As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Dead Island PR come up with most appalling idea in history of gaming PR

145791058

Posts

  • Options
    urahonkyurahonky Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Alright. Glad we sorted that out! I think you guys are wrong and you think I'm wrong. Welcome to the Internet! :)

    You could not have missed the point more. You don't like it because it's ugly, we all agree. We don't like it because it's ugly AND mysoginistic; you give us a golf clap for effort.

    No. I fucking get it. It is sexist because it has perfect boobs. Which is a lie because everyone knows that even if it didn't have the boobs you guys would still be up in arms about how it's a woman's corpse mutilated and not a man's corpse.

    YAY LOGICAL FALLACY!

    Please, go on telling me how offended I'd be if the statue was less offensive.

    Please keep telling me how I'm a horrible person for not seeing anything sexist from a fucking corpse statue. I do love hearing that.

  • Options
    Magic PinkMagic Pink Tur-Boner-Fed Registered User regular
    Fawst wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Fawst wrote: »
    Misogynistic? No, I won't agree to that.

    You don't need to. It will remain mysoginistic with or without your approval.

    OK, then explain how it's misogynistic. I think it's sexist because of its idealistic (to put it foolishly) portrayal of the female body. But can you prove 100% that it exists because the creator hates women? I'm going with the dictionary definition here, so please, if you can explain to me how that is a wrong interpretation of the word, I'd appreciate and welcome it.

    read the last 5 pages again.

  • Options
    rRootagearRootagea MadisonRegistered User regular
    edited January 2013
    It's called "zombie bait" but it sure ain't baiting the zombies.

    rRootagea on
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    Magic Pink hit it on the head. urahonky, my whole problem with your position in disagreeing with us is that you keep referring to it as "trying" on our part. You're implying that we're being disingenuous in our reactions, and that's pretty shitty man.

  • Options
    PreciousBodilyFluidsPreciousBodilyFluids Registered User regular
    Fawst wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Fawst wrote: »
    Misogynistic? No, I won't agree to that.

    You don't need to. It will remain mysoginistic with or without your approval.

    OK, then explain how it's misogynistic. I think it's sexist because of its idealistic (to put it foolishly) portrayal of the female body. But can you prove 100% that it exists because the creator hates women? I'm going with the dictionary definition here, so please, if you can explain to me how that is a wrong interpretation of the word, I'd appreciate and welcome it.
    Fawst wrote: »
    Objectification of women as just a pair of tits? Yes, in a literal sense, this is. Misogynistic? No, I won't agree to that.

    Alright, let's settle this then, since all you seem to care about is semantics.

    Regardless of whether you want to call it misogyny, can you at least admit that the literal reduction of a woman to a pair of tits is a bad thing? Can you really not understand why some of us feel that is a bad thing and that we should express that it is a bad thing?

    Oh, and to pre-emptively reply to your "lol wikipedia" response, you'll find it's an incredibly well-sourced article.

  • Options
    FawstFawst The road to awe.Registered User regular
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Fawst wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Fawst wrote: »
    Misogynistic? No, I won't agree to that.

    You don't need to. It will remain mysoginistic with or without your approval.

    OK, then explain how it's misogynistic. I think it's sexist because of its idealistic (to put it foolishly) portrayal of the female body. But can you prove 100% that it exists because the creator hates women? I'm going with the dictionary definition here, so please, if you can explain to me how that is a wrong interpretation of the word, I'd appreciate and welcome it.

    read the last 5 pages again.

    No, you don't get to wiggle out of it like that. That's not a valid explanation. You tell me what is misogynistic about it in your own words.

  • Options
    Death of RatsDeath of Rats Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Alright. Glad we sorted that out! I think you guys are wrong and you think I'm wrong. Welcome to the Internet! :)

    You could not have missed the point more. You don't like it because it's ugly, we all agree. We don't like it because it's ugly AND mysoginistic; you give us a golf clap for effort.

    No. I fucking get it. It is sexist because it has perfect boobs. Which is a lie because everyone knows that even if it didn't have the boobs you guys would still be up in arms about how it's a woman's corpse mutilated and not a man's corpse.

    YAY LOGICAL FALLACY!

    Please, go on telling me how offended I'd be if the statue was less offensive.

    Please keep telling me how I'm a horrible person for not seeing anything sexist from a fucking corpse statue. I do love hearing that.

