Sexuality in gaming, your stance?

[Vale]

Who the fuck asked to know your personal preferences?
Ah, right. Nevermind.

My stance is that BioWare's "romance scenes" and subquests should die in a fire because they are so deep within the uncanny valley it's practically eldritch.

 

[King Zeal]

We have one female that looks more or less normal, one extremely muscular half-naked girl and one with over exaggerated tits and ass.

We have one dude that looks almost normal, one extremely muscular half-naked dude and one armored bishonen type guy with gigantic shoulders.

I'd say it's almost equaled out.

But the only point I was making is that the amount of sexualized women is still two out of three. And that's not including the other NPC examples, including the ones you can grope.

Also, as has been mentioned before, the men aren't really sexualized. They're idealized, which is its own problem, but not this problem. I can elaborate later if you wish.

I wouldn't call the amazon sexualized either. You will find very few men are into that muscular women. Besides, if all the body proportions are off, it seems much more likely that the point was hilariously wrong proportions and not sexualizing anyone.

Being sexualized isn't proportionate to how many people are into your particular fetish. The Amazon is sexualized because her clothing, curvature, and posing, are all designed to emphasize her body as a sexual object. If the goal was wrong proportions, those things weren't necessary.

I can only remember one npc girl you could grope.

I don't remember, either, honestly. But, just one still tips the balance toward sexualization.

 

[lapan]

We have one female that looks more or less normal, one extremely muscular half-naked girl and one with over exaggerated tits and ass.
We have one dude that looks almost normal, one extremely muscular half-naked dude and one armored bishonen type guy with gigantic shoulders.

I'd say it's almost equaled out.

The Fighter isn't really "bishonen". His entire face and head is almost always covered, so he's in no way sexualised in-game. As for the Dwarf, as I said above, hypermasculinity is not the same as sexualisation.

The fact is, the only truly sexualised character (to a ludicrous degree) is female. That's not even counting the Amazon, whose natural stance has her shaking her bare ass at the camera, and whose bonus artwork looks like this [http://static2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130508225147/dragons-crown/images/thumb/0/00/Tokuten_p4_0510.png/269px-Tokuten_p4_0510.png]. It's not equalled out at all.

I think that's the only amazon picture i ever saw that gives her almost normal proportions.

If we count npcs and bonus artwork we also have to count fighter, who never has a helmet in artwork.

If you want to see sexualization you will see it everywhere. I'm sure someone out there has a fetish for overproportioned muscles, there is even an entire subgenre of yaoi manga called bara that is focused on muscular dudes. People have fetishes for everything, from tits and ass, to outfits, to different weights, even to animals and inanimate objects. But thinking that was the intent with either gender in Dragons Crown is reading a bit much into it.

Ultimately i guess we would have to ask the artist.

 

[mistahzig1]

As long as it advances the plot, I'm ok with it. Gratuity lowers the quality of my gaming immersion

 

[Silvanus]

I think that's the only amazon picture i ever saw that gives her almost normal proportions.

If we count npcs and bonus artwork we also have to count fighter, who never has a helmet in artwork.

If you want to see sexualization you will see it everywhere. I'm sure someone out there has a fetish for overproportioned muscles, there is even an entire subgenre of yaoi manga called bara that is focused on muscular dudes. People have fetishes for everything, from tits and ass, to outfits, to different weights, even to animals and inanimate objects. But thinking that was the intent with either gender in Dragons Crown is reading a bit much into it.

Ultimately i guess we would have to ask the artist.

It's true that the Amazon is hyper-muscular in most images, and in-game. That said, she also flashes her ass pretty non-stop, which is something her hypermasculine counterpart doesn't do.

With or without a helmet, the Fighter isn't emphasising his crotch or his ass, or any sexual part of himself. Neither is the dwarf. It's really stretching it to see balance between the genders in this game.

 

[King Zeal]

We have one female that looks more or less normal, one extremely muscular half-naked girl and one with over exaggerated tits and ass.
We have one dude that looks almost normal, one extremely muscular half-naked dude and one armored bishonen type guy with gigantic shoulders.

I'd say it's almost equaled out.

