Does sexist tropes in video games influence behavior? Violence =/= Sexism?

[giles]

Well there is one sexist notion that society does enforces that women don't seem to be complaining about.

It is bad for a person of the male sex to to strike someone of the female sex.

This is drilled into our heads from preschool and up.. Of course those of the female sex are under no such restrictions.

This is sexist. That you treat an action differently based on the genders of those involved, is sexist.

Is it really, though? I guess it comes down to what we want to define as "sexism". I would argue that sexism is generally understood to be "discrimination based on sex/gender" where "discrimination" is meant in the political/sociological sense, i.e. based on prejudice.
Then you could argue that this is not sexist, but merely related to sexual dimorphism. Males, on average, have superior upper body strength and it is wrong to pick fights with someone who is weaker, therefor men shouldn't strike women. The reason is not that women are superior to men and need to be protected but that you shouldn't bully the physically weak.

If you take something to the extreme then it might become sexist, of course. I just think that the core of the reasoning behind this "notion" is not sexist, it just happens to concern the sexes.

 

[James Catling]

We do know that TV can reduce Racism, and sexism! Television shows which become more representative do actually help people become less racist, and less sexist. Particularly for people who come from areas where they don't see many minorities. One of the best studies done on this, brought up the old cartoon "Teen Titans". Cyborg was brought up as a favorite character among many male white children who had never met an African-American person in their life.

...

If you want to bring about change in a society, you need to do it POSITIVELY. Not by criticizing and demeaning others, not by telling them their hobby is morally repugnant and reprehensible, not by freaking out and going after witch hunts for perceived injustice. But by befriending the community and showing how the change is better for everyone over all.

I like this approach. Brings to mind something I read about Star Trek... was there an astronaut who said Uhura was an inspiration? I remember reading something along those lines, forget the details.

I see a problem at the moment, though. People highlighting positive examples seem to get shouted down just the same as people criticising negative ones - just look at the amount of vitriol some critics have received for praising Gone Home. Some of it is just people with very specific ideas about how games should be, sure, but there seemed to be a fair amount of "you only liked this for social reasons, what a hack" floating around (even though the critics in question really did seem to appreciate the game for other reasons, too).

It probably ties into people taking criticism poorly ("this was bad" or "this could have been better" seem to often be taken as "this game is evil and so are you, jerk"), which I guess is another topic. It's frustrating, anyway.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Except that it doesn't take much. Men have higher upper-body strength so? Strength is not the determining factor to combat efficacy. Anyone who fights professionally will tell you that. In game terms. It doesn't matter how OP the AWP is ... it don't mean crap if you can't hit a target. So strength/weakness are subjective terms, bruce lee was not a very strong man but he knew how to apply the strength he had effectively. Heck JUdo (a foundation to most martial arts is based on the priniciple of turning a larger more powerful opponent's strength against themselves.

The fact is, If a boy on a playground slaps a girl he will catch bloody hell for it. If a girl slaps a boy however her punishment will be at best a scolding. The difference in punishment constitutes sexism. Never mind that legally speaking rape is considered a one-way crime... I.e. while a man can most certainly rape a woman... there are still many jurisdictions (countries in fact) where legally it is impossible for a woman to rape a man. That is sexism.

Other issue with that is that the average man is stronger than the average woman. Not that men are stronger than women in an absolute sense.

The idea that women striking men doesn't matter is based on the idea that women are powerless/harmless/useless. This is a very outdated idea.

 

[Netrigan]

Also sexism is a funny thing. Society already reinforces certain sexist notions. One set of sexist notions are okay and another set aren't?

Who said one set of sexist notions was okay? Are you just assuming that, because people aren't discussing them in a thread about the influence of video games and not broader societal influences, that people think those are good things?

Well there is one sexist notion that society does enforces that women don't seem to be complaining about.

It is bad for a person of the male sex to to strike someone of the female sex.

This is drilled into our heads from preschool and up.. Of course those of the female sex are under no such restrictions.

