RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Microagression as a term implies that a behavior is consciously designed to be aggressive, and applies no distinction to levels of behavior.
If this is your understanding of the term, then I can see why you wouldn't like it. However, microaggression as a noun describes an act. The act itself is aggressive, often even passive-aggressive, and does not concern itself with intent. This is often a problem with discussing oppressive behaviors and acts. If I call someone out for telling an offensive and sexist joke at work, I am not necessarily calling that person sexist as an adjective. Of course, I recognize that some feminists and other activists are quick to point at oppressive actions and label a person as oppressive rather than simply their actions. As to whether it distinguishes between levels of behavior: uh, yeah, that's kind of the whole point of the term. A microaggression is an act that is more low-key oppressive. As opposed to larger acts of aggression, such as publicly shouting sexist slurs, or denying someone a job because of their gender, or some other illegal or widely (although often not widely enough...) shamed and discouraged form of behavior, microaggressions are dangerous because they normalize oppressive ideas and actions by being legal and able to be passed off as "just jokes."
Many of the times it is used are in fairly benign applications, lumping them in with much more serious problems.
As I pointed out just above, microaggressions are called this because they appear "fairly benign." You kind of have to take them on a case-by-case basis, but oppressed groups experience them enough that they have been identified and condemned as a separate problem. Overt sexism is not a "more serious problem" than sexist microaggressions, because they are both sexism. Think of it as the difference between military power and espionage.
In this thread we have examples of a guy sitting with his legs spread apart naturally on a mostly empty subway and a guy silently doing a doubletake of a sexily dressed woman being labeled the same thing as a guy actively crowding the people next to him making them visibly uncomfortable and a guy stalking a woman for 5 minutes after she refused to talk to him. Lumping these types of things into the same category results in people not taking them seriously.
I'm p. tired of the manspreading thing so I'm not gonna touch that (j/k I'll briefly mention it in a few sentences). In the case of the Double Taker, the Crowder, and the Stalker: it's not the term "microaggression" that makes people not take sexism seriously. You've ordered these in ascending order of seriousness, so I'll address them in the reverse order. Stalking: creepy, probably sexist(?), illegal. Crowder: jerk move, not illegal; possibly just non-gendered jerk behavior, but similar to the "manspreading" issue in that as a trend, my partner has never texted me to complain about someone who isn't a man crowding her on public transit (and, as I will keep pointing out, this isn't necessarily even an intentional behavior). Double Taker: not necessarily sexist, or even rude; staring can make people uncomfortable, yeah, so don't do that; but the dynamics of such an interaction can reflect sexist values about women and the value of their appearance. Not so much to do without microaggressions if it's merely a reflexive gesture that the man recognizes and doesn't follow up on. If someone isn't taking women seriously when they claim that they feel uncomfortable and/or unsafe in these situations, that's got more to do with normalized sexism than an over-application of the term "microaggression."
I've had someone call me a Tumblr Feminist in a derogatory way recently, not sure why though, only like 30% of my stuff is feminist blogs. The other 70% is video games and pornography. It was interesting to see which one of those three things offended them the most though.The term is meant to be derogatory, there's no other way of using it.
As to the answer of your question, I'm pretty sure it was your feminist material. There's a very local subsection of the gaming culture that believes feminism is on cruade to eliminate them... or at the very least the material they hold so dear to their hearts, or just change what had been up to now, video gaming's almost exclusive pandering to their baser tastes. There's never been a case of a privileged group taking an attack on their privileges well.
Its not a privilege to like what you like and to be yourself.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
Btw, sorry if it felt like I baited you so I could make my response, but I felt that y'all's dislike for the term was due to a misunderstanding of its definition and use (determined by asking you to explain why you disliked it).
Again, I'll be the first to admit that bandying these terms about willy-nilly can be less than useful. But I don't think that a misuse of the term (and here I'm wary of drifting into the dreaded realm of prescriptive linguistics) as an ill-conceived "catch-phrase" or "buzzword" (if indeed such a thing happens) should be taken as the first and foremost understanding of it. I would also encourage that anyone who is not part of a given oppressed group have a little leeway with how that oppressed group describes their experiences. It's more important to try and understand where someone is coming from than to dictate how they should express themselves.
seeing who uses which buzzword the "right" way as an indication of ideological purity seems more like scause than a cause.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As to the answer of your question, I'm pretty sure it was your feminist material. There's a very local subsection of the gaming culture that believes feminism is on cruade to eliminate them... or at the very least the material they hold so dear to their hearts, or just change what had been up to now, video gaming's almost exclusive pandering to their baser tastes. There's never been a case of a privileged group taking an attack on their privileges well.
There is no privilege or sexism involved. It's simple economics.
Do you know why so many games are targeted at male audiences? Because those games sell. The capitalist market doesn't care who is buying the game. It only cares that game is making money.
Many games are designed by males, for males. When you are trying to create something enjoyable, you tend to add stuff you find enjoyable, therefore, male designers are likely to add things that are enjoyed by male audiences.
So, what exactly are those designers guilty of? Not being women? Well... Guilty as charged.
If women want games targeted at female audiences, then all they have to do is buy and/or produce such games. The vast majority of the gaming community would love to see more female gamers, the few who don't are a ever-shrinking minority.
[Redacted] video games, always [redacted] up this [redacted] thread!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
An ever-shrinking minority that "believes feminism is on crusade to eliminate them... or at the very least the material they hold so dear to their hearts, or just change what had been up to now, video gaming's almost exclusive pandering to their baser tastes."
So what's your point? That unless 100% of male gamers are fine with female gamers, gaming as a whole is sexist?
If video-game is almost exclusively pandering to male tastes, that's is because video-game is almost exclusively being produced and bought by male gamers.
If women (or any other portion of the population, really) want more games targeted at them, then all they have to do is buy, support and/or produce said games.
And what exactly are "baser tastes"? And why is it bad pandering to them?
Is it having half-naked women in products targeted at male audience? Because there are half-naked men in products targeted at female audiences too. What exactly is wrong with a product giving its consumers what they want?
I wonder how feminists would react to men protesting the presence of attractive men in products that are obviously targeted at female audiences...
Is it having male protagonists? If so, I guess My Little Pony is guilty of misandry. Look at that show... Every male character is a minor character, a villain, a sidekick and/or a comic relief...
Wow! Such an obvious hatred of men!
...Or, you know... It's just that way because it's targeted at young girls and their moms.
This is f!~*ing bullshiznit! Comrade Poet has somehow slipped into the #1 contributor to this thread position! There are lines over which you do not cross! This (micro?)aggression will not stand!
Goblins
do
it
in
the
motherf&@~ing
s!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
thejefff...
You squandered such a perfect opportunity to post "C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!!"...
:(
I've had someone call me a Tumblr Feminist in a derogatory way recently, not sure why though, only like 30% of my stuff is feminist blogs. The other 70% is video games and pornography. It was interesting to see which one of those three things offended them the most though.The term is meant to be derogatory, there's no other way of using it.
As to the answer of your question, I'm pretty sure it was your feminist material. There's a very local subsection of the gaming culture that believes feminism is on cruade to eliminate them... or at the very least the material they hold so dear to their hearts, or just change what had been up to now, video gaming's almost exclusive pandering to their baser tastes. There's never been a case of a privileged group taking an attack on their privileges well.
It wasn't a gamer issue, it was based on him being annoyed because he didn't like comments about how it is hard to understand someone's cultural take on gender roles without a good understanding of the culture to begin with, calling a specific feminist blog I reposted 'filth' when it was sandwiched between naked pictures of Triss from the Witcher 2 and pictures of a handsome young man performing fellatio on multiple partners, It tickled my funny bone, I guess what is considered 'filth' really is subjective and changes with the times =)
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
An ever-shrinking minority that "believes feminism is on crusade to eliminate them... or at the very least the material they hold so dear to their hearts, or just change what had been up to now, video gaming's almost exclusive pandering to their baser tastes."So what's your point? That unless 100% of male gamers are fine with female gamers, gaming as a whole is sexist?
At the risk of speaking for thejeff, I believe he was saying that virulent anti-feminists are a minority in games. In this way, I believe he's saying that the majority of gamers are not extreme sexists?
If video-game is almost exclusively pandering to male tastes, that's is because video-game is almost exclusively being produced and bought by male gamers.
About half of all people who play video games are female. At this point, there are more women in their 20's and 30's buying and playing video games than male teenagers. Women do try to get into the video game industry, and their numbers are rising, but the working environment for women in video games in notably sexist and difficult.
If women (or any other portion of the population, really) want more games targeted at them, then all they have to do is buy, support and/or produce said games.
Again, they do buy, support, and produce games. And it's not just that they want games that are made to include them (they do want that), but that games as a whole could be more inclusive and more broadly targeted. Of course, broad targeting is the antithesis of profit, so here sexism and global capitalism work together.
And what exactly are "baser tastes"? And why is it bad pandering to them?
Is it having half-naked women in products targeted at male audience? Because there are half-naked men in products targeted at female audiences too. What exactly is wrong with a product giving what its consumers what they want?
The breast jiggle physics in Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball are different from Kratos in the God of War series, which is still different from the male eye-candy in a Final Fantasy game. I'm legitimately curious what you're thinking of when you say that there are "half-naked men in products targeted at female audiences," because nakedness on its own, without context, doesn't mean much. I could go into more detail about this later, but for now I'll just say that it's a matter of frequency and objectification. The use of women's bodies as objects as opposed to agents--as MacGuffins to further the plot, as decoration, etc.--reinforces negative stereotypes about what women should do, about what they should look like, and generally dictates what women are for (male consumption). This is pretty widespread is mainstream games.
I wonder how feminists would react to men protesting the presence of attractive men in products that are obviously targeted at female audiences...
Again, I'm curious what examples you have in mind? Feminists are not a unified whole, so it would vary from person to person. I guess there are a couple ways to approach this. These are in no particular order, just some thoughts. 1) Well, if you're okay with lots of games having naked women for male consumers, why not the reverse in at least one game? 2) I've seen men protesting this actually, and the comments are often homophobic. When they're not, though, it's a question of: Is it more acceptable to include women with skimpy, sexy "armor" than men with the same? But also, this comes back to the wider issue of frequency and cultural context, in which the sexual objectification of male bodies does not happen nearly as often as the sexual objectification of female ones. Taken as a whole, one objectified male body in a sea of diverse male agents in media isn't 1:1 comparable to the larger trend of female objectification.
Is it having male protagonists? If so, I guess My Little Pony is guilty of misandry. Look at that show... Every male character is a minor character, a villain, a sidekick and/or a comic relief
... Wow! Such an obvious hatred of men!
...Or, you know... It's just that way because it's targeted at young girls and their moms.
