Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
What exactly is your point here? Do you think those movies are perpetuating sexism or something?

I was subtly implying that your complaining against speculative sexism in games is a bit confusing when weighed against your enjoyment of movies with actual sexual assault as one of their main themes.

How can you support one form of expression like 'Irreversible' and be against another form like 'Smite'?

Please note, not judging you for enjoying such movies, I just don't understand the appeal. I'd never dream of taking those movies away though

(for the record my best boss was female, as was my worst)

Well you know because the themes, messages and emotions invoked are different. I an not really well informed on R&R stories though. I think they are stories like kill bill was an example I heard?

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
I was subtly implying that your complaining against speculative sexism in games is a bit confusing when weighed against your enjoyment of movies with actual sexual assault as one of their main themes.

But having sexual assault as one of their main theme does not necessarily makes them sexist. Far from it, actually, as far as I can tell. Feminists tends to speak quite a lot about sexual assault.
Have you seen “A gun for Jennifer”, for instance? Every character that is portrayed in a positive light is a feminist. That movie is just basically one big feminist power fantasy about punishing rapists.
Trailer, NSFW because boobs and violence:

Are Rape and revenge movies exploitative? Yes, they usually, though not necessarily always, are. But sexist? Well, most of them are not, as far as I can tell. Really, the main reproach I would have against them on that front is that they most of the time perpetuate the idea that rape is committed by a random stranger when apparently actually most rape comes from someone who is actually somehow close to the victim.

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
How can you support one form of expression like 'Irreversible' and be against another form like 'Smite'?

Well, I would not count Irreversible as a “rape and revenge” movie, because it is not the victim who is enacting her revenge, it is her husband. And that makes quite a big difference, especially when discussing if those movies are sexist or feminist.
My problem with Smite is that I feel that their perceived need to have every goddamn female goddesses extremely sexualized is completely unfit to the theme of the game, and greatly cheapens and restrict their character design. That is not something you would find on many Rape and revenge movies, that do not actually sexualize their heroin most of the time. If you watched the above trailer, you have seen basically all the most sexually explicit scenes in the movie, and you can notice that the vigilante group's outfit, when going to kill people, is certainly not sexy. Or take Thriller – A Cruel Picture. While it does have very explicit sex scene, it could basically be used as a contraceptive given how disturbing and repulsive they are. And when the heroin starts enacting violent revenge, they made her look just like a complete bad-ass, without sexualizing her at all (which would be of terrible taste given what happened previously).

But do not get me wrong, I am not against sexualization in general, neither in movies or in video games. If it fits the theme and is done right, why not? I really enjoyed watching Faster Pussycat! Kill! Kill! with some friends (and that movie at least also give something for people that are more into men, especially in one scene where the camera lingers on Vegetable's body (yeah, Vegetable is the actual name of one on the characters )), and I would similarly enjoy playing games like Lollipop Chainsaw. I just wish there were more, and better, male sexualization too, and less, but better, female sexualization. I just wish having your female character being sexy was not the default, because I do believe having them all sexy by default, and basically none of the male one, is rooted in some sexist bias. And I really feel Smite is all about “sexy by default”, even when it really does not fit the lore of the goddess, while not really sexualizing any of the male god (except maybe Apollo, iirc, and even then more in jest rather than actually trying to make him attractive).

By the way, I do not consider every movie I like to be above criticism of sexism either. For instance, I just love The FP (Uh, boobies warning again, I am afraid. For one second.), it is a great, highly enjoyable movie, but it does have everything that make the damsel in distress trope bad and then some more. I am not denying either the fact I love the movie, or the fact it uses terrible sexist tropes. I just wish it did not contain them, that would make it even better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Or to put it a different way does the entertainment a society produce change that society for good or il, or does it have no real effect either way.

I am pretty sure the entertainment do influence a society, but not necessarily in obvious ways, and not necessarily by changing it. Strengthening the status quo is an influence.

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Also there are plenty of examples of people using different forms of media as scape goats for societies problems. To quote a book a I read recently, The Proteus Paradox by Nick Yee, "It's easier to put warning labels on video games than to address all the very real social, cultural, and psychological factors that lead to gun violence."

