Defining Misogynism

[excalipoor]

ADMIT IT, come on, you seem pretty sexist in your posts.

So believing that modern feminism is fighting windmills in the name of gender equality while completely ignoring the other half of the equation is sexist? Count me in then.

I'm sure most people who identify as feminists truly are for gender equality, but as (I think) someone in this very thread said, focusing on individual feminists can give a fairly distorted image.

 

[kayo of the Well]

With a tone like that there isn't much he could be saying without sounding petulant and sardonic.

 

[generals3]

So.... it's wrong for women to want or to ask for something that isn't casual shovelware?

Maybe there isn't a market for more mainstream/hardcore games for women because no developer has had the balls or creative insight to make games like that.

There are many bro-hard, female sex-accessory games out there that completely turn me off and I am a male, so not only are these developers missing out on the female market, but they are also turning some of their potential MALE customers away with this bullshit.

I am failing to see your point here as it seems to be that you are indicating what is A LACK of real effort(shovelware) is also somehow evidence of real development or marketing effort.

Also, you must be high off of directly snorting steroids if you think games about babies, playing dress up, and the wii fit are going to appease women demanding more equal consideration and to be taken seriously by the gaming industry.

If anything your examples reinforce the issues brought up by the other side more than they help your case at all...

There isn't something wrong with asking for something you want. However there is something wrong with trying to turn it into some kind of bigger social issue. Just like there isn't nothing wrong with me asking for more difficult games but it would be if i did so by claiming this casualisation is a sign of communistisation of gaming or some kind of other crap (the link being that easy games give everyone regardless of skills the same, you don't need efforts to complete it, etc. which can easily be linked with the whole ideology of giving everyone the same. I'll agree it's a retarded comparison and parallel to draw but than again, I don't do it, it's what people demanding more female centric AAA games do when they start using all those big words like "sexism, misogyny, objectification, the industry is an exclusive boys club, etc.".)

It seems that people have a very hard time asking for female-centric AAA games without trying to appeal to guilt and abuse loaded words linked with RL social issues. Is it so hard to say "I want there to be more female protagonists because i'm tired of playing as a male protagonist or prefer to play as a female protagonist"? Does it really have to become "Games are sexist! Give us more more female protagonists god damn it!". I can sympathize with the former kind of argument but i will instantly dismiss the latter.

And define "more equal consideration"? What does it mean practically. And don't say "more female characters" or "less T&A". Prove me that in order to have more equal consideration something has to change. And to do that you'll have to prove me that the female Potential costumer base of AAA games is big enough to warrant such changes in order for that base to have more equal consideration.

 

[vid87]

Spoiler

But does it play "Cooking Mama"?

 

[Nomanslander]

Yeah, this is the worse type of jerkweed you can ever find, the intelligent type with a major chip on his shoulder that's aware of how spiteful he is but justifies it by playing himself out as a victim.

This is what super villains are made of

 

[Jux]

Somehow managed to make it through the entire video, though my jaw hurts now from the teeth grinding. I haven't watched any other videos to see if there was consistency, but there was something really strange about his mannerisms. Maybe like a cartoon villain of some sort without a hint of humor or sense of irony. In a way, I feel bad for the guy, his attitude plus his mannerisms and way of speaking remind me of a closeted gay fellow I knew in highschool, and he just hasn't realized yet hes in denial.

 

[Calibanbutcher]

Yeah, this is the worse type of jerkweed you can ever find, the intelligent type with a major chip on his shoulder that's aware of how spiteful he is but justifies it by playing himself out as a victim.

This is what super villains are made of

And he looks like a super-villain, too...
QUICK, we need for a benevolent geek to get in lab accident so s/he gains superpowers enabling her to combat this guy when he decides to go full mustace-twirling evil...

 

[PeterMerkin69]

The problem is that no matter how highly you think of yourself now, you'd statistically be more likely to be one of the CASTRATED harem guards or house servants...

Are you sure you want to bring harems back now?

I don't place much credence on risk factors. They don't determine outcomes in and of themselves, and besides they're associated with everything we do anyway. If you let the omnipresent thread of harm influence your behavior you wouldn't be able to do anything but sit in a padded room all day, and even then you'd still be vulnerable to aneurysms and meteorites and house fires and choking to death. Statistically, you'd be more likely to slip, fall and die if you took a shower tomorrow morning. Welp, better never clean yourself again!

