As long as the incessantly musclebound male characters in games are as prevalent as the incessantly shapely female ones, I don't really see what the problem is when it comes to aesthetics. Mai Shiranui is really no less of an outlier than Joe Higashi etc.
As for behavior and roles, that's another matter entirely. Comparing Dante with Bayonetta swiftly becomes a farcical affair.
Kastanj on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
The problem is media as a whole and the way society treats gender, not games.
The problem is media as a whole and the way society treats gender, not games.
Can we agree that games are definitely even less progressed and intelligent on the matter? I mean I have no problem with not reaching an agreement but still.
The problem is media as a whole and the way society treats gender, not games.
Can we agree that games are definitely even less progressed and intelligent on the matter? I mean I have no problem with not reaching an agreement but still.
Ironically enough I've frequently heard the complaint "all the women are just men in dresses!" aimed at games. Which makes them arguably more progressive then other mediums on average. Not something I’d necessarily agree with, but it’s there (glorious androgyny yo).
The problem is media as a whole and the way society treats gender, not games.
Can we agree that games are definitely even less progressed and intelligent on the matter? I mean I have no problem with not reaching an agreement but still.
Well like someone pointed out earlier in the thread, games are less progressed and intelligent on all matters. Story and character are still laughably underdeveloped even in, say, Bioware games where they actually try to put some effort into this aspect.
As far as the "girl" games thing, the way it's handled (both by the designers and the consumers) is incredibly stupid. Yes, female gamers typically gravitate toward a different type of game. No, this is not universal, and making the packaging pink won't ensure solid sales to women.
My wife (who will probably be chiming in here from work to correct me on something) plays things like KotOR, Dragon Age, Zelda, Civilization, Age of Discovery, Animal Crossing, etc. She also plays Borderlands with me on occasion, but I think that's mostly to humor me. Here's the thing, though; all those games are also ones that I play the crap out of.
If she's plays those games, and she's a girl, and I play those games, am I a girl? Because if that's the case, it would probably cause some legal friction with the whole married thing.
My friend's mum was pretty much the one that introduced our group of friends to WoW. She also played ragnarok a lot before that.
I really don't know what it is about WoW that attracts so many more females than other games, or even if it just seems like it does for some reason.
Less overtly sexist than most games and appeals to an extremely broad audience.
Female blood elves.
Female any Horde race, pretty much.
Hacksaw on
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
Ironically enough I've frequently heard the complaint "all the women are just men in dresses!" aimed at games. Which makes them arguably more progressive then other mediums on average. Not something I’d necessarily agree with, but it’s there (glorious androgyny yo).
I've never understood this complaint. Surely in a truly post-feminism no-gender-essentialism society, that's exactly the kind of representation they would like to see (or at least, that a character's dress and actions didn't conform to a particular gender stereotype).
Ironically enough I've frequently heard the complaint "all the women are just men in dresses!" aimed at games. Which makes them arguably more progressive then other mediums on average. Not something I’d necessarily agree with, but it’s there (glorious androgyny yo).
I've never understood this complaint. Surely in a truly post-feminism no-gender-essentialism society, that's exactly the kind of representation they would like to see (or at least, that a character's dress and actions didn't conform to a particular gender stereotype).
Ironically enough I've frequently heard the complaint "all the women are just men in dresses!" aimed at games. Which makes them arguably more progressive then other mediums on average. Not something I’d necessarily agree with, but it’s there (glorious androgyny yo).
I've never understood this complaint. Surely in a truly post-feminism no-gender-essentialism society, that's exactly the kind of representation they would like to see (or at least, that a character's dress and actions didn't conform to a particular gender stereotype).
You are my favourite.
(actually doing an essay on Room of Ones Own/Tipping the Velvet on that exact topic right now).
Leitner on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
The problem is media as a whole and the way society treats gender, not games.
Can we agree that games are definitely even less progressed and intelligent on the matter? I mean I have no problem with not reaching an agreement but still.
No. No we can't. Because have you seen a commercial in the last.... Ever? Have you seen Paris Hilton, of Megan Fox, or whatever? They are on screen because of essentially 3 thing, and not one of them is acting talent. The only reason video game characters wear less clothes is because it's a hell of a lot easier to design skimpy clothes that don't actually show you anything if they don't, technically, exist. The media as a whole treats gender like shit, from idiotic body images to how "Men" and "Women" are supposed to behave. To treat it like games are any worse is to sidestep the real problem, and to avoid actually talking about it.
Also, form fitting clothing has the major benefit of not requiring a soft-body cloth simulation, which is one of the harder things to accomplish in 3D. Even if it doesn't show skin, a leotard looks better a lot of the time then something bulkier that needs to move around differently. EDIT: That's not to say that titillation isn't the goal often, but theres a reason we've moved from form fitting stuff to giving characters sort of seductively loose fitting clothing as technology has advanced.
I'd say there's not an inconsiderable element to the fact that more advanced consoles generally have people wearing more.
Something else I thought of while I was in the car this evening was a simple stylistic point - in computer games and any other medium dealing with imperfect graphics, your female characters need to have somewhat developed breasts simply because if they don't their's a fair chance they end up looking very androgynous.
electricitylikesme on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Also, form fitting clothing has the major benefit of not requiring a soft-body cloth simulation, which is one of the harder things to accomplish in 3D. Even if it doesn't show skin, a leotard looks better a lot of the time then something bulkier that needs to move around differently.
I'd say there's not an inconsiderable element to the fact that more advanced consoles generally have people wearing more.
Something else I thought of while I was in the car this evening was a simple stylistic point - in computer games and any other medium dealing with imperfect graphics, your female characters need to have somewhat developed breasts simply because if they don't their's a fair chance they end up looking very androgynous.
I really think the talks so far about the Wii have missed the point, and it's a huge part of where we are today.
Frankly, the Wii is outselling everything else by being better positioned for women and children, which is fine because (IMO) a really significant number of women don't want to play T rated action games on principle. It's shit for teenaged boys and they want no part of it.
Either way, I think that the vast majority of AAA games are dripping with attitude that turns off women. The Wii doesn't have AAA titles? All the better, from their perspective.
