Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1412033 Posts in 69446 Topics- by 58482 Members - Latest Member: ZerusW

June 20, 2024, 09:28:14 PM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsPlayerGeneralSexuality in games: Where to draw the line between dignity and indulgence
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 12
Print
Author Topic: Sexuality in games: Where to draw the line between dignity and indulgence  (Read 12364 times)
Diabetes Forecast
Guest
« Reply #160 on: November 11, 2015, 12:35:55 PM »

I think this all kinda comes back to labels and a weird aversion/obsessive need for them. Sexist vs Sexual, which both can kinda end up being the same thing to two individuals.

Quantizing and labelling is an inevitable thing. Things are just eventually gonna be labelled and categorized based on a general consensus. I don't think that's a bad thing, but it seems like that's become the new status quo?  To get mad that there's even a label to begin with? Or the opposite, where there's way too many labels. Sometimes a hoe is just a tool for digging. Sometimes Skullgirls is actually just a game about hot girls to jack off to.

What I'm saying is there's really no end to this conversation. It'll go on for eternity.
Logged
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #161 on: November 11, 2015, 12:56:07 PM »

No it's not just a problem of label, it's about one side (generally men) trying to claim authority on something that actually impact the other side (generally women) and his the domain they should have authority on.

There is a very long and documented discomfort of women pointing at VERY specific instance and how it impacts them in everyday life. Showing they don't care for the impact it cause. Which can be basically translated to we don't have to respect you.

You are using a diversion tactic that don't address the point and try to evacuate it by using semantics. semantics don't make the problem go away.

It's similar of a situation where you step on someones toes and then reason that there is actually the shoe between your feet and their toes, and by the way it's not a feet it's a collection of cells, not all the cells are on the toe, they aren't even in contact with the toe because of the shoes. That's absurd.
Logged

Torchkas
Level 10
*****


collects sawdust


View Profile WWW
« Reply #162 on: November 11, 2015, 01:30:52 PM »

See I completely agree with all of your points on sexism Jim, but for some reason I just feel like I should let Jack do his own thing.
Logged

gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #163 on: November 11, 2015, 01:38:48 PM »

I didn't prevent him of doing anything, just arguing, in a thread made for it, why it's not necessarily a great move.

I mean since when offering critic, that has been asked because it's not me jumping at his throat, and offering counter to argument that are voluntary proposed, the same as preventing someone doing his thing he does anyway.

It's not me dropping on his devlog to censor him or anything.

If we can't make a case for point here, which specifically design for it, where could those point be made?

I mean the same reasoning can apply to the other side too, that we should let people who criticized rightfully do their own thing.

I mean if it's about no policing anyone, let's not police anyone.

The only reason I let loose the argumentation in this thread is that this thread is made for it. What do you think this thread was about?

The author took responsibility for this thread, the consequence is that it will serve its purpose, I don't the problem.

Wink
Logged

Pfotegeist
Guest
« Reply #164 on: November 11, 2015, 01:43:51 PM »

sexism also clearly involves gender policing (heteronormativity) and human dominion belief (dominance over animals and nature), as myth or anecdotes sometimes humor sometimes forgotten tradition. sexuality is to sexism as oxygen is to water. I could start postulating about these other things exist in video games, in the thread.

For instance, gim you mentioned how

IMHO one problem with typical game value is that game are about asserting dominance over others and being rewarded for it. That's a problem, for example replace any typical game hero with a "muslim" and try to see if that's not awkward, it a great way (in a bias and prejudiced western society) to reveal the underlying problem. This translate not only in dominance over opponent but also support character, hence why the damsel in distress, the love interest, etc ... it's about to cater to a base level egotism. This translate in the way sexuality is portrayed, as consumption, reward and performance.

But if you are from a minority, this idea of "freedom" through dominance became more a game of "permission", in which agency can be robbed from you anytime by the script and design of the game.

If you want to see games that don't abide to these value and allow it to express a different way to express even the most salacious sexuality, look no further at what Christine Love, Nina Freeman, Meritt Kopa and Anna Anthropy do (among many other), even when these game express idea of "dominance" they do it in a significant different way that making it the central value to uphold, it also open sexuality to a realm often ignored "intimacy".

I think a lot of people don't get why their depiction of sexuality is problematic is that they tend to ignore the idea of intimacy from sexuality for some reason, although that's not all to it.


The first paragraph stating that typical games are about asserting dominance.

Survival games are basically fear of nature given form, also present in literature man vs nature.  Apocalyptic games express the destruction of nature man vs himself or in an ongoing apocalypse it's frequently some killer monster. Heck you don't even need video games, you can kill someone's pet if it bit you, inappropriate behavior of subordinate = death.

I looked up those authors you mentioned too.

Oh a more common word for human dominionism is Anthropocentrism
« Last Edit: November 11, 2015, 01:57:37 PM by Pfotegeist » Logged
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #165 on: November 11, 2015, 01:52:54 PM »

Dominance is however not the only lens in which we can see life. The point was to single out a "lens" and show that other can exist.
Logged

ANtY
Level 10
*****


i accidentally did that on purpose


View Profile WWW
« Reply #166 on: November 11, 2015, 04:06:52 PM »

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

http://www.davegutteridge.com/sexyism

so I read it (took some time, it's quite a long read) and I think it's pretty cool, informative and thought provoking for sure

but what I loved about it was that it was presented in a form of a dialogue between 2 people, not one sided attack, much easier to absorb this way
Logged

gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #167 on: November 11, 2015, 04:11:58 PM »

one sided attack >.>
Logged

gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #168 on: November 11, 2015, 04:23:15 PM »

To be frank on the "attack" rhetorics, I believe it's perceive as less confrontational because the guy "start and lead" the interaction in a domain where  he is generally on the "faulty" side (faulty being a perceive narrative).

By doing so, the writer put the reader who identify with the guy at ease because the interaction is not start by the "other side".

Which is EXACTLY the kind of care women ask for when you deal with their representation, it's a good example of what women wants but applied to a possible sexist man.

However the author still make it that the guy is kinda "rude", the mother keep correcting him to "women" and he completely took her attention for himlsef away of her own comfort (see the ending).

That's smartly written.
Logged

Superb Joe
Level 10
*****



View Profile
« Reply #169 on: November 11, 2015, 04:25:31 PM »

I agree with Joe.
Logged
JWK5
Guest
« Reply #170 on: November 11, 2015, 04:33:06 PM »

I agree with Joe.
I agree with you Joe, about agreeing with Joe. Joe is pretty agreeable.
Logged
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #171 on: November 11, 2015, 04:34:16 PM »

I agree with Joe.

You are superb
Logged

ProgramGamer
Administrator
Level 10
******


aka Mireille


View Profile
« Reply #172 on: November 11, 2015, 04:54:34 PM »

That one conversation was very informative indeed. It's a good read especially if you're on the fence about things or if the whole discussion confuses you.
Logged

TamaraRyan
Level 0
***


none


View Profile WWW
« Reply #173 on: November 11, 2015, 06:41:46 PM »

It's cool to see a thread about this subject that hasn't turned into an all out flame war. So yay for everyone talking about this like adults. Smiley

Ever since this Gamergate thing came about, I've been doing a lot of thinking about the issue of sexism/sexuality in games. I'm a woman, but I love fan service. I like anime like Golden Boy and Ah! My Goddess. I play hentai games. I'm also a feminist. Which may or may not make sense to some people. But basically, this is how I've come to think of it:

Most people would agree that Video games are an art form. And I would agree. It's a new medium for being able to express thoughts, feelings, and points of views that you can share with an audience. It's another way to tell a story. Like paintings, books, film and more, we are expressing and sharing experiences with others through creative means.

Like any other Art form, art has always been personal and political. It has also been commercial and superficial. Some take their craft and really want to do something meaningful with it, to make a statement or convey a strong sense of empathy. Others are taking the craft and just making something fun with it. Not a lot of in depth thought or messages or whatever, just something they think is enjoyable. Both of these are totally cool.

The issue here I think, is that it's rare that the in depth, personal and meaningful art gets made into widely consumed media. It's usually the light hearted, just for fun stuff that we mainly see day in and day out, unless we go and actively search for something different.

Which is fine. I think if you don't like something, then you can find something you DO like. The problem though is, is when the mainstream media stuff fills up so much of your experiences, that even though the people who made those things might not have really been trying to say anything with it, or just made it for fun, it has a very real impact on their audience. Sometimes, you keep seeing tropes and stereotypes so often that they begin coming off as facts. And that can be an issue. More so for some than others, but I think it does impact everyone on some level.

Video games are the same way, there have been mainstream commercial hits that most people consume, and there's plenty of other more meaningful games out there that you simply have to do a little digging for if you want them.

