An update on recent technical problems and more from the admin: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/250292/on-technical-difficulties-mod-coverage-and-other-things/p1?new=1
Options
Sexism in Gaming III
Paladin
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
This thread was built to discuss Sexism in video games. It is a continuation of a discussion we have had for a while about, among other things
And other things I forgot to mention.
State of the Union Time:
Dragon's Crown
Dragon's Crown, a game developed by Vanillaware, is noted for featuring very stylized art that at times gets very sexual. Most recently, released footage of an interaction with NPCs in the game found that clicking on these character portraits sets off an animation, as you can see in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex133LSR6xE
The partial context for this interaction as translated into English I have provided below:
In addition, Polygon put up a review with a score of 6.5, notable for making mention of the art as adolescent fantasy (and the gameplay as repetitive).
Also notable is the response from an Atlus PR representative in the comments section:
Sarkeesian Videos
Next is the continuation of Anita Sarkeesian's kickstarter-funded web series, Tropes vs. Women in video games: Damsel in Distress
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjImnqH_KwM
The transcript can be found here.
In it, she endeavors to find video games that deconstruct or reverse the Damsel in Distress trope and analyzes their efficacy.
Saints Row IV
The subject in question in regard to this game is The Rectifier. Description below, stolen from this article:
The Rectifier as well as some drug use content prevented classification by Australia's Classification Board, but with the removal of the Shaundi side mission in which superpowers were gained through some sort of drug use, the game was given an MA15+ rating. The Rectifier is part of a DLC pack and is also available to people who purchase the season pass for the game.
Other educational resources on Sexism in Gaming
This link leads to a post by ErictheVikingGamer compiling several resources of reading material which talk about the subject at hand. Please read them with an open mind at your convenience. It is not obligatory for participation in this thread, but as a method for reaching out to people passionate about their ideals, there is no finer sign of respect than showing them your interest.
Denoument
So, why did I make the thread? Sexism is a big topic, and research into its effects is complicated by its abstract nature. Themes recur in discussion about different titles that broach this subject, and many of those themes cannot be understood when limiting the discussion to a single example.
However, this introduces another problem which has plagued threads of this nature: people attempt to tackle too many problems at a time and end up accomplishing nothing while losing sight of their original objective. This is to be expected when dealing with a sufficiently complex topic. I can only give a couple pieces of advice to people arguing about an emotional and complex issue:
1. know your limitations. If you have a question to ask, define it clearly, and remember it over the course of the argument. Use your judgment when providing a response to a question on whether or not your post helps realize the goal of the question. If an argument has gotten too complex, you may have bit off more than you can chew as to the diversity of the topics you address and you might have to narrow it down.
2. If the discussion is making you extremely angry and bitter, you might want to take a break for a while. Nobody should fault you for finding time to collect your thoughts or even deciding if the current avenue of discussion is fruitless for you, provided you make your exit gracefully and in consideration of all involved. The people remaining should be as considerate and refrain from provoking people back into discussion if it is deemed unhealthy.
Here is a list of logical fallacies that you can use as reference. It is not meant to replace conversation, but supplement discussion. In other words, it is more fruitful to discover why the argument has lead to this fallacy than to simply point out the fallacy and claim it invalidates the entire argument.
Those are my personal opinions regarding argument and are meant to be taken as advice. As far as I know, there are no rules for thread other than to stay within the bounds of the defined topic at the beginning of this post and adhere to the general rules of the forum and D&D. It is the duty of all of us, excepting no one, to make sure this discussion remains civilized. I hope we can all learn something.
-
*the depiction of females and males in video games
*the effect of video games on our gender culture
*blind spots we all have in regard to gender bias
*our roles as conscious and responsible advocates of gender equality in the area of games
*the theories behind our cultural organization that led to this bias
And other things I forgot to mention.
State of the Union Time:
Dragon's Crown
Dragon's Crown, a game developed by Vanillaware, is noted for featuring very stylized art that at times gets very sexual. Most recently, released footage of an interaction with NPCs in the game found that clicking on these character portraits sets off an animation, as you can see in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex133LSR6xEThe partial context for this interaction as translated into English I have provided below:
Accompanying Video Here
Transcript below for your perusal:
A half naked woman is lying in a dark corner, bound by a chain. Looking closer, you discover she's a kidnapped spirit. The followers of [Mornian] seem to be capturing as many spirits and faeries as they can find to power their rune magic. Rune magic gates have been opened many times in this tower, and the magicians are even traveling to the illusionary land. The spirit finishes her story with a bone-chilling revelation. They have awakened the ancient dragon. After freeing the spirit, you go into the room of one of the [Mornian] leaders.