If not, do you think she realized her mistake in making this thread, or is she just sitting back and collecting note for the paper that this was inevitably just research for?
I really think the talks so far about the Wii have missed the point, and it's a huge part of where we are today.
Frankly, the Wii is outselling everything else by being better positioned for women and children, which is fine because (IMO) a really significant number of women don't want to play T rated action games on principle. It's shit for teenaged boys and they want no part of it.
Either way, I think that the vast majority of AAA games are dripping with attitude that turns off women. The Wii doesn't have AAA titles? All the better, from their perspective.
Lets talk about half the population of the world as one cohesive group. That's a fun idea.
Interesting sidenote on the 'The Wii is so great for women'. Its best selling game is a weight loss device (which isn't any good for that), and the DS has had adverts pulled by the ASA for being sexist. Do you know quite how difficult it is to get an advert pulled for sexism in the current advertising climate?
All of which ignores the fact that the overwhelming majority of female gamers play on the PC. And actually make up the largest majority in the entire gaming industry. Very few of these games are gendered or aimed 'at women'. They make solid games for everyone. That's the way forward.
Ironically enough I've frequently heard the complaint "all the women are just men in dresses!" aimed at games. Which makes them arguably more progressive then other mediums on average. Not something I’d necessarily agree with, but it’s there (glorious androgyny yo).
I've never understood this complaint. Surely in a truly post-feminism no-gender-essentialism society, that's exactly the kind of representation they would like to see (or at least, that a character's dress and actions didn't conform to a particular gender stereotype).
There are different schools of feminism, especially literary feminism. Some forms of feminism focus on the celebration of gender - equality through recognizing female gender traits as good but different rather than bothering to point out that they're mosty arbitrary. French Feminism, regarding literature, posits that women will write and enjoy stories which are less direct and linear than what a man writes and enjoys because women tend to have more erogenous zones, for example.
--
Women are -everywhere- in RPGs. Text-based games are remarkably good places to meet attractive women. :winky:
Incenjucar on
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
(actually doing an essay on Room of Ones Own/Tipping the Velvet on that exact topic right now).
I utterly adore keeley hawes
There are different schools of feminism, especially literary feminism. Some forms of feminism focus on the celebration of gender - equality through recognizing female gender traits as good but different rather than bothering to point out that they're mosty arbitrary. French Feminism, regarding literature, posits that women will write and enjoy stories which are less direct and linear than what a man writes and enjoys because women tend to have more erogenous zones, for example.
As far as I am aware, and this may be a statement arising from gross ignorance but this is the impression I have got from almost every discussion I've ever had on this topic in an academic environment, that would put them squarely in a minority. The rejection of gender traits and gender essentialism is very close to the core of most of what I would recognise as feminism.
surrealitycheck on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
The problem is media as a whole and the way society treats gender, not games.
I don't understand why this comment has come up so frequently. Gender portrayals in other media, like TV and movies, are also regressive; why is that fact supposed to terminate a discussion on gender issues in video games?
Furthermore, it would take a fair amount of work to show that the gender issues in video games show no interesting deviation from the gender issues in other media, like TV and movies. For instance, one seemingly obvious difference is that movies tend to portray women as secretly domestic and dependent--even the successful, hard-edged career women are supposed to suffer from emptiness inside and lingering self-doubt unless they also have a husband and kids, etc. By contrast, women in video games tend to be portrayed as, well, vixens. It's not like Ivy is just desperate to meet the right man to complete her life, or really wants to have kids before the biological window closes.
Ironically enough I've frequently heard the complaint "all the women are just men in dresses!" aimed at games. Which makes them arguably more progressive then other mediums on average. Not something I’d necessarily agree with, but it’s there (glorious androgyny yo).
I've never understood this complaint. Surely in a truly post-feminism no-gender-essentialism society, that's exactly the kind of representation they would like to see (or at least, that a character's dress and actions didn't conform to a particular gender stereotype).
I think the problem is when it's not so much that the characters' dress and actions don't conform to a gender stereotype, but rather, that every character's manners conform to a masculine stereotype. That's not liberated sexuality, that's projecting masculinity as the norm.
Ironically enough I've frequently heard the complaint "all the women are just men in dresses!" aimed at games. Which makes them arguably more progressive then other mediums on average. Not something I’d necessarily agree with, but it’s there (glorious androgyny yo).
I've never understood this complaint. Surely in a truly post-feminism no-gender-essentialism society, that's exactly the kind of representation they would like to see (or at least, that a character's dress and actions didn't conform to a particular gender stereotype).
ehhh... but it still sends the message that only people with these set male characteristics are worthy of being heroes, doing whatever laudable activity, filling whatever social role. ok, so women can participate if they give up whatever traits define them as a woman. It still re-enforces all the same roles, it just tells girls that they can pretend to be a man if they want.
It's be better if character's actions weren't dependent on how they express their gender at all, rather than how characters express their secondary and tertiary gender traits simply not being linked to sex.
redx on
They moistly come out at night, moistly.
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
Also, form fitting clothing has the major benefit of not requiring a soft-body cloth simulation, which is one of the harder things to accomplish in 3D. Even if it doesn't show skin, a leotard looks better a lot of the time then something bulkier that needs to move around differently. EDIT: That's not to say that titillation isn't the goal often, but theres a reason we've moved from form fitting stuff to giving characters sort of seductively loose fitting clothing as technology has advanced.
I'd say there's not an inconsiderable element to the fact that more advanced consoles generally have people wearing more.
Something else I thought of while I was in the car this evening was a simple stylistic point - in computer games and any other medium dealing with imperfect graphics, your female characters need to have somewhat developed breasts simply because if they don't their's a fair chance they end up looking very androgynous.
While I think it's interesting to approach the question from the viewpoint of technical limitations, it's still true that the cloth physics issue doesn't explain the gender disparity in dress. If technology were forcing our hands, then one would expect men to also be portrayed in leotards. Which, it's true, they sometimes are. But nonetheless I think there's still a difference there.
This also gets into the body types issue, which has already been discussed somewhat.
