The rampant Sexualization in videogames

[rob_simple]

Uh huh, here's the thing, though: we have plenty of games that already pander to the male teen-to-late-twenties demographic. In fact, just about every game is tweaked at least a little to fall more on the male side of things.

So what? How is that even an argument to counter my point? It doesn't matter if they already have plenty of toys, you're still taking toys away. And guess what not everyone who likes T&A likes the same kind of genre. Maybe you're removing T&A from a game in a genre where it isn't very present.

Because essentially what you are saying is, 'there are plenty of games that cater exclusively to men, therefore it is okay that there are practically none which do the same for women.' And you think this is an acceptable point of view?

Also, no one is 'removing' anything, these are hypothetical games you're talking about. If we were talking about retroactively going back and removing all the hookers from GTA --the way those nutters wanted to do with cigarettes in old films-- you might have a point, but the only reason anyone is not putting your precious big tits in a game that hasn't been made yet is because the developer doesn't think it will sell.

This is more of that crazy propaganda that the big scary feminists are coming to erase breasts from our minds, like the fucking Borg, and, while I'm sure there are a very small number of feminists who would like to see women clad head to toe in a full bhurka in all games, they are in the minority, whereas most women are just asking for a little bit of equal representation.

Is that really so much to ask?

How many games can you think of, outside of Barbie Horse Adventures, that could claim to be geared exclusively towards girls? And no, just having a female protagonist doesn't count as being geared towards women; not when most of them are still being written by men who got all their knowledge of the female of the species by watching re-runs of Married With Children.

See now you're asking the wrong person. Not being a woman and not seeking women targeted games I don't come into contact with them. And it's not only with female oriented games. I can't name you any indy game except minecraft either.

Okay, let me tell you then: Hardly fucking any. Women are woefully under-represented in video games and the only reason for that is because, for the longest time, it was a male dominated market: games were made by men for men.

But just like in all other parts of society today, attitudes are changing and women are, slowly but surely, finally becoming recognised as equals.

And, just like in all other parts of society today, there are small, selfish pockets of humanity that are upset because suddenly things don't work in a way that only benefits them, anymore.

You can say it's 100% inclusive just because both men and women can physically play the games all you want, but to say that the content is 100% inclusive is complete bullshit.

How so? And if you think women are repulsed by T&A guess again. I've linked to a topic in the Scarlet Blade forum where people presented themselves: plenty of women present. And I dare you to find any game that is more T&A oriented than the scarlet blade with the exception of pure porn games.

Oh here we go: "I know wommenz who said that they like boobies in thur gamez so that means all women like it herp derp!"

Newsflash: Women, just like men, come in all sorts of flavours, and just because you find some who share your beliefs that does not mean they are the status quot. If there weren't a large number of women who feel disaffected by the portrayal of women in video games, then these constant gender discussions would not be happening.

As to the whole, 'people asked for bigger tits so we gave it to them,' well, that just smacks of the old adage, 'just because you can, doesn't mean you should'.

And the same can be said about your request... That adage really doesn't belong in this conversation.

Um...not quite. You see, your example re-enforces negative stereotypes --and no matter what way you cut it, ogling a woman's massive tits in a game is objectification and generally perceived as a negative quality by civilised society-- whereas I am merely suggesting that maybe more games could focus on strong female characters rather than how strong the elastic has to be in her bra to contain those front-loaded anvils.

 

[rob_simple]

snip

If that hypothetical situation where gaming becomes like Hollywod does happen they will still make games with men in mind.

However they will make less of them, so why am I supposed to be happy about that?

Oh boo hoo, at a time when hundreds if not thousands of games are released each year, you're upset because some of them might not appeal to you because, what? They're a bit feminine?

So I take it, right now, you play absolutely every game that comes out? There isn't a single genre that you don't like and wouldn't play no matter what gender it was aimed at?

Well shit, yeah I guess you will be losing out, but given that you must be Dr fucking Manhattan to find the time to play all these games, surely you have more fun stuff to do; like making three of yourself to sex your girlfriend, maybe?

 

[generals3]

Because essentially what you are saying is, 'there are plenty of games that cater exclusively to men, therefore it is okay that there are practically none which do the same for women.' And you think this is an acceptable point of view?

Yes. Publishers are solely profit driven. If there aren't many games for women it's because there is less money to be made. I see this as a result of the market forces. Maybe someday it will change.