The Fighter isn't really "bishonen". His entire face and head is almost always covered, so he's in no way sexualised in-game. As for the Dwarf, as I said above, hypermasculinity is not the same as sexualisation.

The fact is, the only truly sexualised character (to a ludicrous degree) is female. That's not even counting the Amazon, whose natural stance has her shaking her bare ass at the camera, and whose bonus artwork looks like this [http://static2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130508225147/dragons-crown/images/thumb/0/00/Tokuten_p4_0510.png/269px-Tokuten_p4_0510.png]. It's not equalled out at all.

I think that's the only amazon picture i ever saw that gives her almost normal proportions.

If we count npcs and bonus artwork we also have to count fighter, who never has a helmet in artwork.

If you want to see sexualization you will see it everywhere. I'm sure someone out there has a fetish for overproportioned muscles, there is even an entire subgenre of yaoi manga called bara that is focused on muscular dudes. People have fetishes for everything, from tits and ass, to outfits, to different weights, even to animals and inanimate objects. But thinking that was the intent with either gender in Dragons Crown is reading a bit much into it.

Ultimately i guess we would have to ask the artist.

Possessing sexual qualities doesn't make a character sexualized. A sexualized character is one whose characterization/design is in large or total part dependent upon the audience viewing them as a sexual object. Just being muscular doesn't do that, because a character like Superman (for example) isn't dependent upon the mostly-male audience fantasizing him. The muscle-man aesthetic is a holdover from old pulp fiction and "mens' magazine" serials which were intended to be escapism.

The female characters in Dragon's Crown are designed, drawn, posed, costumed, and animated with the explicit purpose of highlighting things which the target audience views as desirable in a sexual partner. The male characters, even the dwarf, are not designed that way. Even if it's argued that the Dwarf's muscles can be a fetish to some women, he's not costumed, posed, or animated to fulfill that the way the Sorceress or Amazon are with their bouncing breasts or supermodel stances.

If you want an example of what a purely "sexualized" male character actually looks like, Jacob and Edward from Twilight are the best examples I can think of. It's not just their physicality that does it, though. It's their entire character, design, costuming, etc.

 

[lapan]

Maybe my brain is just wired wrong, but when i play a game like DoA, I'm not staring at the tits, I'm concentrating on the gameplay. When i look at the female characters in it (which in DoA are definitely sexualized) I'm not seeing them as a sex object, I see them as what the story builds them up to be. When i look at Dragons Crown i laugh about the silly artstyle (and mained the Elf, one of the more normal looking characters).

The last game where i truly was bothered by fan-service was actually Mass Effect, a game that is usually praised for its characters. Miranda's ass taking up an entire screen took even me out of the immersion.

 

[Qtastic]

It's not sexism: it's objectification. There's a difference. It's could also be natural, but it is almost certainly harmful to women:

http://www.livescience.com/21806-brain-male-female-objectification.html

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-our-brains-turn-women-into-objects.

"A recent study found that showing men pictures of sexualized women evokes less activity in areas of the brain responsible for mental state attribution?that is, the area of the brain that becomes active when we think we are looking at an entity capable of thought and planned action. Other studies have found similar results. When men see body shots of women as compared with face shots, they judge women to be less intelligent, likeable, ambitious and competent."

So if it is hardwired, it would be hard to do anything about, but there seems to be hope. Since it is almost certainly harmful to women, I would say objectification of women outside of explicitly pornographic or sexual (such as swimsuit magazines and such) material is bad. This is not to say that pornography or other similar material is fine (that is a discussion for a different thread), but the objectification of people (mostly women) is expected and can be sought out or avoided. When placed in mainstream media, however, this becomes ingrained in the social consciousness. It's an insidious, destructive influence that should not be a mainstay of popular culture. This is not to say that women can never be shown as sexual creatures in popular culture, instead a more enlightened view of sexuality should be demonstrated. For example, having a strong woman enjoy sex as much as any man without feeling the need to wear practically nothing when not engaging in coitus is a good start. If you want a woman to be scantily clad (outside of parody and such), do so in a way that makes sense, such as doing so for the EXPRESS purpose manipulating someone (see the "honeytrap" operation).

 

[King Zeal]

Evolutionary psychology is problematic, though. And regardless, it has little to do with how media portrays women. Even if it's "hardwired" into our brains, we aren't animals. There's nothing forcing us to make jiggle physics or dress a female soldier in a bikini and nylons.

