Jimquisition: Solving the Sexism Situation

[Nurb]

Everyone likes to look at pretty examples of the gender they're attracted to, and everyone likes getting fanservice.

EVERYONE

Except it's only the men who catch shit over their objectification. This oversensitivity nonsense is programed into many people's head as part of their perpetual victimization mindset.

 

[Kyoh]

Strike 2.

 

[Frank_Sinatra_]

Okay this was better than last time, but it still isn't good.
The first episode was Transformers 2, now it's Transformers 1.
Couldn't we get someone better to do this?

 

[fulano]

Had a good chuckle at this one. I was hopeful after episode 1, and indeed it seems like somebody read the comments and took on some of the criticism; this episode is much slicker all round. Looking forward to the next one!

Not crazy about the MS paint drawings, though. I guess I can appreciate that the video needs something to break it up a little.

Has Jim ever seriously talked to a woman about this topic before? I mean, where does he get it that the issue would be solved if they exploited everyone "equally"? Or maybe I'm just ignorant and am not aware of the growing trend of women demanding men without their clothes on in their videogames, to get their rocks off. Women, on average, have a different sets of base preferences than those of males.

I'm a woman. When I Play Left 4 Dead 2, I purposefully choose a character other than Ellis so that I can stare at his arse while he runs ahead of me. Have you ever seriously talked to a woman about this topic before?

Plenty, actually.

But, hey, you happen to be the exception who wants to see more flesh in her male characters 'cause that should be what equates matters, apparently. Good for you.

Yeah, I'm a woman and I wouldn't mind to see more half-naked men. Also, to brownstudies, I usually choose Coach or Rochelle...because Nick is just as good.

You do realize that you have plenty of male blockheads to ogle, right? It's not like we dudes are underobjectified [sic], if that's how you want to define objectification that is. We just don't care as much--I certainly don't, really, but am merely pointing out the other side of the argument.

Also, there aren't that many studios, if there's even a single one, that cater to specific female tastes as there are for the male ones. If there were, along with more demographically geared great games we'd also have the equivalent of harlequin books, filled with swashbuckling assholes with chiseled chests who deep down are sensitive souls than can only be fully understood by either a horse tamer, a marine biologist, the reluctant heir of a corporate empire, etc. and, good lord, that's how equality would truly look like.

If I were to choose in a poll for more exposed men in games, sure I'd vote Yes for the amusement factor,(Like, I was amused by Chuck Greene in his boxers with a weird hat on.) but over all I don't care. It doesn't bring anything or take away from the game itself. The half-dressed woman don't offend me either. It's life. I'm a graphic designer and I've had to put plenty of scantily clad women in an ad to sell a product.

Plus, they're video game characters. If I want half-naked characters with an interesting story, I just watch true blood. lol

It does annoy me when I see a character like Ivy from Soul Calibur whose cup size goes up with every game it makes chuckle at the needless tackiness, or yet another Macho soldier cursing and flexing his biceps and little else.

The issue isn't the frequency of the half-dressed women but the infrequency of those that are little more than that. And that's why Jim's oppinion is wrong.

 

[WorldCritic]

Well, I gave him a second chance. I think I would read articles by this guy, but not watch videos.

 

[Irridium]

I like Jim, every since I found Dtoid.


That PLAYING IT WRONG one showcased a lot of bullshit in the game reviewing process.

he has the ability to make a valid point but proves it a tasteless way
why must he curse every other damn sentence to prove a point.
can't he just prove his point using semi-intelligent words instead?
i am saying he should pretentious; he should just sound smart.(sounding smart and being smart are two different things but in the end all about presentation.)
is it really that hard to not sound like a moron with limited vocabulary?

Its just who he is, and how he talks. He discusses stuff that make him angry, and when he's angry, he swears a lot. Like most people do when angry.

 

[Weasker]

You tried to change som things. Still not good enough. There's your second chance, now please leave.

 

[yundex]

I think the video was entertaining. Of course, that means most of the escapist will hate it. I hate being me sometimes!

 

[Iron Lightning]

Jim
Men are wired to objectify women.

I am a complete pervert. I've seen and enjoyed the most fucked-up stuff the internet has to offer. Do you know what part of a woman that I find most sexually attractive? I'll tell you: the quality of their character. An objectified woman is little more than a statue: aesthetically pleasing but otherwise uninteresting. If I like the character of a woman I'll find her about ten times more attractive than if she was just a pair of tits.

Jim's assertion that sex sells and therefore we should sell sex to both men and women simultaneously is a logical fallacy. Men like to look at half-naked women and women like to look at half-naked men. However, men don't like to look at half-naked men and women (I assume) don't like to look at half-naked women. By including half-naked members of both genders in your game you will neither attract nor repulse potential buyers. It'll sell no more or less than only including the "full-plate" option. It is better, from a marketer's point of view, to only objectify one gender at a time.

Also, women in chain mail bikinis don't look ridiculous because they're standing next to men in full-plate armor. They look ridiculous because only a complete fucking idiot would wear a chain mail bikini to a battle.

One more thing: what's up with the shitty MS Paint drawings of cocks? They distract from the monologue, they're not funny, and they're quite immature. I mean, come now, when have random and unfunny drawings of cocks ever contributed positively to... anything?

 

[Lenin211]

Is this guy a joke or just awful?

 

[Liberaliter]

Does no one realise this is the guy from Destructoid? Or does The Escapist exist in its own separate dimension of the internet.

 

[TrogzTheTroll]

Like it, but get rid of the MS paint crap please.

 

[wizzy555]

Jim
Men are wired to objectify women.

I am a complete pervert. I've seen and enjoyed the most fucked-up stuff the internet has to offer. Do you know what part of a woman that I find most sexually attractive? I'll tell you: the quality of their character. An objectified woman is little more than a statue: aesthetically pleasing but otherwise uninteresting. If I like the character of a woman I'll find her about ten times more attractive than if she was just a pair of tits.

Jim's assertion that sex sells and therefore we should sell sex to both men and women simultaneously is a logical fallacy. Men like to look at half-naked women and women like to look at half-naked men. However, men don't like to look at half-naked men and women (I assume) don't like to look at half-naked women. By including half-naked members of both genders in your game you will neither attract nor repulse potential buyers. It'll sell no more or less than only including the "full-plate" option. It is better, from a marketer's point of view, to only objectify one gender at a time.

A lot of bold assertions in there without much backing, how many action films now feature a brief "hero is topless" scene? I saw Thor the other week and I didn't hear any guys complaining when he got his top off.

 

[Nurb]

Jim
Men are wired to objectify women.

I am a complete pervert. I've seen and enjoyed the most fucked-up stuff the internet has to offer. Do you know what part of a woman that I find most sexually attractive? I'll tell you: the quality of their character. An objectified woman is little more than a statue: aesthetically pleasing but otherwise uninteresting. If I like the character of a woman I'll find her about ten times more attractive than if she was just a pair of tits.

Jim's assertion that sex sells and therefore we should sell sex to both men and women simultaneously is a logical fallacy. Men like to look at half-naked women and women like to look at half-naked men. However, men don't like to look at half-naked men and women (I assume) don't like to look at half-naked women. By including half-naked members of both genders in your game you will neither attract nor repulse potential buyers. It'll sell no more or less than only including the "full-plate" option. It is better, from a marketer's point of view, to only objectify one gender at a time.

A lot of bold assertions in there without much backing, how many action films now feature a brief "hero is topless" scene? I saw Thor the other week and I didn't hear any guys complaining when he got his top off.

It's not quite the same "taboo" as with breasts, but women do love seeing the abs, which is why there was such controversy over older women lusting after topless and objectifying pictures of the then underage actor who played the werewolf in Twilight

 

[Mr. Omega]

Look, just stop with the MS Paint stuff and this show would be a lot better. I know this show can be good, the topics chosen have just been... easy. And the paint stuff makes it more annoying than it is.

 

[Harveypot]

Liked last week and this was better. Makes me laugh and has some good points. Keep it up!

 

[Levethian]

*Snip*

Men project ideal personalities onto anonymous women, and vice-versa.
A half-naked man does not 'counteract' the positive effects of a half-naked woman, and vice-versa.
It isn't "Jim's assertion that sex sells", it is known. This is why you don't see enough 'normal-looking' people in adverts & on aspirational shows.