I am not trying to scapegoat medias. I would never deny another source of sexism by “but video games”, and I never did it. I speak about sexist tropes in video games when I am on a forum about video games, but if I was on a forum about feminism, those would certainly not be my main concern.


[edit]I forgot to put a link to Faster Pussycat! Kill! Kill!'s trailer. Now corrected [/edit]

nomotog wrote:
Well you know because the themes, messages and emotions invoked are different. I an not really well informed on R&R stories though. I think they are stories like kill bill was an example I heard?

While true, that can be argued about any movie/game, none will have an exact match of themes, messages and emotions.

Unless you mean the R&R genre, in which case I don't think there are any R&R video games? The closest I can think of is 'Beat Down: Fists of Vengeance' but Gina's implied sexual assault (if she isn't the selected character) isn't a driving force behind the plot.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
But having sexual assault as one of their main theme does not necessarily makes them sexist. Far from it, actually, as far as I can tell. Feminists tends to speak quite a lot about sexual assault.

I would argue that a film (or game) that includes sexual assault for the semi-guilty titillation of its audience is a bit sexist. It also makes me question the 'Revenge' part, and wonder if it was included so the audience could relieve their guilt at having privately enjoyed the first act.

I'll admit that I've never seen a R&R movie, though, so I might be wrong.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I just wish there were more, and better, male sexualization too, and less, but better, female sexualization. I just wish having your female character being sexy was not the default, because I do believe having them all sexy by default, and basically none of the male one, is rooted in some sexist bias. And I really feel Smite is all about “sexy by default”, even when it really does not fit the lore of the goddess, while not really sexualizing any of the male god (except maybe Apollo, iirc, and even then more in jest rather than actually trying to make him attractive).

So you're not against sexualisation, but EXCESSIVE sexualisation? Where do you draw the line at excessive sexualisation?

Believe it or not, I can get behind that viewpoint if you want to reduce sexualisation in some games for style reasons. I cannot get behind it if it's driven by 'think of the children' or feeling guilty because seeing a scantilly clad character made a pants party happen

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

nomotog wrote:
Well you know because the themes, messages and emotions invoked are different. I an not really well informed on R&R stories though. I think they are stories like kill bill was an example I heard?

While true, that can be argued about any movie/game, none will have an exact match of themes, messages and emotions.

Unless you mean the R&R genre, in which case I don't think there are any R&R video games? The closest I can think of is 'Beat Down: Fists of Vengeance' but Gina's implied sexual assault (if she isn't the selected character) isn't a driving force behind the plot.

I can't think of any video games that could fit. Most don't want to actually get close the subject. It's just like a wholly different way of handing it then how video games do.

The big difference in that in a video game R would be something that happens to an NPC or a side character and the revenge would be the main character's job. (The main character would often be male, or batman.) The R ends up being the motivation and justification for someone else. Well in a R&R the victim gets to revenge themselves.

It's the old actor vs object thing actually. A ton of feminist critic boils down to it. (or maybe I just boil it down to that a lot.)

nomotog wrote:
I can't think of any video games that could fit. Most don't want to actually get close the subject. It's just like a wholly different way of handing it then how video games do.

The big difference in that in a video game R would be something that happens to an NPC or a side character and the revenge would be the main character's job. (The main character would often be male, or batman.) The R ends up being the motivation and justification for someone else. Well in a R&R the victim gets to revenge themselves.

It's the old actor vs object thing actually. A ton of feminist critic boils down to it. (or maybe I just boil it down to that a lot.)

Apart from
I can't think of any player character that gets sexually assaulted as part of the story, and that happened at the end so doesn't fit the R&R genre.

Sounds like a gap in the market!

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

nomotog wrote:
I can't think of any video games that could fit. Most don't want to actually get close the subject. It's just like a wholly different way of handing it then how video games do.

The big difference in that in a video game R would be something that happens to an NPC or a side character and the revenge would be the main character's job. (The main character would often be male, or batman.) The R ends up being the motivation and justification for someone else. Well in a R&R the victim gets to revenge themselves.

It's the old actor vs object thing actually. A ton of feminist critic boils down to it. (or maybe I just boil it down to that a lot.)

