Should Feminism and Gaming Mix?

[RafaelNegrus]

I believe feminism should stay away of games. And that for a simple reason: those who complain about it seem to not know jack about the issue. Let me elaborate: most people defend their complaints with "we're not trying to censor anything and we don't want all T&A (or whatever) to go away, we just want less". Here's the problem though, no one has ever given a percentage of the games in the industry which are actually sexist/women-unfriendly. Let me put some extra emphasis: no-one. How can someone make the claim there is too much of something if they don't know how much of said something there actually is? If you're going to act all self-righteous you better have a good case.

http://www.nouspace.net/dene/475/videogames.pdf

A content analysis of images of video game characters from top-selling American gaming magazines showed male characters (83%) are more likely than female characters (62%) to be portrayed as aggressive. Female characters are more likely than male characters to be portrayed as sexualized (60% versus 1%), scantily clad (39% versus 8%) and as showing a mix of sex and aggression (39 versus 1%).

Great way to prove my point. This doesn't address my point in the slightest.

Great way to illustrate why you claim you never see anyone show facts and figures - its because you plug your ears and yell "lalalalala" whenever anybody does.

One of the almost cliche arguments by feminists for something they find alienates them is that so many female characters tend to be overly sexualised. Here we see figures backing that up to the tune of 60% of female characters who appear in games advertising.

When you couple that with the findings from EEDAR which I know you know about, it becomes pretty clear that facts and figures do actually support the feminist narrative.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/report/article/games-with-female-heroes-dont-sell-because-publishers-dont-support-them

Looking at a sample of 669 games that had protagonists with discernible genders, only 24 had exclusively female protagonists.

So lets consider - we can see that the vast majority of games have male leads. Of those with female leads, we can see a majority of them are still basically being marketed to men, in a way that a lot of women find a turn-off.

Not only that, those games also receive much less advertising, a quote from that same article:

Games with a female-only protagonist ? [received] only 40% of the marketing budget of male-led games. Less than that, actually.

Oh, but lets pretend its all peaches and cream and all these facts and figures don't exist.

I feel you're distorting the numbers a little bit here, because it then says a couple of sentences down "In all three genres, a little under 300 games gave the option of a female lead." So that includes games like Mass Effect that have the ability to customize your character.

And while you're right, I agree with Vegosiux, these numbers do not prove that there is a problem with sexism in videogames as an entire medium. Heck, if we want to examine only the most played videogames then really we ought to be examining Plants versus Zombies 2. But hey, let's look at Amazon and see what they say: http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/2013/videogames

So that has 7 games on that: The Last of Us, COD BLOPS 2, Just Dance 4, Luigi's Mansion, Animal Crossing, Halo 4, and Bioshock Infinite. Two games that are celebrated for their female characters, two games that have no gender, and then 3 games that have male protagonists and are not known for their female characters. Say what you will, I don't think that's too bad.

If you look at the top 100: http://www.amazon.com/best-sellers-video-games/zgbs/videogames/ref=zg_bsar_tab_t_bs#1
There are 90 or so games on there, many of them are repeats. 5 are football games, mostly the same game on different consoles. Because let us not forget that the year's version of Madden is almost always the top selling game of the year.

So let's not forget the staggering diversity of our medium, and that if we restrict our views down to a couple of genres (i.e. action, shooters, and rpgs which is what we seem to do) then we miss out on much of what gaming is to other people.

 

[Vegosiux]

You know, just putting it out there...
the fact that a part of the video games industry is not complex enough to have sexism in it DOES NOT MAGICALLY EXCUSE THE REST OF THE VIDEO GAMES INDUSTRY. Now, if you'd read my post (for the love of god, please tell me you read my post), you'll notice most of it was focused ON mainstream gaming and it's problems - mainly because mainstream gaming is what people assume you've played when you identify as a 'gamer' or when you 'want to get into video games' and is easily the most advertised of gaming out there (seriously, I'm looking at a Killzone Advertisement as I type this).

Yes, I read your post, and yes, it was focused on mainstream gaming and its problems. I just keep maintaining that problems with part of the industry do not mean the entire industry has these problems and that I'm getting frustrated about people talking about the industry while meaning a part of it and going to great lengths to clear up what exactly it is we're talking about.

High-profile gaming and advertising has a problem with a heavy male-centric bias? Yeah, it does. All I keep saying is that's different from the entire industry having that problem. And it's way easier to deal with a perceived problem if you slice it up a bit, realize some parts aren't problematic and then go for the ones that are.

Which, uh, seems to be exactly what you're doing, so I don't think I actually have a problem with it now that it's been cleared up.

