Poll: Dead Island Statue Poll

Recommended Videos

Bostur

New member
Mar 14, 2011
1,070
0
0
It's tacky merchandise unworthy of the attention it gets. But if some people get offended by it, good for them.

To me it's the same as Shepard figurine or a Skyrim dragon statue - pointless marketing.

I do however cry a little for humanity if we can't find more worthy subjects to be outraged by.
 

Legion

Were it so easy
Oct 2, 2008
7,190
0
0
I think it is stupid, pointless and a complete waste of time and money when it could have been spent on something that'd actually make it worth buying.

Offended? No. I don't get offended by things like this, it takes malice to offend me, not stupidity.
 

peruvianskys

New member
Jun 8, 2011
577
0
0
Sexualizing violence is always gross; the fact that it's being done by a company that has shown a deft hand when it comes to objectifying and alienating women, and the fact that it's being put out for a community that is far from friendly towards women, makes me more than confident that this is an expression of the obvious misogyny that video game manufacturers pander to all the time. It's less that the statue itself is pure, distilled hatred of women, and far more that it taps into and represents really fucked up views of women and sexuality and violence that pervade this community.

Things don't happen in a vacuum. For example, woman gets blown up in Zero Dark Thirty. If they had offered a mutilated torso with giant bouncy tits in their collector's edition, it would just be baffling. But because political thrillers rarely trade in the sexualization of violence and the marginalization of women into walking, occasionally talking tits and asses, I would consider it just a weird concept and not an expression of misogyny. But because the products in our industry, especially the more violent games, have an undeniably history of marginalizing women and making light of violence towards them, in addition to generally highlighting their tits over just about everything else, this comes off as a natural expression of that shitty, shitty attitude.

I'm reminded of those racist pick-a-ninny dolls from the South during the 1900's. Was the doll itself inherently racist? No, probably not, some black people did look like that. But the attitudes and concepts and desires behind the creation of those dolls were absolutely racist and contemptuous and vile, and that means that the product created to satiate and exploit those desires was racist too. It's the exact same situation here; a statue of a woman's violently ripped-apart torso is not INHERENTLY, ESSENTIALLY, WITHOUT POSSIBLE EXCEPTION sexist, but it's undeniably playing into some ideas about women and violence and sex and agency that are fucked up and disgusting - and as someone who hates how prevalent those ideas are in my community and in videogames at large, I'm going to criticize both the existential attitudes themselves AS WELL AS their blatant manifestations.

tl;dr if someone could not exist without seriously fucked up views on women and violence, then it is by definition an expression of those shitty views, and that makes it sexist and misogynistic. A product that capitalizes on a violent fascination with the sexualized destruction of female bodies (except the tits, because those are the parts that matter, amiright!) is as gross as the attitudes that fostered its creation.
 

Lucem712

*Chirp*
Jul 14, 2011
1,472
0
0
I don't personally find it offensive. I mean, I would understand why some people would, men or women alike. Men should/can be offended because the pub/dev[footnote] Whoever decides marketing junk[/footnote] is like, well..let's just put big tits on it and guys will eat it up! And uh, I guess using a female torso, barely clad in a union jack could be showing women as a trophy, blah blah objectivation and all that junk.
 

mad825

New member
Mar 28, 2010
3,379
0
0
peruvianskys said:
Sexualizing violence is always gross; the fact that it's being done by a company that has shown a deft hand when it comes to objectifying and alienating women, and the fact that it's being put out for a community that is far from friendly towards women, makes me more than confident that this is an expression of the obvious misogyny that video game manufacturers pander to all the time. It's less that the statue itself is pure, distilled hatred of women, and far more that it taps into and represents really fucked up views of women and sexuality and violence that pervade this community.
...You make it sound like someone is going to have a quick wank over this...While I have doubts that some people might but won't be as a result of this. Racist people will always be racist.

It's not propaganda. Just a statue, art. The reasons behind the picture is pretty moot and has more to how people react to it.
 

Commissar Sae

New member
Nov 13, 2009
983
0
0
I really don't care. Don't plan on buying the game and would not want that monstrosity in my house anyway. That said I know some horror movie buffs who might so to each his own. It's largely pointless sensationalism and, let be honest, without the controversy the bust is stirring up I doubt we would even be talking about the game. It's a sequel to a mediocre zombie game and barely worth talking about.

So well done marketing team I guess, you got your game to be mass marketed for you.
 

LK9988

New member
Jan 3, 2011
15
0
0
How does stuff like this manage to become "controversy"? I don't see how anyone could find it to be misogynistic. The statue doesn't make any statements about women or reinforces any gender roles, it's just a depiction of a woman's torso. I'm not defending it in any way - of course, it is just pandering. The statue is nothing more than a silly piece of memorabilia that just so happens to pander towards a teenage audience. If you don't like it, don't buy it, and certainly try not to give it any media attention by denouncing it as 'misogynistic', since that will just get more people buying the statue.
 

Hagi

New member
Apr 10, 2011
2,741
0
0
I find the statue utterly horrifying and repulsive, even more so due to the breasts on display.

Which I guess means they did an excellent job on it considering it's a collector's item for a horror game.
 

peruvianskys

New member
Jun 8, 2011
577
0
0
mad825 said:
Racist people will always be racist.
So just because people will always have shitty views of women or other minorities makes it okay for companies to pander to those fucked up, maladjusted people for money? Just because a certain segment of the population is always comprised of idiots and assholes doesn't mean that it's okay to exploit their shittiness for money, nor does it mean that decent people can't complain when their community refuses to call out those idiots and assholes.

Hagi said:
Mind if I ask what exactly you were expecting from a Horror game?
Are you implying that objectifying women and sexualizing violence towards them is an integral part of the "horror experience?"


It seeks to elicit a negative emotional reaction, kinda like the outrage here.
So if I made a children's film called "Blacky McNigger's Holocaust Adventure" would it be a horror film just because it elicited a negative emotion reaction?


They often feature scenes that startle the viewer, kinda like the initial reaction to this statue.
I wasn't startled. No one was startled. A lot of us rolled our goddamn eyes out of our sockets, but no one was shocked or frightened.

It often deals with the viewer's nightmares and revulsions, kinda like the statue itself. Prevalent elements include gore and torture, ya know like on the statue.
Although I do have a revulsion towards misogyny, the statue does not exist to trade on that; in fact, it exists to trade on the exact opposite, i.e. a love of violence towards women.

It's supposed to be fucked up. It's supposed to be seen as repulsive. It's supposed to play on primal fears. It's supposed to be completely and utterly horrifying, that's what horror is.
But it's not any of that. It's not horrifying. It's childish and immature and boring and tacky and exploitative.

It's cheap horror, sure. Take a female, something still seen as 'special' too often in this community, and display her mutilated torso, about the ultimate act of desecration to something held sacred for all the wrong reasons. And lo and behold, big surprise, you get a massive negative emotional reaction fed by repulsion and hidden fears.
My negative reaction is not fueled in any way by repulsion or hidden fear; it's fueled by my distaste for asshole misogynists who like to make a quick buck off of our community's fucked up issues with women.

You've clearly misunderstood both my position and the nature of horror itself, mainly through the incredibly scholarly approach of taking a Wikipedia article completely out of context and twisting it to justify your position.

For the record, I'm not opposed to women being harmed in media, if there's a point. Some of the films I consider absolutely masterful and important have incredibly brutal depictions of misogyny and violence. The thing that separates, say, Irréversible or Pascal Laugier's Martyrs from this statue is that while the former use the violence to highlight the cruelty and viciousness of the assailants, trading on the deep-seated revulsion that decent people have to abuse and violence and desecration in order to elicit intense emotional reactions in relation to the victim, the latter is using violence against a woman for sex appeal and base titillation, completely without regard for the woman as a character or being - and that is shameful and disgusting. Violence is a privilege, something that an artist earns the right to use through nuanced and meaningful application, not something that maladjusted guys can put on their mantels and ogle every once in a while.
 

Assassin Xaero

New member
Jul 23, 2008
5,392
0
0
Not offended, I wouldn't buy it though, not something I'd want to look at. I could see a ton of people buying it just because of the boobs.
 

mad825

New member
Mar 28, 2010
3,379
0
0
peruvianskys said:
mad825 said:
Racist people will always be racist.
So just because people will always have shitty views of women or other minorities makes it okay for companies to pander to those fucked up, maladjusted people for money? Just because a certain segment of the population is always comprised of idiots and assholes doesn't mean that it's okay to exploit their shittiness for money, nor does it mean that decent people can't complain when their community refuses to call out those idiots and assholes.
1.they are not breaking the law
2.it's capitalism

I could go on about they shouldn't exploit the people then again this is an entirely different argument in itself.
 

TheProfessor234

New member
Aug 20, 2010
168
0
0
A few things.

I like how they wanted to do something different.
I like how the flag changes depending on where you order it, or at least that's what I heard.

What I don't like is that, in my mind the conversation for this went like,

"Hey, lets sell some breasts to help sell our next game!"
"But how do we make that relate to zombies?"
"Make it a corpse!"

Seriously though, how does a bust relate to anything in Dead Island? I think a zombie head or maybe a signature small replica weapon would of been better.
 

Zen Bard

Eats, Shoots and Leaves
Sep 16, 2012
704
0
0
I just found it stupid and yet another example how the gaming industry is out of touch with its audience.

Gamers are not all lonely sociopaths who are attracted to sexualized violence.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to finish my mod for "Seduce Me" that lets me bludgeon to death anyone who tells me to leave the villa...
 

Beryl77

New member
Mar 26, 2010
1,599
0
0
No I'm not offended but thanks to everyone talking about it, I realised that the next game even exists. I hadn't paid any attention at all before that but now it's fucking everywhere! So good job marketing department and news websites! If it's anything like the first game, I'm still not buying it though. The first game just sucks, one of my biggest game buying regrets.
 

Tayh

New member
Apr 6, 2009
775
0
0
MickDick said:
what if it was a man's torso?
I wouldn't care.
It's hardly a fair comparison though; the male torso is not sexualized in the same fashion that the female is.
 

Evil Moo

Always Watching...
Feb 26, 2011
392
0
0
I wouldn't call it offensive, just incredibly tacky. I really don't see who they are trying to market it towards, other than perhaps mild necrophiliacs. Sure it represents the whole 'perfect holiday retreat turned to hell' idea they seem to be pushing, but I can't see a reason to actually buy it...
 

peruvianskys

New member
Jun 8, 2011
577
0
0
mad825 said:
1.they are not breaking the law
2.it's capitalism

I could go on about they shouldn't exploit the people then again this is an entirely different argument in itself.
Do you think I'm calling for this statue to be made illegal, or its creators to be rounded up and sent to jail? Of course not, they have the right to make whatever shitty things they want to and sell it to whatever shitty people they want to, just like I have the right to complain and criticize when they do.

And as for "point" #2, are you implying that somehow a market-based transaction makes an action inherently moral? Neo-Nazis engage in capitalism when they sell their Jew Slaughter or Panzer Force CDs, but that doesn't make the content of those songs or the action of buying them any less morally offensive.

Point 1 is a strawman and point 2 is a non sequitur.
 

monkey_man

New member
Jul 5, 2009
1,164
0
0
It's not. it's a game about killing people in bikinis in gruesome ways. You can expect some gore from that, can't you?
if it's about the boobs people need to go die then. with an axe wrapped in glass shrapnel. THEY'RE JUST BOOBS. 50% OF EVERYONE HAS THEM, GET OVER IT.

People and their dumb notion that boobs are evil or something. Men like boobs. Men like having boobs around. Hell, some women do. IT SELLS. GET OVER IT. AAAAAHHHH *yells obscenities for 20 minutes* *voice gives out*

We're adults, or supposed to be. The game is supposed to be played only by adults. If you don't like the statue, toss it in the trash or don't buy it. If you go whining, what good will that do? Ruin the company which products you buy? Good job, now what.

I think it's about the boobs. grow up. seriously. *inhales for more yelling, wordless now, just yelling*
 

Hagi

New member
Apr 10, 2011
2,741
0
0
Of course people were startled, horrified and repulsed.

If it was only childish and immature and boring and tacky and exploitative it'd have been mostly ignored. The general reaction would've been "meh" and people would've moved on.

But they don't. They're shocked. They think this is big enough to warrant thousands of posts on dozens of forums.

And violence against women is only okay if there's a point? So the majority of games where you're killing thousands without any real reason or any regard to the victim as a human being are completely okay as long as we're killing men? Or perhaps all violence from games should be banned unless they first feature at least a minute on each victim's life to humanize them?

Do tell, were you just as outraged in just about every shooter ever where you're also inflicting extreme violence on victims without any regard being given to them as a human being? Or some newer games where it's possible to mutilate other people without any recognition being given to them as a character, not even an unique name, like say both Fallout games?