    Wow man, keep fucking that chicken and putting words in people's mouths that no one said and feeling all butthurt because people other than you realize this shit actually matters and hurts the industry. No one is making a judgement about you, we're pointing out that your opinion on the matter doesn't change the reality of the situation.

    If you can't handle that, and it fucks up your worldview, and makes you feel all sad inside, maybe you shouldn't talk about this shit.

    No I don't.
  • Options
    PreciousBodilyFluidsPreciousBodilyFluids Registered User regular
    edited January 2013
    Above you @Fawst. Like really, one post above you.

    I can quote it again if you're hell bent on ignoring it?

    PreciousBodilyFluids on
  • Options
    DelzhandDelzhand Hard to miss. Registered User regular
    I can't really picture the sort of person who would be comfortable having something like that displayed in their household.

    I'd imagine the cops just seeing this thing in your living room is probable cause

  • Options
    Magic PinkMagic Pink Tur-Boner-Fed Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Alright. Glad we sorted that out! I think you guys are wrong and you think I'm wrong. Welcome to the Internet! :)

    You could not have missed the point more. You don't like it because it's ugly, we all agree. We don't like it because it's ugly AND mysoginistic; you give us a golf clap for effort.

    No. I fucking get it. It is sexist because it has perfect boobs. Which is a lie because everyone knows that even if it didn't have the boobs you guys would still be up in arms about how it's a woman's corpse mutilated and not a man's corpse.

    YAY LOGICAL FALLACY!

    Please, go on telling me how offended I'd be if the statue was less offensive.

    Please keep telling me how I'm a horrible person for not seeing anything sexist from a fucking corpse statue. I do love hearing that.

    Quote anyone calling you a horrible person. Seriously.

  • Options
    Skull2185Skull2185 Registered User regular
    I can agree that this statue is a little too sexualized, and can be viewed as mysonginistic. And is a thing that people should be angry over. I don't like the 100% agreed upon sentiment that any person who would want a statue like this is some psychotic weirdo. There are alot of people, both male and female, who are horror film enthusiasts. They see all the films, read the magazines and collect memoribilia(while still being completely normal, nice people). A statue like this would be something they'd like, even one exactly like this and not viewed as sexualized violence towards women, but rather just a cool piece of horror/gore memoribilia.

    That's a different topic altogether though, just something I'm seeing alot that's been bugging me.

    Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
  • Options
    TubeTube Registered User admin
    I'm going to suggest at this point that you might be arguing in circles and that there isn't a magical line of reasoning that is going to persuade the only two people in this thread who think this statue is perfectly fine that they are wrong when their own two eyes and functioning brains are not doing that job for them.

  • Options
    One Thousand CablesOne Thousand Cables An absence of thought Registered User regular
    Fawst wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Fawst wrote: »
    Misogynistic? No, I won't agree to that.

    You don't need to. It will remain mysoginistic with or without your approval.

    OK, then explain how it's misogynistic. I think it's sexist because of its idealistic (to put it foolishly) portrayal of the female body. But can you prove 100% that it exists because the creator hates women? I'm going with the dictionary definition here, so please, if you can explain to me how that is a wrong interpretation of the word, I'd appreciate and welcome it.

    It's misogynistic because it implies that women only have value as sexual objects--it's a piece that is clearly intended for display (and is sold as such), but only portrays an eroticized torso with the limbs and head violently hacked off (as if to say that the boobs are the only important part, anyway.) That's my read on it, and it's probably a waste of time to write this out because you'll no doubt find some semantic reason why it doesn't fit your criteria.

  • Options
    Death of RatsDeath of Rats Registered User regular
    edited January 2013
    Ignorance and apathy are pretty good reasons not to understand something.

    Ignorance and apathy are not good reasons to project dislike for something onto yourself.

    Me disliking your car doesn't mean I dislike you.

    Me disliking your favorite TV show doesn't mean I dislike you.

    And me thinking the videogame industry is sexist doesn't mean I think gamers are inherently sexist or horrible or whatever.

    Death of Rats on
    No I don't.
  • Options
    Maz-Maz- 飛べ Registered User regular
    Man, this is just..weird. How does something like this get greenlighted? I don't really think it's misogynistic, just..stupid.

    Still, they had to know that they'd some flak over this, which could be to the detriment of the game. The first one was critized for basically being in a beta state when it was released and how the trailer nothing to do with the finished product and got rightfully critizised for it, so one would think they'd be more alert to stuff like this.

    Add me on Switch: 7795-5541-4699
  • Options
    PreciousBodilyFluidsPreciousBodilyFluids Registered User regular
    @urahonky I want you to respond directly to what I said earlier.
    urahonky wrote: »
    So it's the boobs that are the problem here?

    It's the sexualization of a horribly dismembered female torso, yes

    It's the fact that this is a statue of a woman, completely and bloodily torn down until all that remained of her were her perfect breasts, somehow unscathed.

    If you cannot see the objectification is this, I really do not know what else to say.

    And I want you to answer if you truly do not think this is objectification. Like, not one bit.

    Don't change the subject. This is not about a hypothetical different statue that would offend us. And I am not calling you anything. I'm asking you; do you really not think that it is objectification? Do you truly not see even a little bit of sexism in what I just described?

  • Options
    urahonkyurahonky Registered User regular
    Henroid wrote: »
    Magic Pink hit it on the head. urahonky, my whole problem with your position in disagreeing with us is that you keep referring to it as "trying" on our part. You're implying that we're being disingenuous in our reactions, and that's pretty shitty man.

    Okay I get what is being said here. And let me make sure that I'm right in this:

    The statue is fucking ugly (I agree). It is sexist because it literally brings a woman down to just boobs, and that if everything on her chest was mutilated it wouldn't be that bad. Correct? I see where you are coming from...

    I honestly believe you guys are trying to see something malicious in it. I agree: They should have made her more "zombie" like (since it is a fucking zombie game). It would have been much better if the flesh had holes and whatever everywhere on it (though would be even creepier). I just don't honestly believe that it was made with the intent of objectionably woman (which is arguably much worse than actively trying to).

    I'm sorry when I said "trying". When I saw the thing I said "ugly.. move on" and didn't really dissect the statue. That's all I meant... Not that you were trying to see something that didn't exist.

  • Options
    Ragnar DragonfyreRagnar Dragonfyre Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Alright. Glad we sorted that out! I think you guys are wrong and you think I'm wrong. Welcome to the Internet! :)

    You could not have missed the point more. You don't like it because it's ugly, we all agree. We don't like it because it's ugly AND mysoginistic; you give us a golf clap for effort.

    No. I fucking get it. It is sexist because it has perfect boobs. Which is a lie because everyone knows that even if it didn't have the boobs you guys would still be up in arms about how it's a woman's corpse mutilated and not a man's corpse.

    YAY LOGICAL FALLACY!

    Please, go on telling me how offended I'd be if the statue was less offensive.

    Would you be offended if it was a statue of a man's torso.

    Y/N?

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    tastydonutstastydonuts Registered User regular
    edited January 2013
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    I'm not saying "why is it offending you?" I'm saying "I can see what you guys are trying to see on something".

    You're still telling us we're wrong.

    I don't think he's trying to tell you that you're wrong. Just because somebody views something differently from you it does not explicitly mean that they are saying your view is wrong. LIke it or not, it's arguably a work of "art", and with that comes that level of subjection. There's a lot of emotion flying around here and it seems to be shutting down reason. :|

    I think it's a tasteless and poorly thought out marketing idea. I don't think the dudes that thought this up are misogynist, because it's entirely possible that they may have, in their ignorance, thought this was a good idea that people would like...

    That doesn't change the fact the end result IS mysoginistic and needs to be treated as such.

    And yes, he is saying we're wrong. Read his posts again. Pay attention to him saying what we're "trying" to do.

    Yea, I read his prior posts and I didn't see it as such. He used "trying to see" because he didn't interpret it the same way you did. From your perspective I guess it could be viewed as saying you're wrong. For me to "try and understand" you doesn't necessarily mean that what you're stating is wrong or unintelligible, for instance. But that's just how I'm reading what was stated...

    I can agree with you guys in that the statue isn't appealing in the slightest, and it was a dumb thing to produce... and I'll leave it at. idk.

    tastydonuts on
    “I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
  • Options
    SmokeStacksSmokeStacks Registered User regular
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Actually? Yes. And it's not that it's boobs, it's PERFECT BREASTS on a mutilated torso.

