So far, the Witcher 3 seems kind of sexist

[The Almighty Aardvark]

Now you're just grasping at straws here. None of the dialogue choices are clearly "right" or "wrong". Of course the bloody baron shoots geralts reply down when geralt chooses the "It's still all your fault"-option. That's what people tend to do when they pour their heart out to you about the dreadfull choices they make and you reply aggressively without any understanding.
Still doesn't make any of the choices more "right" than the other.

He shot it down because of course he shot it down. "It's still all your fault" expands out to Geralt saying the Baron's responsible for his wife's infidelity. There's no way that the Baron's responsible for his wife's cheating. It's the fact that this is the alternative to "You're right, you're both in the wrong here", doesn't say all that much about what they think of the alternative. It's the "wrong" choice because it's indefensible, and the characters in the game flat out tell you that.

What bothers me about the quest is how the developers handled it. I like the Bloody Baron quest, and I liked how they decided to humanize what would normally be a one dimensional villain. I'd love to see more quests like it, but it was toeing a dangerous line of giving him too much sympathy.

If that's true, then I think that's a pretty realistic approach. Home abuse is done by people who look like everyday normal persons, dealing with an imperfect marriage (something that the mayority of the married people relates to, because no marriage is perfect). You see their good side in public, and you wouldn't ever think them capable of doing such horrible things to their spouces in private. What would you do if you discover a long-time friend or a member from your family was that kind of person? (and that you knew they had their problems, but never suspected something so extreme). I know that isn't the part you have issues with, but I wanted to point this out.

EDIT: I certainly have to play these games. This story alone seems pretty interesting.

Totally agree with all this. The portrayal of characters like this as evil boogeymen is really unfortunate, I at the very least liked how human he was made to be.

And, all my objections aside, I'd say the game is well worth playing, and I enjoyed a lot of aspects of this questline.

Wait... rapes her? Maybe I wasn't paying attention, but I don't believe it was ever claimed or suggested in the game that he raped his wife.

It's not explicitly stated, but it's very strongly implied. She hates him, wants out of the marriage, wants him dead, would rather kill herself than be with him, and he beats her. While all of this is the case, they have a child, which she then goes to attempt to abort because she cannot stand the idea of bearing his child.

I can't really imagine a circumstance where that sex was consensual.

EDIT:

Are you familiar with the "seven storys" thesis? If not I recommend at least reading the wiki on it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven_Basic_Plots

Basically what it says is that of all the stories every told, they are only variations of seven basic concepts. So within those limiting seven concepts there is an endless (theoretically) variations that can be built upon those seven concepts, however every story ever told ultimately falls under those seven categories. So take that into account in the Witcher 3, look at all those short stories through out that entire game...and really it is remarkable that small writing team could make the game so interesting.

However that being said, there are bound to be plot points that aren't handled perfectly. Like your Baron example. But that shouldn't be used to take away from the body of the work itself. After all, you wouldn't slam a burger for it's pickles right?

It doesn't ruin it, sure, and I've been trying to really be clear that I enjoy the game despite this. But it's still a shot against it. I think it has negative implications, and it really sours a lot of this questline to me, but I still think it's very well written. The way the story is written just makes it seem like it's taking a bad (Yet not uncommon) stance on a very serious situation. Plot points handled poorly for any other reason can take away from a game, so I don't see why this should be any different.

 

[Amaror]

He shot it down because of course he shot it down. "It's still all your fault" expands out to Geralt saying the Baron's responsible for his wife's infidelity. There's no way that the Baron's responsible for his wife's cheating. It's the fact that this is the alternative to "You're right, you're both in the wrong here", doesn't say all that much about what they think of the alternative. It's the "wrong" choice because it's indefensible, and the characters in the game flat out tell you that.

So, your real problem is, is that that one line wasn't as well written as the other one. Fair enough, that's a pretty good complaint. Though it is quite silly to cry sexism over this one single line of dialogue not being as well written as the rest. Have you ever considered that maybe CDPR just didn't do quite as good a job in that one line? Instead of the thought that they are obviously sexist and trying to portray domestic abuse as a totally justified and nobel thing to do.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Wait... rapes her? Maybe I wasn't paying attention, but I don't believe it was ever claimed or suggested in the game that he raped his wife.

Well, considering she was recently pregnant I took that as the safe assumption. I mean, it's possible that the wife, despite absolutely despising him, consented to having sex with the Baron and that the Baron, despite brutally beating her and keeping her prisoner, never sexually assaulted her, but that seems less likely. Even if she did consent, though, it is immediately questionable when there's such a distinct difference of power in the relationship.

It's not explicitly stated, but it's very strongly implied. She hates him, wants out of the marriage, wants him dead, would rather kill herself than be with him, and he beats her. While all of this is the case, they have a child, which she then goes to attempt to abort because she cannot stand the idea of bearing his child.

I can't really imagine a circumstance where that sex was consensual.

Was there a time given to how far she was into her pregnancy though? I can't really remember. I figured she got pregnant before things had gotten completely unhinged. I don't know how long she was still with the Baron after he had murdered the guy she cheated with. If it's seven or eight months it could be that she got pregnant with his child before that happened. And seeing as when she miscarried the fetus was sizeable enough to have to be wrapped in a blanket, I would think that's the case. Doubt that it was with any affection from her side, but it was probably to keep up appearances for the few times her husband was actually home, so that she could spend the time he was away on the battlefield with the man she really loved.

And I don't know, but I think the game would not ommit or be cryptic about him raping his wife, when it's very matter of fact about him beating her.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

Was there a time given to how far she was into her pregnancy though? I can't really remember. I figured she got pregnant before things had gotten completely unhinged. I don't know how long she was still with the Baron after he had murdered the guy she cheated with. If it's seven or eight months it could be that she got pregnant with his child before that happened. And seeing as when she miscarried the fetus was sizeable enough to have to be wrapped in a blanket, I would think that's the case. Doubt that it was with any affection from her side, but it was probably to keep up appearances for the few times her husband was actually home, so that she could spend the time he was away on the battlefield with the man she really loved.

And I don't know, but I think the game would not ommit or be cryptic about him raping his wife, when it's very matter of fact about him beating her.

Watched the video, looks like this has been happening for roughly 16 years, since Tamara's 19, and apparently the affair went on for 3 years before the Baron found out. At the bare minimum 2, since the Baron says after 2 years her anger turned to indifference. So without a doubt she got pregnant well after she tried to kill the Baron.

Why the game didn't speak about it explicitly? It's worth noting that given the society this takes place in, it probably wouldn't have been considered rape, so the Baron would have had no notion that he raped anybody. Another possibility is that the writers also didn't think that this would qualify as rape. Honestly, I can't say for sure.

For reference, if anyone wants to watch it, here's the video of the Baron giving his side of things:

Spoiler

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

So, your real problem is, is that that one line wasn't as well written as the other one. Fair enough, that's a pretty good complaint. Though it is quite silly to cry sexism over this one single line of dialogue not being as well written as the rest. Have you ever considered that maybe CDPR just didn't do quite as good a job in that one line? Instead of the thought that they are obviously sexist and trying to portray domestic abuse as a totally justified and nobel thing to do.

This isn't just about one line being poorly written, this is what that line says about how this scenario was intended to be viewed. And it's well beyond just that one line, it's just that one line I think gives the best impression of the take they had on the situation. After the whole truth came out, they didn't see it any way besides "They're both at fault". If they had, they'd have found a justification that they themselves didn't think was bull for the second dialogue option.

They certainly weren't trying to portray domestic abuse as totally justified and noble, but the way things come across they were trying to portray the situation in the way that Politrukk interpreted it. That through cheating on him, and verbally abusing him, she brought it upon herself. Maybe slightly less harsh

 

[Casual Shinji]

Watched the video, looks like this has been happening for roughly 16 years, since Tamara's 19, and apparently the affair went on for 3 years before the Baron found out. At the bare minimum 2, since the Baron says after 2 years her anger turned to indifference. So without a doubt she got pregnant well after she tried to kill the Baron.

Why the game didn't speak about it explicitly? It's worth noting that given the society this takes place in, it probably wouldn't have been considered rape, so the Baron would have had no notion that he raped anybody. Another possibility is that the writers also didn't think that this would qualify as rape. Honestly, I can't say for sure.

For reference, if anyone wants to watch it, here's the video of the Baron giving his side of things:

Spoiler

Maybe it's a screw up on the writers part, in that they completely forgot to adress the circumstances by which she got pregnant. I've played through that arc a couple of times now and I never once stopped to actually think about the continuity of the proceedings.

 

[The Madman]

Now I'm not getting into the nitty gritty details here because I've been through this argument before and know perfectly well it leads nowhere, but there is something that should be emphasized in regards to the Bloody Baron quest-line:

-At no point are the Barons actions ever portrayed in a positive light. He is in the wrong for what he did, he is a bad guy, that is without question. The games doesn't even give you the option of supporting him for those actions. He *IS* however a bad guy with some positives to him: He treats Ciri well for example and genuinely seems to both understand how horrible he has been and wants to be better. This does not redeem his earlier actions, it gives him depth. Villains need something to make them vaguely sympathetic else-wise they're boring. The Baron is a villain, but he's one that by all indications desperately wants to be better, this is what makes him compelling.

-Many people are talking about the two 'you're both bad' and 'you suck' dialogue options but there's a third one as well that seems to be ignored. When asked whether Geralt wants to hear the Barons side of events, you can say no, at which point Geralt positively snarls that nothing the Baron says could make what he did better and that he doesn't want to hear it. The game then continues on from there.

Beyond that no, I don't think Witcher 3 is sexist. I think the game most certainly takes place in a setting where sexism is rampant and that the developers aren't shy in terms of the occasional bit of titillation, but I don't believe there was ever any sort of sexist intention by the developers either purposely or by accident. The game features a whole roster of compelling, well-written female characters both good and bad. Not just the romantic interests either, but figures like Cerys, Phillipa, Priscilla, and of course Ciri.

 

[Chaos Isaac]

I mean. It's appropriately sexist to a point?

I never really thought the game was good beyond visuals and world-building, but as I consider this part of the world building... It's not a bad thing. It's not sexist for the same of sexism or male superiority or any stupid shit like that. It's more a reflection of some parts of our reality.

It also makes sense with all of the idiots running around.

 

[Fox12]

Welp, thankfully I prepped a flame proof bunker for just this occasion.

But yeah, The Witcher series is kinda sexist sometimes.

I remember Geralt mentioning Yennifer's distinctive scent of lilac and gooseberries to strangers only twice, both times in the form of a question to discern her location; he's hardly "obsessed".

Spoiler: Sure

While my original comment contained hyperbole, I'm still allowed to think it's weird and creepy and it still took me out of the experience for a moment.

Oh, yes, the young woman that smelled like lavender and cream? Why, I remember smelling her two days ago. She traveled west, I think.

Spoiler

Not creepy : P

It's something I've noticed with some older movies and books that recognizing someone by scent is considered romantic, nowadays it seems to be more associated with creepy behavior as it's generally portrayed as something stalkers and obsessed people do. In the case of the Witcher though, it might just be kind of a clunky way to demonstrate Geralt's superior senses, his sense of smell is supposed to be pretty advanced.

Could also be a language thing, it reads like something that likely sounded more romantic or normal in polish but lost some of the context being translated to English.

I'm sure it was supposed to sound romantic, but it does seem kind of creepy when you think about it, haha. I was reading Jane Austen's stuff the other night, and apparently it was considered romantic to keep a lock of someone's hair, even if they didn't know about it.

 

[Silence]

snip

You are right about that the Beautiful Elite is a trope that applies here, but keep in mind that these are sorceresses, who use their magic to improve their looks. That they are the best looking is not only because these are the love interests - it's the lore of the world.

As I haven't yet played Hearts of Stone, I'm not sure about Shani (found her quite average in Witcher 1), but there the trope might actually apply without background story.

 

[infohippie]

I disagree that it's untrue. The game painting the situation as morally grey 'them being as bad as each other' is something I disagree with and feel that it's painting the abuser in a more sympathetic light than it should.
Just because you don't agree with my opinion doesn't make it 'untrue'. I'm fine if people think it's not trying to make you feel sympathetic. That's fine.

"The abuser"? Which one? They're BOTH abusive of each other. Or does only abuse towards women count?

 

[Flathole]

"(video game) IS MISOGYNISTIC!" is the new "(game) ENCOURAGES VIOLENCE!"

I use the term "misogynistic" because I've NEVER read or heard anything about how a video game portrays men in general in a negative, unrealistic light.

The notion of years of spousal abused being even close to equivalent to cheating on your husband is incredibly dismissive of the severity of spousal abuse, and gives the suggestion that somehow she was asking for it by goading him, and cheating on him.

MAYBE the writers were simply trying to show how people can fool themselves into feeling justified. This is one character, one questline. Writing a human, believable character with views and thought processes that you find abhorrent is the hallmark of talent. It's easy to write a self-insert that parrots your own views, but someone you would despise IRL, while still making them relatable and understandable, is difficult, but creates a whole new experience compared to homogenized characters with clear-cut heroes/villains (ie the newer Assassin's Creed games).

An easy way to deflect claims of misogyny, racism, or whatever is just to make the characters in question murderous psychos who only eat the brains of infant children. And by easy, I mean lazy and disingenuous.

It made me kind of uncomfortable watching the Bloody Baron's questline, I liked that they made him human, but they kept toeing the line between making him understandable and human, to making him seem sympathetic and justified.

Reminds me of the mercenary fellow from Spec Ops: The Line, a well-written character in a well-written game.

Spoiler

Personally, I shot his head after the trucks flips. He did terrible things... but he was doomed to die either way. He seemed to truly believe in his methods. Either way, having him suffer in agony would be pointless.

Can you not form your own opinion on the character and situation, or do you assume nobody who plays the game can? Do you really believe men will play this game, complete the quest, then go savagely beat their wives because a video game told them to?

 

[FirstNameLastName]

They deserve eachother because she cheated on him and drove him insane and he apparently developed into a psychopath because of it so she made him into what he has become due to abuse.

At least that's what I'm reading from this.

I can't quite see how people can't look beyond that it's right their in the words, SHE, MADE, HIM.

If anything not judging her is the most sexist part of all.

This is how I'm interpreting how the writer was trying to make us view the situation, and this is what I take issue with. As I mentioned in the OP, and Phasmal mentioned in one of her posts, there is this notion that this scene conveys that she made him beat her. That she was verbally abusive to the point he had no other choice. This not only absolves him of responsibility, but it ignores the incredibly horrifying context of their relationship. To summarize things:

- She fell in love with another man and cheated on him
- She announced her intention to leave him
- He killed the man she loved in front of her in a fit of rage and fed him to dogs (Which he admitted he was wrong to do, good for him!)
- She gets into a fit of rage and tries to kill the Baron.

Now as things go, we've established that she didn't love the Baron anymore, and that she now loathes him to the point of wanting to kill him. Over the next however many years of their marriage, she attempted to kill herself multiple times, kill him, and escape. It is very clear that she is being kept in this marriage against her will to a man who she'd rather kill herself than be with. On top of that, the Baron beats her and rapes her, resulting in her trying to abort their child.

No shit she's "emotionally abusive". She loathes this man, and she wants nothing more than to be out of this marriage. In a normal, healthy relationship, emotional abuse is terrible. When you're trapping someone in a relationship with you, beating them, and raping them, you lose the right to expect them to be nice to you.

"But he loves her" and "She knew how to push all the right buttons" are two of the prime justifications that people who engage in spousal abuse use to defend their actions. If someone is emotionally abusive, you leave them. You don't hit them. It's never an excuse, even in relationships without so much context behind them.

In our world, yes, but I'm not sure that applies to Temeria. It's been a while since I've played the Witcher, so I'm not too sure exactly which religion is dominant in Velen, but the Church of the Eternal Fire is apparently the official religion of both Temeria and Redania, so it seems likely that's the official religion of Velen even if it isn't necessarily practiced much. There are also various religious practices around The Ladies of the Wood and Melitele, but throughout the game the Witchhunters (affiliated with the CotEF) seem to have increasingly more influence in Novigrad and become increasingly hostile to anything that goes against the church. Further more, unless I'm missing something, I'm not sure they actually address specifically how marriage is handled under any of these religions, but if it's anything like most of the European societies from which much of the lore is inspired it's quite possible they hold to the idea of marriage being for life.

Just saying; in medieval societies leaving a marriage is often a much bigger deal than it is now, especially if you're some kind of ruler in an already troubled region. Since the Baron rules more by force than respect it's questionable what impact would have, but we don't really know exactly how big of a deal remarriage is.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

Do you really believe men will play this game, complete the quest, then go savagely beat their wives because a video game told them to?

Yup. You got it. That's exactly what I believe

EDIT:

Okay, I got snippy, and I'm doing what I said I wouldn't do at the start of this topic.

Of course I don't think that. I've said nothing that would suggest that I believe something so ridiculous.

The thread is long, and I've made a fair few posts, but just to summarize things I've already said: I like the fact that they rounded him out more than a cartoon villain, that is inherent in good writing. I'm not objecting to the fact they made him human. What I objected to was the way that the game handled the situation. I've gone into detail about this at least a couple times before in this thread, but it doesn't boil down to "The characters weren't perfect so this game is sexist".

People can form their own opinions, which, in fact, I did here. However there is still the way that the game was written to convey the events inside of it. The game can be written in a way that endorses a specific interpretation, and that's what I'm arguing it did. The work itself can be built on racist or sexist ideas. If you disagree, there's a lot of old English literature about Africans that you really should read.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

In our world, yes, but I'm not sure that applies to Temeria. It's been a while since I've played the Witcher, so I'm not too sure exactly which religion is dominant in Velen, but the Church of the Eternal Fire is apparently the official religion of both Temeria and Redania, so it seems likely that's the official religion of Velen even if it isn't necessarily practiced much. There are also various religious practices around The Ladies of the Wood and Melitele, but throughout the game the Witchhunters (affiliated with the CotEF) seem to have increasingly more influence in Novigrad and become increasingly hostile to anything that goes against the church. Further more, unless I'm missing something, I'm not sure they actually address specifically how marriage is handled under any of these religions, but if it's anything like most of the European societies from which much of the lore is inspired it's quite possible they hold to the idea of marriage being for life.

Just saying; in medieval societies leaving a marriage is often a much bigger deal than it is now, especially if you're some kind of ruler in an already troubled region. Since the Baron rules more by force than respect it's questionable what impact would have, but we don't really know exactly how big of a deal remarriage is.

I'd actually been thinking about this as well. Even if divorce and remarriage was forbidden, his wife was trying to run away. She pretty much already had before he decided to come over and drag her back. She'd for sure decided to get out of that marriage, he was keeping her there by force. He had the option to let her go, though to be fair she might not want to leave him with their daughter. Hell, that's probably why they stayed together for so long.

Either way, I think it's a little much expecting her to be nice when she's pretty much being held hostage. If a scenario like this happened in real life, I feel like nobody would be saying "Well yeah, the kidnapper beat her repeatedly, but to be fair she was really emotionally abusive."

The daughter does make things more complicated, but dealing with her emotional abuse wasn't something he had to live with, being married to a man who slaughtered her lover in front of her was something Anna had no choice in.

 

[Overusedname]

Is Geralt not allowed to have backwards opinions as well about things? He's a monster killer in a a feudal fantasy world, like how progressive do you actually expect him to be?

I mean the little I've played of Witcher 3, Geralt doesn't come across as a guy who's really good with relationships. So it kinda fits the character that he would say something like that.

To draw a comparison... LA Noir would be a sexist game too, even racist. Well no shit, it's 1950s america and it's characters are flawed. Not every character needs to be a rolemodel, ya know?

That's a pretty solid argueement really. I've never particularly understood why the main character of any given story has to be perfect to satisfying some kind of role model quota. Flaws are interesting.