This has become a bit long winded, so I'm going to try and sum up by saying this: Mainstream media is always allowed to make whatever they want, and should. BUT, they should also be AWARE of the real power and impact they have on their audiences. Trying to censor art is bad, but telling an artist "hey, just so you know, this is really racist/sexist/whatever" is cool too.
Not everyone is aware of their own bad habits or judgments. Sometimes people need it pointed out to them. I know I needed it, and most likely still do from time to time. Nobody is brought up with a completely open and non-judgmental mind. Yeah, we're born that way, but everything around us as we grow up helps us form judgments and opinions that are not always true or right. And our media plays a hand in that.



TL;DR : Games are art and can be made however the creator wants. However, that doesn't mean the creator is always aware of the messages they're sending. Censoring art is bad, but pointing out that it's crappy for whatever reason is good.
Logged

Professional Voice Actress at your service: http://www.tamararyanvo.com/
Abatron - a FPS/RTS hybrid game: http://www.abatrongame.com/
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #174 on: November 11, 2015, 06:55:08 PM »

Preach!
Logged

s0
o
Level 10
*****


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #175 on: November 11, 2015, 07:43:53 PM »

agreed

also we're talking (for the most part) about the AAA game industry here. publishers are not patrons who let developers freely "realize their vision" or watever. they interfere with the dev process constantly to ensure the expensive entertainment product they're selling is commercially viable.

developers do not necessarily reuse the same sexist tropes in videogames because it's their innermost desire (tho a lot probably DO), but because their publisher's marketing department did some focus testing and determined that this sort of things sells games. case in point: i read some suda51 interview where he claimed that shit like the gigolo minigame in killer is dead or the cheerleader protagonist in lollipop chainsaw were done at the request of his publisher, kadokawa, and these games would have been totally different if he was given free reign. and this is a guy with a reputation for being an "auteur" who makes "weird and experimental games", mind you.

point being, people who argue against criticism using "artistic freedom" are often attributing this freedom to people who often don't have it in the first place. AAA games don't represent anything remotely like an "artistic vision" in "classical" sense and feminist criticism is most developers' smallest "problem" (if it is one at all) as far as freedom goes.

tho if im really honest about this, i think the "censorship/freedom" angle is often used by people as a red herring or a derailing tactic. im not convinced that e.g. most gamergaters really care about the "freedom" of developers.
Logged
TamaraRyan
Level 0
***


none


View Profile WWW
« Reply #176 on: November 11, 2015, 08:40:56 PM »


developers do not necessarily reuse the same sexist tropes in videogames because it's their innermost desire (tho a lot probably DO), but because their publisher's marketing department did some focus testing and determined that this sort of things sells games.

Word. Money will certainly be a driving force in how things are made. I'm confident though that eventually, we'll see a shift in what the people want and the marketing results will change with it. I know plenty of men (and women) who enjoy big boobies, but also don't really want every woman in their show/game to be portrayed as the sexy bombshell either.

Previously, it was too scandalous to have a woman so scantily clad in movies and such. And we've reached an age where now it's not only acceptable, but even normal. Eventually, the excitement of it will pass and people will want women to be more than their sexy shells. Which I think we're in the beginning stages of now.
Logged

Professional Voice Actress at your service: http://www.tamararyanvo.com/
Abatron - a FPS/RTS hybrid game: http://www.abatrongame.com/
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #177 on: November 11, 2015, 09:13:34 PM »

Game of thrones, hunger games
Logged

Diabetes Forecast
Guest
« Reply #178 on: November 12, 2015, 12:10:07 AM »

I remember how one of the developers for Dead Space 3 was talking over in the thread for the game on SomethingAwful's forums, and how the female lead from the second game (who was pretty fucking cool to put it mildly) was mandated by the execs at EA to make her 'sexier' in Dead Space 3 by giving her a low cleavage top. There was a constant joke about how stupid it was, and worse off the point that they wanted this to somehow show up on all clothing versions of her whether it made sense or not.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2015, 12:57:56 AM by Diabetes Forecast » Logged
Pfotegeist
Guest
« Reply #179 on: November 12, 2015, 06:37:47 AM »

After I read that imaginary chat I have some comments about it specifically. I omit a few now.

First of all, cats found a social context. It is recommended to look at three cute animals a day to live longer, cats for example. We can feel closer to nature without really admitting it. Moving on.

The message that the writer of the imaginary chat sent from both sides of the argument seems to be that pictures of men aren't sexy.

The idea that women don't like muscles is a myth. In daily life skin & muscles a sign of good health, would provoke inter-gender conflict, across the board decisions based on attraction and danger, same with any other physical traits would take precedence over cultural value.  People don't want to admit their instincts are animal and constantly biased. A myth like this promotes the idea that wealth and status are a man's cultural significance, and not his image, or his health.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 12
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic