CRACKED: "6 Sexist Video Game Problems Even Bigger Than the Breasts"

[Bocaj2000]

This is simply some radical feminist BS. Despite being a feminist myself, I disagree with many of these points, and I cannot bear to let this represent all of us:

6: Daddy issues- Yes, they exist. It adds depth to a character and reveals specific insecurities. Even if this would be considered an offensively sexist trait, I haven't seen this trope used improperly enough to be a trend.

5: Damsel- Yes, I get it. The damsel is bad writing. The industry is doing everything in its power to progress past this embarrassment of a plot. We're working on it.

4: Dominant/Passive- Once again, this is simply bad writing. It breaks continuity and destroys verisimilitude. But, unlike the damsel, I don't see this enough to consider this something that needs fixing.

3: Rape- The writer simply complains that it exists in games without analyzing how it is used. This is a new concept to gaming and is never treated casually when it is implemented.

2: Woman Class- The example was of a game that was made in 1999. This is completely out of date. Because of the archaic example, I discredited the entire argument even though it probably holds water in today's gaming market.

1: Real world- Yes, the video game community can be despicable. As time passes, the community will mature.

 

[Puzzlenaut]

The problem is that I agree with pretty much everything in the article, Bioshock Infinite was built entirely around the Damsel in distress plotline and any attempts to subvert it, in my opinion, fell well short of the mark of having anything meaningful to say. It was a fantastic game, but Elizabeth, despite all her physical strengths, was an extremely weak character (especially with how she is 'raped' by songbird; listen to the dev commentary; that is how they intended it to come out).

(Haven't player the Last of Us)


Importantly though, the article helped people to understand that big breasts in silly games that unabashedly objectify women are less of an issue than well-respected, well-reviewed games that are still written within the confines of male-dominated media.

 

[Gorrath]

Jeez, I'm sick and tired of seeing people think how either all women need to be emotionally dead powerhouses or have practically no women at all because "oohh, this female character has emotions, she must be weak".

What you mention here is something I've been on about for ages. The whole "emotionally dead powerhouses" thing is a massive, massive issue with the way males are portrayed and objectified in games. It seems like a lot of the time, people aren't asking for "well written female characters" they are asking for badly written male character tropes to be shifted to female characters. Why anyone would want this is beyond me, given the complaint that games are filled with these tropes already. Bad, cliched writing is clearly apparent with both female and male characters and should be called out as such. The sexism sword, with regards to stereotyped characters, cuts both ways and I would love it to death if we could address the issue that way.

A great deal of the reason I want female lead protagonists more is because I want to play something other than Biff McBeefneck, the emotionally dead-eyed wonder who crushes empathy under his steel-toed boot. If they do make more female protagonists and they just dump the same bad writing and junk stories on them, does that really do anything to further video games? As much as I want female protagonists, I also want more male protagonists that aren't a bunch of objectification, stereotypes and cliches as well. If I can see my strong male character weeping over the fact that he just lost his family instead of jumping right to not shaving, a 1,000 yard stare, and a tumbler of scotch (Because alcoholism is the way REAL men deal with anguish!), I'd just die of giddiness.

Edit: fixed my misquote, I hope.

 

[SuperScrub]

You know we really should start changing Mens Rights to White Heterosexual Cisgenedered Male's Rights (W.H.C.M.R) because Black Men have gone through turmoil, Homosexual Men have gone through turmoil, and Transexual Men have gone through turmoil and they probably wouldn't want to be associated with whiny white boys complaining about the "evil feminists" taking their games away.

Add to that "Anglosaxon" too I suppose, specially seeing as where I live, well, there's hardly any "white privilege" because an overwhelming majority of people are white, yet some are still being discriminated against based on their ethnicity...Or, hell, just call it "Men's Rights Movement Members' Rights" or something.

Oh god White people are infighting among each other that's both sad and hilarious. Anyway White Heterosexual Cisgenedered Anglosaxon Men's Rights (WHCAMR) works but it doesn't really role off the tongue so we can call it "Men's Rights Movement Members' Rights" for now until we can come up with a better acronym

 

[Atmos Duality]

So...Cracked Trolls Hot Button Topic in Gaming.
I think that about sums it up.

I recently learned that The Escapist hates women. Which, in hindsight, is kind of like recently learning the sun rises in the same place ever day.

Perhaps it's because I don't visit all the forums here, but I have not seen any sort of general hatred of women from "The Escapist" (assuming staff and userbase). The occasional slaphead misogynist perhaps, but they are by far the minority.

But please, don't let my logic get in the way of your obvious, inflammatory generalization.
Or more succinctly: "Bullshit."

Obviously different because we're talking about message boards, not sharing sites, but the concept is the same. The Escapist is elitist, mysoginist, and has a fascist moderating team. That's its "thing", its character gimmick, what have you.

Ah, well nevermind. It seems "logic" had no place to begin with if that's truly what you think.

PS
The sun doesn't rise from the "same place" every day.
If it did, we wouldn't have distinctive seasons anywhere on the planet.

 

[Kenmoo]

they dissed the new lara croft? a story written by a woman nonetheless who's known for speaking out about women's rights...

weeeiiird

 

[broca]

It's a article from Cracked that starts with the words rape culture. It should be taken as seriously as an article on Fox News that starts with a quote from Atlas Shrugged.

 

[sky14kemea]

One by one the old pillars of the community were taken out by the banhammer, the voices of reason were cowed into quiet submission, the once friendly and well known moderators became fickle anonymous enforcers, and slowly rule after rule created a maze of etiquette that cause all to eventually fall to the banhammer.

Most of the Mods are still friendly, if not all of them. ;_;

Yes, the rules may have gotten stricter over time, but if you can't prove someone wrong without insulting them, then there's really no point in replying, is there?

OT: People do realize that Cracked articles are almost never serious, right?

 

[maninahat]

Not even having played BS:Infinite [small]snickersnicker[/small] or Last of Us, I can still say Ellie and Elizabeth are not "damsels."

I can see why people might think this (note I have only played BS:I, so I will only talk about that one), after all, Elizabeth is super powerful, she has a lot of willpower, and she ends up guiding the protagonist by the end. But lets get down to brass tacks here:

* The game still requires you to rescue her from her tower, and the purpose is to get her away from the city.
* For all her strengths, Elizabeth is still the wide eyed, naive, emotionally fragile one who cries over murder, whereas the male protagonist slaughters people by the thousand without batting an eye (regardless of his past regrets about Wounded Knee).
* The story still contrives reasons for why she must spend half the game with a massive cleavage hanging out. She is not the main character.
* The game is still Booker's story, and not her own. Though she is always in the gamer's gaze, the plot is about Booker's actions, Booker's past, and Booker's emotional arc. In other words, the man is still the agent of the story, and the woman's role is ancillary/supporting.

Note that there isn't anything inherently wrong with a female damsel, in and of itself, and Bioshock Infinite probably has the best written damsel character of any game I have ever played. But she exists after decades of games and hundreds of other damsels. It was inconceivable for the writers to make a game in which the protagonist is a mother - even in a fictional setting wherein writers have the opportunity to create any character dynamic they want, they still refer to the same old stock roles. That's why people get frustrated with Bioshock and The Last of Us; the writers are clearly very talented, but they still lack the guts or the vision to see beyond making another boy rescues girl story.

 

[maninahat]

they dissed the new lara croft? a story written by a woman nonetheless who's known for speaking out about women's rights...

weeeiiird

Twilight was written by a woman too. Being female doesn't mean you can't create a problematic, weak female lead. Then again, its worth noting Pratchett is a more talented writer than Meyer, and much of the creative decisions regarding Lara were not in her hands; it wasn't Pratchett who got to decide what happens to Lara. Basic story decisions, like showing Lara as crying and suffering, would be made by modellers and designers long before she was brought in to put words to it all.

 

[the December King]

You know we really should start changing Mens Rights to White Heterosexual Cisgenedered Male's Rights (W.H.C.M.R) because Black Men have gone through turmoil, Homosexual Men have gone through turmoil, and Transexual Men have gone through turmoil and they probably wouldn't want to be associated with whiny white boys complaining about the "evil feminists" taking their games away.

Add to that "Anglosaxon" too I suppose, specially seeing as where I live, well, there's hardly any "white privilege" because an overwhelming majority of people are white, yet some are still being discriminated against based on their ethnicity...Or, hell, just call it "Men's Rights Movement Members' Rights" or something.

Oh god White people are infighting among each other that's both sad and hilarious. Anyway White Heterosexual Cisgenedered Anglosaxon Men's Rights (WHCAMR) works but it doesn't really role off the tongue so we can call it "Men's Rights Movement Members' Rights" for now until we can come up with a better acronym

Oh, can this special group not include me, as well? I mean, I'm an adult white male hetero 'sissy gendered' or whatever, but since I went through turmoil because I stubbed a toe this morning on a Nazi or Terroroist or something I would like to be exempt as well. So make it "Men's Rights Movement Members' Rights except for the December King".

And feminists can do, and play, and holler about whatever they feel is missing in life, or more specifically whatever is needed to achieve equality.

There. Thanks!

 

[Kenmoo]

they dissed the new lara croft? a story written by a woman nonetheless who's known for speaking out about women's rights...

weeeiiird

Twilight was written by a woman too. Being female doesn't mean you can't create a problematic, weak female lead. Then again, its worth noting Pratchett is a more talented writer than Meyer, and much of the creative decisions regarding Lara were not in her hands; it wasn't Pratchett who got to decide what happens to Lara. Basic story decisions, like showing Lara as crying and suffering, would be made by modellers and designers long before she was brought in to put words to it all.

It's a article from Cracked that starts with the words rape culture. It should be taken as seriously as an article on Fox News that starts with a quote from Atlas Shrugged.

and not even a "trigger warning "

 

[broca]

they dissed the new lara croft? a story written by a woman nonetheless who's known for speaking out about women's rights...

weeeiiird

Twilight was written by a woman too. Being female doesn't mean you can't create a problematic, weak female lead. Then again, its worth noting Pratchett is a more talented writer than Meyer, and much of the creative decisions regarding Lara were not in her hands; it wasn't Pratchett who got to decide what happens to Lara. Basic story decisions, like showing Lara as crying and suffering, would be made by modellers and designers long before she was brought in to put words to it all.

It's a article from Cracked that starts with the words rape culture. It should be taken as seriously as an article on Fox News that starts with a quote from Atlas Shrugged.

and not even a "trigger warning "

Yes, a trigger warning for "mindless claims of sexism" and "heavy feminist worldview bias" would have been appreciated.[footnote] I'm explicitly not making fun of trigger warnings, which are useful if used right, but of people who devalue them by using them for basically everything[/footnote]

 

[Moth_Monk]

One by one the old pillars of the community were taken out by the banhammer, the voices of reason were cowed into quiet submission, the once friendly and well known moderators became fickle anonymous enforcers, and slowly rule after rule created a maze of etiquette that cause all to eventually fall to the banhammer.

Most of the Mods are still friendly, if not all of them. ;_;

Yes, the rules may have gotten stricter over time, but if you can't prove someone wrong without insulting them, then there's really no point in replying, is there?

OT: People do realize that Cracked articles are almost never serious, right?

The thing there is, even people in the comments on Cracked are complaining - the regular users! So I doubt the Cracked article is satire.

 

[Kinitawowi]

When somebody stops banging on about problems and starts expressing a willingness to discuss solutions, I'll listen. Until then this article is a piece of sputum and it should be called out as such.

 

[Demongeneral109]

I recently learned that The Escapist hates women. Which, in hindsight, is kind of like recently learning the sun rises in the same place ever day.

The sun doesn't rise in the same place everyday.
http://bit.ly/14ozUd9

If I told you I actually knew that but couldn't think of an appropriate synecdoche other than "the sky is blue", would you believe me?

I still deserve that for saying it, though.

Okay, I will defend Elizabeth for as long as I can. I believe she represents a deconstruction of the damsel in distress. Sure, Booker has to save her a few times, but on the flipside, Elizabeth saves him too [from drowning, falling off, and every time the player dies if you get technical.

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF - no, I'm sorry. It's a personal thing. It's just...I never want to see the word 'deconstruction' again. Saying something is a "deconstruction" does not invalidate criticism. I think the problem partly is that nobody seems to know what a deconstruction is, just that Watchmen was one.

A deconstruction of a damsel-in-distress would probably be either 1) a selfish and evil woman who compels men to do everything for her, probably by manipulating them either sexually or by appealing to their sense of honor, or 2) a mock-Princess Peach scenario, where the whole needing-to-be-saved is actually an elaborate sex game. Oh, or 2b) where the damsel never actually got kidnapped, she just eloped with the supposed kidnapper.

Now I have not played a single second of Bioshock Infinite, so I can make no statement about Elizabeth's character, but I am reasonably confident she is not a deconstruction of a damsel-in-distress.

Maybe he should have said aversion, or that it plays with the trope. Anyway, a deconstruction is "When applied to tropes, or other aspects of fiction, deconstruction means to take apart a trope so as to better understand its meaning and relevance to us in Real Life" In this context, to say Elizebeth is a deconstruction is not strictly invalid. You forget that for a deconstruction to work, it first has to be played straight. With that in mind, only your second example is accurate ie. a damsel being 'kidnapped' while not wanted to be rescued. I think braid is the most prominent deconstruction, since it winds up that you are the villain, the princess does not want to be rescued by you. With this in mind, lets look at the damsel in distress.

According to TV Tropes, the damsel in distress is " A character, usually female and nubile, is portrayed as helpless and in danger in order to put the cast in motion. In particular, the cast is unified, putting aside differences in pursuit of the rescue." Now lets look at bioshock, as far as strict letter of the word goes, Liz falls pretty solidly under playing it straight. She is kidnapped, and you rescue her at least twice. However, lets look further into it. In the traditional sense, the damsel is, in fact, largely helpless, being the load for the party if with them, and the plot device if not. In this, Elizabeth is not a damsel at all. She plays a support role, summoning allies and supplies to help booker... who is a solider, and so should know how to fight better than a girl locked in a tower. She precipitates her own rescue at least once, and actually defeats what by all rights should be a major boss in a cutscene. At best, she is a badass damsel, someone who is kidnapped, but with spunk, but in my mind, she is more an aversion, or perhaps playing with the trope rather than conventionally playing it straight. If it were a deconstruction, she would be psychologically busted by her continual distressed status(which she isn't, particularly since she is rarely distressed) or be opposed to rescue outside of "im not worth it" related reasons. Yeah, im just gonna leave it at 'playing with trope' or aversion, since you are right, it is not a deconstruction.

 

[evilneko]

Not even having played BS:Infinite [small]snickersnicker[/small] or Last of Us, I can still say Ellie and Elizabeth are not "damsels."

I can see why people might think this (note I have only played BS:I, so I will only talk about that one), after all, Elizabeth is super powerful, she has a lot of willpower, and she ends up guiding the protagonist by the end. But lets get down to brass tacks here:

* The game still requires you to rescue her from her tower, and the purpose is to get her away from the city.
* For all her strengths, Elizabeth is still the wide eyed, naive, emotionally fragile one who cries over murder, whereas the male protagonist slaughters people by the thousand without batting an eye (regardless of his past regrets about Wounded Knee).
* The story still contrives reasons for why she must spend half the game with a massive cleavage hanging out. She is not the main character.
* The game is still Booker's story, and not her own. Though she is always in the gamer's gaze, the plot is about Booker's actions, Booker's past, and Booker's emotional arc. In other words, the man is still the agent of the story, and the woman's role is ancillary/supporting.

You imply that Elizabeth is a damsel and my assertion is wrong, then you go on to prove my assertion. Well done, I say.

 

[Something Amyss]

Yeah, characters that have never once experienced actual combat or the actual world outside of their safe little bubbles prior to meeting the main character should not become emotionally and psychologically fragile people when faced with bullets wizzing by their heads or blood thirsty monsters want to eat out their throats, no, they need to be the space marines buried under thirteen inches of armor and can take a bazooka shell to the face before they'll so much as flinch.

Except like the original post, that's a strawman. They're already demonstrated otherwise, and the article comments on it. Agree with it or not, it exists.

By the way, you disagree with them, not me. I merely repeated what was stated and questioned whether the maker of the thread had actually bothered to read what they said.

Did you read it before you started arguing with "me?"

If challenging people who are capable of something to do something about it instead of just talk is brow-beating, then I'm guilty I guess.

Well, that's what the people you're brow-beating are doing, so apply the same standard.

I'm also looking for people who are willing to do something with them and am collaborating with a friend of mine who's interested and capable of developing a game. Its not easy, it will take time but we are committed to doing it even if the expenses come out of our pocket. Why? Because the risk is worth taking.

I'm guessing this goes nowhere. If I had a nickel for everyone who said something almost identical to that, I'd be rich enough to fund a AAA game, market it, and buy off all the reviewers I felt like[footnote]because that's obviously how the review system works[/footnote]

Cheers if you have ambition, but that still leaves me ridiculously skeptical.

I tell you this much, merely saying "I can write but I can't code" is an excuse not a reason. And if you look hard enough, you can find someone who can and is willing to help.

Yes, because you have a friend who codes, anyone who wants to do a game can find someone who codes.

Remember what I said about specious reasoning?

But don't use yourself as a reason this can't work. You aren't the rest of the world.

Don't lie about my statements. That's just a dishonest interpretation. At best, I used myself as an example, highlighting actual issues within the industry.

If you want to buy into some nonsense mentality where the only things you need are desire and effort, then you are welcome to. That doesn't jive with reality, though, so I'll wish you the best of luck and maybe check back in in five or ten years and see how far your plans have gotten.

Myself? Yeah, not so interested in writing games. The "if you don't like it, do it yourself" argument is so stupid, anyway. I'm already doing it in literature, a field I'm both more capable of and more passionate about. I mean, the last guy who preached this to me has a history on The Escapist of complaining about movies, but isn't out there making a better movie, even though he said it wasn't hard. He even had similar "plans." And that's nice and all, but "plans" generally means "dreams."

Honestly, I'll make the same argument I made there, paraphrased:

I have a life. I hope you do, too. I work two jobs because I'm an American and that's what many of us do these days. On top of that, I write novels and pitch myself shamelessly to agents. That's basically a third job right there, and one that is yet to pay off. It might never, and I will self-publish at that point if I have to, but that's sub-optimal for many reasons. I don't really have time to craft things to my specs in every field, even if it's "just" entertainment fields.

Realistically, I'd put money on the notion that neither do you. I bet you're not silent on other media yourself. A quick look at your posting history only shows me an argument for why PhoneBlocks isn't feasible, which sounds like crap since if you want something bad enough you can obviously make it happen.

But maybe gaming is, I don't know, your only hobby. Maybe it literally is the only field where you care about doing your own thing. But then, I would call it naive to assume everyone has that same drive. Most of us buy games for entertainment purposes, and we use them to have fun and decompress. Criticism is the primary venue for most people on most subjects.

In the end, though, the "if you know so much, why don't you make your own" argument is worn out. It's been used against just about every group and sub-group. Hell, the same argument could be applied to Greg Tito. Well, if you don't like the characters in GTA V, why don't you make your own game? Don't like CoD? Make your own shooter!


But honestly, maybe you should wait until you've actually produced someone before you preach it as a legit avenue. Right now, it's just cloud talk. I could pretty much say the same thing and have nothing come of it.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

In the end, though, the "if you know so much, why don't you make your own" argument is worn out.

Worn out? It was never valid to begin with.

Don't like DRM? Make your own!
Don't like bugs? Make your own!
Don't like missing features? Make your own!
Don't like bad writing? Make your own!
Don't like bad mechanics? Make your own!

It's a blanket retort that could be used to dismiss any and every criticism. Don't like something about something? Make your own or shut up.

Except we don't do that. Media criticism and discussion is like, 95% of the content on these forums. We talk about games. We talk about what we like, and what we don't like. When something is perceived as bad, there is an almost unified surge of criticism and bile leveled against it.

Weird how "make your own" never really comes up in those cases. I wonder what sets this one apart. Could be just about anything! It will remain a mystery forever.

 

[Ryan Minns]

Anyone else notice the Xbox controls and Achievement on the picture at the end? The Last of us being PS3 only etc :S

As for the article I will admit I did chuckle at "There there ... it's OK, Y chromosome is here."