Sex-ified Game characters.... problem you have?

[Electrogecko]

Nope.

Your argument misses a crucial distinction: the difference between sexual fantasy and power fantasy.

The game characters you mention are not sexual fantasies, they are power fantasies. There is nothing sexual about the design of Kratos or Ryu or Marcus Fenix. Biceps and triceps are not erogenous zones. These characters are not designed to provide erotic titillation, they are designed to give players a chance to play as an idealised, over-the-top caricature of what it means to be a man.

If you want to see an example of a mainstream male hero being portrayed in a sexual manner, you have only to look at Batman from Batman and Robin:

In Batman and Robin, the sexual elements of the Batsuit are incredibly played up. Not only are there endless shots of Batman's leather-clad behind, the actual suit itself is constructed with sexual imagery in mind. Notice how the suit comes replete with nipples? Or how in Batman's second suit, his crotch comes replete with its own bright silver codpiece to draw attention to it? This is explicit sexualisation of a male hero, and you know the funny thing?

Comic fans everywhere bitched about it like there was no tomorrow. The fact that the likes of Catwoman had already been uber-sexualised in the movies was apparantly nothing to worry about, but the minute that Joel Schumacher decided to make 'sexualisation' an equal opportunities sport, Batman fans everywhere would not stop bitching about it. Apparently, making female superheroes look like street-walkers is alright, but the minute you do it to a male superhero, it becomes an abomination.

This is the hypocrisy which us feminists have to deal with everyday. No, giving a character big muscles does not make them a symbol of sexualisation. Muscles are a sign of strength, not virility. You want to see a sexualised image of a man. Check out Tom of Finland's work.

Spoiler

It's not the muscles here that provide the sexual imagery, it's the exaggeration of the nipples, the tight round bum, and the massive crotch busting at the seams that provide it. Compare this to a typical image of Superman:

The man's penis is non-existent. He's flying round in only a tight spandex suit, and yet his crotch is completely devoid of any sort of bulge or mound. There is nothing remotely sexual in the image, just as there is nothing remotely sexual in the depiction of Marcus Fenix, Kratos (unless you're into chains and S&M) or Master Chief.

Seriously. If you want to critique these sorts of things, then you need to learn to differentiate between what constitutes a sexual fantasy, and what constitutes a power fantasy. Because while all the examples you gave are power fantasies, the likes of the Hitman nuns, or Ivy from Soul Calibur are definitely sexual fantasies. And they're ultimately degrading towards women.

I see what you're saying, and I don't exactly disagree, (and I'm far from agreeing with the OP on many points) but I feel that, for this argument to be resolute, there must be some female fantasy that's equivalent to the male power fantasy.

You say that building characters with large muscles is ok and not sexualisation because muscles are a sign of strength and not virility (ignoring the fact that women are attracted to strength more overtly than men are attracted to virility).....that it's about giving men (and women I suppose) the chance to play as an over-the-top caricature of "what it means to be a man." Then you go on to say that there is nothing remotely sexual about the depiction of Kratos....which I just flat out disagree with (big time) but moving on....

How is this argument different or less sexist than "playing as a woman with big breasts is about virility....an over-the-top caricature of what it means to be a woman." (Playing devil's advocate here- this is not my opinion.) By making the argument you just made, you are generalizing all men and assuming that they are all interested in this muscle-bound fantasy, which is just as much of a stereotype as women being the nurturer/caregiver.

I get that you're talking more about costume design and specific details than overall body type, but the fact is, big breast are sexy to men just like how big muscles are sexy to women. Batman is sexy even without the suit that you just presented just like how catwoman is sexy even without having heels and being zipped down. It seems to me like you (and society for that matter) just think men don't mind being portrayed as huge as much as women mind being portrayed as lean and curvy, and if I had to call that mindset one thing, I'd call it sexist. Am I not allowed to complain about being conformed to these monstrous hulks that pass for protagonists nowadays?

 

[Woodsey]

Muscly men in games aren't sexualised for women, they're made strong and 'cool' for men. Yeah, it's a gender stereotype, but they're all aimed at the same demographic.

It's not the same thing.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

To put it very simply: I am against female characters whose entire being is based around the fact that they're a female rather than expressing any other characteristics, I am not against sexy female characters, I am neutra/slightly against female characters who have skimpy armour/clothing in a situation where all the other male characters are heavily armoured/clothed, I am not against female characters in skimpy armour/clothing in situations where it is not impractical. Men are idealised too, and probably shouldn't be as much. As for the heroically idealised/sexualised thing, male characters tend to be heroically idealised because it identifies with their stereotype, heroically idealising males is just as bad/not bad as sexualising females. My views in a nutshell.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

Unlike the audience's useless non-superpowered male partners, Superman will not only be able to pull your fat out of the frying pan when you need help but he'll also juggle saving the world and a successful professional career at the same time.

That's not my power fantasy. My power fantasies don't even begin to even closely resemble any of that.

Ooh, ooh, I can play this game, too!

Unlike the audience's useless non-heroic male partners, Odysseus will not only cross oceans to return to you (and kill a small army of creepers) when you miss him but he'll also juggle crossing the ocean with amassing wealth on the way back.

Unlike the audience's useless non-heroic male partners, Conan will not only be able to rescue you from a gratuitous bondage scene (because R. E. Howard gotta get on the cover of Weird Tales, man) but he'll also juggle saving you and a successful professional careers as a thief, pirate, king, conqueror...

Those aren't male power fantas... oh, wait, they totally are.

And there you go missing the point again.

We could spent the next couple of days making and comparing lists of which male fictional characters have been retained as unadulterated examples of male escapism and which characters women have gentrified over the years as objects of female desire.

But that would miss the point I was trying to get across. Which is that feminist ideology starts right off the bat with the prescribed notion that male sexualisation is unclean and vile, when men are simply following their biological cue cards when they focus on the physical attractiveness of women when looking for a desirable mate. And yet modern feminism considers this a dirty unnatural thing, which is unsurprising for a philosophy created by women for women, as not all women are sexually-attractive and grading women like that is demeaning.

And yet without nary a second thought is given to when women sexualise men, and make no mistake as the sexual selectors of the human species women are sexualising the living shit out of the men on a day to day basis. Putting them through the exact same demeaning style of inspection, grading and selection according to their own biologically installed checklists and no voices are raised in objection.

Feminism holds one method of inspecting, grading and selecting a mate above the other, and funnily enough for a philosophy created by women for the advancement of women that method is the method women utilise.

 

[soh45400]

The entire argument can be neutralized by the fact that if you ask any man who the best female character in a videogame is they will mostly say Alex Vance.
But Valve had to work to make her and then make her likeable, who else spends that much time on making games. We are still waiting for Half-Life 3 since 2007.

It happens because the target audience for most action games or movies are young men and marketers are stupid, they want stuff on the box. Spec Ops The Line has no need of a co-op multiplayer, but due to publishers and marketers,it has. The same with Bioshock 2 and Max Payne 3. It is just one more thing they can put on the box.
While women may play video games, how much money do you think God of War made from female audience. The flip side of this is not in games but on TV.

Nothing can stop this now, just like nothing has managed to stop the Twilight bug. Men aren't starting forums over that, they aren't starting Kickstarter projects against it, they aren't making videos or books against it that gain public attention despite it ruining things men may like like Avatar The Legend of Korra or the new Thundercats or Hunger Games or several others. I can't even play Vampire The Masquerade Bloodlines knowing it shares something with Twilight, I refuse to watch or play anything with vampires or werewolves in it because of that and after Warm Bodies, I fear that I may have to do the same with Zombies and I loved Dead Rising 2 and Resident Evil 4 and Dead Space.

 

[Clearing the Eye]

I like sexy guys. I like sexy girls. Am I a horrible person? :O

 

[Electrogecko]

I see what you're saying, and I don't exactly disagree, (and I'm far from agreeing with the OP on many points) but I feel that, for this argument to be resolute, there must be some female fantasy that's equivalent to the male power fantasy.

You say that building characters with large muscles is ok and not sexualisation because muscles are a sign of strength and not virility (ignoring the fact that women are attracted to strength more overtly than men are attracted to virility).....that it's about giving men (and women I suppose) the chance to play as an over-the-top caricature of "what it means to be a man." Then you go on to say that there is nothing remotely sexual about the depiction of Kratos....which I just flat out disagree with (big time) but moving on....

How is this argument different or less sexist than "playing as a woman with big breasts is about virility....an over-the-top caricature of what it means to be a woman." (Playing devil's advocate here- this is not my opinion.) By making the argument you just made, you are generalizing all men and assuming that they are all interested in this muscle-bound fantasy, which is just as much of a stereotype as women being the nurturer/caregiver.

Sorry, but what the fuck?

Nowhere in my post did I say I support the over-the-top portrayal of men in videogames. I don't. I find characters like Kratos and Marcus Fenix incredibly boring and unsympathetic, and cannot relate to them in any way, shape or form. All I did was explain the reason why those male characters are designed the way they are. Never did I say I support it. So I would appreciate it if you wouldn't put words in my mouth, please.

I get that you're talking more about costume design and specific details than overall body type, but the fact is, big breast are sexy to men just like how big muscles are sexy to women. Batman is sexy even without the suit that you just presented just like how catwoman is sexy even without having heels and being zipped down. It seems to me like you (and society for that matter) just think men don't mind being portrayed as huge as much as women mind being portrayed as lean and curvy, and if I had to call that mindset one thing, I'd call it sexist. Am I not allowed to complain about being conformed to these monstrous hulks that pass for protagonists nowadays?

You are perfectly allowed to complain about it. Just complain about it for what it is. The portrayal of men in games in undoubtedly an issue to do with sex, hinging as it does on gender, but it is not an example of sexualisation.

I will say this once again: big muscles and six packs do not sexualisation entail. I have included several pics of examples of men being portrayed in a sexual manner already. If you need reminding, go look at the Tom of Finland picture again. That is the sort of thing that entails male sexualisation. Sexualisation requires that a man's sexual attributes be highlighted. Biceps and six packs are not sexual attributes. The penis, however, is. So too are a man's behind, his nipples, his tongue, and his hips. If a character is portrayed with emphasis on those attributes, then he is being portrayed in a sexual manner. But for the last time, big muscles do not a sexy character make.

No, Batman is not sexy. Not in his regular guise. In his regular get-up, he is a big masked dude wearing body armour and a cape, and is therefore no more sexual than your average SWAT team member. If you object to Batman's portrayals on grounds of the over-the-top machismo image he presents, that's fine, but Batman has never been portrayed in an overly sexual manner outside of the Joel Schumacher films. In fact, he's a pretty asexual character.

For shits and giggles, I'm including the following pic of the Avengers, so you can hopefully see what I'm talking about when gender roles are reversed. Notice how in the second pic, Black Widoe is in the stereotypical 'power' pose, and everyone else is pulling a stereotypical 'female hero' pose.

I didn't say that you support them. I just said that you don't consider them to be "sexualised," and it seems like you just confirmed that. Also, I'd like to clarify that I agree that female characters are more sexualised than male characters in pretty much everything. What I'm disagreeing with you on, I suppose, is that male characters are sexualised as well, even if it's not to the same degree.

The problem that I had with your first post, and now your second one, is that you keep deciding what's considered sexualised and what isn't based on what amounts to nothing more than your personal opinion. Who are you to decide which parts of the male body are "sexual" parts in the eyes of the women and homosexual men? Last time I checked, everyone has a different set of priorities when it comes to judging a body's desirability and these priorities are heavily influenced by sexual orientation. And if sexual orientation affects which parts of the body are key sexual features, it stands to reason that male and female characters of equal sexualisation will have different poses in...oh...say....a movie poster? (Devil's advocate. I agree that the black widow is more sexualized than others in that poster....just sayin.)

On top of that, you're drawing some kind of line between body type and specific details of design and costume, and I'm just saying that certain characters (like, 99% of all central video game characters) are sexy and designed to be sexy whether they're wearing hooker getup or not. You've said now that there's nothing sexual about Kratos, and Batman isn't at all sexy unless he's got his nipple suit on, and in both cases, you're speaking for all women, and in both cases, you're pretty clearly incorrect. I think that women are attracted to this "male power fantasy" in much the same way that men are attracted to voluptuous and possibly even feeble women....and I'm pretty sure I'm not wrong. It's nobody's fault that guys may be more comfortable with their stereotypical sexualised image than women are, but claiming that Kratos is not at all a sexualised image seems ridiculous to me, and maybe even a bit insecure.

