters tend to be male and it is the main character that does things. So while the result is [some] males escape and females don't, that has more to do with the narrative of the main character then the gender.

Now why are most main characters male. I would say it had to do with the initial demographics involved, influence of fairy tales and myths, etc. Hopefully, we have seen as time goes on more men are quite willing to play female characters and game designers are more willing to have them. Are we ever going to see a "dude in distress" become a common trope where the heroine saves a guy who falls into her arms. Doubtful. Even the most militant feminists of heterosexual women would not probably find that interesting.

[Samurai]

pres man wrote:

I have no idea why someone would threaten anyone in that fashion.

As to the video produced, I wasn't overly impressed. The big issue is that women aren't often the main hero. Complaining that a woman NPC doesn't escape on her own is a stupid issue, given that male NPC don't escape on their own. If they did, that would be basically programmer masturbation. Sort of like when a GM just runs adventures for the NPCs and ignores the PCs.

No the issue is that the main characters tend to be male and it is the main character that does things. So while the result is [some] males escape and females don't, that has more to do with the narrative of the main character then the gender.

Now why are most main characters male. I would say it had to do with the initial demographics involved, influence of fairy tales and myths, etc. Hopefully, we have seen as time goes on more men are quite willing to play female characters and game designers are more willing to have them. Are we ever going to see a "dude in distress" become a common trope where the heroine saves a guy who falls into her arms. Doubtful. Even the most militant feminists of heterosexual women would not probably find that interesting.

Also, nearly all her examples were from the '80's and 90's, and many were from Japan, an entirely different country with its own values. Many more modern games allow customizable playable heroes, usually both male and female. I always play a female hero when given a choice, and it's rare to find an RPG, MMO, or shooter that doesn't give a choice.

[Nymian Harthing]

Darklord Morius wrote:

Men have their own problems, society is merciless with males, but do not try to mitigate women's problems.

Yes, please! Both sexes have some real issues they struggle with, and neither side's issues should be marginalized. (I do have to idly wonder though how often males consider crossing the street because a possibly threatening-looking group of women are approaching on the same stretch of sidewalk.)

[Samurai]

Nymian Harthing wrote:

Darklord Morius wrote:

Men have their own problems, society is merciless with males, but do not try to mitigate women's problems.

Yes, please! Both sexes have some real issues they struggle with, and neither side's issues should be marginalized. (I do have to idly wonder though how often males consider crossing the street because a possibly threatening-looking group of women are approaching on the same stretch of sidewalk.)

And I wonder how often women fear hugging, tickling, or playing with their kids/nephews/nieces in public lest they be called a child molester and the police are called.

[Nymian Harthing]

Fair point, Samurai. Again, both sexes do have some real issues they struggle with. Both sexes have my sympathies on the issues they face. Perhaps someday we can have societies where these issues aren't prevalent, but we're not quite there yet.

I'm genuinely curious about this stuff though; my question was more the "there are some differences in what women and men view as threats; what are they?". No malice here, and it's my sincere hope my question wasn't viewed as malicious in any way. Sometimes I get the impression that when folks tend to feel really very strongly about a subject that can lead to the impression that perhaps an innocent question is really some sort of psuedo-attack. Totally not what I was going for! The subject of gender inequality on both sides is an issue I can definitely see as potentially inflammatory, though.

People as a subject are fascinating; I suspect that's why I aspire to play fairly fleshed out characters instead of a collection of stats with a few defining quirks. :) Differences in gender issues are interesting to me too. I've lived as one gender my entire life, and would like to understand where my experiences differ from the opposite gender's experiences as well as how my experiences differ from the more typical experiences of those sharing my biological gender.

Hopefully the thread will continue to generate some positive discussion points! And not get locked...

[Irontruth]

Samurai wrote:

Nymian Harthing wrote:

Darklord Morius wrote:

Men have their own problems, society is merciless with males, but do not try to mitigate women's problems.

Yes, please! Both sexes have some real issues they struggle with, and neither side's issues should be marginalized. (I do have to idly wonder though how often males consider crossing the street because a possibly threatening-looking group of women are approaching on the same stretch of sidewalk.)

And I wonder how often women fear hugging, tickling, or playing with their kids/nephews/nieces in public lest they be called a child molester and the police are called.

I have never had that fear. I've also never had the police called. Even while working as a nanny and the kid tried pulling a screaming act. I watch my friends 5 y/o all the time too. I take her to the zoo, science museum, etc.

Frankly, I have no idea why you'd even fear this at all.

For a visual reference, I basically look like Dusty from the recent Medal of Honor game. No one has ever accused me of abusing a child.

[Samurai]

Nymian Harthing wrote:

Fair point, Samurai. Again, both sexes do have some real issues they struggle with. Both sexes have my sympathies on the issues they face. Perhaps someday we can have societies where these issues aren't prevalent, but we're not quite there yet.

I'm genuinely curious about this stuff though; my question was more the "there are some differences in what women and men view as threats; what are they?". No malice here, and it's my sincere hope my question wasn't viewed as malicious in any way. Sometimes I get the impression that when folks tend to feel really very strongly about a subject that can lead to the impression that perhaps an innocent question is really some sort of psuedo-attack. Totally not what I was going for! The subject of gender inequality on both sides is an issue I can definitely see as potentially inflammatory, though.

People as a subject are fascinating; I suspect that's why I aspire to play fairly fleshed out characters instead of a collection of stats with a few defining quirks. :) Differences in gender issues are interesting to me too. I've lived as one gender my entire life, and would like to understand where my experiences differ from the opposite gender's experiences as well as how my experiences differ from the more typical experiences of those sharing my biological gender.

Hopefully the thread will continue to generate some positive discussion points! And not get locked...

I saw no malice in your post, sorry if I came off sounding brusque. I was trying to simply provide a corresponding fear from the male perspective and didn't see the need to overly elaborate on it. I guess I should, though, since Irontruth has never heard of such a thing, apparently. There have been numerous cases, I was just reading about 1 today: Dad's year of torment His daughter tickled him and kissed him in the park, the police were called, and despite his kids, his wife, and others saying nothing bad had happened, he has been facing ongoing prosecution attempts for the last 20 months. He was banned from seeing his children most of that time, and can still only see them under supervised visitation.

I too find the issue interesting, and at times frustrating, but I enjoy debating the issues with people of other perspectives. Talking only with like-minded people may prevent disagreement, but it does nothing to increase understanding. I too hope the thread doesn't get closed. I think these issues are very important, and need to be discussed with honesty and openness, even if that isn't always the most PC thing to say.

[Bruunwald]

Samurai wrote:

There have been numerous cases, I was just reading about 1 today: Dad's year of torment His daughter tickled him and kissed him in the park, the police were called, and despite his kids, his wife, and others...

What's really ridiculous about this, is that any parent can tell you that kids learn boundaries in stages, through trial-and-error, and based on their level of sophistication and maturity. Touching is something that falls off in time, as those boundaries are set. In the meantime, there is a gradual change, and shift in what is comfortable. For instance, I am no longer comfortable with my 12-year-old son patting my belly, as this little girl is described in this story, though at one time it was acceptable behavior between us. He is still in some ways like a little kid, so I still find myself on rare occasions correcting this behavior. Meantime, I still sometimes pat his bottom to get him to move out of the way (like for instance when I am carrying a hot plate, or something). But those days are also coming to an end.

What's lame about this, is that every parent goes through this process with their children, but oh, how quickly they forget and become outraged when they see some other parent going through the process. Suddenly, what is a normal, natural learning experience for a parent-child relationship they have nothing to do with and know nothing about (not knowing these people) becomes an arrest-worthy offense. Even cops know better and go through this themselves, but then allow themselves to slip into the judgmental mob mentality ruling the day.

Decent people want to protect little kids. But we need to remember that people's entire lives may hang in the balance before we start throwing our outrage around. I think people love to be outraged. It makes them feel special and important to "help" in such situations. So we are prone to creating them. And that can be quite destructive.

[Samurai]

Getting back to the OP:

Lord Fyre wrote:

If change is not inevitable, then what are they worried about?

If change is going to come, would it not be better to be honest about what one wants in order to try to influence that change. They might very well be shocked that even most feminists would not be automatically hostile to their viewpoint.

IMO, change of SOME kind is inevitable... nothing stays the same forever in human sociological relations and culture. But just what that change is can be manipulated and altered. And that is where the battle is, over what changes there will be, how they'll be implemented, etc. Every "Rights" group out there believes that, or else they wouldn't be fighting for change they'd kick back and let the inevitable happen.