It's important to remember that the worst thing anyone can do to you is going to happen to you anyway.

Being one of the privileged is great, but for those of us that can care for things beyond ourselves, living in a society that extends privilege to as many as practically possible is better. That is what we have strived for and what we have to a large degree achieved. So, please don't fuck things up for the rest of us, we've worked hard and have overcome a lot to get here, just to have it dismissed and destroyed because selfishness is in vogue again...

The emphasized portion implies you're emotionally invested in the welfare of others. That's a delirium I've escaped for whatever reason, and I don't think it's that selfishness is in vogue so much as I can clearly see the schism between individual and societal needs. I don't irrationally personalize my crimes and trespasses. Obviously everyone can't be that way otherwise we'd be back in the dark ages and I likely wouldn't even exist, but I'm already here now, and the dirty little secret is that the system is perfectly capable of playing host to "cheaters." Call me a parasite, a degenerate, a hypocrite, the fact is that I benefit more from taking than giving, and if I've got the opportunity to do that, I'd be a fool not to take it.

 

[excalipoor]

ADMIT IT, come on, you seem pretty sexist in your posts.

So believing that modern feminism is fighting windmills in the name of gender equality while completely ignoring the other half of the equation is sexist? Count me in then.

I'm sure most people who identify as feminists truly are for gender equality, but as (I think) someone in this very thread said, focusing on individual feminists can give a fairly distorted image.

Well I wasn't even talking to you or are aware of anything you've said, but sure go right ahead!

Something tells me that you really didn't need to use me as an excuse at all.

I'm just trying to follow your reasoning. Unless I missed a good chunk of this thread, that is what you're implying here; that criticizing feminism is inherently sexist.

And I'm sorry, but this isn't a private conversation.

 

[Creator002]

I watched the whole way through. It's really not something any person trying to be open-minded and fair wants to watch. Sure, you may agree on some points depending on your own personal experiences, but the main content of the video is really vile and just hateful in general.

 

[excalipoor]

For your benefit I will give you the ENTIRE paragraph from which you pulled that little sentence.

Yes, I did read the whole post. Being 'a little bit sexist' and 'pretty sexist' hardly hold the same weight, however, possibly implying that being anti-feminism is being anti-women. If that's not your intention, then that's that I guess.

I later go on to admit that I am a little bit racist and sexist. So why would it be ok for me to be sexist but not the guy that seems so damned afraid of being called "sexist"?

'Sexist' is a dirty word. There are laws against it. It gets people fired. You using it in a benign manner doesn't change that, or other people's interpretation of it.

Don't get me wrong though, I actually agree with you on this. Sexism shouldn't be the boogeyman it currently is. People don't all need to look, function and think the same to get along (though that does hold some appeal to me...), and to think that they should, or that they ever could, is absurd. Everybody has a skewed perspective on the world, and that's just something we have to live with. Trying to convert everyone to a single line of thinking is a fool's errand.

And with that said, someone, somewhere, will hate you for being gay, and no amount of campaigning or chestbeating will change that. Assholes will be assholes. The best you can do is make sure the system isn't rigged against you, as it certainly isn't rigged against the contemporary western woman. Gay rights on the other hand aren't quite there yet.

I guess what bothers me the most is that certain people insist that other people cant have their concerns and fears addressed AT THE SAME TIME they insist that their own fears and concerns are important or perhaps MORE important.

That's feminism VS. MRM in a nutshell. People taking personal anecdotes as proof of societal failings (like the gentleman in the video), and the radicals ruining it for everybody by making the opposition that much more vehement in their cause.

There isn't going to be "equality" for as long as either one is throwing the victim card in the other's face.

 

[PeterMerkin69]

Fine, then, allow me to rephrase my statement. The risk of becoming detached from MY nuts is not worth the potential reward to ME of being lucky enough to be able to afford or have the necessary status to have a harem. Besides my harem would be comprised of physically fit men between the ages of 18 and 30, which would probably not even be allowed in your "harem fantasy" world. Personally, and with direct regard to my nuts I am glad the days of forced servitude and castration are behind us. See, I made my statement singularly exclusive and ego-centric, just for you! (Oh the yummy irony!)