Again, frequency. White male protagonists are normalized and standardized, and have a disproportionate presence in games because media portrays that demographic as the default person. I would personally love to see more diverse default protagonists, and more options for diverse character customization. I'm pointing out that there is an over-representation of white dudes as protagonists and saying, "Hey, maybe we could switch that up a little when we make games going forward? Like a little more than it has been? Other people are capable of being cool heroes and anti-heroes, it would be nice to see some representation that I, the non-white-male game consumer, can relate to!"
MLP is also an interesting point to bring up, because it's a great show. And because it's a great show with wide appeal, bronies are a thing, because if dudes wanna watch MLP, (mostly) no one has a problem with that. There is no widespread trend of gendered gatekeeping to silence and dismiss bronies as "fake pony lovers." The same cannot be said of many male gamers (see: the "fake geek girl").
Here's what sexism in video games looks like:
Me: Why is there no option to play as a female character in <insert game title here>?
Game Company: It would have been too expensive! We'd have to do twice the work!
Me: Except this is just one character out of like 100 in the game, and most of the dialog is just text rather than spoken out loud.
Game Company: We'd have to have everyone react differently! That's whole new dialog trees and everything!
Me: ..... only if everyone in the game world is a sexist pig. Maybe you could have a world where people don't scoff at the idea of a strong, independent woman?
Game Company: We'd still have to redo the romance options to include male love interests!
LGBT Community: That's exactly what we've been asking for!
Game Company: Something, something, 3d models!
Me: Yeah, no. The protagonist wears a 500 lb suit of power armor. Use the same goddamned model the male uses. Slapping boobs on the front would just be sexist and stupid.
ad nauseam, ad infinitum
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
About half of all people who play video games are female. At this point, there are more women in their 20's and 30's buying and playing video games than male teenagers.
Exactly. My point is that video=games are not "almost exclusively pandering to male tastes". There are plenty of games with cool, well-written, awesome female characters in a variety of roles. If there are that many females playing games, there is something attracting those women.
You can't say there are more women than men playing games and then say that games are excluding women. It doesn't make sense.
Women do try to get into the video game industry, and their numbers are rising, but the working environment for women in video games in notably sexist and difficult.
Once again, I really freaking doubt sexism is the main reason why there are less female game developers than male ones. I have never seen any convincing evidence. It's always "there are more male engineers than female ones, therefore sexism!" and the usual claim of victimhood that plagues modern feminism.
The breast jiggle physics in Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball are different from Kratos in the God of War series, which is still different from the male eye-candy in a Final Fantasy game.
1- The designers are sexist pigs who want women to stay away from their games.
Tell me, which one is it more likely the reason for existing half-naked women in DoA...1- The designers are sexist pigs who want women to stay out of gaming.
2- The designers made a game with male audiences in mind, and therefore added stuff that said audience would enjoy.
1 is sexism. 2 is just adapting the product to the target audience.
I'm legitimately curious what you're thinking of when you say that there are "half-naked men in products targeted at female audiences," because nakedness on its own, without context, doesn't mean much.
Look at Twilight and its ever-shirtless wolf-dude, which made how much money, again? Or you, know... Any product targeted at women. I'm pretty sure its far more likely to include attractive men as eye-candy than attractive women, who will most likely be the protagonists.
You could say that men generally value appearance more than women do. You'd be right. So freaking what? Despite the insistence in pretending otherwise, men and women are different. They express themselves differently.
That's not to say that any behavior or psychological trait is exclusive to any one gender or that there is anything wrong with having a trait more often found on the opposite sex. Both are perfectly normal and completely fine, but they don't erase the fact that, on average, men and women behave differently and are attracted to different things.
I could go into more detail about this later, but for now I'll just say that it's a matter of frequency and objectification. The use of women's bodies as objects as opposed to agents--as MacGuffins to further the plot, as decoration, etc.--reinforces negative stereotypes about what women should do, about what they should look like, and generally dictates what women are for (male consumption). This is pretty widespread is mainstream games.
Well, I can name dozens of games with strong female characters... From Metroid to Tomb Raider, passing by Mirror's Edge, Transistor, Bayonetta and gods-know how many games where you can pick/create female character that are just as badass as their male friends.
There is also lots of games with lots of violence (including Pathfinder), many of which depict gory violence. And yet... Violence is on decrease.
Here is a little secret: People are not stupid. They can tell the difference between reality and fantasy. Just because they enjoy seeing half-naked girls in DoA doesn't mean they think women are inferior or objects. THey don't have any problem turning those characters into objects, because that's what characters are: objects that exist only to do what the author/player/reader/whatever wants. They are not real people. And consumers know that.
Do you think games make people violent? What about rock music and RPGs? Do they turn youth violent degenerates? No? Then why do you think they would make anyone sexist?
Again, they do buy, support, and produce games. And it's not just that they want games that are made to include them (they do want that), but that games as a whole could be more inclusive and more broadly targeted. Of course, broad targeting is the antithesis of profit, so here sexism and global capitalism work together.
Yeah.. Who would want a larger consumer base, right? I'm sure all those video-game companies are doing their best to make sure their games is as unappealing as possible to half the world population! All because their loyalty to The Patriarchy (tm) is greater than their huunger for money...
Again, frequency. White male protagonists are normalized and standardized, and have a disproportionate presence in games because media portrays that demographic as the default person. I would personally love to see more diverse default protagonists, and more options for diverse character customization. I'm pointing out that there is an over-representation of white dudes as protagonists and saying, "Hey, maybe we could switch that up a little when we make games going forward? Like a little more than it has been? Other people are capable of being cool heroes and anti-heroes, it would be nice to see some representation that I, the non-white-male game consumer, can relate to!"
So... You know... How about buying and producing games with the kind of protagonist you want, instead of expecting huge corporations to do it for you out of the good of their heart? Huge corporations are not known for their empathy and humanity, you know...
I'm all for having a greater diversity of characters, but it's no developer's obligation to do it.
Companies only care about the money they are making. See Dragon Age. You can play as male, female, straight, gay, whatever you want... And it made a lot of money. I'm betting they'll look at that and think "See? Diversity brought us money [i]and[/b] good publicity! Let's add more of it in our future games!".
That's the way to increase diversity in games. Supporting products that have it. Complaining about lack of diversity won't do anything, not because game developers are sexist or, but because companies don't care what you like unless you're buying their product.
MLP is also an interesting point to bring up, because it's a great show. And because it's a great show with wide appeal, bronies are a thing, because if dudes wanna watch MLP, (mostly) no one has a problem with that. There is no widespread trend of gendered gatekeeping to silence and dismiss bronies as "fake pony lovers." The same cannot be said of many male gamers (see: the "fake geek girl").
So what? By your logic ("all protagonists belong to the same gender"), the show is sexist. Imagine if a huge number of male non-bronies, instead of simply not watching the show, decided to go on tumblr and b+~~~ about how the show is obviously prejudiced and excluding them because it has no major male characters, blamed it on a conspiracy to oppress men and then acted like poor oppressed victims because not every show fits their taste... Wouldn't it be pathetic?
It's silly to expect every movie/show/game/whatever to be equally attractive to everyone. This would make all products generic and bland. Every product is made with a target audiences in mind, so it'll cater to that audience's desires.
Men enjoy having attractive women in their games. Therefore, games targeted at male audiences include attractive women. All those companies are doing is giving their audience what they want. There is nothing wrong with that. There is literally nothing sexist about it. It's business 101. Likewise, a product targeted at female audiences will focus on what women enjoy. That includes attractive men... And whatever else the average female likes.
Since most products can't be designed and sold on case-by-case basis, companies do their research and appeal to the traits most commonly found in their target audience.
Here's what sexism in video games looks like...
See, the thing is... Not every game needs the option to play with every possible type of character. Sometimes the developers have an specific character in mind and decide to use that character.
It'd be pretty bad if, say Dragon Age only allowed male, straight characters. The whole idea of the game is customizing your character and having multiple possibilities of interaction with the game world and its characters (including romance).
But, let's say Mario. The reason Nintendo uses Mario instead of Peach is not sexism. It's the same reason they use Mario instead of Yoshi, because Mario is the character we've grown to love and the protagonist of the franchise. Similarly, the reason we play as Samus in every Metroid game is because we've grown to love Samus, not because of misandry.
I do think having greater variety of characters would be awesome, but I also realize the simple fact that the reason companies are reluctant to add said variety is not bigotry, but their desire to make money. If games with straight white male protagonists are the ones that sell the most, then those are the ones that will be created more often.
The only way to change that is proving that the alternative is producing. And the only way to prove it is with our wallets.
Personally... I'll keep buying whatever game I think is fun. I don't care about the character's ethnicity, gender, sexual preference or anything. I don't care if the game has boob jiggle physics or penis jiggle physics.
If it's a fun game, I'll play it. And a good start to make a fun game is having interesting characters.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
Exactly. My point is that video=games are not "almost exclusively pandering to male tastes". There are plenty of games with cool, well-written, awesome female characters in a variety of roles. If there are that many females playing games, there is something attracting those women.
You can't say there are more women than men playing games and then say that games are excluding women. It doesn't make sense.
Except...I'm not saying that they're excluding women from playing them. I was responding to your original point that the video game audience is almost exclusively male. Maybe I misread your tone?
In any case, there are a lot of women playing games, but breaking into the field to make video games is difficult because the workplace environment is hostile to women.
And yeah, there are things that draw people of all genders to play video games. But that doesn't mean those games can't contain problematic elements, or that the industry overall doesn't have a sexist lean, or that there aren't large segments of video game players that don't act like sexist jerks. There are women who love playing Call of Duty multiplayer despite the fact that they get a ton of harassment if they reveal themselves as female. There are women who love playing Mario and Zelda games despite the tired, recurring, sexist damsel in distress plot. It's possible to like something but be dissatisfied with its sexist aspects. If women didn't care about video games, they wouldn't be so invested in seeing the industry change.
Once again, I really freaking doubt sexism is the main reason why there are less female game developers than male ones. I have never seen any convincing evidence. It's always "there are more male engineers than female ones, therefore sexism!" and the usual claim of victimhood that plagues modern feminism.
Okay, I think you're demonstrably wrong on this, but I don't feel like challenging you on this again. At least not right now.
Tell me, which one is it more likely the reason for existing half-naked women in DoA...
1- The designers are sexist pigs who want women to stay out of gaming.
2- The designers made a game with male audiences in mind, and therefore added stuff that said audience would enjoy.1 is sexism. 2 is just adapting the product to the target audience.
Probably reason 2, but I already explained why that's sexism (sexual objectification).
Look at Twilight and its ever-shirtless wolf-dude, which made how much money, again? Or you, know... Any product targeted at women. I'm pretty sure its far more likely to include attractive men as eye-candy than attractive women, who will most likely be the protagonists.
Twilight isn't a video game...? And yeah, Twilight is targeted at women, but there are feminist reasons to dislike it (mainly that it glorifies an abusive relationship). There's a conversation to be had about women in the movie industry, but it seems mostly irrelevant to talk about now.
You could say that men generally value appearance more than women do. You'd be right. So freaking what? Despite the insistence in pretending otherwise, men and women are different. They express themselves differently.