Apart from

Spoiler:

Fear 2

I can't think of any player character that gets sexually assaulted as part of the story, and that happened at the end so doesn't fit the R&R genre.

Sounds like a gap in the market!

There was going to be a part in alien isolation where the alien would act like a creepy rape monster, but it was changed from the actual release.

Assaulting the player like that would be rather different. I don't know if it whould be good or bad, just really uncomfortable.

nomotog wrote:
There was going to be a part in alien isolation where the alien would act like a creepy rape monster, but it was changed from the actual release.

Assaulting the player like that would be rather different. I don't know if it whould be good or bad, just really uncomfortable.

It'd probably be bad and very uncomfortable, but I wonder if it would be an effective way to make the player hate the villain on a deeper level.

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There was going to be a part in alien isolation where the alien would act like a creepy rape monster, but it was changed from the actual release.

Assaulting the player like that would be rather different. I don't know if it whould be good or bad, just really uncomfortable.

It'd probably be bad and very uncomfortable, but I wonder if it would be an effective way to make the player hate the villain on a deeper level.

It could, but I doubt that you should. If your going to do something like that to your player, then you should have a good reason and I don't think making the villain hateable would be sufficient.

nomotog wrote:
It could, but I doubt that you should. If your going to do something like that to your player, then you should have a good reason and I don't think making the villain hateable would be sufficient.

I disagree, isn't most of the point behind villains in R&R using sexual assault to make them completely hateable, to the extent that brutally murdering them is fine because they're no longer human in the eyes of the audience?

Naturally for video games we can't be sure because no one has done it. Unless I've guessed the intro to Hatred

 LordofHats wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Not everyone would agree that art shapes society though, is my point.

Given the vast number of people in history who have been outspoken about how books, film, music, etc have changed and shaped their lives, I think such people have no legs to stand on.

Yea but how many people went and saw James Cameron's Avatar and actually started panting themselves blue and going out in the wilderness to act like Navi. The answer, almost no one. I have no doubt that art/entertainment can effect the lives a specific person but the question is not whether or not you can affect specific people but society.

I mean we are talking about is more behavior for larges groups of people, specifically does playing video games potentially make one less or more sexist. Is it something you could actually measure with a study. I mean we talking about outcomes here.

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I am pretty sure the entertainment do influence a society, but not necessarily in obvious ways, and not necessarily by changing it. Strengthening the status quo is an influence.

But what do mean by strengthening the status quo exactly?

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:I am not trying to scapegoat medias. I would never deny another source of sexism by “but video games”, and I never did it. I speak about sexist tropes in video games when I am on a forum about video games, but if I was on a forum about feminism, those would certainly not be my main concern.

Didn't say you were.

 Blood Hawk wrote:
I have no doubt that art/entertainment can effect the lives a specific person but the question is not whether or not you can affect specific people but society.

That's like saying evidence of Micro-Evolution isn't evidence of Macro-Evolution. It's patently obvious that art/entertainment effects people. Art effects people. Art effects society. Given that society is made of people it is impossible for the former to be true and the later to be false (the reverse is equally true). The question isn't does it happen but how influential the connection is.

*Removed because of technical error*


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nomotog wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There was going to be a part in alien isolation where the alien would act like a creepy rape monster, but it was changed from the actual release.

Assaulting the player like that would be rather different. I don't know if it whould be good or bad, just really uncomfortable.

It'd probably be bad and very uncomfortable, but I wonder if it would be an effective way to make the player hate the villain on a deeper level.

It could, but I doubt that you should. If your going to do something like that to your player, then you should have a good reason and I don't think making the villain hateable would be sufficient.

But Alien has always been heavily rape and sexually horrific in its orientation to begin with. I mean heck, look at the entire design of the alien from birthing to fully grown, look how it's implied it kills things. ALIEN is heavily sexual.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
I have no doubt that art/entertainment can effect the lives a specific person but the question is not whether or not you can affect specific people but society.

That's like saying evidence of Micro-Evolution isn't evidence of Macro-Evolution. It's patently obvious that art/entertainment effects people. Art effects people. Art effects society. Given that society is made of people it is impossible for the former to be true and the later to be false (the reverse is equally true). The question isn't does it happen but how influential the connection is.