Oh, I don't know. I get bored pretty easily. I think after a few hundred rounds with the same old girls I might start to want something a little different, in which case it might be a good idea to keep a few alternatives around.

Unfortunately for you, that means you'll be having that corrective procedure.

Even for the egomaniac, surely a choice that ensures more self-serving excess and or extends the time you have to enjoy said excess is better than missing that choice and having your excess and time to enjoy it cut short, right?

If you know ahead of time, sure. But it's still always going to be better to eat your cake and have it, too. Besides, if your time is cut short it's not like you'll be missing much of anything anyway.

 

[Elate]

That was hilarious.
I used to wonder if people like that actually existed.

Then I made a horrible mistake of going to a convention.. The odor still haunts my nightmares.

 

[generals3]

snip.

This isn't linked to a RL social issue. This is PART of a RL social issue. Granted it is in an area that is a luxury. I mean no one needs video games in order to survive or succeed in life... And so it can be put near the bottom of a list of "must have" priorities.

Imagine the INSANITY of living in a world were game developers responded to the current uproar by simply releasing more games that can appeal to women (just the possibility that they could would be a significant change), or by limiting the number of over the top hypermasculine games. I am sure that is all many of the people here want. No laws, no one being robbed of their rights or denied access to a genre of media that they enjoy.

I mean everyone thinks its a bad idea for game developers to listen to their customer base or potential customer base, right? It's not like it seems that AAA developers are already running out of good ideas an are scraping the bottom of the barrel or just regurgitating old concepts.

If you want to know what "more equal consideration" looks like, try listening to some of the people asking for change or pointing out what they feel is wrong. After reading through several threads on this forum on this topic I have seen many good, even handed ideas, and examples of games that "got it right". You will learn more of what you want to know than by only seeing "Games are sexist! Give us more more female protagonists god damn it!", in their posts.

You want an example of a good, non-sexualized female lead character? I give you Captain Janeway from the Voyager series.

Prove to me that I am obligated to give you proof. Prove to me that you are entitled to proof, especially when you seem to think entitlement is a problem. While you are at it, prove to me that the female (and turned off male) customer base is too small to have more of a share of the consideration.

See, I can make demands and ultimatums too, go ahead and tell me how they make my argument more credible.

The idea of demanding proof that someone needs to demand proof seems extremely illogical. Our whole scientific method is based on the concept of demanding proof to back up claims. The need to prove your claims is necessary for the discussion to have any value. There is perhaps no inherent need to do it (i can't force you to). But if you cannot prove your claims your claims have no value. And since you're the one demanding change and making claims you're the one who needs to provide evidence.

And that is also why i don't need to prove the costumer base is too small, the status quo is based on that idea. Being the one challenging the status quo the burden of proof lies on you. If you go to your boss telling him he needs to change his management style he'll ask you to prove him that there is a need to do so. And the idea that the ones who do not challenge the status quo be the ones who need to proof the status quo is the best way to continue is ludicrous. That would make it too easy for the challengers. The existence of the current status is in itself already evidence there must be something to it. It may not be correct, but that's up to you to prove.

And no this isn't part of the social issue. Unless you can prove me publishers/devs are sexists and purposely discriminating against female gamers (potential gamers) just because they're female.

And i know very well what some people think is "doing things right". There is no problem with people sharing their opinion on what they think makes a better game. We all do it. But the claim that when things are not being done right it must be some kind of social issue is ludicrous. It's not because games don't do things your way it's objectification, sexism, evidence of a boys club mentality, etc.

 

[Tono Makt]

Do you agree or disagree with this guy? Thoughts in general?

I couldn't get past about 1:30 before I decided I didn't care if it was real or satire. I know it doesn't really help in the discussion to not watch the source video, but assuming this guy is being serious, then this is the kind of guy who we need to allow to make as many videos as he wants... then just ignore him.

 

[Tono Makt]

And while I don't agree that videogames should be a boys club or a male space, after going through high school during a time where you pretty much had to hide that you played videogames because most girls would put you on their blacklist for it, yeah I guess now it seems a little bit insulting that they come in making demands and expecting game devs to cater to them. There's already incentive to market to you. If a game markets to you you'll buy it, if it doesn't you won't. Condemning its existence and getting pissed that it isn't for you operates on the premise that everything should be for you.

You would make a valid point... if the same women who said "You have a Nintendo? Eww, no sexy time for you, EVER!" came back to the same group of men and said "Please admire my body in this awesome hand-made skin tight Rikku outfit!". That doesn't seem to be the case - it seems to be that women in the 80's and 90's (ages 14-25 at the time) said "You play video games? Okay, enjoy your little Princess Leia Star Trek doll, 'cuz that's the only girl you're going to be playing with for a long time!" whereas women now (women who are 14-25 NOW) are saying "You mean I can dress up slutty and people will actually APPLAUD me for it? Where do I sign up? And hey, now that I've played the games to see just how much skin I can show while still be considered in character, these are actually kinda fun - can you make something that is more what I really like?"

 

[A random person]

Oh, it's this guy.

For those who haven't figured it out, he's pretty much just an MRA. Hardly the worst out there, but still.

 

[Aramis Night]

Another thing that bothers me is all of this congratulatory ****e for women who manage to do anything more complicated than tying their shoelaces. "Women in Business" and all this crap.
I'm sorry... you just told me that women could do things just as well as men... now you expect me to be impressed that a woman did something that millions of men do every day?
That just sounds insulting to women, not to mention unfair that it assumes things are so very easy for men and we're justified in highering our expectations for men.
Doesn't exactly seem to help, if people being seen equally is indeed one's goal... and I doubt it is the goal of many of these disingenuous wretches.

Ever heard of inspiration? Surely you were inspired by someone you thought you could relate to and wanted to achieve the same or something similar to what they did.

So, now it's wrong for women to try to inspire other women with stories of success?

Maybe we should start a new strategy in schools. Just to be equal we will say the same thing to boys and girls. God forbid we do something sexist and show a boy/girl something about another successful boy/girl so we'll start telling these kids, "no one remotely like you has ever achieved anything meaningful, worthwhile, or even sustainable, if you want to succeed you need to find a way to be something besides what you are right now". Yeah isn't that nice?

I'm sorry but this part of your argument just doesn't fly.

I fail to see the downside to this or why you think it doesn't fly. Actually this is the exact message i was given growing up: That i would have to change to be anything worthwhile. This is the reality most boys face, or at least used to before we started encouraging entitlement to everyone. Do you honestly think that people need idols so much? Do you really believe that people need encouragement to such a degree? I will acknowledge that it could be that most women work this way, but men do not. Men in fact have a natural tendency to defiance.

As a historical point to illustrate what i mean: Black slaves were not encouraged to make music. In fact many of them suffered greatly because of it, enduring beating and all manner of other punishments most harsh. On the other hand women were encouraged in the use of instruments during the same time periods. Yet black slaves created the blues and later jazz. Women on the other hand created no new cultural forms of music. Almost no great female composers.

Meanwhile the former slaves who were originally not encouraged to foster any musical talent have either created or influenced almost every modern musical genre from rock and roll to rap. The same can be said of almost every great artistic or scientific mind throughout history. Great men throughout history have not been encouraged. Plato was ordered to ingest poison by his own people. Galileo was proclaimed a heretic by the church and placed under house arrest by the inquisition(lucky). Tesla was marginalized by monied interests and died poor with nothing to show for his attempts to give everyone access to cheap/free/safe energy. I could go on and on with examples. None of these men were given encouragement and all of them were facing institutions that were entirely hostile to their goals.

So either we need to stop coddling women or acknowledge that sadly sexism may have some grounding in objective reality and women need different treatment. Which would you prefer? If women do in fact need to be encouraged to such a degree then it will send the message that women are not equal. You can't expect different treatment and be expected to be treated the same. If equality is to have any chance women need to complain less and do more without needing positive feedback.

 

[generals3]

Oh so this is all about logic and science now?

No, but arguments gain validity by being proven.

Tell me what is logical about playing a video game? Logically shouldn't you be doing something more productive with your time?
It is not logical to waste time and energy in pursuits that do not benefit your species, your immediate family, and most of all yourself.

Too bad that people who play video games do believe it benefits them. Having fun makes them happier. And the reasons why people play video games are quite irrelevant. If you want we can start an argument about that but this was about the validity of arguments. And there, regardless of the field, it is expected that arguments backed up with proof are given more weight than those without.

"I can sympathize with the former kind of argument but i will instantly dismiss the latter." -- Where is the logic here?

Very logical actually. Because the former is merely an opinion, it doesn't involve unbacked claims. If i say I like blondes that's me expressing my opinion, there is no evidence needed because it's my own claim about myself. If i claimed that blondes were universally more attractive people would expect some evidence because now i'm making a claim which involves a lot more individuals than myself. And the idea that I know what others like needs to be backed up.

You dismiss what people have to say just because you don't like how they frame it? These people feel underrepresented, and worse yet insulted, by the lack of variety in games on the market. They don't feel that sexism might be a factor of their desire to want something different. They KNOW IT. Just like you know you have an illogical desire to play video games, and how you know you will be very upset if this movement goes too far and every game released plays like a "Twilight" movie.

Nono, I dismiss what people say because they make very big claims with no evidence. Ironically in certain cases we're fighting the same fights (I'm personally not a big fan of sexualization in videogames) but that doesn't make their arguments more valid and I still won't overlook blatant speculation and will point out it's just that. And how can they know it's because of sexism if there is no hard evidence which backs it up? You see there were Moroccans who thought they knew my eyes happened to look at them because i was a racist white guy who looks at Moroccans because I hate them. But that was obviously not true, I happened to look at them for a moment because I tend to look around when i walk on the streets. But they made that unfounded assumption and started making all sorts of threats and throwing all sorts of insults based on that unfounded assumption. And this is the type of unfounded assumptions i see in all of these discussions.

Hell I don't want to get rid of any possibility of sexism in games, to remove the specter of guilt. I want to SPREAD it around. I want to see more games were men are pretty pieces of eye candy that do nothing more than fetch ammo for their dominant, and clearly has her shit together, heroine.

And there is nothing wrong with wanting change. But I do find this part to be a bit weird. You said sexism in games was part of the social issue and yet you want more of it? That seems a bit weird.

And then you have some game developers saying that they aren't thinking of women when they make their games and don't even want to hear from women in focus groups about the game. I tried to look for a source and then realized I was wasting my precious time trying to appease you. I am not here for that.

How are they "not thinking about them"? Because there is a big difference between not thinking about them because they make a game for a predominantly male segment and just never thought about women because they just don't care about women in general. The former being an entirely justified marketing strategy and latter being quite a weird move. You see i doubt Beiersdorf cares about the opinion of women when they make Nivea For Men products but that makes sense since those products are targeting men.

And if you don't want to do it to appease me do it for yourself. You're the one challenging the status quo so you're the one who will benefit from backing up his claims to rally more people to the cause.

I'm sorry but humans aren't robots. If we were then logic would be the end all and be all for us. You dismiss people because they see a gender bias and bring it up as a social issue. I dismiss you because you are trying to force logic in to an illogical subject. Your argument has no value to me because you have not yet demonstrated an emotional investment in it.

The logic of the subject itself is irrelevant. What is relevant is the idea that people tend to give more consideration to claims backed up with evidence, or at least they should. I'm not asking you to be 100% logical. I'm asking you to back up your claims.

 

[Batou667]

I made just over 5 minutes before realising that I was wasting time that I'd never get back. The guy might have one or two points hidden away in there, but they're lost in the white noise of his ego, his PUA bullshit, and him conspicuously taking a drag on his bloody fag (that's a cigarette to the Americans) every ten seconds like a 14-year old trying to look tough in front of their mates.

Yeah, I thought this one was a lot more interesting, and only slightly marred by somebody/something breaking wind into the right speaker every ten seconds. It's true: men as a whole work harder, longer, in more dangerous jobs and unlike women are expected to risk their lives in times of war. These are facts I've yet to see a feminist tackle head-on - either they get dismissed as MRA propaganda, or hand-wavingly used as "proof" that "the Patriarchy hurts men too, duh", or else twisted into proof that men are still more "privileged" since fighting and dying in wars is more socially valued than childcare (which is great consolation to the soldiers coming home with limbs missing, or in boxes, I'm sure).

And now for a proper deconstruction of Feminism: