Why women criticise sexualised character designs (READ OP)

StonedCrows said:

Heh, thanks for providing me with a case.

See, this is the thing with learned empathy. If you haven't learned how women feel to be in that situation, you think this is "healthy." Then the question must be asked: What else is "healthy?"

Is slavering over women healthy? Is giving them lustful looks healthy? Is making really sexist remarks at them healthy? Are wolf whistles healthy? Are drunken, forceful passes at women healthy? Is it healthy when a guy gropes or slaps a woman's butt and thinks that that's okay?

This is the point I'm making. I think video games developers have a responsibility to actually teach some empathy, here. If you haven't had a chance to learn what it's like to be on the other side of that ogling, you don't realise how unhealthy it can be.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That's a very important point and actually might explain why i don't really feel comfortable with the arguement that they should just equally objectify male characters as well - I'm a straight female gamer and I don't what the same level of objectification, and it's not because "women are attracted to things differently, they care more about personality (hah!)" like some have suggested earliar in the thread, it's the fact I know how uncomfortable and shitty a lot of these designs make me feel, and I guess I just don't want to get something that will benefit me at the expense of someone else? It reminds me of how shitty it feels being treated like a sex object, that takes the enjoyment out.

That's just how it is, really there are giant double standards in real life just as they are in video games.

Women tend to be sexualized more and male characters tend to be cattle set for slaughter in violent games. That would be an interesting topic to discuss.

Another angle of this that I need to cover before I have to withdraw for a bit because of excessive processing and empathy overload (so many layers of feels)...

Okay, so, here's a thing.

The whole expectation that happens with a lack of learned empathy has an even uglier side that my partner experiences. If you never teach guys who're only capable of cognitive empathy the kind of pain women experience, those guys feel ENTITLED to women being a certain way. I can't stress this enough.

So what happens when a woman is chubby, and has a gene that leads to more body hair than usual? Awful things.

The attitude of men then isn't: "Hey, strip off so I can ogle your naked body! [Expletive that's insulting to women, here]!"

No.

Then it's: "Shave and lose some goddamn weight so I can get off to you!"

This is the real world. This is what women deal with. I've always been sensitive to this (effective empathy et al, I am as much an empath as anyone can be). It really bothers me. And guess what happens if you don't reciprocate those demands?

Go on, guess.

"The only way a [some expletive here] like you would get laid is if you were raped!"

Yeeeep.

My partner's been hit with that one. More times than I can count. Again, for those who don't believe that this is a thing, I will once again link this site.

http://fatuglyorslutty.com

That's worth a read, for about as far as you can go.

So this is why I think game developers have a responsibility. Instead of just creating these sexploitative worlds, where they basically are just a sexual fetish for the mainstream (guh). What they could do is either just respect women and allow them to be fully clothed so that women don't have to experience that trauma, or they could fully represent what they go through in the game.

By having heavily objectified women and none of the reactions to that that real world women experience?

That's cowardly.

It's sickeningly cowardly.

And that's why I haven't bought XBC2, nor have I played it. Nor will I buy or play other cowardly games of its ilk.

Okay, I'm done for now. Sorry. I just really have to stress that it's important to read up on effective vs. cognitive empathy and the kinds of effects it can have on the mind that has one or the other.

If you only have cognitive empathy (sociopath), or you only have a small amount of effective empathy which is bolstered by a lot of cognitive empathy (neurotypical), then you're going to need to understand that there's a lot of empathy to be learned.

And yeah, things can really hurt people, traumatise them. So seeing a heavily sexualised, objectified woman brings back all the cat-calls and wolf whistles she's endured, or in the case of chubby women, something even worse.

Empathy is important.

Q_Pippin said:

That's just how it is, really there are giant double standards in real life just as they are in video games.

Women tend to be sexualized more and male characters tend to be cattle set for slaughter in violent games. That would be an interesting topic to discuss.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

The gender roles you're citing aren't exactly great either. The assignment of men to be soldiers or work in the coal mines and women to raise kids is a remnant of patriarchal systems.

Thus I don't think you can cite men are killed more in video games as a defense of this.

Q_Pippin said:

That's just how it is, really there are giant double standards in real life just as they are in video games.

Women tend to be sexualized more and male characters tend to be cattle set for slaughter in violent games. That would be an interesting topic to discuss.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

What it comes down to, is that a group of people wants games to set a positive example by only including content that they agree with. And I think that's scary. I don't want game developers to encourage certain thoughts or behaviors. I wouldn't trust them with such an important task anyway. Developers shouldn't be lumbered with raising and educating people. They're just creating entertainment. Entertainment that reflects the real world. Entertainment catered towards people's desires. That's the free market.

Lone Cactus Motel said:

What it comes down to, is that a group of people wants games to set a positive example by only including content that they agree with. And I think that's scary. I don't want game developers to encourage certain thoughts or behaviors. I wouldn't trust them with such an important task anyway. Developers shouldn't be lumbered with raising and educating people. They're just creating entertainment. Entertainment that reflects the real world. Entertainment catered towards people's desires. That's the free market.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

You don't know what you're talking about.

I forgot to quote MusclesAreGirly

not meant to derail ...
all good tho

psychowave said:

You don't know what you're talking about.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Perhaps you could point out how I'm wrong. That would be helpful. Moreso than that... sad excuse of a post.

