Tropes vs Women in video games

[Udderdude]

When you've got the ideological blinders on that tight, everything gets distorted .. and that goes for any ideology.

[louisg]

When you've got the ideological blinders on that tight, everything gets distorted .. and that goes for any ideology.

Yeah :/ I think too is that when you study one group so closely that I'm sure it starts becoming hard to see the forest for the trees.

[BryanM]

People associate both feminism and radical feminism because they tend to be louder and more obnoxious.

It's the same kind of mentality that feels attacked all the time by invisible assailants and a mountain of confirmation bias. If the average feminist wants to send all men to death camps, then all gamers photoshop seminal fluid onto women's faces and kick puppies in the balls and all white guys are in the klan.

A group you never interact with is only as good as the worst person you've ever met in it



Some "outsider" made a bunch of money talking about something she knows little about, whoop die doo. Not even close to the worst thing on Kickstarter...

[Bananamatic]

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sus ... brothers-w
the worst thing on kickstarter is all about "girl power" and "beating the mean boys"

also useless projects like this http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1319761157/gtfo
no matter how much money you funnel into these documentaries, internet will be full of assholes

[AntiFritz]

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sus ... brothers-w
the worst thing on kickstarter is all about "girl power" and "beating the mean boys"

If you actually look into it, that kickstarter had scam written all over it. Especially considering just how wealthy the mother is.

[BryanM]

Play some CoD or equivalent under a female gamer handle on that thar Xboot live with the audio on your head set on and see the mountains of fun you'll have.

[louisg]

You know, I never understood that stereotype. Most math majors I've known have been women, and lord knows I've sucked at math (alongside some of my fellow CS majors there's a reason we let the computer do it for us).

A group you never interact with is only as good as the worst person you've ever met in it

I dunno if that's quite it. I've seen an overwhelming amount of bad feminist blogs. Even though I agree with the goal in general, I find the writing to be too pissed and badly argued, and it comes off as just wanting to be in a perpetual state of angry righteousness.

That said, someone has turned me onto these videos by NineteenPercent on YouTube. It's snarky as usual, but it also has a degree of sensitivity that you don't see enough when discussing inequality. I think this sensitivity is necessary to get people on board who otherwise might feel attacked.

Play some CoD or equivalent under a female gamer handle on that thar Xboot live with the audio on your head set on and see the mountains of fun you'll have.

I don't doubt it. It's not like we have an asshole shortage.

[Bananamatic]

Play some CoD or equivalent under a female gamer handle on that thar Xboot live with the audio on your head set on and see the mountains of fun you'll have.

Play some League of Legends, you don't even have to be female to have mountains of fun with the community.

It's not misogyny or hating on female gamers, just people being retarded in general(kids in particular)
Someone should instead make a documentary about the internet being anonymous and full of dicks instead so this "XYZ person received death threats on the internet" stuff can die in a fire.
Playing the victim card over something anonymous is dumb and it happens way too often these days(anita, the RPG maker kickstarter, DmC and Tameem, etc.)

[evil_ash_xero]

You know, I just keep seeing this junk in game reviews lately. And not even just Dragon's Crown! lol

In the Eurogamer review of Brothers, they are like "There's only one female character in the game, and the nature of her role is problematic to say the least.". And a review I read of some cruddy JRPG was talking about how it "refreshingly" didn't have the "princess in peril trope".

It's just like this has wormed it's way into so many journalists reviews, and the gaming public.

Can you imagine if every film that came out, and showed a sexy girl, or a film where someone had to save a princess, that tons and tons of movie journalists starting yakking about how sexist they were?

I just sort of look at it like gamers are such fucking dorks, that they're tripping over themselves to please these ladies. All two or three that have actually said something about it. lol

I just can't get over how "princess in peril" is now "sexist"(well, to game "journalists", and some gamers). It just blows my mind.

And I just keep seeing references to it all the time. It's....nuts. Like shut the fuck up already! Just make some games where you're some...well, hell, I don't even know. That Anita Sarkeesian doesn't even like tough girls, because she thinks they're just guys with tits or whatever. It's bad enough that games kind of suck now, and now we have this garbage to hear about all the time.

Play some CoD or equivalent under a female gamer handle on that thar Xboot live with the audio on your head set on and see the mountains of fun you'll have.