Yes the question is whether or not it is significant, which you would test for in this case. I say affect I mean significant affect, from more a stats prescriptive. And yes it is possible to have specific cases that are not representative or the overall situation, I am talking about anecdotal evidence.

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

nomotog wrote:
It could, but I doubt that you should. If your going to do something like that to your player, then you should have a good reason and I don't think making the villain hateable would be sufficient.

I disagree, isn't most of the point behind villains in R&R using sexual assault to make them completely hateable, to the extent that brutally murdering them is fine because they're no longer human in the eyes of the audience?

Naturally for video games we can't be sure because no one has done it. Unless I've guessed the intro to Hatred

I am not well versed on the genre, but I don't think it's about the villain; more about the victim and their transformation. Not really knowledgeable on the genre though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StarTrotter wrote:
*Removed because of technical error*


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nomotog wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There was going to be a part in alien isolation where the alien would act like a creepy rape monster, but it was changed from the actual release.

Assaulting the player like that would be rather different. I don't know if it whould be good or bad, just really uncomfortable.

It'd probably be bad and very uncomfortable, but I wonder if it would be an effective way to make the player hate the villain on a deeper level.

It could, but I doubt that you should. If your going to do something like that to your player, then you should have a good reason and I don't think making the villain hateable would be sufficient.

But Alien has always been heavily rape and sexually horrific in its orientation to begin with. I mean heck, look at the entire design of the alien from birthing to fully grown, look how it's implied it kills things. ALIEN is heavily sexual.

They don't really do it to you though. One big reason is that most alien games are SM shooters. They trim down on the face hungers and some of the other sexual assault imagery and protect you by giving you a big gun. NPCs are more the victims rather then the player.

Alien isolation is the one game that gets close to what the alien is because they don't give you a big gun. It doesn't include much imagery though. They ended up cutting it.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
I have no doubt that art/entertainment can effect the lives a specific person but the question is not whether or not you can affect specific people but society.

That's like saying evidence of Micro-Evolution isn't evidence of Macro-Evolution. It's patently obvious that art/entertainment effects people. Art effects people. Art effects society. Given that society is made of people it is impossible for the former to be true and the later to be false (the reverse is equally true). The question isn't does it happen but how influential the connection is.

That's not an apt comparison. And even if you are correct about art, the answer could also be "none at all"

The question really is, "does art effect people" and if yes, than how does it effect people.

We should have a poll, as everyone here qualifies as a gamer, and I'd assume everyone posting also plays video games.

#1 on a scale of 0-10 with 0 being not sexist and 10 being a misogynist, how sexist were you before you started playing games?
#2 on a scale of 0-10, how sexist are you now?
#3 Did any game have a great impact on your increased sexism?
#4 Did any game cause you to think that your sexism isn't cool and you should change your ways?

if "Mr noproof ever given" is correct we should see a increase between 1 & 2.

I'll start
3
3
No
No

Do you honestly believe anyone would rate themselves as more sexist?

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
So you're not against sexualisation, but EXCESSIVE sexualisation?

Well, I would say “out of character” and/or pervasive sexualization, rather than excessive sexualization. But yeah, I never meant to have all female characters in video games in burka .

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Believe it or not, I can get behind that viewpoint if you want to reduce sexualisation in some games for style reasons. I cannot get behind it if it's driven by 'think of the children' or feeling guilty because seeing a scantilly clad character made a pants party happen

Funnily, I remember being heavily mocked for suggesting exactly that about female models in wargaming.

sirlynchmob wrote:
#1 on a scale of 0-10 with 0 being not sexist and 10 being a misogynist, how sexist were you before you started playing games?

Oh, and please include your age when starting playing video games, for funsies. I was about 10, iirc. 17 years ago.
I certainly remember my mindset well enough to grade how sexist I was . Not that I could in any way realistically rate how sexist I am today, see below.

sirlynchmob wrote:
if "Mr noproof ever given" is correct we should see a increase between 1 & 2.

Someone did not watch the video I linked to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLjFTHTgEVU&feature=youtu.be&t=10m43s
Enjoy Google expert Dr. Brian Welle destroying your methodology .
Is that “proof” enough for you?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Do you honestly believe anyone would rate themselves as more sexist?