Lone Cactus Motel said:

Perhaps you could point out how I'm wrong. That would be helpful. Moreso than that... sad excuse of a post.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I don't have to point anything out. There's an OP and 174 pages you can read. You can start there.

StonedCrows said:

See, this is the thing with learned empathy. If you haven't learned how women feel to be in that situation, you think this is "healthy." Then the question must be asked: What else is "healthy?"

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

If it is relevant to the matter, at this point in my life I identity as a woman. In case you think I am coming to this subject with a "man's perspective". I'm also a fairly sexual person who liked to oogle the human body. To the point that I think I would probably serve as the perfect example for TERFs to point to as say "see, I told you Blanchard was right, and those TIM are gross, pornsick autogynephiles!".

I think that pleasure derived from looking at the human body and liking what you see is a function of many if not most people's sexual orientation. Much like the way food tastes or smells good, we are biologically compelled, at least many of us are, to have a sexual "gaze". To fixate over appearance.

I think this this must always be done with another person's consent and comfort. I do not approve of people leering at people uncomortable or other rude behavior or behavior that may make a person feel sexually threatened. Or "revenge porn" or things like this. Consent is of utmost importance in all aspects of life.

I think that you can enjoy the way the body looks without being leering, making other people uncomfortable, or violating their personal boundaries, though. And video game characters in particular don't exist so they don't have the ability to consent or not consent to whether someone has their gaze on them.

StonedCrows said:

Is slavering over women healthy? Is giving them lustful looks healthy? Is making really sexist remarks at them healthy? Are wolf whistles healthy? Are drunken, forceful passes at women healthy? Is it healthy when a guy gropes or slaps a woman's butt and thinks that that's okay?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Absolutely not. And I think there is a big difference between that and wanting to oogle or look at the human body in a sexual manner. And I don't think that sexualization of video game characters necessarily encourages people to behave in such a way.

I do, however, think that video games should do more to teach empathy.

Lone Cactus Motel said:

What it comes down to, is that a group of people wants games to set a positive example by only including content that they agree with. And I think that's scary. I don't want game developers to encourage certain thoughts or behaviors. I wouldn't trust them with such an important task anyway. Developers shouldn't be lumbered with raising and educating people. They're just creating entertainment. Entertainment that reflects the real world. Entertainment catered towards people's desires. That's the free market.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

They... ah... they already do. How terrified are you now?

Lone Cactus Motel said:

What it comes down to, is that a group of people wants games to set a positive example by only including content that they agree with. And I think that's scary. I don't want game developers to encourage certain thoughts or behaviors. I wouldn't trust them with such an important task anyway. Developers shouldn't be lumbered with raising and educating people. They're just creating entertainment. Entertainment that reflects the real world. Entertainment catered towards people's desires. That's the free market.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

They still have a responsibility. To use an extreme example, if they catered towards certain people's desire to be racist or hateful (i.e. that game Hatred) there are gonna be consequences. They can't just do whatever they want. If every creator on this planet adhered to your request to not encourage certain thoughts and behaviours, nothing of any value would be produced.

Also, for clarification, what are these 'certain thoughts or behaviours' you're talking about?

Lone Cactus Motel said:

What it comes down to, is that a group of people wants games to set a positive example by only including content that they agree with. And I think that's scary. I don't want game developers to encourage certain thoughts or behaviors. I wouldn't trust them with such an important task anyway. Developers shouldn't be lumbered with raising and educating people. They're just creating entertainment. Entertainment that reflects the real world. Entertainment catered towards people's desires. That's the free market.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

There is just... so much wrong with this. Just going to put some counters to this... ball of ridiculous.

Entertainment doesn't reflect the real world. See:
Free markets are never truly free: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/free-market-economics-critique_b_1155820.html
This isn't censorship or some Hypnotoad dystopia games will be entered into if they treat characters more like characters, and less like objects.

And most importantly, game developers already are encouraging certain thoughts and behaviors, whether they intend to or not. Additionally, there are also developers out there that are educating people with intent, and it can be a really great thing. Games are doing all the things you're scared of. The world didn't end. Games didn't implode. So maybe it's time to take a look at why you're so scared of something that's already happening.

This game about having black slaves is just catering to its market of people wanting black slaves, you guys. Absolutely no one has the right to complain. Free market is sacrosanct.

a harmless rabbit said:

What people bristle super heavily at, as a general rule, is people coming in to drive-by about how anyone with concerns about sexualization in media is a prudish puritan who has the active power to enact legislation and take the things they like away and wants to do so.

[...]

But yeah, I don't think anyone who actually posts actively here has ever made any particular claims that works that contain fanservice have no worth, or that people who enjoy them are bad people, as much as people can be pretty outspoken about their personal dislike for a piece of media. There's an important distinction between vitriolic dislike of a work and the active belief that it shouldn't exist or that the people who do like it are bad people.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I believe this goes partly against what the OP states, though:

Persephone said:

It's like, okay, we get it, this game is for dudes and the women are there for eye candy. Can we stop now, please? We're just so fucking tired of this.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

There also is the argument that sexist depictions and stereotypes in games influence attitudes and behavior towards women and therefore should not exist. This I have some issues with, because...

a) the problem should be put into perspective: Games seem to be such a marginal factor in shaping sexist behavior.
b) I believe that the overwhelming amount of players are mature enough to consume games with eye candy and still act decently toward women.
c) games let you play as a gangster, steal, commit violent acts, drive past the speed limit and run from the police. All morally questionable acts that might motivate someone to do the same in real life. But they can also all be enjoyable experiences, too. I do not want things to be taken out of games only because they can hypothetically motivate immoral behavior.
d) I like a little eye candy. I think that mostly subconsciously, games with cute and sexy women are more appealing to straight men, like graphics with a beautiful color palette.

I have absolutely no issue with women disliking and criticizing sexist depictions and stereotypes, or asking developers for games free of sexism to be more appealing to them, or trying to create awareness for the potential problems. But I am not sure if this is really all that is asked.

Mad Scientist said:

I believe this goes partly against what the OP states, though:
There also is the argument that sexist depictions and stereotypes in games influence attitudes and behavior towards women and therefore should not exist. This I have some issues with, because...

a) the problem should be put into perspective: Games seem to be such a marginal factor in shaping sexist behavior.
b) I believe that the overwhelming amount of players are mature enough to consume games with eye candy and still act decently toward women.
c) games let you play as a gangster, steal, commit violent acts, drive past the speed limit and run from the police. All morally questionable acts that might motivate someone to do the same in real life. But they can also all be enjoyable experiences, too. I do not want things to be taken out of games only because they can hypothetically motivate immoral behavior.
d) I like a little eye candy. I think that mostly subconsciously, games with cute and sexy women are more appealing to straight men, like graphics with a beautiful color palette.

I have absolutely no issue with women disliking and criticizing sexist depictions and stereotypes, or asking developers for games free of sexism to be more appealing to them, or trying to create awareness for the potential problems. But I am not sure if this is really all that is asked.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Oh no.
What more are the scary women asking for, that isn't directly stated in the Op and all the posts from women in this very thread?

What is asked?

My least favorite part about these kinds of discussions is when I or other women make a broad statement like Persephone's out of sheer frustration and exhaustion and men jump on them and overanalyze every last word in order to "prove" that we're trying to take their anime tiddies away.

psychowave said:

... What? Are you trying to "subtly" pull the "lol women just dislike fanservice because they're jealous they're not as hot as my anime waifu" "argument"?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'm surprised it didn't come up sooner. Seems like "If sexy characters are so bad why do women cosplay them?" is the new "if evolution is real, why do we still have apes?"

Dary said:

We coming back round to the ol' "SJWs are ugly and fuelled by envy" argument again?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Was it? I must've missed those posts.

StonedCrows said:

You see, you have these sexualised characters that stand out like a sore thumb. Okay. How do people react to this? Nobody notices. And that, right there, is the problem! That's the disconnect. No one notices.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yeah this really sticks in my craw too. I think a harmless rabbit covered this too. Like, if you're going for and objectified and sexy for the blades, why not just go all in?

Even Rex (from what I've played) doesn't really acknowledge Pyra's figure or outfit. I did find this though



It was brought up in the character design thread by me and Nemesis162 but Centaur's Life/Worries is great and really shouldn't be mixed up with the likes of Monster Musume as it's not just "How hot would it be to date a sexy mythological creature?". The lore and world building is FASCINATING. There's an episode where the titular character and her classmates visit a merpeople school and of course all the mermaids are shown with huge breasts. It's never really explained why so I just kind of assumed it was just a way to cater to the "anime tiddies" crowd. But then they showed that the mermen were going gaga for the flat chested visiting students because they were desensitized to large breasts and flat chests were more exotic to them. It was a detail I could appreciate. There's a girl later who's shown to be half mermaid that's troubled over her mixed heritage and IIRC even gets called out for her smaller breasts from full blooded mermaids.

The show's definitely not all about breasts though, so don't let that scare you off. It's a good show. I just think that's a good example Xenoblade 2 COULD have followed if they wanted to.

RedHoodedOwl said:

Zelda's butt from BOTW? I thought that was an edited image.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Oh man, I hated that. I couldn't play BotW for a few months after release because I couldn't get a Switch. I saw the stuff about that scene everywhere. "OMG Zelda's ASS!!!!1" and then when I finally got to that scene in the game, it was cute, but all I could think about was all those people freaking out about it. Maybe it's just me, but I didn't even see it in a overly sexual way (not like say Twintelle in ARMS and how people went crazy for her).

I think this is an excellent moment to bring up more of Dan Olson's work, specifically his (almost 20-minute long) video on GamerGate from his lovely puppet days.



The first ~ 7 minutes aren't specifically about GamerGate, but raise a lot of interesting points about how no work is apolitical and how the text of a work can build a message or world that perhaps wasn't the direct intent of the creator. From the later half specifically about GamerGate, I find his summary of the ideas at the core of GamerGate to be incredibly relevant;



I find it relevant because many people seem to base their views on that same core, including people who have posted here. That is not to accuse anyone of being a GamerGater - these core ideas were around long before GamerGate existed -, but to point out that I believe that these core ideas seem to be the source of why a lot of people are hostile or dismissive of these discussions of diversity and social issues. They just don't see the problem, see it as 'just the free market', and disruption of the existing market or criticism of the existing market is likened to censorship or 'forcing developers to do things'. This is in turn a fundamental misunderstanding of what the free market is.

I think understanding these core ideas can help us better rebut the people who hold them.