They act shameful as hell. And on some sites too. I would like to think they are mainly teenage boys harassing female players, but I'm probably wrong.

[Ed Oscuro]

I have to say I'm not feeling the "gamers get the double standard" issue is really pressing right now, even compared to real instances of sexism. And the princess in distress in RPGs? Does that even exist anymore?

[evil_ash_xero]

I have to say I'm not feeling the "gamers get the double standard" issue is really pressing right now, even compared to real instances of sexism. And the princess in distress in RPGs? Does that even exist anymore?

In RPGs? Hmm...I don't know about that one. You're usually a female character, or a group with a female character. They tend to point out Zelda.

I mean of all the games, they pick the ones that have the most two dimensional characterization possible. Peach? Zelda? All I know is that they wear dresses. But I don't know jack about Link either. Mario...well, he's a plumber.

I'm surprised that Sarkeesian never mentioned Super Princess Peach. I mean, she's got her own game, where she is the hero! Oh well.

[AntiFritz]

I have to say I'm not feeling the "gamers get the double standard" issue is really pressing right now, even compared to real instances of sexism. And the princess in distress in RPGs? Does that even exist anymore?

In RPGs? Hmm...I don't know about that one. You're usually a female character, or a group with a female character. They tend to point out Zelda.

I mean of all the games, they pick the ones that have the most two dimensional characterization possible. Peach? Zelda? All I know is that they wear dresses. But I don't know jack about Link either. Mario...well, he's a plumber.

I'm surprised that Sarkeesian never mentioned Super Princess Peach. I mean, she's got her own game, where she is the hero! Oh well.

Peach uses her emotions to attack enemies in Super Princess Peach aparently. So anita wouldn't like the idea of it.

[Ed Oscuro]

But she wouldn't like Peach to attack with violence, either, right? Because then it's just a man with the mams. I say, this is all quite refreshing. And here I thought DmC was making me question my priorities.

[Udderdude]

I think the ultimate result of these videos is less people caring about it just because it's been so overexposed, idealogues yelling about it will just become background noise similar to the "Violence in videogames is corrupting our kids" moral brigade, and few, if any, developers will change their games to reflect what she considers good or bad. :: shrug ::

Also see http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Identity_politics

[CIT]

Well, I think whether you agree with Sarkeesian's videos (and by extention the whole videogame gender critique) largely depends on whether you accept her underlying assumptions as being true. Those being:

There is inequality between men and women.
This is the easiest one to accept, because there are enough hard facts that show exactly that.

Fictional narratives that uphold heteronormative gender roles (i.e. damsel in distress) reinforce this inequality, by essentially "brainwashing" people into believing this is "the way things are supposed to be".
I'm not so convinced about this. For one, fictional narratives are not monoliths, but subject to interpretation and critical scrutiny. Everybody forms an opinion about narratives they hear and put them into some sort of context. It is also not clear to me, why we should assume that people are not able to separate fiction from reality, i.e. treating the social inequality, wage difference, difference in political representation as one thing, and fictional depictions as another. After all, this is the reason the argument that videogames promote violence hasn't really been able to gain much traction.

Narratives in video games actually matter and are taken seriously.
This is the assumption shoot 'em up players will have the greatest difficulty to accept.
I think she cites a lot of games as examples, where the narrative is actually an entirely superfluous embellishment, and nothing that drives the game itself or its enjoyment thereof. I think most gamers will be the first to point out, that the majority of narratives are completely interchangeable schlock — but, that's not the reason these games are played anyway.


And that's Sarkeesian's main problem. She doesn't really explain her assumptions, but simple takes them as a given.

[louisg]

For one, fictional narratives are not monoliths, but subject to interpretation and critical scrutiny. Everybody forms an opinion about narratives they hear and put them into some sort of context. It is also not clear to me, why we should assume that people are not able to separate fiction from reality, i.e. treating the social inequality, wage difference, difference in political representation as one thing, and fictional depictions as another. After all, this is the reason the argument that videogames promote violence hasn't really been able to gain much traction.

I'm liberal, but this is one thing I disagree on with many other liberals. A lot of people seem to treat popular culture as if it's some kind of mind-ray, and that an individual is only as good as whatever it is he/she has absorbed like a sponge. Yes, this would be true if the individual has no critical reasoning skills and is some kind of psycho. I grew up watching violent action movies, my favorite games were ones where I was mowing down foes with a machine gun or blowing the crap out of enemy spaceships, and yet I am one of the biggest pacifists.

I do see the concern that girls are being brought up without good female role-models and that boys are growing up in a culture where it's OK to treat women like objects, and that concern definitely has merit. But I see such ridiculous dissection and misinterpretation of pop culture that I just have to laugh sometimes. Like I said, some people will just never be happy with anything, especially where testosterone-soaked action movies and games are concerned.

[Ed Oscuro]

Fictional narratives that uphold heteronormative gender roles (i.e. damsel in distress) reinforce this inequality, by essentially "brainwashing" people into believing this is "the way things are supposed to be".
I'm not so convinced about this. For one, fictional narratives are not monoliths, but subject to interpretation and critical scrutiny. Everybody forms an opinion about narratives they hear and put them into some sort of context. It is also not clear to me, why we should assume that people are not able to separate fiction from reality, i.e. treating the social inequality, wage difference, difference in political representation as one thing, and fictional depictions as another. After all, this is the reason the argument that videogames promote violence hasn't really been able to gain much traction.

I don't think this is actually where the strong criticism should lie, although the broad point is the area I target most for criticism. Representations of gender roles in the media help promote them as normal - just look at how people have started to feel that they know and understand homosexuals and the homosexual community, after many media portrayals; there's arguably correspondingly more understanding and empathy for them. I don't think the argument that media is viewed only as fiction is believable, although at the same time it clearly isn't always viewed as the unvarnished truth, either. But when we look at fictional or media narratives that are thought to be representative of reality, they probably hold more sway on our beliefs than do popular pornography, Gundam ethics, or war-themed video games, which for many people probably seem a bit fantastic in parts. Of course, there are other groups that probably view these few areas more believable than do others (i.e. the ethics of Gundam, such as they are, do seem to represent more strongly the feeling of at least some people in Japan; on the flip side, the "peace through strength" meme and its portrayals in American culture might not seem believable to many others).

What I think the question should be is the role these narratives play: Good or bad? We keep hearing about how it is bad to view people as a type instead of as something else (and generally I strongly agree it's a shame to view people as a type - not just a preset type, but as any type - rather than as individuals, which might be a more nuanced position than some anti-sexism campaigners actually hold), but that has got to be the first thing demonstrated. Thinking back to Dr. Sanjay Gupta's reversal on his stance on marijuana the other day, he criticized the current literature as being much better at outlining dangers of the drug - because studies were 90% focused on that from the start. But almost always there are conflicting goals in play where what seems unequivocally bad from one viewpoint (i.e. for one set of goals) might be permissible in another.

There's also the matter that many gender roles appear and are reinforced merely because they offer the path of least resistance, and while this doesn't make them immune to criticism, some of these are so strongly entrenched that it would be a very serious project (and dangerous for the unforeseen consequences) to upset that order. For example, in examining the tendency of mothers and their infants to have a stronger bond than between the infants and their male partners, Sarah Blaffer Hrdy notes that women naturally have more opportunity and proximity to their infants than do the men - it's hard to bond with somebody when you're physically distant. There are other consequences to this - does it mean men get more time to run around and cause trouble, and is it another incentive chaining women to a set of economic imperatives? I think some of these assertions may prove reasonably to be viewed as problematic, while others may sound less like a construction of sexism or some other easily shaken construct, and more a matter of the inescapable natural condition of living beings.

[Randorama]

A rejoinder to CIT's comment:

Well, I think whether you agree with Sarkeesian's videos (and by extention the whole videogame gender critique) largely depends on whether you accept her underlying assumptions as being true. Those being:

There is inequality between men and women.
This is the easiest one to accept, because there are enough hard facts that show exactly that.

Fictional narratives that uphold heteronormative gender roles (i.e. damsel in distress) reinforce this inequality, by essentially "brainwashing" people into believing this is "the way things are supposed to be".
... It is also not clear to me, why we should assume that people are not able to separate fiction from reality

This is a mantra stemming from a certain style of "social studies" broadly based on continental philosophy (Baudrillard, Horkeimer, etc.), who promote a form of social constructivism. What she seems to buy from all of this perverted non-sense is the general idea that we are clay, sculpted by society, so we are not supposed to distinguish fact from fiction unless the art critics tell us which one is which. Sarkesiaan must have studied this stuff, and bought into it wholesale (so, finally, somebody can "think" for her). She seriously looks like she is convinced that her wannabe "argument" will allow her to make normative judgments - so that we're told what games to play, and so on.

