Jimquisition: The Creepy Cull of Female Protagonists

[Baresark]

snip

A study of studies is still a study.

Just because people have a tendency to act irrationally doesn't mean such irrationality should be indulged. This is kind of a "ministry of the bleeding obvious" as "people are prejudiced" and "prejudice is irrational" DUUUUUUUUUUDUUUUUUUUUHH! The significance is finding a measurable basis for this, but downvotes for you for acting like this is any sort of defence for such tendencies.

You'll have to do better to excuse such favouritism than "oh no, science proves they really do have this prejudice".

Bigotry isn't acceptable just because the majority do it!

And I think YOU are the one guilty of reducing their work by bringing up their work in such trite terms, so don't you start making any accusations.

I'm gonna try this one more time. Having a preference isn't the same as bigotry. You make choices every single day that mean you prefer one thing over another. If I want grapefruit juice with breakfast, that doesn't mean I hate or have something against oranges. There work explains that people make choices and have preferences that do not always follow a set of concise rules. It shows us that if people have every single reason in the world to make the same choices from day to day, they will not make the same choices from day to day.

I revere their work. You are reducing simple preferences to earth shattering bigotry, racism and sexism. I'm not allowed to prefer to play a game as a certain protagonist why exactly? In one playthrough of Dark Souls I play someone who is like me, large and physically powerful. Likewise, sometimes I have an inkling to play as a female character I modeled after my girlfriend (small, athletic, quick on her feet). Both of these things are wrong to you? Afterall, I'm making a choice based on a preference, which by your definition seems to be a result of bigotry to the opposite character.

Irrationality isn't "indulged". It's who people are. You act as if people are making a choice to be that way. They aren't. The opposite is true actually. In a given situation, people ALWAYS think they are being rational, even when they are not being rational.

 

[Technicka]

snip

I'm gonna step back for a moment, I went to a dark place on that one and I apologize. I clearly inferred concepts that didn't exist and I owe both you and the conversation more than that. I'll reduce what I was saying to something that is... more focused. I mentioned the that there are instances where sexism or racism are cited that it's simply not the case. You insisted that the theory of Implicit Egotism is dressed up bigotry. It's not. That's all. I don't owe you an explanation for that. It's simply not that. Many great psychologists have studied it and found it to exist. They have shown that it affects, statistically, the choices people make. I don't, personally, feel that marketing based on focus groups equals sexism. I'm not going to get into an argument about making points out of minor statistics being important or why we should concentrate on them. I'm not a CEO of videogame publishing company.

Many fine people have commented on how they do not have a preference but that is impossible. I do not have a strong preference, but I do have a preference. More often than not I play games as myself, given the choice. I make choices in games like Mass Effect that are choices I personally would make in that situation. Going back, I couldn't stand to let Myrle die in Metal Gear Solid because I personally would not let someone die when I had the chance to save them.

I always, at some point, play a game as if I was the person in the game. If a game allows me to really customize the appearance of my character (like Dragon Age Origins did) I will spend a pain staking amount of time creating myself in that game. It's not because I'm selfish, or I don't like women, or black people, but because I'm a white guy who has high self esteem and self respect. Making that character look like me makes it all the easier to be engrossed in a great game. That is what implicit egotism is, it's finding comfort in things that are familiar. That does not equal hating things that are different, it means preferring that which is familiar, which all people do. Not just in reference to people though. If you grow up with dogs as pets, you are more likely always to favor having a dog over a cat. If you spent your formative years in a hot tropical environment, you are not likely going to move to Alaska as that is a much more alien environment than you are used to. It's a preference, that people are more than entitled to. And preferring the play a game as a male, if someone actually cares about that, shouldn't be treated as if it's some great catastrophe or that the person is some evil human being.

Edit: I forgot to put this. At no point am I saying that racism or sexism doesn't exist. I'm simply saying that it may not always be the case, as some people such as yourself seem to purport is the definitive case here. Jim as well.