That's not to say that any behavior or psychological trait is exclusive to any one gender or that there is anything wrong with having a trait more often found on the opposite sex. Both are perfectly normal and completely fine, but they don't erase the fact that, on average, men and women behave differently and are attracted to different things.
Yeah, but a lot of this is less "inherent psychological trait" and more "psychological condition determined by culture." I think you're giving way too much credit to nature instead of nurture, as it were.
Also, the "So freaking what?" is that women are much more affected by standards of appearance than men. A woman's appearance has to fit in a much narrower band of acceptability, which affects how people respond to them (harassment and appearance policing), their ability to be employed, their health. The majority of people with easily fatal eating disorders are women. So that's the "So freaking what." Again, could go into this more, will leave it at that for now.
Well, I can name dozens of games with strong female characters... From Metroid to Tomb Raider, passing by Mirror's Edge, Transistor, Bayonetta and gods-know how many games where you can pick/create female character that are just as badass as their male friends.
Yeah, but for every game you can name with a female protagonist, there are five more AAA games with exclusively male protagonists. Just because there are female protagonists doesn't mean there's not an unequal distribution. Also, just having an exclusively female protagonist doesn't somehow make a game free of sexist elements. Consider that Lara Croft is a woman because the developers wanted to ogle her pixel-y butt rather than stare at a pixel-man's. I've heard that Bayonetta has a decent storyline and gameplay, in which NPCs treat her with respect and aren't sexist. But that doesn't matter when there are women who won't experience that because they choose not to play the game because of the sexually objectifying costume/advertising/box art.
There is also lots of games with lots of violence (including Pathfinder), many of which depict gory violence. And yet... Violence is on decrease.
Violent games often portray violence differently between genders, too. Consider the ads for a recent Hitman game, in which assassinated male bodies are presented in relatively neutral poses, but assassinated female bodies are presented in (unnecessarily) sexual poses. Also, you want to talk about violence in Pathfinder? Go read through the first book of Kingmaker. The human(oid) NPCs with back stories are a smorgasbord of using violence against women to drive their motivations and desires. There are men who have had violence done to them as part of their back stories, too, but generally they get to be NPCs with stat blocks and plot potential, not narrative blips to drive male stories.
Here is a little secret: People are not stupid. They can tell the difference between reality and fantasy. Just because they enjoy seeing half-naked girls in DoA doesn't mean they think women are inferior or objects. THey don't have any problem turning those characters into objects, because that's what characters are: objects that exist only to do what the author/player/reader/whatever wants. They are not real people. And consumers know that.
But when you're playing a game, the protagonist is not the object, it's the subject. It's an avatar subject to the player's will, but it's also the subject who acts with agency in the game. And more often than not (the key phrase here), male characters are agents and actors while female ones are objects--sexual, plot, whatever.
Do you think games make people violent? What about rock music and RPGs? Do they turn youth violent degenerates? No? Then why do you think they would make anyone sexist?
I literally never said this. I do think that sexist people raised in a sexist culture make sexist video games, though.
So... You know... How about buying and producing games with the kind of protagonist you want...
Been there, explained that.
So what? By your logic ("all protagonists belong to the same gender"), the show is sexist. Imagine if a huge number of male non-bronies, instead of simply not watching the show, decided to go on tumblr and b$~!+ about how the show is obviously prejudiced and excluding them because it has no major male characters and acted like poor oppressed victims because not every show fits their taste... Wouldn't it be pathetic?
Bro, your posts keep getting deleted because you keep talking about tumblr.
It's silly to expect every movie/show/game/whatever to be equally attractive to everyone. This would make all products generic and bland. Every product is made with a target audiences in mind, so it'll cater to that audience's desires.
Yeah, but video games are a diverse medium with a diverse fan base. So why do they keep making the majority of their games with white guys as the target audience? Shouldn't they be branching out a bit to capitalize on that diverse market?
Men enjoy having attractive women in their games. Therefore, games targeted at male audiences include attractive women. All those companies are doing is giving their audience what they want. There is nothing wrong with that. There is literally nothing sexist about it. It's business 101.
Sexually objectifying women is a frequent, sexist marketing technique. It is literally sexist. They are doing a sexist thing. There is everything sexist about it. Capitalism is not concerned with ethics, it is concerned with profit, and if sexism is what gets them profit, they'll do it. Which is wrong.
I am honestly curious about some things in this topic:
First, if half of gamers are women, does this mean women consume the same types of games as men? Because I was under the quite distinct impression that women were a far smaller percentage of those who play the A-budget titles, with most female gamers focusing on app games or at least far lower budget projects. This, in turn, would deny the idea that A-budget titles should be designed equally with them in mind. If they WERE as many as the male gamers, I believe we would see a pretty strong proliferation of studios willing to make A-budget games about shirtless werewolves. And of course, it is a given that low-budget games won't go too much into titillating subjects, given that it's typically a costly thing to do, what with heavy graphics and so on.
Second, if feminists cast any game that doesn't have a female protagonist as sexist (due to ignoring women), and any game that has one as sexist (consider Ms Pacman, if you will, seen as THE WORST example of sexism in gaming by some...), what do they hope will happen? If even the obvious protests against sexism are judged to be sexist crap, like Watchdogs, it is getting difficult. If you want someone to change, it's usually seen as pretty useless to condemn them whatever they do.
I believe most people are sensible if they take the time to think about things. That certainly doesn't mean all of them are. Some are too fixated on their protests that they lose sight of their goal. Hopefully, that goal is to make gaming a vibrant, interesting scene where everyone can be welcome, where people can give us interesting stories and characters, that breaks new ground, and even possibly change people's minds about some things. That certainly isn't where we are today. Most of the money in the industry is poured into stupid military propaganda games, and everything else tends to follow suit. So, if we want to change the industry for the better, it is far more important to point out the good than the bad. Otherwise, if the push for change merely hits the things you don't like - and that's going to be the depiction of women itself. To the big companies, it's going to be far easier not to depict women at all than to take risks with female characters. The feminists will holler, but that beating is easier to withstand. Cue Medal of Duty XXXVIII.
Or can things change for the better? What have been good depictions of women in games? Why?
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
First, if half of gamers are women, does this mean women consume the same types of games as men? Because I was under the quite distinct impression that women were a far smaller percentage of those who play the A-budget titles, with most female gamers focusing on app games or at least far lower budget projects. This, in turn, would deny the idea that A-budget titles should be designed equally with them in mind. If they WERE as many as the male gamers, I believe we would see a pretty strong proliferation of studios willing to make A-budget games about shirtless werewolves. And of course, it is a given that low-budget games won't go too much into titillating subjects, given that it's typically a costly thing to do, what with heavy graphics and so on.
Excellent points. It's true that women don't play the big-budget triple-A's in as large numbers as men do. But that's hardly surprising, given that those games are often the worst offenders as far as toxic multi-player communities, lack of playable female characters, and sexist portrayals of female NPCs. This isn't, of course, to say that indie games are always better. Many of them are still sexist, and in many of the same ways. But there are also plenty of triple-A's that are striving to be more inclusive, like your Mass Effects, Dragon Ages, etc. However, I would like to point out that feminist criticism of trends in gaming production, culture, and content is not somehow cancelled out by a capitalist argument of which demographic is more profitable to cater to. Video games are a medium, and therefore an expression of culture, and there is nothing inherently gendered about it.
The other thing about this is that the games women play more of are often decried as "not real games" by "hardcore" gamers. This is essentially just more gatekeeping. It also ignores that video games are just a medium, so the more interesting line to pursue is "how many different kinds of things can video games do?" The "real games" line is just a No True Scotsman argument that ultimately hampers the creativity of the field. Again, though, creativity and profit are not necessarily aimed in the same direction.
Second, if feminists cast any game that doesn't have a female protagonist as sexist (due to ignoring women), and any game that has one as sexist (consider Ms Pacman, if you will, seen as THE WORST example of sexism in gaming by some...), what do they hope will happen? If even the obvious protests against sexism are judged to be sexist crap, like Watchdogs, it is getting difficult. If you want someone to change, it's usually seen as pretty useless to condemn them whatever they do.
Again, I'll point out that lacking a female protagonist is not necessarily sexist, not on its own. But in the larger cultural context of long-spanning trends in video games, male protagonists continue to be the norm. And male characters are disproportionately given agency as protagonists and NPCs compared to female NPCs, who are usually objectified as plot objects or sex objects. Watchdogs, to use your example, uses women's bodies as plot-fuel for the male protagonist. Honestly, I don't know much about this game, but from what I've seen it's like playing Liam Neeson in Taken as an Assassin's Creed game? It does violence to female NPCs in order to give the protagonist motivation. Yet-Another-Gruff-Brunette-White-Guy-In-His-Thirties protag guy gets to shoot bad guys for vengeance, and it's basically just an "edgier" version of the damsel in distress. It's boring, it's played out, and it keeps happening. Watchdogs doesn't seem to engage with anti-sexism in any meaningful way. Again, I haven't played it, but it basically seems like the plot of Taken (which I have similar problems with), mixed with a little bit of justified Minority Report precog-justice (which is a little terrifying in its own right).
As a feminist, I just want more positive representation of people who aren't white guys. This means: PCs and NPCs with agency, a lack of unchallenged stereotyping, no unchallenged sexual objectification. Basically more games where the people who get the short end of the stick in other games get to do more cool video game stuff.
Cue Medal of Duty XXXVIII.
Funnily enough, I heard that the producer (maybe some other high up position?) of Call of Duty said that most CoD players aren't "real gamers" because they rarely branch out into other titles.
Or can things change for the better? What have been good depictions of women in games? Why?
I believe Anita Sarkeesian has a Curator list on Steam? It looks like it's under the Steam group Feminist Frequency. That might be a good place to start. Otherwise, I'll need some time for the what and the why.
An old but funny and relevant rant from the forever pontificating Jim Sterling: Here.
The number of things games can do will not exactly flourish if anyone who tries to do something different has to worry about feminist backlash with substantial support. A good example of this is Heavy Rain. The infamous dance scene has garnered criticism, but the scene is relevant in the context of the game, and it is one facet of a game that definitely does its best to break new ground. Using your example of Mass Effect gives us the alien sideboob debacle. To my thinking, computer games should be able to deal with human nature and all its complexity, not merely the violent facets. If it is to be able to do that, sexuality in a wide meaning is going to be pretty big on that plate. Shirtless werewolves, femmes fatales, vulnerable men and women, strong men and women, and so on.
So what exactly is wrong with something being gendered?
Criticism of a piece of media can be helpful though, CD PROJEKT RED listened to fans when they were told the 'women I've boned' collectable card game from the first Witcher was going pretty far in a negative direction. They were like 'alright, let's not do that again' they corrected it for the next game and the Witcher games are still filled with more sex than a late night Showtime movie. It is great fun traveling the world killing monsters and sleeping with heaps of random people.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
So now the question is: do I keep going in circles and re-explaining myself? If you're just going to keep asking broad questions while ignoring the contexts I keep providing, I suggest you just reread my posts.
An old but funny and relevant rant from the forever pontificating Jim Sterling: Here.
Aside from the disturbing (farcical?) sexual advances at the end, this essentially gets at my main points. The issues are:
-the female subject versus the female object-sexism within the game industry, among game makers (often in the context of a marketing catch-22).
And since I already opened the Pandora's Box that is merely mentioning Anita Sarkeesian, here's a video where she proposes what a feminist subversion of the damsel in distress trope could look like in a game.
The number of things games can do will not exactly flourish if anyone who tries to do something different has to worry about feminist backlash with substantial support.
...
To my thinking, computer games should be able to deal with human nature and all its complexity, not merely the violent facets. If it is to be able to do that, sexuality in a wide meaning is going to be pretty big on that plate. Shirtless werewolves, femmes fatales, vulnerable men and women, strong men and women, and so on.
As the video Yuugasa provided points out, "doing something different" like having a female protagonist is met within the industry by a lack of funding/advertising, not to mention other people reacting with sexist "you can't have female protagonists" and homophobia (our male players don't want to play a lady who kisses a dude! That's gay!).
The infamous dance scene has garnered criticism, but the scene is relevant in the context of the game, and it is one facet of a game that definitely does its best to break new ground. Using your example of Mass Effect gives us the alien sideboob debacle.
As I keep repeating, it's entirely possible to enjoy, even respect a game, while still being critical about its flaws. But for some reason people react much more violently when I say "Hey, Mass Effect is cool, but it does have some of the ol' female sexual objectification," than when I say "Hey, Mass Effect is cool, but these elevator rides are ridiculously long. It's kind of silly."
The lack of funding/advertising is most likely an effect of female gamers playing mostly app games, wouldn't you say? Every single computer game company is at most three failed games from bankruptcy, and if games targeted to women do not sell, it is a harsh bargain to sell to them. No matter what they, you, me or anyone think about it.
As for being critical about a game's flaws, you are right, in theory. The alien sideboob mess had people claiming on national TV that it was a game (IIRC) about enslaving females and forced sex. None of them had played it, of course, but that didn't matter. Some brave people went out to counter their crap, though. If they had not, it would have been a very uncomfortable situation for Bioware. The point is, by focusing on the bad, which you express as criticizing the flaws of a game you like, you send a message. This message gets amplified through a massive sounding board of people who have no idea what a Mass Effect is. This gets interpreted by the company as "that game was a problem, let's not do that again". I know you hope for "our depiction of alien sideboobs was a problem, let's not do that again", but the truth is, a complaint is a complaint about a brand.
What you need to do is show an equally strong support of precisely what games you like did RIGHT.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am honestly curious about some things in this topic:
First, if half of gamers are women, does this mean women consume the same types of games as men? Because I was under the quite distinct impression that women were a far smaller percentage of those who play the A-budget titles, with most female gamers focusing on app games or at least far lower budget projects. This, in turn, would deny the idea that A-budget titles should be designed equally with them in mind. If they WERE as many as the male gamers, I believe we would see a pretty strong proliferation of studios willing to make A-budget games about shirtless werewolves. And of course, it is a given that low-budget games won't go too much into titillating subjects, given that it's typically a costly thing to do, what with heavy graphics and so on.
Second, if feminists cast any game that doesn't have a female protagonist as sexist (due to ignoring women), and any game that has one as sexist (consider Ms Pacman, if you will, seen as THE WORST example of sexism in gaming by some...), what do they hope will happen? If even the obvious protests against sexism are judged to be sexist crap, like Watchdogs, it is getting difficult. If you want someone to change, it's usually seen as pretty useless to condemn them whatever they do.
I believe most people are sensible if they take the time to think about things. That certainly doesn't mean all of them are. Some are too fixated on their protests that they lose sight of their goal. Hopefully, that goal is to make gaming a vibrant, interesting scene where everyone can be welcome, where people can give us interesting stories and characters, that breaks new ground, and even possibly change people's minds about some things. That certainly isn't where we are today. Most of the money in the industry is poured into stupid military propaganda games, and everything else tends to follow suit. So, if we want to change the industry for the better, it is far more important to point out the good than the bad. Otherwise, if...
The closest character I have ever heard of being described as a positive video game female character is Jade from Beyond Good and Evil. Of course feminists still attacked her for being physically unrealistic, despite the fact that I personally know women with her, or more extreme, proportions. I've also seen her get attacked by feminists because she takes care of the other children in her orphanage and is maternalistic.
As a side note I find it really amusing that my spell checker has paternalistic but not maternalistic.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Btw, sorry if it felt like I baited you so I could make my response, but I felt that y'all's dislike for the term was due to a misunderstanding of its definition and use (determined by asking you to explain why you disliked it).
Again, I'll be the first to admit that bandying these terms about willy-nilly can be less than useful. But I don't think that a misuse of the term (and here I'm wary of drifting into the dreaded realm of prescriptive linguistics) as an ill-conceived "catch-phrase" or "buzzword" (if indeed such a thing happens) should be taken as the first and foremost understanding of it. I would also encourage that anyone who is not part of a given oppressed group have a little leeway with how that oppressed group describes their experiences. It's more important to try and understand where someone is coming from than to dictate how they should express themselves.
I think you misunderstand me. I have no problem with the definition. I have a problem with its use. It gets used to describe behavior as being aggressive that is in no way such. It gets used to describe every possible behavior someone can take that isn't strictly towing the feminist line, and even sometimes then. If a guy shows any sign of interest in someone, I've seen it somehow labeled a microaggression. The term is being used as a sledgehammer to say any non-puritanical male thoughts are somehow oppressive, regardless of how he acts on them.
Forgive me, but I feel sex shaming is a bad thing. The US is too puritanical society as it is.
Worth mentioning perhaps that Jade has a scene where she is pretty much enveloped by a fleshy tentacle plant thing, so there is that...
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
The lack of funding/advertising is most likely an effect of female gamers playing mostly app games, wouldn't you say?
Hmmmmm maaaaaaaybe, but it could also just be the effect of a fearful male-dominated industry. I understand that video games, especially the larger titles, are huge monetary investments, and so any deviation from their formula is seen as a potentially disastrous risk. And this isn't without reason, because if they don't make that money back, they have to fire a bunch of people and potentially don't get to make games anymore. But again, it's a chicken-and-egg sort of thing: a game that got half the advertising budget didn't do as well in sales. It's not just difficult to know whether Remember Me got a low ad budget because "games with female protags don't sell as well," or because that perception was the reason for the low ad budget that resulted in lower sales; it's impossible to know.
In any case, I don't think the percentage of consumers buying high-end console games is so skewed along gender lines that these companies shouldn't at least make some effort. And to be fair, some are trying, but the larger trends and internal industry attitudes are discouraging.
This also doesn't address the fact that you don't have to completely identify with a video game protagonist in order to enjoy a game! Women and non-men play games all the time with protags that don't match their gender, and still enjoy them. The problem is that certain people in the industry and the player base see any move toward gender diversity or equal inclusion as an "imbalance." Consider the infamously whiny homophobes on the Bioware forums, or the game developers who literally say "You can't have this woman protag kiss a dude, it will make the male players [because, of course, only dudes are playing games] feel awkward."
National TV stuff
Television news is trash and I'm not really interested in discussing my responsibility for it. Because it's not my responsibility. And even if it is, am I not here right now saying over and over again that we need a more nuanced approach to games?
What you need to do is show an equally strong support of precisely what games you like did RIGHT.
In general ways? In feminist-approved ways? I'll interpret this as an additional challenge, but I don't really have the proper effort to give it just at this moment.
Ideally, this would be the realm of video game reviews. But game reviews are a joke where graphics and functionality are given high scores over any real critical concerns. What greater sign of the immaturity of game reviews where the scoring acts like the American school grading system (worst game ever, worst possible score: 5/10!)?
Krensky: Oh, that is horrible! Where do I send my followers to protest about Mirror's edge???
MechaPoet: Game reviews are a true swamp of misery, and ceased being useful for any purpose ages ago.
My point about TV was merely that complaints can very easily become problems the companies do not want to deal with. Thus, if you want to improve things for real, complain about the things that are not redeemable.
And IIRC, AAA title players are not just mostly male, but overwhelmingly so. Perhaps someone has data?
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
What you need to do is show an equally strong support of precisely what games you like did RIGHT.
I like the Youtube channel Errant Signal for some pretty good, actually critical game reviews and commentary on gaming topics. Recommended videos (from newest to oldest): GTAV, Watch_Dogs, Civilization, Actual Sunlight + Depression Quest, "Keep Your Politics Out of my Video Games", Gone Home . . . that's probably a good place to stop with my recs for now.
MechaPoet: Game reviews are a true swamp of misery, and ceased being useful for any purpose ages ago.
My point about TV was merely that complaints can very easily become problems the companies do not want to deal with. Thus, if you want to improve things for real, complain about the things that are not redeemable.
And IIRC, AAA title players are not just mostly male, but overwhelmingly so. Perhaps someone has data?
Last I saw was over 70% male for the Call of Duty franchise.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
Again, I'll point out that lacking a female protagonist is not necessarily sexist, not on its own. But in the larger cultural context of long-spanning trends in video games, male protagonists continue to be the norm. And male characters are disproportionately given agency as protagonists and NPCs compared to female NPCs, who are usually objectified as plot objects or sex objects. Watchdogs, to use your example, uses women's bodies as plot-fuel for the male protagonist. Honestly, I don't know much about this game, but from what I've seen it's like playing Liam Neeson in Taken as an Assassin's Creed game? It does violence to female NPCs in order to give the protagonist motivation. Yet-Another-Gruff-Brunette-White-Guy-In-His-Thirties protag guy gets to shoot bad guys for vengeance, and it's basically just an "edgier" version of the damsel in distress. It's boring, it's played out, and it keeps happening. Watchdogs doesn't seem to engage with anti-sexism in any meaningful way. Again, I haven't played it, but it basically seems like the plot of Taken (which I have similar problems with), mixed with a little bit of justified Minority Report precog-justice (which is a little terrifying in its own right).* Sigh.
No.
Why do you even try and critique a game you admit you never played or know anything about? This is the problem with most of critical theory, it's more interested in proving it's argument then actually examining literary works. Basically everything you said about the game is completely wrong. Laughably so.
It's like someone saying: "Mirror's Edge is a horrible game because it's all about running to get to makeup and clothing sales and make it to Faith's date with her boyfriend on time."
I said I never played it, but to claim that I don't know anything about it is a bit presumptuous.
But anyway, if you want to come back when you're more interested in "actually examining literary works" instead of just condescendingly dismissing me, I'll be here.
If you're going to say, 'no game sells as well as ______', please at least list a game in the top 10 most sold. Madden isn't even on that list, and the best Call of Duty has ever placed is #14.