What's really annoying is that any time you actually point out things like the Otaku-fication of Japanese media being a bad thing in the long run, you get an immediate response of people screaming how the free market suddenly doesn't matter. Well, either that or express denial.

I thought I was out after that last post! I was gonna take a break for a couple days!

Mad Scientist said:

There also is the argument that sexist depictions and stereotypes in games influence attitudes and behavior towards women and therefore should not exist.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

You're tilting at windmills with this one, because you're not gonna find any of the regulars in this thread making this claim without misinterpreting vitriolic quips made out of frustration with drive-by bullshit. Nobody currently active here wants to ban fanservice or pornography. I'm certain someone, somewhere on the internet does, but it'd be a discussion best had with them and they're not here right now. Heck, it'd probably be a good discussion, you're just not going to find a partner to play the other side here because this isn't debate club and we don't have that opinion, so it'd be too much effort to argue the point.

Mad Scientist said:

a) the problem should be put into perspective: Games seem to be such a marginal factor in shaping sexist behavior.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yes. They're also the topic of this particular extreme niche enthusiast forum, so they tend to be the center of discourse, regardless of how marginal they are in any particular facet of society.

Mad Scientist said:

b) I believe that the overwhelming amount of players are mature enough to consume games with eye candy and still act decently toward women.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I agree. I'm very good friends with a lot of people who consume games with eye candy and are decent toward both women and everyone. Some of them are women. One of them is me.

Mad Scientist said:

c) games let you play as a gangster, steal, commit violent acts, drive past the speed limit and run from the police. All morally questionable acts that might motivate someone to do the same in real life. But they can also all be enjoyable experiences, too. I do not want things to be taken out of games only because they can hypothetically motivate immoral behavior.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yup.

Mad Scientist said:

d) I like a little eye candy. I think that mostly subconsciously, games with cute and sexy women are more appealing to straight men, like graphics with a beautiful color palette.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I, too, like eye candy.

Mad Scientist said:

I have absolutely no issue with women disliking and criticizing sexist depictions and stereotypes, or asking developers for games free of sexism to be more appealing to them, or trying to create awareness for the potential problems.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

You'll find no issue with us, then. Nor we you.

Mad Scientist said:

But I am not sure if this is really all that is asked.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I've been here for more or less the full run of the thread and read the parts before I was. It definitely is.

psychowave said:

My least favorite part about these kinds of discussions is when I or other women make a broad statement like Persephone's out of sheer frustration and exhaustion and men jump on them and overanalyze every last word in order to "prove" that we're trying to take their anime tiddies away.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This thread would certainly not have lasted two months if it weren't such a strong impulse. I think I can understand where it comes from, though.

Mad Scientist said:

I believe this goes partly against what the OP states, though:
There also is the argument that sexist depictions and stereotypes in games influence attitudes and behavior towards women and therefore should not exist. This I have some issues with, because...

a) the problem should be put into perspective: Games seem to be such a marginal factor in shaping sexist behavior.
b) I believe that the overwhelming amount of players are mature enough to consume games with eye candy and still act decently toward women.
c) games let you play as a gangster, steal, commit violent acts, drive past the speed limit and run from the police. All morally questionable acts that might motivate someone to do the same in real life. But they can also all be enjoyable experiences, too. I do not want things to be taken out of games only because they can hypothetically motivate immoral behavior.
d) I like a little eye candy. I think that mostly subconsciously, games with cute and sexy women are more appealing to straight men, like graphics with a beautiful color palette.

I have absolutely no issue with women disliking and criticizing sexist depictions and stereotypes, or asking developers for games free of sexism to be more appealing to them, or trying to create awareness for the potential problems. But I am not sure if this is really all that is asked.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

a) Got anything to back this up?
b) That's a nice belief but gamergators being all over Twitter and YT comments would suggest otherwise, also look at the response to stuff like Anita Sarkesian.
c) Treating women like shit online doesn't post a threat of jail time, so there's that.
d) Are you familiar with pornography? It's free and readily available using the world-wide web!

Televator said:

What would be the relevance? Private individuals Vs. a mass consumed medium. It seems neither here nor there.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

psychowave said:

... What? Are you trying to "subtly" pull the "lol women just dislike fanservice because they're jealous they're not as hot as my anime waifu" "argument"?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Lotus said:

This feels like setup for a weird "gotcha" question

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

zoukka said:

Lmao

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

MochaKoffee said:

There are many other ways to frame this question that don't immediately make you look ridiculously disingenuous.

But yes, there is a difference between a fictional character and a real life person. If someone wants to cosplay as Quiet, then all power to them.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

People, people, you're all jumping the gun. I'm sure he meant no ill, and definitely wasn't trying to setting anyone up for a gotcha or anything like t-

MangaFan462 said:

For all the bashing against men, the world is still so highly dependent on them to succeed. This badgering from women and low-T males isn't accomplishing anything.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

... carry on.

Mad Scientist said:

But I am not sure if this is really all that is asked.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Well, I don't know how to put this diplomatically, but that's entirely your problem. There's been almost 150 pages of discussion, well over 8500 posts: if you feel there's more than criticism going on, perhaps a call for actual censorship, then you should not have any trouble finding the offending posts and replying to them. Until then, making neboulous strawmen and casting aspersions and assumptions on the whole thread accomplishes nothing except forcing everyone to go through the "criticism isn't censorship" song and dance for the 1000th time. And believe me when I tell you everyone is beyond tired of it at this point.

Weltall Zero said:

People, people, you're all jumping the gun. I'm sure he meant no ill, and definitely wasn't trying to setting anyone up for a gotcha or anything like t-



... carry on.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

somehow the most offensive part of that post is the fact that this guy genuinely thinks that the world is "succeeding" in any way, shape or form

a harmless rabbit said:

I thought I was out after that last post! I was gonna take a break for a couple days!
You're tilting at windmills with this one, because you're not gonna find any of the regulars in this thread making this claim without misinterpreting vitriolic quips made out of frustration with drive-by bullshit. Nobody currently active here wants to ban fanservice or pornography. I'm certain someone, somewhere on the internet does, but it'd be a discussion best had with them and they're not here right now. Heck, it'd probably be a good discussion, you're just not going to find a partner to play the other side here because this isn't debate club and we don't have that opinion, so it'd be too much effort to argue the point.
Yes. They're also the topic of this particular extreme niche enthusiast forum, so they tend to be the center of discourse, regardless of how marginal they are in any particular facet of society.
I agree. I'm very good friends with a lot of people who consume games with eye candy and are decent toward both women and everyone. Some of them are women. One of them is me.
Yup.
I, too, like eye candy.
You'll find no issue with us, then. Nor we you.
I've been here for more or less the full run of the thread and read the parts before I was. It definitely is.
This thread would certainly not have lasted two months if it weren't such a strong impulse. I think I can understand where it comes from, though.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

At this point, I almost wish it was debate club. At least in debate club you actually needed an argument instead of this continued round of stupidity to the point that the OP now has a list of things to stop screaming at because we've heard it so many times before. Also, to be fair, while it did die down, when there isn't any trolls to play whack-a-mole with, the context tends to travel towards specific games or towards various things we would like to see in gaming that is both interesting and doesn't result in heavy fanservice costumes.

Weltall Zero said:

And believe me when I tell you everyone is beyond tired of it at this point.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Hey, man, speak for yourself. I--I feel like I've been through three or four wars but I could probably do another if work's slow tomorrow.

Please nobody start any wars for me to test the theory thanks.

psychowave said:

somehow the most offensive part of that post is the fact that this guy genuinely thinks that the world is "succeeding" in any way, shape or form

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'd love to see a mod-enforced push to write more substantive posts following up on the one or two sentence drive-bys just to see what people'd come up with. I have no issue playing ball with people who actually want to hash out a thing or have anything substantive to say, but it seems like an eternal cycle of one sentence drive-by, warning/temp ban, and then return for another. An "I expect a minimum of three full paragraphs detailing your actual point by next Saturday evening on this topic, or your ban will be permanent" would be interesting to see the response to, just for the science of it.

Not that I have any authority over that kind of stuff or am trying to tell anybody how to do their jobs. I just think it'd be entertaining in an academic way.

Xaszatm said:

At this point, I almost wish it was debate club. At least in debate club you actually needed an argument instead of this continued round of stupidity to the point that the OP now has a list of things to stop screaming at because we've heard it so many times before. Also, to be fair, while it did die down, when there isn't any trolls to play whack-a-mole with, the context tends to travel towards specific games or towards various things we would like to see in gaming that is both interesting and doesn't result in heavy fanservice costumes.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Personally speaking I keep finding myself pulled back in here because it's rare to have deep-digging talks about social aspects of games in the capacity that we've periodically had here and as much as I like talking strategies and shit, the former's more interesting.

psychowave said:

somehow the most offensive part of that post is the fact that this guy genuinely thinks that the world is "succeeding" in any way, shape or form

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

He has other posts praising the Trump tax reform and telling posters that are against them that they're piggybacking on successful people; that should give you an idea where he stands, and obviously why he would consider the current situation a "success". I think he stumbled into the wrong forum by mistake.

Xaszatm said:

At this point, I almost wish it was debate club.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It is kind of like a debate club, if one of the teams was entirely composed of rotating people attracted by a blinking "FREE BEER! ->" neon sign outside.

a harmless rabbit said:

I'd love to see a mod-enforced push to write more substantive posts following up on the one or two sentence drive-bys just to see what people'd come up with. I have no issue playing ball with people who actually want to hash out a thing or have anything substantive to say, but it seems like an eternal cycle of one sentence drive-by, warning/temp ban, and then return for another. An "I expect a minimum of three full paragraphs detailing your actual point by next Saturday evening on this topic, or your ban will be permanent" would be interesting to see the response to, just for the science of it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

God I would pay good money to see that. But considering people are already shitting on the mods because they're doing their job and warning people that don't read the OP, I can't imagine the meltdown if something like that came to pass.

But yeah, it's us who're perpetually outraged. *rolleyes*

psychowave said:

somehow the most offensive part of that post is the fact that this guy genuinely thinks that the world is "succeeding" in any way, shape or form

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Well yeah, if the goal is to repress minorities and continue the status quo of rich white male dominance... SUCCESS!

Hahaha, that poster was salty about the soy boys.

What a world.

Also, Dan Olson is great. Always happy to see people recommending him.
I made an OT a while back to promote and discuss progressive Youtubers, if anyone is interesed.

Weltall Zero said:

It is kind of like a debate club, if one of the teams was entirely composed of rotating people attracted by a blinking "FREE BEER! ->" neon sign outside.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

So...like this?



I've been waiting for an opportunity to post that.

a harmless rabbit said:

Hey, man, speak for yourself. I--I feel like I've been through three or four wars but I could probably do another if work's slow tomorrow.

Please nobody start any wars for me to test the theory thanks.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

But..I was planning on releasing my thread tomorrow... :(

Sorry, I think this thread as put me on permenant sarcastic status.

Xaszatm said:

I was planning on releasing my thread tomorrow... :(

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

You are?
What about the proofreading?
:screamemoji:

Xaszatm said:

So...like this?

I've been waiting for an opportunity to post that.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I swear I've never seen that before, "Free beer!" is the first thing that occurred to me :D . But damn if that doesn't nail the feel of this thread sometimes, doesn't it?

Xaszatm said:

What's really annoying is that any time you actually point out things like the Otaku-fication of Japanese media being a bad thing in the long run, you get an immediate response of people screaming how the free market suddenly doesn't matter. Well, either that or express denial.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's typically both really.

edit: Also, unlike a harmless rabbit , I do get tired of seeing the same conversation every thirty pages or so (if it even goes that long before the next tired rehash begins). I've dealt with it before, I'm sure I'll deal with it again, but it's only ever rewarding when there's genuine interest on the other side and that's... rare, in any situation where teaching and learning are involved. For however lazy teachers might be, students can be just as, if not more lazy when it comes to taking in the ideas being presented. And that's assuming they're interested in the material to begin with!

I tried to write a reply to everyone who commented on my post, but I can't explain what I mean accurately, so I thought maybe it'd be useful if I just replied to that image Llyrwenne posted instead. I watched the video itself too, btw.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

1. There are real problems, obviously, because certain groups don't see enough games catered towards their wishes. This thread is proof of that. On top of this there's discussion about games' role in reinforcing harmful behavior.

2. These problems do matter. The goal IMO should be to have all sorts of games on shelves that cater towards different groups, including those in this thread who feel left behind. Criticizing individual games to send a message is a-okay in my book. The problem for me is, what happens when developers decide not to cater to such a group, or even to alienate them. Of course you have the right to voice your concerns and disappointment with this decision, and you have every right to criticize the final product (just making this perfectly clear), but the game being "harmful" shouldn't be part of that criticism. Or if you do, I don't think you can say you don't want to take away games with those elements anymore.

If you criticize a game for containing element X, and ask the devs to replace X with element Y because that would be the perfect package for you, that's fine. I will always support that, though I would prefer the game to have the option to toggle between X and Y. But if you say you want the developer to make a game with element Y, and that they shouldn't make a game with X because it's harmful, that's when I want you to just be honest with me and say you want to reduce X as much as possible. Element X is just unacceptable to you in that case. And I don't understand how one could be fine with there being games with unacceptable elements in them, while at the same time wanting to reduce their prevalence (as much as possible, they're unacceptable after all). I don't understand how you could combine those two positions. In my mind you just can't say you're fine with sexualized designs in games, and then noting how they're harmful. That just doesn't make any sense to me.

Please notice how I never said anything about anyone having the power to censor games, or to bully devs into submission, or anything like that. I've just seen lots of people in this thread claim they're fine with having sexualized designs in games, but then see very different arguments as well that, in my opinion, don't match this position. The OP for example seems to say she wants these games to stop getting made. At least, I don't see any other way to interpret that sentence, and I haven't seen her come back to this particular statement (though I haven't read all 170+ pages). So this seems to be a genuine position held by at least one person in this thread, and if not please correct me. In any case, I thought it was valid that I responded to that position.

3. I don't care if there's disruption and whether it's artificial or not. I'm open to change. The thing I worry about is whether (some of) the properties of the current status quo are being deemed harmful or not, and these properties potentially dissolving because of it.

So hopefully it's clear what my position is now. I didn't go into the whole "influencing of thoughts and behavior" because in my mind, there is just a huge difference in doing something intentionally or not, but I can't accurately express myself so I'll just drop that topic for now.

I've seen many posts claiming that they don't want to eradicate element X, just that element X is in everything. I feel the same way. Personally, it seems like X is finding itself more and more prevalent in an increasingly wide variety of games. This is mostly true of Japanese games.

Lone Cactus Motel said:

3. I don't care if there's disruption and whether it's artificial or not. I'm open to change. The thing I worry about is whether (some of) the properties of the current status quo are being deemed harmful or not, and these properties potentially dissolving because of it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

So, I think this is where you're having trouble. The status quo is going to change, and it's going to change because of the input people put into what the status quo should be. The status quo isn't static. It changes based on what people think it should be. And if you're open to change, then you should be open to the possibility that harmful things may be part of what shifting the status quo includes, meaning that those harmful things may increase, decrease or change based on what people think the status quo should be.


These aren't really fully formed, so, grain of salt:
Additionally, to respond to your other ideas - people are a mass of contradictions. It's okay to accept certain things in some scenarios but not accept them in others (like, we all know there are situations where it's okay to be naked and situations where it's not). That's just part of socialization and culture. You're not going to find a rule book or a consistent "this is always how things should be" situation for subjective works. That said, you can still find things that are definitely typical - you can find patterns, and you can subvert or play into them. The mark of a real work of art is something that changes the frame. Changes where we're looking, or how we're looking at it. And a lot of what's being asked for in this thread, is just that. It's asking people to look at the frame, and to do so critically.

^ To add to that, it's funny to see fears about the status quo changing, when the status quo was very different in the 80's and 90's anyway. JRPGs weren't always the overly sexualized pander-fest they are now; this 90's status quo changed, in large part to attract otaku money (and not because of "creative freedom").

Lone Cactus Motel said:

2. These problems do matter. The goal IMO should be to have all sorts of games on shelves that cater towards different groups, including those in this thread who feel left behind. Criticizing individual games to send a message is a-okay in my book. The problem for me is, what happens when developers decide not to cater to such a group, or even to alienate them. Of course you have the right to voice your concerns and disappointment with this decision, and you have every right to criticize the final product (just making this perfectly clear), but the game being "harmful" shouldn't be part of that criticism. Or if you do, I don't think you can say you don't want to take away games with those elements anymore.

If you criticize a game for containing element X, and ask the devs to replace X with element Y because that would be the perfect package for you, that's fine. I will always support that, though I would prefer the game to have the option to toggle between X and Y. But if you say you want the developer to make a game with element Y, and that they shouldn't make a game with X because it's harmful, that's when I want you to just be honest with me and say you want to reduce X as much as possible. Element X is just unacceptable to you in that case. And I don't understand how one could be fine with there being games with unacceptable elements in them, while at the same time wanting to reduce their prevalence (as much as possible, they're unacceptable after all). I don't understand how you could combine those two positions. In my mind you just can't say you're fine with sexualized designs in games, and then noting how they're harmful. That just doesn't make any sense to me.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This is more a matter of pervasiveness and degrees than it is about any single individual work being harmful. It's difficult because we need to talk about specific works to point out things that we take to be an issue, but the actual thing that's most often seen as a problem is sheer prevalence of the criticized content. It is potentially extremely harmful to have a medium that is so widely overrun with less than ideal treatment of women. Individual games need to be cited because what the hell else are we going to do, but the core issue is an issue of trends, not individual works.

Lone Cactus Motel said:

The OP for example seems to say she wants these games to stop getting made. At least, I don't see any other way to interpret that sentence, and I haven't seen her come back to this particular statement (though I haven't read all 170+ pages). So this seems to be a genuine position held by at least one person in this thread, and if not please correct me. In any case, I thought it was valid that I responded to that position.

3. I don't care if there's disruption and whether it's artificial or not. I'm open to change. The thing I worry about is whether (some of) the properties of the current status quo are being deemed harmful or not, and these properties potentially dissolving because of it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

The hypothetical Persephone presented was in reference to Final Fantasy XV--a specific, blockbuster mass market game with highly varied and broad target audiences in a genre that is historically known to be a preferred genre of girls and women in the west. I'm not her and I'm not going to pretend to be her, but I don't think she'd make the same criticism of Senran Kagura: Peach Beach Splash. Maybe she would, but something tells me she probably would not be trying to play it in the first place. Generally speaking if a fellow poster in this thread were ever to say that he or she felt alienated by Senran Kagura: Peach Beach Splash and felt that the next installment in the series should be toned down so that he or she could play it, I would probably roll my eyes at him or her.

I would never roll my eyes at someone for saying that about Final Fantasy XV.

Now, there's a solid nugget worth mentioning in here about the fact that most games overtly built around titillation are often kind of bad video games from a mechanics and design perspective, so if sexual pandering that bordered on softcore pornography was removed from these wider audience titles, people who only played those wider audience titles and wanted their lingerie armor would have to resort to playing games that weren't as good to get their fix. Generally speaking I'm perfectly comfortable putting the burden on devs of titillation focused games with this and suggesting that perhaps they make their damn games better so that this wasn't a potentially real problem. That said, I'm much more concerned with women not being alienated from entire genres than I am with dudes who want a little bit of titillation in their games but don't want to resort to full on pornography. Like, I recognize the plight as a real one, it's just I care more about women being able to actually play games than I do about a guy having to go a bit more hardcore than he'd ideally prefer in his pursuit of boobs that he'll still be able to easily have access to. Hopefully that's not seen as too selfish, but even if it is I'm comfortable with being seen as selfish if necessary in this context.

I'm going to link a compilation of my own posts on this subject to you for further reading in case you're interested, as it touches on some of the same subject matter from different angles. Note that the preface in the linked post is pretty confrontational and I won't apologize for it in the context it was initially presented in, but I am linking it to you now because it's cleaner than quoting them all again, not because I intend to take a confrontational tone with you specifically.

I'm just tired of writing essay-length posts about the same things repeatedly after two months and it's faster and less repetitive to link to what I've already written at this stage.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/wh...er-designs-read-op.4483/page-165#post-2520624

EDIT: I wrote an essay anyway. Woe is me.

Morrigan said:

^ To add to that, it's funny to see fears about status quo changing, when the status quo was very different in the 80's and 90's anyway. JRPGs weren't always the overly sexualized pander-fest they are now; this 90's status quo changed, in large part to attract otaku money (and not because of "creative freedom").

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Has it affected western rpg dev.s? Say witcher, torment, mass effect?

