Gender Diversity / Politics in games (was Tropes Vs. Women)

[Wroth]

Your above post reads almost exactly like Neg's first post on here. basically: "hey guys! I can't really follow all of this, but isn't it all just nonsense anyway?". Which doesn't make a great first impression.
 

It's a lot to sift through at this point, but if you're actually interested in engaging in the discussion, perhaps read through a good chunk of the thread. Have you watched the tropes videos?

[Fugitive]

1 minute ago, Wroth said:

Your above post reads almost exactly like Neg's first post on here. basically: "hey guys! I can't really follow all of this, but isn't it all just nonsense anyway?". Which doesn't make a great first impression.
 

It's a lot to sift through at this point, but if you're actually interested in engaging in the discussion, perhaps read through a good chunk of the thread. Have you watched the tropes videos?

 

I have followed this thread for a while and don't worry, I'm of average intelligence and can understand most of it..

 

Sarkeesian essentially pointed out some things that to a degree had been concerning me too, but the GG/SJW circus has pulled the focus away from those valid concerns which may be why games like Nier are still featuring female characters fighting in their pants. 

 

This distraction needs to be reduced. It has become the main show while the issues that sparked it off have become sidelined because they're not the spectacle that threats, SWAT raids and job losses are.

[Shoes]

On the page before this there was a lengthy debate about negs and censorship.

[Benny]

I think that threats, SWAT raids and job losses are a lot more important than just "spectacle" really, considering they are actual real things happening to people. As opposed to just the content of the art being criticised, which is actually leading to the critics to receive these threats when they are pointed out. How are people supposed to focus on the content of these games and make critisism when they fear for their lives for trying? I think that issue of people being unable to do that without being harassed is more important to tackle right here and right now. But, you know, maybe that's just taking "sides".

[Fugitive]

14 minutes ago, Benny said:

I think that threats, SWAT raids and job losses are a lot more important than just "spectacle" really, considering they are actual real things happening to people. As opposed to the content of the art being criticised which is actually leading to the critics to receive these threats. But, you know, maybe that's just taking "sides".

 

Of course they're vitally important to the people it's happening to, but it is happening to an infinitesimally small subsection of the world Sarkessian's observations have enveloped.

 

I wouldn't wish that on anybody and it goes without saying that those behind such attacks need to be dealt with in accordance with the law.

 

But I suppose I'm just baying at the moon in impotence here, really. Pictures of females fighting in their underwear - while being the main issue - can't compete with the bombast of someone being raided by a SWAT team. I'm definitely not the Canute who's going to stand up and turn the tide of human nature. 

[Benny]

If people are being raided by SWAT teams simply for pointing out that women fighting in their underwear is a bit stupid, then that becomes the main issue, as it indicates something rotting at the heart of the culture beyond the art itself.

[Zael]

13 minutes ago, Fugitive said:

 

Of course they're vitally important to the people it's happening to, but it is happening to an infinitesimally small subsection of the world Sarkessian's observations have enveloped.

 

I wouldn't wish that on anybody and it goes without saying that those behind such attacks need to be dealt with in accordance with the law.

 

But I suppose I'm just baying at the moon in impotence here, really. Pictures of females fighting in their underwear - while being the main issue - can't compete with the bombast of someone being raided by a SWAT team. I'm definitely not the Canute who's going to stand up and turn the tide of human nature. 

 

I don't think females fighting in their underwear is the main issue. It's part of a much bigger problem along with harassment, lack of women in the industry, passive hostility etc. 

[Fugitive]

I disagree. It's the usual story of the extreme actions of a tiny minority eclipsing everything else simply because those actions are so extreme and unusual. While the real issue at the heart of the debate 'females fighting in their underwear' affects everybody. We know calling in death threats, SWAT teams and hounding people from their jobs is wrong. We've always known it,  but society is only just realising that images of 'women fighting in their underwear' might just be harmful.

[Fugitive]

5 minutes ago, Zael said:

 

I don't think females fighting in their underwear is the main issue. It's part of a much bigger problem along with harassment, lack of women in the industry, passive hostility etc. 

 

Of course, the underwear thing is merely a synonym for most of what my daughter will find herself fighting against. She is working in a pub part time while studying her A levels. Everyday sexism.

[NEG]

40 minutes ago, Zael said:

 

I don't think females fighting in their underwear is the main issue. It's part of a much bigger problem along with harassment, lack of women in the industry, passive hostility etc. 

 

Except, if we go by the thread title, it is the main issue. Aka, tropes in video games.

 

Everything else is extra.

[Qazimod]

Spoilers!  But yeah, the superficial design of Kaine undermined the writing that had gone into making that character interesting from a story perspective. Okay, that sounds a bit "words and deeds", and the creepy DLC costumes I later heard about didn't help, but it'll be interesting to see if Automata does anything similar for 2B...

[rockstarjez]

On 4/23/2016 at 0:30 PM, Shoes said:

Even ignoring that, having women in underwear is just funny! Ha, people wanting women to be treated with respect!  Crazy.

 

 There aren't sides, apart from nutbags on Twitter. No-one here is 'on a side'. Except Jez. 