In addition, Polygon put up a review with a score of 6.5, notable for making mention of the art as adolescent fantasy (and the gameplay as repetitive).
Also notable is the response from an Atlus PR representative in the comments section:
Love the review, Danielle. It’s a fair assessment and completely factual. I’m truly thankful that it was you who wrote it, and wouldn’t even think of requesting you change a single letter.
The comments from the game’s supporters are definitely disheartening. It’s ok to not like a game based on an art style, and Polygon is allowed to score the game however they feel necessary. It goes through multiple levels of editing before it’s fully approved, and they’re entitled to their own, informed opinion of the game.
I urge you to please respect the Danielle’s/Polygon’s opinion and then form your own instead of trying to force your opinion on them.
Sarkeesian Videos
Next is the continuation of Anita Sarkeesian's kickstarter-funded web series, Tropes vs. Women in video games: Damsel in Distress
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjImnqH_KwMThe transcript can be found here.
In it, she endeavors to find video games that deconstruct or reverse the Damsel in Distress trope and analyzes their efficacy.
Saints Row IV
The subject in question in regard to this game is The Rectifier. Description below, stolen from this article:
"The lower half of the weapon resembles a sword hilt and the upper part contains prong-like appendages which circle around what appears to be a large dildo which runs down the centre of the weapon," reads the ACB description of the Rectifier from their June ruling. "When using this weapon the player approaches a clothed victim from behind and thrusts the weapon between the victim’s legs and then lifts them off the ground before pulling a trigger which launches the victim into the air. After the probe has been implicitly inserted into the victim’s anus the area around their buttocks becomes pixelated highlighting that the aim of the weapon is to penetrate the victim’s anus."
The Rectifier as well as some drug use content prevented classification by Australia's Classification Board, but with the removal of the Shaundi side mission in which superpowers were gained through some sort of drug use, the game was given an MA15+ rating. The Rectifier is part of a DLC pack and is also available to people who purchase the season pass for the game.
Other educational resources on Sexism in Gaming
This link leads to a post by ErictheVikingGamer compiling several resources of reading material which talk about the subject at hand. Please read them with an open mind at your convenience. It is not obligatory for participation in this thread, but as a method for reaching out to people passionate about their ideals, there is no finer sign of respect than showing them your interest.
Denoument
So, why did I make the thread? Sexism is a big topic, and research into its effects is complicated by its abstract nature. Themes recur in discussion about different titles that broach this subject, and many of those themes cannot be understood when limiting the discussion to a single example.
However, this introduces another problem which has plagued threads of this nature: people attempt to tackle too many problems at a time and end up accomplishing nothing while losing sight of their original objective. This is to be expected when dealing with a sufficiently complex topic. I can only give a couple pieces of advice to people arguing about an emotional and complex issue:
1. know your limitations. If you have a question to ask, define it clearly, and remember it over the course of the argument. Use your judgment when providing a response to a question on whether or not your post helps realize the goal of the question. If an argument has gotten too complex, you may have bit off more than you can chew as to the diversity of the topics you address and you might have to narrow it down.
2. If the discussion is making you extremely angry and bitter, you might want to take a break for a while. Nobody should fault you for finding time to collect your thoughts or even deciding if the current avenue of discussion is fruitless for you, provided you make your exit gracefully and in consideration of all involved. The people remaining should be as considerate and refrain from provoking people back into discussion if it is deemed unhealthy.
Here is a list of logical fallacies that you can use as reference. It is not meant to replace conversation, but supplement discussion. In other words, it is more fruitful to discover why the argument has lead to this fallacy than to simply point out the fallacy and claim it invalidates the entire argument.
Those are my personal opinions regarding argument and are meant to be taken as advice. As far as I know, there are no rules for thread other than to stay within the bounds of the defined topic at the beginning of this post and adhere to the general rules of the forum and D&D. It is the duty of all of us, excepting no one, to make sure this discussion remains civilized. I hope we can all learn something.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Paladin on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
It has the additional benefit of not giving up on people who would otherwise be seen as rejects in a post-prejudice society. I like that, seeing as how I'm one of them.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I like this a lot and believe in this. Who's doing a good job of education these days?
Nuclear families? Parents? Schools? Gubmint? HBO?
Frank Frazetta?
NSFW
oh you meant just enemies. yeah video games are pretty uncomfortable with shooting women in general
The problem with applying it to sexism is one of scale. Sexism and any other prejudice has less of a primal impact than violence, so the intensity of the lesson is not as dependable or ingrained. We gain our sexual education later in life for various reasons if we're lucky, and in other cases we're left to fend for ourselves. By the time we're legally allowed to engage in sexual media, we're 18 years old. This is way after the critical period where we learn the differences between boys and girls and what stereotypes are associated with each. Therefore, gender relations becomes a more complicated issue than simple violence, and needs more education when addressing the variety of scenarios where it comes into play.
However, it is not impossible. Take a look at this paper which studied college age males and females before and after simply watching a video on appropriate sexual workplace conduct. The males were able to identify more scenarios afterward as ambiguous or severe sexual harassment rather than innocuous. If people can be recovered like this, why toss them aside?
That is my rationale for the comparison between violence and sexism in video games. Sexism is harder to overcome by education, but it is still possible.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Call me out on this one if you feel it's off the mark.
I don't find the art style offensive. To me, it's about what I'd expect in a game designed by the people it's designed by. Does that mean I'm OK with the way many Eastern games portray women? Not at all. I guess it means that, unfortunately, I expect it now to the point where it doesn't faze me. Whether that says more about me or about the games/designers, I'm not sure. The art style itself is so over the top that I just can't get too worked up about it. That doesn't mean people who feel differently are wrong. They're not. It's a personal opinion and I respect that.
The offending video in question, with the Bound Spirit, is a different matter altogether. While I'm not going to decry the game and renounce it based on that video, I don't think it's appropriate one bit. If it were a static picture, that would be one thing. But the interactivity is the problem. It speaks to a complete ignorance and disregard for people who are affected by abuse on the part of the developers. I would rather it be cut from the game. However, it would be hypocritical of me to say that its inclusion bothers me enough to not play the game, because quite frankly I'm interested in the game since I love 2D brawlers. I won't, however, be taking part in that scene beyond what I need to in order to progress what story there is. Much in the same way I didn't take part in the sex scenes in the God of War series, I would rather just skip what I don't agree with and enjoy the rest of the game. I actually find it a little less offensive than Kratos lugging around a half-naked woman and forcing her to take part in opening doors and solving puzzles, only to see her die in a horrible manner after forcing her against her will to do these things (she's crushed by a crank wheel). At least you can choose not to poke and prod the bound spirit in Dragon's Crown.
The response to the Polygon review is flat-out disgusting, and I wasn't aware of it until a few hours ago, when I started researching the subject. If anything, a woman's perspective on the game is far more interesting to me than a man's, because no matter how they may argue to the contrary, and this is just my opinion, a man knows just about dick when it comes to being discriminated against because of his gender. I said last night that my wife thought DC was "hilarious". That was true, however, all I'd shown her at that point was the gameplay and cinematic videos. After reflecting on it a bit, I showed her the video of the Bound Spirit and her opinion about that portion is a complete 180 from her opinion on the art style and gameplay in general. It made her uncomfortable, and we had a discussion about why it did so, which also opened my eyes quite a bit. This entire subject is, admittedly, one I'm fairly ignorant on and I suppose I had blinders on until I stopped and actually looked at what's going on in the gaming community. I had no idea female journalists and gamers in general were treated the way they are, because I simply don't do much research aside from seeing a few gameplay videos here and there and checking release dates. The past day or so has been fairly eye-opening. That's probably going to lead some people to ask how I can still want to play a game like DC after realizing some of these things, and my honest answer is because most of it looks like fun, and at the end of the day I play games to escape my daily drudgery. If there's more in the game that we don't know about that is similar to the Bound Spirit scene, my opinion will probably change, because my wife hangs out while I game most of the time. If there's more instances like that, she'll invariably ask me why I'm playing something like that, and "because it's fun" won't be a good enough answer.
In countries other than the US, I believe the sexualization of males to cater to people sexually attracted to males has been achieved. However, in America at least, the female sexual standard is a lot more refined than the male sexual standard, at least to people who are attracted to each. There may be some females attracted to hulk-type males, but the gold standard for a sexual male in video games at least is not well represented. I don't think we in this country can do a good job of making a depiction of a sexual male on par with a sexual female, if that is a valid goal.
As for the attraction of heterosexual men to musclebound men, I guess it depends on how much you self-insert into your fantasy, if the fantasy is to actually be the character depicted.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
This does lend credence to the thought that more females in games should exist, but
How far are we actually willing to go to use games as teaching tool? There is an onus to victimizing women in games, and therefore the dilemma of appropriating abuse for commercial means vs. telling what could be a helpful story regarding it is probably what makes these games marketing poison.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
On further reflection, I think I have some other thoughts developed.
As I've stated before, I'm more insulted by the presumption that I should be sexually attracted to the women thrown at me in Dragon's Crown. (For reasons of grotesque anatomical incorrectness, yadda yadda.)
I found a blog about anatomical stuff in art and boobs and stuff in video games, by the way. Link is obviously NSFW. But it did highlight for me the kind of ridiculous bendy straw spine physics and posing that I hadn't really paid attention to before. Partly as cr0w mentions, because I simply glazed over it all.
While that seems like a small thing, it makes me wonder if this 'gold standard' woman won't also hurt hetero males in the long run because anybody who deviates won't be considered "masculine" enough. Just to be clear, I'm not dismissing the harm to women by the blanket statement that, "guys are sexualized too!" Ironically, that statement seems to miss that the harm is actually cutting both ways. I'm sort of irritated that the games that I play seem to think it's doing a good job of pandering to me.
Hmm, I think we can dispense with a lot of tediousness if we point to the simple absurdity of expecting our games to do parenting for us. We don't expect games to instruct our youth in issues pertaining to self defense or violent crime so we can't very well expect it to instruct us on matters of human sexuality. I'm not willing to blame the games themselves and I'm certainly not willing to censor them.
The real problem, insofar as I'm allowed to frame it, is that the industry at large is openly hostile to criticism. If you're a woman, then you're dismissed out of hand. And worse, it's difficult for women to really actually do things like submit a game that panders to the sexual preferences of women, gay or otherwise, or make a game where women aren't necessarily there to pander to the audience. I obviously think there's room for those games and am more discomfited by the notion that society basically censors this sort of self expression out-of-hand.
"But men are sexualised too!" would be a hell of a lot more legitimate as an argument if games actually pandered to women as well.
The lack of female enemies (bandits anyway) is explained in story. The Hyperion corporation brought the bandits there. They were essentially inmates brought to the planet, hence, all men.
But if nothing else, I think BL2 has a lot of great female characters, despite only having a few female antagonists.
A good question to ask would be whether or not Japan has earned that argument purely on the basis of equal opportunity sexualization.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
mindbogglingly stupid comments from devs aside, two decent enough female PCs. Main female NPCs who are only slightly tropeish. rescue missions for male characters.
in my book, it gets -1 on the Redx Feminish Scale, from -10 to 10, for only being slightly objectionable.
this is very very good for a game with human characters in it.
GranTourismo is one of the highest rated series on this scale, with a rock solid 0.
well... except when you're mercy killing your girlfriend/wife who was 'corrupted' in some way
Perhaps. Although it is fair to note that Japanese society still seems to be very sexist.
I might partly attribute this to a culture of shame, so even if you are into that stuff, you damn well don't mention it.
Likewise, two injuries balanced on a scale does nothing to wash them away. Not that the scale is balanced necessarily.
Yaoi is a thing, but it still seems like it's in the minority and it probably wouldn't make things better even if it weren't. It might just mean that both sexes have more or less have developed equally unhealthy attitudes.
Call me out on this one if you feel it's off the mark.
Sexualization through imagery is more to cater to men. I believe there is some hardwiring going on there.
There's a whole yaoi industry to be sure, but most of it is not very explicit. To compare it to musclebound dudes, I agree it's a male power fantasy dominating the of depiction of musclebound dudes in games.
Yaoi is full of more cerebral things like longing gazes by contrast. Just like the romance novel industry.
Same here. I didn't like it for the guys he sent to their deaths either and I really have a problem with media in which people have to be colossal evil fuckwads now for drama and attention to be the central figure in a story. Also see True Blood. Kratos was interesting when he fucked up one time and spent a lifetime of repentence, but then the gratuitous "Just in case you weren't sure if Kratos was a really bad guy or not here we go" puzzles really made me not like that series.
I have a few theories as to why we think this, and they fit into a couple of categories:
A. male misunderstanding of women
B. male self hatred
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
My reaction is probably not that far off from your wife's, and that's what I was hoping you'd see. The art style alone was groan-worthy, but not a huge offense by itself. Combined with the groping (no matter how small a part it plays, optional or not), it takes on really gross overtones. As I said in the other thread, if someone can still enjoy the game despite those parts, that doesn't bother me. I just hope they can acknowledge why those parts of the game (and the act of ignoring those parts, and making excuses for them) is just harmful to our culture, and our hobby in particular.
I think this actually speaks a little more to just our general entertainment standards. And I think you're right, you can kill women when they have been victimized and it's seen as 'mercy'
No aggressively killing ladies, unless you're also a lady, but you can totally be a dude and just 'put them out of their misery'
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
historically
C. just another excuse to limit what women are allowed to do, excluding them from fields and fucking with their autonomy.
Things like the Bound Spirit and the option to basically molest her cast our hobby in a really bad light. That and the reaction of the people to the Polygon reviews makes us gamers all seem like woman-hating dicks who only play these types of games so we can jerk off to animated sprites or something.
One thing I do find sad, as a Skyrim player and a part-time modder of said game, is that anytime I want to play a female character and get a better body for her with upgraded armor, it's almost invariably got super huge boobs and a butt that would make Shakira weep. And of course, the only armor available for that body is skimpy as hell. But hey, it enhances the game so what choice do I have? The male model with the huge dick? Whole new can of worms.
I can't say I expected that at all from the posts you made in the Dragon's Crown thread, but that's a really good post and shows a really sound understanding of where we (those critical of the game) are coming from. I don't expect you or want you to feel bad about playing the game or buying it on an individual basis though: I think it's more important to see how it fits into the bigger picture. Also I want to add some context to the things you bought up with Polygons review of the game by bringing over this post about it from the GnT DC thread (as the review isn't linked here yet):
For the record, this is the Polygon review that I have mentioned several times. It should be noted for anyone who hasn't read it and thinks "It's someone complaining about the art style for a billion paragraphs, just like the thread" it actually isn't. Only the opening and then the final paragraph of the actual review even deal with the art style controversy whatsoever, the rest of it is actually dedicated to the gameplay and she does in fact have legitimate sounding complaints there as well.
But allow me to restate why this review and the critique of the games art style is so important in context. Firstly, because as the stories from the #1reasonwhy threads show, women are frequently marginalized or made to feel unwelcome in the gaming industry, which comments then aptly demonstrate:
Then his equally as hilarious follow up, which should immediately remind a few people of their own conduct in this thread (I will bold the relevant portion):
That bold portion isn't even matching reality, as I discussed and as anyone can see for themselves just by clicking the link above. The comments however are 90% focused on the art style and that's where the main discussion about the game has really been and it's an important one to have (as I've said before).
But these two comments just shows every problem nicely. No, the males in this game are not portrayed as agency devoid sexual objects in offensive poses (Warrior Monk and Bound Spirit come to mind). No, they are not the same thing at all and that should be obvious to anyone who follows this debate. But note the last sentences of both posts, that the site delberately gave the review to a woman for click-bait. I've begun seeing this argument a lot more now, that instead of engaging with any issue or similar it's written off with offensive cries of "White Knighting", "Pretending to be interested in social justice", "Click bait" or similar accusations for websites that dare to bring it up. It's offensive on two levels, because it firstly carries the implication in that statement that a woman obviously can't review a game like this as objectively as a man can (I certainly would have docked it in a review for the art style as well) and that people hold these opinions because of getting that sweet click through advertising revenue.
The point is that this is yet another example of why #1reasonwhy exists: Women are marginalized in games, their opinions on games are marginalized or made to feel unwelcome and Dragon's Crown is yet another example of how both of those things are intrinsically linked to one another.
I will add to the end there though that "Not that it is the sole, only and most important cause of anything of this", because I realize I didn't make that clear probably.
Based on my experience, art (and fantasy) follows different logic than reality. It is important to know the differences between these laws. A relevant example is perfected in Stranger Than Fiction (or Watchmen). The main character needs to die to make it a good story. There is nothing we can do other than kill him. However, this is not murder, though in every interpretation in the real world this would be. A lot of horror stems from just transplanting the rules of fantasy into the setting of reality - Drag Me To Hell being the most recent one I can think of. Therefore, if you touch a bound woman who didn't specifically ask to be touched, is it rape? Of course it is, in reality. Narrative doesn't matter. Outside context doesn't matter. What the person looks like doesn't matter. But in fantasy, the rules of reality designed to protect us and preserve happiness do not apply. Apologies for the second Louis CK video in a row, I went on a binge:
In reality, this is how it should happen every time. But in fantasy, the characters enjoy the privilege of a predestined narrative. It is important to understand this. Literature has long suffered the "protagonist bias," where everyone who hates the main character is deemed evil and everyone who likes the main character is a friend. Some of the heroes of your childhood could be considered monsters once deprived of their narrative focus.
Now, I understand how this point of view could be considered objectionable. That's fine. But I believe it's a good habit to develop multiple perspectives and choose the best one. I chose this because of a fallacy of mine which I will never give up: authorial intent. I can never dismiss the intent of the author regarding a work, and that's just what my personality is. If he came up to me and said "yeah, she's not that into you touching her," then at that exact second I will classify it as a rape scene across all interpretations.
Nobody has to adopt this point of view, but if you feel that just knowing about it helps, I'm glad. If you reject it completely on the basis of your own critical thinking, I'm even more glad, because that means I'm right that education can vaccinate against social brainwashing.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I'm curious, what makes you think that this speaks to the 'ignorance' of developers, or disregard for real abuse victims. If a piece of art depicts someone being punched in the face, I don't assume that the artist has a disregard for assault victims, or that they want those things to happen to people in the real world. So why do we assume otherwise for sex crimes in art?
I guess one of the things that bothers me about this discussion is that we seem to hold sexuality in art to a different standard than we hold everything else. No one argues that Christopher Nolan thinks rich masked vigilantes are the right way to save a city infested by crime - nobody would even think to say that. Yet for some reason people feel perfectly okay arguing that people who have sexual fantasies (and express those fantasies through art) must want those fantasies to carry over to the real world. Why do we hold that double standard? Why do people assume that sex is different?
It's more that this happened to be a case where you have a woman review a game and it just happens to be one with really weirdly sexualized female characters in it. There are plenty of women who write various reviews on gaming websites, but this is probably the first time it's ever sort of run up against the general internet hate brigade for anything to do with womens issues in gaming. Another recent example was how a writer at RPS criticised the upcoming XCOM third person shooter for not having female agents as an option and so on.
The sad thing is that once you go looking for this kind of thing, it's actually everywhere and there are too many examples to discuss. The debate is about the root cause of it firstly and how to actually adequately address it. Both are enormously complicated issues with very difficult answers.
How do you interpret this then?
I am curious, let's test your opinions right now, do you feel this is "Art" and should be defended?
Edit: And I seriously want an answer here. This is literally the very example you just mentioned being expressed on this very topic. I am really curious to know how much more information you need to know about this person before you can determine they are a hateful misogynistic individual (because I didn't need anything beyond the flash game, but there is certainly more than enough evidence outside of it).
Because from what I understand, sex crimes carry a much more long-term effect on the people they happen to. And a depiction of a sexual assault can affect a previous victim of one in ways that a simple picture of someone being punched in the face never would affect a dude who got in a fight once. At least, that's the way I see it.
I hold sexuality in art in very high regard, actually. So long as it's tasteful. I've no problem with sexuality whatsoever, nor do I believe that people who see something in a game are going to enact it in the real world. I think it's more of a respect issue. Much in the way that the vast majority of us would never use racial slurs at people because of the way past incidents have affected them, some of us feel like things have gone too far from the realm of sexuality into the realm of the perverse, and that what is being depicted on screen could trigger memories for people who have been molested in the past. That's the big issue, I believe.
I will go ahead and take a gamble that we have all been sexually aroused by something we really shouldn't have been aroused to. We can't defeat that brain chemistry. We don't talk about it. "I saw Charlie [my nemesis] get punched the other day. I liked it." I can tell that to a concerned human being. "I saw my sister in the shower and I masturbated later that night." You see how creepy that is in comparison? Can you imagine saying that to anybody, ever? So you eat it and let the guilt fester inside you, and you put it on the stack of evidence that says you might just be a horrible person. And from then on, your perception of yourself is at a disconnect from the person everyone knows you are.
And that's why I think people believe that deep down, sex can turn you into a horrible person when other abhorrents cannot.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
My answer is that the intent of the artist delivered by the game would drive up my desire to ask him the question: "do you really want Anita Sarkeesian to come to harm?" which would isolate the most dangerous of predictions of what's really going on in his head before separating out the less important minutiae.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I don't need to ask him "Are you a sociopath", I have already concluded that this is the kind of thing that such a person does and that yes, they almost certainly do want her to come to harm. Subsequent statements prove that, but I don't need those to know the kind of vile intent such a game already has.
Except that in reality, people argue about the real-world impact of how violence is depicted in popular culture all the time.
There's not as much discussion about the impact of violent media within the gaming media/community for a number of reasons, but to pretend that nobody bothers to criticize violence in media seems at best disingenuous.
Also, even if we both agree there's a double standard where sexualized violence in media is considered more objectionable than non-sexualized violence, that doesn't mean that there needs to be less discussion about the real-world impact of sexualized violence.
That depends entirely on the person though, doesn't it? Some people are permanently injured in fights, physically or mentally. Some people have PTSD and seeing depictions of violence causes them real harm. Some people get groped on a subway and shrug it off, for others it's a big deal that majorly affects their life (and no, I'm not dismissing the reaction of the second group, just saying that everyone handles things differently).
I guess I don't see how the artist is responsible for the viewer's reactions in this case. People will interpret a piece of art in all kinds of different ways. It's down to each person what art they expose themselves too and how they interpret it.
Part of the problem with sexuality is that one person's tasteful is always another person's gross. I think we've all met guys who cringe when they run into any media depicting a sexualized guy and call it "gross" or "gay." In general, we're very good as a society at hating any kind of sexual fantasy that is different from the norm, whether it's homosexuals, furries, or fetishists. Saying that artists should only depict only things the majority will find 'tasteful' is very limiting, and feels a little victorian.
Likewise, with DC specifically we're dealing with a pretty big cultural barrier. Sexual themes and fetishes that are taboo in America are considered acceptable in Japan. If what he made features themes that are common fantasies in his home country, and less likely to shock anyone who lives there, does that make a difference?
None of this is to say you have to like DC or play it, the game doesn't look like my cup of tea either. But there's an important difference between saying "I don't like this" and "This is horrible, anyone who likes it is wrong."
Verbatim responses:
"She's hot." x2
"She seems to be enjoying it."
She said she would have a problem with it if she were crying, or saying no.
"She could easily break the thin gold chain."
At this point I explained the narrative was such that the bad guy really has her captured, so she can't.
"But you're the good guy!"
I explained that she should be outraged. She's also been personally abused keep in mind.
"But she's hot, if I save her I get to do what I want with her if she's willing right that's how fantasies work?"
Then she equivocated that she probably has too many friends into S&M. Also that this is fairy tale 101 and that everyone lives Happily Ever After after being rescued in such stories.
Yeah I know star witness, I just thought it would add something to this thread. I already said personally I would hit the boob deflate switch and the minus bondage switch if there was one, just like I usually flip anti-gore switches in games. So I'm not defending anything on certain scores, but I do take issue with all the white knighting going on about it. Is it art? YES! Is it art that's been inflated and somewhat corrupted for the sake of controversy and drama to sell some games? Also yes? Just like gore in Dragon Age.
Ooo someone has stumbled upon the actual problem. Puritanism (American?) and self-loathing. The root of every problem IMO.
Folks in this thread are in fact putting out great stuff that is a whole dinner for thought, and I will read it later but I'm going to the store right now.
I don't convict on 99% for things like this. Your original question was "should this be defended as art?" which I dodged by asking "should the artist be defended for his art?"
According to Virginia v. Black and Brandenburg v. Ohio, legally my recourse is to ascertain the intent of the artist, at which point the art in question could be characterized as free or restricted speech.
For the satisfaction of my own conscience, my recourse is also to ascertain the intent of the artist. To sleep at night, I remind myself that sociopaths are uncommon in real life and people are likely to learn that harming Anita is stupid.
Do I want the art taken down? No, unless the artist plans to use it somehow to enact some sort of effective plan to recruit people to harm Sarkeesian. I believe in humanity to look at it and at least think, "how crass." I hope to meet anyone who doesn't fulfill that requirement and find out what deficiency in their education made them think that the flash game was a call to arms.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.