Narratives in video games actually matter and are taken seriously.

I think she cites a lot of games as examples, where the narrative is actually an entirely superfluous embellishment, and nothing that drives the game itself or its enjoyment thereof.

Well, she mostly misrepresents these plots (see the Bayonetta case...), and firmly asserts that her misrepresentations are the received wisdom on some games. None of these misrepresentations focus on the substance of a game: the rules themselves. They focus on the vapid and temporary aspects of the visual design. In other words, she obssesses on the "video" part of "videogame", and shows not to have an even remotely rational approach to this aspect.

And that's Sarkeesian's main problem. She doesn't really explain her assumptions, but simple takes them as a given.

Humanities' approach, continental philosophy/literature theory style 1.01. Yell with gusto and a good master of the language. People into "game theory" have milked lovely tenured positions, within academia. She got 150k out of a poorly made video, so yelling non-nense pays, somehow.

[Udderdude]

People into "game theory" have milked lovely tenured positions, within academia.

And the result is almost always hilarious gibberish or pretentious unuseable shit like "Gamefeel".

[Metalsludge]

Wow, this was a great discussion. I could never cover all aspects I might want to as I am evidently late to the party. But I will say that it's kind of odd how engaged many gamers are in this discussion lately, with stuff such as the controversy over that Dragons crown game. I wonder why this issue is suddenly so hot...

But it's also odd how defensive some gamers are about it. I agree with those in the thread suggesting that the industry needs to grow up beyond cliches in general, especially at a time when games seem to have more and more artistic aspirations and (perhaps sometimes pretentious) attempts at being more and more like serious dramatic films and such. I think that lazy writing bothers me more than any real or perceived gender bias. I don't mind exploitative games that know what they are and have a sense of humor about it. But when you want me to take your plot seriously and still build it on tired clichés cause supposedly that's what sells, that's just really annoying. Unless they give new twists a chance, they will never know what fun new ideas gamers might actually enjoy.

[Ed Oscuro]

People into "game theory" have milked lovely tenured positions, within academia. She got 150k out of a poorly made video, so yelling non-nense pays, somehow.

How did I miss this excellent post? A rather weak ending to an impressive summary, though - human nature is to listen to the people speaking most aggressively, rather than thinking about who has the best arguments, so it's not a big mystery. It's also more severe than just a malaise afflicting academia, as politics is the simple practice of yelling nonsense with conviction.

[Randorama]

How did I miss this excellent post? A rather weak ending to an impressive summary, though - human nature is to listen to the people speaking most aggressively, rather than thinking about who has the best arguments, so it's not a big mystery. It's also more severe than just a malaise afflicting academia, as politics is the simple practice of yelling nonsense with conviction.

if the complaint is about style, then: a simple catch-phrase is worth a thousand witty punchlines.
If the complaint is about content, then: I'd mention the Sokal incident, and the kind of attitude that it lampooned (and that gets amply rewarded in academia), as a reference.

I'd throw in the recent debate Pinker-Pigliucci, if it were relevant.

[blackoak]

The last tropes vs women video came out. I didn't find it as insightful as the last one, but it was still worth watching.

On a shmup related note, I've been looking through INH's Mushihimesama superplay dvd for concept art images for an upcoming Mushihimesama interview to be posted on shmuplations. If you're registered at vgmdb, you can see it here: http://vgmdb.net/album/4214 .

The early draft art for Reco is interesting and far less sexualized than her eventual design. I'm no prude and don't dislike her present incarnation, but I think the comparison here bears consideration. The initial design is much closer to Nausicaa, who more than one Japanese woman have told me was an idol of sorts for them as a child. Can you imagine, otoh, a woman saying she wants to be like Reco? Most of us here are responding to these ideas as fairly intelligent, educated males. I think we have to consider what it would be like if we lived in a world where we were constantly asked to emulate and sympathize with scantily clad dudes in codpieces who were always on the sidelines while Amazonian women performed all deeds of heroism and adventure.