The winning side! 

[Gorf King]

21 hours ago, geekette said:

Gorf, So you don't believe in "racially motivated" as an exacerbating factor to crime? And you think that harassment is only meaningful if objectively threatening to any person, regardless of how it impacts on the victim? I think we will have to agree to disagree.

 

No, I don't hold either of those positions. A racial motivation is a motivation, not necessarily an exacerbation (or, rather, an aggravation). Crimes can be aggravated by a number of factors, and, quite separately, motivated by them. The second statement is almost the opposite of what I was saying. I was saying that you can't objectively categorise the supposed gravity of threats or harassment by appealing to statistics showing how the act threatened is more likely to happen to a person of group a than group b. You can (and should) look at numerous factors, including the frequency and severity of the threats or harassment, and at factors indicating the seriousness of the threat and the perpetrator's intention to carry it out, but blanket categorisation of gravity by reference to statistical probability isn't a wise basis for judging the relative seriousness of what you must bear in mind I exemplified as an 'equal' threat (into which evaluation I'd roll the factors I mention here). 

[Unofficial Who]

Talking about costumes http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-ridiculous-excuses-sexy-video-game-costumes/

 

They go through the usual suspects but they make a pretty good point about Bayonetta

 

Bayonetta is what happens when you get God of War without the desperate insecurity. She still strips off to eliminate everything she encounters, but does it with a genuine sense of enjoyment instead of yelling to try to make herself feel big enough.

 

The Excuse:

 

She uses her magical hair to create clothes and conjure attacks. The more hair used for an attack or to summon a demon, the less hair left to cover her body.

 

Why That's Bullshit:

 

Bayonetta's ridiculous excuse is that it's not an excuse at all, which is brilliant. The only bullshit here is how it highlights every other developer for the cowards they are. When asked about the sexiness, developer Hideki Kamiya told 1UP:

 

"So the whole, the theme of her attacks is 'sexiness.' So, when I was working on Dante's theme, his theme was 'Coolness,' and Viewtiful Joe's theme was 'Beauty.' ... What I want her to do is to use that little space to make herself look sexy."

 

See, every other developer? How hard was it to admit that you just want sexy? Or is that the wrong question in this context? Platinum Games deliberately and blatantly made their character as sexy as possible. And more importantly, they didn't then patronize everyone in the world by claiming that "guy in full battle plate, woman in two bandanas" was anything but blatant pandering.

[Gorf King]

11 hours ago, geekette said:

Well that's a large shift in position from your earlier posts. Now it isn't 'all threats are equal if they use the same words, regardless of who makes them', which is what I objected to you saying, it's 'the level of threat depends on numerous contextual factors', which is what I've been saying all along.

 

It'd be useful when quoting someone to use the words they used. Obviously, I didn't say that. I said 'If anyone received the same level of, let's say, rape and death threats as someone else of lesser power, or with a history of having received such threats, they should be taken just as seriously. Before you respond, let me add that I am well aware of how words or actions are taken differently by people with different backgrounds, and different statuses, and different histories - and even a different understanding of language. I know that the same action affects someone vulnerable to that action more than it does someone less vulnerable to it...' And so on, at terrible length. Yet somehow, I think you've still missed the point. And I certainly don't agree with what you said, which was that a threat is less of an issue if it comes from a group with less power in society relative to another (along with several other invalid codifiers such as 'minorities' suffering more (again, power isn't all, or even principally, about who is in a minority)). The main reason I disagree is that this might be exactly the justification that some GGers - a group I have no doubt wield little power in society at large - give for the stuff they do. They don't think it really means anything, because they're just words types by a disenfranchised group of misfits to some relatively successful and high-profile women/journalists/writers. This is what Mentazm does, too, I suspect. I think what you proposed reinforces this gradation of seriousness which, taken to a logical end, could downgrade very serious and upsetting threats that some groups make towards others. Not exactly excuse them, but, in your words, make them 'less of an issue.' In the last instance of repeating myself, I think - since we're talking about contexts - that in the context of what's gone on with Gamergate that's a mistaken claim to make. 

 

And that's it for me when it comes to this particular sub-debate. I don't think any more words are going to help if the point's not already clear.

[macosx]

Well said.

 

On 23 April 2016 at 1:43 PM, Fugitive said:

I disagree. It's the usual story of the extreme actions of a tiny minority eclipsing everything else simply because those actions are so extreme and unusual. While the real issue at the heart of the debate 'females fighting in their underwear' affects everybody. We know calling in death threats, SWAT teams and hounding people from their jobs is wrong. We've always known it,  but society is only just realising that images of 'women fighting in their underwear' might just be harmful.