 

[Angelblaze]

We have one female that looks more or less normal, one extremely muscular half-naked girl and one with over exaggerated tits and ass.
We have one dude that looks almost normal, one extremely muscular half-naked dude and one armored bishonen type guy with gigantic shoulders.

I'd say it's almost equaled out.

The Fighter isn't really "bishonen". His entire face and head is almost always covered, so he's in no way sexualised in-game. As for the Dwarf, as I said above, hypermasculinity is not the same as sexualisation.

The fact is, the only truly sexualised character (to a ludicrous degree) is female. That's not even counting the Amazon, whose natural stance has her shaking her bare ass at the camera, and whose bonus artwork looks like this [http://static2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130508225147/dragons-crown/images/thumb/0/00/Tokuten_p4_0510.png/269px-Tokuten_p4_0510.png]. It's not equalled out at all.

I think that's the only amazon picture i ever saw that gives her almost normal proportions.

If we count npcs and bonus artwork we also have to count fighter, who never has a helmet in artwork.

If you want to see sexualization you will see it everywhere. I'm sure someone out there has a fetish for overproportioned muscles, there is even an entire subgenre of yaoi manga called bara that is focused on muscular dudes. People have fetishes for everything, from tits and ass, to outfits, to different weights, even to animals and inanimate objects. But thinking that was the intent with either gender in Dragons Crown is reading a bit much into it.

Ultimately i guess we would have to ask the artist.

Bara is actually yaoi manga created and made for gay men, not for straight women (not saying you're wrong, but lets pay attention to who this is traditionally made for). Yaoi, however, is made for straight women and almost never has that same level of over-the-top muscles but instead thin, spindly young males and slightly larger/taller guys who really don't have the same level of muscle as say, the dwarf ALTHOUGH in yaoi it isn't uncommon for the 'male' of the sexual pairing to be large or much bigger to a level of 'bara'ness. (Example: Klaus from Maiden Rose)

I'd also like to note that on average serialized Yaoi often has emotional subplots, drama and sometimes even violence (Example: Loveless, Maiden Rose and Okane ga Nai (aka No Money)). Due to a lack of experience on the matter, I can't quite say much for Bara.

Just thought I would point that out.

 

[Izanagi009_v1legacy]

From a female perspective, the least offensive pic in the OP probably is the bottom character (Ivy), as she is the only one that looks somewhat real. As a woman, I find the Anime eyes and the view we are "talking dolls" MORE offensive than the focus on our breasts.

That's a very good point.

Although I'm not so sure that the boob thing isn't also perpetuating a view of women which is quite belittling or patronizing. I mean, I've encountered enough people who seem perfectly willing to make the logical leap from "you have breasts" to "ergo, you exist for my enjoyment" irrespective of actual situation or context.

But I agree that much of the appeal of the "teeny anime girl" type in my observation seems to be that it implies a submissive, doll-like or "feminine" persona, as opposed to the subtextual aggression and "excessiveness" of the ridiculous boobs style (I mean, the whole slap-you-in-the-face-obvious subtext with Ivy is that she's a domme, even her weapon is basically a whip).

And the sad truth of the moe boom is revealed. I technically have no place to talk since i have a few moe character i like but I am well aware of the subtext behind moe and who otaku twist it into a "protective" instinct and an objectification. I do try to like characters for personality than looks but it is hard to avoid the large eyes and cute faces completely.

However, I don't think it is easy to separate anime girl into submissive and ridiculous boobs as aggressive. There are many moe girls in anime that are aggressive about their body and looks and I bet there are a few large chested characters that are actually more meek than Ivy and their ilk. While the subtext of appearance is there, the actions of a character can override that subtext.

P.S. I am distracted and tired so if it sounds like i am talking out of my ass, inform me

 

[Angelblaze]

I think if you're trying to get a sexual sensation from video games, you should google the word "Porn".

That.

Increase the size of that post, quickly. You're about to get a warning - not saying it's coming from me.

OT: I've also noticed that a-lot of the games like say, Tera, often actually annoy me because its apparently sexualized for both male and female but the action camera during battle is making it hard to stare at my character chest during movement without being paranoid I'm about to be hit.

