Support NeoGAF

[Giolon]

You've still got way more personalities than we do. And plenty of supplementary characters with various designs and motivations. In a lot of media women are all the same figure, personality and relegated to mother, sister, girlfriend, and the token team mate/coworker.

Agreed, didn't say it's not worse, just that I don't think it's good on our side of the fence either.

 

[Risette]

Because I don't hold the same viewpoint as you? Well, I can't say I expected any different. It is why I said I don't think NeoGAF will ever be the place to have this discussion.

If you want to look at it that way, sure. But it has more to do with my viewpoint being correct and yours wrong.

 

[Jathaine]

If you want to look at it that way, sure. But it has more to do with my viewpoint being correct and yours wrong.

Though you'll never be able to prove that.

 

[Devolution]

Agreed, didn't say it's not worse, just that I don't think it's good on our side of the fence either.

It's not in games for sure. The power fantasy needs to go away just as much as the consistently boring and sexy characters.

 

[QisTopTier]

Well it can get pretty obnoxious how many representations of the female form in video games are about accentuated breasts, hips and ass.

The best comparison I can make is imagine male characters were consistently shirtless, ripped and in a thong.

I bet you love tekken tag 2

haha well minus the thong it just has some speedos XD

 

[VanillaCakeIsBurning]

Reminds me, I think Jaffe said something along the lines of, you can't rewrite the dictionary to fit your agenda. Which is pretty true.

Yeah, I'm not too fond of deviating from dictionary definitions if I can help it.

Also on another note, I'm confused as to why people are using things like "14 year old boys" as justification for arguments.

Is there supposed to be some kind of implied shame with sharing interests with someone who is 14 years old? I'm sure a lot of the things I like could be also interesting to people who are 14 years old. I don't see any shame in that.

Things like breasts, butts, abs, whether on males or females people usually find appealing from puberty all the way till old age so I don't see what value there is in calling these features juvenile.

It kind of reminds me about how people would use the "natural" argument to explain why being homosexual was wrong. Something being natural or unnatural has no positive or negative qualities beyond very specific cases so it didn't make any sense at all to use that as justification for discrimination. It's not a 1:1 comparison but hopefully you understand my meaning.

So with the "14 year old boy" thing I don't think it's a good idea to use that as justification for why something is bad because quite a few things can fall under that label that persist well into old age and are most certainly not bad.

I had some more stuff to write out but I lost my train of thought so I'm just going to end this post here.

 

[Metroidvania]

I still don't see this as sexist.

Better yet, at what point do breasts become sexist? Is there a criteria that says the bigger a woman's chest, the more sexist she is? Is Sorceress 75% more sexist than Elf?

That sounds ridiculous to me.

The argument being made is that this happens to only to the female characters, while the male characters are not equally exposed or their sexual aspects portrayed in a similar manner.

But to that, like I mentioned above, context is still important (but obviously not an absolute defense either)

 

[QisTopTier]

Real talk, when I was a 14 year old boy I was checking out other girls my age and playing my damn gameboy. I guess some were into older big breasted women though? *shrug*

The argument being made is that this happens to only to the female characters, while the male characters are not equally exposed or their sexual aspects portrayed in a similar manner.

But to that, like I mentioned above, context is still important (but obviously not an absolute defense either)

Well, to be honest the only way it could be made more fair is if we got some male ass and the knight fought with his helmet off.

 

[terribletwo]

Is there supposed to be some kind of implied shame with sharing interests with someone who is 14 years old? I'm sure a lot of the things I like could be also interesting to people who are 14 years old. I don't see any shame in that.

Yes. 1000 times yes

 

[cicero]

That is how artistic analysis works.

That it does doesn't make it any less useless.

 

[Risette]

That it does doesn't make it any less useless.

It's not useless though.

 

[Weltall Zero]

The best comparison I can make is imagine male characters were consistently shirtless, ripped and in a thong.

The weird thing is that I would be perfectly OK with this because:
1) It would actually create a non-fictional standard for guys to understand what the issue is with all these copypasted standard bimbos, and..
2) They might get more women or gay men into gaming, which is always a good thing (although probably not, as what you described is not what most women find attractive from what I know).

 

[thumb]

So with the "14 year old boy" thing I don't think it's a good idea to use that as justification for why something is bad because quite a few things can fall under that label that persist well into old age and are most certainly not bad.

That was an insult from Jason, not an argument. It was subsequently apologized for. Let's put it behind us.

 

[Jathaine]

That was an insult from Jason, not an argument. It was subsequently apologized for. Let's put it behind us.

People keep bringing it up, not just Jason. It isn't put to rest yet. I believe there's even been multiple posts on the past few pages calling the design juvenilel

 

[Devolution]

Botticelli, Titian, and Manet were totes 14. Shush bruhs.

 

[QisTopTier]

That was an insult from Jason, not an argument. It was subsequently apologized for. Let's put it behind us.

You see the problem is, once someone in media makes a statement like that it becomes clear that that is something they think. Even if they apologize for it the statement will stick around with the masses for the rest of their career. You know the whole think before you speak thing.

Edit: Honestly my respect levels for a lot of posters has gone WAY THE FUCK UP or WAY THE FUCK DOWN across the board the last few days.

And it's not based on agreeing or disagreeing with my viewpoints on the mater either

 

[Risette]

That was an insult from Jason, not an argument. It was subsequently apologized for. Let's put it behind us.

He only apologized for that insult to prop up the rest of his poorly conceived argument. Typical Kotakuism. Reminds me of when that Kamiya thing happened and they took out the part where they called him clueless and left the rest as-is, as if it wasn't the entire thing that was stupid and insulting.

 

[Delusibeta]

The best comparison I can make is imagine male characters were consistently shirtless, ripped and in a thong.

Saints Row 3 was ahead of its time.

 

[Weltall Zero]

what the fuck

I regret trying to discuss anything with you.

Funny, I was thinking exactly the same. My reply to him was quite long, even! I almost feel embarrassed that I took him seriously. Ah well.

 

[Trakdown]

Yeah, I'm not too fond of deviating from dictionary definitions if I can help it.

Also on another note, I'm confused as to why people are using things like "14 year old boys" as justification for arguments.

The idea is that at 14, boys are nothing but hard-ons and hormones and that all you need to do is show them some tits to sell your product. Which ironically is both an unrealistic assessment of 14 year old boys and the people being called such.

 

[frequency]

I don't know if you saw it, but there was a picture-link discussed in the thread somewhere explaining the exaggeration of the Sorceress' breasts and her link to necromancy magic, which the artist has used before in past works.

No, I did not see it. I am new to this thread (I didn't really care enough to post until a certain particularly offensive one drove me to it). I will look for it.

Possibly, but is the focus automatically negative? It's catering, certainly, but does it exclude women?

Possibly as a role model for which to identify with, given the scale of her breasts, while males can more readily associate with a bulging muscly dwarf whose private area is not equally expanded upon, but that line seems a bit murky without context, as has been stated earlier.

I can see the unease that comes up when a LOT of women characters do share the 'boob armor' design choice, but I don't know if singling out a particular title really brings the right aspect of that discussion to the table.

I still don't see this as sexist.

Better yet, at what point do breasts become sexist? Is there a criteria that says the bigger a woman's chest, the more sexist she is? Is Sorceress 75% more sexist than Elf?

That sounds ridiculous to me.

The sexism isn't the breasts but that the consideration of, "What should be the defining artistic characteristic of this character," came down to being private parts for at least 2 of the 3 women. And this was not the case for the men.

But I must apologize. I think I will likely step down from this particular sub-topic as I don't feel strongly enough to really debate this. I can understand why people would take issue with these designs but more often than not, I myself have trouble being offended by it. I do often feel uncomfortable but I'm not sure I myself would say it is because of sexism. I only meant to say there are valid reasons it can be considered sexist if you're in a certain mind set.

Although I do wonder why we do not equal emphasis on the private areas of men.


I was trying to think how it could be a more relatable experience for men. But I only have second-hand knowledge. There is an episode of the Simpsons where Homer is particularly distraught about Flanders in a very tight suit with a particularly nice bottom ("It's like I'm wearing nothing at all"). And I've known men to be uncomfortable when I show them particular videos of Gackt (not to antagonise... I'm just a fan). So I thought maybe it could be similar to imagine if a majority of males were portrayed with some emphasis on their private areas or perhaps sexual prowess.

 

[QisTopTier]

The idea is that at 14, boys are nothing but hard-ons and hormones and that all you need to do is show them some tits to sell your product. Which ironically is both an unrealistic assessment of 14 year old boys and the people being called such.

I'd say that's closer to the 17-24 year old demographic

But for some weird ass reason when ever immaturity comes up 14 year old seems to be the magic age

 

[Jathaine]

Funny, I was thinking exactly the same. My reply to him was quite long, even! I almost feel embarrassed that I took him seriously. Ah well.

The only viewpoints to be taken seriously are the ones in line with your own? That's actually kind of sad and overly typical of Cultural Marxists.
Why I expected any better is beyond me... either way, I'm still open to discussion and I certainly would consider any evidence you have that is contrary to my beliefs.

And always remember, you'll be completely ineffectual at convincing anyone of anything if you give up at the smallest sign of resistance.

 

[Devolution]

No, I did not see it. I am new to this thread (I didn't really care enough to post until a certain particularly offensive one drove me to it). I will look for it.





The sexism isn't the breasts but that the consideration of, "What should be the defining artistic characteristic of this character," came down to being private parts for at least 2 of the 3 women. And this was not the case for the men.

But I must apologize. I think I will likely step down from this particular sub-topic as I don't feel strongly enough to really debate this. I can understand why people would take issue with these designs but more often than not, I myself have trouble being offended by it. I do often feel uncomfortable but I'm not sure I myself would say it is because of sexism. I only meant to say there are valid reasons it can be seen sexist if you're in a certain mind set.

Although I do wonder why we do not equal emphasis on the private areas of men.


I was trying to think how it could be a more relatable experience for men. But I only have second-hand knowledge. There is an episode of the Simpsons where Homer is particularly distraught about Flanders in a very tight suit with a particularly nice bottom ("It's like I'm wearing nothing at all"). And I've known men to be uncomfortable when I show them particular videos of Gackt (not to antagonise... I'm just a fan). So I thought maybe it could be similar to imagine if a majority of males were portrayed with some emphasis on their private areas.

Honestly sexualizing men is different from sexualizing women. You can't make 1:1 comparisons about body parts.

 

[thumb]

You see the problem is, once someone in media makes a statement like that it becomes clear that that is something they think. Even if they apologize for it the statement will stick around with the masses for the rest of their career. You know the whole think before you speak thing.

Well, people still make ill-considered statements that, on reflection, they would qualify or retract. This is sometimes due to impression management, but can also be genuine. I'd prefer to have an environment where people are allowed to back down, reconsider, and apologize, to one where "never forgive, never forget" is the slogan (so to speak).

 

[terribletwo]

I'd say that's closer to the 17-24 year old demographic

But for some weird ass reason when ever immaturity comes up 14 year old seems to be the magic age

14 is about the age where teenage boys begin to explore sexuality. They like extreme representations of such because they lack context

 

[QisTopTier]

Honestly sexualizing men is different from sexualizing women. You can't make 1:1 comparisons about body parts.

I don't think people really understand this at all. I've been saying it for about a month now and it always goes over people's heads.

14 is about the age where teenage boys begin to explore sexuality. They like extreme representations of such because they lack context

Oh >.> I did so at like 11. Actually to be honest all of my friends didn't like the "extremes" either. They do now though xD

Well, people still make ill-considered statements that, on reflection, they would qualify or retract. This is sometimes due to impression management, but can also be genuine. I'd prefer to have an environment where people are allowed to back down, reconsider, and apologize, to one where "never forgive, never forget" is the slogan (so to speak).

People have a hard time believing the apology when he still says the same things but worded differently or worse.

 

[Jathaine]

I don't think people really understand this at all. I've been saying it for about a month now and it always goes over people's heads.

Well, its probably true that you've been saying it but your words don't necessarily ring true. I believe that you can't make 1:1 comparisons about body parts but I certainly don't believe that sexualizing men is all that different from sexualizing women.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

14 is about the age where teenage boys begin to explore sexuality. They like extreme representations of such because they lack context

What an expert you are.

/sarcasm.

You're going to find that age varies hugely from person to person. The availability of the Internet certainly affects this as well.

 

[cicero]

Well it can get pretty obnoxious how many representations of the female form in video games are about accentuated breasts, hips and ass.

The best comparison I can make is imagine male characters were consistently shirtless, ripped and in a thong.

Imagine the surprise of so many men to find that feminist "Slut Walk" style female empowerment is based largely on flaunting sexuality that would be considered sexist if they were representations of the female form aimed at male viewers.

If we are talking true "equality" here, then why not remove overt sexuality entirely from video games, or adhere to some logically applied standard? Because depictions of "empowered females" in games are still going to appeal sexually on some level to the majority of consumers of video games, that being males. To deny that innate biologically determined sexual appeal while promoting sexuality as a specific form of feminist female empowerment ideal in products aimed at an audience which is comprised largely of men, is just laughable.

 

[Corto]

Botticelli, Titian, and Manet were totes 14. Shush bruhs.

Links pls. I'm doing some... hmmm research. PM me

Spoiler

god I hope you get this one.

 

[Superflat]

I found myself agreeing with this guy, who basically wants to push more sexy men into the foreground instead of telling/expecting the industry to scale sexy women back.

 

[VanillaCakeIsBurning]

The idea is that at 14, boys are nothing but hard-ons and hormones and that all you need to do is show them some tits to sell your product. Which ironically is both an unrealistic assessment of 14 year old boys and the people being called such.

Yeah, when I was 14 there was a definite variety of interests that people in my age group had. Saying that they are all are obsessed with A because they are age B doesn't seem like a good idea to perpetuate.

I'm sure you'll find that the people who have deep love for breasts are found across all ages instead of one specific age or stage of life.

 

[terribletwo]

The availability of the Internet certainly affects this as well.

not really

 

[Devolution]

I found myself agreeing with this guy, who basically wants to push more sexy men into the foreground instead of telling/expecting the industry to scale sexy women back.

Eh, I don't really need sexualized men in my games. What I need is better representations of everyone.

 

[Akkad]

lol, why is this topic 18 pages? What happened here?

 

[frequency]

Honestly sexualizing men is different from sexualizing women. You can't make 1:1 comparisons about body parts.

This is coming up on some uncomfortable topics for me but I think I can go this far:
Are we not often appealed to with shirtless men in tight bottoms? The most common emphasis of a private part I can think of is the buttocks. But it is not so common compared to emphasis on breasts.

I don't think people really understand this at all. I've been saying it for about a month now and it always goes over people's heads.

I admit then that I do not understand. But I would like to understand if you'll help me to.

 

[QisTopTier]

Well, its probably true that you've been saying it but your words don't necessarily ring true. I believe that you can't make 1:1 comparisons about body parts but I certainly don't believe that sexualizing men is all that different from sexualizing women.

You can do it in a similar fashion but the way it's done is different. This statement you just said is basically arguing against and agreeing with me at the same exact time which makes no sense.

I admit then that I do not understand. But I would like to understand if you'll help me to.

Devo or some of the other female posters could do it waaaay better than I could honestly. But I'll go into it in a bit if none of them wants to.

 

[Jathaine]

You can do it in a similar fashion but the way it's done is different. This statement you just said is basically arguing against and agreeing with me at the same exact time which makes no sense.

I'm saying that its different but so slightly different that its not even worth pointing out the difference. The only reason its not 1:1 as far as body parts go is that we don't have the same body parts.
I am pretty sure that's not what you believe.

 

[Risette]

The only viewpoints to be taken seriously are the ones in line with your own? That's actually kind of sad and overly typical of Cultural Marxists.
Why I expected any better is beyond me... either way, I'm still open to discussion and I certainly would consider any evidence you have that is contrary to my beliefs.

And always remember, you'll be completely ineffectual at convincing anyone of anything if you give up at the smallest sign of resistance.

lol lol lol

Now I understand. Using this term is like holding up a sign that says "I AM A BIGOT" in big red letters.

To those who don't know: go google it and see what the first page of hits is.

 

[cicero]

Eh, I don't really need sexualized men in my games. What I need is better representations of everyone.

So would you have depictions of men and women conform to a more realism based ideal? So a woman in armor would be armor like a typical man, from head to toe?

This has always been my big issue. The disparate standard for female characters that took me out of the immersion of the created world because the basic fundamental factor of believability was completely off. I can suspend belief to a certain degree, but the stomach baring female characters with strips of wispy silk covering their breasts fighting in hand to hand combat just annoyed me to no end.

 

[Jathaine]

lol lol lol

Now I understand. Using this term is like holding up a sign that says "I AM A BIGOT" in big red letters.

To those who don't know: go google it and see what the first page of hits is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

Feel free to call me a bigot when I prove that I am one. Until then, please keep the attacks to the minimum.
You may or may not have noticed that I am not attacking you.

You may not deserve even the slightest bit of respect for this display but I'll still continue to give you some.

 

[Risette]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

Feel free to call me a bigot when I prove that I am one. Until then, please keep the attacks to the minimum.
You may or may not have noticed that I am not attacking you.

You may not deserve even the slightest bit of respect for this display but I'll still continue to give you some.

That in combination with your inane posts proves that you are a bigot. Don't play stupid.

 

[Jathaine]

That in combination with your inane posts proves that you are a bigot.

Sorry, no. I don't hate any group of people, I simply disagree with your viewpoint. That does not give you grounds to call me a bigot.

 

[cicero]

lol lol lol

Now I understand. Using this term is like holding up a sign that says "I AM A BIGOT" in big red letters.

To those who don't know: go google it and see what the first page of hits is.

Not sure why your rebuttal would consist entirely of mocking based on what the first page of google hits consists of.

 

[Knux-Future]

this thread has run it's course..

 

[QisTopTier]

I'm saying that its different but so slightly different that its not even worth pointing out the difference. The only reason its not 1:1 as far as body parts go is that we don't have the same body parts.
I am pretty sure that's not what you believe.

But that's not completely true, the whole fact men and womens bodies in general are built different makes it so. Straight down to a base instinct level.

this thread has run it's course..

Pretty much, though it would be fun to have a skype debate or something similar with some of the posters about the subject.

 

[Risette]

Not sure why your rebuttal would consist entirely of mocking based on what the first page of google hits consists of.

Do you know what that term entails?

Namely, when it's used as a pointed word while the user is trying to play the victim.

 

[Devolution]

This is coming up on some uncomfortable topics for me but I think I can go this far:
Are we not often appealed to with shirtless men in tight bottoms? The most common emphasis of a private part I can think of is the buttocks. But it is not so common compared to emphasis on breasts.



I admit then that I do not understand. But I would like to understand if you'll help me to.

Well it's complicated. First of all the features that we consider sexual on women are quite obvious and the conventional fashions throughout history (even the so called "conservative" ones) have accentuated these features. It's not really the same with men because they haven't been sexualized to the degree of women in plenty of cultures. A lot of people have thought a man merely being shirtless is enough but much of the representations portray a musclehead that's not particularly appealing to the opposite gender but a manifestation of power and strength. The best example of this would be Kratos, not particularly sexy at all just over the top hypermasculinity. Someone a bit closer to what it would be is Dante from DMC but even that's not a completely good example.

 

[Jathaine]

Do you know what that term entails?

Do you?

Cultural Marxism refers to a school or offshoot of Marxism that analyses culture as the deciding factor in posited oppression, rather than the economic factors that Karl Marx emphasized. An outgrowth of Western Marxism (especially Antonio Gramsci and the Frankfurt School) and finding popularity in the 1960s as cultural studies, Cultural Marxism argues that oppressive power structures exist within traditional cultural artifacts Western society like capitalism, nationalism, the nuclear family, gender, race, or cultural identity; and that the goal of Cultural Marxism is to use Marx's methods (e.g., dialectic materialism) within academia to expose and challenge such "capitalist hegemony"

Doesn't that sound like the arguments of those who believe in "The Patriarchy" or the systemic oppression of women?