CRACKED: "6 Sexist Video Game Problems Even Bigger Than the Breasts"

[Rebel_Raven]

Nice article.

Hopefully these problems will dimish, or hopefully go away so people that complain about these threads can ... do what the hell ever they'd do.

Problems go away, so do these threads, and people talking about it. Pretty damn simple. My levels of giving a damn about how small people think these problems are are depleted.
Gotta wonder why the people that don't want to talk about it, or see it talked about don't just help the people complaining. Leaving these problems as they are won't help.

 

[astrav1]

Cracked went to shit a long time ago. And shame on you for advertising them. It's what they want.

 

[Something Amyss]

Amongst other things, they claim that The Last Of Us and BioShock Infinite are sexist because Ellie and Elizabeth need the help of the male main character. >.<

No, it's that these capable or in one case powerful characters turn phenomenally stupid and need to be led around on a leash because REASONS that is at issue here, not that they need a man's help. Or not merely that they need a man's help, but how desperately incompetent they become without it.

I mean, this is explained directly in the artile. Did you not understand it or are you deliberately ignoring it?

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

And three guesses what it is, six iterations of the same tired shit we've all heard before. Agree or disagree, this article sheds no new light.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I feel that these topics become useless arguments of "I'm right" "No, I'm RIGHT" and falls short of real discourse. Video games are fiction and fiction is just fantasy, a exaggeration of the creators "vision" of whatever the fuck they want to say. Sometimes they really want to say nothing in particular, have no political or social commentary, they just want to tell a story. And a good story no matter what the content is still a good story. Just because the protagonist may be x-generic male and the plot may be saving y-female-in-distress doesn't detract from it being a good story.
At this point I feel that proponents of the "we need moar strong female leads" should take that as a challenge to write something instead of trying to force others to do it by brow-beating and political correctness bashing.
I don't say that the conversation shouldn't be around but I will say that we're not adding anything by rehashing the same arguments over and over. Someone has to just take initiative and create something different. And more people need to follow that example.
Basically what I feel it boils down to is debate means jack shit without a real action and the only real action isn't to batter down what is already in existence but to build up that which is not. Take fucking risks, do something about it that isn't destructive or abrasive, but constructive and creative.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

I mean some asshole did make a game where you beat the crap out of her.

More than one guy made a game where you shoot and main the hell out of bin Laden, or throw a truckload of shoes at Bush, and I personally used a poster of Michael Schuhmacher as as dartboard back in the 90s.

I'd say Michael Schuhmacher is the only relevant one there. There's a slight difference in appropriate aggression levels between people responsible for thousands of deaths, and some woman on youtube who had the audacity to call a bunch of games sexist.

You can actually get the side of the story of the guy that made the game in a recent interview actually.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjJAYaFGbbs

Interesting how he isn't the horrible evil person everyone makes him out to be.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

I feel that these topics become useless arguments of "I'm right" "No, I'm RIGHT" and falls short of real discourse. Video games are fiction and fiction is just fantasy, a exaggeration of the creators "vision" of whatever the fuck they want to say. Sometimes they really want to say nothing in particular, have no political or social commentary, they just want to tell a story. And a good story no matter what the content is still a good story. Just because the protagonist may be x-generic male and the plot may be saving y-female-in-distress doesn't detract from it being a good story.
At this point I feel that proponents of the "we need moar strong female leads" should take that as a challenge to write something instead of trying to force others to do it by brow-beating and political correctness bashing.
I don't say that the conversation shouldn't be around but I will say that we're not adding anything by rehashing the same arguments over and over. Someone has to just take initiative and create something different. And more people need to follow that example.
Basically what I feel it boils down to is debate means jack shit without a real action and the only real action isn't to batter down what is already in existence but to build up that which is not. Take fucking risks, do something about it that isn't destructive or abrasive, but constructive and creative.

I disagree, even rehashing the same stuff time, and time, and time again, we're talking about it. It's being talked about, and thus in the eyes of people. We're letting people know we still want female protagonists. It's all some can do.