In closing, if a character is sexy, I think that makes him/her sexualised. There are varying degrees of this, and everyone has a different level of tolerance to it, (the point where they start to feel patronized, offended, w/e) but even characters like Ryu and Jade are sexualised. It seems to me like your argument is built around the idea that men are more comfortable being portrayed as hulks than women are being portrayed as lean/voluptuous, and this is an assumption....one that may or may not be true but can very well be made out to be sexist.

Again, I agree that characters like Ivy and the like are way over the top and unacceptable on every level. Just making discussion here.

 

[ultrabiome]

i would like to point out context in all of this, with kratos being a prime example.

i'm not arguing he isn't designed partially with the 'power fantasy' aspect in mind, but everything i can remember reading about greek mythology is pretty much exactly how it is in the God of War games. kratos couldn't have been anything but a muscle-bound warrior because it wouldn't fit the context in creating a greek mythological action-adventure game (although if designed right, they could have had a female kratos that was equally flawed, but both beautiful and a bad-ass at the same time in the context. and i don't mean topless).

you can't necessarily apply context in all cases, but sometimes the 'sexualization' of men and women in games are more justified in the context of creating an immersive whole. (and not just the men, the women too. they didn't have to have their clothes be so transparent, but it wasn't out of context either. besides, its just boob .)

other times, as we can all admit, they sexualize just to do it (see lollipop chainsaw...).

 

[Smeatza]

My 2 cents.

Sexualised characters are not an iherently bad thing. After all we are all sexual beings, there is no getting away from that.
The issue is (supposedly) not that sexualised characters exist but that women in games are almost always sexualised and men are almost always not, it's disproportionate.
I can certainly understand why people would find this annoying, or even offensive.

But I'm even skeptical that this is even the case.

When I look through my game collection I find very few titles that feature sexist representations of women (either intentionally or unintentionally). And the majority of those that can be considered sexist are based on other media (like WWE or Dynasty Warriors). Those very few that we have left are so poorly written they're offensive to pretty much anybody from any minority group, be it ethnic minorities, females (it's strange to call females a minority group but I suppose in regards to video games they are) or even overweight people. These games (Dead Island, Saints Row etc.) rarely have their plots or characters taken seriously or even set out to achieve such a thing.

Okay, maybe I've just got good taste and have managed to avoid sexist portrayals for the most part. Let's say that women are definately unfairly represented en masse in video games.

Should we try to eradicate all sexualised characters from video games?
No, of course not. Having a lot of overly sexualised characters is usually seen as a bad thing in books, film and television, it's often seen as trashy.
Rather than going on a witch hunt, declairing all sexuality and it's depictions immoral and condemning those who enjoy them, perhaps we should just work at encouraging the video game audience (in general) to reach the level of maturity that other media's audiences have (in general).
Hell, perhaps this will happen naturally over time.

The only problem that comes to mind is that when I look at modern television, film and books (more established media), there seems to be an increasing demand for this trashy media that has entire casts of sexualised characters, that constantly display both genders in a bad light. There also seems to have been an increase in awful role models that endorse these sexist (amongst other morally abhorent) ideals.
It makes me think this issue is much bigger than video games. And why I struggle to address this issue within the small scope of video games.
It seems that your average person (male or female) is either not aware, or does not care about the issue of sexism in the media. Which makes me think the problem is with western media and culture itself.

In short, while we should certainly try to ensure that both genders are fairly represented in video games (and the media in general) we should not be trying to eradicate all sexualised characters.
And while video games are an excellent way to get people aware of sexism in the media, and campaigning for them to change is most likely worthwhile, it still seems like treating a symptom, rather than a cause of a much deeper problem.

 

[Electrogecko]

I didn't say that you support them. I just said that you don't consider them to be "sexualised," and it seems like you just confirmed that. Also, I'd like to clarify that I agree that female characters are more sexualised than male characters in pretty much everything. What I'm disagreeing with you on, I suppose, is that male characters are sexualised as well, even if it's not to the same degree.

Again, I am not disagreeing with you that there aren't men out there who are portrayed in a sexual manner. However, you really need to learn the difference between a power fantasy and a sexual fantasy. They both revolve around objectifying a character, but they do so in different ways, and that is the issue. Your argument pretty much comes down to "This character is objectified, so it's blatant sexualisation." This is not the case. All sexualisation is objectification, but not all objectification is sexualisation.

The problem that I had with your first post, and now your second one, is that you keep deciding what's considered sexualised and what isn't based on what amounts to nothing more than your personal opinion. Who are you to decide which parts of the male body are "sexual" parts in the eyes of the women and homosexual men? Last time I checked, everyone has a different set of priorities when it comes to judging a body's desirability and these priorities are heavily influenced by sexual orientation. And if sexual orientation affects which parts of the body are key sexual features, it stands to reason that male and female characters of equal sexualisation will have different poses in...oh...say....a movie poster? (Devil's advocate. I agree that the black widow is more sexualized than others in that poster....just sayin.)

Sorry, but that's a cop out answer. If we base our definitions of sexualisation on every last kink, fetish and desire that various people in the world have, then quite literally, every film/game/advert/poster ever is rife with sexualisation. Seriously. If you have a character barefoot, as in the Lord Of The Rings, then that's sexualisation catering to the foot-fetish demographic. If you have a scene with a car, you're pandering to the Objectophiles who fantasize about sex with cars (and yes, people like that really exist). If you have any scene at all where characters are tied up or restrained then roughed up a bit, like Casino Royale, then you're targeting the S&M crowd.

Just because sexuality is versatile enough that some people will find anything sexy, that doesn't mean we lose all ability to distinguish between what's sexualisation and what's not. People's different tastes do nothing to change the fact that portraying a woman like this or this is incredibly demeaning, whereas the same cannot necessarily be said for this and this.

On top of that, you're drawing some kind of line between body type and specific details of design and costume, and I'm just saying that certain characters (like, 99% of all central video game characters) are sexy and designed to be sexy whether they're wearing hooker getup or not. You've said now that there's nothing sexual about Kratos, and Batman isn't at all sexy unless he's got his nipple suit on, and in both cases, you're speaking for all women, and in both cases, you're pretty clearly incorrect. I think that women are attracted to this "male power fantasy" in much the same way that men are attracted to voluptuous and possibly even feeble women....and I'm pretty sure I'm not wrong. It's nobody's fault that guys may be more comfortable with their stereotypical sexualised image than women are, but claiming that Kratos is not at all a sexualised image seems ridiculous to me, and maybe even a bit insecure.

Look, this isn't some small-time theory I cooked up in my basement just the other day. The idea of 'power fantasy' is an established part of pop psychology. You can read about it here and here to give yourself a grounding in the idea.

Most importantly, games like Gears of War and God Of War are not targeted specifically at women. If they were, why would they have such ludicrous amounts of violence? Would you argue that it is the female gender that enjoys graphic displays of violence, more than the male gender? I think not. Graphic violence has always been marketed towards men, because whether its true or not, big companies assume that men enjoy violence more than women. So if these violent films and games are targeting men (adolescent teenagers, actually) with graphic violence, why would they then portray the characters in a way designed to appeal to women?

Except that they're not. Hurly-burly beefcake characters are designed to give men a sense of empowerment. By playing as such a ludicrously over-the-top exaggeration of what a man is, male gamers are allowed to experience raw violence that is otherwise frowned upon in modern society. Male gamers can project themselves onto these characters, and pretend that they're not Office Worker# 223, but are instead Hulking Monsterslayer Man with a giant sword/gun/swordgun.

In closing, if a character is sexy, I think that makes him/her sexualised.

That right there is bullshit. A character is not sexualised simply if they're sexy. They're sexualised if that is their defining characteristic.

Kratos's defining characteristic is his bloodthirsty rage. That's not particularly sexy. I can't imagine threats of being disembowelled and ripped apart would make most women feel all that horny. Marcus Fenix isn't all that sexy either. His defining characteristic is shouting really loudly, shooting stuff, and bro-fisting his comrades.

On the flip-side, look at Alyx Vance. She's an undeniably attractive girl. Valve modelled her to be pleasing on the eye. But that is not her defining characteristic. She's a well written character with her own motives, her own fears, her own interests, who can look after herself and knows how to make a quip. Trying to sum up Alyx Vance in one word is impossible. Trying to sum up Kratos in one word is easy: RAGE!

There are varying degrees of this, and everyone has a different level of tolerance to it, (the point where they start to feel patronized, offended, w/e) but even characters like Ryu and Jade are sexualised. It seems to me like your argument is built around the idea that men are more comfortable being portrayed as hulks than women are being portrayed as lean/voluptuous, and this is an assumption....one that may or may not be true but can very well be made out to be sexist.

Men are comfortable with being portrayed as hulks, as long as it massages their ego and makes them feel more powerful than they really are. Why on earth do you think Kratos is so popular in the first place? Are you honestly going to tell me that Kratos' place in popular culture comes from his legions of swooning fangirls?

If you want a real example of a female sexual fantasy, here are a couple:

Apart from being male, these two characters have nothing in common with Kratos or Marcus Fenix. They're also probably the two most popular examples of 'female sexual fantasy' in any medium from the last ten years.

You are REALLY misunderstanding my arguments and making them out to be something they're not. You're also continuing to make arbitrary distinctions and presenting them as facts.

I'm not disagreeing with you on much here. My main point is that women find power attractive much more than men, and so find muscular or powerful men more attractive then men find muscular or powerful women. I maintain that you have no real right to decide definitively who is and isn't a sexualised character, and putting Jack Sparrow up did not do well for your previous argument that basically said that a key component of such a character is the frequent ass camera and nipple appearances. Also, I've been talking about nothing but the characters' appearances in any of my posts, and now all of the sudden you're talking about attributes and target audiences and saying that certain characteristics over-ride physical appearance, but only if they're important enough....or something like that....more arbitrariness.

The fact that men are often comfortable being portrayed as hulks (and many are not comfortable...like me....you're generalizing....being sexist, really....not that I care or am offended, we're all sexist on some level) and the fact that women are sexually attracted to hulks (by which I mean incredibly muscular men) is not a coincidence; It's evolutionary causation, and saying that a male power fantasy isn't sexualization for women just seems ridiculous to me. I'd say that being a vampire or a pirate IS a male power fantasy.

Who are you to make any of these statements as anything more than you're opinion? You've just said that Kratos isn't sexualised because his "defining characteristic" isn't his physical attractiveness, but that's your opinion, and somebody who was just looking at his picture might say something like "Holy shit this guy is ripped!" What if I think that Ivy's defining characteristic is her fighting ability or her unique weapon? What if I think that Catwoman's defining characteristic is her thieving skill?

What if I think that Marcus Fenix's defining characteristic is his arm circumference?

 

[Elate]

-snip-

You missed a key piece of information, he was played by George Clooney, it was sexualised by default.

And hey, I loved that movie..

Captcha: grease the skids, for George? You bet.

 

[scw55]

If the answer to suppression (sexualisation of female characters) is the suppress the opposite in equal amounts then there is something wrong.
If people really care about x not longer being suppressed, then the answer should be liberation.

Put it this way, I personally want my itemised people kept in wank-formats; porn. Not video games.


Both genders are idealised in video games, just woman have the raw deal of only having one type; slutty. Men have the privilege of being 'Powerful', 'Heroic' and slutty. Neither are wanted.


I think things will get better eventually. The internet allows players to voice their opinions faster and louder than before. If the majority of humans are tired of sexy men/women in swimwear holding phallic weaponry, the majority of humans will make their voice heard.

 

[Electrogecko]

snip for the love of god snip!

For the last time, I understand the difference between a power fantasy and a sexual fantasy and I could do without the incredible condescending nature of your posts. You're still not qualifying anything that you're saying and you're still taking your personal opinions as incontrovertible facts, and I'm the one who's seeing it as black and white? My entire post could be summarized as "everything is subjective" and you're making me out to be the simpleton?

Let me know when you want to respond to the actual point of my posts.

 

[Kahunaburger]

i'm not arguing he isn't designed partially with the 'power fantasy' aspect in mind, but everything i can remember reading about greek mythology is pretty much exactly how it is in the God of War games. kratos couldn't have been anything but a muscle-bound warrior

The Greek ideal wasn't muscle-bound, it was toned. Srsly, look at their art. It doesn't look like Kratos.

Which is that feminist ideology starts right off the bat with the prescribed notion that male sexualisation is unclean and vile,

A) I think the word you're looking for is "sexuality."

B) Spoken like a guy who has never dated a feminist. Or dated a feminist and didn't realize it. Or...

C) What Dr. Vornoff said.

as the sexual selectors of the human species women

Haha what? We aren't exactly birds of paradise.

Putting them through the exact same demeaning style of inspection, grading and selection according to their own biologically installed checklists and no voices are raised in objection.

Why do I get the sense you're seconds away from lapsing into a fit of ladder theory?