They need to put more holes in the pants too.

 

[Izanagi009_v1legacy]

We have one female that looks more or less normal, one extremely muscular half-naked girl and one with over exaggerated tits and ass.
We have one dude that looks almost normal, one extremely muscular half-naked dude and one armored bishonen type guy with gigantic shoulders.

I'd say it's almost equaled out.

The Fighter isn't really "bishonen". His entire face and head is almost always covered, so he's in no way sexualised in-game. As for the Dwarf, as I said above, hypermasculinity is not the same as sexualisation.

The fact is, the only truly sexualised character (to a ludicrous degree) is female. That's not even counting the Amazon, whose natural stance has her shaking her bare ass at the camera, and whose bonus artwork looks like this [http://static2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130508225147/dragons-crown/images/thumb/0/00/Tokuten_p4_0510.png/269px-Tokuten_p4_0510.png]. It's not equalled out at all.

I think that's the only amazon picture i ever saw that gives her almost normal proportions.

If we count npcs and bonus artwork we also have to count fighter, who never has a helmet in artwork.

If you want to see sexualization you will see it everywhere. I'm sure someone out there has a fetish for overproportioned muscles, there is even an entire subgenre of yaoi manga called bara that is focused on muscular dudes. People have fetishes for everything, from tits and ass, to outfits, to different weights, even to animals and inanimate objects. But thinking that was the intent with either gender in Dragons Crown is reading a bit much into it.

Ultimately i guess we would have to ask the artist.

Bara is actually yaoi manga created and made for gay men, not for straight women (not saying you're wrong, but lets pay attention to who this is traditionally made for). Yaoi, however, is made for straight women and almost never has that same level of over-the-top muscles but instead thin, spindly young males and slightly larger/taller guys who really don't have the same level of muscle as say, the dwarf ALTHOUGH in yaoi it isn't uncommon for the 'male' of the sexual pairing to be large or much bigger to a level of 'bara'ness. (Example: Klaus from Maiden Rose)

I'd also like to note that on average serialized Yaoi often has emotional subplots, drama and sometimes even violence (Example: Loveless, Maiden Rose and Okane ga Nai (aka No Money)). Due to a lack of experience on the matter, I can't quite say much for Bara.

Just thought I would point that out.

I will admit it's odd that the country most gamers hammer on for having "sexualized and objectified" characters also has some of it's most sexy and cute characters in a few dramatic, comedic, or touching stories. Yume Miru Kusuri, Katawa Shoujo, and various other light novels and eroge have their females go through either rough stories or have stories that hit the player hard (if I bring up Key, I think you know what I mean).

Doesn't excuse Japan for it's more blatant fanservice but it does show that it is possible to have sexy/cute without objectified; just takes a lot of effort to actually pull it off.

 

[aozgolo]

Well first of all, at least one of those pictures is from Queen's Blade, an Ecchi Harem Fighter anime, not a game. Queen's Blade however I think well illustrates a valid point however. Nobody, and I mean nobody, who dislikes over the top fan-service style ecchi harem animes is going to watch Queen's Blade. It has a decent enough story, and the characters are actually well developed and likable, but the whole package has a presentation that screams fan-service, and it doesn't detract or break the story because it was designed to be that way right from the beginning.

I don't think there's an issue of sexuality in gaming being too overt, I think it's a problem of mindset. Psychologically speaking we live in an age where most first world societies treat sex as a far greater taboo than violence. It's become ridiculous to the point of people asserting sexism anytime you show a slight bit of cleavage. The thing is, sexualizing a character is not the equivalent of objectifying their gender. I genuinely like women, my best friends are women, I treat them all as equals with respect and courtesy, and yet strangely I enjoy the hell out of "giant boobs in your face" fan service in games and other media.

I get that some people think it's distracting, and that's fine, don't play it, don't watch it. I hate horror slasher films because I dislike gore or cheap jump-scares, so I don't watch them. We all have personal tastes and I have no issue with that, but I do take issue when people try to impose their personal tastes as a platform for reforming an entire medium based around their own sensibilities.

That level of thinking will only lead to the equivalent of The Hays Code for videogames.

 

[Icehearted]

We have one female that looks more or less normal, one extremely muscular half-naked girl and one with over exaggerated tits and ass.

We have one dude that looks almost normal, one extremely muscular half-naked dude and one armored bishonen type guy with gigantic shoulders.

I'd say it's almost equaled out.

But the only point I was making is that the amount of sexualized women is still two out of three. And that's not including the other NPC examples, including the ones you can grope.

Also, as has been mentioned before, the men aren't really sexualized. They're idealized, which is its own problem, but not this problem. I can elaborate later if you wish.

Part of the problem with Male vs female sexualization is that the genders do not perceive sexuality the same way, societally, psychologically, or physically. The idea that a man can be objectified like women is nonsense because our sex drives do not operate the same way, so the arguments made in cases of attempting to find a level area upon which both may be exemplified is futile.

Further I would argue that in many cases outside a vocal and for some reason humored minority our perception of sexuality and gender roles involved with it are largely accepted or even welcome. I have never known a woman to reject sexuality in a medium like video games, never known anyone that had felt threatened or as if an unrealistic standard was being imposed upon them by characters like Ivy Valentine or Lara Croft. On the contrary many of them seemed to find the characters sexy and cool as well (their words). I realize this is subjective, but in my experience outside of personal friends and relations the criticism is mostly from a small group of people rather than society at large, exceptions of course when it's crudely gratuitous and deliberately offensive, or sensationalized like that Fox news report that called Mass Effect a pornographic game.

Women are not attracted to men the way men are attracted to women, that's just how it is. Attempting to shame men into thinking differently about how they feel themselves is destructive and hypocritical.

 

[King Zeal]

Part of the problem with Male vs female sexualization is that the genders do not perceive sexuality the same way, societally, psychologically, or physically. The idea that a man can be objectified like women is nonsense because our sex drives do not operate the same way, so the arguments made in cases of attempting to find a level area upon which both may be exemplified is futile.

Further I would argue that in many cases outside a vocal and for some reason humored minority our perception of sexuality and gender roles involved with it are largely accepted or even welcome. I have never known a woman to reject sexuality in a medium like video games, never known anyone that had felt threatened or as if an unrealistic standard was being imposed upon them by characters like Ivy Valentine or Lara Croft. On the contrary many of them seemed to find the characters sexy and cool as well (their words). I realize this is subjective, but in my experience outside of personal friends and relations the criticism is mostly from a small group of people rather than society at large, exceptions of course when it's crudely gratuitous and deliberately offensive, or sensationalized like that Fox news report that called Mass Effect a pornographic game.

Women are not attracted to men the way men are attracted to women, that's just how it is. Attempting to shame men into thinking differently about how they feel themselves is destructive and hypocritical.

Men and women are not that different. And again, whether they are or not means nothing when it comes to gender roles. Hell, even accepting a gender binary in the first place is already a falsity. Most of what media uses as examples of "sexiness" today (high heels, short skirts, cleavage) are not universal across the human race. Many of those tropes didn't exist a few hundred years ago, and even something like big breasts has come, gone, and come back as an indication of sexiness. The Greeks, for example, thought big breasts were "meh". In short, regardless of what men and women are "wired" to think (and I have yet to come across conclusive evidence that it's significantly different so as to replace nurture with nature), the content we create in fiction has nothing to do with it.

Your anecdotal experience is not a good indication of society, either, although you seem to be aware of that. I can easily counter it by saying that, in my time studying, lecturing, and hearing about gender roles, I've met many women who have felt pressured by society and its notions of gender conformity. And frankly, I'd argue that if even one person doesn't want to conform to gender roles, society shouldn't force it upon them.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

Sexuality in games should evolve naturally. People should make the games they want to make.
Whether it's depictions of rape or sexy women.

I play all sorts of games and watch all sorts of anime.

 

[Qtastic]

Evolutionary psychology is problematic, though.

That's a vague response. How so? This is not to say the it isn't flawed in some ways (most of psychology is, as it is young), but dismissing the study with "evolutionary psychology is problematic" is...problematic .

And regardless, it has little to do with how media portrays women.

What are brains wired to do (or may be hardwired to do) has nothing to do the media's portrayal of women how? Who makes media? People. Who has brains wired to objectify women? People.