The problem with making our own stuff, aside from the fact that not everyone has the time, resources, or talent to do that, and no amount of BS will change that is that since when does the industry really pay attention to indie games? I mean seriously? I'm not saying it to crush dreams, but any indie developer that gets the industry to stop being so against women deserves several nobel peace prizes. They'd have shattered te conventional wisdom that women in games harm the game, created a game men and women alike love bringing them together, and made so much money that the industry would have to notice as it's all they care about in the end.

Women getting into the industry to make AAA games? Go for it! But lets not pretend women are necessary for it. Men can write for women, and vice versa. Other mediums prove this like the romantic comedy movies, plus the fact that most of our beloved female figures are created by men in games.

I'm not saying that a person can't make a difference, but I'd say the change needs to happen among those in the industry, producers, developers, etc, that block female protagonists from being made. The people in power over these matters that fight diversity among protagonists need to be replaced by people who aren't so eager to think negative of ethnicity or gender.

 

[Something Amyss]

At this point I feel that proponents of the "we need moar strong female leads" should take that as a challenge to write something instead of trying to force others to do it by brow-beating and political correctness bashing.

But your brow-beating and political correctness bashing is okay, I see. This entire post reads like "do as I say, not as I do."

That said, in an industry that doesn't want female leads, females on covers unless they're cheesecake, or females in focus groups, it would take more than just writing. I can write, but the question becomes who will code for me? There's a bit of an entry level issue here, a bigger one than most other media.

There's a common sentiment within creative communities that nobody is actually going to steal your work because they have their own work to work on. It's also why generally, nobody cares about producing your game. Specious arguments don't solve anything either, dude,.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

**snip**
I disagree, even rehashing the same stuff time, and time, and time again, we're talking about it. It's being talked about, and thus in the eyes of people. We're letting people know we still want female protagonists. It's all some can do.

The problem with making our own stuff, aside from the fact that not everyone has the time, resources, or talent to do that, and no amount of BS will change that is that since when does the industry really pay attention to indie games? I mean seriously? I'm not saying it to crush dreams, but any indie developer that gets the industry to stop being so against women deserves several nobel peace prizes. They'd have shattered te conventional wisdom that women in games harm the game, created a game men and women alike love bringing them together, and made so much money that the industry would have to notice as it's all they care about in the end.

Women getting into the industry to make AAA games? Go for it! But lets not pretend women are necessary for it. Men can write for women, and vice versa. Other mediums prove this like the romantic comedy movies, plus the fact that most of our beloved female figures are created by men in games.

I'm not saying that a person can't make a difference, but I'd say the change needs to happen among those in the industry, producers, developers, etc, that block female protagonists from being made. The people in power over these matters that fight diversity among protagonists need to be replaced by people who aren't so eager to think negative of ethnicity or gender.

I see your point but I disagree because the argument has stagnated and degenerates quite quickly into flame wars. I've always felt that action means more than words and there's a whole helluva lot of words and not much action. Even if its just a few indies the fact that its out there gives people a choice. And indy games are getting more attention these days than they ever have. Sure the AAA industry has their heads up their asses, but nothing lasts forever. Ask Rome, THQ, Atari, the British Empire, the dodo, the quagga, etc.
I feel that in this industry you have to have the mavericks who do their own thing without corporate oversight. We don't live in a world where we only get our information from paid off sources, we have the internet which amounts to the biggest word of mouth device ever. Look at Minecraft. Do you think that Mojang would exist without Notch taking the risk of making a game that doesn't conform to AAA standards and ended up selling better than some established AAA IPs as well as gaining respect from the gaming universe? I have faith in the little guy or gal getting their message across with action to back up the talk. But the discussion has yet to make an impact because there hasn't been any real action to make the discussion a reality.
You have to make things happen, not just talk about them. There was a time that revolution was just a closed-door discussion in secret between colonists who were tired of the British micro-managing them and that discussion was backed up by actions. Without it the US for good or ill would not exist. All I'm saying is that while the discussion is a good thing, its not enough and something has to be done. Someone has to put it all on the line and take a risk and make that game-changing... game. Its a hard thing to do, but no great work in history was done by taking the easy road.
I challenge people to do something about their beliefs, not just talk about them. And I believe the talent and drive is out there. Those that can do it and haven't yet need to get over this notion that "If it isn't AAA then it isn't worth it" because that's bullshit.
It starts small, as every thing in life does and grows beyond its smallness. But first it has to come together and be made.

 

[BNguyen]

Amongst other things, they claim that The Last Of Us and BioShock Infinite are sexist because Ellie and Elizabeth need the help of the male main character. >.<

No, it's that these capable or in one case powerful characters turn phenomenally stupid and need to be led around on a leash because REASONS that is at issue here, not that they need a man's help. Or not merely that they need a man's help, but how desperately incompetent they become without it.

I mean, this is explained directly in the artile. Did you not understand it or are you deliberately ignoring it?

Yeah, characters that have never once experienced actual combat or the actual world outside of their safe little bubbles prior to meeting the main character should not become emotionally and psychologically fragile people when faced with bullets wizzing by their heads or blood thirsty monsters want to eat out their throats, no, they need to be the space marines buried under thirteen inches of armor and can take a bazooka shell to the face before they'll so much as flinch. Ellie was not an all-powerful character - she was a child with somewhat of an attitude problem towards the people she wasn't familiar with, and Elizabeth was a woman who had been contained by a hulking giant of a monster all of her life - sure she had the power to open up tears in reality, but she was also afraid of what was on the other side or what might happen if she failed - for instance, the scene where she and Booker are in the elevator and she opens a tear and the Songbird flies towards them - yeah, an all powerful character can be afraid and it isn't wrong to see them as being human rather than androids.
Jeez, I'm sick and tired of seeing people think how either all women need to be emotionally dead powerhouses or have practically no women at all because "oohh, this female character has emotions, she must be weak".
I'm for the idea that if male characters can be portrayed in a rainbow of variation, then females can as well, and that includes the emotionally weak, hysterical, or ones that show weakness when in the face of danger when compared to the leading character who is established as a person who has experience with day-to-day life threatening situations and combat. A character unfamiliar with such things needs to be led through the battlefield, not leading themselves - it'd be like a toddler trying to fly a jet against a pilot who has over ten years experience, it just isn't realistic to see something like this happen.

TL;DR: You and I don't agree on this point

 

[00slash00]

There might be an argument for Elizabeth being a damsel, and an even greater argument for her being little more than a mobile item dispenser. Ellie, however, I never thought of as a damsel. In fact she probably should have needed to be saved more. She was what, like 12? It's perfectly reasonable to think that a child might not be able to defend herself as well as a grown man. Also, Ellie fuckin kicked ass. She was more of a badass than Joel, most of the time. And let's not forget that the winter chapter opens with you saving Joel and freeing yourself after getting captured. I had a lot of problems with The Last of Us and overall did not enjoy the game. But of all it's problems, Ellie was not one of them. In fact I'd say she was by far the best thing about it

 

[Fox12]

So even Cracked has got in on the gender issues in videogames bandwagon: http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-sexist-video-game-problems-even-bigger-than-breasts_p1/#ixzz2fNWnPC8E

Amongst other things, they claim that The Last Of Us and BioShock Infinite are sexist because Ellie and Elizabeth need the help of the male main character. >.<

I have to say that this train-wreck of face-plant after face-plant, over this stuff, coming from one gaming journalism outlet after another is quite the spectacle to behold.

I really feel like this is what's happening:

Spoiler: The state of gaming journalism today

Anyway, what do you lot think? Are BioShock Infinite and The Last of Us sexist because they feature - for want of a better word - damsels? (This is before we get into the other "issues" Cracked brings up...)

I read that this morning, and I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought it was rubbish. If OP didn't post it then I would have. The points were terrible, the examples were terrible, and even the writing was terrible. I'm thinking it was a guest writer perhaps. In any case, the article made me nauseous, especially the part about TLoU. I mean, if that game is considered sexist then there's really no hope any more. A character can be vulnerable without being weak, and if I was put into Ellie's position I would probably shit my pants and die.

The sexism debate is an important one to have, but what's also important is that you portray your ideas in an intelligent way. Otherwise you undermine your own argument. I felt like the article quickly devolved into ranting nonsense, and I'm legitimately curious how an article like this got on Cracked.

It's awful, because I think there are legitimate sexism issues out there, but this article is so badly pieced together that I found myself agreeing with the other side. It also wasn't funny.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

At this point I feel that proponents of the "we need moar strong female leads" should take that as a challenge to write something instead of trying to force others to do it by brow-beating and political correctness bashing.

But your brow-beating and political correctness bashing is okay, I see. This entire post reads like "do as I say, not as I do."

That said, in an industry that doesn't want female leads, females on covers unless they're cheesecake, or females in focus groups, it would take more than just writing. I can write, but the question becomes who will code for me? There's a bit of an entry level issue here, a bigger one than most other media.

There's a common sentiment within creative communities that nobody is actually going to steal your work because they have their own work to work on. It's also why generally, nobody cares about producing your game. Specious arguments don't solve anything either, dude,.

If challenging people who are capable of something to do something about it instead of just talk is brow-beating, then I'm guilty I guess.
I can write too, whether or not its good isn't up to me. I've got a ton of game ideas written down, and a bunch of organized outlines and proposals. I'm also looking for people who are willing to do something with them and am collaborating with a friend of mine who's interested and capable of developing a game. Its not easy, it will take time but we are committed to doing it even if the expenses come out of our pocket. Why? Because the risk is worth taking. I am not intimidated by the industry, I could give a fuck less what the industry wants. I'm doing this for me, to get my work out there and see what happens. If it never goes anywhere at least I did it. You have to start somewhere. Bruce Lee said once that life isn't peaks and valleys its a series of never ending plateaus and you are the only thing standing in your way of climbing to the next one. (that was paraphrased)
I tell you this much, merely saying "I can write but I can't code" is an excuse not a reason. And if you look hard enough, you can find someone who can and is willing to help. It won't be easy, it will take time and if you're not committed thats fine, don't do it. But don't use yourself as a reason this can't work. You aren't the rest of the world.
Basically speaking, people having a discussion is all well and good, but in the end its not the discussion that will change things, its the actions taken by people who are committed to doing it. I'm all for discussion, but action has to be taken whether the odds are in favor of it or not.

 

[Worgen]

Dude, one of the sources they cited was Anita Sarkeesian (or however you spell it). I think that is enough to show that, at the very least, any research done fell heavily into Confirmation Bias territory.

Kind of like what you just said?
In fact, your right, women shouldn't be allowed to play video games. You hear that girls, men only. Huf Huf Huf Huf huf.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

**snip**
I disagree, even rehashing the same stuff time, and time, and time again, we're talking about it. It's being talked about, and thus in the eyes of people. We're letting people know we still want female protagonists. It's all some can do.

The problem with making our own stuff, aside from the fact that not everyone has the time, resources, or talent to do that, and no amount of BS will change that is that since when does the industry really pay attention to indie games? I mean seriously? I'm not saying it to crush dreams, but any indie developer that gets the industry to stop being so against women deserves several nobel peace prizes. They'd have shattered te conventional wisdom that women in games harm the game, created a game men and women alike love bringing them together, and made so much money that the industry would have to notice as it's all they care about in the end.

Women getting into the industry to make AAA games? Go for it! But lets not pretend women are necessary for it. Men can write for women, and vice versa. Other mediums prove this like the romantic comedy movies, plus the fact that most of our beloved female figures are created by men in games.

I'm not saying that a person can't make a difference, but I'd say the change needs to happen among those in the industry, producers, developers, etc, that block female protagonists from being made. The people in power over these matters that fight diversity among protagonists need to be replaced by people who aren't so eager to think negative of ethnicity or gender.

I see your point but I disagree because the argument has stagnated and degenerates quite quickly into flame wars. I've always felt that action means more than words and there's a whole helluva lot of words and not much action. Even if its just a few indies the fact that its out there gives people a choice. And indy games are getting more attention these days than they ever have. Sure the AAA industry has their heads up their asses, but nothing lasts forever. Ask Rome, THQ, Atari, the British Empire, the dodo, the quagga, etc.
I feel that in this industry you have to have the mavericks who do their own thing without corporate oversight. We don't live in a world where we only get our information from paid off sources, we have the internet which amounts to the biggest word of mouth device ever. Look at Minecraft. Do you think that Mojang would exist without Notch taking the risk of making a game that doesn't conform to AAA standards and ended up selling better than some established AAA IPs as well as gaining respect from the gaming universe? I have faith in the little guy or gal getting their message across with action to back up the talk. But the discussion has yet to make an impact because there hasn't been any real action to make the discussion a reality.
You have to make things happen, not just talk about them. There was a time that revolution was just a closed-door discussion in secret between colonists who were tired of the British micro-managing them and that discussion was backed up by actions. Without it the US for good or ill would not exist. All I'm saying is that while the discussion is a good thing, its not enough and something has to be done. Someone has to put it all on the line and take a risk and make that game-changing... game. Its a hard thing to do, but no great work in history was done by taking the easy road.
I challenge people to do something about their beliefs, not just talk about them. And I believe the talent and drive is out there. Those that can do it and haven't yet need to get over this notion that "If it isn't AAA then it isn't worth it" because that's bullshit.
It starts small, as every thing in life does and grows beyond its smallness. But first it has to come together and be made.

The flame wars are generally just proof that the White Guy Defense Force, and the ugly side of humanity exists. Nevermind all the Ad Hominem. They, in their angry posts, are sort of helping perpetuate the talks which helps keep it in the public eye.

The problem with indie games is the severe lack of impact they have on consoles, and negligible impact they have, period. Indie games are far from the magic cure.

Ok, looking at minecraft... who in the industry is trying to emulate minecraft in any way, shape, or form? What real change and impact has it had on the industry? Has it changed anything? I feel all the answers point towards negative. Popular as Minecraft is, it's not -that- popular.

In general, it is up to "you" to make things happen, but really, that's going to take time, and a young generation, and it goes without saying, really.

A funny notion crosses my mind all of a sudden. Saying "make your own game" and equivalents and pretending you can just suggest it and make a difference is... well... more oft than not, it's hypocratical. What are the people suggesting it doing with that advice?
If the person suggesting it don't have a problem with the status quo, it's basically an equivalent to STFU, and quite the cop-out.
If they are heeding their own advice, more power to them.
Mind you, I'm not directing this at you, so please try not to take offense. I'm just bothered by the whole "make your own game!" suggestions.

Even then, if the suggestion is pointed at someone specefic, it can be a suggestion loaded with ignorance.
1: If they could, they would, and didn't really need you saying anything.
2: The suggester knows diddly about the life, talent, and resources of the person they're suggesting it to. They assume that the person complaining can make an indie game. If a person can't, then no amount of encouragement will fix that.

It doesn't have to be AAA for the effort to count. It just has to be profitable enough to show the industry that women aren't detrimental to games. Financial success with a game with a female protagonist is what matters. I'm hard pressed to believe an indie game can do that, but like I said, I am willing to be proven wrong.

 

[gideonkain]

I recently learned that The Escapist hates women. Which, in hindsight, is kind of like recently learning the sun rises in the same place ever day.

The sun doesn't rise in the same place everyday.
http://bit.ly/14ozUd9

 

[2xDouble]

I think the biggest issue here is considering Cracked to be "journalism". It's a joke site; you might as well be getting news from The Onion or Fox News.

 

[Callate]

It's a badly written article, full of layers of unfounded and under-supported assumptions. It does both gaming and feminism a disservice, not least because people rush to say that anyone who has a problem with it at best "defensive" and at worst a misogynistic rape-culture supporter.

If being vaguely pro-female is all an article requires to get you in siege-mentality mode, you have every bit as much of a problem as the knee-jerk "they're trying to take our games away" guys some people want to believe are the spearhead of all criticism of feminist gaming commentary. A conversation is not made of people who want to yell and people who cower; it's made of people who listen to each other respectfully, as rare a flower as that might be in the age of social media.

It's one thing to say that there should be more empowered female characters in games, more diverse female characters in games, more leading female characters, more well-written and fully-developed female characters in games; I think an awful lot of people would agree with that, including myself, including many people who are frustrated with the article as written. The way the author singles out some of the strongest and best-written female characters in modern games implies that all female characters should meet some sort of role-model litmus test to receive approval. No character should have to do that.

 

[Pierre Poutine]

Okay... I want to state outright that when I see a thread about gender issues in gaming, I don't automatically turn off and just go: "not this again", or "Anita Sarkeesian was cited, therefore article sucks" or whatever. I do think this sort of thing should be discussed, and not dismissed outright.

That said, I thought this was a pretty bad article. Especially considering that it's on Cracked, which usually hits the mark for me. This though...

Okay, I will defend Elizabeth for as long as I can. I believe she represents a deconstruction of the damsel in distress. Sure, Booker has to save her a few times, but on the flipside, Elizabeth saves him too [from drowning, falling off, and every time the player dies if you get technical. It's not the strong man coming to save the helpless woman, it's a mutual partnership. His strength is with the running and gunning since he's a trained soldier, and hers is more tactical by avoiding combat, scrounging for supplies, feeding Booker the items he needs when he needs them and is also able to make objects appear out of nowhere via tears. It'd be weird if she fought on his level because she has lived that sheltered life. Furthermore, she doesn't blindly follow him. When she [very cleverly mind you] figures out Booker is taking her to New York and not Paris, she knocks him unconscious and breaks it off. When Booker saves her from the procedure [which was only possible because old Elizabeth brought him there in the first place], she makes it clear that Comstock will pay, and that Booker is in no position to stop her [as she summons a tornado behind her in a way that can only be described as badass]. Why didn't she just open a tear and leave her prison? For one thing, the siphon on the island seriously inhibits here abilities. In the game she makes things appear in certain cases, and occasionally tears to other worlds are opened, but never to the point where it's consistent enough that it'd be an obvious solution. It's often too dangerous and unpredictable. Hell, when the siphon is destroyed at the end is when she's able to just completely jump through portals and go to different worlds. It's not to say she has no daddy issues, but they barely even mentioned the actual ones in the plot. They also imply that Booker is just an anonymous manly man, which he starts off as, but again, you get to the ending and they flip it all back at you and you realize exactly how deep this relationship actually goes.

I haven't played The Last of Us, but, yeah, I'm siding with the whole, "she's a child" argument. They cry. Especially in harsh situations. It happens.

Anita did a much better job breaking down the damsel trope then this part did. Any case, want to address Peach and Zelda. I don't it's a problem, since Mario games have no plot. They have a premise. The games are not about Mario trying to get the reward of Peach. They are about running through the crazy ass levels. Peach is basically an indication that the player is near the end of the game. Also, while it is messed up that so many games copy this trope, probably due to Mario's success, I don't think Peach herself is the problem. It's happened so many times to her, people don't think: "Oh women, always need help from a man", they think "Goddammit Peach, how do you keep letting this happen!".
Zelda I'll also defend on the notion that, at least in the Zelda games with more plot, that she's very much an active character in the narrative. She's not a trophy to be won, she's a key player in the events of Hyrule. She ends up getting kidnapped in some manner eventually, but I don't think this takes away all her positive attributes.

Haven't finished Metroid Other M yet. I know people hate it for the depiction of Samus, but I don't think one bad attempt should negate all the other years of her being awesome.

Sexualize Violence is pretty messed up, but the article brought up 2 examples relating to games. I'd need more to sell me on it in this medium.

Girls as class is a takeoff of the Smurfette Principal. When it happens, it does suck, but it's important to distinguish situations where there's only one female character, and those where the one female character's sole defining attribute is her gender.

Yes, in the real world, sexism is a very real problem, and one that should be talked about and not dismissed as something that doesn't matter. My sole point is that this is a pissy, unconvincing article that didn't tell me anything I didn't already know from much better writers and thinkers.