Games right now are one thing, but with better augmented reality, vr, ai we are going to get experiences similar to those seen in the last bladerunner film.

Morrigan said:

^ To add to that, it's funny to see fears about the status quo changing, when the status quo was very different in the 80's and 90's anyway. JRPGs weren't always the overly sexualized pander-fest they are now; this 90's status quo changed, in large part to attract otaku money (and not because of "creative freedom").

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yeah, JRPGs used to be a lot more aimed at universal appeal back then. To be fair though, a lot of game designers are otaku themselves, and this is somewhat reflected in the things they create. Still, I think that most of this is the normalization of otaku fetishes in video games.

D.A. said:

Has it affected western rpg dev.s? Say witcher, torment, mass effect?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Those come from different cultures so it's much hard to generalize them than it is for Japanese games. What we can say is that Western AAA developers are more familiar with the issue and that some of them are making concrete efforts to do better. Outside of the AAA space, games are all over the place, but some of the better treatments of women can be found in these indie games.

D.A. said:

Has it affected western rpg dev.s? Say witcher, torment, mass effect?

Games right now are one thing, but with better augmented reality, vr, ai we are going to get experiences similar to those seen in the last bladerunner film.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I think it's worth noting the issues that are commonplace in Japanese games aren't reflective of Japanese culture but of a specific subculture in Japan. Japan is not the land of Otaku. It just has otaku in it and various media has catered to them out of proportion to their actual percentage of the population. It would be as if, say, Disney fans became the number one subculture in the west and every game looked like the offspring of Frozen. A poor economy homogenized sectors of the Japanese entertainment industry. It's not that these fan service elements weren't there before. It's just that those elements have becomes a sort of common mold. There isn't an equivalent to that in the West.

I would like to see how you guys define what is part of otaku and what isn't. Is there a number of manga to be sold to see what are otaku for you? Is it 50k? 100k? 500k? 1 million? Because those numbers are much bigger than any market, including the american comics. How do you identifiy if said manga is part of otaku or not in that case? There's manga selling more than 100k and others selling less, so if it sells less it's part of otaku culture or it's just not successful as the bigger ones? I would like to know that thinking in the case of manga.

DragonKeeper said:

I think it's worth noting the issues that are commonplace in Japanese games aren't reflective of Japanese culture but of a specific subculture in Japan. Japan is not the land of Otaku. It just has otaku in it and various media has catered to them out of proportion to their actual percentage of the population. It would be as if, say, Disney fans became the number one subculture in the west and every game looked like the offspring of Frozen. A poor economy homogenized sectors of the Japanese entertainment industry. It's not that these fan service elements weren't there before. It's just that those elements have becomes a sort of common mold. There isn't an equivalent to that in the West.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Sure, but sexism, LGBT issues and much more things are definitely part of the japanese culture and how people are raised.

Nemesis162 said:

I would like to see how you guys define what is part of otaku and what isn't. Is there a number of manga to be sold to see what are otaku for you? Is it 50k? 100k? 500k? 1 million? Because those numbers are much bigger than any market, including the american comics. How do you identifiy if said manga is part of otaku or not in that case? There's manga selling more than 100k and others selling less, so if it sells less it's part of otaku culture or it's just not successful as the bigger ones? I would like to know that thinking in the case of manga.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Otaku is a matter of culture, not one of genre. There is no such thing as otaku manga, but manga can have lesser or greater amounts of otaku-oriented material.

Nemesis162 said:

Sure, but sexism, LGBT issues and much more things are definitely part of the japanese culture and how people are raised.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Sure, that doesn't contradict anything I said. As I stated. The problems aren't new. They just show up to a higher degree in more places.

DragonKeeper said:

Sure, that doesn't contradict anything I said.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I wasn't trying to contradict you but you said that the common issues of japanese games aren't part of japanese culture and what I said is definitely part of it.

4Tran said:

Otaku is a matter of culture, not one of genre. There is no such thing as otaku manga, but manga can have lesser or greater amounts of otaku-oriented material.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

So, it's the same for anime and Light Novel, I guess?

Nemesis162 said:

I wasn't trying to contradict you but you said that the common issues of japanese games aren't part of japanese culture and what I said is definitely part of it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I was referring to the increasing degree and extremity of fan service, not the general social issues.

Nemesis162 said:

So, it's the same for anime and Light Novel, I guess?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Exactly. While it may be convenient to think of them as otaku works, they're technically not. They're just works with a ton of otaku elements.

Damn, guess I really should just stay the fuck out of this thread huh..

Nemesis162 said:

I wasn't trying to contradict you but you said that the common issues of japanese games aren't part of japanese culture and what I said is definitely part of it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

You'll need to do some reading if you want to really understand what this is all about: http://neojaponisme.com/2011/11/28/the-great-shift-in-japanese-pop-culture-part-one/
The five article series linked explains, to some degree, what happened to certain culture industries, namely anime, manga and video games. How the otaku subculture emerged and what it's doing to the industry is complicated, but it also presents itself as a negative for anyone who is not an otaku themselves. Which is just about everyone, because the otaku subculture is an extreme niche and is shrinking. It's not a sustainable audience (because, among other things, otaku don't have children, nor do they disseminate or critique the media they consume to a wide audience), even if otaku do spend exorbitantly compared to their means. The danger of catering to an extreme niche however is evident in a shrinking games market in Japan.