This is sexist. That you treat an action differently based on the genders of those involved, is sexist.

This is a good example of a point I was hoping to make somewhere in one of these conversations.

There are two ways to respond to this. One making a positive contribution, the other making a negative one.

The positive contribution is adding to the discussion that it should be considered unacceptable to hit anyone without proper provocation.... regardless of sex. Only self-defense and the protection of another would it be considered okay to hit someone. This builds upon a very good point to make it a more complete point.

The negative contribution is to gripe about the double-standard. About the only thing you do in this situation is start an argument.

In discussions of these kinds, very often the person you're dealing with is fairly reasonable. If someone leaves off a part of the story, it's because they're focusing on an issue they find important... not that they're trying to say that other part doesn't exist and isn't also a serious problem. It's often pretty easy to piggy-back your point on theirs. Body issues affect both men and women, and while we focus much more on the female part of the equation (largely because women organized against it far earlier), there's no reason why you can't say something like "yes, that's important, but I think we should also address how this affects men".

If they're unreasonable, then being reasonable at them makes them the asshole

But in my experience, far more often than not, when we're dealing with these kinds of issues, they're happy to widen the tent so long as we're not invalidating their point.

 

[DrOswald]

We do know that TV can reduce Racism, and sexism! Television shows which become more representative do actually help people become less racist, and less sexist. Particularly for people who come from areas where they don't see many minorities. One of the best studies done on this, brought up the old cartoon "Teen Titans". Cyborg was brought up as a favorite character among many male white children who had never met an African-American person in their life.

...

If you want to bring about change in a society, you need to do it POSITIVELY. Not by criticizing and demeaning others, not by telling them their hobby is morally repugnant and reprehensible, not by freaking out and going after witch hunts for perceived injustice. But by befriending the community and showing how the change is better for everyone over all.

I like this approach. Brings to mind something I read about Star Trek... was there an astronaut who said Uhura was an inspiration? I remember reading something along those lines, forget the details.

I see a problem at the moment, though. People highlighting positive examples seem to get shouted down just the same as people criticising negative ones - just look at the amount of vitriol some critics have received for praising Gone Home. Some of it is just people with very specific ideas about how games should be, sure, but there seemed to be a fair amount of "you only liked this for social reasons, what a hack" floating around (even though the critics in question really did seem to appreciate the game for other reasons, too).

It probably ties into people taking criticism poorly ("this was bad" or "this could have been better" seem to often be taken as "this game is evil and so are you, jerk"), which I guess is another topic. It's frustrating, anyway.

I really don't see the people bringing up positive examples getting shot down, at least not by anit-feminists. Gone Home is an entirely different discussion, the game is controversial not because of the attached social issues but because of the gameplay issue. I can't think of any time someone specifically set out to highlight a really good example of a female character or an important woman in the game industry that was shouted down by anti-feminists.

On the other hand, I have seen a few of examples of someone highlighting a female character they think is good and feminists jumping down their throat and telling them they are sexist scum for liking a female character they think is problematic.

Maybe we just have been in different places.

Edit: I should also mention that the positive approach is exceedingly rare. For all the positive things feminism can do for video games, for all the great potential it represents, I find it extremely strange that the standard approach (to almost the complete exclusion of any other approach) of feminists is to point at things they don't like and say "bad!". I have said it before, there is no group collectively worse at selling a good idea that feminists.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I like this approach. Brings to mind something I read about Star Trek... was there an astronaut who said Uhura was an inspiration? I remember reading something along those lines, forget the details.

First African-American female astronaut (I forget her name) cited her as an inspiration, I think she had a guest spot on TNG.

It probably ties into people taking criticism poorly ("this was bad" or "this could have been better" seem to often be taken as "this game is evil and so are you, jerk"), which I guess is another topic. It's frustrating, anyway.

There's certainly an problem with this, as well as a false dichotomy. Yes, talking about positive examples is a better idea than attacking people at random in some way connected to negative examples, but this is not to say that talking about negative examples is always a bad idea.

 

[Gamerpalooza]

I've played racing games. I don't see myself partaking in any racing event and never ever went above the speed limit unless it was a long drive where I started losing focus and concentration in which instead I would pull over and rest.
I've played fighting games. Haven't gotten in a fisticuff yet or any sort of rumble. (unless discussions and debates count)
I've played shooting games. I've only gone hunting (didn't shoot just scouted) and the shooting range because I was invited and was part of a relatives hobby/pass time.
I've played RPGs. I don't go around buying swords, smiting evil, or practicing magic. Don't even go full ham when I use the kitchen knife when making food.
I've played rhythm games. I don't even dance.
I've played party games. I don't even party.

I have done a lot of gathering and crafting and I don't even do even practice that bs in real life.

I doubt your average reader picks up a murder mystery and becomes either a murderer or a crime solver or picks up a fantasy novel and gets high to go on the adventures.

 

[QuietlyListening]

I don't think anyone is saying that videogames cause sexism out of nowhere. Sexism has existed long in our culture. This is reflected in mass media, true, but the argument is that said mass media also serves to perpetuate sexism. It is a beast that feeds itself.

 

[zelda2fanboy]

Yeah, this is the one point of contention in this whole conversation about video games that bugs the hell out of me. We argued for years that violent video games don't make you violent (because they don't), yet the second we get fully protected free speech from the Supreme Court on the matter, suddenly playing sexist games makes you a sexist. It's a pretty classic double standard - my cause is more important than your cause, so I'm going to ignore logic. Honestly, I see it as a self propelling scandal because the single men who play video games are often the most vocal about them. And by throwing the word "misogynist" at strangers who I'm sure desperately want relationships with women, you get a very angry response in return.

 

[QuietlyListening]

Snip

First, I don't know if it's your intention, but your tone sounds condescending and it's pretty damn irritating. But that aside...

Yes, women's jobs are typically valued less than men's jobs (an often overlooked part of the wage gap). However, women have been shown to suffer discrimination in both salary negotiations (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/29/AR2007072900827.htm) as well as in percieved competence during hiring (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/2012/09/23/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/). To say that these issues don't exist or are just a myth is patently false.

The really harmful thing is to chalk all of this up to a simple divergence of "interests", especially when the fields in question actually display bias against or even outright hostility towards women. How one is perceived in the world by others and oneself, taken over time, has a tremendous influence over final outcomes. Or to put it a slightly different way, we tend to become what people expect us to be.

 

[QuietlyListening]

Yeah, this is the one point of contention in this whole conversation about video games that bugs the hell out of me. We argued for years that violent video games don't make you violent (because they don't), yet the second we get fully protected free speech from the Supreme Court on the matter, suddenly playing sexist games makes you a sexist. It's a pretty classic double standard - my cause is more important than your cause, so I'm going to ignore logic. Honestly, I see it as a self propelling scandal because the single men who play video games are often the most vocal about them. And by throwing the word "misogynist" at strangers who I'm sure desperately want relationships with women, you get a very angry response in return.

One is the connection between a stimulus and a behaviour and the other is a connection between a stimulus and an attitude. However, while violent videogames do not cause violence, they do heighten aggression. On a deeper level, exposure to violence can make one desensitized to it. Or, exposure to only one simplified narrative of an issue can lead to a warped understanding of it. Exposure like that is how you get Muslims being removed from planes for praying before a flight. If one's only exposure to Muslims is action movies, videogames, and foreign news stories, it would be understandable to have the conception that they only pray before blowing themselves up. But this is not the case.

Likewise, with women and media, a person may not "hate" women, but still may hold misogynist beliefs that have been constantly reinforced by media and culture. Ideas that women act irrationally (man, she went crazy!). Ideas that women are less competent (boobs on the ground, e.g.). Ideas of sexual entitlement (but I'm a nice guy!).

It's not just a problem in videogames, it's in most media. However, videogames, largely due to the youth of the industry and the overwhelming focus on a particular demographic, can be particularly bad offenders. Also, for the sake of discussion, it's probably a little more manageable to talk about just videogames rather than all of American culture. Although, even this topic is gigantic in i

 

[Orphan81]

Snip

First, I don't know if it's your intention, but your tone sounds condescending and it's pretty damn irritating. But that aside...

Yes, women's jobs are typically valued less than men's jobs (an often overlooked part of the wage gap). However, women have been shown to suffer discrimination in both salary negotiations (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/29/AR2007072900827.htm) as well as in percieved competence during hiring (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/2012/09/23/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/). To say that these issues don't exist or are just a myth is patently false.

The really harmful thing is to chalk all of this up to a simple divergence of "interests", especially when the fields in question actually display bias against or even outright hostility towards women. How one is perceived in the world by others and oneself, taken over time, has a tremendous influence over final outcomes. Or to put it a slightly different way, we tend to become what people expect us to be.

Your first link doesn't work, and second off, if I came off as condescending that wasn't the intention, it was to be informative. I'm a graduate student in Sociology, so I take actual data very seriously. That being said, if you found me irritating, that's on you, not on me.

Now If you actually bothered to read my responses, I never said sexism doesn't exist. In fact, several times, I said it does exist. It's just not actually to the degree that extreme feminists are making it out to be. It's just like racism still exists too, but I think we can agree we've come further in recent years then from what it was say 20 years ago or even 10 (Current Police deciding they like to shoot Black guys more than normal not withstanding)... each generation is progressively less sexist and less racist than the last... and Millenials in particular show the lowest degree's of sexism and racism.

That doesn't mean these things don't exist of course...again several times I stated they do. But some individuals are distorting facts or cherry picking their data...

Honestly, think about it. If sexism existed to the degree it's being reported on...if it was really as bad as it's being said in certain circles (and AGAIN THIS ISN'T SAYING IT DOESN'T EXIST! I KNOW IT DOES!) wouldn't we be seeing rampant reports of increased rape, increased sexual harassment compared to say 10 or 20 years ago even?

Let's further go to your argument further down where we have reports that Videogames increase agression and violence (We have reports saying they don't do that too). Violent Videogames have existed since the 80's...look at the trends of crime, aggression, and violence in society... particularly among those who grew up playing these games..

Across the board, figures for violence, and sexual misconduct are going DOWN. Despite the claims our society is more sexist than ever, despite the claims of being more violent than ever, our current society is more peaceful than it's ever been.

The point is, the world just does NOT reflect what some of these extremists are saying. Now that doesn't mean we still don't have sexism and racism, and we still shouldn't be aware of it... But I'll tell you this... Going after videogames is not going after where the real problems are...and honestly that's why I have a problem with it.

Trying to say it's all videogames fault, and they're supporting some sexist rape culture narrative that's making things worse, is doing a genuine disservice to where the real problems are coming and originating from. It's literally just away for some of these individuals to make Money. That's all.

No one is saying we can't have more women in videogames, or more minorities, that's fine. But what we are saying, is that we don't want every game to be Depression Quest and "Gone Home". And that is literally what some of these articles, particularly the one's released in August are arguing. They want to change the market place completely.

Now I'm not a fan of the million and one Call of Duty games. I'm not a fan of FPS culture either...but I understand that I don't have to play those games...and the existence of those games doesn't make Society worse, and it doesn't make people into killers. I also understand that I have a choice to not engage in those games at all... I can instead play my Zombie Apocalpyse simulators, and my Dark Souls and Street Fighters and really get into those communities...

But someone's going to come along and tell me "The Witch" in L4D is sexist, and Zoey and Rochelle aren't ugly enough, or are to pretty, or are too weak looking...or looking for anything else when I just want to shut the hell up and shoot Zombies (And yes I think the Witch is sexy, and there is NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.)

The point is, I don't care that "Gone Home" and "Depression Quest" exist either... They're great to exist along with how many other Indie games are out there... Hell I love 2 indie games in particular, Skull Girls and 1 Finger Death Punch... but I don't want to see Call of Duty go under, because that would make a ton of people sad, and it would be for no good fucking reason. I don't want to see Dark Souls go under, or Mortal Kombat either... and I don't want to see Indie Games go under either...they can all exist along side of one another...

So when I argue that Sexism isn't as bad as these extremists are making it out to be...that's not me saying I'm dismissing all claims of Sexism.. Its me defending my love of the Hobby as a Gamer, and me as an Academic saying there are better and much more valuable places to focus attention on, then the damn Videogames.

Finally, I do have one last question for you. To you truly believe, that their should be an equal representation of men and women in every occupation out there, in every single hobby? I want to know, do you think we should always have the same distribution of men and women who enjoy Hunting&Fishing? That enjoy Knitting&Crocheting? That are Firearm Enthusiasts? That are Primary School Teachers? In Sports? Do you believe Society should be equal 50/50 in population in every hobby and vocation?

 

[vIRL Nightmare]

The issue is very muddy at best. My position on the thing is that the game itself has negligible influence if any at all on a person's disposition towards anything. I've played many games where I've shot, stabbed, vaporized, and magicked many people, robots, and aliens to death yet I believe it is fair to say that not only do I not wish to perform any harmful task to anyone but am actually quite put off by the idea of inflicting or being harmed. I don't even like trash talking unless it is with close friends.

The whether or not violent video games makes people violent (I don't believe so) aside, I feel we can apply this to sexism and again I don't see an influence. Honestly I've spent more time wishing a Breast plate on a female character model was more plate and less breast for both practicality and being tasteful. In Dragon's Dogma there was a very childish stance with some people that your Pawn wouldn't be hired unless they were barely dressed. This notion was ludicrous and myself and many other community members found that to be particularly tasteless and it would be fair to say that there was more people in favor of tasteful attire for the pawns. Even if we assumed the split was even, which it wasn't, we'd be at the crossroads of there being enough difference in opinion that claiming there was a trend would be a bit of a stretch.

Now something I do see is claims on traditional male hero female damsel scenarios. On one hand yes that's true, it is very easy to have such scenarios. On the other hand I don't think it is bad story writing for games to have that especially with games like red dead redemption or assassin's creed that has historical context. As long as the context and narrative makes sense I don't see a problem. It would certainly win points in the story telling department if we got to see less tradition plot devices and honestly we are at a point where we should be able to expect some shying away from what could be considered long dead traditional roles in games where the context and plot don't justify it. The best example I could possibly give to show what I mean would be Django Unchained. It could be considered a very tasteless movie but with the historical context it is viewed as acceptable and is highly appraised for it's writing and acting. Why can't we do that with games?

 

[lacktheknack]

I'd think it obvious: if millions of gamers are, collectively or individually, influenced by these games to the point it can reasonably be said to affect their behavior, then we would be seeing THOUSANDS of Columbines and Jack Thompson would have been 100% correct.

Ad absurdum, ad nauseum.

Instead, we get get Gamergate, which is riddled with sexism problems to the point in insanity. Hmmmm.

OT: Of course we're affected by what we're exposed to. We aren't iron walls. We process what we consume. That's how humans work.

The only thing that separates a game from a standard manifesto is how seriously it's meant to be treated.

 

[QuicklyAcross]

Does violence in video games cause actual violence and condition gamers into behaving violently in real life?
No.

The answer is as simple as the question.
These type of threads just end up being echo chambers if people have a reasonable and sensible discussion

 

[Dizchu]

Then you could argue that this is not sexist, but merely related to sexual dimorphism. Males, on average, have superior upper body strength and it is wrong to pick fights with someone who is weaker, therefor men shouldn't strike women.

I don't think anyone should strike anyone else unless it is in self-defense. Regardless of gender. If you have the muscle mass of a Greek god and a woman attacks you then you should have every right to defend yourself. All that saying "men shouldn't hit women" does is normalise violence between males and give certain women the belief that they can get a judge to consider "self-defense" as "unprovoked attack", and they are usually sympathised with regardless of how violent they are.

The reason is not that women are superior to men and need to be protected but that you shouldn't bully the physically weak.

There are plenty of frail men too, are they excluded from that rule? I agree that sexual dimorphism doesn't make one gender "better" than another but I think humans should be expected to adhere to the same standards when it comes to being part of the same society, regardless of gender.

A game with sexist undertones won't make you sexist. Same for racism, homophobia or any other bigotry. It can however help cement existing sentiments within people. Diversity in media can help challenge people's bigoted preconceptions.

Better representation in media can go a long way to help people better understand and accept those that are different to them.

Excellent point. I think the issue isn't with stereotypical portrayals, but with the absence of non-stereotypical portrayals. I think instead of getting so hung up on portrayals we see as "negative" (unless they really cross the line) we should champion portrayals we see as "positive".

I love George Takei and I think that as a (really funny) social media celebrity he's doing a lot to normalise LGBT individuals in pop culture without constantly bringing everyone down by dwelling on how bad homophobia is.

 

[OldNewNewOld]

I usually try saying too much and end up saying nothing because my post ends up being all over the place so I will try to make it short.

First, there is no difference between "games make you violent" and "games make you sexist". Saying otherwise would be a double standard.
Second, games do influence the people who play them, but the way they influence us isn't always obvious and the way we think it is.
In your subconscious "world" we have our morals, our standards, our persona. In order for something to influence those things, it first needs to pass through a conscious filter. Just because we see, hear or read something doesn't mean it will pass that filter. To pass that filter, to actually influence our persona, the thing we hear needs to either already be part of our persona or it needs to be some damn well made argument and influence our emotions. Negative things in video games like violence and sexism will very rarely have a well thought out argument and appeal to emotions in a way that will make us more open to violence/sexism.

Basically games will only influence cause more violence and sexism if the person is already open to violence and sexism.
I'm more of a pacifist, I don't really like violence and when playing games with excessive amount of violence it only reinforces my stance on it. Same goes with other things I dislike. Every time I see rape in a TV shot, I think to my self how I hate it even more. It doesn't cause me to think "hey, rape isn't that bad."

If you have a strong opinion about sexism, sexism in games will only reinforce your opinion about it, positive or negative.

There are exceptions, there are people who don't really understand the difference between reality and fantasy and there are people who are easily influenced. But for the schizophrenic there are medications and for the easily influenced which are most of the times kids there are age ratings for games.

 

[Netrigan]

But what we are saying, is that we don't want every game to be Depression Quest and "Gone Home". And that is literally what some of these articles, particularly the one's released in August are arguing. They want to change the market place completely.

Well, that's an interesting interpretation of those articles.

Don't think it's even slightly supported by any of the articles in question, but an interesting interpretation nonetheless.

It's also so completely out of the realm of possibility that if someone actually put forward this as what should happen, your reaction shouldn't be anger but derisive laughter.

What's happening is the video game industry has created numerous revenue streams which have nothing to do with the traditional Gamer. Although when I say "video game industry" I frequently mean various Indy developers working by themselves or in small groups making money hand over fist creating non-traditional games like Angry Birds, Minecraft, etc. Games which don't cost millions of dollars to create and can earn their creators billions.

Smart phones and tablets have completely changed the landscape as virtually everyone has a gaming platform on them. Suddenly you have large numbers of middle-aged women looking for a fun little time-kiler. What this means is there's no longer a mono-market. There are a bunch of different markets, many of which are easily, cheaply, and profitably catered to.

The industry has moved beyond Gamers. This is not "we will no longer be servicing your interests", it's "you no longer define what video games are." We're moving into a world where games like Depression Quest and Gone Home are important, which serve niches outside of the previously all-important Gamer.