A problem with Sarkeesian's series is the appearance of anecdotal bias. I think the tropes vs women would be stronger if she did a more numerically precise analysis on games she considers sexist vs. those with strong female protagnists. You would need to first categorize those games with sexist gender roles vs those without, and then look at sales figures of each to get a more objective picture of the reach of these ideas. My intuition tells me her basic thesis about the roles of women in video games is correct, but intuition doesn't win arguments or convince those in need of convincing.

[evil_ash_xero]

This almost seems like some sort of push towards censorship, honestly.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. That's the way it is with everything else.

Of course Recco's design got more sexualized. Hell, I DESPISED the loli thing that kicked in with CAVE and other publishers, and still won't go away.
But I just don't buy it and grumble.

These "sexism in games" folks are taking it to the cyber streets. And fuck, I'm tired of hearing it every week.

Also, have you noticed that industry people, journalists, and most people in general(not Sarkeesian, funny enough) seem to just attack Japanese developers? Like Dragon's Crown, and most recently Quiet from MGSV.

I would LOVE to see some finger pointing by Western developers at...oh, people that they actually interact with once or twice a year. You know, every time I go to PSN, there's an ad for GTA 5, with a girl in a bikini. Why doesn't some Western dev hop on his/her twitter and talk about that. Why doesn't Kotaku talk about it?
You know, you'd think the outrage for sex mini-games in GOW would bring more ire than some chick in skimpy attire in MGSV. But nope, that's too close to home base.

Bunch of fucking pussies, I tell you.

[Udderdude]

It's pretty amusing if you compare it to the moral outrage over Mortal Kombat and Doom in the 90s, and those righteous crusaders of moral justice were going up against games with people getting their heads ripped off and blown to bloody bits.

The end result? An age rating system was added to games, and today's violent games make Doom and Mortal Kombat look quaint by comparison.

What's the big moral outrage this time? Not enough female protagonists? Big tits? Oh noes. Everybody panic.

Maybe they can put a "Check your privilege" sticker on the game boxes.

Like I said a few posts ago, they're yelling so loud that people are just starting to ignore it.

[Randorama]

If I may:

The early draft art for Reco is interesting and far less sexualized than her eventual design. I'm no prude and don't dislike her present incarnation, but I think the comparison here bears consideration. The initial design is much closer to Nausicaa, who more than one Japanese woman have told me was an idol of sorts for them as a child.

given what you say below, I'd like to offer you a question:

A problem with Sarkeesian's series is the appearance of anecdotal bias. I think the tropes vs women would be stronger if she did a more numerically precise analysis on games she considers sexist vs. those with strong female protagnists. You would need to first categorize those games with sexist gender roles vs those without, and then look at sales figures of each to get a more objective picture of the reach of these ideas.

So, if Sarkeesian's problem is her abuse of anedoctes rather than facts, then your point on Nausicaa's influence as a role model has the same problem. My wife is one of the women you mention, but this says little on whether the average japanese woman of a certain generation followed that model, rather than others, shallower in natur.

Aside this: Sarkeesian does what everybody in e.g. literary theory does: confuse anedoctes with statistically significant facts. See below my answer to one point in which you, quite frankly, lose the plot:

My intuition tells me her basic thesis about the roles of women in video games is correct, but intuition doesn't win arguments or convince those in need of convincing.

You mean your bias, don't you? Without numbers and with anedoctes, any intuition ends up being a confirmation bias of whatever beliefs you have on the matter. So, given that you lament her lack of actual numbers, but at the same time mention anedoctes to apparently raise a point on role models, you really would be a nice chap if you could tell me:

which one is which?

1. You buy the radical chic non-sense that the situation of women will improve when Maria will save prince Peach, in videogames?
2. You don't buy such radical non-sense, because numbers do not support it?
3. Mu?

Nothing personal, but your post sounds rather confusing (which is an understatement of a certain sort).

[Skykid]

Well, I can't believe that in three whole episodes Sarkeesian didn't get her tits out once. What a let down.

Part 3 has to be the weakest of them all. How confused can you possibly make your point? The relevance of the material in the 2nd part seems quickly forgotten as she returns to what appear to be personal ideals about the representation not of women, but of damsels - even going so far as to illustrate how a damsel (as opposed to a female protagonist) can liberate herself by dressing up in stock female videogame attire and performing actions already seen by a ton of female videogame characters.

Not especially special.

I couldn't discern any clear or original basis for argument in this one - at least nothing that can't be adequately combatted with simple common sense. This crusade is personal, that much is clear: it's not the will of all women or even all feminists. Rather, it's Sarkeesian's insecurity and feeling of inadequacy in being female that's prompted a mostly unnecessary tirade against the videogame medium.

Do I think her argument has some substance? Yes, in that videogame themes are unoriginal and mostly fucking boring, but I've been saying that for years and it has nothing to do specifically with gender representations.

[blackoak]

So, if Sarkeesian's problem is her abuse of anedoctes rather than facts, then your point on Nausicaa's influence as a role model has the same problem. My wife is one of the women you mention, but this says little on whether the average japanese woman of a certain generation followed that model, rather than others, shallower in nature.

I'm not really sure how to respond to this: your point is not my point. What I said about Reco vs. Nausicaa is simply that the comparison bears consideration; it isn't pulled out of thin air, but rather what Wakabayashi/Kotani apparently had at one point for the design. Why did they change it? I think that's interesting to think about, especially with regard to what _we_ want in the future. Regarding japanese women and the relativism of different generations, so what? The point isn't to pass some glistening condemnation on art of the past, something to frame on the wall and say "Look! I was right about that!" The point is to use the shortcomings of the past, innocent or otherwise, to make newer and more fulfilling art. But I feel here we might be talking past each other.

You mean your bias, don't you? Without numbers and with anedoctes, any intuition ends up being a confirmation bias of whatever beliefs you have on the matter.

This is also difficult to respond to, in no small part due to your snarkiness, but perhaps the word intuition was poorly chosen. I'm attesting to the fact that without certain kinds of evidence, a proposition like "games have a negative gender bias towards women" can't be convincingly made. Its preaching to the converted or demagoguery. So I agree with you: my comment was recognizing that shortcoming in myself as well (although, fyi, I do have more than "intuitions" about this subject matter, I just don't feel like trotting them out in a very complicated and probably boring internet argument).

1. You buy the radical chic non-sense that the situation of women will improve when Maria will save prince Peach, in videogames?
2. You don't buy such radical non-sense, because numbers do not support it?
3. Mu?

Do you really expect me to answer that as you've phrased it? I think of this entire project differently. The situation of women overall will not be greatly improved if, in isolation and by fiat decree, video games suddenly put women in more active and less gendered roles. And there's a preciousness to this issue that comes from it being argued online by young "first world problems" types; BUT, engaging in criticism with media is still important for a variety of different reasons. I'm aware those reasons have been challenged elsewhere in this thread but I don't really feel like arguing about them right now: maybe later.

[blackoak]

This almost seems like some sort of push towards censorship, honestly.

Really? Censorship is when a governing body decides for all and sundry that something cannot be done, under penalty of law. Is that what's being pushed for here? Or is it more accurate to say that a group of people who find the depictions of women lacking in video games are attempting to sway public opinion and engage in criticism. For the record, actual censorship would be a horrible idea.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. That's the way it is with everything else.

You also seem to be saying: don't talk about it either. Reminds me of what my Mother used to say: "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all." Mom can keep that one.

Of course Recco's design got more sexualized.

But why did that happen? Don't you think that's worth thinking about, and heaven forbid, perhaps voicing criticism over?

These "sexism in games" folks are taking it to the cyber streets. And fuck, I'm tired of hearing it every week.

This is just a personal bit of advice from my life experience (destined to be challenged by Randorama as a non-scientific non-fact, haha), but you should cast a forgiving eye on people who, caught in the zeal of a new idea, express themselves poorly. Also known as the "benefit of the doubt." When I read some silly bloggers College Feminism 101 post, I don't sit back and scoff: "what a fucking moron." If I say anything it will be to help give nuance to their ideas.

[evil_ash_xero]

Really? Censorship is when a governing body decides for all and sundry that something cannot be done, under penalty of law. Is that what's being pushed for here? Or is it more accurate to say that a group of people who find the depictions of women lacking in video games are attempting to sway public opinion and engage in criticism. For the record, actual censorship would be a horrible idea.

I'm gonna have to split some black oak! Just kidding.

Anyway, let me try to respond a bit. I guess by "censorship", I mean more...I guess shaming people into doing something other than they would do originally. So, not really a governing body, but a bunch of people causing a fuss about something enough to where developers change their art in reaction to that. I guess that could be good or bad. I guess it just matters what it is. So yeah, not ACTUAL censorship.