Even if it's "hardwired" into our brains, we aren't animals.

Oh we most certainly are. You cannot prevent hardwired reactions. Try not to smile when you are happy. People the world over have a universal, unbreakable reaction to smile when happy. We can certainly reteach ourselves many things, and consciousness makes us special, but retraining hardwired behavior is not promising work. Thankfully, this perspective on women might not be hardwired.

There's nothing forcing us to make jiggle physics or dress a female soldier in a bikini and nylons.

Isn't there? It depends on how you define "force." I don't think we have no other choice, but we do seem to be predisposed, or at least socialized to objectify women.

Men and women are not that different.

Agreed. Many if not most perceived differences in the sexes seems to be things internalized by individuals from society and upbringing. There is some speculation in evolutionary psychology that suggests that women are more naturally nurturing IN GENERAL and men are more competitive IN GENERAL, but yeah. Also, the aforementioned tendencies fall off with a more diverse gene pool vis-a-vis modern society.

 

[Icehearted]

Part of the problem with Male vs female sexualization is that the genders do not perceive sexuality the same way, societally, psychologically, or physically. The idea that a man can be objectified like women is nonsense because our sex drives do not operate the same way, so the arguments made in cases of attempting to find a level area upon which both may be exemplified is futile.

Further I would argue that in many cases outside a vocal and for some reason humored minority our perception of sexuality and gender roles involved with it are largely accepted or even welcome. I have never known a woman to reject sexuality in a medium like video games, never known anyone that had felt threatened or as if an unrealistic standard was being imposed upon them by characters like Ivy Valentine or Lara Croft. On the contrary many of them seemed to find the characters sexy and cool as well (their words). I realize this is subjective, but in my experience outside of personal friends and relations the criticism is mostly from a small group of people rather than society at large, exceptions of course when it's crudely gratuitous and deliberately offensive, or sensationalized like that Fox news report that called Mass Effect a pornographic game.

Women are not attracted to men the way men are attracted to women, that's just how it is. Attempting to shame men into thinking differently about how they feel themselves is destructive and hypocritical.

Men and women are not that different. And again, whether they are or not means nothing when it comes to gender roles. Hell, even accepting a gender binary in the first place is already a falsity. Most of what media uses as examples of "sexiness" today (high heels, short skirts, cleavage) are not universal across the human race. Many of those tropes didn't exist a few hundred years ago, and even something like big breasts has come, gone, and come back as an indication of sexiness. The Greeks, for example, thought big breasts were "meh". In short, regardless of what men and women are "wired" to think (and I have yet to come across conclusive evidence that it's significantly different so as to replace nurture with nature), the content we create in fiction has nothing to do with it.

Your anecdotal experience is not a good indication of society, either, although you seem to be aware of that. I can easily counter it by saying that, in my time studying, lecturing, and hearing about gender roles, I've met many women who have felt pressured by society and its notions of gender conformity. And frankly, I'd argue that if even one person doesn't want to conform to gender roles, society shouldn't force it upon them.

Hence my preemptive remark, an attempt on my part to simply avoid the usual "anecdotal" strawman reply these sorts of things often boil down to, marked in spicy red.

I know that we cannot hear all sides, that in any case there are exceptions and considerations, but that goes both ways. You seem aware of as much, your final remark demonstrates that, but again I would offer that due to this not being a majority issue outside of extremes the position that society does not view this as a serious detriment to either gender seems well indicated. Gay rights is a problem in need of fixing, and we're on it, same as civil rights and the right for women to vote and seek equal employment and educational opportunities, redundantly a matter of civil and gay rights as well. Video games are, on the other hand, no where near the issue, again, with exceptions from a radical portion of our communities. By extremes I mean people like Anita Sarkeesian and her supporters that, rather than addressing issues honestly or constructively, often choose misrepresentation and counterproductive exploitation to engender misguided support from people that typically don't appear to have the facts. I could point out that this in itself is a matter of foisting a personal agenda/principles upon other people, rather than being at all about equality or mutual respect of preferences and individuality, but this already feels circular, and again you seem to already understand this anyway.

Technically I'm not arguing or even disagreeing with you, though I do not exactly agree with you either.