Anita Sarkeesian + Hitman Absolution = Epic Fail

[WhiteNachos]

As far as the sexual comments you made above, that battle has already been ongoing to be honest, so it doesn't make for very good sarcasm. A lot of Japanese games and those made from parts of the world with much lower ages of consent have indeed run into problems with people getting upset about pedophilia or potential pedophilia. This is to say nothing of the "Second Life" battles over so called "ageplay" and people creating underage avatars and animation sets specifically to have sex and/or engage in virtual prostitution. The defense of which has involved things like how the person pretending to be a child isn't actually a child, so it shouldn't count... it's a giant mess, but the point is we've already seen this kind of thing as well.

Why does that stuff need defending? It's fiction, who cares. The only possible arguments against it AFAIK are unsubstantiated claims about the real world effects of it or "I don't like it therefore it should be banned"

 

[Therumancer]

Anita should have used footage from the previous Hitman game, Blood Money, instead.
That game is rife with examples of the sort of thing she's talking about.

Scantily-clad women standing around, who serve no other purpose than for fully-clothed male NPCs to ogle at them. Objectified and sexualized women who are the very definition of "background decoration".
One of them even serves as your target.

And you can't even argue that they're "strippers" in a "strip club", so you would "expect" them to be there, ... because they're not strippers, and it's not a strip club.
So, why are they dressed like that?


There's also that other mission, that takes place at a 'porn mansion' in the freezing cold Rocky Mountains, which also has scantily-clad women standing around, with fully-clothed men ogling at them.
Though, in that particular case, it being a 'porn mansion', maybe you could argue that they're "part of the background decoration"... But whatever.

Have you never heard of Hugh Heffner? That mission was clearly a take on him and his mansion.

True. And I admit that's the weaker of the two examples I presented.

The stronger example is the one included in the screenshot above. That 'masquerade party' mission, full of scantily-clad women.
It's not a reference to anything, ... porn mansions, strip clubs, or anything else. And how many masquerade parties have you been to, that have women dressed like that?

Well, the thing is that none of us are rich enough to wind up at a party of that quality, "47" is pretty much operating at the top of the totem pole, and these kinds of backgrounds are pretty much showing how wealthy and powerful the characters he's interacting with, or targeting are.

Having worked casino security, I've seen some aspects of this, nothing that has gone that far because nobody rich enough to put something like that on is going to be renting a casino ballroom, but you do see some rather impressive set ups.

The thing is that modeling agencies and the like make their money by hiring girls out to parties and the like, specifically to create scene dressing. The "Playboy Bunnies" themselves are pretty much an organization of world class "party girls" which is what we're literally talking about... girls hired to go to parties and help create a
scene, entertain clients, etc. Some of the groups I've dealt with at the casino for example DID hire models and such
to act as eye candy, dance with/dry hump tractors at say an agway show and similar things.

Let's say your a world class crime lord, and for whatever reason your holding a big party where your going to be inviting a few world class arms dealers, the biggest drug dealer on the west coast, the biggest drug dealer on the west coast, connections from the Chinese mob, a few corrupt buddies high up in the KGB, and whatever else. Chances are you can say drop $20 million and hire a couple busloads of playboy bunnies to show up in coordinated theme costumes. Heck, most modeling agencies would do almost anything to land a gig like that, and most models do almost anything to attend and be part of it.

I mean granted, in the real world it would be more along the lines of a rich CEO, entertaining other really rich people, with half the point being to show off how obnoxiously rich he is, but in the scope of a video game it works out more like the above because it's a more exciting environment.

One of the problems with a lot of these arguments about girls just being there for eye candy, is that in real life, especially in situations like this, girls literally line up to do those jobs. Playboy international, Jaegermeister (who has run "The Jaegerettes"), Elite Modeling, and other groups like that aren't exactly engaging in human trafficking or forcing these women into servitude. A lot of women, especially those with really good looks, have no compunctions about using those looks to make a living, especially seeing as they can make more money than most of us would make in a month showing up for the right events for a couple of hours.... of course we're talking about very high end stuff which is uncommon, most gigs for this kind of thing aren't anything like that.