Okay, you're missing a pretty big part as to why people can successfully argue that a lot of things (even if you don't see it that way) are racist/sexist/etc.: Status Quo. Since I'm American, I'll use the US as an example. This is a country that was, essentially, "born" when a group of white people sailed over and decided they were the best, and have since operated under that very assumption. From the near eradication of the First Nations, to slavery, to internment camps, to segregation...all of it has been buolt off the foundation that if you weren't white, you were lesser. And it hasn't even been a century in that many of the ethnic races have been legally granted equal rights. So this is a country that is still crawling out of a pit of racial bigotry. And for those member of the marginalized groups, the effects of this are still being dealt with. NDNs are scattered or segmented off )and with appalling living arrangements to boot), African Americans still deal with a steady stream of distrust and limited opportunities, Asians are regularly slighted, or used as scare tactics. So if a society that is still operating under stereotypes in regards to race, how can a focus group - or a majority of people, not hold racist viewpoints, even if they're minor. Because there are great swaths of the nation that honestly think such ridiculous things about non-white races, even in 2013.

And you can easily take that racism argument and apply it to women. This is a world that would blame a rape victim for being raped. So are you seriously going to say that sexism isn't a prevalent thing that women still have to worry about? Because I'd call you either blissfully unaware, or willfully ignorant. When being called a girl is still seen as a huge insult, can you really say that sexism isn't alive and well?



And as for you argument on customization? That's a pretty lazy argument to make. Games like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Elder Scrolls, and plenty of MMOs that allow for high levels of customization aren't sexist/racist because they leave it up to the players to create who the want to be. It's the marketing that is the issue in games such as that. Yea, the ME series is a smash hit, and sure, only a small portion played as fem!Shep, but the marketing would have you believe that Shepard was only a male. Skyrim ads showed a male dragonborn, as did the cover, but you could still roll as a woman. The industry is still in the mindset that only dudes are into games. And by staying on that path they, in effect, alienate girls/women. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. The movie industry has finally started to inch away from that mindset when they FINALLY looked at numbers and realized the biggest spenders weren't men, as they long thought, but women (and PoC...but they're still failing on that front).


But for other games? When the 'default' for a hero is the slightly grizzled white dude, in an industry that spans the entire globe, you have a real disconnect issue. And when developers do take the chance to break the mold, unless it's a solid franchise (and even then, as with Bioshock, that's still not a sure bet), the publishers are eager to watch it fail without their support so that they can point and go, "See, players don't like being chicks!" You don't stand at the finish line and claim the runner up is just inferior because they started at the actual starting line.

 

[Dorian Cornelius Jasper]

(Really just quoting as a

I realize point-by-point rebuttals are always awkward to read, but unlike most we don't have that many points

On relationships and the like, talking purely outside of the realm of games, there's a large wealth of media with female protagonists engaging in romance. If you really have a problem with people complaining that women shouldn't enter into relationships for fear of appearing "submissive," it's a simple matter of pointing out that media for women and by women, with female protagonists, can and have depicted romantic relationships. (Of varying quality, mind.) Yes, you're right that these idiots do exist, but their views should be treated as the dross that they are and shouldn't be factored into reasonable discussion. Indeed, with the Mass Effect series, people clamoring for FemShep not to have a romantic relationship with a male character for fear of her submitting to a male character's authority are a very clear, absolutely tiny minority, if such an opinion even exists--and I'm speaking theoretically, as the majority of discussion re: Mass Effect romance is very enthusiastically pro-romance.

Most feminist opinions regarding romance in games generally support having More Representation and choices for women, especially on par with the choices men have, as it's very noticeable when, say, the male Bhaalspawn in Baldur's Gate 2 has three love interest choices of which two are rather interesting while a female lead only has one throwaway bard guy.

On godmoding, whether these are good games or not is a bit of a moot point. Arguably, those poorly-written games involving male protagonists mowing down swathes of mooks are on the same level as poorly-written games involving female protagonists doing the same. And I'm willing to wager you feel the same. Personally, I would say the Uncharted series is pretty decent as far as writing and characterization goes, but the extent to how much Nathan Drake is a one-man army stretches belief. Characterization is almost as good as the first Die Hard, but that's undermined a good deal by having even more action than the later Die Hards. (That good writing is juxtaposed against that much of a power fantasy is odd and has been noted by people before.)

By the female cannon fodder remark I suppose this is a reason, if any, to mention Hitman Absolution's trailer fiasco. Let's just say that the fact that the not-nuns were all women was only part of the fuel to the fire. It's that they were all practically dressed like strippers that brought everything down a notch from, "Okay, all female hit squad, kind of silly," to "Okay, this is kinda sleazy." That said, there does exist female cannon fodder in games, but few games (I can't name a single gunbro game that qualifies) even think to put women or visibly humanoid female figures into a combat role that might actively threaten the player. Those that do either do so for a reason (Silent Hill 2's nurses were a reflection of James Sunderland's own character flaws) or fit them in within context (it's hard to really complain about the hypersexual Joy angels from Bayonetta compared to stripper nuns because they don't stand out from the rest of the game's tone or content AT ALL.)

As an aside, on Bayonetta and feminism: She's a divisive character because she's so extremely sexual, but she's also strong and in charge, including of said sexuality. She's cut from the same cloth as the original DMC's Dante and is arguably a female counterpart to him, and it's impossible to discuss her outside of the wider context of Platinum Games' oeuvre. One will find many feminists complaining against her (mostly on the grounds of her creator, Kamiya, being a creep and the game's content shows this), but you'll also find feminists defending her because in her context she's a great character in a great game who isn't undermined by unfortunate assumptions that plague the writers and creators of games featuring other sexy, otherwise strong heroines. Of which we can all probably name a few.

And finally, on ME again: Man what. These opinions you have, I don't share them. At all!

 

[animeh1star1a]

Ok.... Men and Women of the Escapist forum... Ehem.... Calm the hell down.... I came to see is i could get two simple questions answered: who the hell is Melcolm Gladwell and why did Jim reference him. I come in to find comments the size of book pages... And to sum up the argument raging very quickly out of control in this thread,... if a more,... ill say progressive thinking, community as we have here at the escapist can get its hackles up when faced with a controversial issue, chances are that issue is in some way lagit (god what a long sentence... count the grammar mistakes?). Whether that issue is from women being objectified or whether the issue is a non-existent problem made real by outcry is tough to empirically say (personally I lean more towards the side that videogames don't do so well in regards to any gender issue, male or female, due to financial constraints. Ususally, however, the men get portrayed better and tend to be more fleshed out (not literally of course)). Sooooo ya,.... Melcolm Gladwell or whats-his-face.... who and why.... thanks.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Just like with the Pandering to Casuals/Dark Souls topic...yeah, I knew this one was coming.
Of course, last time I commented on this topic, stating the bleeding obvious (yes, the industry is very sexist) got me flamed.

There is no chicken-and-egg scenario anymore; as far as I'm concerned the cycle is so developed that everyone is to blame.

Personally, I love strong female characters. My favorite video game characters are strong females and with rare exception (Samus Aran, Jade from BG&E) they are relegated to secondary roles (Freya, Agrias in War of the Lions).
Partly because female characters that aren't written as love-bait, slut-smut eye-candy "bad girls", or a damsel is rather rare.

Even though the demographic for video gaming has grown beyond the 9-25 White Heteorsexual Male (emphasis on teens especially); even though progressive society is making headway in most every other aspect; even though gaming is now supposedly an art form (to the point where a strong female lead could be considered avant-garde); we're still stuck in the mid-90s marketing mindset.

 

[likalaruku]

No love for Alice from American McGee's Alice/Madness Returns?

The movie industry is having the same problems. Can't have an unattractive woman unless she's fat comic relief. Can't avoid being in a relationship,. needs to think about relationships, sex, romance, children, makeovers, & shoes, can't have a female protagonists unless it's in a romance drama or rom com.

The industries are ruled over by petulant rich elderly people who think they know best & refuse to listen to reason or catch up to modern thinking. The only way you can punish them is by not giving them money & letting them know why.

& whatever happened to the talking animal protagonists of the 90s? It's boring playing a human all the time. The only good that comes of their absence is no fodder to feed the furry porn artists on DA.

 

[infohippie]

Well, publishers have never seemed all that bright, or particularly in touch with their own industry. I am a male, comfortable in myself, who is not only willing to play a female character, I much prefer them. When given a choice of gender in a game I will almost always choose a female one, and I am always very disappointed when a game only offers a male protagonist.

 

[Dorian Cornelius Jasper]

(Quite a lot of ellipses, with words sprinkled in between, all ultimately camouflage for a simple question made impossible to answer by Google thanks to a simple spelling error. Frankly, I should've ignored this because the poster put no effort into it but it's actually kind of funny trying to read the thing)

Before I get to your question, games are pretty shit for representing anything in general, be it race, gender, sexuality, whathaveyou. It's even worse than Hollywood because at least chick flicks can actually get made and we're not inundated with movies that only star a 30-something brunet white males (not to say they're not a majority, just not an overwhelmingly depressingly large one). This is why there's such a fuss about representation in games--it's not a "tough" thing to "empirically say," there's loads of evidence and it gets carted out all the time. Hence, the argument in thread. One of many hundreds on this site alone, and among millions across the internet abroad.

As to your question, which I'm surprised you couldn't have looked up yourself, a quick googling of Malcolm Gladwell brings this up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Gladwell

He apparently wrote Blink, which is a somewhat interesting and trendy pop psychology book that was being discussed over the past decade. Why did Jim mention him? Well, you don't have a monopoly on not giving a toss.

 

[GrimHeaper]

Saying that girls play casual games is not the same as saying girls aren't allowed to play games like Bioshock, or any other non casual game.

It is when they are using it as an excuse as to why we can't have decent female protagonists. We are basically being told our opinion doesn't count because we apparently aren't as invested.

You can't have decent female protagonist because people who make games, for the most part, right shit female characters. I don't think anyone said it's because girls only play casual games. If you see insult, you will find it, even when it is not offered. That is not to say there aren't plenty of idiotic pigheaded people in gaming "culture" (used very loosely, of course). Couple that with the fact that no one seems to be able to decide what exactly a good female protagonist is. If they are remotely brave enough to put some female only traits, they usually get torn a new asshole for it. Do you know what the average male character is? They are a meat train. They are something you point in a direction and tell them kill everything in their path. That is a terrible thing and an incredibly shallow character that does not mimic real life in any way. I don't know any guys who are exclusively machines of destruction and quite frankly, it's not flattering at all. But we don't care so much about it either. That is one of the ways men and women are different.

A crap female protagonist would even be welcome at this point I'll take what I can get -,-

Also again, people HAVE said in this thread the reason why there are male protagonists is because girls only play casual games.

Not that many women play those types of games and a female lead wouldn't change that.
Granted I want a female leads more often.
I'm tired of male leads they aren't interesting anymore.

Just like with the Pandering to Casuals/Dark Souls topic...yeah, I knew this one was coming.
Of course, last time I commented on this topic, stating the bleeding obvious (yes, the industry is very sexist) got me flamed.

There is no chicken-and-egg scenario anymore; as far as I'm concerned the cycle is so developed that everyone is to blame.

Personally, I love strong female characters. My favorite video game characters are strong females and with rare exception (Samus Aran, Jade from BG&E) they are relegated to secondary roles (Freya, Agrias in War of the Lions).
Partly because female characters that aren't written as love-bait, slut-smut eye-candy "bad girls", or a damsel is rather rare.

Even though the demographic for video gaming has grown beyond the 9-25 White Heteorsexual Male (emphasis on teens especially); even though progressive society is making headway in most every other aspect; even though gaming is now supposedly an art form (to the point where a strong female lead could be considered avant-garde); we're still stuck in the mid-90s marketing mindset.

What think Bayonetta is sexist down to her core? You seem to be implying it, best to not judge a book by it's cover.
Like some people would say skullgirls is sexist... when there are only girls and they are the dominating force.
Only just now is there going to be a male in the form of DLC. For all the complaining done things have moved forward.
People just need to fight for it that includes men not just women.

 

[Fiairflair]

No, that's not objectification.

You seem to mistake "object" as in "physical thing without life" and the original use of the term, in Grammar.

Alex finds Jessie

"Alex" is the subject and "Jessie" is the object.

Sexual objectification is the sense of women being the objects in a sexual sense.

"David is dating Sarah"

David is the subject, Sarah is the object, the verb phrase is to do with sexual relations.

There can also be violent objectification.

"Captain Price shoots the platoon of Russian Soldier"

Price is the subject, russian platoon is the object, violence is the verb phrase.


Objectification CANNOT be at work when the playable character is a woman, they are de-facto the subject, everything is through their perspective.

The term "sexual objectification" has been carried over whole from film criticism and applied to games with no understanding of what it actually means.

The problem is in fact sexual SUBJECTIVITY, because where the player character is female then they are the subject and the player is identifying with them in sexual preference. It's not that they don't like the idea of a woman being in love with a man...

... it's that they are imagining they are that woman.

How can we damn this as regressive, that men are wholley considering themselves in the role of a woman. They are not passive observers, they are living this avatar.


This is why where there is romance it is in RPGs where you pick the player-character's gender and pick what relationships they are in.

The definition of objectification is more complicated than the explanation you gave.

objectification, n.

1. The action or an act of objectifying something; a material thing which embodies or expresses an abstract idea, principle, etc.

2. spec. The demotion or degrading of a person or class of people (esp. women) to the status of a mere object (see objectify v. 2); reification; (also) behaviour or an attitude characterized by this. sexual objectification: the regarding of a person or class of people (esp. women) only as a sex object.

objectify, v.

1. trans. To express (something abstract) in a concrete form; to render objective.

2. trans. To degrade or demote (a person, class of people, etc.) to the status of a mere object; to treat as an object; to reify. Also: to identify (a person) with a particular stereotype; to stereotype.

- Oxford University Press, accessed 26 March 2013. http://www.oed.com.ezproxy/view/Entry/129625?redirectedFrom=objectify#eid and http://www.oed.com.ezproxy/view/Entry/129623?redirectedFrom=objectification#eid


The objectification referred to by Jim and by others is the latter of those definitions (#2 in each instance). Not Jim nor Legion were at fault in referring to objectification as "a lack of agency or control."

 

[CyanideSandwich]

As a guy who actually prefers to play as female characters, I don't understand people's problem with having a female character the protagonist. If it's one of those predominately-Japanese games that has a female lead, but dresses her in practically nothing and makes her overly sexualised, however, then I won't be playing that game.

 

[knight steel]

Male gamers want cool male protagonists in their escapist fantasies, who knew? I guess the only solution is to call dude bros insecure closeted homosexuals in order to feel like a big man!

Don't blame culture, blame biology and economics. You have to accept that most males, especially males that play shooty games, are going to want to play as strong males and want their games to have an air of machismo to them. Most males are just programmed to be that way, if you make them a single struggling single mother in their action game looking for love while simultaneously filling the role of the strong male action hero, then you're just going to be ruining their entertainment for the sake of your own agenda.

If you want to make a change, try starting a movement actively boycotting "dudebro" shooters and game publishers who hinder developers from making games with strong female characters with genuine feminine traits. They'll start caring more about the damage to sales more than they ever will the condemnations of some overweight gamma male on the internet.

Welcome to the ESCAPIST,LOVE your avatar,Brilliant first post,Don't go into the basement,Goodbye.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Quite frankly, I don't want my male protagonist having a romance subplot either. Fuck that shit.

I hate to say it but I agree with you.

The shoehorned in love interest that consisting of titties, ass or some combination thereof seems to have become another tickbox for the AAA gaming scene, right along-side multiplayer and DLC.

 

[NKRevan]

What I don't understand is why the "defenders" of the current status (as in, people who say it is perfectly fine that most characters are male, blahdibiblah), try to argue against more female characters in general. Why do the two have to be mutually exclusive?

Why can't there be an equal (or at least more equal than it is now) cast of male and female characters in games, diverse, different, interesting? There will still be (always), the strong male lead in games. No one is trying to take that away from anyone. But instead of having 1 strong female lead for every 10 male leads, it would be nice to have...oh, I don't know...5? Maybe 6...dare I say 10? You know....equality and all that.

Of course, we won't get more games, just because we want more diverse characters. So it'd be more like...instead of 9 males and 1 female, we'd have 5 males and 5 females. Sounds fair?

Or is this taking too much away from the people who NEED a male avatar to be happy?

In any case, I don't know what all this anger is about. The main point Jim was making is a very valid one and a sad one. It was a good video and hopefully some food for thought for people.

 

[GrimHeaper]

No, that's not objectification.

You seem to mistake "object" as in "physical thing without life" and the original use of the term, in Grammar.

Alex finds Jessie

"Alex" is the subject and "Jessie" is the object.

Sexual objectification is the sense of women being the objects in a sexual sense.

"David is dating Sarah"

David is the subject, Sarah is the object, the verb phrase is to do with sexual relations.

There can also be violent objectification.

"Captain Price shoots the platoon of Russian Soldier"

Price is the subject, russian platoon is the object, violence is the verb phrase.


Objectification CANNOT be at work when the playable character is a woman, they are de-facto the subject, everything is through their perspective.

The term "sexual objectification" has been carried over whole from film criticism and applied to games with no understanding of what it actually means.

The problem is in fact sexual SUBJECTIVITY, because where the player character is female then they are the subject and the player is identifying with them in sexual preference. It's not that they don't like the idea of a woman being in love with a man...

... it's that they are imagining they are that woman.

How can we damn this as regressive, that men are wholley considering themselves in the role of a woman. They are not passive observers, they are living this avatar.


This is why where there is romance it is in RPGs where you pick the player-character's gender and pick what relationships they are in.

The definition of objectification is more complicated than the explanation you gave.

objectification, n.

1. The action or an act of objectifying something; a material thing which embodies or expresses an abstract idea, principle, etc.

2. spec. The demotion or degrading of a person or class of people (esp. women) to the status of a mere object (see objectify v. 2); reification; (also) behaviour or an attitude characterized by this. sexual objectification: the regarding of a person or class of people (esp. women) only as a sex object.

objectify, v.

1. trans. To express (something abstract) in a concrete form; to render objective.

2. trans. To degrade or demote (a person, class of people, etc.) to the status of a mere object; to treat as an object; to reify. Also: to identify (a person) with a particular stereotype; to stereotype.

- Oxford University Press, accessed 26 March 2013. http://www.oed.com.ezproxy/view/Entry/129625?redirectedFrom=objectify#eid and http://www.oed.com.ezproxy/view/Entry/129623?redirectedFrom=objectification#eid


The objectification referred to by Jim and by others is the latter of those definitions (#2 in each instance). Not Jim nor Legion were at fault in referring to objectification as "a lack of agency or control."

To love is to be able to objectify something or someone.
I hope everyone thinks long and hard what I just said so they can learn what that actually means.

Spoiler

"I love my wife"
"My wife loves me"

Practically any sentence I end up using that makes any kind of sense ends up with love objectifying something and I would be hard pressed to find one that does not go into sarcasm or have little meaning otherwise.
"I love nothing"
"I love love"
Like has similar but less heavy objectification.
If anyone else has a different view point on this go right ahead.
But our languages revolves around objectification.

As a guy who actually prefers to play as female characters, I don't understand people's problem with having a female character the protagonist. If it's one of those predominately-Japanese games that has a female lead, but dresses her in practically nothing and makes her overly sexualised, however, then I won't be playing that game.

I'll inform you those leads sometimes end up being the strongest and least shallow.
Undersexualized women can be just as or even more so sexist.

 

[VonBrewskie]

Good video. Videogames have an opportunity to let women take center stage and lead the story in compelling ways. It's a pile of shit that women, who have different mindsets and life challenges altogether, haven't been portrayed in a compelling way in videogames just yet. They have to have their specific needs characterized in homogeneous ways; need that health pack. Need that "mana" boost. There's not, "I'm having my period and I need to figure out how to avoid zombies smelling my blood." That's not a smarmy line of bullshit either. Maybe I'm too fucked up as a man to get at the meat of what a woman's experience in a conflict really is. I like games. I love them, in fact. I think this could be a viable next step for game makers. I also figure you have a lot of text to read Jim. Just trying to catch your eye I guess. Love the show, btw. I'd love a female developer to show me what it's like to be a woman in a game. Be unapologetic. Let me feel it through gameplay mechanics. I'll buy it if it's interesting and fun. I think that it's hard to sell "female life realities" as a fun game though. I don't know though. Resource management is resource management. Shit man. Man. See that? My signs of exasperation are to simply say "man". Why not woman? Women drive me nuts. Drive me nuts. OK. Think time. Bye all. You're great Jim. You set a grass fire in my noggin. Luckily, it should burn out within the hour.

 

[Fiairflair]

To love is to be able to objectify something or someone.
I hope everyone thinks long and hard what I just said so they can learn what that actually means.

Spoiler

"I love my wife"
"My wife loves me"

Practically any sentence I end up using that makes any kind of sense ends up with love objectifying something and I would be hard pressed to find one that does not go into sarcasm or have little meaning otherwise.
"I love nothing"
"I love love"
Like has similar but less heavy objectification.
If anyone else has a different view point on this go right ahead.
But our languages revolves around objectification.

It is confusing to refer to objectification in a grammatical sense during a broader discussion about the objectification of women, but perhaps there is a point to be made about how the very nature of human interaction objectifies those that partake of it.

Either way, objectification has multiple definitions.

 

[Gilhelmi]

I arrived at this thread approximately 17 hours after original posting of the video. There is currently 423 posts.

In 17 hours.

What I find sad is that a flame war RIVALING THAT ON GUNS, RELIGION, AND JUSTIFICATION FOR WARS, is still going on and still strong. On a subject that is essentially the same if you replaced word "Female" with "Black person" (I refuse to use African-American because it discriminates against Black Europeans, there found a PC way to end the use of the term African-American). That is right anyone saying that there is no sexism in games is the same as saying, Jim Crow Laws were not racist.


I agree with Jim 100% this time. This does not happen often, usually I agree with him about 70-80% (usually disagreeing on the solution or the severity of the problem). But in this case, he may be understating the problem a bit.

 

[Norix596]

The comparative lack of female lead characters in games is a well established issues, but the other half of Jim's point is something that had never occurred to me before until he mentioned it. I can't think of a single game with a female lead I've played or heard of where the woman is in a romantic relationship. That is, when the character is explicitly the player. There is of course the build-your-own protagonist approach where there are "romance options" like in Skyrim or the Mass Effect/ Dragon Age approach but never any female characters that are explicitly written as being in a relationship with a man. Beyond Good and Evil, Mirror's Edge etc.