There is nothing wrong with having a market where one gender is less targeted than the other. (beer also comes into mind)

Also, no one is 'removing' anything, these are hypothetical games you're talking about. If we were talking about retroactively going back and removing all the hookers from GTA --the way those nutters wanted to do with cigarettes in old films-- you might have a point, but the only reason anyone is not putting your precious big tits in a game that hasn't been made yet is because the developer doesn't think it will sell.

It doesn't matter if it's in the future, since Devs can't magically make games appear Dev time spent in one game is time not spent in an other. It's a cost of opportunity. If devs were to be pressured to create more non T&A games they would create less T&A games. Thus less toys for whoever likes those.

This is more of that crazy propaganda that the big scary feminists are coming to erase breasts from our minds, like the fucking Borg, and, while I'm sure there are a very small number of feminists who would like to see women clad head to toe in a full bhurka in all games, they are in the minority, whereas most women are just asking for a little bit of equal representation.

It's not propaganda it's called "reality". Maybe in feminist world you can make things appear out of thin air, but in mine not.

Is that really so much to ask?

If it wasn't you wouldn't need to ask for it.

Okay, let me tell you then: Hardly fucking any. Women are woefully under-represented in video games and the only reason for that is because, for the longest time, it was a male dominated market: games were made by men for men.

Depends on how you define "underrepresented" actually.

But just like in all other parts of society today, attitudes are changing and women are, slowly but surely, finally becoming recognised as equals.

They are already in games. However free market theory dictates that supply follows demand. If demand isn't there supply isn't either. It's for instance also why fast food chains in western countries don't serve halal food => too little demand, it's not because of racism. The only way for women to have more games tailored for them is for them to be actually willing to buy them sufficiently to justify the investments. I don't complain i'm being discriminated against because there are more themepark MMO's than sandboxes. Because that's the level of silliness these discussions have reached.

And, just like in all other parts of society today, there are small, selfish pockets of humanity that are upset because suddenly things don't work in a way that only benefits them, anymore.

Ironic because you're demanding things to benefit you. Your selfishness is not in any way superior to anyone else's. And if you're telling me you're not doing for yourself: well great you have decided to consider one person's selfishness to be superior than an other. Still no moral superiority, sorry.

Oh here we go: "I know wommenz who said that they like boobies in thur gamez so that means all women like it herp derp!"

Newsflash: Women, just like men, come in all sorts of flavours, and just because you find some who share your beliefs that does not mean they are the status quot. If there weren't a large number of women who feel disaffected by the portrayal of women in video games, then these constant gender discussions would not be happening.

Yes because we all know that a group being vocal means it's larger. And let's not forget 75% (yes i pulled this out of my arse) of those complaining are white knights and not women.

And what beliefs?

Um...not quite. You see, your example re-enforces negative stereotypes --and no matter what way you cut it, ogling a woman's massive tits in a game is objectification and generally perceived as a negative quality by civilised society-- whereas I am merely suggesting that maybe more games could focus on strong female characters rather than how strong the elastic has to be in her bra to contain those front-loaded anvils.

Great first you make the first mistake to equate sexualization with objectification and than you couldn't resist presenting yourself as some kind of crusader of the civilized society.

And let's not forget many games with T&A feature women JUST as strong as men. (think of dragon's crown)

which btw is stereotype BREAKING. In rl the stereotype isn't sexy women are strong it's the opposite.

 

[rob_simple]

Snips are all around me.

Congratulations, you just made me real-life facepalm.

Your whole supply and demand schtick is exactly the point of contention here: Male gamers are upset because the rapidly growing demand for games that are aimed at women --or at least not aggressively aimed at men-- means less games purely for men.

This is the crux of the argument, and yet you've got sucked up in this weird circular logic, somehow, by saying:

A)Making more games aimed at women is taking away games aimed at men (which is bad, apparently)
B)Even though shifts in market demographics show that this is what many consumers want, the market is apparently wrong in this case because A)

You can't have it both ways here: either you accept that the market is beginning to change and games have to reflect that, or your board up the windows and try and halt progress for as long as you possibly can so that the Boys Club can keep arm-wrestling and looking at tits all day.

 

[Genocidicles]

So I take it, right now, you play absolutely every game that comes out? There isn't a single genre that you don't like and wouldn't play no matter what gender it was aimed at?

I only play good games... But I mean, it depends on what games aimed at women end up like, because if they go with the Hollywood template, with shitty romance films and annoyingly quirky romcoms, then yeah I'm gonna be pissed.

Say they make 500 games a year (I know they make more, but bear with me), exclusively made for men. Of them, only 10 are worth looking at.

So after that year let's say they go with a fifty-fifty split, with games being made for men and women, with the women's games being like women's films (IE: soppy tripe).

So that's 250 games already rules out, and of the other 250 only five are decent. So that's less good games.

 

[generals3]

Congratulations, you just made me real-life facepalm.

Your whole supply and demand schtick is exactly the point of contention here: Male gamers are upset because the rapidly growing demand for games that are aimed at women --or at least not aggressively aimed at men-- means less games purely for men.

This is the crux of the argument, and yet you've got sucked up in this weird circular logic, somehow, by saying:

A)Making more games aimed at women is taking away games aimed at men (which is bad, apparently)
B)Even though shifts in market demographics show that this is what many consumers want, the market is apparently wrong in this case because A)

You can't have it both ways here: either you accept that the market is beginning to change and games have to reflect that, or your board up the windows and try and halt progress for as long as you possibly can so that the Boys Club can keep arm-wrestling and looking at tits all day.

Funny how you made me facepalm actually. You're the one who's complaining about the situation and is trying to force a change. If the market forces were enough you wouldn't need to put your white knight helmet on and go full moralist on the industry.

I have to ask though: did you manage to keep a straight face when you wrote this 180degree turn and thought "he won't notice"?

And funny how you assume i like T&A in games. I just dislike cheap self righteousness more than T&A.

 

[CloudAtlas]

Yes, 100%. And the Republican Party is 100% inclusive of gays, because, hey, no gay is told, you can't join us. Sure, we think you are a lesser human being, we'll marginalize you as best we can, we crap on your rights, but you're not prohibited join us.

Yes they are inclusive. And the "lesser human being" part is purely subjective. While their actions may lead people to think they think that it isn't set on stone and I doubt most think that. (never thought i'd be defending repubs ...)

You obviously don't know the meaning of the word inclusiveness.

Because essentially what you are saying is, 'there are plenty of games that cater exclusively to men, therefore it is okay that there are practically none which do the same for women.' And you think this is an acceptable point of view?

Yes. Publishers are solely profit driven. If there aren't many games for women it's because there is less money to be made. I see this as a result of the market forces. Maybe someday it will change.

There is nothing wrong with having a market where one gender is less targeted than the other. (beer also comes into mind)

Maybe someday it will change. Yes. And do you want to know when it will change? When publishers notice that there are quite a few people who want things to change. And how do these people get the publishers to noticing them? By telling them, by complaining about stuff, by demanding stuff. And how do folks like you react when people do exactly that?

They whine about them "taking their toys away".

 

[rob_simple]

So I take it, right now, you play absolutely every game that comes out? There isn't a single genre that you don't like and wouldn't play no matter what gender it was aimed at?

I only play good games... But I mean, it depends on what games aimed at women end up like, because if they go with the Hollywood template, with shitty romance films and annoyingly quirky romcoms, then yeah I'm gonna be pissed.

Say they make 500 games a year (I know they make more, but bear with me), exclusively made for men. Of them, only 10 are worth looking at.

So after that year let's say they go with a fifty-fifty split, with games being made for men and women, with the women's games being like women's films (IE: soppy tripe).

So that's 250 games already rules out, and of the other 250 only five are decent. So that's less good games.

The problem with that is that you, by your own admission, completely pulled those figures out your arse.

No one is saying that for every one game made purely for men, there must be another made purely for women, all we rational-minded folks are saying is that maybe, once in a while, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if games had more of a feminine slant.

And here's the problem with your whole argument:

I only play good games...

Do you want to know what is wrong with this? I'm a straight, twenty five year old dude and I like rom-coms. I will watch absolutely anything with Ryan Reynolds in it, which just so happens to include balls-out action flicks like Blade Trinity and Wolverine, and romantic comedies like Definitely Maybe. They are all good films, and I enjoy them for that reason; I don't just enjoy what society says my gender is supposed to enjoy.

Likewise, a good game does not become bad if it is suddenly given a feminine perspective, I would have enjoyed Deus Ex every bit as much if it was less JC Denton and more JC Penney, because at it's heart the gameplay and story are what drive the game, not what is swinging between my characters legs.

I don't mean to be rude, but this all kind of just sounds like you being insecure about your masculinity, which is pretty much the vibe I get from every man who is against women in gaming.

 

[generals3]

Maybe someday it will change. Yes. And do you want to know when it will change? When publishers notice that there are quite a few people who want things to change. And how do these people get the publishers to noticing them? By telling them, by complaining about stuff, by demanding stuff. And how do folks like you react when people do exactly that?

They whine about them "taking their toys away".

See now that's wrong. My fight lies against those who think they can impose their cheap self righteousness on the industry. The irony is that years ago I was complaining about T&A in games too. But than social crusaders came and i just can't get myself to tag alongside of them. I disapprove so much of the cheap methods I'm willing to give up our common goal.

 

[rob_simple]

Congratulations, you just made me real-life facepalm.

Your whole supply and demand schtick is exactly the point of contention here: Male gamers are upset because the rapidly growing demand for games that are aimed at women --or at least not aggressively aimed at men-- means less games purely for men.

This is the crux of the argument, and yet you've got sucked up in this weird circular logic, somehow, by saying:

A)Making more games aimed at women is taking away games aimed at men (which is bad, apparently)
B)Even though shifts in market demographics show that this is what many consumers want, the market is apparently wrong in this case because A)

You can't have it both ways here: either you accept that the market is beginning to change and games have to reflect that, or your board up the windows and try and halt progress for as long as you possibly can so that the Boys Club can keep arm-wrestling and looking at tits all day.

Funny how you made me facepalm actually. You're the one who's complaining about the situation and is trying to force a change. If the market forces were enough you wouldn't need to put your white knight helmet on and go full moralist on the industry.

I have to ask though: did you manage to keep a straight face when you wrote this 180degree turn and thought "he won't notice"?

And funny how you assume i like T&A in games. I just dislike cheap self righteousness more than T&A.

I'm not forcing change, I'm just not opposed to it. I am saying that if the market wants it, it will happen, in contrast to many male gamers who are saying, 'no! Keep the women away from my precious hobby! IT'S MINE!'

Good job on calling me a white knight, though, I knew that was coming sooner or later. Out of curiosity, I also recently got into a spirited debate regarding gay rights on this same forum --which you're welcome to go look up-- despite being straight, myself, so, what does that make me, now?

Am I trying to get gay guys to fuck me? Because that seems like it wouldn't go over well for either party, involved. Maybe I'm hoping that some hot lesbian will see me boldly standing up for something that doesn't affect me in the slightest and, for one moment, forgo her sexual orientation to reward me for my selflessness?

I must confess, though, I'm at a loss as to what 180 you are referring to? I thought I'd stuck to my guns throughout this whole debate.

 

[generals3]

I'm not forcing change, I'm just not opposed to it. I am saying that if the market wants it, it will happen, in contrast to many male gamers who are saying, 'no! Keep the women away from my precious hobby! IT'S MINE!'

Good job on calling me a white knight, though, I knew that was coming sooner or later. Out of curiosity, I also recently got into a spirited debate regarding gay rights on this same forum --which you're welcome to go look up-- despite being straight, myself, so, what does that make me, now?

Am I trying to get gay guys to fuck me? Because that seems like it wouldn't go over well for either party, involved. Maybe I'm hoping that some hot lesbian will see me boldly standing up for something that doesn't affect me in the slightest and, for one moment, forgo her sexual orientation to reward me for my selflessness?

I must confess, though, I'm at a loss as to what 180 you are referring to? I thought I'd stuck to my guns throughout this whole debate.

There's still a long road to travel, and it certainly doesn't help that the detractors of Anita Sarkeesian set the scale back a few years or so every time she releases a video, but I think we're getting there.

Actually you were implying that games have to change a certain way. You're not simply tagging along with the market forces, you're pretty much saying "this is where the market has to go!".

But if you truly meant what you just said and i misinterpreted your intentions, than my apologies.

There are so many moralists around here who think that just throwing the "sexism" word means that the market should be the way they see it that it sometimes becomes hard to distinguish one from an other.

 

[SinisterGehe]

And yet the games sell. Why would you make games with concepts that are not popular and do not sell. Unless you are a bedroom programmer.
Games are escapism, we want to escape that what we are, to something we want to be.

But yeah I'd like to see more variety in characters, more Gordon Freeman, mute nerds... Or young/fragile/weak
not a demigod in power armor or arian superhuman... There are more kinds of character to tell a story with. So why do we keep using he SAME FUCKING ONES!

But this boils down to:
1. Lack of will
2. Lack of creativity
3. Lack of skill

It is hard to write characters that are more complicated than the power armored knuckleheads, whose answer to everything is excessive swearing, bullet to the face or some other object to the face.
Having to create a real character that has weakness that affect the gameplay and behavior, takes time and therefore money.

 

[rob_simple]

There's still a long road to travel, and it certainly doesn't help that the detractors of Anita Sarkeesian set the scale back a few years or so every time she releases a video, but I think we're getting there.

Actually you were implying that games have to change a certain way. You're not simply tagging along with the market forces, you're pretty much saying "this is where the market has to go!".

But if you truly meant what you just said and i misinterpreted your intentions, than my apologies.

There are so many moralists around here who think that just throwing the "sexism" word means that the market should be the way they see it that it sometimes becomes hard to distinguish one from an other.

I was referring to women's equality as a whole, rather than their representation in video games; although generally speaking a large portion of male gamers provide an itemised list of everything that is holding equality back.

This is why I referenced Anita Sarkessian, (whom personally I cannot stand): You only have to look at reactions to her to see how vile and immature a large part of the male gaming community is in their attitudes towards women.

Really I suppose what I should be saying is, 'it's not games that have to change, it's gamers'. I agree that there is no reason why large-breasted eyecandy can't exist alongside deep well-written female protagonists --just like grindhouse cinema does not prevent the existence of arthouse-- but it's the aggressive reaction that male gamers exihibit whenever their hobby is met with any criticism that I find distasteful and, frankly, embarassing.

 

[rob_simple]

B)Even though shifts in market demographics show that this is what many consumers want,

No it doesn't. If anything it would mean that more women are trying the games right now and are liking them.

Liking them, yes, but finding them wanting. I might move into a house and think it's perfect, but I'm still going to want to make some changes.

If everyone was perfectly happy with the way things are, there wouldn't be so much debate and campaign for change; Anita Sarkeesian wouldn't have received the preposterous amount of money she did.

 

[rob_simple]

B)Even though shifts in market demographics show that this is what many consumers want,

No it doesn't. If anything it would mean that more women are trying the games right now and are liking them.

Liking them, yes, but finding them wanting. I might move into a house and think it's perfect, but I'm still going to want to make some changes.

If everyone was perfectly happy with the way things are, there wouldn't be so much debate and campaign for change; Anita Sarkeesian wouldn't have received the preposterous amount of money she did.

You can't deduce how many people find them wanting from market demographics. There's debate because some people are dissatisfied but that doesn't tell us how much, they could be a very small minority.

Anita got a lot of money because she played up the fact that people were trolling her and a lot of the money came out of spite.

I would argue that the fact there are so many people asking for change, men and women, straight and gay, all over the internet would suggest that it is more than a small minority, at this point.

But whatever, keep burying your head in the sand if you want, time will prove one of use right.

 

[Genocidicles]

The problem with that is that you, by your own admission, completely pulled those figures out your arse.

No one is saying that for every one game made purely for men, there must be another made purely for women, all we rational-minded folks are saying is that maybe, once in a while, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if games had more of a feminine slant.

Well I mean developers don't have unlimited time and resources. If they're spending time and money making something that means they can't spend that time and money on something else.

And here's the problem with your whole argument:

I only play good games...

Do you want to know what is wrong with this? I'm a straight, twenty five year old dude and I like rom-coms. I will watch absolutely anything with Ryan Reynolds in it, which just so happens to include balls-out action flicks like Blade Trinity and Wolverine, and romantic comedies like Definitely Maybe. They are all good films, and I enjoy them for that reason; I don't just enjoy what society says my gender is supposed to enjoy.

Maybe I dislike them because I find them boring? I don't exactly like all the stereotypical manly stuff, but it's more entertaining to watch someone have a gun fight than it is to watch two adults ***** like a couple of teenagers over difficulties in their relationship.

Likewise, a good game does not become bad if it is suddenly given a feminine perspective, I would have enjoyed Deus Ex every bit as much if it was less JC Denton and more JC Penney, because at it's heart the gameplay and story are what drive the game, not what is swinging between my characters legs.

Ah yes, I wasn't very clear. Someone said earlier in the thread that just because it has a female protagonist, it doesn't make it aimed at women, and I'm inclined to agree with that. Just because Ellen Ripley is the hero of the Alien films, it doesn't make them women's films. I also reckon that there could be something aimed at women, that has an entirely male cast (not talking about porn).

I have no problem with female protagonists. I just find the kind of entertainment you're supposed to watch at a sleepover while eating chocolate and an entire tub of strawberry icecream incredibly boring and not worth my time.