Also, if you have a halfway decent art style then you don't need burgeoning tits to convey gender. They had clearly female characters way back in the 8-bit days, long before they had the ability to render polygonal chest-monsters.
MrMister on
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
hat's not liberated sexuality, that's projecting masculinity as the norm.
Depends how you view it. Let us say that we have our images of action heroes derived from mostly male role models. If we then think "let's make a female action hero", and use (unconsciously) a bunch of male-typical behaviour as our basis that isn't necessarily projecting masculinity as a norm.
Why?
Because certain masculine traits are in the set of traits you expect to find in aggressive people. Men are expected to be more physically violent than women, for example. But if this game is about physical violence, then our female character is masculinised just by her inclusion! I think there is an element of unfairness to this. If we are abandoning gender essentialism, it means both abandoning male stereotypes as well as female. By straightforwardly letting a female behave in a male-typical fashion in an area where male-typical behaviour is beneficial (EG being aggressive in a combat environment) I think this is a fair thing to do.
ehhh... but it still sends the message that only people with these set male characteristics are worthy of being heroes, doing whatever laudable activity, filling whatever social role. ok, so women can participate if they give up whatever traits define them as a woman. It still re-enforces all the same roles, it just tells girls that they can pretend to be a man if they want.
Only in a society that has fairly rigid views about what constitutes masculine or feminine behaviour. It's sort of a chicken and egg problem, but I genuinely do think the complaint is misguided.
EDIT: To make it a bit clearer: Our perception is that the things soldiers do are masculine, and their approach to life is male-typical. If we make a female soldier character with soldier-typical behaviour, she will seem masculinised - a problem with our perception of masculinity, not with the practice of making an aggressive physically violent atypical female.
ehhh... but it still sends the message that only people with these set male characteristics are worthy of being heroes, doing whatever laudable activity, filling whatever social role. ok, so women can participate if they give up whatever traits define them as a woman. It still reinforces all the same roles, it just tells girls that they can pretend to be a man if they want.
Only in a society that has fairly rigid views about what constitutes masculine or feminine behaviour. It's sort of a chicken and egg problem, but I genuinely do think the complaint is misguided.
Your statement implies that we are not "a society that has fairly rigid views about what constitutes masculine or feminine behaviour." It's not a notion I agree with.
redx on
They moistly come out at night, moistly.
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
Your statement implies that we are not "a society that has fairly rigid views about what constitutes masculine or feminine behaviour." It's not a notion I agree with.
That's not quite what I meant.
I meant that given feminists which us to move away from such views, having a female character like that could be a sign of having fully embraced gender inessentialism. Or role reversal. Or any of that good stuff. Not men consciously masculinising women because they believe that they should be masculine (the vital distinction being that one cannot control what one subconsciously thinks, but one can control how one consciously behaves and designs a character - and if a genuinely gender-blind attempt to create a female character that isn't a female stereotype produces a "masculine" character that is not a sign of naughtiness).
I guess the reverse argument would be that for writing gay/black characters. By portraying them exactly the same as hetro-male you ignore and marginalise the specific struggles they go through that effects a change upon their personality. The same argument against colour-blindness being less than ideal. Being one of these groups in our current societies is different then being hetronormative.
Leitner on
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
I guess the reverse argument would be that for writing gay/black characters. By portraying them exactly the same as hetro-male you ignore and marginalise the specific struggles they go through that effects a change upon their personality.
But then you get trapped in the never-ending rabbit hole of people questioning the stereotypes. Because asserting, as an author, that gay people will almost always be qualitatively different than a straight person is dangerously close in some feminist eyes to the offense of group categorisation!
I do have some sympathy with that point of view.
EDIT: It's also worth saying that there is a distinction between a masculinised female (a girl with an atypically large number of male-typical traits) and a totally masculinised female (a female character with entirely male-typical traits). Both are equally likely to be accused of being "boy with boobs", but the former is something I find compatible with the idea that these groups may be subtly different.
Your statement implies that we are not "a society that has fairly rigid views about what constitutes masculine or feminine behaviour." It's not a notion I agree with.
That's not quite what I meant.
I meant that given feminists which us to move away from such views, having a female character like that could be a sign of having fully embraced gender inessentialism. Or role reversal. Or any of that good stuff. Not men consciously masculinising women because they believe that they should be masculine (the vital distinction being that one cannot control what one subconsciously thinks, but one can control how one consciously behaves and designs a character - and if a genuinely gender-blind attempt to create a female character that isn't a female stereotype produces a "masculine" character that is not a sign of naughtiness).
I'm trying to remember a point in time where feminism was not concerned about the subconscious motivations that led to sexual disparity. There is not much point to blaming specific developers for 'naughtiness', so much as getting them to consciously and critically think about the roles characters' genders play.
If game developers are using definitions of masculinity and femininity that lead to an inability to produce female characters that are not either stereotypically male or female, then it is desirable to get them to find new definitions. If they are not able to prevent their subconscious biases for effecting how they design characters, than it is desirable to make them more consciously aware of their biases.
The whole women acting like males so they can fulfill masculine roles is not something new. It's been around in society and media for thousands of years. It's a very common model found in many societies. I have a hard time seeing it as hugely progressive.
redx on
They moistly come out at night, moistly.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
The problem is media as a whole and the way society treats gender, not games.
I don't understand why this comment has come up so frequently. Gender portrayals in other media, like TV and movies, are also regressive; why is that fact supposed to terminate a discussion on gender issues in video games?
No. But acting like it's only games that are a problem, or that games are somehow special marginalizes the actual problem and lets people avoid talking about it. It essentially turns it into a sort of parallel to the whole "Lol gamer nerds" thing, so it's as if it doesn't need to be addressed.
Fencingsax on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
Because that's not true. Because you're ignoring how the media can and does repeatedly present unattractive male characters as being heroic, sexual people, and rarely if ever does the same for unattractive female characters. Presenting a sample of images designed only to reinforce the false equivalency you want to impose doesn't make it so.
Can I have an example of this in a video game that's not Duke Nukem, please?
Seriously. Again, slamming back to the L4D pictures - Francis went from a fat, muscly biker to something closer to 'normalcy'. Louis lost his hair and beard and adopted non-threatening office clothing. These were not random changes, but reflect an effort to create broad appeal. Apparently, gamers aren't ready for either the original Francis or Louis characters.
I can't really speak to Francis, but given how well that horrible 50 Cent game sold, and how well GTA 3 sold, I don't think that the original Louis would have negatively impacted sales. If anything, changing him into an office drone kicked against what I would have seen as the expected stereotype.
Irond Will on
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
You are subtly losing my point.
I'm trying to remember a point in time where feminism was not concerned about the subconscious motivations that led to sexual disparity. There is not much point to blaming specific developers for 'naughtiness', so much as getting them to consciously and critically think about the roles characters' genders play.
I'm not saying they're unconcerned about subconscious influences, but that the specific type of behaviour that they want people to watch out for in their own behaviour is in general the consciously disciminative statements. For example, my decision to say "women are stupid" is a conscious one, and part of the angle of attack that feminists use to try and stop such behaviour is to try and say "if you feel this urge, fight it". The other angle, to which you are referring, is trying to affect how society works to no longer produce environments in which these subconscious effects are generated, but the two are separate. And I am saying that a game designer producing a masculine female character is not subject to censure for the former. They may need to think a little harder, but to be honest I find it quite refreshing seeing female characters who are out and out brutal with no trace of compassion, rather than trying to soften it by including any female-typical properties. This can also be a positive thing; in general, joke-telling and being funny is very much seen as a male-typical trait. Including a lot of funny female characters (who one laughs with) can be part of an effort to get the idea that women can be funny without threatening out into the culture at large.
If game developers are using definitions of masculinity and femininity that lead to an inability to produce female characters that are not either stereotypically male or female, then it is desirable to get them to find new definitions. If they are not able to prevent their subconscious biases for effecting how they design characters, than it is desirable to make them more consciously aware of their biases.
That's not what I was getting at. They don't think "women must be either super male or super female", they think "I am making a soldier character who happens to be female." As a consequence of the way we interpret this character, we see them as very male - even though the character was not constructed with regard to their gender!
The whole women acting like males so they can fulfill masculine roles is not something new. It's been around in society and media for thousands of years. It's a very common model found in many societies. I have a hard time seeing it as hugely progressive.
Women excelling in male-typical areas and using male-typical traits to do it is nothing I have a problem with. If you wish to excel in a violent occupation, it helps to have a temperament that tends towards violence. The fact we interpret this as typically male is an imposition of our perceptions.
I read this and I have to say:
- I'm glad the OP got reamed for her first post, while her intentions were probably harmless it was all layed out in a very pretentious way
- I really don't see why people think this thread is a trainwreck, I see people bringing up points, some disagreements and eventual understanding or agreement to cease topic since it's not going anywhere
I'd like to chip in that, on a community such as this you'll find sexist comments all the time, both from male and female posters because, for the most part, we don't care anymore. Most of the posters here understand when the others are joking about an issue and understand that things don't need to be taken personally all the time. This is what I believe the true end to sexism should be, when neither side is actually sexist but nobody gets in a bind because someone made a joke.
edit: Additionally, I'd like to see some games with an overweight female party member for once, even better, see if developers know how to make that attractive. Don't take me wrong on that statement, I think heavier women can easily be attractive, I just don't know if game designers believe this.
edit edit: The bar maid from Twilight Princess is probably a good example of developers who know how to do this.
To Evander: You may be surprised to hear this, but I’m actually really glad that you made that point. As I was writing this up, I noticed the same kind of sexist thinking behind that remark I made, but instead of removing it I decided to leave it there to illustrate the point that it’s impossible to escape sexist thinking, even for feminists. It’s just something to keep in mind. The fact is, although I’ve noticed a lot of sexism in forums in my past experience, a lot of that remark was simply based upon unfair assumptions. You make an entirely valid point, and I’m sorry for the presumption.
To Crimson King: I’m sorry if I came off as patronizing. In actuality, I meant to post this on a different forum where I had noticed a lot of sexist discussion in the past, but I changed my mind at the last minute because I knew I was more likely to get a more intelligent and coherent conversation going here. For the forum I was originally going to post this on, I was prepared for bitter arguments, and that remark was made for that reason. I know that this forum in particular sees this kind of discussion a lot, and I wasn’t careful to edit my post with that in mind. Sorry for the confusion. As for your point about video games being no less sexist than other forms of media, and male gamers being no more discriminatory than other demographics, you make a very good point. However, keep in mind that I never claimed that video games were in any way more sexist than anything else, or that male gamers were more sexist than other groups—it’s just that I’ve seen a noticeable amount of sexism in video game journalism and on video game forums in my experience. But your point about the media reminds us that there are a lot of forces that affect people, and gamers aren’t solely affected by video games.
To MalaysianShrew: You make an excellent point about the term feminism itself. It can be really problematic to use that term when it’s so loosely defined, almost to a ridiculous level. But that’s part of why I threw it into the discussion that way, to see what everyone else makes of it and how individual people define it.
To Khavall: I think you misunderstand my intentions. I’m also a gamer, and I hardly believe that all gamers are inherently sexist, or even that most gamers are inherently sexist. My only hope with this discussion is to get other people talking and see what kind of ideas they have. It doesn’t suit my purposes (and certainly not any of yours) if you all happily agree with what I say. That in mind, I’m not entirely sure I’ve said much for anyone to either agree or disagree with. The questions don’t have yes or no answers—they’re just things to consider. The answers to those questions are certainly going to be different for each person because I’m asking about other people’s experience. As for the question you addressed, that’s an excellent point you made about interacting between opposing genders. It certainly is true that these interactions are different in almost any given social setting. The reason I decided to include that question is because I’ve noticed in my own experience that the way my male friends behave toward me and other girls when we play video games together is distinctly different from how they behave in other social settings—I was curious if anyone else had such experiences, and if they had an ideas as to why these changes in behavior exist.
To LibrarianThorne: It’s true, it’s also possible to be sexist against men. Men are just as likely to be hyper-sexualized and objectified in video games as women are. That’s a great observation.
In general, I’d just like to remind you that I’m not suggesting by any means that video games are more sexist than other media or other aspects of life. The reason I’m making this video game-specific is because I love games but I’ve also suffered discomfort at times over the sexist themes. These themes in other media make just as uncomfortable, but I don’t watch as much TV and I’m not really interested in talking about other forms of media. I also chose to make it video game specific for the opposite reason—I’ve played a lot of video games and met a lot of gamers who are very pro-feminist, and you’ll notice that the questions I presented allow room for recognition of these things, too. I’m not asking anyone to tell me how sexist games and gamers are—I’m asking people what they’ve noticed, what they believe is true about sexism/feminism in video games, so there’s no need to get offended.
Anyway, thank you all for your feedback so far. It’s been very enlightening, and I appreciate your participation. Sorry again for any confusion, and I hope you all have a nice day.
Because that's not true. Because you're ignoring how the media can and does repeatedly present unattractive male characters as being heroic, sexual people, and rarely if ever does the same for unattractive female characters. Presenting a sample of images designed only to reinforce the false equivalency you want to impose doesn't make it so.
Can I have an example of this in a video game that's not Duke Nukem, please?
Seriously. Again, slamming back to the L4D pictures - Francis went from a fat, muscly biker to something closer to 'normalcy'. Louis lost his hair and beard and adopted non-threatening office clothing. These were not random changes, but reflect an effort to create broad appeal. Apparently, gamers aren't ready for either the original Francis or Louis characters.
I can't really speak to Francis, but given how well that horrible 50 Cent game sold, and how well GTA 3 sold, I don't think that the original Louis would have negatively impacted sales. If anything, changing him into an office drone kicked against what I would have seen as the expected stereotype.
Honestly, I think the reason may simply be that the characters weren't visually distinctive enough. I mean, three dudes with beards, three tough guys. The way it ended up, you get one biker, one vet, and one Sean of the Dead. It's easier to pick out who is who in a melee.
I think you're reading more into the alteration than is necessarily there, Robman. I think the viewing public is actually ready to deal with mondo facial hair.
The problem is media as a whole and the way society treats gender, not games.
I don't understand why this comment has come up so frequently. Gender portrayals in other media, like TV and movies, are also regressive; why is that fact supposed to terminate a discussion on gender issues in video games?
No. But acting like it's only games that are a problem, or that games are somehow special marginalizes the actual problem and lets people avoid talking about it. It essentially turns it into a sort of parallel to the whole "Lol gamer nerds" thing, so it's as if it doesn't need to be addressed.
Even beyond 'media', the problem is people's views and expectations. If gender stereotypes and objectification didn't sell then they wouldn't be prevalent in games, movies, etc. It's not like some media conglomerate board decided one day that Western culture should be dominated by sexist imagery. It's dominated by sexist imagery because the majority of people have sexist notions and the imagery plays into them.
You're not going to convince any media industry to stop making products that cater to sexist, racist, classist, or whatever other fantasy if doing so is going to cost them sales. When guys stop wanting to be he-man action heroes who solve problems with the judicious application of high explosives and then get the girl, they'll stop making those movies and games. When women stop wanting to be outwardly confident but with a secret vulnerable side who need an apparently assholish but secretly gentle man to sweep them off their feet and make them learn to open up, they'll stop making horrible romantic comedies that follow that formula. Crying about industries producing sexist media is kind of putting the cart before the horse.
There's a strong argument that sexist media reinforces the sexist notions people have. I don't know what the solution to breaking a very strong cycle is, but I'm pretty sure that it's not saying "sex shouldn't sell" when sex very clearly does.
A major problem of mine with the whole examination of feminine/masculine biases in gaming is the assumption that certain types of games are 'for men' or that women want some other type of game. The article about Metroid someone linked up-thread had a paragraph talking about how Metroid Prime involved an emphasis on puzzle-solving and collecting rather than on violence and domination, so was more female-friendly. I think that's BS. It's more puzzle-based/item-collection gameplay friendly. I love puzzle games and I'm a guy. Does that make me feminine? I don't think it does. I know women who like FPS and RTS games. Are they more masculine for that? Saying that a game is 'for women' or 'feminine' or 'female friendly' because it's not about shooting dudes in the head is silly and marketing them that way would be moronic. It alienates male gamers who appreciate that style of gameplay, reinforces the idea that women shouldn't be aggressive or competitive, and alienates the women who do enjoy games featuring violent/dominating gameplay.
Men and women are people. Games are entertainment. Some people like some types of entertainment. Trying to broadly categorize what men or women want as a group, or what a genre of entertainment as broad as 'gaming' is/should be providing is just doing a disservice to everyone.
CptHamilton on
PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
Not trying to be pedantic, but as a gamer and a woman, what would you like to see in a more "female oriented" gaming campaign?
To me, it seems like the lack of women gamers is more perception than reality.
Its more that I'd like to see less singling out of women as a special demographic, especially when said demographic is promptly re-labelled 'girls'.
While I totally agree that the Imagine series of games look absolutely ridiculously bad, many fantastic games that either subverted or elided the expected kind of gaming gender stereotypes (BG&E, Psychonauts, Mirror's Edge) sold really badly. They utterly failed to capture what passes for a female gaming demographic, and mostly seemed to sell to the games-as-art crowd.
Asinine marketing exists for a reason. It lets the fratboys know that they're going to be trash-talking and throwing a football in their game. It lets basement-dwelling otaku know that their androgynous ladyboy is going to save the world. And, by the same token, it lets women or girls know that the developer has intended the game for whatever their demographic is imagined to be.
And finally, my guess is that publishers are going to see the solution to getting females into games is going to be inserting ridiculous female wish-fulfillment into the male wish-fulfillment. Expect to see, like Dragon Age, some romance novel layered on top of your manly-man-saves-the-world.
Posts
As for behavior and roles, that's another matter entirely. Comparing Dante with Bayonetta swiftly becomes a farcical affair.
I would also love a free trip to Hawaii, but hey, what can you do?
Can we agree that games are definitely even less progressed and intelligent on the matter? I mean I have no problem with not reaching an agreement but still.
Ironically enough I've frequently heard the complaint "all the women are just men in dresses!" aimed at games. Which makes them arguably more progressive then other mediums on average. Not something I’d necessarily agree with, but it’s there (glorious androgyny yo).
Well like someone pointed out earlier in the thread, games are less progressed and intelligent on all matters. Story and character are still laughably underdeveloped even in, say, Bioware games where they actually try to put some effort into this aspect.
Female Dwarves.
Yeah, I was trying to bite my tongue on that one.
Trust me man
You're not going to win any arguments with WoW's character models being sexualized only towards the female characters.
As far as the "girl" games thing, the way it's handled (both by the designers and the consumers) is incredibly stupid. Yes, female gamers typically gravitate toward a different type of game. No, this is not universal, and making the packaging pink won't ensure solid sales to women.
My wife (who will probably be chiming in here from work to correct me on something) plays things like KotOR, Dragon Age, Zelda, Civilization, Age of Discovery, Animal Crossing, etc. She also plays Borderlands with me on occasion, but I think that's mostly to humor me. Here's the thing, though; all those games are also ones that I play the crap out of.
If she's plays those games, and she's a girl, and I play those games, am I a girl? Because if that's the case, it would probably cause some legal friction with the whole married thing.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I've never understood this complaint. Surely in a truly post-feminism no-gender-essentialism society, that's exactly the kind of representation they would like to see (or at least, that a character's dress and actions didn't conform to a particular gender stereotype).
I'm onboard with this one too.
You are my favourite.
(actually doing an essay on Room of Ones Own/Tipping the Velvet on that exact topic right now).
No. No we can't. Because have you seen a commercial in the last.... Ever? Have you seen Paris Hilton, of Megan Fox, or whatever? They are on screen because of essentially 3 thing, and not one of them is acting talent. The only reason video game characters wear less clothes is because it's a hell of a lot easier to design skimpy clothes that don't actually show you anything if they don't, technically, exist. The media as a whole treats gender like shit, from idiotic body images to how "Men" and "Women" are supposed to behave. To treat it like games are any worse is to sidestep the real problem, and to avoid actually talking about it.
I'd say there's not an inconsiderable element to the fact that more advanced consoles generally have people wearing more.
Something else I thought of while I was in the car this evening was a simple stylistic point - in computer games and any other medium dealing with imperfect graphics, your female characters need to have somewhat developed breasts simply because if they don't their's a fair chance they end up looking very androgynous.
This too.
Frankly, the Wii is outselling everything else by being better positioned for women and children, which is fine because (IMO) a really significant number of women don't want to play T rated action games on principle. It's shit for teenaged boys and they want no part of it.
Either way, I think that the vast majority of AAA games are dripping with attitude that turns off women. The Wii doesn't have AAA titles? All the better, from their perspective.
If not, do you think she realized her mistake in making this thread, or is she just sitting back and collecting note for the paper that this was inevitably just research for?
Lets talk about half the population of the world as one cohesive group. That's a fun idea.
Interesting sidenote on the 'The Wii is so great for women'. Its best selling game is a weight loss device (which isn't any good for that), and the DS has had adverts pulled by the ASA for being sexist. Do you know quite how difficult it is to get an advert pulled for sexism in the current advertising climate?
All of which ignores the fact that the overwhelming majority of female gamers play on the PC. And actually make up the largest majority in the entire gaming industry. Very few of these games are gendered or aimed 'at women'. They make solid games for everyone. That's the way forward.
There are different schools of feminism, especially literary feminism. Some forms of feminism focus on the celebration of gender - equality through recognizing female gender traits as good but different rather than bothering to point out that they're mosty arbitrary. French Feminism, regarding literature, posits that women will write and enjoy stories which are less direct and linear than what a man writes and enjoys because women tend to have more erogenous zones, for example.
--
Women are -everywhere- in RPGs. Text-based games are remarkably good places to meet attractive women. :winky:
I utterly adore keeley hawes
As far as I am aware, and this may be a statement arising from gross ignorance but this is the impression I have got from almost every discussion I've ever had on this topic in an academic environment, that would put them squarely in a minority. The rejection of gender traits and gender essentialism is very close to the core of most of what I would recognise as feminism.
I don't understand why this comment has come up so frequently. Gender portrayals in other media, like TV and movies, are also regressive; why is that fact supposed to terminate a discussion on gender issues in video games?
Furthermore, it would take a fair amount of work to show that the gender issues in video games show no interesting deviation from the gender issues in other media, like TV and movies. For instance, one seemingly obvious difference is that movies tend to portray women as secretly domestic and dependent--even the successful, hard-edged career women are supposed to suffer from emptiness inside and lingering self-doubt unless they also have a husband and kids, etc. By contrast, women in video games tend to be portrayed as, well, vixens. It's not like Ivy is just desperate to meet the right man to complete her life, or really wants to have kids before the biological window closes.
I think the problem is when it's not so much that the characters' dress and actions don't conform to a gender stereotype, but rather, that every character's manners conform to a masculine stereotype. That's not liberated sexuality, that's projecting masculinity as the norm.
ehhh... but it still sends the message that only people with these set male characteristics are worthy of being heroes, doing whatever laudable activity, filling whatever social role. ok, so women can participate if they give up whatever traits define them as a woman. It still re-enforces all the same roles, it just tells girls that they can pretend to be a man if they want.
It's be better if character's actions weren't dependent on how they express their gender at all, rather than how characters express their secondary and tertiary gender traits simply not being linked to sex.
While I think it's interesting to approach the question from the viewpoint of technical limitations, it's still true that the cloth physics issue doesn't explain the gender disparity in dress. If technology were forcing our hands, then one would expect men to also be portrayed in leotards. Which, it's true, they sometimes are. But nonetheless I think there's still a difference there.
This also gets into the body types issue, which has already been discussed somewhat.
Also, if you have a halfway decent art style then you don't need burgeoning tits to convey gender. They had clearly female characters way back in the 8-bit days, long before they had the ability to render polygonal chest-monsters.
Depends how you view it. Let us say that we have our images of action heroes derived from mostly male role models. If we then think "let's make a female action hero", and use (unconsciously) a bunch of male-typical behaviour as our basis that isn't necessarily projecting masculinity as a norm.
Why?
Because certain masculine traits are in the set of traits you expect to find in aggressive people. Men are expected to be more physically violent than women, for example. But if this game is about physical violence, then our female character is masculinised just by her inclusion! I think there is an element of unfairness to this. If we are abandoning gender essentialism, it means both abandoning male stereotypes as well as female. By straightforwardly letting a female behave in a male-typical fashion in an area where male-typical behaviour is beneficial (EG being aggressive in a combat environment) I think this is a fair thing to do.
Only in a society that has fairly rigid views about what constitutes masculine or feminine behaviour. It's sort of a chicken and egg problem, but I genuinely do think the complaint is misguided.
EDIT: To make it a bit clearer: Our perception is that the things soldiers do are masculine, and their approach to life is male-typical. If we make a female soldier character with soldier-typical behaviour, she will seem masculinised - a problem with our perception of masculinity, not with the practice of making an aggressive physically violent atypical female.
Your statement implies that we are not "a society that has fairly rigid views about what constitutes masculine or feminine behaviour." It's not a notion I agree with.
That's not quite what I meant.
I meant that given feminists which us to move away from such views, having a female character like that could be a sign of having fully embraced gender inessentialism. Or role reversal. Or any of that good stuff. Not men consciously masculinising women because they believe that they should be masculine (the vital distinction being that one cannot control what one subconsciously thinks, but one can control how one consciously behaves and designs a character - and if a genuinely gender-blind attempt to create a female character that isn't a female stereotype produces a "masculine" character that is not a sign of naughtiness).
But then you get trapped in the never-ending rabbit hole of people questioning the stereotypes. Because asserting, as an author, that gay people will almost always be qualitatively different than a straight person is dangerously close in some feminist eyes to the offense of group categorisation!
I do have some sympathy with that point of view.
EDIT: It's also worth saying that there is a distinction between a masculinised female (a girl with an atypically large number of male-typical traits) and a totally masculinised female (a female character with entirely male-typical traits). Both are equally likely to be accused of being "boy with boobs", but the former is something I find compatible with the idea that these groups may be subtly different.
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/column/111831-asserting-femininity-in-super-metroid/
There are a few claims of symbolism I don't agree with, and I commented on it at the bottom of the page, but on the whole it is a pretty good article.
I'm trying to remember a point in time where feminism was not concerned about the subconscious motivations that led to sexual disparity. There is not much point to blaming specific developers for 'naughtiness', so much as getting them to consciously and critically think about the roles characters' genders play.
If game developers are using definitions of masculinity and femininity that lead to an inability to produce female characters that are not either stereotypically male or female, then it is desirable to get them to find new definitions. If they are not able to prevent their subconscious biases for effecting how they design characters, than it is desirable to make them more consciously aware of their biases.
The whole women acting like males so they can fulfill masculine roles is not something new. It's been around in society and media for thousands of years. It's a very common model found in many societies. I have a hard time seeing it as hugely progressive.
No. But acting like it's only games that are a problem, or that games are somehow special marginalizes the actual problem and lets people avoid talking about it. It essentially turns it into a sort of parallel to the whole "Lol gamer nerds" thing, so it's as if it doesn't need to be addressed.
I can't really speak to Francis, but given how well that horrible 50 Cent game sold, and how well GTA 3 sold, I don't think that the original Louis would have negatively impacted sales. If anything, changing him into an office drone kicked against what I would have seen as the expected stereotype.
I'm not saying they're unconcerned about subconscious influences, but that the specific type of behaviour that they want people to watch out for in their own behaviour is in general the consciously disciminative statements. For example, my decision to say "women are stupid" is a conscious one, and part of the angle of attack that feminists use to try and stop such behaviour is to try and say "if you feel this urge, fight it". The other angle, to which you are referring, is trying to affect how society works to no longer produce environments in which these subconscious effects are generated, but the two are separate. And I am saying that a game designer producing a masculine female character is not subject to censure for the former. They may need to think a little harder, but to be honest I find it quite refreshing seeing female characters who are out and out brutal with no trace of compassion, rather than trying to soften it by including any female-typical properties. This can also be a positive thing; in general, joke-telling and being funny is very much seen as a male-typical trait. Including a lot of funny female characters (who one laughs with) can be part of an effort to get the idea that women can be funny without threatening out into the culture at large.
That's not what I was getting at. They don't think "women must be either super male or super female", they think "I am making a soldier character who happens to be female." As a consequence of the way we interpret this character, we see them as very male - even though the character was not constructed with regard to their gender!
Women excelling in male-typical areas and using male-typical traits to do it is nothing I have a problem with. If you wish to excel in a violent occupation, it helps to have a temperament that tends towards violence. The fact we interpret this as typically male is an imposition of our perceptions.
- I'm glad the OP got reamed for her first post, while her intentions were probably harmless it was all layed out in a very pretentious way
- I really don't see why people think this thread is a trainwreck, I see people bringing up points, some disagreements and eventual understanding or agreement to cease topic since it's not going anywhere
I'd like to chip in that, on a community such as this you'll find sexist comments all the time, both from male and female posters because, for the most part, we don't care anymore. Most of the posters here understand when the others are joking about an issue and understand that things don't need to be taken personally all the time. This is what I believe the true end to sexism should be, when neither side is actually sexist but nobody gets in a bind because someone made a joke.
edit: Additionally, I'd like to see some games with an overweight female party member for once, even better, see if developers know how to make that attractive. Don't take me wrong on that statement, I think heavier women can easily be attractive, I just don't know if game designers believe this.
edit edit: The bar maid from Twilight Princess is probably a good example of developers who know how to do this.
To Crimson King: I’m sorry if I came off as patronizing. In actuality, I meant to post this on a different forum where I had noticed a lot of sexist discussion in the past, but I changed my mind at the last minute because I knew I was more likely to get a more intelligent and coherent conversation going here. For the forum I was originally going to post this on, I was prepared for bitter arguments, and that remark was made for that reason. I know that this forum in particular sees this kind of discussion a lot, and I wasn’t careful to edit my post with that in mind. Sorry for the confusion. As for your point about video games being no less sexist than other forms of media, and male gamers being no more discriminatory than other demographics, you make a very good point. However, keep in mind that I never claimed that video games were in any way more sexist than anything else, or that male gamers were more sexist than other groups—it’s just that I’ve seen a noticeable amount of sexism in video game journalism and on video game forums in my experience. But your point about the media reminds us that there are a lot of forces that affect people, and gamers aren’t solely affected by video games.
To MalaysianShrew: You make an excellent point about the term feminism itself. It can be really problematic to use that term when it’s so loosely defined, almost to a ridiculous level. But that’s part of why I threw it into the discussion that way, to see what everyone else makes of it and how individual people define it.
To Khavall: I think you misunderstand my intentions. I’m also a gamer, and I hardly believe that all gamers are inherently sexist, or even that most gamers are inherently sexist. My only hope with this discussion is to get other people talking and see what kind of ideas they have. It doesn’t suit my purposes (and certainly not any of yours) if you all happily agree with what I say. That in mind, I’m not entirely sure I’ve said much for anyone to either agree or disagree with. The questions don’t have yes or no answers—they’re just things to consider. The answers to those questions are certainly going to be different for each person because I’m asking about other people’s experience. As for the question you addressed, that’s an excellent point you made about interacting between opposing genders. It certainly is true that these interactions are different in almost any given social setting. The reason I decided to include that question is because I’ve noticed in my own experience that the way my male friends behave toward me and other girls when we play video games together is distinctly different from how they behave in other social settings—I was curious if anyone else had such experiences, and if they had an ideas as to why these changes in behavior exist.
To LibrarianThorne: It’s true, it’s also possible to be sexist against men. Men are just as likely to be hyper-sexualized and objectified in video games as women are. That’s a great observation.
In general, I’d just like to remind you that I’m not suggesting by any means that video games are more sexist than other media or other aspects of life. The reason I’m making this video game-specific is because I love games but I’ve also suffered discomfort at times over the sexist themes. These themes in other media make just as uncomfortable, but I don’t watch as much TV and I’m not really interested in talking about other forms of media. I also chose to make it video game specific for the opposite reason—I’ve played a lot of video games and met a lot of gamers who are very pro-feminist, and you’ll notice that the questions I presented allow room for recognition of these things, too. I’m not asking anyone to tell me how sexist games and gamers are—I’m asking people what they’ve noticed, what they believe is true about sexism/feminism in video games, so there’s no need to get offended.
Anyway, thank you all for your feedback so far. It’s been very enlightening, and I appreciate your participation. Sorry again for any confusion, and I hope you all have a nice day.
-Jasmine
Honestly, I think the reason may simply be that the characters weren't visually distinctive enough. I mean, three dudes with beards, three tough guys. The way it ended up, you get one biker, one vet, and one Sean of the Dead. It's easier to pick out who is who in a melee.
I think you're reading more into the alteration than is necessarily there, Robman. I think the viewing public is actually ready to deal with mondo facial hair.
Even beyond 'media', the problem is people's views and expectations. If gender stereotypes and objectification didn't sell then they wouldn't be prevalent in games, movies, etc. It's not like some media conglomerate board decided one day that Western culture should be dominated by sexist imagery. It's dominated by sexist imagery because the majority of people have sexist notions and the imagery plays into them.
You're not going to convince any media industry to stop making products that cater to sexist, racist, classist, or whatever other fantasy if doing so is going to cost them sales. When guys stop wanting to be he-man action heroes who solve problems with the judicious application of high explosives and then get the girl, they'll stop making those movies and games. When women stop wanting to be outwardly confident but with a secret vulnerable side who need an apparently assholish but secretly gentle man to sweep them off their feet and make them learn to open up, they'll stop making horrible romantic comedies that follow that formula. Crying about industries producing sexist media is kind of putting the cart before the horse.
There's a strong argument that sexist media reinforces the sexist notions people have. I don't know what the solution to breaking a very strong cycle is, but I'm pretty sure that it's not saying "sex shouldn't sell" when sex very clearly does.
A major problem of mine with the whole examination of feminine/masculine biases in gaming is the assumption that certain types of games are 'for men' or that women want some other type of game. The article about Metroid someone linked up-thread had a paragraph talking about how Metroid Prime involved an emphasis on puzzle-solving and collecting rather than on violence and domination, so was more female-friendly. I think that's BS. It's more puzzle-based/item-collection gameplay friendly. I love puzzle games and I'm a guy. Does that make me feminine? I don't think it does. I know women who like FPS and RTS games. Are they more masculine for that? Saying that a game is 'for women' or 'feminine' or 'female friendly' because it's not about shooting dudes in the head is silly and marketing them that way would be moronic. It alienates male gamers who appreciate that style of gameplay, reinforces the idea that women shouldn't be aggressive or competitive, and alienates the women who do enjoy games featuring violent/dominating gameplay.
Men and women are people. Games are entertainment. Some people like some types of entertainment. Trying to broadly categorize what men or women want as a group, or what a genre of entertainment as broad as 'gaming' is/should be providing is just doing a disservice to everyone.
While I totally agree that the Imagine series of games look absolutely ridiculously bad, many fantastic games that either subverted or elided the expected kind of gaming gender stereotypes (BG&E, Psychonauts, Mirror's Edge) sold really badly. They utterly failed to capture what passes for a female gaming demographic, and mostly seemed to sell to the games-as-art crowd.
Asinine marketing exists for a reason. It lets the fratboys know that they're going to be trash-talking and throwing a football in their game. It lets basement-dwelling otaku know that their androgynous ladyboy is going to save the world. And, by the same token, it lets women or girls know that the developer has intended the game for whatever their demographic is imagined to be.
And finally, my guess is that publishers are going to see the solution to getting females into games is going to be inserting ridiculous female wish-fulfillment into the male wish-fulfillment. Expect to see, like Dragon Age, some romance novel layered on top of your manly-man-saves-the-world.
My girlfriend loved the new Prince of Persia.