You also seem to be saying: don't talk about it either. Reminds me of what my Mother used to say: "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all." Mom can keep that one.

No, I think we should talk about it....but it's just so....I mean some of the stuff just seems so ridiculous to me. A damsel in distress is bad? And there ARE lots of strong women characters out there. A lot of them ARE sexy, yes, but they're games made by men, for boys/men...so that will happen. Is it great? No...I mean, even I am like "what the fuck" when I saw the character designs for the girls in Ninja Gaiden, or the redesign of Lady from DMC3. But that was what the people wanted at the time, so they were given what they wanted. I don't really think Joe Schmoe gives a rat's ass if girls are sexy in games, or about the princess in peril cliche. It just seems like a bunch of journalists and white knights are trying to force what THEY think should be in games, on other people. Don't get me wrong, a lot of it is embarrassing, and over the top.

But why did that happen? Don't you think that's worth thinking about, and heaven forbid, perhaps voicing criticism over?

Why did it happen? Pandering to otakus. It sucks, yeah. I really hate all the loli junk in recent CAVE shmups, but it's more because it's shameful and embarrassing than anything else. I mean, sexy women are one thing, but these are all like moe lolis. Obviously it's a Japanese thing. They have their problems, we have ours. But yes, if one was to take a gander at all the PVCs and game designs and fuck pillows...one could very understandably think "otakus are a bunch of perverts". They're right too. But they seem to be lonely perverts, and that's always the worst kind. Dementia sets in from lack of social interaction. [/quote]

This is just a personal bit of advice from my life experience (destined to be challenged by Randorama as a non-scientific non-fact, haha), but you should cast a forgiving eye on people who, caught in the zeal of a new idea, express themselves poorly. Also known as the "benefit of the doubt." When I read some silly bloggers College Feminism 101 post, I don't sit back and scoff: "what a fucking moron." If I say anything it will be to help give nuance to their ideas.

Probably the reason I personally get so hostile about it, is because a lot of the accusers are like "you are bad for liking this. the developers are bad people. you should be ashamed." That's not a good way to get your point across. And attacking things from such a basic level like saving a princess, instead of more (I would think)obvious targets, like Kratos' fuck adventures, kind of...well, it's like "oh come on!", rather than "hmm...yeah I see what you're saying". Because there IS sexism in games. But is most of it sexism or just sexy? That's certainly a debate. Guys like to see sexy girls. It doesn't mean they all hate women, or see them as "lesser". Guys are just like this. I'm like this. My friends are like this. And they aren't misogynists. But these "folks" are acting like people who like these things are "bad". Or some kind of cave men that are helping create an atmosphere for rape culture. This sounds ridiculous...and it is. But these are the words and ideas that are being tossed about by these supporters of this...I hesitate to say movement..but I guess that's what it's trying to be.

I dunno, it seems like by trying to be "progressive", we're also getting "regressive". Like prudes.

One last thing...there are a lot of gamers who are female. BUT, most of them don't play the kinds of games that have these "sexist" things in them. Now, I know that will ruffle the feathers of so and so, but whatever(we're all the same! don't make sexist preconceptions!). Most women do not play Ninja Gaiden Black, Dragon's Crown, or Dead Or Alive. Most do not play God Of War. Those games are MADE for boys/men. Now, I'm sure there are women who like them, but I'm sure that number is very small, in the grand scheme of things.

You know what most women like to play? JRPGs. Mobile games. Mario. Tetris. Nintendo titles(Animal Crossing seems to be a favorite). I don't know a single woman who plays shmups. I'm sure some do(probably girlfriends of players on this board), but it's got to be a SMALL number.

I don't see why the argument is being pushed so hard that we need to rise above our perversions, and lesser tendencies, to alter games for the really small number of female players who play these games that are being tossed about in blogs and articles.

I'm sure there are men who love Lifetime, but we don't see them starting movements on the internet to make men look better on their shows.

I still think it's so nuts that these folks are making arguments like "boys will think women are weak" and "girls don't have strong role models in games", when games these days all you do is blow people away, and do the worst stuff known to man. But THAT'S not an issue?

When violence gets mentioned, gamers are like Legion, and just say "fuck you. don't play it. the games are rated. leave our hobby alone. it doesn't cause anything, it's just fantasy". But with this sexism shit, it's a whole different reaction.

Kind of ironic...and sad too.