 

[Gorf King]

I haven't missed anything in what you've said though, and I've answered every point you've made several times over - it's not as if I've been evasive or avoided the debate you began. If you don't agree with what I've said, that's grand. I still think you've missed the point - and more importantly, the danger in blanket assumptions that a threat coming from a 'minority' is less of an issue than that from, well, a majority. I think you have a tendency toward monocular vision on some issues that blinds you to any degree of nuance - that's a common trait in humans with strong beliefs, and this is one of those issues for you. And I think you've got a problem here - and with me in general - because I don't automatically assume the wisdom or objective truth of everything you say on an issue in which you think yourself supremely qualified. But unlike you I'm not going to bestow on you what you've falsely accused me of - some sort of belittling gender bias because of my own gender - along with a bunch of ad hominem nonsense. You know what that amounts to, geekette? I think you do. And I'll keep my experience and qualifications to myself. But I will say that I find your repeated eagerness to trot out the fact that you have a degree mildly nauseating. 'I have a doctorate.' Erm, and?

 

It's all cool though, people sometimes get a bit het up about stuff they care about. All cool, apart from the bit about fucking mansplaining. Oh my word, that's so not cool. So very not.

[NEG]

1 hour ago, geekette said:

But "I'm going to rape and murder you" from a man to a woman does not equal "I'm going to rape and murder you" from a woman to a man.

 

In the fair and equal everything world feminists strive for, this is something you'd want to equal both ways, I'm assuming.

 

Are you implying it's impossible as a woman (forever and ever!) to threaten/scare a male with such words and actions?

[Delargey]

Neither of you are coming across as very intelligent right now.

[Gorf King]

That's probably because it's a pointless argument. Pointless arguments are usually stupid.

[matt0]

On 23/04/2016 at 1:43 PM, Fugitive said:

I disagree. It's the usual story of the extreme actions of a tiny minority eclipsing everything else simply because those actions are so extreme and unusual. While the real issue at the heart of the debate 'females fighting in their underwear' affects everybody. We know calling in death threats, SWAT teams and hounding people from their jobs is wrong. We've always known it,  but society is only just realising that images of 'women fighting in their underwear' might just be harmful.

 

The death threats, SWAT teams and people hounded out of their jobs are directly connected to the "women fighting in their underwear" as it's a concerted effort to shut down any debate about why women fighting in their underwear might be harmful. I don't think you can disconnect the two. If women are represented poorly in videogames and there's a movement of people forcing people out of the industry because they want those distorted depictions of women to go unexamined and untouched then surely that's part of the same issue?

[Rev]

The Sad Puppies (Gamergate for Science Fiction, if you've led a charmed life and avoided them so far) have come back and they've got a plan. Last year, they nominated a bunch of things for the Hugos by right-wing people, they appeared on the nomination lists and then the Hugos chose to give "No Award" if none of the nominees were good enough. One of their nomination did win though, Guardians of the Galaxy, clearly nothing to do with who nominated it. But it gave the puppies an idea!

 

Nominate things that would have been nominated anyway.

 

It's genius!

 

http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-john-scalzi-hugo-award-nominations-20160426-story.html

[Mr Cochese]

Neil Gay-Man more like! Amirite, Jez?

[Unofficial Who]

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/thefeed/article/2016/05/06/jb-hi-fi-employee-hilariously-took-piss-out-games-girls-will

 

Turns out a lot of people walking into JB Hi-Fi are just as confused about what to buy their daughter/sister/girlfriend/fellow human when it comes to video games. “Is there a game that teaches girls about getting paid less than men?” or “Where’s the RPG for dealing with man spreaders?” are probably some questions that are asked at the counter.  

 

One JB Hi-Fi employee had enough of people asking about “girls” games and took matters into his own hands.

 

Morris Umali made a tongue-in-cheek section for all those lost people wondering about what it is women like to play. And you’ll never guess, it’s the same games as everyone else (aka Grand Theft Auto, Dark Souls, Call of Duty etc.)

 

“I’m tired of customers asking for "Games that girls will like" so we made this,” Umali wrote on his Facebook. “All the women I know are playing the shooters and scary games. I'm the one playing Animal Crossing and crying at To The Moon.”

 

[Dig Dug]

Was going to leave it but the thread got bumped.

People are crying about localisation again, this time in Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE. Considering how unmarketable the game is I find it a bit silly that people are getting upset over Nintendo deciding that school girls in Bikini's isn't how they want to present the game to the west.

 

Spoiler

 

[Alex W.]

The Rapp debacle was always going to result in greater scrutiny of that content by Nintendo. It sent a pretty clear message, fabricated or not, that gamers were strenuously opposed to that sort of content and its very mention was a PR liability.

[Dig Dug]

Yep, to hear people cry censorship after all that is amusing to say the least. Kind of reminds me of the 4chan post that went viral after Nintendo announced Skyward Sword.

[NEG]

 

[Wroth]

What does that video have to do with the tropes series or any of the recently discussed topics in this thread?

[rockstarjez]

On 5/7/2016 at 2:53 AM, Wroth said:

What does that video have to do with the tropes series or any of the recently discussed topics in this thread?

The thing that I got from the video, which is a great video btw NEG. Is that complaining about how a female character "sit's" in a videogame, or how they are scantily dressed. Is a bit nonsensical and a waste of time. 

 

If these online feminists would stop moaning about "patriarchy" Or how some teenager called them a nasty words online and actually point their feminist gaze towards countries, where women are stoned to death for being raped. The world would be a better place.

 

But I guess it's just easier to call all white men "Misogynists"