In the case of feminism, I feel that it has left men in the dust, sometimes purposefully so because it benefited them, sometimes to get back at "the evil patriarchy", and sometimes because it simply wasn't what they cared about. It's time for men to take a stand and start demanding rights of our own, from schooling methods to reproductive rights, fairness in divorces to the way husbands and fathers are often portrayed in media (as incompetent fools that need to be taught a lesson each week by their more intelligent wives).

[JonGarrett]

My brain hurts...

Men may be made to pay for a child they conceive. They may have to pay cash. A women will have to spend years of her life with her primary function as raising that child, spending vast sums of her own money, and of course time, to raise the kid. 'Oh no, she takes all my money 'cos I stuck it in her' seems rather...petty when you realize how much a single mother will have to sacrifice. And given my dead beat, drunken father cheated on his taxes, there are apparently plenty of ways to not pay if you can't be bothered (or want to drink it away).

And that's not include the health risks of pregnancy for a woman, up to and including death. Unless you're in debt to the mob, that's not a risk a dad has to consider when doing the dance of love.

I'd also bet you that for every single guy whose been wrongfully forced to pay child payments because of some evil scheme, they'll be a dozen dead beats who try to wiggle there way out of having anything to do with a kid, especially paying for it.

Yeah, sometimes we get a negative. I'm a huge guy with long hair and a beard. When I was waiting outside a shop with my then three year old daughter, who was screaming and yelling (she could see a ride she wanted to go on) I had a cop come up to me, asking me questions, obviously wondering if I had kidnapped my own kid. He was actually getting quite upset, especially as my daughter would not calm down. If my wife hadn't come out when she did I honestly think I'd have ended up at a police station, my wife not knowing where I was, my daughter held in custody until I could work out a way to prove I was really her dad.

But there are a hell of a lot more negatives to being a woman. Since money is such an issue for dads paying child support, it bears remembering women will not be paid as much for the same work as a guy, nor will women be as likely to be able to actually get a high paying job. When it comes to domestic disputes, women are more likely to be arrested then a man, and more likely to be arrested at the first offence. Even if it's self defence.

Most of the people in power are guys. Lawyers and cops? Mostly guys. TV producers, writers, directors? Mostly guys. Politicians? Mostly guys. Bankers? Dudes. According to Forbes, there are 1226 billionaires in the world - 104 of those do not own a wang. Power, socially via the media, monetarily and politically is very firmly in the hands of men, globally.

Yeah, we're getting some backlash. It sucks. But the fact is, all the crap we go through, women have had to have go through something as nasty. If not worse. The fact that we're having some problems doesn't mean people are being horrible to guys just for the sake of being mean to guys, at least not in all cases. It means we're getting treatment similar to that of women. We're actually becoming equal.

That doesn't mean there aren't some major problems, still. When people get divorced dad is a whole lot less likely to get to keep the kids. Or even see them. As a father, that's something that strikes home. But as a father of two daughters, and two sons, I'm a lot more bothered by the fact my daughters are so much more likely to be physically and sexually abused by a future partner. That if they decide to sleep with a guy they face a lot more than just potentially loosing money, and even if they choose to put a child up for adoption or have an abortion that comes with it's own sets of risks and emotional issues.

As for why guys like scantily clad women in there video games (oh hey, the topic) I'm kinda clueless. Even as a horny teen I preferred my female character to have depth, and clothes. My only guess is that it helps some guys feel all is right in the world, and women dressing for them to oggle is somehow good and right. But then, I don't have a very high opinion of some of my gender.

[Viscount K]

JonGarrett wrote:

As for why guys like scantily clad women in there video games (oh hey, the topic) I'm kinda clueless. Even as a horny teen I preferred my female character to have depth, and clothes. My only guess is that it helps some guys feel all is right in the world, and women dressing for them to oggle is somehow good and right. But then, I don't have a very high opinion of some of my gender.

Hokay, so first things first: I am not even beginning to chime in on the rest of this argument, just the bit of your post that applies to the original topic.

