Duke Nukem and sexism

Yureina

Who are you?
May 6, 2010
7,098
0
0
I understand that Duke Nukem is meant to me one giant tasteless joke. Nobody should take that game seriously at all. Even so... I don't plan to buy it because I don't like it, or the joke that it is making. That's it.
 

Kortney

New member
Nov 2, 2009
1,960
0
0
Wait, how is it sexist to slap a girl's bum?

Man I hate feminists. How can you claim to stand up for females whilst you are opposing your own arbitrary morality on everyone? I'm a female and I have no problem with it. If a random stranger did it, it would be sexual assault. It would have nothing to do with sexism.

The game is a satire. Duke Nukem is supposed to be this ridiculously overworked macho asshole. That's the point of the fucking game.

BRex21 said:
The reason sexism like this is bad is that it encourages gamer A to go and thread female B as a sex object.
This is a valid thought, and one I have some serious problems with.

First of all, both genders are seen as sex objects. There is nothing inherently wrong with this. I used to slap my boyfriend on the backside all the time - it's playful and it doesn't mean I am degrading him at all. And it works the same vice versa. I have no problem with my boyfriend doing that to me. And most girls I know feel the same. There is no wide spread morality issue here.

Secondly, it involves this weird skewered morality. It's wrong to imply that females are sex objects in video games, but it's okay to imply that murdering hundreds and hundreds of people is just fine.

This is exactly what is holding the video game industry back. It's stupid, reactionary people like this. Movies are allowed to portray sexist characters. Songs are too. As are books, poetry, paintings and pretty much every aspect of human creativity. But video games aren't! Why? Because video games are interactive? That's not a good enough reason.

Nice. And people here actually believe our medium deserves the same respect as film?
 

Espsychologist

New member
Sep 30, 2010
61
0
0
psyks said:
Espsychologist said:
As to the first point: Yes that blanket statement would still apply, though it would receive far less sympathy and support. In the end, however, what is being discussed is DIGITAL REPRESENTATIONS. Any "person" being butt-slapped (or lynched) would ultimately be a computer-generated fantasy.
I feel that for better or for worse, it's still a form of art that contributes influence to society. It's the responsibility of each member of that society to make sure the influence isn't negative, and I feel, as I assume you do, that racism and sexism contributes negatively to society. The question then resolves itself to "does this game contribute to that influence?". Neither of us can know that for sure, partly because we haven't played the game yet, and partly because we're not omniscient. That's why debate and enquiry exists.
As to the second point: You have nice scarecrow [straw-man] there because killing people on a battlefield is, indeed, something in which "everyone" can be influenced to participate. Actually getting "everyone" to do so would require a sociological mastermind, but it could be done. Hell, WWII was as close as we, as a species, have come to doing just that, and that was only 70 years ago! And everyone involved felt completely justified if their side should win!!!
That's not really a straw man and you really just backed up my claim. Casual sexism displayed in popular culture translates much more easily to real world actions than war does. As you said, everyone can be influenced to participate in war, but it was a huge propaganda campaign, as well as nationalistic tensions which were left over from the first world war that polarised people during the second world war. Now, whether or not war games make people violent or polarise them in the same way we saw during the first half of the 20th century is really a moot point since it has little bearing on the argument and isn't at all equivalent to misogyny.
As to the third point: Penny Arcade is so obviously a joke website that anyone who believes the creators of it to be serious needs to get themselves informed, and fast! That said, since comedy MUST have no boundaries placed upon it in order to be ethical, apologizing for anything they have done in the past would be not only unethical but hypocritical. And apparently you think only women can be raped by men, and that men, somehow and for some reason, do not rape other men.

Bottom line: If murder of any sort can be lampooned, then so can anything and everything else.
I don't think I mentioned anything particular about the dickwolves thing and I most certainly didn't claim that rape doesn't concern men. Indeed, statistics show that on average, 1 in 33 men are sexually assaulted in their lifetime. The figure for women is 1 in 6. Not that it becomes a less important crime for men, simply that feminist groups are more closely involved.
With regards to the comic, I was simply making the point that Penny Arcade make un-nuanced, obnoxious statements like saying that sexism isn't important or rape is ok to make light of, without thinking about their actions. It's basically the same excuse that the daily show uses, where it's often assumed that nobody takes anything but humour away from comedy, which isn't true. If you think that you aren't constantly analysing everything you absorb, including seemingly harmless comedy, in order to form opinions and world views, then you're mistaken.

Some comedians can work in areas like that successfully because they own it. When it's a webcomic, whose writers aren't the most sensitive of people, the result is much more snidey and superior.
No, it is not the responsibility of every person to make sure an influence isn't negative. It IS the DUTY AND RIGHT of every person in ANY society to speak freely and openly, and especially so in cultures that have outlawed free speech. I live in the United States, and I will comment on and do my best to get others to not engage any media or behavior I believe to be truly harmful, but censorship, as you are suggesting, is NEVER the answer. No, you did not use 'censorship' specifically, but "negative influence" is an inherently empty phrase that may be used arbitrarily. Also, while you did mention sexism and racism as being "negative influences", the overall tone suggests censorship rather than genuine concern for any given society.

Penny Arcade was not making light of sexism, but good on 'em if they had because it is THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT! What they were saying is that, when compared to the fact that a player is able to, quite easily, commit GENOCIDE repeatedly, the "utter outrage" many people loudly proclaimed over The Duke's ass-tapping shenanigans is next to worthless. As to Penny Arcade being snidey, insensitive and superior, allow me to refer you to one of the oldest sayings in the book: "You can't please all the people all of the time." If they were more "diplomatic", then they would be hypocrites, as I stated above, as well as actually being racist, sexist, etc. for holding one particular subject above others.

Side note: If you have a leftist agenda to push, or are in favor of censorship in any form, find somewhere else to peddle the bullshit. 90% of the people that frequent this website are in favor of completely free and open speech, and the other 10% generally don't worry about it unless something starts to sting too much.
 

Chefodeath

New member
Dec 31, 2009
759
0
0
BENZOOKA said:
Yeah, it's pointless. And every kind of correctness gone mad.

Why haven't they banned every James Bond movie yet...
They know the ghost of Sean Connery will haunt them forever.

Wait is he dead yet? Doesn't matter.
 

Espsychologist

New member
Sep 30, 2010
61
0
0
I love the trailer that has Duke just throwing around his own freshly squeezed piece of shit. "What kind of a stupid ************ picks up wet feces?!"

GOLD!!
 

Haydyn

New member
Mar 27, 2009
976
0
0
Had the creators of Duke Nukem bought stock in Fox, they would be praising Duke Nukem for innocent fun.
 

Kair

New member
Sep 14, 2008
674
0
0
ericphillips said:
What a lot of people fail to realise is the Duke Nukem is and always has been a work of satire.
Look at Duke himself, huge muscles, blonde buzzcut weilding huge guns and disrespecting women, this is the picture perfect 70s-80s American action hero that shows that he is in fact a blown up stereotype. As are all of the people that surround him, the women are generically attractive bimbos and his friends are all macho badasses just like he is.

Duke Nukem games are satyrical, they feature sexist content because that's what this american badass stereotype does, and he is frankly hilarious.

If any of you have seen Borat or Bruno then you will see what I mean when I say on the surface these games may seem offensive, but end up being hilarious and very intelligent in that they show us how ridiculous and funny our stereotypes are.

People that complain about Bruno or Borat or Duke Nukem usually haven't seen or played the content, and instead have been handed a list of all of the potentially offensive things that happen in them, and have based their opinions on the content based on these things. Frankly, if i was to read a list of things that occur in Duke Nukem when put in an out of context situation like that, I would probably deem it offensive! But we need to realise the underlying message beneath the macho surface of Duke Nukem.

What these people need to hear is try the content in context, see how ridiculous and fun Duke Nukem is, what will hold us back is telling them that they are wrong and trying to justify what happens in these games.
I agree that some people just do not understand Duke Nukem.
 

psyks

New member
Feb 17, 2010
25
0
0
Espsychologist said:
psyks said:
Espsychologist said:
As to the first point: Yes that blanket statement would still apply, though it would receive far less sympathy and support. In the end, however, what is being discussed is DIGITAL REPRESENTATIONS. Any "person" being butt-slapped (or lynched) would ultimately be a computer-generated fantasy.
I feel that for better or for worse, it's still a form of art that contributes influence to society. It's the responsibility of each member of that society to make sure the influence isn't negative, and I feel, as I assume you do, that racism and sexism contributes negatively to society. The question then resolves itself to "does this game contribute to that influence?". Neither of us can know that for sure, partly because we haven't played the game yet, and partly because we're not omniscient. That's why debate and enquiry exists.
As to the second point: You have nice scarecrow [straw-man] there because killing people on a battlefield is, indeed, something in which "everyone" can be influenced to participate. Actually getting "everyone" to do so would require a sociological mastermind, but it could be done. Hell, WWII was as close as we, as a species, have come to doing just that, and that was only 70 years ago! And everyone involved felt completely justified if their side should win!!!
That's not really a straw man and you really just backed up my claim. Casual sexism displayed in popular culture translates much more easily to real world actions than war does. As you said, everyone can be influenced to participate in war, but it was a huge propaganda campaign, as well as nationalistic tensions which were left over from the first world war that polarised people during the second world war. Now, whether or not war games make people violent or polarise them in the same way we saw during the first half of the 20th century is really a moot point since it has little bearing on the argument and isn't at all equivalent to misogyny.
As to the third point: Penny Arcade is so obviously a joke website that anyone who believes the creators of it to be serious needs to get themselves informed, and fast! That said, since comedy MUST have no boundaries placed upon it in order to be ethical, apologizing for anything they have done in the past would be not only unethical but hypocritical. And apparently you think only women can be raped by men, and that men, somehow and for some reason, do not rape other men.

Bottom line: If murder of any sort can be lampooned, then so can anything and everything else.
I don't think I mentioned anything particular about the dickwolves thing and I most certainly didn't claim that rape doesn't concern men. Indeed, statistics show that on average, 1 in 33 men are sexually assaulted in their lifetime. The figure for women is 1 in 6. Not that it becomes a less important crime for men, simply that feminist groups are more closely involved.
With regards to the comic, I was simply making the point that Penny Arcade make un-nuanced, obnoxious statements like saying that sexism isn't important or rape is ok to make light of, without thinking about their actions. It's basically the same excuse that the daily show uses, where it's often assumed that nobody takes anything but humour away from comedy, which isn't true. If you think that you aren't constantly analysing everything you absorb, including seemingly harmless comedy, in order to form opinions and world views, then you're mistaken.

Some comedians can work in areas like that successfully because they own it. When it's a webcomic, whose writers aren't the most sensitive of people, the result is much more snidey and superior.
No, it is not the responsibility of every person to make sure an influence isn't negative. It IS the DUTY AND RIGHT of every person in ANY society to speak freely and openly, and especially so in cultures that have outlawed free speech. I live in the United States, and I will comment on and do my best to get others to not engage any media or behavior I believe to be truly harmful, but censorship, as you are suggesting, is NEVER the answer. No, you did not use 'censorship' specifically, but "negative influence" is an inherently empty phrase that may be used arbitrarily. Also, while you did mention sexism and racism as being "negative influences", the overall tone suggests censorship rather than genuine concern for any given society.

Penny Arcade was not making light of sexism, but good on 'em if they had because it is THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT! What they were saying is that, when compared to the fact that a player is able to, quite easily, commit GENOCIDE repeatedly, the "utter outrage" many people loudly proclaimed over The Duke's ass-tapping shenanigans is next to worthless. As to Penny Arcade being snidey, insensitive and superior, allow me to refer you to one of the oldest sayings in the book: "You can't please all the people all of the time." If they were more "diplomatic", then they would be hypocrites, as I stated above, as well as actually being racist, sexist, etc. for holding one particular subject above others.

Side note: If you have a leftist agenda to push, or are in favor of censorship in any form, find somewhere else to peddle the bullshit. 90% of the people that frequent this website are in favor of completely free and open speech, and the other 10% generally don't worry about it unless something starts to sting too much.
Please, nowhere did I say we should censor anything. Free speech is great up to a point, but that doesn't mean that no one is obliged to analyse the content of what others are saying. For example, in a free democracy, I have the right to shout "FIRE!" at the top of my lungs, but it would be irresponsible to do so in a crowded theatre where I might start a riot. Like I said, it's through debate and enquiry that we can further a "leftist" agenda for a happier society, if that's how you wish to put it. If you can't see how rational debate can further discourse and help to eliminate tensions like casual sexual discrimination, there's not really much I can say to you.

I don't think you actually read anything I wrote, so this debate is over.
 

Twilight_guy

Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
7,131
0
0
Yeah except for the fact that if we say "sexism is bad and should be eliminate" then it means sexism everywhere. We can't say "all sexism except those guys over there playing the games." No we have to remove the whole thing as an institution from the equation to eliminate sexism. If we say its bad but we live with it, then obviously there is no complaining, but I think quiet a few people wish to eliminate it which implies eradicating every trace of it.
 

AllLagNoFrag

New member
Jun 7, 2010
544
0
0
Thanks for these responses. There are valid reasons as to why sexism is bad and how material promoting or displaying acts of it is harmful to many.

However, as I posted in another thread: "People who judge things should at the very least be EXPERIENCED at the things they judge." The various parties that criticize Duke Nukem Forever will most likely not even bother playing or even try to see just what Duke Nukem is all about. As many of us know, it is an exaggerated and over the top action run n gun game meant for pure entertainment.

It just irritates me that people are able to change things in the gaming industry without having first hand experience of just exactly what they are changing. They are effectively judging games and trying to alter the public's view on games without ever changing their view that video games make people "violent and stupid".

On another note: Fox didnt cause an uproar about the recent game Dead Space 2 (which I love) and in that game you kill children amongst other disturing things that happen throughout. Perhaps its the fact that they are mutated?
 

Rayne870

New member
Nov 28, 2010
1,250
0
0
AllLagNoFrag said:
As alot of you are aware, the "babe slapping" mode in Duke Nukem's multi player has been critisized about by a fair amount of people (not forgetting FOX). After thinking for a while, yes, it is sexist and yes, it is meant to be a total joke (its duke nukem ffs).

If you are even considering to buy a game like Duke Nukem, you should be able to accept the nature of the material.

Sexist: sexism (ˈsɛksɪzəm)

? n
discrimination on the basis of sex, esp the oppression of women by men

This bring me to my point: If these types of sexist games are created for males to play, why the hell are the people that dont want to play the game complaining?

Take this for example, smoking is bad for health, not only for those that smoke, but to those that don't smoke too as they get second hand smoke. Therefore it is valid that those that do not smoke complain and go against smoking. Whereas sexist games that are created which targets males (who are meant to be of mature age) are being criticized by those who do not play them. Yes, it is offensive material to some but, is being advertised as such to warn them. If people are afraid of their kids getting affected, them Im sorry but, look at the day and age we live in.

Discuss.
Me thinks the Feminists don't want to be slapped by their men after playing Duke. Won't be much of a change for me though I already slap my fiance on the ass.
 

Lyx

New member
Sep 19, 2010
457
0
0
I think one needs to distinguish between two aspects here:

aspect 1: Personal preferences. To take me as an example: Even though my attitude is gender neutral, i appreciated to some extend the sarcasm and parody of the original duke nukem 3d (not the current reincarnation). I liked it simply as a reoccuring theme that made fun out of itself. I however did NOT appreciate the sexism that existed solely for its own sake (so, not for the sake of parodying itself). For similiar reasons, i'm not interested in the current modern incarnation.

aspect 2: Moral shit. I don't like it, therefore everyone else has to dislike it. Bad is absolute. The difference between this aspect, and aspect 1, is that here it's no longer just about personal preferences, but rather demanding that everyone else has the same preferences as oneself, regarding a game of fiction, that clearly tells you ahead of time what to expect

I have exactly zero symphaty with #2. I do sympathize with #1.
 

Yaasamine

New member
Jun 4, 2011
1
0
0
I am seeing a lot of people here, especially "men" keep saying:

"It is just a game, and people who get offended by it are retards", or, "It is just a parody of the sexist man oppressing and disrespecting women".

What i am not understanding here is: why on earth would anyone want to play a game that would rather make fun of something that is so real and damaging to women (sexism)?? Why would anyone want to enjoy something that is disrespectful to women whether it is a parody or not. I bet I will be told to "get over it is just a game". So what if it is "just a game"? It is still making fun of something that many people dont find funny as it is disrespectful to women, and I find that people who cant respect people's anti-sexist views and feelings are immature in the least. I also strongly believe that men who play this game are disrespectful to women in real life, because why else would a guy enjoy such a moronic game like this?? It is because he is sexist and disrespectful to women. Any real man will see this game is a piece of horse crap. There has to be a sound reason why men enjoh this game, and the reason so-called "men" enjoy this is because they are chauvinistic pigs. Saying you are just playing the game for the humor of the parody is bullshit and a just a lie to cover the ass of those "men" who know they are chauvinist snobs who view women as pieces of meat. You just like the parody? Blimey...Then why do you like the parody? Because you dislike sexism? Well laughing at the parody of sexism is a real assbackwards way to show your disgust for sexism, because if you really had disgust for sexism, then you would take the matter of sexism seriously, and not play video games that are wholeheartedly devoted to spoon-feeding candy-coated sexism to it's game players. I hate racism, so therefore i am not going to laugh at parodies of White men in white sheets dancing around an Asian or black man hung up in a noose on a tree. Guess what could be done in the meantime while playing stupid sexist games like Duke ******? Planting a tree. Changing your community. Help a school. There is a time and a place for everything.