Should Feminism and Gaming Mix?

[MaximumTheHormone]

feminisim, if I'm not mistaken, is a movement for equality for women.

therefore as long as there is inequality, there is room for all such movements for equality.

personally, i'm Pro-Equality Anti-Positive discrimination.

Hold on there buddy!
If you are 'pro-equality' it would imply that you would also sympathize with communism, after all, communism was also rooted in the pursuit of 'equality'.
But wait on just for a second, before you rattle down on your keyboard so hard that the Cheeto dust off your fingers creates a thicker smog than a Chinese industrial plant, I am not equating feminism to communism, my point here is equality may not be as universally a great ideal as you think it is.

Also to imply that women should be represented more because of a need for equality in the medium also overstates the presence of women. Considering that women hold a slanted minority share of the viewership of this medium it is understandable the disproportionate placement of protagonists as male and targeting generally male audiences. Especially in the triple A market, where games with female protagonists have, in the majority, received poor commercial response [source: http://www.penny-arcade.com/report/article/games-with-female-heroes-dont-sell-because-publishers-dont-support-them] especially in comparison to those aimed at men.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

feminisim, if I'm not mistaken, is a movement for equality for women.

therefore as long as there is inequality, there is room for all such movements for equality.

personally, i'm Pro-Equality Anti-Positive discrimination.

Hold on there buddy!
If you are 'pro-equality' it would imply that you would also sympathize with communism, after all, communism was also rooted in the pursuit of 'equality'.
But wait on just for a second, before you rattle down on your keyboard so hard that the Cheeto dust off your fingers creates a thicker smog than a Chinese industrial plant, I am not equating feminism to communism, my point here is equality may not be as universally a great ideal as you think it is.

Also to imply that women should be represented more because of a need for equality in the medium also overstates the presence of women. Considering that women hold a slanted minority share of the viewership of this medium it is understandable the disproportionate placement of protagonists as male and targeting generally male audiences. Especially in the triple A market, where games with female protagonists have, in the majority, received poor commercial response [source: http://www.penny-arcade.com/report/article/games-with-female-heroes-dont-sell-because-publishers-dont-support-them] especially in comparison to those aimed at men.

what the f##k is a Cheeto? and why are they dusty? seems a very strange thing to state to someone you don't know.

 

[carnex]

feminisim, if I'm not mistaken, is a movement for equality for women.

therefore as long as there is inequality, there is room for all such movements for equality.

personally, i'm Pro-Equality Anti-Positive discrimination.

Problem with equality is that if can be defined in many ways. I once presented with equality in workplace

For example when we talk about equality there are 3 main ways social equality could be looked upon

- Equal Opportunities - set the demands, best suited candidate does it. (what I want)
- Equal Chances - set ground rules adapted to abilities of individuals or group (I think this begins to stink, but can be good in some areas.)
- Equal Representation - set ratio of representation of each group, best suited candidate of EACH group get it with no merit between groups (what Feminists demand in male dominated areas, for me this is smells like outhouse on wet and hot summer day)

Equality is that you can't complain about something and defend the same thing when it's effects are reversed.

There are many words thrown here and all of them resiously stretch, to say the least, their meaning. Plus we are replacing feeligs with facts. Just because someone feels discriminated does not mean that actuall discrimination took place. Just because person identified with fictional character or drawing does not mean that any characteristics given to that fictional character or drawing was projected on to that person. Several times I started to write something like my conclusions to all thing written here, but always remembered not to waste ma breath on to uselees tasks.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

feminisim, if I'm not mistaken, is a movement for equality for women.

therefore as long as there is inequality, there is room for all such movements for equality.

personally, i'm Pro-Equality Anti-Positive discrimination.

Problem with equality is that if can be defined in many ways. I once presented with equality in workplace

For example when we talk about equality there are 3 main ways social equality could be looked upon

- Equal Opportunities - set the demands, best suited candidate does it. (what I want)
- Equal Chances - set ground rules adapted to abilities of individuals or group (I think this begins to stink, but can be good in some areas.)
- Equal Representation - set ratio of representation of each group, best suited candidate of EACH group get it with no merit between groups (what Feminists demand in male dominated areas, for me this is smells like outhouse on wet and hot summer day)

Equality is that you can't complain about something and defend the same thing when it's effects are reversed.