Now, to go a little further with this, even if you want to move beyond "scene" into saying your dealing with an outright sex party, that in of itself would be really easy to do as well. A lot of big porn studios have girls who will do porn movies "on demand" for clients who pay and/or agree to even make an *ahem* art film with them (which can be a weird legal technicality). Nevada has some large, world class bordellos also. You could easily set it up by spending your $20 million to hire tons of escorts out of Nevada (it's not likely they would be caught if you were flying them somewhere else), or just outright rent the people from a porn studio for your party... then there you go, you've got your sexy party people in theme costumes for the VIPs, more than willing to take anyone into a side room.

This kind of thing is not common, and we are talking about a video game, but the very existence of or impossibility of such things isn't where I feel I need to aim my suspension of disbelief when it comes to games like this. It's all the stuff going on in combination with it.... and as I said, I think it's not just about the eye candy, but also to kind of sell the bad guys/targets, by showing they can afford to blow money like this, and presumably do it all the time. The idea being that the bad guy say promotes foreign wars with weapon sales where thousands of people die every day, so he can sit around with other similar people and throw elaborate parties where he fills the house with models and porn stars. It adds to the feeling of justice when you finally show the target the business end of a silverballer.

 

[Therumancer]

I have played Absolution, there are many times when the game offers me a solution to my problem and even encourages me to use it, when that option makes my score go down. There is for many events in that game nothing but practical upsides, where the score may go down, but the action is implicitly encouraged.

One of the more set up kills involves a rifle, but that also lowers my score, it would be absurd to suggest that the gun placed where I don't need to move in order to get a kill isn't being offered to me as a way to solve my problems.

You shouldn't go "look at the score go down you dumb broad", that is the most irrelevant and ineffective way of guiding the player in the entire game.

I'm not a huge Hitman fan, but I've played around with them in the past, and I'll say that I think your sort of missing the point. Simple progression is easy, 47 is a powerful character and can complete his missions in a large number of ways. Heck, in some cases you can walk right in the front door and just kill everyone and progress. Part of the fun of the game though is to figure out ways of doing things quietly and efficiently as opposed to just getting it done and moving on. In many cases the most obvious methods are simply very average overall, the game encourages experimentation.

Now, one of the reasons I never became a huge fan of the series, was sort of for the same reason I never really got into "Dishonored". The game presents you with a huge variety of things to play with, but ultimately punishes you for using them if you want things to turn out for the best in the end. In the end you get a lot of fun stuff and a cool sandbox of sorts to play with, but if your going to finish the game "seriously" you pretty much need to reload after you experiment with the more awesome and fun options because the game slaps you for being naughty in the long term.

A recurring joke for some people like me is that Agent 47 is pretty much an engineered badarse who acts like a wuss. It seems like all the options of what he COULD do exist to more or less sell the character, when really to do well at it, you pretty much need to be fairly sneaky and obtuse... and games that encourage that are fine, I just tend to dislike it when it comes in the form of giving you a bunch of toys to use, and a place to play with them, and then telling you not to because of some kind of arbitrary karmic retribution. 47 and Corvo have a hundred ways to kill, but ultimately always go for the same types of takedowns and non-lethal weaponry... kind of boring. In Corvo's case I find it amusing that he might say have a gun in his scary mask for example, but god forbid you actually shoot someone with it... that could contribute to dooming the entire city you see.

 

[Ironshroom]

Lots of FF characters are surprisingly young.
Zidane and Garnet from IX are 16.
Basically everyone in VIII is 17 or 18.
Tidus and Yuna are 17 and Rikku is 15.

Well bugger my bumblebees bread-bins. I seriously had no idea. How old is Terra then??????

 

[carnex]

Lots of FF characters are surprisingly young.
Zidane and Garnet from IX are 16.
Basically everyone in VIII is 17 or 18.
Tidus and Yuna are 17 and Rikku is 15.

Well bugger my bumblebees bread-bins. I seriously had no idea. How old is Terra then??????

Either 18 or ageless depending whether she is human or esper. But it's all pointless. So what if they FF characters are those ages. They are meant for poeple of those ages to identify with them (originally).

As fir their clothes... it's Japan. Society that wasn't as repressed as western world so they don't really give a F about it.

 

[Therumancer]

As far as the sexual comments you made above, that battle has already been ongoing to be honest, so it doesn't make for very good sarcasm. A lot of Japanese games and those made from parts of the world with much lower ages of consent have indeed run into problems with people getting upset about pedophilia or potential pedophilia. This is to say nothing of the "Second Life" battles over so called "ageplay" and people creating underage avatars and animation sets specifically to have sex and/or engage in virtual prostitution. The defense of which has involved things like how the person pretending to be a child isn't actually a child, so it shouldn't count... it's a giant mess, but the point is we've already seen this kind of thing as well.

