I used to dislike Anita Sarkeesian, but...

carnex

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2008
828
0
21
Oh, how did this slip my mind.

In Dragon Age we have characters, in Dragon's Crown we have sprites. No story means no character. Now if you want character that has problems it's Samara from Mass Effect 2 and her "boob slit" (that thing is so deep clevlage doesn't even begin do describe it). That costume has absolutly oposite effect to her character. For me that could make compelig argument for mistreatment of female charater in game. That her clotches make absolutely no sense in context of her character.

Foe example Jack (female too), from the same game, wears nothing but pants and nipple-straps yet her costume actually really adds to her charater so I don't have any qualms with it. But on any other charater it would look positively moronic.
 

Scott Rothman

New member
Feb 2, 2012
162
0
0
carnex said:
And that i covered here,

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/9.826049.20054644

from middle ages on. If you want to go before that, to the basis why it turned out so bitter towards women i said few things about that here.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/9.826049.20053261

I'm sorry if I seem hostile, but during long debates on whatever I develped this steamroller aproach and it's really bloody hard to avoid it now.

P.S.
"You are can't see that I'm right" is always a converation breaker. Try to explain how and why he is wrong in your opinion. Theese are all opinions backed (or not) by facts and researches.
In response to your post script, I wasn't trying to say that from my perspective. It was more that numerous women have expressed feelings of discrimination. In my opinion the fact that they feel oppressed or off put by specific issues in itself proves there is an issue.

I don't think you're being hostile, it's a hot button issue and it's very easy for people to get heated and emotional. I have a bit myself.

I read your post and I actually agree with a lot of what you said. There are definitive physiological differences between men and women. I disagree with some of what you said about the position of women in modern day. While they have achieved a lot of rights and have great strides toward equality, I don't think we are as far along as you think we are. There is a huge wage disparity gap. I know that some of this is actually caused by conscious decisions by women to not seek higher positions of employment, but there are a lot of women in positions 100% parallel with male counterparts fir which they are paid less.

With a lot of what you talked about (theft of intellectual property, etc) as a background to modern day, I feel there is an inherent need to (not necessarily right those wrongs as that's not really possible) but making a concerted effort to really evaluate what each of our genders have been through on an individual basis. If it inconveniences us or forces men to rescind some of their control and power to ensure that women get their fair say and share, well I don't think it's unreasonable for the men to bite the bullet.
 

Scott Rothman

New member
Feb 2, 2012
162
0
0
carnex said:
Oh, how did this slim my mind.

In Dragon Age we have characters, in Dragon's Crown we have sprites. No story means no character. Now if you want character that has problems it's Samara and her "boob slit" (that thing is so deep clevlage doesn't even begin do describe it). That costume has absolutly oposite effect to her character.
I didn't really mean to compare the two. Obviously the characters in those games aren't really comparable. I just wanted to give an example of how women can be sexy and sexual in a non-demeaning manner.
 

Eacaraxe_v1legacy

New member
Mar 28, 2010
1,028
0
0
Rebel_Raven said:
I'm snipping, because I really feel this productive vein of conversation is drawing to a close.

Absolutely, there's way too much sexist dudebro shit out there on the gaming market. That by all means ought to change. We're totally on the same page. That doesn't change the fact it exists because there is a market for it, and that not only is the path of least resistance for making triple-A titles, but also the most lucrative. It is a response to market forces, not a cause for market forces.

It's not as if a game company one day got the wonderful idea to make "Super Hooker Fighter XTreme", and an entire generation of males upon seeing this title realized tits are awesome and want to see more of them. Game companies realized the majority of their audience is male, and since men like tits, tits can be put in video games and make them more popular. It's not just oversexualization of women although it's certainly the issue with greatest exposure (heh), that extends to male power fantasy and every other iteration thereof comparative to the female experience and representation of women in games. And women, by and large, as you said yourself interpret this as a Hobson's choice and buy the shit anyway.

Meanwhile, indie and small-time developers aren't started and grow in a vacuum. They're not athlete's foot or herpes for god's sake. People don't buy their games, which limits their exposure and their revenue, putting them in turn in a catch-22. If they're making good, female-friendly games, buy them and give them word-of-mouth advertising. We in the western world live in a capitalist paradigm in which consumption drives revenue, which in turn drives growth. Look at BioWare, one of the more forward-thinking triple-A companies out there in terms of gender and gender issues and representation, which started as an indie company and grew because people liked and bought their games. The "next" BioWare isn't going to be the "next" BioWare, unless people look past the fact they're an indie company and buy their games!

That's the issue at hand. Why would companies find a different, riskier way to have their cake and eat it too, when they already have a way to have their cake and eat it too? It's going to be market forces that drive reform in the game industry, and that will never, ever coalesce unless people like me, and you by your own admission, start speaking with their wallets -- and advocating others do so. That's where Sarkeesian threw the bloody ball and ran away from it screaming, in my opinion, is she didn't just say "don't buy sexist games".
 

carnex

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2008
828
0
21
Let's repeat this like a parrots until it sinks in

If we compare monetary compensation for the same jobs in the same positions males and female earn roughly (or as I have seen it put, within the margin of statistical error) the same. Adjusted for less work time clocked in by females on average they actually earn more.

Look, I really understand that women feel uncomfortable about many things, but where is the limit of giving in to emotional blackmail over real hard data? And I know it's easy writing that on internet forum when i feel like shit when my fiancee looks at me with sad eyes, but line has to be drawn somewhere. Women have burdens men don't, but in return men have feeling, not social but, as far as I know ingrained within our being, of obligation towards women.

Equality means equal opportunity. They have it, and then some. There are more "female only" things to support them then mechanized division can fire at. Thanks to those they are now overwhemingly dominant in education, pedagogy, general medicine etc. Thanks to female only scholarship, prohibition of male associated activities, reduced competition in education and female safe spaces they are majority of graduates. Not to mention family court and sentencing for criminal activity. And they still demand more. Where is the limit?

They wanted equality. Well, they should feel what it means to be equal. Both good and bad. They dodged most of the bad side very efficiently so far.
 

Zykmiester

New member
Jun 22, 2010
30
0
0
She completely lost me during her second video when talking about the player having to kill or harm a loved one as part of the damsel in distress trope. Firstly it is the ol' yeller tope, it's meant to horrify to player by making them kill someone they love because it is the best alternative. And if that wasn't enough to call her credibility into question she also has the ignorance to state that context dose not matter to the use of this trope, that was enough for me to believe that she is no more suited for discussing video games than Fox News.
 

funkzillabot

New member
Dec 10, 2009
85
0
0
Skops said:
*sigh*... With all due respect, I just don't care. And have never cared about this 'sexism' issue. How many bloody threads are we gunna have about this before we put this to bed? I'm not upset, I'm exhausted of this topic and I wonder when this community will have some ELSE to talk about.
How VERY MATURE. Listen....junior, "sexism" is not something that will "just go away" because you wish it too. Or feel the need to bury you head in the sand, as if it doesn't effect you. YOUR MOTHER IS A WOMAN (unless, of course, you were hatched?) Your sister. Your girlfriend/wife (unless you are gay). Your daughter.

I'm sorry to be the one to bust your bubble, but this DOES EFFECTS YOU!
- Because you live on this planet.
- Because you are part of this society.
- Because there are only 2 sexes, of which YOU are 1.
- Because you have a responsibly for you own actions.

Now......whether you wish to acknowledge these facts or not, only makes YOU part of the problem. (But it is NOT going to just go away.)
 

spartandude

New member
Nov 24, 2009
2,721
0
0
carnex said:
Oh, how did this slip my mind.

In Dragon Age we have characters, in Dragon's Crown we have sprites. No story means no character. Now if you want character that has problems it's Samara from Mass Effect 2 and her "boob slit" (that thing is so deep clevlage doesn't even begin do describe it). That costume has absolutly oposite effect to her character. For me that could make compelig argument for mistreatment of female charater in game. That her clotches make absolutely no sense in context of her character.

Foe example Jack (female too), from the same game, wears nothing but pants and nipple-straps yet her costume actually really adds to her charater so I don't have any qualms with it. But on any other charater it would look positively moronic.
ironically i felt like Jack was one of the least sexualised characters in that game despite her being very forward about sex and wearing the least amount of cloths. mostly because she isnt ridiculously proportioned, her tattoos really help to cover up and her background really makes it believable.
 

II2

New member
Mar 13, 2010
1,492
0
0
*tired sigh*

She's just the gift that keeps on giving isn't she?

Put me down for the discussion burnout camp. As mentioned, prior, the problems with or surrounding her / her work are:

- Conclusions drawn based off content analysis of interactive systems : ergo, flawed methodology yielding uneven, disputable results, based on an architecture of inductive conclusions of sociological studies (left unestablished).
- Lack of transparency regarding both research methodology and points of her social political beliefs that are informed from sociological research, beyond personal belief. (no bibliography, or equivalent accreditation)
- Above problems are more true of academic endeavors and research journals than informal video essays, but as a university graduate offering 'deep systemic analysis' in video lectures, it creates confusion and undermines her credibility.

Basically what I'm saying is that she's presenting a judgement of games and their attendant mechanics / gamplay, based off sections of their audiovisual presentation and that she is a media critic with a political agenda doing so in the manner of an official seeming academic lecture.

THAT, as she is wont to say, is "problematic"... Something ultimately rather unfortunate, since talking about things is good, but all the noise and feelings regarding HER are the focus of all the chatter.
 

Skops

New member
Mar 9, 2010
820
0
0
funkzillabot said:
Skops said:
*sigh*... With all due respect, I just don't care. And have never cared about this 'sexism' issue. How many bloody threads are we gunna have about this before we put this to bed? I'm not upset, I'm exhausted of this topic and I wonder when this community will have some ELSE to talk about.
How VERY MATURE. Listen....junior, "sexism" is not something that will "just go away" because you wish it too. Or feel the need to bury you head in the sand, as if it doesn't effect you. YOUR MOTHER IS A WOMAN (unless, of course, you were hatched?) Your sister. Your girlfriend/wife (unless you are gay). Your daughter.

I'm sorry to be the one to bust your bubble, but this DOES EFFECTS YOU!
- Because you live on this planet.
- Because you are part of this society.
- Because there are only 2 sexes, of which YOU are 1.
- Because you have a responsibly for you own actions.

Now......whether you wish to acknowledge these facts or not, only makes YOU part of the problem. (But it is NOT going to just go away.)
Granted, when I said "And have never cared about this 'sexism' issue" it is a broad statement that can easily be misunderstood. Considering what forum we're in (GAMING if you hadn't noticed) and the topic is about Anita Sarkeesian and her web series "Tropes vs. Women" which is mainly focused on video games "typical" depiction of women. At the time, I guess I didn't feel it was necessary to be very specific in what capacity of sexism I don't care about, seems to be pretty obvious to me, and several others that have quoted me.

So to make it abundantly clear for you:

I don't care about sexism in gaming

Because it ISN'T REAL. These are fictional characters that have no effect on my life or anyone else's life beyond some cheap thrills on screen. And if people have trouble differentiating between whats real and whats not, then that's their problem.
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
17,598
1,808
118
I'm fine with her being out there standing for better female characters. Her videos are kind of boring though, watching the first few minutes of her first video I thought she kept going in circles around the same issue. Never watched the other (two?). But whatever, I don't see the hate. For all intents and purposes she's just another person with a webcam.
 

daubie

New member
Mar 17, 2010
100
0
0
Zenn3k said:
Daystar Clarion said:
I don't dislike the fact she has ideas.

I dislike the fact she closes off any chance of anyone debating the issues with her ideas.

If she were a scientist, she'd refuse to have her research peer reviewed.
Exactly.

I automatically dismiss her entire message because she doesn't allow comments or even voting on her videos. Someone who does that clearly has a major ego problem and thats a shadow on everything she's trying to say.

Lest we forget that she is terribly under-informed on the topic of gaming and shouldn't be talking about it in the first place. The ***** doesn't even know WHO Samus is, and wants to talk about women in gaming. Fuck off Anita.
Your reaction has something to do with why comments were closed on her videos, and why her wikipedia page had to be locked. Anyone who ignores information they encounter because they can't comment on youtube has some seriously odd views on research.

Video games are an increasingly socially influential medium. More people are going to be talking about it. Better someone who's done research on the subject than a Fox News commentator or, God forbid, a Congressman. I have seen several of her videos including a TED talk that came later. The presentation is not perfect, and she could have made a stronger argument if she included some counter evidence to debunk (which would not have been hard), but what she did present was not incorrect. Yes, her message is pointed, but it's supposed to be. That's how social change happens.

We all know what the videos were intended to do. They were to point out the overuse of certain storytelling elements in regard to female characters. However, with reactions like yours, a new topic was dragged into the spotlight. Between the entirety of the internet calling her a ***** for talking about video games, having death and rape threats cast at her, games made where you can violently assault her, etc, there was ample evidence to talk about the treatment of women in and out of digital culture. Of course, that opened a whole other can of worms. People were insulted because she started calling them out on their bad behavior in public, so they doubled down.

Also, to address the first quote, her thesis is not on her site anymore. However, it can still be found online. Like many masters thesis and other research papers, you have to pay to download it on some sites. It can still be reviewed. That may actually be the root issue here. Everyone has been reviewing her work. Most people just aren't particularly thoughtful about it. Ranting nutjobs on youtube are not "peers"

Finally, I'd like to point out that a new sociological law has been defined because of the backlash against her. Anita's Irony: "Online discussion of sexism or misogyny quickly results in disproportionate displays of sexism and misogyny. So...yeah, I feel like we can check that box off in this thread.
 

Rebel_Raven

New member
Jul 24, 2011
1,606
0
0
thebakedpotato said:
Rebel_Raven said:
thebakedpotato said:
Aww yeah another one of these threads! Wooohoo!

Honestly what pisses me off about the whole ordeal is that the energy behind it all is misdirected. If both parties approached a different, solvable, remarkable issue like say... curing AIDS; with as much energy, and vitriol as they do debating and arguing and taunting and threatening and soapboxing... That shit would have been cured.

Now I know how the pope must feel about masturbation
To be fair, I think the gender issues in gaming is an easier battle to win vs Aids. :p

If gender issues in games stopped being an issue, people could move on to other things. Maybe racial variety in games? I'd like to see that take flight. I think it needs to be addressed, but I'm a one battle at a time kind of person.

If the small problems would just go away, we'd have nothing but the larger problems to focus on.
Buuut the small problems, like gender issues in videogames, aren't going away any time soon, few people are in a hurry to fix them, and some people are actually fighting to keep them in.
The battle wages so long as there's something to fight over.

Threads like these are full of reasons why people are hung up on combating the status quo of gaming.
I think you're chasing what you perceive to be easy targets while ignoring the problem as a whole.
Changing video games won't affect the gender inequality in society. However changing society will affect the gender inequality in games.

The feel that I've gotten from Anita's latest video in particular isn't that she wants broad social change, but to have a single media industry display her backward ideal of gender equality.
I can see where you're coming from, but fixing the problem as a whole? I think that'd take hundreds, if not thousands of years. Especially tackleing it all at once, and even more so on a world wide scale.
I'm sure women have been upset about inequities in society for a very long time, but it's only recently in history that we're seeing substantial change, and even then it was mostly in certain areas of the world. There's no doubt areas in te world as backwards today as they were 2 millenia ago. Other places are playing catch up, but what they're catching up to is still in the race.

