next »

[Diabetes Forecast]

Wasn't there a mobile Square Enix RPG about a dude basically wearing an armor-kini with a super tiny codpiece some time ago? I remember seeing screenshots of it and lots of people commenting about how awkward it made them feel.

[gimymblert]

final fantasy mevius



Girls loved it!



But they had to cover the skin



But vagrant story is also notable

[Superb Joe]

secret mission: email your mom a screenshot of an arkham game captioned "this is what i do all day"

[s0]

btw this thing dacke posted earlier itt is actually very insightful, but it seems like no one read it

http://www.davegutteridge.com/sexyism

[absolute8]

EPIC POST LOADING...

[starsrift]

This discussion is really interesting, but it doesn't answer a lot of questions about what to do with sexuality in indie games. Let's say that I have a situation in my game and I'm unsure if it'll be considered sexist or not. What do I do then? Is there a systematic set of criteria I can run my game through to get my answer? How do I determine what parts of sexuality are okay to include and which ones aren't? And if I ever accidentally include something sexist in a game and release it, how do I handle the situation without losing my dignity?

Food for thought I guess, and moving towards a more concrete discussion I hope.

One thing that I find helps is considering their purpose and situation first.

Is the middle of the battlefield a good time to be worried about looking sexy? Is wandering the arctic wastes a good time to be worried about looking sexy?

Oh, please. I always wanna look sexy.
/ speaking of arctic wastes, I have this super sexy winter jacket...
// um, anyway...

[yeahjim]

A lot of really good points raised. A lot of counter-arguments perfunctorily dismissed. But then, that's easy to do when you are having an imaginary discussion. Kind of reminds me of reading the Dialogues way back when - frustrating.

It's an interesting time for progressivism and reform in a lot of areas. Distortion from all sides is presumed, even lauded if it serves the needs of one's faction. For instance, a rather innocuous example - I thought the Google Doodle displayed for USA's Veteran's Day this year was interesting, demographically (the U.S. military is 70% white, 85% male.)



I'm still very much a progressive (because the alternative is so horrifying) but it bums me out to see so much progressive argumentation that serves the immediate interests of whatever progressive faction, while it undermines the very foundation of liberalism (that foundation being frank openness, fairness, rational debate, transparency, empathy, desire to represent faithfully and understand the realities of the opposing side, working forward toward a conclusion rather than from a conclusion backward toward one's own vested interests...) That's all but gone these days. But then again, my exposure is limited to tumblr rants and television these days, so...

[Dragonmaw]

just a reminder

as long as you are honest about your desire to look at a tity or balsac i don't think anybody is going to care

[gimymblert]

@yeahjim
You miss the point, showing black character aren't just for black people, it's for white people too, t remind them that black people are people first and black second, just like you don't have quota on hair color drawing because hair color don't create harmful prejudice. How does it come that a ll white cast is for everyone but an all black cast is for minority? What does it tells us about white people?

@dragonmaw
But there is also the case of showing it in a public forum that is supposed to feel safe to anyone, when it's known to send bad signal to some. I mean no one in their right mind would show a drawing of sambo here. No one care but keep it private or for the appropriate circle.

[Dragonmaw]

it's a weird line you have to walk with sexuality for sure, and i don't really like public depictions of sexual scenarios either, but it's usually because it's gratuitous to a point that it feels dishonest. like, i value honesty above basically all else, so if a designer were to say "we drew her like that because it's cute and sexy and turns us on" i can respect that more than some bullshit excuse.

[Superb Joe]

[as if singing the bassline to stand by me acapella] Gay Men's Ass...es, Gay Men's Ass...es, _{Gay Men's Ass...es}

[Dragonmaw]

gay cyborg ass

[gimymblert]

straight men can valorize their ass too, it's not like straight women don't look at them, their sexy too! Next time you look at your straight ass, think about how women might be turned on by it. Learn to appreciate and love it.

[absolute8]

it's a weird line you have to walk with sexuality for sure, and i don't really like public depictions of sexual scenarios either, but it's usually because it's gratuitous to a point that it feels dishonest. like, i value honesty above basically all else, so if a designer were to say "we drew her like that because it's cute and sexy and turns us on" i can respect that more than some bullshit excuse.

I second this...still gathering power for final epic post...ignore this post for lack of epicness please...

[gimymblert]

@dragonmaw

There is also the devlog, we had some pretty sexy devlog no one care about, however the pic thread is another thing entirely.

