boots said:
Legion said:
I agree.
There is of course, sexism in gaming. But the idea that it is a problem that gaming has specifically, or that it is a larger issue than it is in the rest of society or the media is just delusional. Most of it are ridiculous ideas like a woman being scantily clad being sexist when many women in real life are happy to wear little clothing (and why shouldn't they?). Or the idea that not having a female in a lead role is inherently sexist, regardless of whether in the context of the game it makes sense or not.
If the game suggests that these things happen because women are only good for eye candy, or aren't important enough to be the the lead role, then yes, that's a problem. But there are very few examples of games where this is the case.
Uh-huh. Sure. Yeah. It is very rare to find women in games who play unimportant roles or are just eye candy. Sure. Right. I'm sorry, I'm going to need a bit more time to wrap my head around that claim.
It obviously also doesn't help when you get the genuinely sexist, racist or homophobic people chiming in and threatening to rape people such as Anita Sarkeesian for her videos, but to suggest that these are "gamer/gaming related" traits is ignoring the larger reality.
That reality is that anonymity makes some people reveal their nastier sides, and it certainly isn't limited to gaming. You hear almost daily about celebrities getting abuse from things such as twitter, or if you read the papers about people getting nasty comments on their facebook walls for no obvious reason. It's not a gaming thing, it's not a problem with the culture, it's a problem with society at large.
Then there is the difference between sexist content, and a game being sexist. The former is not necessarily bad, not if it is there to make a point or to add realism. If the game is condoning sexism, or portraying sexist intentions on behalf of the creators, then yes, that's an issue, but most examples people use are not like that at all. Jim's example with the "slut shaming" mission is sexist in the sense that the characters involved could be sexist, but that doesn't make Skyrim itself sexist, because the game is not suggesting that what they did was right.
Did any of you actually watch this video? Jim made - quite clearly - the point that just because a game might contain sexist elements, it doesn't make the game itself sexist. If someone has a problem with that mission, they're not automatically condemning the entire entire game as sexist. It is possible to talk about the isms without attaching an "ism" label to the entire game.
Also, I can't begin to tell you how sick I am of hearing, "there are bigger problems with sexism in the world, why don't you concentrate on them instead?"
Those other problems
do get talked about. They really do. No one is saying that sexism is limited to gaming, and I have no idea where you'd even get that idea from. But does that mean that we're not allowed to talk about sexism in gaming? Saying stuff like this just gives the impression that you're standing in front of your precious games like an overprotective parent and jabbing your finger going, "No, there's nothing wrong here. Look over
there, there are way more interesting things happening over
there." Which is not the response of someone who genuinely doesn't think there's a lot of sexism in gaming.
Go back and watch Jim's video again. Then one more time for good luck. However many times it takes for you to get the message that it's OK to talk about the isms, and that no one is trying to take your video games away.
I never said there was a lack of women in unimportant roles. I said that it isn't an issue if there is, as long as it isn't done to make a point that women
shouldn't be. That there are no female soldiers in Spec-Ops: The Line is not making a statement that women are not important, the context of the game simply doesn't have any female combatants. The developers of ICO saying that they deliberately chose not to make a female as the lead due to it requiring a lot of climbing on the other hand, is an example of when there is actual sexism in place.
I never said anything remotely like "There are bigger issues to deal with." or suggested that they don't get talked about. I was stating that this idea that gaming is sexist is ignoring the fact that
gaming isn't sexist. Our
culture is. You are not going to remove sexism in gaming as long as sexist attitudes are widely accepted in society. Gaming is not going to be the element that drives true equality forward, it is far too niche.
Having a game include a homosexual main character is not going to miraculously stop all the homophobic idiots you deal with in multiplayer games and forums disappear. It needs to be dealt with out in the real world before it gets dealt with in fictional ones. That's not to say that sorting it out in gaming is a bad idea, but the way people talk, you'd think it's a greater priority.
I never suggested that Jim was talking about anything other than he was. I was saying that there is a difference between a game containing sexist elements as in "That part of the game is sexist, sexism is bad and shouldn't exist" and "That game has sexist elements to add a sense of realism and depth to the game. It shows the world the game is based in isn't perfect and it doesn't condone sexism, it merely exists in the lore."
Jim seemed to suggest that the "slut shaming" quest was sexist as in the former example. My point was that it is the latter.
I am well aware that he was not talking about sexism elements making an entire game sexist. I was pointing out the difference between a sexist attitude on behalf of the creator, and a sexist attitude on behalf of a character. The former is bad, the latter is not.
To use a film as an example: American History X. Edward Norton plays a racist, the film contains racism. Him calling black people niggers is racist. But nobody would suggest that the film is wrong for having these elements, because it is not condoning it, it is not doing it to reinforce a stereotype, it is doing it to explore the theme of racism.
I see Jim's example of Skyrim as the same thing, where he seemed to imply it was sexist as in, condoning sexist behaviour.
I do not say the things I do out of any fear of "games being taken away", I simply do not see sexism, racism or homophobia (the kind condoning it kind) as being anywhere near as prevalent as people seem to suggest. Of course it exists, but the way people talk about it you'd think it's unavoidable.
You mention earlier that I suggested there aren't many games with eye candy. That is not really what I meant. I was saying that the ratio of games with that kind of thing compared with those that don't have it is so large that in the grand scheme of things it's incredibly minor.
For every game where there are female characters who are nothing more than T+A I could easily mention ten where there aren't. The idea that there are no games women can play without having to run into T+A eye candy is ridiculous, there are plenty of games out there that do not have any of these kinds of things.
Even if they do exist in games, unless the game or developers are suggesting that women are only good as eye candy, it doesn't even matter if in the context of the game that they are. It's not making a grand statement about real women. It's not suggesting that real women are only good as eye candy, no more than the thousands of games with muscular grizzly white men isn't claiming that all men are strong, brave heroes. It's a fantasy world, it's not creating a message of any kind.
The lack of women in important roles in games does not automatically suggest discrimination against women. No more than the lack of homosexuals is suggesting discrimination, if the developers do not feel that these types of characters fit what they want to do with their game, then that's up to them. Unless they are suggesting there is something wrong with either then it's not any kind of ism.