The 'why' you refer to in the above quote: This seems fairly obvious, doesn't it? Whether it's politically/ethically correct or not to portray women in this manner is another question entirely, but why would guys like there to be scantily clad and/or sexy women in video games? For the same reasons we would ever like such women to exist anywhere, at any time, in any venue - because we like to look at them. Genetic imperative, pure and simple. I'm certainly not saying that alone is a good reason for including such characters in a game (or media of any kind), but the why, both the why of many guys liking it and the why of its inclusion, is easy.

Whether you meant it to or not, that last paragraph pretty strongly implies that in order to enjoy such things, a man must be some kind of misogynistic jerk. I'd like to think that some of us are capable of appreciating an aesthetic, or a fantasy, without having to believe that "women dressing for them to ogle is somehow good and right". Sure, we prefer characters we interact with to have depth - but a woman having depth does not necessarily mean she must be conservative, nor does a lack of depth mean she must dress or act sexy. And for that matter, seeing an attractive or sexy woman (real or not) and appreciating it is not a bad thing. It's how that influences your behavior that determines the good or bad.

I think the question shouldn't be whether a certain type of behavior, or style of dress, or whatever, should be included in media or not. I think the question should be doing it right. If a woman - or a man, for that matter - is going to look or behave a certain way, then make a character that makes sense for that aesthetic. Sometimes, a woman may be intelligent, strong, and confident, and feels like dressing in a skimpy outfit. As in the game world, so in real life: Good for her.

Just in case somebody feels like jumping down my throat for this, I would like to reiterate one more time that I am not advocating the random inclusion of bikini-clad women just for the amusement of the masses. I'm just saying that when that sort of thing shows up, it's not inherently a bad thing. Only when it's abused is there a problem. Admittedly, it does get abused pretty often, but not every time, is all I'm saying.

[JonGarrett]

I don't object to women character in scanty clothes if there's a reason for it - but how often is there a need? Did Lara Croft need breasts the size of watermelons to be the same character? Nope.

I'm not especially prudish. I'm fine with games like Heavy Rain that have sex scenes. That actually feel relevant to the plot, anyway. But it was certainly noticeable that Madison, the only female character in Heavy Rain, ended up naked more than the others - although in fairness Ethan was not too far behind.

But yes, the above statement was a bit sweeping. I'm sorry about that. I was slightly grumpy.

I, personally, don't get why people want to stare at semi-naked pixels when playing a beat 'em up, and I don't think anyone could argue that Dead or Alive is anything but fanservice.

But yes, I agree with you - it's not about the dress, but about the relevance to a character. Having a nun in lingerie and a wimple while never having her refer to anything sexual is obviously a dumb ass idea. Having the same appearance for a stripper makes sense.

My big problem with games is they tend to be Option A - Sexy for sexy's sake. It honestly does put me off. For example, the newest Tomb Raider is the first one I've considered buying, and only because it's written by Rhianna Pratchett

[Viscount K]

Agreed, mostly. Although I do have to say there is some point to making a character attractive just to make them more pleasing to look at. Agreed, of course, on your initial sentence about Lara Croft, but just to look at it from the other end - did having said *ahem* assets make her a different character? Nope. I mean, sure, they took her to probably-unnecessary extremes, but I can see the purpose in making someone who we're essentially going to be staring at for the next twenty hours or so at least pleasing to the eye: you'll just plain sell more games that way. Attractive people...well, attract, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. And the games certainly didn't do as well as they did just for the (supposed) eye candy - most of the people I know who actually enjoy Tomb Raider are straight girls.

(Just a side note, on Dead or Alive - you're totally right in that the female characters are complete and total, no-holds-barred sexist fanservice, but at least some iterations have had a surprisingly in-depth fighting game hiding underneath their high kicks. I admit to not having played any of them since DoA 3, though, so all that could totally have changed.. As to the 'why'... see my above post. Red-blooded male and all that.)

I can definitely see your point about some games being sexy just 'cause, and that is of course the problem. A related example: There's a comic book that I have long enjoyed, called Gold Digger. The series is chock full of witty humor, awesome action, an engaging setting, and interesting characters, but it is also loaded - allow me to emphasize here, LOADED - with fanservice. To the point that it's almost embarrassing to be a fan of the book. As I've stated, I don't find that sort of thing to be a problem, in its place, but when it's that gratuitous, to the point that it just distracts from what's actually going on, I think we've hit our limit.