[yeahjim]

How does it come that a ll white cast is for everyone but an all black cast is for minority? What does it tells us about white people?

i value honesty above basically all else

Man I don't even know what to say, it's like reading a verbal mobius strip. It's like being tilting at the windmills by night and being some kind of anti-windmill politician by day. It must be awesome.

[Faust06]

it's a weird line you have to walk with sexuality for sure, and i don't really like public depictions of sexual scenarios either, but it's usually because it's gratuitous to a point that it feels dishonest. like, i value honesty above basically all else, so if a designer were to say "we drew her like that because it's cute and sexy and turns us on" i can respect that more than some bullshit excuse.

I think this is spot on.

But just because it's partly subjective doesn't mean we can't say meaningful things about such characterizations and their effect on real people. People seem to confuse subjectivity/objectivity with meaningless/meaningful or unknowable/knowable.

I agree, I don't contest that. An experience through the lens of subjectivity is not a non-experience, it's every experience. Whether it has value to anyone but the one experiencing is up to everyone else I suppose. We draw them from empirical data, and lend a whole other level of credence to that. To misconstrue subjective data as objective is a distortion and tacitly invalidates other subjective experiences (shits on them). Conversely distortion of the objective and subjective can lead to some pretty wild and sometimes heinous ideas.

The idea that portrayal of agency is irrelevant since it isn't actual agency.

Well I'm saying more than that. We cannot reliably distinguish between agency and non-agency in terms of portrayal in an objective sense. Mileage will vary, as per above - a subjective experience, which is all I'm saying. Some portrayals may seem contrived and forced to me (they're fabricated after all) and genuine to others, but whether the character desires or has full control over their behavior seems rather moot unless we're talking molestation scenarios (on them), precisely because we don't know, we merely project. To me this means the overwhelming majority of portrayals would arguably include agency, including some where people call out objectification. I've seen the line "it's ok, she's a strong independent woman!" often in youtube comments for what's essentially fan-service, meant for ogling, and it's pretty funny now to the point where it might as well be satire. And annoying.

The thing is you try to get a mental shortcut of something that must be studied

You seem to know a thing about shortcuts, you forgot to form a counter-argument. How quickly the ad hominem came.

[Torchkas]

Yeah, I'd prefer my reminder to be representative.
And undermining the majority group isn't a good strategy when dealing with minority acceptation.

[gimymblert]

How does it come that a ll white cast is for everyone but an all black cast is for minority? What does it tells us about white people?

i value honesty above basically all else

Man I don't even know what to say, it's like reading a verbal mobius strip. It's like being tilting at the windmills by night and being some kind of anti-windmill politician by day. It must be awesome.

You misquote me, stop that

The first quote is mine, and it's basically my experience, I made a game and because of its context it's all black women cast, I have been told it's not universal, that I should get other it and that it's black stuff. In fact it's a very common pattern for minority artist. I didn't set up to make an all black cast, it emerged from the context. Now I don't stop at tumblr and TV show so I dig it up and it's a long standing pattern and that's not cool. Now you are calling me a liberal, I spoke not form an ideological stance, I'm a black person I spoke at what life toss at me and actual documentation and study over the year.

@faust
I'm going to call you stupid on that one, there you can put that against me now

I was gently pointing at how you were doing reductio ad absurDUM. I took great care of not adressing the objectivity trap because just because something isn't 100% objective does not mean it does not have SOME objectivity. Like I said there is a definite and measured basis. Also there is the logical fallacy of equating everything as subjective therefore my subjectivity is best, making a false equivalence to in fact put one as better than the other ( x = y therefore I stand by x over y) which is common here. I mean the reason I said that is that I precisely choose 2 links you certainly didn't look at, I mean one defend dead or alive in very precise term, outlining precise difference using objective terms, and so is the second who is praising a porn parody of bioshock infinite involving elizabeth, which again detail the rational. My answer therefore is to point at the fact you ask for data and overlook the data provided, which is, if I were doing a true ad hominem, very dishonest of you and show you don't care but bend the argument your ways without having to substantiate it. In fact you aren't making argument, you are asking question and looking preemptively to shout down any argument whatever their substance, placing you in a supposed position of authority, it's a common rhetorical tactics.

[gimymblert]

http://killscreendaily.com/articles/heres-game-about-having-sexual-relations-chair-confuse-and-disturb-you/