Playing as a female character usually annoys me.
- Thread starter The_Vigilant
- Start date
Recommended Videos
So honestly, you use the game Mass Effect as your example for a game that contains jarring breaks of realism. A game based off of a story where giant sentient spaceships are hell-bent of destroying our galaxy's life. And of all things, you provide the example of a female soldier being able to rifle-smash a Krogan over. Do you honestly think any human would have a chance against a Krogan, assuming they were real? The things look to be almost 7 feet tall, and probably weigh at least 400 pounds. They also spend their life fighting each other, it's their goddamn culture.
Also, the combat in Mass Effect isn't designed for realism, if that's what you want, I have some good games I can recommend for you (such as Operation Flashpoint, ARMA2, or Red Orchestra). Speaking of combat, how does having a vagina hinder a person's ability to fire a gun? The guns in Mass Effect are light-weight, don't have to be reloaded often (in ME1, anyhow), and have little kickback. I know a few girls who can easily outshoot me, or at least compete well with me, in terms of firing fast and accurately.
Finally, are you sure that you're stronger than every woman? http://www.oddee.com/item_97013.aspx
I dunno how you posted this thread and voiced your opinions in such a dickish way, yet didn't expect a huge back-blast from it... So far, you've gotten off very easy.
EDIT: TLDR: Of course the female Shepard should be a bit weaker, but the whole game is so beyond realism, I can't believe this is what is riling your feathers.
Also, the combat in Mass Effect isn't designed for realism, if that's what you want, I have some good games I can recommend for you (such as Operation Flashpoint, ARMA2, or Red Orchestra). Speaking of combat, how does having a vagina hinder a person's ability to fire a gun? The guns in Mass Effect are light-weight, don't have to be reloaded often (in ME1, anyhow), and have little kickback. I know a few girls who can easily outshoot me, or at least compete well with me, in terms of firing fast and accurately.
Finally, are you sure that you're stronger than every woman? http://www.oddee.com/item_97013.aspx
I dunno how you posted this thread and voiced your opinions in such a dickish way, yet didn't expect a huge back-blast from it... So far, you've gotten off very easy.
EDIT: TLDR: Of course the female Shepard should be a bit weaker, but the whole game is so beyond realism, I can't believe this is what is riling your feathers.
ohh come on that was HILARIOUS.....(and as I recall it wasnt wrex she was headbutting) for what its worth Id rather femshep being masculine and all rather than not having the optionMetalMagpie said:
plus why is it so hard to belive in a sci fi world full of aliens? you know that shepard has been "improved" right? (both through the alliance training and the lazerus project)
wow
i have seen threads WAY less sexist [most were NOT sexist] then this and on those threads the OP gets flamed. THIS one however barely gets a any flames
no offence to the op thou BUT
------
yeahhh i read your post, OP and i find it to be quite misogynistic.
i have seen threads WAY less sexist [most were NOT sexist] then this and on those threads the OP gets flamed. THIS one however barely gets a any flames
no offence to the op thou BUT
------
yeahhh i read your post, OP and i find it to be quite misogynistic.
First of all, yes, men are going to be stronger than women, while woman are going to be more flexible - Garrus taught us that. From reading these posts though, I'm led to believe that outside this discussion the OP has a sexist view anyway, as he seems to think he is oh-so-superior to women based on his limited experience; not to flame the OP at that, merely an observation, and probably reasoning behind the view.
One, women can be intimidating, I don't care if you haven't been intimidated by your mother since you were 6, that doesn't automatically make women unable to be intimidating. You don't need muscles to do it now, you certainly don't need it in 200 years. The person with the biggest firepower is going to be the most intimidating; 'good, bad, the guy with the gun makes the rules'.
Two, I can't vouch for every female character in every game here, but I can for Mass Effect. That armour you're wearing isn't there to look pretty; it has other effects other than, well, armour. In Mass Effect 2 you can get a piece of armour to increase your physically damage; in Mass Effect you can get an armour upgrade to the same effect; so it seems logical that your armour increases physical strength. So if male Shep can do that because of the armour, so can Fem Shep. If the armour doesn't add strength and Shepard can knock over a creature who weighs over a ton when wearing armour with the butt of his assault rifle, that is going to break immersion just as much if Male Shep does it, because that is BS. If you want to complain about female characters in, say, Oblivion however, I'll just step out of way because they have no excuse.
Also, as a side note: would you have a problem if I complained about Ezio? since as a man he CLEARLY shouldn't be flexible enough to do all those acrobatic stuff, as women are better at that then men utterly, and he should grow some muscles and be a Brute or something.
One, women can be intimidating, I don't care if you haven't been intimidated by your mother since you were 6, that doesn't automatically make women unable to be intimidating. You don't need muscles to do it now, you certainly don't need it in 200 years. The person with the biggest firepower is going to be the most intimidating; 'good, bad, the guy with the gun makes the rules'.
Two, I can't vouch for every female character in every game here, but I can for Mass Effect. That armour you're wearing isn't there to look pretty; it has other effects other than, well, armour. In Mass Effect 2 you can get a piece of armour to increase your physically damage; in Mass Effect you can get an armour upgrade to the same effect; so it seems logical that your armour increases physical strength. So if male Shep can do that because of the armour, so can Fem Shep. If the armour doesn't add strength and Shepard can knock over a creature who weighs over a ton when wearing armour with the butt of his assault rifle, that is going to break immersion just as much if Male Shep does it, because that is BS. If you want to complain about female characters in, say, Oblivion however, I'll just step out of way because they have no excuse.
Also, as a side note: would you have a problem if I complained about Ezio? since as a man he CLEARLY shouldn't be flexible enough to do all those acrobatic stuff, as women are better at that then men utterly, and he should grow some muscles and be a Brute or something.
But females kicking ass does make the universe more enjoyable.The_Vigilant said:
"as realistic as possible while still permitting a free imagination."
I guess by your standards "free-imagination" can only go so far, certainly can't go as far as women taking any active combat role. That is not deus-ex-machina, that is a contrived-resolution to a story, you are coming up wit contrivances that EVERY man is better than EVERY woman in EVERY way all at the SAME TIME.
As a red blooded man I don't want my games to be a freaking sausage-fest. The LAST THING I want is the only female presence in games to be some nagging dispatch/radio woman, the "cortana syndrome".
See that's why I think your views should be dismissed as bigoted sexism, because regardless of actualities you just don't like the idea of women kicking ass regardless of how real or unreal the justification is.
I really prefer playing as FemShep, as I much prefer the voice acting of Hale to that of the bollocks coming from Meer's mouth. The male Shepard just sounds like an emotionless robot to me.
Also, do you have any idea how many aspects of the mass effect series aren't physically possible? So many scientific and logical impossibilities, and you're getting hung up on the sex of Shepard?! Really?
The game is a science fiction game. The physicality's can be overlooked in favour of equality. It all comes down to personal preference.
Just keep playing your male Shepard, and don't worry about what others are doing.
Also, do you have any idea how many aspects of the mass effect series aren't physically possible? So many scientific and logical impossibilities, and you're getting hung up on the sex of Shepard?! Really?
The game is a science fiction game. The physicality's can be overlooked in favour of equality. It all comes down to personal preference.
Just keep playing your male Shepard, and don't worry about what others are doing.
Step 1) Why physical strength does not matter for F-Shep
Step 2) there is no step 2
But also, she's a battle hardened marine with armor, genetic modifications and what...10 years of training? At some point, physical strength does not matter. It does not MATTER if a girl can lift more or less weight than you. What DOES matter is if she can fuck you up.
And the answer is...yes. Most women in the same situation can fuck you up.
Step 2) there is no step 2
But also, she's a battle hardened marine with armor, genetic modifications and what...10 years of training? At some point, physical strength does not matter. It does not MATTER if a girl can lift more or less weight than you. What DOES matter is if she can fuck you up.
And the answer is...yes. Most women in the same situation can fuck you up.
The underlying message is "despite the fact that she was more skilled than I was, and she was more physically apt than other females, I still would have won because I'm a male." And that doesn't sound the slightest bit sexist to you at all? If your answer is no, then your quest to not sound sexist has failed dramatically. Perhaps the reason your are unable to not sound sexist is because you are legitimately sexist.The_Vigilant said:
Just putting it out there.
This opinion is clearly wrong when to held to reckoning against a number of other posts I have made throughout this thread. I already said I loved Samus Aran and Linda Hamilton in T2. I even went on to say that I would accept a woman filling a man's role in an unaltered way if she at least LOOKED like a woman strong enough to do it. My problem is not with women kicking ass, it's with skinny supermodels kicking ass and talking trash in the same way a man would do it.Treblaine said:
One of the reasons I chose this example is that SHE said it. Not me. I didn't disagree with her because she was right. I'm taller than her, faster than her, stronger than her, bigger than her (which matters when playing in the paint), and I can jump higher. Her reasoning was pretty good and objective when it comes to the game of basketball. It was just surprising to hear a modern, educated woman put it down to gender so plainly. And she of all people should know. She's an athlete.MercurySteam said:
Hm, what's this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_women_in_early_modern_warfare
While OP has a couple of valid points, most are pretty silly.
While OP has a couple of valid points, most are pretty silly.
Just because you acknowlede this fact, it doesn't make it ok to say the rest of the stuffThe_Vigilant said:
I usually play female characters because meh, I prefer to. The "why" of it probably has a lot of factors. I find it very interesting to see what the developers have put into making you a female, if anything, or if it's merely a model/voice change with nothing added or subtracted.
You almost, but not quite, have a good point going. The spectrum of female strength and speed does not go as high as a male. The average male will in most cases, with similar amounts of training and exercise, be stronger and faster. The difference is noticeable in high-performance sports; there's a reason women compete against women and men compete against men in the 100m sprint, for instance. So yes, at peak unaltered condition, you have a fair point.
But being a hero, protagonist, or even PERSON, is more than your maximum weightlifting potential, and how many people are at peak physical condition? And WHEN? You can't be at peak condition all the time. Athletes know this, that's why they try to top up their form just before important events. Most people aren't NEAR peak condition at any point in their lives. I'm six foot four inches, overweight but quite strong. I don't know ANY women who are as big as me (luckily for them), and none as strong either. I know several who can kick my ass. If I trained as much at martial arts as them, or even a little less, and got in better shape I might turn that around, in fact it's likely, but I don't.
Then there's force multipliers. Put a gun in a woman's hand, and she's effectively just as deadly as a man. The only applicable factors now are that she's strong enough to hold the gun, which is NOT too high a bar. Then her ability to aim, her eyesight and her reaction time; women do just fine with that, and her bullets will kill you JUST as dead as a man's.
Women not being able to be as threatening as a man is lazy writing and stereotypes, and that's all. That a threat of violence from a woman is less threatening to you than one from a man is because YOU find it less likely that she can and will carry out the threat, based on your experiences. Those are societal behavioural norms. Let's say I'm a criminal trying to run from the police. A police officer tells me to freeze, and levels a gun at me. How do I decide? Well. Are there innocents in the way? If so, the officer is less likely to take the shot. Is there cover nearby that I can use? At no point does it concern me if the officer is male or female.
Now, in Mass Effect I agree on female Shepard being... less enjoyable. Even I, who usually play female characters, couldn't in that game. That was mostly because I found the female supporting cast and potential love interests hugely more interesting than the male ones. I don't get why you'd have a problem with a sci-fi supersoldier being female rather than male, really. Your example illustrates my point perfectly. Female Shepard knocks a Krogan down with gun butt, you disbelieve. Sure, I'll accept that. Male Shepard knocks a Krogan down with gun butt, I disbelieve. Krogans are unstoppable monstrosities, more hardass than any other common species, and a HUMAN knocks one out? You'd have trouble slowing one DOWN with less than two mags! Now, in a world with cybernetic implants, powered exo-suits, collapsible high-powered weaponry, and goddamn magic (Mass Effect Fields are essentially that), you're concerned because the raw, unaltered character might bench press slightly less than if she had been male? No. I don't get it.
As for flames, yes you are and will be getting them, which I don't see any reason for. While clumsily put, your question is valid, and merits discussion, if nothing else then so we can reach a greater understanding and come together as one brotherhood of man and... then there'll be cake. Probably.
You almost, but not quite, have a good point going. The spectrum of female strength and speed does not go as high as a male. The average male will in most cases, with similar amounts of training and exercise, be stronger and faster. The difference is noticeable in high-performance sports; there's a reason women compete against women and men compete against men in the 100m sprint, for instance. So yes, at peak unaltered condition, you have a fair point.
But being a hero, protagonist, or even PERSON, is more than your maximum weightlifting potential, and how many people are at peak physical condition? And WHEN? You can't be at peak condition all the time. Athletes know this, that's why they try to top up their form just before important events. Most people aren't NEAR peak condition at any point in their lives. I'm six foot four inches, overweight but quite strong. I don't know ANY women who are as big as me (luckily for them), and none as strong either. I know several who can kick my ass. If I trained as much at martial arts as them, or even a little less, and got in better shape I might turn that around, in fact it's likely, but I don't.
Then there's force multipliers. Put a gun in a woman's hand, and she's effectively just as deadly as a man. The only applicable factors now are that she's strong enough to hold the gun, which is NOT too high a bar. Then her ability to aim, her eyesight and her reaction time; women do just fine with that, and her bullets will kill you JUST as dead as a man's.
Women not being able to be as threatening as a man is lazy writing and stereotypes, and that's all. That a threat of violence from a woman is less threatening to you than one from a man is because YOU find it less likely that she can and will carry out the threat, based on your experiences. Those are societal behavioural norms. Let's say I'm a criminal trying to run from the police. A police officer tells me to freeze, and levels a gun at me. How do I decide? Well. Are there innocents in the way? If so, the officer is less likely to take the shot. Is there cover nearby that I can use? At no point does it concern me if the officer is male or female.
Now, in Mass Effect I agree on female Shepard being... less enjoyable. Even I, who usually play female characters, couldn't in that game. That was mostly because I found the female supporting cast and potential love interests hugely more interesting than the male ones. I don't get why you'd have a problem with a sci-fi supersoldier being female rather than male, really. Your example illustrates my point perfectly. Female Shepard knocks a Krogan down with gun butt, you disbelieve. Sure, I'll accept that. Male Shepard knocks a Krogan down with gun butt, I disbelieve. Krogans are unstoppable monstrosities, more hardass than any other common species, and a HUMAN knocks one out? You'd have trouble slowing one DOWN with less than two mags! Now, in a world with cybernetic implants, powered exo-suits, collapsible high-powered weaponry, and goddamn magic (Mass Effect Fields are essentially that), you're concerned because the raw, unaltered character might bench press slightly less than if she had been male? No. I don't get it.
As for flames, yes you are and will be getting them, which I don't see any reason for. While clumsily put, your question is valid, and merits discussion, if nothing else then so we can reach a greater understanding and come together as one brotherhood of man and... then there'll be cake. Probably.
The basic thrust of what the OP said is true; the male body is definitely built stronger than the female body. Fact is, the female body is built the way it is - wide, high hips, proportionally longer legs, generally weaker upper body - because they're built for childbearing. (To anyone who wants to take offense at that statement, I say this: men don't have fucking wombs! I'm not saying childbirth is the defining point of a woman's existence - she can choose not to have children; I'm saying it's a defining point of her genetic build.)
The main reason this is, is because of the way humans have evolved within our society over the last several millenia; simply put, men have always been the worker/warrior class and as such have evolved to be bigger and stronger because they're expected to defend and provide for their family group.
It's not saying that women are in any way inferior to men. How can they be? They're built in a completely fucking different way, which is superior to the male build at what it's evolved to do >>
The main problem here is that the OP was completely obnoxious in how he stated his opinion, and came across as sexist even if he isn't. The sentence saying 'most women can't even get the lid off a jar of pickles without a rubber grip' for example. All these 'hard women' he knows obviously don't eat pickles >>
TL;DR
Men and women are built differently on a genetic level and OP needs to learn to be more eloquent
The main reason this is, is because of the way humans have evolved within our society over the last several millenia; simply put, men have always been the worker/warrior class and as such have evolved to be bigger and stronger because they're expected to defend and provide for their family group.
It's not saying that women are in any way inferior to men. How can they be? They're built in a completely fucking different way, which is superior to the male build at what it's evolved to do >>
The main problem here is that the OP was completely obnoxious in how he stated his opinion, and came across as sexist even if he isn't. The sentence saying 'most women can't even get the lid off a jar of pickles without a rubber grip' for example. All these 'hard women' he knows obviously don't eat pickles >>
TL;DR
Men and women are built differently on a genetic level and OP needs to learn to be more eloquent
Can you name more than two genuinely popular computer games in the entire history of gaming that realistically deal with men (let alone women) utilizing ridiculously heavy armour and weaponry from the medieval period?The_Vigilant said:
Does your blood also boil & seethe when the platemail-wearing RPG character you've sent hiking through the wilderness for days, actually manages to successfully defend himself from attack when by all rights they should immediately collapse from the torturous physical exertion you've put them through?
Or does your suspension of disbelief only break down when natural law gets violated by someone who appears to have both a set of breasts and a vagina?
And do you realise that a woman will never be considered equal to a male navy seal, even if she is able to complete the training? (which I highly doubt any woman is able to complete) Why you ask? Because the male body is better suited for fighting and the entire menstrual cycle thing isn't exactly ideal for the missions those special forces guys preform.blakfayt said:
There's a reason why society looks down on a man fighting/hitting a woman you know. It's because the female body is weaker and more fragile than the male body. It's not sexist, it's fact.