You mean we don't live is a misogynistic rape culture? If we do than there should be nothing to fear about admitting how sexist you are?

surely those who are claiming as fact, that games make people sexist, can admit that they are now more sexist as a result of playing games.

Hey, did you miss the part about a guy with a PhD which work is to study those unconscious bias about women telling you your methodology is flawed and proved inefficient?

sirlynchmob wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Do you honestly believe anyone would rate themselves as more sexist?

You mean we don't live is a misogynistic rape culture? If we do than there should be nothing to fear about admitting how sexist you are?

surely those who are claiming as fact, that games make people sexist, can admit that they are now more sexist as a result of playing games.

Or you could stop with the strawmen, but where would the fun be in that?

Further, your methodology is bunk. You're assuming that people can accurately gauge their own biases, which would mean said biases did not exist in the first place. As an example, just because some self-professed "nice guy" claims to be a nice guy it does not have to follow that he actually is. The Ku Klux Klan probably believes they are in the right, that does not mean that they are not douchebags of the highest magnitude.

It is worth nothing though than even Sirlynchmob himself decided to grade himself as having 3 levels of sexism. If that is how much he admits to himself, how much more can we expect him to be .

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
It is worth nothing though than even Sirlynchmob himself decided to grade himself as having 3 levels of sexism. If that is how much he admits to himself, how much more can we expect him to be .

We don't know. That's the entire point, for all we know he could be overestimating his sexism. I dare say there's enough flaws in the argument being put forth to sink it without resorting to character sniping.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
for all we know he could be overestimating his sexism

Given how precise the scale is, I am not even sure he is estimating his sexism. He is giving a number, but what does this number correspond to? No idea.

@OP: Honestly the only "misogyny" I've ever encountered in my years of gaming was from Counter-strike numerous times and ONLY Counter-strike. There's probably a valid reason for this somewhere, but this narrative that's been painted that (male) gamers exist to harass women is utter horse crap. If anything, gamer culture LIKES women due to the popularity of 'girl gamer' streams.

Beyond that I don't really see any problems with "gamer culture". That is, unless I'm missing the secret meetings because I'm simply not 1337 enough.

There are jerks out there, as there are in every hobby (I'm thinking this is my consistent point I've been trying to make.)

But yeah, I'd bet that people who self-identfy as part of the 'gamer culture' have probably made up a rather good proportion of the donators to:

http://www.twitch.tv/geekandsundry

over the past couple of days. And have now raised $81,416,12 in aid of Lupus Research.

sirlynchmob wrote:
That's not an apt comparison. And even if you are correct about art, the answer could also be "none at all"

Its perfectly apt. It's not even a matter of proof but a matter of logic. If one state is true, it is impossible for the other to be false, and it would take an incredible amount of ignorance and/or obtuseness to honestly believe that people do not use media to help shape their views (i.e. influence).

Just looks at Ayn Rand and how her books almost single handed spawned modern Libertarianism, or how Uncle Tom and Gone with the Wind as books have shaped (to the point of subverting history) the perception of Antebellum and Civil War Southern America. All those celebrities and fans who talk about how much they loved <insert fictional hero> as a kid and how embracing that character got them through hard times. Everytime some moron with a 6th grade level of critical reading offers a banal argument about how the US government is an Orwellian conspiracy and that's why they hate the US Government. All the people who describe themselves as "South Park Republicans."

What is a “South Park Republican” ?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
What is a “South Park Republican” ?

It is a term used by some Libertarians and Conservatives to define their political views by making reference to those of TV series South Park.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, another good example is Anarchy. How many people honestly understand the political philosophy of Anarchism, and how many simple assume it means "no government!" You can honestly blame popular media for perpetuating that misconception.

I know and really like South Park, but I would never have thought of it as “Republican”. Ever.
[edit]Or conservative, actually.[/edit]

The show really isn't (it is accurately described as Libertarian), but many Conservatives and Liberals cherry pick the show because it tends to lampoon both sides. They just ignore when it lampoons their side or conveniently forget. Other times the show is just really subtle in who it is poking fun at. Honestly the same thing happened for years with Steven Colbert. Even now, I regularly run into ardent Conservatives who don't realize his entire show is making fun of them.