    Imagine if this statue instead was of a man's severed pelvis, bloody, with a throbbing, engorged cock, 10" easy, bulging from the scraps of ripped speedo, desperately struggling to restrain it.

    More to the point, think about how that would never happen.

    I know this says absolutely nothing good about me, but I'd probably find that fucking hilarious, and giggle like a 6th grader every time I looked at it.

    You should; it would be funny as hell.

    Sadly, you will never see it outsde of a gay sex shop yet you will see the opposite everywhere you go.

    Whoa chief, back the truck up. Are you trying to say that men are no oversexualised today?

    Because that would just be silly.

    Have you seen the average mall clothing store ad lately? The one with the shredded guy seductively pulling off his shirt while staring right at you? Find me a non-sexually attractive male in advertising or entertainment (that doesn't come from a stoner comedy).

    Regardless of whether or not the statue is sexist, to claim that only women experience hypersexualisation in modern society is stupid. A woman's "society tells me that I should wish I had tits and an ass like hers" is a man's "society tells me that I should wish I had abs and a jaw like his".

    Whether or not it's on an equal level is certainly up for debate, but whether or not it happens at all is not.

  • Options
    FawstFawst The road to awe.Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    I'm going to suggest at this point that you might be arguing in circles and that there isn't a magical line of reasoning that is going to persuade the only two people in this thread who think this statue is perfectly fine that they are wrong when their own two eyes and functioning brains are not doing that job for them.

    I think it's perfectly stupid, not perfectly fine. I also am not offended by it. You're right about arguing in circles, though.

  • Options
    curly haired boycurly haired boy Your Friendly Neighborhood Torgue Dealer Registered User regular
    Skull2185 wrote: »
    I can agree that this statue is a little too sexualized, and can be viewed as mysonginistic. And is a thing that people should be angry over. I don't like the 100% agreed upon sentiment that any person who would want a statue like this is some psychotic weirdo. There are alot of people, both male and female, who are horror film enthusiasts. They see all the films, read the magazines and collect memoribilia(while still being completely normal, nice people). A statue like this would be something they'd like, even one exactly like this and not viewed as sexualized violence towards women, but rather just a cool piece of horror/gore memoribilia.

    That's a different topic altogether though, just something I'm seeing alot that's been bugging me.

    yeah, context is everything

    if someone has a 'horror den' in their home with lots of memorabilia this wouldn't look too out of place in a collection

    but in the context of the video game industry, it has a decidedly different tone

    RxI0N.png
    Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
  • Options
    PreciousBodilyFluidsPreciousBodilyFluids Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Alright. Glad we sorted that out! I think you guys are wrong and you think I'm wrong. Welcome to the Internet! :)

    You could not have missed the point more. You don't like it because it's ugly, we all agree. We don't like it because it's ugly AND mysoginistic; you give us a golf clap for effort.

    No. I fucking get it. It is sexist because it has perfect boobs. Which is a lie because everyone knows that even if it didn't have the boobs you guys would still be up in arms about how it's a woman's corpse mutilated and not a man's corpse.

    YAY LOGICAL FALLACY!

    Please, go on telling me how offended I'd be if the statue was less offensive.

    Would you be offended if it was a statue of a man's torso.

    Y/N?

    Please explain how this is relevant in a world where such a statue does not exist.

  • Options
    Magic PinkMagic Pink Tur-Boner-Fed Registered User regular
    Fawst wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Fawst wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Fawst wrote: »
    Misogynistic? No, I won't agree to that.

    You don't need to. It will remain mysoginistic with or without your approval.

    OK, then explain how it's misogynistic. I think it's sexist because of its idealistic (to put it foolishly) portrayal of the female body. But can you prove 100% that it exists because the creator hates women? I'm going with the dictionary definition here, so please, if you can explain to me how that is a wrong interpretation of the word, I'd appreciate and welcome it.

    read the last 5 pages again.

    No, you don't get to wiggle out of it like that. That's not a valid explanation. You tell me what is misogynistic about it in your own words.

    I've said it repeatedly already.

  • Options
    CarbonFireCarbonFire See you in the countryRegistered User regular
    edited January 2013
    Here's the mock box art from the press image again

    bad_box_art.jpg

    It is ABSOLUTELY clear what their intended focus is with this piece of trash.
    I will not purchase this game now, even though I enjoyed the first one. This isn't just in poor taste, it's just straight up vile.

    CarbonFire on
    Steam: CarbonFire MWO, PSN, Origin: Carb0nFire
  • Options
    UncleSporkyUncleSporky Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Magic Pink hit it on the head. urahonky, my whole problem with your position in disagreeing with us is that you keep referring to it as "trying" on our part. You're implying that we're being disingenuous in our reactions, and that's pretty shitty man.

    Okay I get what is being said here. And let me make sure that I'm right in this:

    The statue is fucking ugly (I agree). It is sexist because it literally brings a woman down to just boobs, and that if everything on her chest was mutilated it wouldn't be that bad. Correct? I see where you are coming from...

    I honestly believe you guys are trying to see something malicious in it. I agree: They should have made her more "zombie" like (since it is a fucking zombie game). It would have been much better if the flesh had holes and whatever everywhere on it (though would be even creepier). I just don't honestly believe that it was made with the intent of objectionably woman (which is arguably much worse than actively trying to).

    I'm sorry when I said "trying". When I saw the thing I said "ugly.. move on" and didn't really dissect the statue. That's all I meant... Not that you were trying to see something that didn't exist.

    You mean malicious on the part of the marketing guys?

    You mean that the marketing guys didn't go to work and say to themselves "man I really dislike women, I wonder what the best way would be to diminish their personhood today."

    They're just creepy and stupid?

    Switch Friend Code: SW - 5443 - 2358 - 9118 || 3DS Friend Code: 0989 - 1731 - 9504 || NNID: unclesporky
  • Options
    kaliyamakaliyama Left to find less-moderated fora Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Magic Pink hit it on the head. urahonky, my whole problem with your position in disagreeing with us is that you keep referring to it as "trying" on our part. You're implying that we're being disingenuous in our reactions, and that's pretty shitty man.

    Okay I get what is being said here. And let me make sure that I'm right in this:

    The statue is fucking ugly (I agree). It is sexist because it literally brings a woman down to just boobs, and that if everything on her chest was mutilated it wouldn't be that bad. Correct? I see where you are coming from...

    I honestly believe you guys are trying to see something malicious in it. I agree: They should have made her more "zombie" like (since it is a fucking zombie game). It would have been much better if the flesh had holes and whatever everywhere on it (though would be even creepier). I just don't honestly believe that it was made with the intent of objectionably woman (which is arguably much worse than actively trying to).

    I'm sorry when I said "trying". When I saw the thing I said "ugly.. move on" and didn't really dissect the statue. That's all I meant... Not that you were trying to see something that didn't exist.

    What? The thing reduces a woman to her boobs as a sex object. If it was about zombies instead of sex, the woman would be intact, rotting and decidedly un-sexy. I have no idea what the authorial intent was, but it really doesn't matter - the thing is an awful piece of misogyny regardless of what the author intended. Clearly there was not a single woman involved in designing this thing.


    fwKS7.png?1
  • Options
    PreciousBodilyFluidsPreciousBodilyFluids Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Magic Pink hit it on the head. urahonky, my whole problem with your position in disagreeing with us is that you keep referring to it as "trying" on our part. You're implying that we're being disingenuous in our reactions, and that's pretty shitty man.

    Okay I get what is being said here. And let me make sure that I'm right in this:

    The statue is fucking ugly (I agree). It is sexist because it literally brings a woman down to just boobs, and that if everything on her chest was mutilated it wouldn't be that bad. Correct? I see where you are coming from...

    I honestly believe you guys are trying to see something malicious in it. I agree: They should have made her more "zombie" like (since it is a fucking zombie game). It would have been much better if the flesh had holes and whatever everywhere on it (though would be even creepier). I just don't honestly believe that it was made with the intent of objectionably woman (which is arguably much worse than actively trying to).

    I'm sorry when I said "trying". When I saw the thing I said "ugly.. move on" and didn't really dissect the statue. That's all I meant... Not that you were trying to see something that didn't exist.

    The thing is, objectification happened. That it wasn't intentional doesn't really matter. Lots of discrimination takes place in a subconscious way, borne of ignorance rather than malice.

  • Options
    urahonkyurahonky Registered User regular
    @urahonky I want you to respond directly to what I said earlier.
    urahonky wrote: »
    So it's the boobs that are the problem here?

    It's the sexualization of a horribly dismembered female torso, yes

    It's the fact that this is a statue of a woman, completely and bloodily torn down until all that remained of her were her perfect breasts, somehow unscathed.

    If you cannot see the objectification is this, I really do not know what else to say.

    And I want you to answer if you truly do not think this is objectification. Like, not one bit.

    Don't change the subject. This is not about a hypothetical different statue that would offend us. And I am not calling you anything. I'm asking you; do you really not think that it is objectification? Do you truly not see even a little bit of sexism in what I just described?

    I didn't when I first looked at it. I saw it on the front page of escapist and thought it looked stupid and wondered who would buy such a thing. But now that everyone has been pointing out everything about it then yes I do see it.

  • Options
    urahonkyurahonky Registered User regular
    Does that make you feel a little better @Magic Pink and @Henroid and @PreciousBodilyFluids?

  • Options
    Death of RatsDeath of Rats Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Magic Pink hit it on the head. urahonky, my whole problem with your position in disagreeing with us is that you keep referring to it as "trying" on our part. You're implying that we're being disingenuous in our reactions, and that's pretty shitty man.

    Okay I get what is being said here. And let me make sure that I'm right in this:

    The statue is fucking ugly (I agree). It is sexist because it literally brings a woman down to just boobs, and that if everything on her chest was mutilated it wouldn't be that bad. Correct? I see where you are coming from...

    I honestly believe you guys are trying to see something malicious in it. I agree: They should have made her more "zombie" like (since it is a fucking zombie game). It would have been much better if the flesh had holes and whatever everywhere on it (though would be even creepier). I just don't honestly believe that it was made with the intent of objectionably woman (which is arguably much worse than actively trying to).

    I'm sorry when I said "trying". When I saw the thing I said "ugly.. move on" and didn't really dissect the statue. That's all I meant... Not that you were trying to see something that didn't exist.

    You hit the nail on the head here. The reason people are ANGRY about this instead of just sluffing it off, is because someone in the industry who made this statue thinks this is what gamers want. That's how bad the gaming culture is perceived not by those outside of the industry, but by those INSIDE the industry.

    This is what's OK to sell us now. Which not only says a lot about the industry as a whole, but also about the gaming subculture.

    No I don't.
  • Options
    Magic PinkMagic Pink Tur-Boner-Fed Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Alright. Glad we sorted that out! I think you guys are wrong and you think I'm wrong. Welcome to the Internet! :)

    You could not have missed the point more. You don't like it because it's ugly, we all agree. We don't like it because it's ugly AND mysoginistic; you give us a golf clap for effort.

    No. I fucking get it. It is sexist because it has perfect boobs. Which is a lie because everyone knows that even if it didn't have the boobs you guys would still be up in arms about how it's a woman's corpse mutilated and not a man's corpse.

    YAY LOGICAL FALLACY!

    Please, go on telling me how offended I'd be if the statue was less offensive.

    Would you be offended if it was a statue of a man's torso.

    Y/N?

    No. A man's torso isn't a sexualized object in the same way a woman's breasts are. Would I be grossed out by it? Yes. Would I think it's a terrible idea? Yes. Would I buy it? No.

  • Options
    rRootagearRootagea MadisonRegistered User regular
    If I were the CEO of Deep Silver, I'd be giving marketing a massive bonus right about now.

  • Options
    Magic PinkMagic Pink Tur-Boner-Fed Registered User regular
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Actually? Yes. And it's not that it's boobs, it's PERFECT BREASTS on a mutilated torso.

    Imagine if this statue instead was of a man's severed pelvis, bloody, with a throbbing, engorged cock, 10" easy, bulging from the scraps of ripped speedo, desperately struggling to restrain it.

    More to the point, think about how that would never happen.

    I know this says absolutely nothing good about me, but I'd probably find that fucking hilarious, and giggle like a 6th grader every time I looked at it.

    You should; it would be funny as hell.

    Sadly, you will never see it outsde of a gay sex shop yet you will see the opposite everywhere you go.

    Whoa chief, back the truck up. Are you trying to say that men are no oversexualised today?

    Because that would just be silly.

    Have you seen the average mall clothing store ad lately? The one with the shredded guy seductively pulling off his shirt while staring right at you? Find me a non-sexually attractive male in advertising or entertainment (that doesn't come from a stoner comedy).

    Regardless of whether or not the statue is sexist, to claim that only women experience hypersexualisation in modern society is stupid. A woman's "society tells me that I should wish I had tits and an ass like hers" is a man's "society tells me that I should wish I had abs and a jaw like his".

    Whether or not it's on an equal level is certainly up for debate, but whether or not it happens at all is not.

    Excapt that's not the AVERAGE ad. That's most likely ONE ad you see a lot and I'll bet it's from Abercrombie.

    For every example of this sort of ad you can show me I can show you 50 (if not more) of women being oversexualized in the medium. Including toddlers.

    And what I'm saying is you will not see the same level of sexualiztion for men that you see casually for women outside of a sex shop. Believe me, I know, I look for it all the dang time.

  • Options
    histronichistronic Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Alright. Glad we sorted that out! I think you guys are wrong and you think I'm wrong. Welcome to the Internet! :)

    You could not have missed the point more. You don't like it because it's ugly, we all agree. We don't like it because it's ugly AND mysoginistic; you give us a golf clap for effort.

    No. I fucking get it. It is sexist because it has perfect boobs. Which is a lie because everyone knows that even if it didn't have the boobs you guys would still be up in arms about how it's a woman's corpse mutilated and not a man's corpse.

    YAY LOGICAL FALLACY!

    Please, go on telling me how offended I'd be if the statue was less offensive.

    Please keep telling me how I'm a horrible person for not seeing anything sexist from a fucking corpse statue. I do love hearing that.

    Wow man, keep fucking that chicken and putting words in people's mouths that no one said and feeling all butthurt because people other than you realize this shit actually matters and hurts the industry. No one is making a judgement about you, we're pointing out that your opinion on the matter doesn't change the reality of the situation.

    If you can't handle that, and it fucks up your worldview, and makes you feel all sad inside, maybe you shouldn't talk about this shit.

    This is where I have to completely disagree. The statue is ugly and stupid yes, definitely sexist and maybe misogynistic. But to say that this statue is ruining the Video Game Industry? That's just absolutely knee jerk and wrong. The industry can appeal to a large variety, but there are specific games that will try to appeal to more specific core audiences. I really enjoy playing video games with my girlfriend and to that end I like that the industry has a wide variety of games that can appeal to everyone. But if there can be a porn industry then I don't see why including something like this in video games is hurting the industry. Its certainly not something I am going to be picking up, but then you don't see me boycotting cinema because some movies are made with dumb girls with huge boobs.

    WiiU Friend Code: rlinkmanl
    PSN: rlinkmanl
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Does that make you feel a little better Magic Pink and Henroid and PreciousBodilyFluids?

    We're fine now.

  • Options
    urahonkyurahonky Registered User regular
    Alright yeah I agree. At first glance I dismissed it as being stupid and ugly. But now that you guys are talking about it and the whole industry it is pretty fucking disturbing that someone looked at that and said "yep, send it out to the gamers... They love this sort of stuff!"

  • Options
    Magic PinkMagic Pink Tur-Boner-Fed Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Does that make you feel a little better @Magic Pink and @Henroid and @PreciousBodilyFluids?

    Not really. That statue still exists.

  • Options
    Ragnar DragonfyreRagnar Dragonfyre Registered User regular
    urahonky wrote: »
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Alright. Glad we sorted that out! I think you guys are wrong and you think I'm wrong. Welcome to the Internet! :)

    You could not have missed the point more. You don't like it because it's ugly, we all agree. We don't like it because it's ugly AND mysoginistic; you give us a golf clap for effort.

    No. I fucking get it. It is sexist because it has perfect boobs. Which is a lie because everyone knows that even if it didn't have the boobs you guys would still be up in arms about how it's a woman's corpse mutilated and not a man's corpse.

    YAY LOGICAL FALLACY!

    Please, go on telling me how offended I'd be if the statue was less offensive.

    Would you be offended if it was a statue of a man's torso.

    Y/N?

    Please explain how this is relevant in a world where such a statue does not exist.

    I asked a yes or no question. Please answer the question and then I'll answer yours.

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    TubeTube Registered User admin
    For an equivalent statue to be misandrist either a lot of things about it would have to be very different or the surrounding society would have to be very different. Saying "we'll if it were exactly the same but with different sexual characteristics would you be offended" is a stupid question for that reason. It's the same reason that saying "I wish you were a slave boy" is more offensive when said to a black man than a white one.

This discussion has been closed.