Misogyny or Sexual Persecution? [Update!]

[Jack Action]

Perhaps I should play it (or watch a let's-play) before commenting, admittedly. I'll put it in the "ambiguous" pile for now.

Fair enough. And I should probably not say what's gay or not, seeing as how I'm not gay. Though I would like to see a gay protagonist in a game, as long as whoever makes the game manages to avoid making the relationship (like most game romances) utterly cringeworthy.

 

[Zipa]

I haven't played it, myself. I asked my roommate, who had, and who said there might have been something kind of hinted a bit. I searched online, and mostly found people saying they didn't get that vibe, and nothing explicit.

Okay, yeah, I may be reading too much into it. Possibly because I don't see physical contact as merely friendly, and Raziel "dies" caressing Kain's chest. While the normally sarcastic and stoic Kain gets as close as he physically can to crying, or showing any emotion that isn't contempt.

I do see your point though.

Its been a long time since Ive played Defiance but from what I remember Raziel is touching Kain's chest to heal the wound he inflicted upon him earlier when he ripped the heart of darkness from Kain's chest while in a hilden induced rage mode. This also has effect of "curing" Kain of corruption letting him see the Elder God, the real enemy of Nosgoth for the first time.

 

[Jack Action]

Its been a long time since Ive played Defiance but from what I remember Raziel is touching Kain's chest to heal the wound he caused earlier when he ripped the heart of darkness from Kain's chest while in a hilden induced rage mode. This also has effect of "curing" Kain of corruption letting him see the Elder God, the real enemy of Nosgoth for the first time.

Nope, he didn't cure Kain of corruption, he purified the Soul Reaver by willingly entering it after purifying his own soul (as opposed to being forced into it, which was the 'natural' course of things, and which should have happened after Raziel killed his human self, back in Soul Reaver 2). That's what allowed Kain to see and fight the Elder God.

Edit: specifically, Raziel purifying his own soul before being absorbed was the important part, more than the 'enter willingly'. He didn't get a chance to do that before Kain stopped the Reaver from eating him in... er, 'previous' cycles, so the Reaver itself was never purified before.

 

[Zipa]

Its been a long time since Ive played Defiance but from what I remember Raziel is touching Kain's chest to heal the wound he caused earlier when he ripped the heart of darkness from Kain's chest while in a hilden induced rage mode. This also has effect of "curing" Kain of corruption letting him see the Elder God, the real enemy of Nosgoth for the first time.

Nope, he didn't cure Kain of corruption, he purified the Soul Reaver by willingly entering it after purifying his own soul (as opposed to being forced into it, which was the 'natural' course of things, and which should have happened after Raziel killed his human self, back in Soul Reaver 2). That's what allowed Kain to see and fight the Elder God.

Ah yeah you're right, as I said its been a long long time since I played Defiance. Either way that is the reason for Raziel touching Kain.

I really wish they would pick up a sequel to Defiance to, its long overdue.

 

[Jack Action]

Ah yeah you're right, as I said its been a long long time since I played Defiance. Either way that is the reason for Raziel touching Kain.

I really wish they would pick up a sequel to Defiance to, its long overdue.

It's not, that was my point. Raziel was impaled on the Reaver when he did that, and was already being absorbed. Touching Kain's chest served no physical purpose. He *may* have done it simply to reinforce the point about re-taking his place as Kain's right hand though.

Also, yes, I want an ending to my favorite series, goddamnit.

 

[Zipa]

Ah yeah you're right, as I said its been a long long time since I played Defiance. Either way that is the reason for Raziel touching Kain.

I really wish they would pick up a sequel to Defiance to, its long overdue.

It's not, that was my point. Raziel was impaled on the Reaver when he did that, and was already being absorbed. Touching Kain's chest served no physical purpose. He *may* have done it simply to reinforce the point about re-taking his place as Kain's right hand though.

Also, yes, I want an ending to my favorite series, goddamnit.

Well one thing is apparent, I need to play Defiance again, thankfully GoG has it.

 

[Jesterscup]

Any time you find content titillating ask yourself: "what am I being encouraged to find sexually arousing and yes, gratifying? Am I being encouraged to seek sexual fulfilment in a way that acknowledges, validates, and respects the other person? Or am I being encouraged to find dis-empowered women that have be reduced to, by way of various structures of inequality, sex toys or wank socks?"

For men this is a question that requires more than just rigorous self-honesty to answer, it requires the introduction of a different perspective. The perspective of a woman.

Whoa!!!

While I get your point, there are on examination some frankly worrying concepts within that, so lets clear up a little shall we.

Firstly we ask "Am I being encouraged to seek sexual fulfilment in a way that acknowledges, validates, and respects the other person?" - and you state that is requires a womans viewpoint to answer that?

If the OP creates a piece of art the dis-empowers the male form does he need a woman to tell him?

Secondly the concept of a woman being disempowered does not need to be sexually linked. Take Princess Peach, she not overly sexualised, yet truly disempowered.

Thirdly your post implies there is a 'male' viewpoint and a 'female' viewpoint, that men simply can't understand what it's like to be a woman. Now that is one of the most dangerous assertions that is made by some who would consider themselves feminist. In fact its utterly sexist in it's own way, and is damaging to the discussion.
Let me give an example, there is a common narrative in the media surrounding sexual abuse, and you'll see many feminist authors Discussing sexual abuse in terms of men being the abusers, and women being the survivors ( victims is a term avoided now ). yet this isolates those 15% of men who have also survived. This horrific crime being termed a 'womens issue' means that those resources to help male survivors simply don't exist and are hard to access or even find when they do.
As a survivor myself, this is clearly an issue for me, being told I "don't understand" because I'm not a woman? As a drag-queen I regularly get groped, and suffer from other forms of ( generally minor, but thats beside the point ) sexual harassment, but it "doesn't count, because I don't get it every day"


If, as is implied, men will "never get it" lets just shut up shop and go home now, because it's and issue that'll never go away, because every male will need a female beside him telling him if thoughts ( any thoughts, not just sexual ones see princess peach above ) are appropriate or not.

 

[Thaluikhain]

If, as is implied, men will "never get it" lets just shut up shop and go home now, because it's and issue that'll never go away, because every male will need a female beside him telling him if thoughts ( any thoughts, not just sexual ones see princess peach above ) are appropriate or not.

This very much depends on what the "it" in context is. No one point of view is ever going to totally understand everything. Sure, there's lots of times where this isn't an issue, where a limited amount of understanding is adequate, or where something is common to most/all people. But then there's times where it's not.

The idea that the default viewpoint (whatever that might be in that particular situation) is automatically the best one to understand something, and that we should actively avoid any other, is not helpful.

 

[PromethianSpark]

Whoa!!!

While I get your point, there are on examination some frankly worrying concepts within that, so lets clear up a little shall we.

Firstly we ask "Am I being encouraged to seek sexual fulfilment in a way that acknowledges, validates, and respects the other person?" - and you state that is requires a womans viewpoint to answer that?

If the OP creates a piece of art the dis-empowers the male form does he need a woman to tell him?

Secondly the concept of a woman being disempowered does not need to be sexually linked. Take Princess Peach, she not overly sexualised, yet truly disempowered.

Thirdly your post implies there is a 'male' viewpoint and a 'female' viewpoint, that men simply can't understand what it's like to be a woman. Now that is one of the most dangerous assertions that is made by some who would consider themselves feminist. In fact its utterly sexist in it's own way, and is damaging to the discussion.
Let me give an example, there is a common narrative in the media surrounding sexual abuse, and you'll see many feminist authors Discussing sexual abuse in terms of men being the abusers, and women being the survivors ( victims is a term avoided now ). yet this isolates those 15% of men who have also survived. This horrific crime being termed a 'womens issue' means that those resources to help male survivors simply don't exist and are hard to access or even find when they do.
As a survivor myself, this is clearly an issue for me, being told I "don't understand" because I'm not a woman? As a drag-queen I regularly get groped, and suffer from other forms of ( generally minor, but thats beside the point ) sexual harassment, but it "doesn't count, because I don't get it every day"


If, as is implied, men will "never get it" lets just shut up shop and go home now, because it's and issue that'll never go away, because every male will need a female beside him telling him if thoughts ( any thoughts, not just sexual ones see princess peach above ) are appropriate or not.

I understand why you interpreted it that way, and I perhaps should of made it more clear. I am not saying that when ever a man finds himself aroused, that he should consult a woman about whether it is appropriate. Nor or am I saying that men can not intrinsically understand the perspective of a women. It is rather a check your privilege sort of thing. Power inequities seldom present themselves, unless of course you are the exploited party, as being that. Instead they appear as harmless, and indeed the natural order of things.

My point is that we often need the perspective of, the 'other' to see that they are being othered, the exploited to reveal the structure of exploitation, and the dis-empowered to become aware of the processes of dis-empowerment. This does not mean that we have to actively consult these people for updates on their perspective, we can be aware of it because, as in your case we might identify strongly with them, or because we have already encountered and taken seriously this perspective through the course of our lives.

 

[Jesterscup]

If, as is implied, men will "never get it" lets just shut up shop and go home now, because it's and issue that'll never go away, because every male will need a female beside him telling him if thoughts ( any thoughts, not just sexual ones see princess peach above ) are appropriate or not.

This very much depends on what the "it" in context is. No one point of view is ever going to totally understand everything. Sure, there's lots of times where this isn't an issue, where a limited amount of understanding is adequate, or where something is common to most/all people. But then there's times where it's not.

Of course, but we need to be very very careful, dismissing my (or anyone's) point of views because of some trait they have isn't the best start. I can give example after example of areas where I like to think I've got an interesting point of view and have been told that 'I don't understand' because I'm not 'X'( insert whatever). Sure I will never understand what it's like to go through childbirth but dismissing what I'm saying is a type of stereotyping and sexism all by itself.

Taking the point above, no I never will 'understand' what it's like to go through childbirth, but I was there through 2 home births, one of them a home water birth ( and highly active in both cases, basically doing the traditional midwifery), making my experiences, and views, on child birth at least worth a listen.

Absolutely, sometimes I'm wrong, sometimes I'm an a$&e, sometimes I have an outmoded concept of something. A concept that seems to have been central to many conversations I've been having lately is 'awareness' ( self-awareness included) It the ability to try and look at a situation from more than one angle, to understand how you feel, why you feel, to ask what other viewpoints there might be. And yeah sometimes you need someone else to tell you where you're being an a$&e.... But it's also important for us to listen and try to understand first.

Don't just tell me I'm wrong because of who/what I am, or you perceive me to be.
( Yeah I know you didn't I'm positing a concept, not levelling an accusation )

 

[Thaluikhain]

Of course, but we need to be very very careful, dismissing my (or anyone's) point of views because of some trait they have isn't the best start. I can give example after example of areas where I like to think I've got an interesting point of view and have been told that 'I don't understand' because I'm not 'X'( insert whatever). Sure I will never understand what it's like to go through childbirth but dismissing what I'm saying is a type of stereotyping and sexism all by itself.

Taking the point above, no I never will 'understand' what it's like to go through childbirth, but I was there through 2 home births, one of them a home water birth ( and highly active in both cases, basically doing the traditional midwifery), making my experiences, and views, on child birth at least worth a listen.

Absolutely, sometimes I'm wrong, sometimes I'm an a$&e, sometimes I have an outmoded concept of something. A concept that seems to have been central to many conversations I've been having lately is 'awareness' ( self-awareness included) It the ability to try and look at a situation from more than one angle, to understand how you feel, why you feel, to ask what other viewpoints there might be. And yeah sometimes you need someone else to tell you where you're being an a$&e.... But it's also important for us to listen and try to understand first.

Oh sure, definitely agree with you on that.

Though:

Don't just tell me I'm wrong because of who/what I am, or you perceive me to be.

A lot of people are quick to assume that's why they are being told they are wrong, which may or may not be the case.

ETA: Another problem is that these sorts of discussions crop up over and over and end badly, and an innocent comment might gets confused with all the trolling and reactionary backlash that goes on, and be treated as such.

 

[Jesterscup]

Don't just tell me I'm wrong because of who/what I am, or you perceive me to be.

A lot of people are quick to assume that's why they are being told they are wrong, which may or may not be the case.

Nah, you're just wrong

But thats a good point, it's an easy trap to fall into, to assume that someone is judging you or your point of view. Especially when their comments seem to contradict your own opinion. Thats a difficult thing to deal with. Hell even if we are being outright told we're wrong, don't we ( generally speaking) have a duty to at least consider it, even if we 'feel' ( rightly or wrongly) thats it's because of who/what we are?

You're still wrong though ( sry couldn't help it )

EDIT:

ETA: Another problem is that these sorts of discussions crop up over and over and end badly, and an innocent comment might gets confused with all the trolling and reactionary backlash that goes on, and be treated as such.

oh again agreed, it's one of the reasons I love THIS thread. it's happened, and been squashed, over and over.. so we keep having good debate with interesting ideas & concepts.
I've been making the effort ( perhaps badly I admit) to try and question a particular point without offending or aiming comments, at the poster, and often it moves the debate along rather than entrenching into flame

 

[Thaluikhain]

But thats a good point, it's an easy trap to fall into, to assume that someone is judging you or your point of view. Especially when their comments seem to contradict your own opinion. Thats a difficult thing to deal with. Hell even if we are being outright told we're wrong, don't we ( generally speaking) have a duty to at least consider it, even if we 'feel' ( rightly or wrongly) thats it's because of who/what we are?

Not sure. Maybe the first time, yeah, but if it keeps happening again and again and you think you were right about those, you might stop considering them all. Not ideal, but understandable.

 

[Dragonmouth]

The problem with the OP is that it confuses ostracism for persecution. Persecution is when somebody targets a group of people and hurts them for it. Ostracism is when you merely dislike people and exclude them from social situations, which is perfectly within your rights. You can't be excluded from education, job, or business opportunities but you can be excluded from social situations. You do not have the right to be liked. You do not have the right to dates, sex, or even casual conversation.

That's what the OP doesn't understand. Nobody is being hurt because of their sexual urges. Nobody is taking away your property or your ability to gain more property. They are merely stating their opinion that the way you express your urges is gross and choosing not to associate with you.

 

[Jesterscup]

The problem with the OP is that it confuses ostracism for persecution. Persecution is when somebody targets a group of people and hurts them for it. Ostracism is when you merely dislike people and exclude them from social situations, which is perfectly within your rights. You can't be excluded from education, job, or business opportunities but you can be excluded from social situations. You do not have the right to be liked. You do not have the right to dates, sex, or even casual conversation.

That's what the OP doesn't understand. Nobody is being hurt because of their sexual urges. Nobody is taking away your property or your ability to gain more property. They are merely stating their opinion that the way you express your urges is gross and choosing not to associate with you.

Firstly you can, as an individual be persecuted...

Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group.

What you do have the right to, is to not be abused either physically of verbally on the street, in a shop, at your work, in your school. These are still common occurrences for women, for those who would consider themselves as 'trans' and for those who are gay.

In addition were he to make his living via creating erotic art, the calls for this to be banned, if heeded, would indeed remove his ability to earn a living in the manner he chooses to do so.

You also seem to be unaware that although there are laws against this, it is still the case that when a man and a woman of equal skill go for a job ( especially at higher levels of corporate life / higher incomes ) the man is more likely to get the job, similarly someone who is openly homosexual will lose out to someone who is not, or is openly heterosexual. I'll happily dig out the studies that prove this if required.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I think your thinking is backwards. All sorts of accusations of misogyny and harassment and general assery in relation to gaming culture are being thrown around right now. This, of all times, is when you don't generalize. You speak with as much clarity and precision as you can. It seems crazy to me that in such a turmoil of emotions you would count on your posts being interpreted with level headed benefit of the doubt.

Concise and clear communication is an absolute must when the only form is text-based. The absence of other tells (body language especially) in such online communication means the tone of the statement will be taken on how one initially reads it.

In this context, you were right on the money the first time.
There is absolutely NO REASON for omitting such clarity from a point unless the intent is to antagonize or sensationalize.

I would have thought that point would be more clear after the recent swath of articles demonizing "gamers".

 

[grassgremlin]

Whoa!!!

While I get your point, there are on examination some frankly worrying concepts within that, so lets clear up a little shall we.

Firstly we ask "Am I being encouraged to seek sexual fulfilment in a way that acknowledges, validates, and respects the other person?" - and you state that is requires a womans viewpoint to answer that?

If the OP creates a piece of art the dis-empowers the male form does he need a woman to tell him?

Secondly the concept of a woman being disempowered does not need to be sexually linked. Take Princess Peach, she not overly sexualised, yet truly disempowered.

Thirdly your post implies there is a 'male' viewpoint and a 'female' viewpoint, that men simply can't understand what it's like to be a woman. Now that is one of the most dangerous assertions that is made by some who would consider themselves feminist. In fact its utterly sexist in it's own way, and is damaging to the discussion.
Let me give an example, there is a common narrative in the media surrounding sexual abuse, and you'll see many feminist authors Discussing sexual abuse in terms of men being the abusers, and women being the survivors ( victims is a term avoided now ). yet this isolates those 15% of men who have also survived. This horrific crime being termed a 'womens issue' means that those resources to help male survivors simply don't exist and are hard to access or even find when they do.
As a survivor myself, this is clearly an issue for me, being told I "don't understand" because I'm not a woman? As a drag-queen I regularly get groped, and suffer from other forms of ( generally minor, but thats beside the point ) sexual harassment, but it "doesn't count, because I don't get it every day"


If, as is implied, men will "never get it" lets just shut up shop and go home now, because it's and issue that'll never go away, because every male will need a female beside him telling him if thoughts ( any thoughts, not just sexual ones see princess peach above ) are appropriate or not.

I understand why you interpreted it that way, and I perhaps should of made it more clear. I am not saying that when ever a man finds himself aroused, that he should consult a woman about whether it is appropriate. Nor or am I saying that men can not intrinsically understand the perspective of a women. It is rather a check your privilege sort of thing. Power inequities seldom present themselves, unless of course you are the exploited party, as being that. Instead they appear as harmless, and indeed the natural order of things.

My point is that we often need the perspective of, the 'other' to see that they are being othered, the exploited to reveal the structure of exploitation, and the dis-empowered to become aware of the processes of dis-empowerment. This does not mean that we have to actively consult these people for updates on their perspective, we can be aware of it because, as in your case we might identify strongly with them, or because we have already encountered and taken seriously this perspective through the course of our lives.

Goddamnit, I accidently closed out the window before I could give a very strong worded rebuttal to this. Okay, I collect my thoughts.

I have a problem with the concept of "Check You Privilege." It's basically saying that I must acknowledge my superiority over others.

As a black gay man, and with my friend being a drag queen who does go through various traumas, I don't think we have much of that to check. The only indication of Privilege we have is being male.

The problem is that this unbalances the scales that people cry of Equality. The idea that the priviledged inviduals must not only lower themselves, which I agree they should, but now they must place others above them.

I remember having a conversation about the fact that we human beings compete for who is the most miserable. Who is the most "special." Instead of arguing against it and calling out bigotry as we see it, we revel in being the most pathetic creatures on the planet. I feel this has had a negative effect.

It's no longer a competition for privilege but a competition for underprivileged. How much one can protect, coddle and hug you.

As a black gay man who deals with a lot of bigoted shit, I want people to acknowledge who I am. I'll make a call against the sexist, racist, bigoted assholes, but the truth is. I rather someone call me a ****** or ****** then pity me.

That is the worst fucking feeling ever. I hate the films about the white woman saving the underprivileged black man from poverty. That's so fucking offensive. There's a film about a football player that really got under my skin.

True maybe I interpret this wrong, but there are two tropes I hate.
Magical Negro is the one side of the extreme.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MagicalNegro
The black man who acts like he has no problems but must save the white people cause that's his only role.

Then the other extreme is the white man's burden.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WhiteMansBurden

I get the sentiment all this comes from, but I feel like people have taken these concepts way to far.
I want to treat people like I treat everyone.
Feminist want to say women can be strong, so they can be treated like they are strong, but I will never hold any human being above me.

I never gave a damn about how much people suffer and I grew out of fucking telling people about how much my suffering is worst then theirs. I'm really sick of that idea.

I spent my life growing up with women. I am very much familiar with a woman's privileges as they compare to mine.

I feel like with these conversations women are just as guilty for not understanding men as men are of understanding women. The problem is always that issue.

The following will come off as misogynistic and call me out on this.
But honestly, I'm really happy I'm gay. Not just because I'm happily attracted to men, but I don't have to deal with a woman in a relationship.

I never came to that conclusion when I came out mind you, but from these kinds of conversations, I realize that I'm happy that my partner is not female.


Can't I just view cat calls as sometimes being uncomfortable for anyone
Can't I just view rape as wrong?
Can't I just think calling a women a ***** is harmful?
What more does one ask of me that hasn't already been asked?

with all these issues being brought up, I realize the truth is sometimes my greater shame isn't my sexual preferences, but the fact that I belong to the male species.

Respect my sexual preferences, skin color and my right to be me. But do not pity me at all.

I'll go grab my flame shield, but I await if people can tell me I'm wrong. With this post, I'm honestly begging for someone to educate me on this in a rational manner.

 

[Jack Action]

-snip-

Are you trying to tell me the internet lied to me about people with more melanin than me, people with different sexual preferences and that they're actual human beings with pride and dignity?

Next you'll be telling me you want to be held accountable when you screw up or something.

Spoiler

Safety disclaimer: yes, I'm joking, in case it wasn't obvious, and yes, obviously I realize not everyone's going to find it amusing. Hence the disclaimer.

 

[Dragonmouth]

What you do have the right to, is to not be abused either physically of verbally on the street, in a shop, at your work, in your school. These are still common occurrences for women, for those who would consider themselves as 'trans' and for those who are gay.

What is the line between criticism and abuse? Where would, say, Anita Sarkeesian's level-headed videos fall on this spectrum?

What if I find the work of art itself insulting? If a person makes art that insults my race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation and places it in a certain setting, why don't I have the right to be equally insulting in the same setting?

In addition were he to make his living via creating erotic art, the calls for this to be banned, if heeded, would indeed remove his ability to earn a living in the manner he chooses to do so.

I don't believe in government bans on artwork. However, actual calls for banning erotic art or porn are rare these days and are unlikely to get off the ground (assuming you live in the US). Therefore, I feel like all this talk of censorship is more of a red herring than a serious discussion. I think people are trying to avoid answering criticism by falsely equating it to censorship and changing the subject.

 

[Kathinka]

while i'm all for equality for all races, genders and creeds, i think we should let developers have their artistic license. if they want to make games with burly chiseled muscly men and scantly clad sexualized women, let them. this sjw crusading and trying to bully devs to make games in a way that pleases them bothers me way more and is more harmful to gaming than any of that supposed misogyny and objectification that is being talked about so much, but that i as a girl playing videogames since 24 years have never felt a victim of.