...No, still works for Indie games and Casual games. It's a very efficient game, really.

Oh I'm sure it works for them too, but I'd say you'd get different results, results representative of indie games and casual games, respectively. If you wanted results representative of the entire medium, you'd need to play that game with the entire medium.

TLoU isn't included because it's one of the games that said 'Fuck that noise' and actually fought for the right to put Ellie on the front cover - so, it's not much of a counter-example anyway, if anything indicative of the sexism in video game advertisement seeing as they had to fight to have one of the main fucking characters on the cover.

Yet it's an example how things can be changed with some effort. Look, I'd be elated if all kinds of prejudice and bigotry just disappeared because we want them to. But we'd be foolish to expect they'll just go away if we keep yelling at them loud and long enough.

And I make it a point to simply not buy entertainment products if they employ practices I find offensive. Those include but are not limited to, fucking over the consumer with nickel-and-diming, churning out sequels like there's no tomorrow instead of doing something creative, and indeed, trying to sell me the product by sticking tits in my face.

As for the other two - as influential as they were on the games industry, they don't qualify for this game due to not having characters on them. I should have clarified that rule of the game of 'Actually should have characters on the cover art' dealy. The game is meant to show the sexist approach to marketing video games in gaming advertisement when it comes to characters, so it doesn't cover every single game out there (Pokemon doesn't qualify either, unless FireRed LeafGreen use a female Charizard/Venusaur on their covers).

That's different then, and under those conditions, it's very much the way you say it is. I mean, two centuries from now, people will collect game cases featuring a grim-expressioned thirty-something male soldier walking slowly towards the camera like they collect stamps today, at this rate (and no I'm not being sarcastic)

Ahh, for fucks sake, you did the whole 'Oh, well THEY aren't doing anything but talking about it, so they're useless' thing. *Sigh* one of these days, people are going to stop saying that...

I did accuse people of taking the path of least resistance, yes, because that's what I see them doing. Didn't call them actually useless, though, just...giving themselves more credit than that kind of effort is worth, I suppose. Still more effort than just liking something on Facebook, yet not quite as much effort as actually looking into where the problems are and taking them head-on.

An example I used in a slightly related thread, if a female gamer gets abused by a bigoted brodude manly man, I'm not going to start talking about sexism in the community, I'll tell the girl "Pssst, if you want, I can show you a trick or two so you can wipe the floor with the next asshole who treats you like that"; and tell people I happen to see n a ame with him "That guy's a bit of a prick, try to not to give him too much attention". Of course I haven't single-handedly solved the problem of bigoted morons in the community, my contribution is tiny (there's just one of me and more assholes than I have hours in a day to deal with them after all), but a lot of people making such contributions will make a difference.

Or, if you see a guy harassing a woman in a bar, you poke the bouncer and have him encourage the dude to call it early tonight, rather than step on a soapbox. (I mean, that's what I'd expect a person to do, bit of an assumption on my part, I admit)

Now, this isn't a "one or the other" thing, obviously you can do both, I'm just saying one of them seems like a more effective course of action to me; to tone down on adversarial rhetoric of my previous post a little.

Not giving money to devs/publishers doing/creating stuff we find disagreeable will affect them more than posting threads about it. On the other hand, giving support to those creating stuff we want to see more off will again make more of a difference than just saying we want less of what's currently being made. I'd say Kickstarter is a good thing for that, but seeing as a large chunk of internet-using world is region locked from utilizing it, I don't think it's quite there at this point.

Sadly, I have somewhere I need to be like... 10 minutes ago, so I can't really keep going; But if you really want 'qualifiers' (whatever that means) and elaboration and that, here you go:

http://gamestudies.org/1202
http://jvwresearch.org/
http://www.eludamos.org/index.php/eludamos
http://scholar.google.com.au/schhp?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

there you go, 4 databases filled to the brim with Academic Sources discussing sexism in video games, the industry, etc. Whatever the fuck you want to float your boat. I'd provide links and shit to support whatever i'm saying, but...

I'll look into that, then, thanks.

Not kidding about that '10 minutes late thing'.

No rush, we can continue this anytime you have time, if you're still up for it.

 

[carnex]

--

What can I say, wouldn0t want to be in your position. Seems like you really just can't find someone who makes games just for your taste. That sucks, but other than that I can't really say anything. Gather people with same problem and try to get some attention. But, as I said before, publishers have really bad experience with listening to such pleads/demands.

Only thing I can say is that information are more readily available than ever before. One can't complain about lack of something if they didn't research it beforehand. But, as it stands now, largest demographic group in gaming is not interested enough to look up what would suit their tastes, they have enough games they like showed down their throats on facebook and all other sites they visit on regular basis.

--

Oh the horror of having 10 or so games with sexually charged contend on covers in last 5 or so years. Oh the horror, the apocalypse. men are going to rape everything that walks and then beat them up, all in public... yea, I'm being highly sarcastic because you are being highly cynical and spinning your opinions on the spot in same post.

Now that out of the way, you should understand that Bayonetta is embodiment of female empowerment exactly because of what you described. It's all in context. She is always one in charge, and obviously she is always doing it for herself. It purposefully exclude player and other characters from her acting. That's because it's for her and her alone. She is sexy and she knows it but at the same time she let's player know that she isn't just anyone. She is large and in charge, hovering above everyone, dominating everything and if you want her you better be top of the masterclass. That character is, in my opinion, actually created to metaphorically castrate male gamers who are used to have slavish doll presented to him like you get in Dead or Alive Extreme Beach Volleyball.

I won't address rest except to notice how you go on full frontal attack on sexually charged representation of women, then when confronted retreat to equal representation only to charge gain in very next post you make. An I will keep saying the same. You have no right to decide what I like. I keep my nose out of you business and plan to keep yours out of mine. Only equal treatment there is.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

No.

I want to play videogames.

I don't want politics, feminism, cis-privilege, gay marriage, immigration reform, gender politics, transsexual acceptance, anti-war, pro-interventionist, abortion, PeTA or Greenpeace in my entertainment.

Take your soapbox, for whatever purpose, however valid or petty your complaints, and take it somewhere where it doesn't impact my unrelated hobby.

My only problem is, you keep saying it's your entertainment, your hobby. It is a hobby that also "belongs" to feminists, trans*, gays, immigrants, and environmentalists. Right? I mean, you don't want it, but you do not own videogames, and you can't honestly tell me more variety would be bad for the industry.

There's no such thing as "just" entertainment. This - and related - industries provide jobs, a venue for artistic expression, careers, technological advancement, companionship, competition, and other numerous goals beyond a goal to just be "entertaining". I mean, music is technically just for entertaining, but I won't put up a fence and say Bob Dylan should keep his Times They Are A-Changin' riffs to himself... movies are entertainment, but we all take the Schindler's Lists with the Transformers, right? And games, they are entertainment, but is it any one person (or group of person's) responsibility to gatekeep the perspectives that come into that?

Your entertainment is just that - your entertainment. Videogames are not yours, though. They are, not to sound to sappy, everyone's. Don't be the troll at the bridge for everyone and everything that wants to participate that isn't to your expectations or standards, man.

 

[wulf3n]

you can't honestly tell me more variety would be bad for the industry.

Variety in games is rarely the issue being discussed, except for a select few insane ranters.

The real issue is a different group of insane ranters who are trying to impose their beliefs on the masses. Take the recent example of the censoring of Zero Punctuation because a select few were "offended" at an offensive joke within a show that gained notoriety by being offensive.

The idea that games are for everyone is noble if not somewhat naive, however it can only truly work if people are willing to leave well enough alone when a games(s) is catering for something they find distasteful.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

you can't honestly tell me more variety would be bad for the industry.

Variety in games is rarely the issue being discussed, except for a select few insane ranters.

The real issue is a different group of insane ranters who are trying to impose their beliefs on the masses. Take the recent example of the censoring of Zero Punctuation because a select few were "offended" at an offensive joke within a show that gained notoriety by being offensive.

The idea that games are for everyone is noble if not somewhat naive, however it can only truly work if people are willing to leave well enough alone when a games(s) is catering for something they find distasteful.

Well that's up to a creator to censor their own work. If people have strength enough to stand their ground they will make a product that is... you know, their product. "Catering to everyone" is less a problem with the everyone bit and a more a problem inherent to the caterers.

When I talk about variety, though, I talk about a variety of perspectives. Feminism has a "place" in gaming because it's a a viewpoint that is often ignored. If someone shoehorns in feminist ideals to their game, then that's on them - they're as horrifically pandering as if they shoehorned in, I dunno, online multiplayer, co-op, Kinect. But more games made fresh from the perspective, made with intent and passion... and made alongside what we already have? That can't honestly be a bad thing.

It is the artist's job to maintain artistic integrity, not the audience. If people were offended by Zero Punctuation, is it their fault it was censored? Truly? And I mean, if Zero Punctuation wants to offend people, the show can continue to do so - Yahtzee clearly doesn't, though, and makes these decisions himself. No-one is making up anyone's mind but their own, and if they sway someone else's hand, well... you know, that's on the hand. People choose their target demographic. It's not hard to do. If they decide that demographic is "everyone," well, so be it. If they offend people in that scope, and they don't want to... well that's their decision to enact self-censorship.

No feminists are working at the FCC, to my knowledge. There's no council on this with any kind of actual power to make people say and do things. It's the creator's choice to cater to these people.

 

[JediMB]

No form of activism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activism] that tries to tell a creator what they can and can't create should have any right to exist.

Haha, that's brilliant! A straw man argument and horrible hypocrisy at the same time!

Good show, wulf3n!

Here is also a video of a young gentleman that actually did his research, telling you about a lot of games that Anita conveniently overlooked:

Oh, look! Is that another video from a guy who thinks that the Damsel in Distress parts of Sarkeesian's video series should have totally deviated into completely different subjects? I think it is!

"Here is my essay on how to save pandas from extinction. But because of popular demand, I'm going to spend a couple of pages talking about grizzly bears."

 

[wulf3n]

Well that's up to a creator to censor their own work. If people have strength enough to stand their ground they will make a product that is... you know, their product. "Catering to everyone" is less a problem with the everyone bit and a more a problem inherent to the caterers.

I'd argue it's more about capitilism and the desire to eat being stronger than a desire for artistic integrity but ultimately neither is the issue at hand.

What is at hand is that while some were offended many weren't and while offense itself isn't much of an issue, what is an issue is having something you enjoy altered because others didn't like it.

It is the artist's job to maintain artistic integrity, not the audience. If people were offended by Zero Punctuation, is it their fault it was censored? Truly?

When they actively call for it to be censored yes, yes it is their fault.

if Zero Punctuation wants to offend people, the show can continue to do so - Yahtzee clearly doesn't, though, and makes these decisions himself.

Well we're speculating as to whether it was Yahtzee or The Escapist who decided to change the content.

People choose their target demographic. It's not hard to do. If they decide that demographic is "everyone," well, so be it. If they offend people in that scope, and they don't want to... well that's their decision to enact self-censorship.
No feminists are working at the FCC, to my knowledge. There's no council on this with any kind of actual power to make people say and do things. It's the creator's choice to cater to these people.

In a world where the desire to survive outweighs the desire to create and no few demographics are really enough to fill that need the power of the people is grander than that of the FCC.

No form of activism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activism] that tries to tell a creator what they can and can't create should have any right to exist.

Haha, that's brilliant! A straw man argument and horrible hypocrisy at the same time!

Good show, wulf3n!

Feel free to contend the point as opposed to the scatter shot of fallacies hoping one sticks.

 

[Saxnot]

Oh, I know it's not a new thing. I've watched the rise and fall of female characters, the evenlope pushing of the sexualization grow and grow, and such.

Few games rely on sexualization? In the long run, sure, since few games have women. But even Tomb Raider's Lara Croft was based off a model, and she's a lil' noisy when breathing.
Remember Me? Just look at the cover.
I'm not saying that they can't exist but I figure they hold up as examples.

I gotta say it flat out, female NPCs likely don't mean anything to women who're interested in gaming.
Bayonetta is extremely polarizing between the sex positive and sex negative sorts, and it's not hard to see why.

CoD has very few female characters but once word spreads women are being included, they're in.

Women do play street fighter, and I've heard of some in SF tournaments on a more pro level.

As much as Giana Sisters stand as a decent game where the female protagionists are done fairly well, I gotta ask, how well known is that game beyond intense gamers who pay attention to gaming? The women who're turned off by the way gaming's gone aren't hanging out at the windows waiting, they need their attention grabbed.

So, your nationality is getting painted badly. Why not complain about it? You certainly are allowed to.
You can't say "Something like that's hapening to me, so stop complaining" and expect it to work. Having a thick skin only goes so far. Decades of trying to put up with my pet peeves have worn my skin away, and I'm really tolerant. Again, imagine the women who aren't as tolerant because it's the first impression?
As much as a nationality can get painted as the bad guy, I can't think of it being consistently, and heavily done for a long time. Sure, kinda often, but I don't think it in stacks up vs women getting sexualized. And it's way easier to pretend the soldier you're playing as comes from your nationality, imo, than pretending a guy is a woman.
That's not to say I don't have empathy for you, here. I'm not going to outright say "suck it up" so much as try and point out that where you stand isn't as close to where women stand as you think.
I can see where you're coming from, and I wouldn't mind it much at all if you elaborated.

