So, I agree with pretty much everything in Anita Sarkeesian's Damsels in Distress video.

[Keymik]

Oh wow. Replies that are testosterone fueled mockeries of anything resembling an actual response that isn't completely ad hominem, that manage to either twist, distort, or otherwise miss completely the points made by the topic creator as well as Anita's video. I'm...I'm not sure else I was expecting, honestly.

Which isn't to say that there aren't reasonable posts made within the topic, of course, but they're a minority against a shambling monstrosity of ignorance, misogyny, and all-around sexism that only serve to reinforce exactly why we need this video series, as well as developers to help contribute against this colossal embarrassment to the gaming community.

Sort of puts those arguments of how the Escapist is "Elitist" to rest for me, there is nothing special about the crop that visits here than any other gaming forum/site. Are you old wrinkled farts really that afraid of a woman's opinion that you'd rather just stick your fingers in your ears and pretend such issues don't exist?

Pot, meet kettle?

"You're a femi-nazi!"
"You're just saying that because you're a misogynist!"
"Nuh-uh!"
"Ya-huh!"

Progress!

You're only saying that because you are a nazi communist who hates women and freedom and applepie.

 

[generals3]

So you don't like someone saying it in a publicly funded video series that no one insists you watched with a host that plays video games herself.

Yes. Just like you'd probably dislike videos where people say things you don't like. I don't see what's so special about disliking a video where someone makes assertions you don't like.

She isn't trying to ban video games hell she's not even suggesting people stop playing the ones she thinks are the worst offenders. Why are you acting like she is?

She is however suggesting that these games reinforce attitudes she wants to see removed from society. Unless off course new feminists like "toxic, paternalistic and patronizing views of women".

All she is doing is saying 'Guys you know maybe you could portray women a little better?'

Why is that so bad. It's no different to Yahtzee banging on about crap fps games or Jim about online DRM...

And than also goes on how the portrayal of women in games is somehow linked to real life attitudes. Why do you forget that? You know if the anti-violent game crowd would just ask for more non-violent games gamers wouldn't get mad at them. What makes gamers mad are how they imply that said games are poisoning society. Same goes with Anita.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

And than also goes on how the portrayal of women in games is somehow linked to real life attitudes. Why do you forget that? You know if the anti-violent game crowd would just ask for more non-violent games gamers wouldn't get mad at them. What makes gamers mad are how they imply that said games are poisoning society. Same goes with Anita.

This. In big bold words.

1. Nobody, and I mean nobody, has claimed that they do not want strong/better female characters in video games. The consensus seems to be, however, that the "feminist" approach of demonizing games males (and, yes, plenty of females as well) enjoy is both intellectually dishonest and flagrantly biased.

It is mandating that the medium bow to a particular view point, and if it doesn't, then it is a den of heinous "misogyny."

Jesus.

2. Just so people are aware, this general3 bloke already pointed out that he didn't particularly care for the bikini armor concept. Stop harping on it.

3. "I don't ask that my opinion be made into the law." - Bill Maher.

Which is what these types are trying to do.

And, in general, do you know why people, not just gamers, have developed a dislike for the term "feminist"?


There's another one where a shrill woman screams at a guy in a "gender equality" group, calling him scum and all sorts of other things.

These women. These women are the reason. These are the women who are at the forefront, galvanizing the troops, so to speak. ;D

I'll admit, that's a bit unfair, but seriously now...it makes me feel a bit dirty to employ tactics like what those sorts use by getting all hyperbolic and anecdotal like that. *shrug*

The actual concept of feminism? The real one which enabled suffrage. That's the one I can get behind. Philosophical equality with a logical understanding and acceptance of biological differences between the sexes! Woo! The modern self-imposed victimization that's being propagated by these folks is, at the least, disconcerting, and at the most, god damned infuriating.

4. I've mentioned this before, but personally? I like women in armor. I like women without armor. I like women in leather. I like women who aren't in leather. Frankly, I just enjoy the visual appeal of womenfolk. I also very much prefer and greatly enjoy deep, well written, and well fleshed out female characters. I also enjoy popcorn. We're a very mercurial species in that respect. Our likes and wants shift pretty consistently in time with our moods.

I want to address more things specifically, but I'm not confident in my current ability to remain civil. Therefore, I'll moderate myself a bit.

Cheers.

 

[dementis]

My only issue with Anita is that she purely concentrates on females in video games and I feel there are other groups that get treated a hell of a lot worse than females.

I think the reason that video games still have this view of females is that they're a relatively young media compared to everything else, think the equivalent of a 8-11 year old kid who thinks the opposite sex is icky! Give it a few more years and we'll mature into a nice healthy medium that treats women equally whilst still misrepresenting every other group.

 

[Lady Larunai]

Since its dinner time i will make this short, and answer with: since you don't like male points of view on anita's work as it doesn't count here are 2 females takes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJihi5rB_Ek

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDtyrK1butI

the males are not alone on their dislike

might add more after dinner

 

[IceForce]

So, congratulations you have an unpopular opinion, aren't you a special little flower!

Indeed. I'll never understand why some people think their opinions are important enough to warrant their own separate thread.

Speaking of which, where did the OP go? They haven't replied to this thread once.
It just further cements in my mind that they must be simply badge-fishing.

 

[generals3]

I'm going to make a little debunk post about sexism in videogames just because it's stuck in my head and don't want to start a new topic for something that actually very well fits in this topic. And I eagerly await rebuttals because i feel they can only be funny.

First of all: We established that the marketing may be sexist. However it is also well known and basic knowledge marketing is discriminatory by nature (and there is even a lot of literature which suggests it HAS to be). Whether it discriminates based on nationality, age, sex, personal interests, size of your wallet or whatever. Marketing doesn't like to treat people equally and rightfully so. Complaining about sexist targeting in the name of social equality is like complaining water is made of two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom in the name of science. It makes no sense.

Secondly: keeping that in mind it is natural for a product to please a certain category of people. An easy game could be considered racist towards hardcore gamers (yes a group such as hardcore gamers can be considered a race, let's not confuse race with ethnicity). However we would all find it ridiculous to call these games racist, wouldn't we?

Thirdly: Considering the games are trying to please a certain set of costumers the way to determine whether a game is sexist is not by looking how characters are portrayed but the standards used to portray them. Take bikini armor MMORPG's for instance. They are aimed at a group of people who find male characters with fancy/classy/bad ass armors aesthetically pleasing and also find sexy armor on female characters aesthetically pleasing. Both genders are subject to the same standards: they are both being aimed at aesthetically pleasing the target costumer. What would be sexist is if the developers did not follow the same standards for both genders and would totally overlook the aesthetic part of male characters, which they don't.

Fourthly: The fact that men are overrepresented in the "strong character" area does not imply sexism. In a story driven game developers have to make a choice for the gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. for the characters. Imagine if developers had to be 100% politically correct? That would mean that you would have strong characters of every gender, every sexual orientation, every religion (if religion is relevant in the game), every ethnicity, etc. in every game. That's plainly unfeasible. The gaming industry is going to appear sexist because developers have to make choices and there is always going to a group which ends up being underrepresented. And what you also need to keep in mind is that you cannot take an average of characters in all games because every game is a separate entity. As such you need to look at whether or not a single game is sexist.

There, now please feel free to over-analyze and over-think this.

 

[Lady Larunai]

I'm going to make a little debunk post about sexism in videogames just because it's stuck in my head and don't want to start a new topic for something that actually very well fits in this topic. And I eagerly await rebuttals because i feel they can only be funny.

First of all: We established that the marketing may be sexist. However it is also well known and basic knowledge marketing is discriminatory by nature (and there is even a lot of literature which suggests it HAS to be). Whether it discriminates based on nationality, age, sex, personal interests, size of your wallet, etc. Marketing doesn't like to treat people equally and rightfully so.

Secondly: keeping that in mind it is natural for a product to please a certain category of people. An easy game could be considered racist towards hardcore gamers (yes a group such as hardcore gamers can be considered a race, let's not confuse race with ethnicity). However we would all find it ridiculous to call these games racist, wouldn't we?

Thirdly: Considering the games are trying to please a certain set of costumers the way to determine whether a game is sexist is not by looking how characters are portrayed but the standards used to portray them. Take bikini armor MMORPG's for instance. They are aimed a group of people who find male characters with fancy/classy/bad ass armors aesthetically pleasing and also find sexy armor on female characters aesthetically pleasing. Both genders are subject to the same standards: they are both being aimed at aesthetically pleasing the target costumer. What would be sexist is if the developers did not follow the same standards for both genders and would totally overlook the aesthetic part of male characters, which they don't.

Fourthly: While unrelated to this prior analysis the fact that men are overrepresented in the "strong character" area does not imply sexism. In a story driven game developers have to make a choice for the gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. for the characters. Imagine if developers had to be 100% politically correct? That would mean that you would have strong characters of every gender, every sexual orientation, every religion (if religion is relevant in the game), every ethnicity, etc. in every game. That's plainly unfeasible. The gaming industry is going to appear sexist because developers have to make choices and there is always going to a group which ends up being underrepresented. And what you also need to keep in mind is that you cannot take an average of characters in all games because every game is a separate entity. As such you need to look at whether or not a single game is sexist.

There, now please feel free to over-analyze and over-think this.

Can i under analyze it and ask if you want to trade videogames for makeup?

 

[generals3]

Can i under analyze it and ask if you want to trade videogames for makeup?

Unfortunately makeup doesn't entertain me as much as video games so i'll go ahead and keep the video games.

 

[ninjaRiv]

snip

A good example is the bikini armour you brought up. That to me is 'contempt' for women. We can't really be heroes so we may as well be the sex appeal. A captured princess can't save herself a man has to do it. There's not room for women in this story beyond getting killed and providing motivation for the male lead. Do you not see how that is mysogynistic?

Don't you see how that is contemptuous.

Also just because women play Scarlet Blade doesn't mean it isn't sexist. You can be sexist against your own gender. That said I doubt many women play it.

Also I'd say they have an ingrained predjudice becuase as you are so eager to point out they are so often aimed at men.

What do you think of Red Sonja? This whole bikini armour got me to thinking and I was reminded of the fact that Gail Simone, celebrated female comic book writer, has taken over writing duties for the title.

Red Sonja is the lady version of Conan; she's a rude barbarian who loves to fight and kind of doesn't give a fuck. I sort of wonder if this is maybe a compromise between the sexualised and strong female leads in fiction.

I wanted to get your opinion because you obviously know your shit.

I didn't know Simone was doing Red Sonja.

I wonder how she's gonna reconcile that "I will only sleep with a man who can defeat me in combat" with the rape in Sonja's backstory. Seems.... I dunno... kinda messed up that a rape victim would offer herself to one who would violently subjugate her.

Am I wrong here?

I don't think you're wrong, it's pretty crazy. But then again, she's a barbarian so I guess that's their code or whatever. Kind of like Conan would take any woman he wants as his sex slave but a woman who could best him in combat, he might consider his equal. I'm guessing here, though. I haven't read much of either character so I don't know if I'm at all right, or just talking shit but from what I do know, I figure that's how they work. So I guess Sonja sort of felt weak after being raped and decided she needed to get stronger? Crazy barbarians!!!

 

[Soviet Heavy]

I'd pay more attention to her videos if they weren't so boring. For someone with a lot to say on subjects, she has a terrible stage presence and her presentation lacks any visual punch to keep people interested.

 

[Sack of Cheese]

*snip*

Must be hard having a hobby where its focus group isn't yourself.

A strong protagonist who represents one's own gender is often very desirable. Some people don't understand the frustration and point out very few examples of strong female characters, when I can tell all you want are more recognition and stronger support for your own gender.

 

[TheDoctor455]

Sorry. Wait, no. I'm not sorry. I'm really not sorry at all. Sorry I'm not sorry.

There's a lot of misconceptions about what she's saying in the video. A lot of strawman arguments about her video. And a lot of downright wrong and sometimes misogynists rebuttals of her videos.

On the other hand, I pretty much agree with pretty much everything in her video. Maybe not %100, but the very vast majority. Since there are a lot of videos attempting to, usually quite poorly explain why they disagree with her video, picking it apart piece by piece usually with strawman arguments and so forth.

I'm going to, piece by piece, explain why I agree with the various points she makes in the video.

0:45
One of the things I like about her introduction to the video, is that she states that it is very much possible to enjoy media that contains sexism, without approving of the sexism itself. A statement that has sadly, mostly fallen on deaf ears. As many of the arguments against her are on the argument that she feels and claims the opposite. A strawman argument that ignores the fact she said this, because it doesn't go along with their agenda against her.

I enjoy video games. I enjoy video games with sexism in them. That does not mean I do not think that video games can and should be improved upon in their gender representation.

Dinosaur Planet
There is nothing wrong with this example at all. And I agree entirely, the way in which Dinosaur Planet had a strong woman originally, only to eventually play second fiddle to Fox McCloud, is saddening to me. And an evidence of sexism that has long been in the industry, and still exists today. There has been recent talk about "Remember Me" and articles from Penny Arcade [http://www.penny-arcade.com/report/article/remember-mes-surprising-connection-to-facebook-and-why-its-protagonist-had], about the industry purposely pushing female characters out of the way for male ones. Crystal, is a strong female character we lost because of this industry practice, and I lament it.

And, there is nothing historically inaccurate about her claim. This is a piece of video game history that happened.

And not only did it happen. But it is a fantastic starting example. To exemplify the point that women needing help or being put into compromising positions in games is not the problem. But how female empowerment is so often traded for male empowerment. Crystal goes from empowered to damsel. And from a subject, to an object.

A lot of people criticize her going into historical precedent for the damsel in distress trope. As it doesn't related to modern video games in the modern era. However, I think it is important to provide historical context in general. That also shows how she isn't singling out video games as having a problem, both merely taking part of a cultural trend that has pervaded all media for centuries. Many people blame Anita of being against video games and singling out video games for attack. In reality, she is just showing that video games are just another piece of media which partakes in this sexist trope. In fact, Damsels in Distress are still fairly common in Hollywood. Of course, just because this has a long history, and still happens in Hollywood, does not excuse video games. And does not mean that video games cannot be better than that.

It was also a great specific example to bring up the origins of Donkey Kong.

Her examples of which games Peach is or is not kidnapped are also accurate. The sports games and so forth are not the "core games". And the fact that Super Mario Bros. 2, where she is playable, is merely a re-skinning of Doki Doki Panic, only makes things more sad.

She goes on after this, to describe the subject object dichotomy. Which makes sense. Also, this is true. The damsel in distress trope, the biggest problem with it, is the double standard in which men tend to be given the status of subject, while women are robbed of it and relegated to the status of object. Not allowed to have their own agency.

"Most often becoming or reduced to, a prize to be won, a treasure to be found, or a goal to be achieved."
I agree with this assessment. Also, this is one very common statement that people who disagree with Anita, lazily take issue with. Such as thunderf00t's incredibly bitter strawman rebuttal which is pathetic and embarrassing to witness(it should be noted that both thunderf00t and TJ "The Amazing Atheist" have a strong vendetta against feminists and both of them are very defensive about white heterosexual male atheists and like to think they are a minority. And that being white men makes them every bit as much of a minority as being atheist.).

The lazy rebuttal?
"Or a loved one to be protected. Good God girl you are one sick puppy something something hyperbolic drivel about empathy."

Why is it lazy? It's a strawman argument and that completely misses the point. There is nothing wrong with wanting to help others, have empathy for others, wanting to protect those you care about. And this is not what Anita is attacking. In the majority of these games, female characters have cheap, one dimensional characterization, and are made as an excuse, not as characters in and of themselves. Nary is it implied that Mario and Peach care for each other. And the majority of these "damsel" characters, are females made to be helpless, without explanation other than them being women. With no other explanation for their helplessness and needing of saving, than being women. It is cheap, lazy characterization, and it is a double standard in which men are allowed to be heroes, save the day, and save others, while women are reduced to being helpless objects.

It is natural and good to want to help others. It is sexist to create a double standard where female characters are tended to be rendered helpless and in need of saving rather than men. And in the majority of the cases where the trope is applied, the female characters are treated more like objects than loved ones. Their feelings and desires and agency are not expressed.

"I've heard it said that in the game of patriarchy, women are not the opposing team. They are the ball."
I don't know who originally said this quote, but it is brilliant, and related to far more than merely the damsel in distress trope. In fact this is related to the whole "dating game", which which many men promote obscene and ridiculous theories about "alpha males", "friend zones" and other such nonsense. The idea that a man's worth is judged by how much sex he's having, and how desirable the women he's having sex with are seen by the average man. In societies' dating game, women are treated as a possession of value depending on their looks and number of sexual contacts. Which is extremely predatory and sad, but that's a topic for another time.

I also agree with her claim that not all damsels are created equal. And Zelda's role in Wind Waker is one of the more gender forward in the Zelda games. And indeed, Wind Waker is one of the better Zelda games in terms of gender representation. Also containing characters like Medli. Tetra and Medli are awesome. And have a decent amount of female agency, subverting the trope a bit.

And as she states, and I agree again and have already stated my reasons for why, the problem isn't so much of showing women as having weakness or flaws. But of ripping the ability and agency of female characters, often even ones who are canonically stated to be capable, for that of male leads. It should also be noted that this trope and the problems involved in it, are heavily related to the fact that women in games are underrepresented in general. The damsel in distress trope rips away the empowerment from female characters much in the way that publishers often try to rip away female representation from developers. Remember, Jim Sterling's point about magazine covers and so forth.

It is also good to see the contrast between female and male characters who are dis-empowered presented. The problem isn't that female characters are shown to be in compromising positions in games. In plenty of games, male characters are captured, incapacitated, and so forth. But in contrast with the damsel in distress trope, male characters are typically allowed some kind of agency in their own escape.

Later, here's the part I might take the most issue with, if anything. What she's doing is showing how the tropes are around, especially helped by many remakes. However, I think it comes off a bit counter-intuitive to her point about still being able to enjoy games with sexism in them. Overall I don't disagree, I love HD remakes, even if classic games had some sexist issues. And I'm a retro gamer in general. That being said, it does make me realize how new generation are going to continue to be exposed to the same old tropes. In this case, though, I would have broke away from the traditional example, and shown more modern games with the damsel in distress trope.

That is about the only decision in her video that I disagree with. Really.

So, I'm sorry I'm not sorry. Because she's right and I completely agree with her. Also, one common criticism of her video is that she's "playing captain obvious". And I agree that, yes, most of the stuff in her video should not be mindblowingly new to most people. Her points should be obvious. However, given how many people defensively and viciously disagree with her, I would say that stating the obvious is still quite important, because many people clearly do not see that her points are true.

Thunderfoot does seem to have a stick up his ass about feminists in general.

TJ on the other hand... only a certain brand of feminists in particular. And all he does in his video (if you bothered to watch it) is comment on how disappointing it was that Anita disabled comments on her videos. Nothing else. He even says at the beginning of his video that he doesn't have many problems with the content of her video. In fact, he spends most of the video criticizing/mocking self-proclaimed 'feminists' that were very rude to him on his blog. Again, did you actually watch his video about it?

On that note, is why I have very little respect for Anita as an intellectual. She disabled comments on the vast majority of her videos. And when I tried to leave a comment on her channel's comment page, politely asking her to enable comments on her videos (and given a well-reasoned argument for why she should do so), that comment was deleted within SECONDS of me posting it in order to make room for her sycophants. That isn't exactly what I'd call a sterling example of intellectual integrity.

As for her video... I'd say that yes, there is sexism in the industry...

but a lot of it isn't driven by malice that some people seem to think it is. Most of it is driven by laziness.

Nintendo cranking out the same kind of story again and again and again isn't them conveying a message, its them not having a creative spark in them to begin with.

Now, is the 'default' setup of a lot of games steeped in sexism? Yes, possibly.

But why does the industry do this? Because that's where they think the easy money is.

If we want more varied characters, stronger female characters, etc. we need to reward developers and publishers who take the risk to make a game with a strong female character in it. (assuming its actually a good game)

Take for instance, Beyond Good and Evil. Classic game. Strong female protagonist, admirably so. Great story, slightly wonky gameplay... but amazing game all around. What happened? Ubisoft made the mistake of having it published alongside its also excellent Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. Which... also had a strong female character... but not as a playable one. Why is that a problem? Go onto gametrailers and do a search for both games. From what I recall... you'll find no less than five trailers for Prince of Persia, some of which emulate movie trailers. And you'll find no more than maybe... three (more likely two) trailers for Beyond Good and Evil. Why wasn't BGE marketed better? Because it was largely experimental in a number of different ways, whereas PoP was a reboot of a popular classic series, AND had a male lead. Why does the male lead part bring it up? Because that's all the industry currently believes is guaranteed to sell.

So if we want better and more varied characters, we need to speak with our wallets and reward great games that have great characters in them. Simple as that. It'll take a while for the industry to acknowledge it, but eventually... they'll have to pay attention to a shift like that or they'll go the way of the dodo and pave the way for someone else to take their place.

 

[AuronFtw]

fishing all the badges, fishing super hard

Anyway, who cares? Everyone knows video games are sexist, it's kind of the byproduct of 30 years of geek/nerd culture indoctrinating every dev and every publisher. They grew up/learned their trade in a field with little to no females. As more females become coders, devs and the like it'll be less and less of an issue (spoilers; it isn't even that much of an issue now, they're just blowing it out of proportion because internet popularity is fun).

 

[blackrave]

Thing is, she states obvious things
Yes, it was dick move to make Crystal from protagonist into damsel
Yes, it gets ridiculous that Peach and Zelda is being kidnapped on regular basis
And sadly sexism exists in game media
But not because that is some conspiration, but rather because awfully large amount of game developers have no frigging idea what exactly female is and how to make such character.
So her video was
[sub]Not bad, not good, it simply was.[/sub]

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

I'm going to make a little debunk post about sexism in videogames just because it's stuck in my head and don't want to start a new topic for something that actually very well fits in this topic. And I eagerly await rebuttals because i feel they can only be funny.

So essentially what you're saying is that the reason women are objectified in so many games isn't because developers are sexist, but because games are consciously marketed to sexists?

 

[Okysho]

Dinosaur Planet
There is nothing wrong with this example at all. And I agree entirely, the way in which Dinosaur Planet had a strong woman originally, only to eventually play second fiddle to Fox McCloud, is saddening to me. And an evidence of sexism that has long been in the industry, and still exists today. There has been recent talk about "Remember Me" and articles from Penny Arcade [http://www.penny-arcade.com/report/article/remember-mes-surprising-connection-to-facebook-and-why-its-protagonist-had], about the industry purposely pushing female characters out of the way for male ones. Crystal, is a strong female character we lost because of this industry practice, and I lament it.

Maybe it's just me, but I think this is more due to Nintendo's general business practices than some industry practice of pushing female characters aside. Nintendo has a history with placing their popular characters (especially Mario) into another game. In this instance, it was Fox McCloud, and let's face it, people want to play as Fox in Star Fox game, not some mysterious character they've never heard of, or is the Sonic community the only one like that? Could they have handled it better? Yeah, probably, but I think saying that they did it just to push a female character aside because she's female is sort of a stretch.

That's my counterpoint to this argument also. I don't think Nintendo had any misogynistic intentions when Miyamoto said "Hey, that character uses the same anthropromorphic style as starfox". The meaning behind it was more of a "Hmm that character looks like Fox. We'd probably get more sales out of it if we switched the character model. People know who that guy is"

 

[Requia]

My main issue with the thing is, that she implies some sort of malice on the part of the developers, publisher and possibly even gamers. She makes it seem like everyone is pushing an anti-women agenda to further their own male status. And that is just being paranoid.
The DiD is mostly lazy writing. Women can't rescue themselves in games? I think I've rescued thousands of men in my gamer life who couldn't rescue themselves either. And most male and female characters in games are really badly written, stereotypical or bland. Those are all tropes. But no trope is designed to hurt a single gender or enforce some sinister world view.

The cause of the problem is not an excuse for the problem. Though this is something a lot of feminists completely fail to understand, Anita included, understanding the causes is also critical to fixing the problem (in this case, in fact I suspect in nearly all gender issues with modern works, its part crap writing and partly a lack of female characters providing a counter balance).

Really long bit

The rest of this I have to agree with you on though.

 

[Periodic]

The question of whether or not sexism in games is relevant hinges entirely on the demographics question. Is sexism in video games the primary reason that men make up the vast majority of the video game audience, and if sexism wasn't a factor, would that cause a significant degree of gender equalization? You give evidence that it would, then it is something to consider. Personally, I have doubts.

There's nothing wrong with making a product that panders to a specific demographic. There are industries that pander to men, women, white people, black people, whatever. People have different perspectives and demeanors based on these things, and have different interests, like it or not. The idea that the video game industry is showing contempt towards women by sexualizing women in their games is like the idea that the porn industry is showing contempt towards women by sexualizing women in their movies. Or for that matter, that romance novel writers show contempt towards men by writing shallow male characters who are only intended to satisfy the fantasies of female readers.

The reality is, the difference between the general male and female mental state is pretty firmly rooted in physiology. This ideological demand for unisex entertainment is unfairly restrictive to the preferences of both sexes. Even if it were known that men and women at a natural level enjoyed video games equally, it would likely just result in more games being made that specifically pander to women at the expense of men.

It's a shame that female gamers feel marginalized, but demanding that the industry change to accommodate a minority's taste is unrealistic. This is, ultimately, just entertainment. It's not social justice.

 

[generals3]

I'm going to make a little debunk post about sexism in videogames just because it's stuck in my head and don't want to start a new topic for something that actually very well fits in this topic. And I eagerly await rebuttals because i feel they can only be funny.

So essentially what you're saying is that the reason women are objectified in so many games isn't because developers are sexist, but because games are consciously marketed to sexists?

Great, you've suggested anyone who thinks sexy women are aesthetically pleasing a sexist.

And if we're talking about the choice for protagonists or other characters, whats wrong with preferring such character to be of your gender which makes it easier to identify yourself with them? That's far from being sexism.