There are many words thrown here and all of them resiously stretch, to say the least, their meaning. Plus we are replacing feeligs with facts. Just because someone feels discriminated does not mean that actuall discrimination took place. Just because person identified with fictional character or drawing does not mean that any characteristics given to that fictional character or drawing was projected on to that person. Several times I started to write something like my conclusions to all thing written here, but always remembered not to waste ma breath on to uselees tasks.

so hang on, you've not stated a conclusion for fear of wasting your breath? but quoted me anyway? just wanting to be clear what you meant there.

 

[carnex]

--

so hang on, you've not stated a conclusion for fear of wasting your breath? but quoted me anyway? just wanting to be clear what you meant there.

That part wasn't meant as comment to you, just the comment on how this thread is going. Sorry that I didn't make that clear.

My reply to you was the part of quoting myself, and then i proceeded to comment on thread itself. How constantly goals and narrations move around, words are abused and misused and opinions portrayed as facts. Not everyone that participated are guilty of them, but most of us, me included, overstep boundaries of constructive discussion time or another.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

--

snip.

That part wasn't meant as comment to you, just the comment on how this thread is going. Sorry that I didn't make that clear.

My reply to you was the part of quoting myself, and then i proceeded to comment on thread itself. How constantly goals and narrations move around, words are abused and misused and opinions portrayed as facts. Not everyone that participated are guilty of them, but most of us, me included, overstep boundaries of constructive discussion time or another.

ah ok cool. the peole who have replied to my post dont seem to pay attention to the second part

personally, i'm Pro-Equality Anti-Positive discrimination.

i hate positive discrimination as much as discrimination. its gonna be a hell of a balancing act getting true equality in this world

 

[BunnyKillBot]

Have not read the thread, but the answer to the OPs question is Yes, just as 'Masculinism' should be in gaming as well, which is to say the expounding of ridiculously overblown gender stereotypes. Men being emotionless physical powerhouses is just as frustratingly wrong as women being delicate little flowers to be abducted and or protected. Give us real characters with real stories, not teenage boy wank caricatures.

 

[generals3]

hmmm, tough one, i'll be honest, i don't have the answers. I'm a guy so i've no idea what would make a woman feel equal in gaming. I guessing a woman would be better suited to answer.

And this is exactly the problem. The problem is extremely vague and depending on who you ask it is defined differently, ultimately it's a case of dogs chasing cars. And I also have issues with the idea that a woman would be better suited to answer. And that's simply because that argument would only work if women were some kind of hive-mind. Not everyone woman objects sexualization and not every woman think princess peach is an evil patriarchy-reinforcing character. A woman would only be capable of representing her opinion, and that doesn't really help a lot.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

hmmm, tough one, i'll be honest, i don't have the answers. I'm a guy so i've no idea what would make a woman feel equal in gaming. I guessing a woman would be better suited to answer.

And this is exactly the problem. The problem is extremely vague and depending on who you ask it is defined differently, ultimately it's a case of dogs chasing cars. And I also have issues with the idea that a woman would be better suited to answer. And that's simply because that argument would only work if women were some kind of hive-mind. Not everyone woman objects sexualization and not every woman think princess peach is an evil patriarchy-reinforcing character. A woman would only be capable of representing her opinion, and that doesn't really help a lot.

oh yeah it is a very tough one to sort out. not one person can speak for a whole gender. but maybe a mixed femal group would be a start? who knows. i those who stick their fingers in their ears and want to keep the status quo or make violent threats to anyone who proposes change are the main problem.

 

[nuttshell]

I'm not sure what happened to your second sentence here, but it came out word salad.

Sorry, english is not my native language and I was tired. Let's put it simple. My second sentence means this:
Artist does hard work = artist does good art?

But when an artist talks about needing to distinguish his work from "generic fantasy" and the solution he comes up with is to just super-exaggerate secondary sexual characteristics, then yes...I would typify that as creatively lazy.
But maybe you guys are right, and maybe this really is the best idea he was capable of coming up with. In that case, it was wrong to characterize him as "lazy". You've got me there.

I am allways baffled, when I see this argument. The guy is not Dalí or van Gogh. His work isn't really revolutionary in the general visual arts department but I didn't see anything similar yet in games except Team Fortress. Look at his fighter. Those arms and shoulders. Doesn't he look like an adorable caricature of a generic male fighter character in modern fantasy? Are all of these just lazy? https://www.google.de/search?q=caricature&client=firefox-a&hs=wI8&rls=org.mozilla:defficial&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=DTMjUsbrJIiYtQbY_4DoBQ&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=648

 

[Bocaj2000]

Does feminism belong in gaming? YES, EVERYTHING BELONGS IN GAMING.

With that said, everything also deserves to be criticized.

 

[Dragonbums]

Your thread title sounded interesting.

Unfortunately your post came off really flat.

You gave us one example of a highly unbelievable story some guy wrote on his blog (with no source may I add.) and then go off on a semi-rant that doesn't even really have anything to do with what the title of the thread is talking about.

Gonna have to try harder then that OP.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

That?s literally this entire argument summed up.

It's tempting to just leave it here, isn't it?

I don?t think any one work will make anyone anything (as long as said person has unimpaired mental faculties), but that the environment (nurture and nature) as well as socialization, personal experiences and education plays the biggest role.

In fact consuming works that might be controversial or you might not agree with are often highly helpful in challenging ones knowledge/broadening ones horizon by looking at something from a different perspective or strengthening ones beliefs.

Are often? I'd have to disagree with that. What I see when people consume works from a different perspective is that more often than not their existing perspective is reinforced. Which is how you can have, say, people from the far left and far right of the political spectrum each claiming victory in a debate using the exact same talking point. People who are willing or even capable of taking on talking points that do not endorse what they have already chosen to believe are exceedingly rare.

This doesn?t have anything to do with me disagreeing about the definition of the word (and even less with colloquialisms), but personal experiences and abundant evidence clashing with said definition.

Neither of our personal experiences are worth a hill of beans as evidence goes. As for "abundant evidence"...I see you link farming a lot of opinion pieces...some of which are dubiously linked to the topic at hand at best...and then angrily berating them. That does not constitute "abundant evidence". Perhaps you find it to be sufficient evidence to support your own beliefs...that's fine. People have believed more based on less.

You implied dangerous.

You've referred to feminists as ideologues, and compared them to facists, religious extremists, and Crusaders. If nothing else, the implication is that feminists are volatile fundamentalists. "Dangerous" is hardly a leap of faith.

It?s curious though that half a page ago the worst you seemingly had to say about any of said works was that they were ?lazy?, then you didn?t recall ever calling anyone a sexist/misogynist/a 14 or 13 year old or any number of things (which might be true). But when pointed out directly how this seems to be a pattern lately and pressed on the matter about said things being said by ?games journalists? you are suddenly okay with it and willing to defend all of them (seemingly agreeing with them by proxy).

Did I endorse or support any individual article? Did I say "I agree with this" or "This mirrors my thoughts on the subject entirely"? If it suits you to dress me up as a windmill and then tilt at it, by all means do so, but it's a little silly.

Am I okay with people expressing criticisms of media/art? Yes. Yes I am. It never occurred to me that we must rush to shut such people up.

Obviously calling creators these things over the breadth of press channels because of their artistic design or the choice of characters in a video game (and trying to shame their audience into obedience, because tits? actually I think there is a totally ?scientific? study that links liking big breasts to being a misogynist too: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2293422/Why-sexist-men-likely-prefer-Kim-Keira-Misogynistic-attitudes-make-males-likely-prefer-big-breasts.html so there you go) is totally fine, constructive and doesn?t hold any moral judgments or implications whatsoever? (and they aren?t calling for censorship? really!)

Seems to me that any critic that relies on endless hectoring and/or shaming of their audience in order to bully them into sharing a belief will soon cease to have an audience. This problem should be self-correcting, n'est-ce pas?

That's because these 'criticisms' are not valid criticisms at all, the feminist argument that certain depictions of women in art can lead to a culture of sexism (or at least a culture apathetic to sexism) is not only completely unfounded scientifically, it's also entirely irrelevant.

LOL. Who determines whether or not something is a "valid criticism"? Is it you? Like many people, I imagine you believe the benchmark for "reasonable" begins and ends perfectly in alignment with your own beliefs.

Even if 'sexist' depictions in art did lead to this sort of culture I can honestly say I would still not give a single solitary shit, if you criticize a work of art by the effect it has on society that means you art not judging the work based on it's merits as art but it's merits as a tool for society (which is disgusting in my opinion.)

OK. Good to know Olikar. Thanks for the input. =D

Sorry, english is not my native language and I was tired. Let's put it simple. My second sentence means this:

Artist does hard work = artist does good art?

It's cool. I thought it might be something like that. I was just confused.

I do believe I tried to clarify what I meant by "lazy" in my last reply to you.

I am allways baffled, when I see this argument. The guy is not Dalí or van Gogh. His work isn't really revolutionary in the general visual arts department but I didn't see anything similar yet in games except Team Fortress. Look at his fighter. Those arms and shoulders. Doesn't he look like an adorable caricature of a generic male fighter character in modern fantasy? Are all of these just lazy? https://www.google.de/search?q=caricature&client=firefox-a&hs=wI8&rls=org.mozilla:defficial&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=DTMjUsbrJIiYtQbY_4DoBQ&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=648

Many of those caricatures are quite clever. Exaggerating secondary sexual characteristics to distinguish yourself from "generic fantasy" is not. The exaggeration of secondary sexual characteristics in fantasy is a trope as old as Jimmy Hoffa's bones. It is the living definition of "generic", at least in the T/A swords and sorcery tradition. That doesn't mean you can't like it. Nor does it mean it can't or shouldn't exist. It just means I think it was creatively lazy. The artist himself was accused of much, much worse things than creative laziness, and took the criticism cheerfully in stride. There's really no need to rally to his defense.

Although it may be negative feedback, I am very thankful for having one of our titles being covered. I do understand what Jason and the rest of the discussions on the internet are saying for the most part. I am not sure if I can implement the critiques from him and others around the internet into my future artistic creations, but I will definitely keep in mind that these opinions are out there and affect people on a personal level. I feel that any form of media content faces death when it doesn?t receive attention at all. So, be it criticism or support, I am truly thankful for the people talking about Dragon?s Crown and the people discovering Vanillaware for the first time.

 

[Olikar]

LOL. Who determines whether or not something is a "valid criticism"? Is it you? Like many people, I imagine you believe the benchmark for "reasonable" begins and ends perfectly in alignment with your own beliefs.

No what is valid and reasonable criticism is what is relevant, feminist (or more specifically the type of pro-censorship feminists like Anita Sarkeesian) style of criticism is irrelevant because their criticisms of art has little to nothing to do with it's value as art.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

No what is valid and reasonable criticism is what is relevant, feminist (or more specifically the type of pro-censorship feminists like Anita Sarkeesian) style of criticism is irrelevant because their criticisms of art has little to nothing to do with it's value as art.

I'm not really a fan of hers, but I'd be interested in reading a quote where Sarkeesian calls for censorship of anything. When you find one, post it in reply, and we can discuss it together, and have a good laugh at her foolishness.

Also...out of curiosity...who determines what does and doesn't contribute to the "value of art"? Let me guess! Does their name rhyme with "Bolikar"?

 

[broca]

I'm not really a fan of hers, but I'd be interested in reading a quote where Sarkeesian calls for censorship of anything. When you find one, post it in reply, and we can discuss it together, and have a good laugh at her foolishness.

From her second video (transcript as given on her website).

[...] Of course, if you look at any of these games in isolation, you will be able to find incidental narrative circumstances that can be used to explain away the inclusion of violence against women as a plot device. But just because a particular event might ?makes sense? within the internal logic of a fictional narrative ? that doesn?t, in and of itself justify its use. Games don?t exist in a vacuum and therefore can?t be divorced from the larger cultural context of the real world.

It?s especially troubling in-light of the serious real life epidemic of violence against women facing the female population on this planet. Every 9 seconds a woman is assaulted or beaten in the United States and on average more than three women are murdered by their boyfriends husbands, or ex-partners every single day. Research consistently shows that people of all genders tend to buy into the myth that women are the ones to blame for the violence men perpetrate against them. In the same vein, abusive men consistently state that their female targets ?deserved it?, ?wanted it? or were ?asking for it?,

Given the reality of that larger cultural context, it should go without saying that it?s dangerously irresponsible to be creating games in which players are encouraged and even required to perform violence against women in order to ?save them?.

Even though most of the games we?re talking about don?t explicitly condone violence against women, nevertheless they trivialize and exploit female suffering as a way to ratchet up the emotional or sexual stakes for the player.

Despite these troubling implications, game creators aren?t necessarily all sitting around twirling their nefarious looking mustaches while consciously trying to figure out how to best misrepresent women as part of some grand conspiracy.

Most probably just haven?t given much thought to the underlying messages their games are sending and in many cases developers have backed themselves into a corner with their own game mechanics. When violence is the primary gameplay mechanic and therefore the primary way that the player engages with the game-world it severely limits the options for problem solving. The player is then forced to use violence to deal with almost all situations because its the only meaningful mechanic available ? even if that means beating up or killing the women they are meant to love or care about.

One of the really insidious things about systemic & institutional sexism is that most often regressive attitudes and harmful gender stereotypes are perpetuated and maintained unintentionally.

Likewise engaging with these games is not going to magically transform players into raging sexists. We typically don?t have a monkey-see monkey-do, direct cause and effect relationship with the media we consume. Cultural influence works in much more subtle and complicated ways, however media narratives do have a powerful cultivation effect helping to shape cultural attitudes and opinions.

So when developers exploit sensationalized images of brutalized, mutilated and victimized women over and over and over again it tends to reinforce the dominant gender paradigm which casts men as aggressive and commanding and frames women as subordinate and dependent.

[...]

Consequently violent revenge based narratives, repeated ad nauseum, can also be harmful to men because they help further limit the possible responses men are allowed to have when faced with death or tragedy. This is unfortunate because interactive media has the potential to be a brilliant medium for people of all genders to explore difficult or painful subjects.

So to be clear here, the problem is not the fact that female characters die or suffer. Death touches all of our lives eventually and as such it?s often an integral part of dramatic storytelling. To say that women could never die in stories would be absurd, but it?s important to consider the ways that women?s deaths are framed and examine how and why they?re written.

There are some games that try to explore loss, death and grief in more genuine or authentic ways that do not sensationalize or exploit victimized women. Dear Esther, The Passage and To The Moon are a few indie games that investigate these themes in creative, innovative and sometimes beautiful ways. These more contemplative style games are a hopeful sign but they?re still largely the exception to the rule. A sizable chunk of the industry is still unfortunately trapped in the established pattern of building game narratives on the backs of brutalized female bodies.

Violence against women is a serious global epidemic; therefore, attempts to address the issue in fictional contexts demands a considerable degree of respect, subtlety and nuance. Women shouldn?t be mere disposable objects or symbolic pawns in stories about men and their own struggles with patriarchal expectations and inadequacies.

 

[Tanakh]

-snip-

Ohhh, he got you good Guppy, here she seems to be using EXACTLY the same arguments as "videogames makes you kill people" dudes with more or less the same objectives and even less concrete evidence or solid parameters except "I like this, don't like that". Though it's kinda creepy that someone that dislikes her have read so much of her writing.

 

[Olikar]

Also...out of curiosity...who determines what does and doesn't contribute to the "value of art"? Let me guess! Does their name rhyme with "Bolikar"?

Well there are generally accepted ideas about the purpose and value of art in western society derived from centuries of thought but this is admittedly not objective and in calling it irrelevant my wording was slightly off because their values on art aren't entirely irrelevant but only irrelevant to the accepted definition. What I should of said is that I find the values Anita-type feminists find in art (it's societal purpose and not it's aesthetic purpose) reprehensible and opposed to the values most artists would hold for their own work. If they want to judge art based on societal values then they're free to do so but shouldn't be surprised when people call they're criticism irrelevant or pointless or toxic to intellectual thought. They could of course create art purely for societal value but I think they'll realise pretty quickly art like that turns out to be utter shite.