Really, i'm not sure whether sexualisation is still that prevalent in recent games. You mentioned remember me, but that's more of a counter-example. yes, Nilin looks good, but she has a personality and importance to the plot. I never had the feeling she was being objectified or sexualised. is the fact that she is attractive enough to accuse remeber me of sexualisation? Likewise, Tomb Raider. i'll agree that for most of it's history Lara was sexualised, but the reboot portrayed her as a normal young woman, not a sex object.

obviously, games like Deadpool or Soul Calibur have very sexualised female characters, but that's part of what those games are. i'm not saying it's a good thing there, but you don't expect an action movie or a james bond movie to have a lot of deep, nonsexualised characters.

 

[JediMB]

Oh, look! Is that another video from a guy who thinks that the Damsel in Distress parts of Sarkeesian's video series should have totally deviated into completely different subjects? I think it is!

"Here is my essay on how to save pandas from extinction. But because of popular demand, I'm going to spend a couple of pages talking about grizzly bears."

Did you even read my post (I know you didn?t watch the video), or did you just see ?Anita? and immediately felt the sudden urge to jump to her defense in a blind rage because that is what you people do?

Haha, blind rage. That's rich. Sorry, but my default state of apathy is too strong for my emotions to reach that high.

No, I didn't think I had half an hour to watch yet another bullshit video excelling at Missing The Point?. So I skipped through it. That's pretty much what you deserve with an unprofessional splash screen like what that video has. Not to mention his Kickstarter's splash image, which was so obviously and terribly modeled after Sarkeesian's.

And I've read your post, but I wanted to focus on your hilarious comment that a "gentleman" talks about games "Anita overlooked", as if adhering to the subject of one's video means you're overlooking all the stuff you could go on infinite tangents with.

No form of activism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activism] that tries to tell a creator what they can and can't create should have any right to exist.

Haha, that's brilliant! A straw man argument and horrible hypocrisy at the same time!

Good show, wulf3n!

Feel free to contend the point as opposed to the scatter shot of fallacies hoping one sticks.

But you did the fallacies so well, yourself!

I didn't think I needed to say more, considering that your apparent claim that feminism inherently tries to censor creators is false, and your very statement not only encourages censorship of feminists... but says feminism shouldn't exist to begin with.

 

[Olikar]

No form of activism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activism] that tries to tell a creator what they can and can't create should have any right to exist.

Haha, that's brilliant! A straw man argument and horrible hypocrisy at the same time!

Good show, wulf3n!

Wow you managed to type out a full sentence without actually saying anything of any value to the discussion and you got a few condescending remarks in there too! Great job! But next time try to actually substantiate why you think it's a strawman or horrible hypocrisy instead of throwing around buzzwords.

Oh, look! Is that another video from a guy who thinks that the Damsel in Distress parts of Sarkeesian's video series should have totally deviated into completely different subjects? I think it is!

"Here is my essay on how to save pandas from extinction. But because of popular demand, I'm going to spend a couple of pages talking about grizzly bears."

But isn't that exactly what Anita and other pro-censorship feminists do? Look at the recent case of Hotline Miami 2 and the 'rape' controversy, "Here is my essay on a game that has nothing to do with gender roles or rape and is purely a celebration of the ultra-violent aesthetic. But because it suits my political opinions, I'm going to spend a couple of pages talking about gender roles and rape."

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

In a world where the desire to survive outweighs the desire to create and no few demographics are really enough to fill that need the power of the people is grander than that of the FCC.

Do you think that there are so many people that were offended that not catering to them would be a significant loss? Do any of them even watch the show in the first place? Is it not offending them all of a sudden going to start them watching? Even if it is - is that audience really so large? Is that what you believe? Is it not just a vocal minority?

I don't think censoring content for the sake of feminist desires is going to be the difference between sleeping in a box and having running hot water.

 

[Maitresse Zem]

this thread is a whole lotta talk, not so much actual less-of-being-a-douchebag, which I personally feel is the root of the problem to begin with. good intentions or not- if you're gonna be an ass about it, you're not helping the case.

 

[wulf3n]

I didn't think I needed to say more, considering that your apparent claim that feminism inherently tries to censor creators is false, and your very statement not only encourages censorship of feminists... but says feminism shouldn't exist to begin with.

Please show me where I said any of that.

And while I thought it was painfully obvious I suppose I need to clarify my position.

This is about Activism, the "ism" behind why is ultimately irrelevant to the point I'm making. Social Activism in the context of the entertainment industry and the free market really only relates to actively trying to impede creation.

In essence what I'm saying any attempt at censorship has no right to exist. And before you cry hypocrisy again, an act of censorship is not a form of expression, and no, I'm not saying criticism has no right to exist.

Now you might say it's still a strawman as feminism/feminists haven't done this, I refer back to my initial post were I make no reference to feminism, and to the recent Zero Punctuation Censorship to which I was ultimately referring to.

Therefore it's neither Strawman nor Hypocrisy.