Why does that stuff need defending? It's fiction, who cares. The only possible arguments against it AFAIK are unsubstantiated claims about the real world effects of it or "I don't like it therefore it should be banned"

To be honest I think most of what you quoted above shouldn't be defended, and I already explained my thoughts on children vs. teens. To be honest with you I do not think the damage done when people have sex with the pre-sexual is "unsubstantiated". When I was in residential facilities I met, and dealt with, a lot of kids who were the result of such abuse, and as someone who was attacked by an older kid at the age of 6 let's just say even if my mind blocked out the details it has had a profound effect on me.

I personally do not think there is any way to say having sex with an 8 or 9 year old is fine, or that someone of that age is even capable of understanding things to the point of giving informed consent.

Teenagers are different, as I explained my personal attitude on it is pretty much teens with others in their own general age group, I think adults and teens tend to be emotionally very different, despite how mature and worldly teens tend to see themselves. An adult can fairly easily exploit a teenager if they know what they are doing, and the damage done can be pretty extreme. While it's true some teenagers might be capable of an adult relationship, the overwhelming majority are not, but most probably think they are (which is half the problem). As laws and policies can't be subjective my basic attitude is that this is a no-no, and that if say some 40 year old and a 16 year old think they can have something, then waiting 2 years is probably a good way of proving it. When it's teen on teen, it's fairly parallel playing field, and your not going to stop it anyway (which is a big part of my thinking believe it or not, I'd rather give them condoms for example, than try and force hardcore abstinence and then have them all go around doing it anyway without them).

To be blunt, I personally have an issue with someone simulating a personal crime like this, say engaging in age play where the "fun" of it is to coax an underage child into sex behavior or something like that. Not to mention the damage such things are going to do if you succeed.

While opinions vary I feel there is far more detachment between say a general array of violent crimes, especially when exaggerated like in say "Grand Theft Auto".

Now, as an important exception I will mention that in the realm of pure fantasy exceptions can exist by the way they are defined. Piers Anthony is a good example of someone who likes to sell/push the envelope with this at times. Perhaps a good example some people might be familiar with is the whole "Pretty Sammy" factor. That is to say an alien or creature like a pixie, who happens to look child-like, but isn't actually a child, and isn't in the same process of emotional and identity development, and despite how it looks actually has a sexually developed body (ie no physical damage is going to be done by the act). While she has been defined differently due to all of the various version of the character and different "Tenchiverses" Pretty Sammy is a good example because she has been defined as being an immortal who is actually hundreds or thousands of years old and merely chooses to look like that with the body being a manifestation of what she wants to look like (please note this is not how she's always defined). If you take that definition of the character it's fair to point out that there is no real reason why she couldn't choose to enter into
a relationship or have sex with someone. Certain pixies, faeries, deity-type characters, aliens, etc... can all fit this definition. Piers Anthony once had a situation where a 4 year old (I think it was) had sex with an ice demon, but the 4 year old was "The Unicorn Adept" and being part unicorn aged by their standards and thus hit maturity astoundingly quickly despite having a rather dimuitive build, given that an "ice demon" in this world was basically a living construct of ice (like an elemental) they actually had to use magic to copulate if I recall... but as I said Piers Anthony does stuff like that just to mess with people I think. In Xanth (a different series, the other one was "Adept" series") he even got worse with things like "how do you get a winged centaur... well it turns out a regular centaur and a hippogryph both happened to both drink from the same love spring..." thankfully that was kept mostly to background details, but I still need brain bleach for it making me have to think of the mechanics of the act...

You might disagree with me, but as a general rule I see no real defense for having sex with the pre-sexual. I don't care if it's "fake" or not, I think it's just flat out wrong. The fantasy stuff above is not my cup of tea, but I can at least sort of accept it's right to exist when it's done correctly. When I say "done correctly" I generally mean involving characters/species that aren't supposed to be permanently locked into a permanent childlike emotional and mental state along with it, which still opens up all kinds of questions about exploitation. For example your typical fairy might be whimsical or whatever, but can suddenly get very serious usually and show it's age, and despite how she acted, the version of Pretty Sammy above was just acting, as it was made clear at her core she was quite ancient and quite mature. Basically a big part of this is "could this person knowingly consent to this, and understand it", a child, or someone who is on that level, pretty much cannot. Basically if I wouldn't trust a person to more or less conduct their own affairs and be able to take care of themselves because of their mental or emotional development, I would not trust their ability to consent to sex or pursue a relationship and they should be "off limits".

That's just what I think. It's why for example I'm very much against child porn, but feel that when it comes to comics and illustrations and such a depiction of something that might be underage and sexual shouldn't be banned outright, as it comes down to the context. An example would be say some of the classical depictions of cherubs or cupid which aren't banned because of context, which can also be applied to certain things like pixies and fairies. But on the other hand if your say dealing with porno comics dealing with little kids who are supposed to be little pre-sexual kids as opposed to something else that just looks that way and doesn't actually act childlike, then yeah, as far as I'm concerned drop the hammer.

 

[The_Scrivener]

Generally agree with the sentiment Anita puts forward, but as average as Hitman: Abs was, there are some misguided points here. But I don't support Anita's general message on the grounds that we're identical twins that simply must be in sync on every issue, I support her general message because I think it's worthy and important to the culture.

 

[Colour Scientist]

Lots of FF characters are surprisingly young.
Zidane and Garnet from IX are 16.
Basically everyone in VIII is 17 or 18.
Tidus and Yuna are 17 and Rikku is 15.

Well bugger my bumblebees bread-bins. I seriously had no idea. How old is Terra then??????

Either 18 or ageless depending whether she is human or esper. But it's all pointless. So what if they FF characters are those ages. They are meant for poeple of those ages to identify with them (originally).

As fir their clothes... it's Japan. Society that wasn't as repressed as western world so they don't really give a F about it.

Chill out, we were just talking about their ages as a point of interest.

 

[carnex]

Lots of FF characters are surprisingly young.
Zidane and Garnet from IX are 16.
Basically everyone in VIII is 17 or 18.
Tidus and Yuna are 17 and Rikku is 15.

Well bugger my bumblebees bread-bins. I seriously had no idea. How old is Terra then??????

Either 18 or ageless depending whether she is human or esper. But it's all pointless. So what if they FF characters are those ages. They are meant for poeple of those ages to identify with them (originally).

As fir their clothes... it's Japan. Society that wasn't as repressed as western world so they don't really give a F about it.

Chill out, we were just talking about their ages as a point of interest.

Not agitated in slightest, just answering in spirit of topic.

But you know, you do have a point. I do have to chill out from reading this topics. I stood away from this one for longest time as, at first, it was as pointless as one can get but as usual topics drift and somehow it lured me in again. I really need more to take short hiatus on this topics.

P.S. Pedophilia is sexual attraction to children before they hit puberty. While it's still very wrong to have sex with 13 years old and problematic to be even sexually attratcted to them, it's not pedophilia. Just to clarify that.

 

[Naqel]

A person that has zero understanding of game and gameplay design or anything else in general makes a poorly justified statement about a supposedly controversial video game.

She should work for Fox News, cause she'd be right at home with those people.

Hitman has its flaws, but that woman only lands within a very general vicinity with her shots at it.
If she wanted to take potshots at sexism, there was a lot of far better examples she could have used.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

Geeze, so many people responded to my post, and you all missed the point in the exact same way. I'll respond to therumancer here, because he wrote out a long detailed response and I appreciate that.

Basically, here's how it goes:

Having sex with any NPC in a game: Okay!
Having kids in your game: Okay!
Having both those things in your game: Well... it's not a black-and-white issue. I'd say if you're really committed to making a mature game (not a "Mature" game) and you intend to deal with this sensitive subject in an honest and meaningful way, I say go for it. Make some art. However, if you're just gonna make some fun action fantasy, maybe don't include it, because an action fantasy is an inherently trivial thing, and this is NOT a trivial issue.

Now, my joke was a metaphor, so here's the equivalent:

Murdering any NPC in a game: Okay!
Having hookers/strippers in your game: Okay*!
Having both those things in your game: See above!

*this actually comes with its own set of issue, but that's a whole 'nother discussion.

heres the problem with your horrible metaphor

first you imply people should treat adults and kids differently, which is true, a kid absolutely doesnt enough maturity, both mentally and physically to participate in sex

then you imply people should threat sex workers and "any other person" differently, which is bullshit, its a job, many people decide to be sex workers, and you are reducing them to the status of a child

to use freakin' stupid feminist lingo: an "object" doesnt stop being an "object" just because its invincible, an ingame tank or wall can be invincible as well, it needs "agency" to stop being an object, to act instead of being acted upon

of course these dumb definitions carry a whole lot of problems particulary when it comes to games because even at a programming level all in-game entities are "objects"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming

(more like white CIS-gender oriented programming! am i right fellas?)

but thats a discussion for another day, the thing is, your metaphor is so horrible it doesnt even address anita's complains

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

Geeze, so many people responded to my post, and you all missed the point in the exact same way. I'll respond to therumancer here, because he wrote out a long detailed response and I appreciate that.

Basically, here's how it goes:

Having sex with any NPC in a game: Okay!
Having kids in your game: Okay!
Having both those things in your game: Well... it's not a black-and-white issue. I'd say if you're really committed to making a mature game (not a "Mature" game) and you intend to deal with this sensitive subject in an honest and meaningful way, I say go for it. Make some art. However, if you're just gonna make some fun action fantasy, maybe don't include it, because an action fantasy is an inherently trivial thing, and this is NOT a trivial issue.

Now, my joke was a metaphor, so here's the equivalent:

Murdering any NPC in a game: Okay!
Having hookers/strippers in your game: Okay*!
Having both those things in your game: See above!

*this actually comes with its own set of issue, but that's a whole 'nother discussion.

heres the problem with your horrible metaphor

first you imply people should treat adults and kids differently, which is true, a kid absolutely doesnt enough maturity, both mentally and physically to participate in sex

then you imply people should threat sex workers and "any other person" differently, which is bullshit, its a job, many people decide to be sex workers, and you are reducing them to the status of a child

to use freakin' stupid feminist lingo: an "object" doesnt stop being an "object" just because its invincible, an ingame tank or wall can be invincible as well, it needs "agency" to stop being an object, to act instead of being acted upon

of course these dumb definitions carry a whole lot of problems particulary when it comes to games because even at a programming level all in-game entities are "objects"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming

(more like white CIS-gender oriented programming! am i right fellas?)

but thats a discussion for another day, the thing is, your metaphor is so horrible it doesnt even address anita's complains

I'm not talking about real people. I'm talking about fictional characters. The rules are different. For instance, while it is totally okay to kill fictional characters, it is generally frowned upon to kill real people. However, if your story is about how great it is when your white fictional characters kill your black fictional characters, then I'd have some issues with your story.

because as we all know, black people and white people arent equal

i swear some of the stuff you people say...

how about you look at the INTENT of the work in question, Django is a movie about a black dude killing a bunch of white people, is it racist? of course not, because we know the people Django kills throughout the film are trashbags, because we know Django doesnt hate white people, its a film that PORTRAITS racism, but doesnt endorse it

likewise lets look at Hitman Absolution

does agent 47 go around killing "sexualized" women for no reason as part of story? no, the vast mayority of people you can kill i bet arent sexualized, atleast i havent seen it, is the character of agent 47 ever portrayed as a mysoginist? no, does the game allow you to kill sex workers? yes, does it endorse it or rewards you for it? no, in fact the objective of that mission is to kill the trashbag owner of the stripclub in which those sex workers are being abused, the game PORTRAITS mysoginy, but it doesnt endorse it, atleast not in that mission, the fact anita had to get out of her way and fabricate evidence just to make it seem like it should be enough proof of this

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

Geeze, so many people responded to my post, and you all missed the point in the exact same way. I'll respond to therumancer here, because he wrote out a long detailed response and I appreciate that.

Basically, here's how it goes:

Having sex with any NPC in a game: Okay!
Having kids in your game: Okay!
Having both those things in your game: Well... it's not a black-and-white issue. I'd say if you're really committed to making a mature game (not a "Mature" game) and you intend to deal with this sensitive subject in an honest and meaningful way, I say go for it. Make some art. However, if you're just gonna make some fun action fantasy, maybe don't include it, because an action fantasy is an inherently trivial thing, and this is NOT a trivial issue.

Now, my joke was a metaphor, so here's the equivalent:

Murdering any NPC in a game: Okay!
Having hookers/strippers in your game: Okay*!
Having both those things in your game: See above!

*this actually comes with its own set of issue, but that's a whole 'nother discussion.

heres the problem with your horrible metaphor

first you imply people should treat adults and kids differently, which is true, a kid absolutely doesnt enough maturity, both mentally and physically to participate in sex

then you imply people should threat sex workers and "any other person" differently, which is bullshit, its a job, many people decide to be sex workers, and you are reducing them to the status of a child

to use freakin' stupid feminist lingo: an "object" doesnt stop being an "object" just because its invincible, an ingame tank or wall can be invincible as well, it needs "agency" to stop being an object, to act instead of being acted upon

of course these dumb definitions carry a whole lot of problems particulary when it comes to games because even at a programming level all in-game entities are "objects"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming

(more like white CIS-gender oriented programming! am i right fellas?)

but thats a discussion for another day, the thing is, your metaphor is so horrible it doesnt even address anita's complains

I'm not talking about real people. I'm talking about fictional characters. The rules are different. For instance, while it is totally okay to kill fictional characters, it is generally frowned upon to kill real people. However, if your story is about how great it is when your white fictional characters kill your black fictional characters, then I'd have some issues with your story.

because as we all know, black people and white people arent equal

i swear some of the stuff you people say...

how about you look at the INTENT of the work in question, Django is a movie about a black dude killing a bunch of white people, is it racist? of course not, because we know the people Django kills throughout the film are trashbags, because we know Django doesnt hate white people, its a film that PORTRAITS racism, but doesnt endorse it

likewise lets look at Hitman Absolution

does agent 47 go around killing "sexualized" women for no reason as part of story? no, the vast mayority of people you can kill i bet arent sexualized, atleast i havent seen it, is the character of agent 47 ever portrayed as a mysoginist? no, does the game allow you to kill sex workers? yes, does it endorse it or rewards you for it? no, in fact the objective of that mission is to kill the trashbag owner of the stripclub in which those sex workers are being abused, the game PORTRAITS mysoginy, but it doesnt endorse it, atleast not in that mission, the fact anita had to get out of her way and fabricate evidence just to make it seem like it should be enough proof of this

The story context matters, of course. But you also have to look at it in the context of the culture at large. Black people have a history of being oppressed by white people in America, so Django Unchained was cathartic. A movie about a heroic white guy going around killing evil black people would be tasteless and offensive, because of the exact same context. Hookers and strippers are very frequently murdered by men, due to the incredibly off balance power dynamic, so it's kinda crappy that a silly/fun action fantasy would trivialize that.

you know ive always thought the main principle of tolerance is equality, i dunno its probably just this foolish mind which is the result of living my entire life in a country that has never experienced real racism, because like 90% of the population in my country is mulatto and we abolished slavery the same day we became a republic and declared our independence. i live in Venezuela btw

i havent seen someone ever in my country being a target of a hate crime, or being discriminated by the color of their skin, ive heard racist jokes thrown around in equal measure and everyone just laughing it off

plus let me tell you, historic revisionism is the biggest pile of bullshit that can ever exist

is pretty much one of the main reasons why my country is so fucked up right now, the past 15 years the people in power have been constantly reinterpreting history, finding the slightest miserable fault done to us, as an excuse for their actions, they are right because the US wronged us in the past, they are right because previous governments were wrong, etc

killing virtual black people in a video game is not wrong just because real black people were oppressed in the past, it implies we are not equal, that one race is in debt with the other, that unless something equally bad is done upon white people by black people, they cant get along like equals, and that the color of their skin will always matter

and hell what do i, a mulatto have to do with all this? now i cant kill black people because white people killed black people? if a mulatto cant play as a white guy killing a black dude, then whats the bloody point of video games?

now, its pretty much the same argument towards killing sex workers, yes sex workers have been the subject of abuse in the past, just because a game represents that doesnt mean it endorses it and again, if the same rules dont apply to all characters in the game it implies we are not equal

 

[ACman]

Ehhhh....

You can argue whether the Hitman universe is misogynistic, or simply deeply misanthropic.

My position would be it is both. Every character is reprehesible in character whilst dead eyed and sickly in appearance. This is a universe where humanity lacks many redeming features. The utter lack of agency or hope for most of the female characters in Hitman does push this message further.

But these are artistic decisions made for the game, not demonstrations of the misogyny/misanthropy of the writers or artists.

The game is misogynistic however. Its representations of women are pretty grim. Any feminist critical reading of the game would mention the things Anita mentions.

Unless she actually said the words "This game should not exist" then I can't get angry with Anita for this one.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

killing virtual black people in a video game is not wrong just because real black people were oppressed in the past, it implies we are not equal, that one race is in debt with the other, that unless something equally bad is done upon white people by black people, they cant get along like equals, and that the color of their skin will always matter

and hell what do i, a mulatto have to do with all this? now i cant kill black people because white people killed black people? if a mulatto cant play as a white guy killing a black dude, then whats the bloody point of video games?

now, its pretty much the same argument towards killing sex workers, yes sex workers have been the subject of abuse in the past, just because a game represents that doesnt mean it endorses it and again, if the same rules dont apply to all characters in the game it implies we are not equal

Did you miss your own previous comment about the importance of the story context? I never said "no killing black people/prostitutes in games ever!"

you said historical context is important, its not, it only serves to obstruct real equality, black people cant be equal to everyone else, neither can women or sex workers under that point of view

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

you said historical context is important, its not, it only serves to obstruct real equality, black people cant be equal to everyone else, neither can women or sex workers under that point of view

I was referring to cultural context. Our culture includes recent history. I really do not understand why you think that obstructs real equality.

because it does, you are saying killing a black man in a video game and killing a white man in a video game is not the same thing, both acts are not equal so both races cant be treated equally

you cant simply make special rules for one group and argue everyone is equal

 

[WhiteNachos]

Basically, here's how it goes:

Having sex with any NPC in a game: Okay!
Having kids in your game: Okay!
Having both those things in your game: Well... it's not a black-and-white issue. I'd say if you're really committed to making a mature game (not a "Mature" game) and you intend to deal with this sensitive subject in an honest and meaningful way, I say go for it. Make some art. However, if you're just gonna make some fun action fantasy, maybe don't include it, because an action fantasy is an inherently trivial thing, and this is NOT a trivial issue.

Neither is war or crime or murder. And can you tl:dr why it's so bad if a stripper winds up amongst the dead?

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

you said historical context is important, its not, it only serves to obstruct real equality, black people cant be equal to everyone else, neither can women or sex workers under that point of view

I was referring to cultural context. Our culture includes recent history. I really do not understand why you think that obstructs real equality.

because it does, you are saying killing a black man in a video game and killing a white man in a video game is not the same thing, both acts are not equal so both races cant be treated equally

you cant simply make special rules for one group and argue everyone is equal

Everyone isn't equal. That's the issue. That's why you need to be thoughtful as to how you're portraying certain groups of people.

so why did you ask me why i think it obstructs real equality? you know it does, you just dont care

 

[Shadowstar38]

you said historical context is important, its not, it only serves to obstruct real equality, black people cant be equal to everyone else, neither can women or sex workers under that point of view

I was referring to cultural context. Our culture includes recent history. I really do not understand why you think that obstructs real equality.

because it does, you are saying killing a black man in a video game and killing a white man in a video game is not the same thing, both acts are not equal so both races cant be treated equally

you cant simply make special rules for one group and argue everyone is equal

Everyone isn't equal. That's the issue. That's why you need to be thoughtful as to how you're portraying certain groups of people.

But, shouldn't we BE treating everyone as equals while the rest of the world tries to get there? Doesn't the fact that developers didn't see an issue with murdering females the same as males say something positive about society, or those particular people? Wouldn't treating them as if they need extra protection add to the problem?

 

[WhiteNachos]

The story context matters, of course. But you also have to look at it in the context of the culture at large. Black people have a history of being oppressed by white people in America,

That is a racist statement. There was never a point where all white people participated in oppressing minorities. Not every white person in the south owned slaves, there were tons of white abolitionists and tons of white people against segregation.

so Django Unchained was cathartic. A movie about a heroic white guy going around killing evil black people would be tasteless and offensive, because of the exact same context.

Ok how about a white shopkeeper defending his store from rioting black people. Let's make it the Rodney King riots just to double down. Or how about a white dude vs. the bloods or the crips.

Hookers and strippers are very frequently murdered by men, due to the incredibly off balance power dynamic, so it's kinda crappy that a silly/fun action fantasy would trivialize that.

Trivialize how exactly?