Poll: Concerned for how the eradication of female objectification/sexism is being approached?

[LookAtYouHacker]

Concerns for the eradication of female objectification/sexism in video games has been periodically elevating, especially with the recent announcement of Anita?s Tropes VS Women In Video Games on Kick-starter. I know not everyone agrees with Anita?s methods, but I digress.

I?ve perceived this as a justifiable pursuit, but in the process I?ve progressively noticed some questionable attitudes amongst those who desire to eradicate it (most of them being men.)

This mostly originates from articles on gaming websites such as IGN, user-accounts on sites such as Facebook/Twitter, comic strips, blogs etc.

Now, I know how I?m probably being interpreted by a select few (a constantly aroused heterosexual male that wants to keep their provocative female characters). I implore readers to keep an open mind and not jump to knee-jerk reactions, because my concerns in fact pertain to feministic issues (or more specifically, slut-shaming.)

Note: I'm not attacking anyone who admires provocative video game characters.

In order to briefly clarify some forthcoming points, feminism makes a distinction between attraction and objectification. Objectification only occurs when sexuality is the only defining character trait, it doesn?t occur when attraction is simply ?part? of a female character.

From my personal perspective, some people (of whom seek to eradicate female objectification/sexism in video games) don?t understand that distinction, and (I believe) in the process make some very unfair criticisms.

To establish context, I?m not talking about the criticism of female knights with sex robot walking configurations and cleavages you can ski down. I?m talking about the criticism of what I (and evidentially others) believe to be genuinely harmless portrayals of attractive female characters in video games.

For example (amongst Lara Croft this is one of many I have,) Faith from Mirrors Edge. Someone accused her portrayal of being objectifying because of her tank top (Anita herself cited her to be a positive example of female characters in video games.) When I tried to explain this provided dexterity and the differences between attraction/objectification, they reproached me.

http://catiemonstro.us/post/24993421904/ladies-and-gents-have-some-opinions-hmm

(I contacted the author of this comic on their Twitter account, and they have apologised for advocating slut-shaming.)

Another example: https://twitter.com/radicalbytes

This individual has made numerous claims of objectification/sexism directed at Diablo 3 and the London Olympics (I don't know what readers think regarding this, but feel free to inform me of your opinions.) I confronted his claim, and was blocked.

From my personal perception, it seems that any interpretations of female attraction in video games, whether it be innocent, creative, or purely circumstantial, are being procedurally classified as indisputable objectification/sexism (which I believe is wrong.)

It?s particularly distressing because some men see this as justifiable (or in feminist interests,) when in reality they're indirectly advocating an abstract form of slut-shaming (the shaming of female sexuality.)

There seems to be no distinction between claims of sincere female objectification/sexism and petty-minded/uninformed assumptions (which is considerably dangerous.) Any opposing confrontation of such claims (as readers can see in previous examples) nearly always results in knee-jerk accusations of sexism and misogyny etc.

It's infuriating (and perhaps think it best to simply remain silent.) I feel there's nothing that can be done.

I hope some can comprehend (and sympathize) with my sentiments without jumping to knee-jerk conclusions, because this has been genuinely distressing me recently (and it's hard to fluently explain.)

 

[Zhukov]

Oh yay, another sexism/gender thread. I eagerly await the pathetic vitriol directed at that one Youtube lady.

[sub][sub][sub]Hey, I gotta be me.[/sub][/sub][/sub]

Anyway, yes, some people get unnecessarily worked up over a bit of skin. (I mean, Faith, really? She's a fucking runner. She wears baggy trousers, light shoes and a singlet. Y'know, like someone who runs. What do they expect?)

The verdict from the womenfolk seems to boil down to, "We don't have a problem loads of sexy chicks running around, we just want them - or at least some of them - to be sexy and be interesting characters in their own right." Well, so far as I can tell anyway.

On the other hand, I will admit that it kind of irks me that every single bloody female character has to be a paragon of sexiness because anything else will supposedly cause the game to tank... or something. I mean, how many intentionally non-attractive female game characters can you think of? (No, monsters don't count.) I can think of two, Avallene from DA2 and Rachel from Binary Domain.

So how about some more plain or butt-ugly chicks, eh? If only for the sake of variety. After, all, it's not like half the human population consists entirely of Barbie dolls.

 

[burningdragoon]

This being the internet, people tend to explode in outrage at any given chance. That being said, what harm would come if the ultra-sexified characters were also sometimes, you know, good characters too? I'd say somewhere in the "no harm" range.

Also this post reeks of using larger, more unusual or unnecessary words to make your point seem more well thought out. But maybe that's just me (it probably isn't just me >.>)

 

[LookAtYouHacker]

This being the internet, people tend to explode in outrage at any given chance. That being said, what harm would come if the ultra-sexified characters were also sometimes, you know, good characters too? I'd say somewhere in the "no harm" range.

Also this post reeks of using larger, more unusual or unnecessary words to make your point seem more well thought out. But maybe that's just me (it probably isn't just me >.>)

That's a harsh judgement. I simply admire the expandability the English language provides. I write about issues constantly, and I know I'm not idiosyncratic when it comes to expandable delineation.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

This being the internet, people tend to explode in outrage at any given chance. That being said, what harm would come if the ultra-sexified characters were also sometimes, you know, good characters too? I'd say somewhere in the "no harm" range.

Also this post reeks of using larger, more unusual or unnecessary words to make your point seem more well thought out. But maybe that's just me (it probably isn't just me >.>)

agree with all of this..especially the second part. there is no reason for using bigger/uncommon words unless it is describing something very specific.

OT: while I can see alot of the concerns, and I agree that there needs to be more women who are provided with depth and are "down to earth" (i.e. not tits on a stick that needs to be saved by musclejock #5, they can wear as much clothes as they want and be the main protagonist..hell the whole game can have all women and no men, as long as it's good, I don't really care.)

BUT...I do think alot of extreme femi-nazi's make mountains out of molehills and don't approach situations right sometimes, but I do think they are on the right track in a few instances.

 

[Voulan]

When the sexiness is used purely for sales, and it contributes nothing to anything, that's when I have a problem. Naturally, though, everyone wants their characters to be attractive, so I agree that to a certain extent it should be okay.

It's common tropes like the 'useless love-interest that needs saving' to the 'femme fatale' to the 'eye candy' type that really gets annoying.

But people hated Faith? Seriously? That is stupid. She's practical, and that's what works for me. I get so annoyed watching Hollywood films where the badass-chick character wears the most impractical outfit and wears their hair out. I mean, come on! That's blatantly for eye candy.

My only real problem is that I'd like to play as a female character more in games, and not one that wears barely anything. Armour can still be cool even when it actually becomes useful, y'know.

 

[LookAtYouHacker]

agree with all of this..especially the second part. there is no reason for using bigger/uncommon words unless it is describing something very specific.

I don't intend to come across as arrogant I also see this as rather specific, lest I offend those who may leap to judgemental conclusions.

 

[LookAtYouHacker]

When the sexiness is used purely for sales, and it contributes nothing to anything, that's when I have a problem. Naturally, though, everyone wants their characters to be attractive, so I agree that to a certain extent it should be okay.

It's common tropes like the 'useless love-interest that needs saving' to the 'femme fatale' to the 'eye candy' type that really gets annoying.

But people hated Faith? Seriously? That is stupid. She's practical, and that's what works for me. I get so annoyed watching Hollywood films where the badass-chick character wears the most impractical outfit and wears their hair out. I mean, come on! That's blatantly for eye candy.

My only real problem is that I'd like to play as a female character more in games, and not one that wears barely anything. Armour can still be cool even when it actually becomes useful, y'know.

Don't worry, some admired Faith (as I did.)

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

agree with all of this..especially the second part. there is no reason for using bigger/uncommon words unless it is describing something very specific.

I don't intend to come across as arrogant I also see this as rather specific, lest I offend those who may leap to judgemental conclusions.

it's not so much arrogance, as it is unnecessary for everyone. It's a hassle for the users your trying to plead/discuss with. I'm not accusing you of being a dick/snob(as some people do act like a dick/snob about it, but I don't think you meant to be at all), just saying that for everyone involved it can be just a bit easier..

also I'd like to add in, I think people should get up in arms equally about all pieces of entertainment then, not just video games..movies/tv are just as bad if not worse of doing these things, it's just video games are newer, so they don't have as much exposure/examples to build off of that are good. I just think they pick and choose their issues sometimes with bigger tropes/battles to be won that are right next door.

 

[targren]

You make some good points, but yes, in other places, you do come off as a dick.

Now, I know how I'm probably being interpreted by a select few (a surreptitious sexist that wants to keep their provocative female characters).

This implication is outright hypocrisy when you say later (correctly, IMO)

In order to briefly clarify some forthcoming points, feminism makes a distinction between attraction and objectification. Objectification only occurs when sexuality is the only defining character trait, it doesn't occur when attraction is simply "part" of a female character. From my personal perspective, some people don't understand that distinction, and (I believe) in the process make some very unfair judgements.

So there's nothing wrong with attractive/sexy/provocative female characters as long as they're good characters, but liking provocative characters makes one a sexist? That's out of line. Games are a visual medium, and there's nothing inherently sexist about preferring that the depictions be visually pleasing. That's why they spend millions upon millions of dollars constantly tweaking graphics engines every generation.

 

[LookAtYouHacker]

You make some good points, but yes, in other places, you do come off as a dick.

Now, I know how I'm probably being interpreted by a select few (a surreptitious sexist that wants to keep their provocative female characters).

This implication is outright hypocrisy when you say later (correctly, IMO)

In order to briefly clarify some forthcoming points, feminism makes a distinction between attraction and objectification. Objectification only occurs when sexuality is the only defining character trait, it doesn't occur when attraction is simply "part" of a female character. From my personal perspective, some people don't understand that distinction, and (I believe) in the process make some very unfair judgements.

So there's nothing wrong with attractive/sexy/provocative female characters as long as they're good characters, but liking provocative characters makes one a sexist? That's out of line. Games are a visual medium, and there's nothing inherently sexist about preferring that the depictions be visually pleasing. That's why they spend millions upon millions of dollars constantly tweaking graphics engines every generation.

No? I'm not attacking anyone that admires provocative characters (I'll add that later,) I'm criticising those who make unfair judgements regarding claims of female objectification.

For example "Hey, I see a... clevage! It's small but it's there if you look with a magnifying glass! I call female objectification!"

See? Ridiculous judgements advocated by someone who clearly misunderstands legitimate objectification.

 

[Evil Smurf]

I can fix sexism in games: Both sexes are in their underwear! happy now?

 

[Evil Smurf]

I can fix sexism in games: Both sexes are in their underwear! happy now?

You mean just like Skyrim after I've pickpocketed everyone's clothes off of them?

So you can pick people's clothes off their bodies out of the pockets? That is meta or something.

 

[targren]

No? I'm not attacking anyone that admires provocative characters (I'll add that later,) I'm criticising those who make unfair judgements regarding claims of female objectification.

For example "Hey, I see a... clevage! It's small but it's there if you look with a magnifying glass! I call female objectification!"

See? Ridiculous judgements advocated by someone who clearly misunderstands legitimate objectification.

I see what you're saying now. I apologize. I took it the opposite way.

Damn the English language and its ambiguities. My mistake.

 

[LookAtYouHacker]

No? I'm not attacking anyone that admires provocative characters (I'll add that later,) I'm criticising those who make unfair judgements regarding claims of female objectification.

For example "Hey, I see a... clevage! It's small but it's there if you look with a magnifying glass! I call female objectification!"

See? Ridiculous judgements advocated by someone who clearly misunderstands legitimate objectification.

I see what you're saying now. I apologize. I took it the opposite way.

Damn the English language and its ambiguities. My mistake.

No problem friend, sorry If I came across as a dick.

 

[Something Amyss]

That's a harsh judgement. I simply admire the expandability the English language provides. I write about issues constantly, and I know I'm not idiosyncratic when it comes to expandable delineation.

You're also not a stickler for using words correctly. That makes your diction come off as disingenuous.

The big problem here is trying to separate two very closely related issues.

 

[LookAtYouHacker]

Objectification is a huge part of sexualisation.

Sexualisation is a powerful marketing tool and if used correctly, a powerful tool full stop.

Anyone who is actually for the eradication sexualisation can go swivel on a cactus as far as I'm concerned. Women objectify men, men objectify women... (and other various combinations that I'm leaving out for the sake of brevity and relevance.)

We're sexually charged animals. Of course that comes across in practically every facet of our culture. You want to see what happens when we suppress that sexual expression? Look at religiously governed countries in the past and present.

In short. Fuck anyone who's deluded enough to think that they're fighting some huge injustice by trying to censor page 3 models or some other daft bollocks.

(As a side note, maturing the way we express our sexuality is another issue entirely. And that certainly has a place in my ideal future.)

If this thread had an instant "delete comment" option... your comment would be left alone. I cannot count the instinctive fools who've jumped to conclusions at my criticisms and blocked me. I don't want that frustration to be experienced by anyone else, so I want you and others to know any opinion is welcome on any thread of mine.

Sorry if that was a little unorthodox, but it happened only just recently on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/radicalbytes

This individual claimed that female objectification was present at the Olympics. I confronted his claim, and I was blocked. It's no surprise that Anita is a user he follows. -_-

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

I think the issue is that you're concerned about the "loud annoying people who jump on topic bandwagons to get fame" and not the serious individuals concerned about real objectification.

As noted, even Anita doesn't think that Faith from Mirror's Edge is a problem.

What we don't like is Ivy from Soul Calibur (and not even old-school Ivy, just the recent Ivy outfits that look both awful and stupid) or stripper Beach Volleyball with giggle physics.

Aya Brea, from Parasite Eve, has a sexy shower scene, but she's still a strong female character - she's a hard cop from New York who shoots monsters.

You can do sexy and still be respectful. That's all that most of us are asking for. The rest - the ones screaming that any sexyness is evil, are just screaming for the attention.

 

[crazyfills]

I totaly agree with you, and faith is a great female character!