Honestly, while painting my desire to change the gaming industry as a societal matter makes it sound more glorious, I'm not looking to change society as a whole with changing videogames. It's generally why I don't bring up societal impacts in my points.
I'm not discounting the possibility that there may be changes in society when games get more egalitarian, but I'm not betting too heavily on it.

If I were to consider what benefit to society there might be, we might have a better unity between males, and females as they're more and more likely to work together over videogames, and learn to get along better. It -could- promote better teamwork in general. It might not be this generation that benefits, but consider the generations that grow up with inclusive media?
It's like dropping a pebble in a pond. It might not seem significant, but the ripples could spread to the edges of the pond.

Making it a societal matter, or not, I'd still say it's still an easier battle than fixing world wide views on sexism. I mean it's a pain doing it on a small scale like videogames. I mean it's still happening. This seemingly insignificant matter is still meeting resistance, and is still being talked about. Sure it's mking progress, but if even this tiny matter in the grand scale of things is taking this long, then I have to believe it's a measuring stick for how long larger issues will take.

For all the issues I take on, the difficulty would just be multiplied for every other facet added. The more on my plate the more expert I need to be in more areas, making the battle far more difficult. If I didn't become specialized in a certain field, I'd be poorly equipped vs someone who is. Kinda funny that people would argue against equality, but they do.
That isn't to say that I'm expert on even trying to straighten out videogames, and I've been at it a while on my own.

And I think my point stands, that so long as people have issues with female representation, this isn't going away. The only way I can see to fix the issue is via more variety among female representation, and playable women. Going the opposite direction will just make people more chatty about it. Taking steps away from the goal is basically taking steps away from stopping people from talking about this matter.
The only way I see to go is forward.
When this issue is solved, it'll be one less problem, and we can move on. This issue might not be the nail that sticks up the most, but once hammered, it'll be a nail we don't have to worry about, and we can focus more on nails sticking out more, perhaps with some better security/support as we do go after more important nails.

You don't build a house all at once. You don't move a dresser all at once as it's generally easier to take the drawers out. You certainly don't fight wars on 2 fronts.

And while this might be a small scale problem, who's to say some people aren't taking this on as a side mission while they try to fix larger problems?

Even with some people focused heavily on gaming's gender issues lets not forget there are others taking on larger issues.
 

decapode

New member
Jul 29, 2012
2
0
0
carnex said:
If we compare monetary compensation for the same jobs in the same positions males and female earn roughly (or as I have seen it put, within the margin of statistical error) the same. Adjusted for less work time clocked in by females on average they actually earn more.
The main problem when it comes to the wage gap in scientific feminist discourse is the glass ceiling. Wage gaps are vastly overdiscussed; the main problem is how responsibility of the home is divided and the "risks" involved in hiring female workers. I skipped the rest of your comment, as I think you oversimplify things, but felt that it was neccessary to clear this up. Also, no, women do not earn more. They earn as much, with some very small exceptions in "third world" countries.
 

carnex

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2008
828
0
21
@Rebel_Raven

You seem like a normal person taht represents other side of a debate on different grounds, so I have to ask you something

Would it be agreable for you, to drop the idea of censorship and limiting the freedom of artist and, instead of that path, go with greater numbers of female protagonists and male characetrs tailored exclusevly for female preferences?

@decapode

I didnt want to go there not to derail conversation even further. 93-98% male workplace death, unviling of female workers to commit to workplaces which can't provide real downtime etc.

As I sid, adjusted for time clocked in. Women are, as a group, actually absent from work significantly more, not counting maternity leave. Where I work it's about 10% difference. So my statement stands.
 

mecegirl

New member
May 19, 2013
737
0
0
carnex said:
Scott Rothman said:
Presenting males with unreasonable expectations is one thing. Turning women into objects is another. Are you actually offended by the portrayal of men in said romance novels? Or are you just presenting that so you can try to undermine women's displeasure with the portrayal in video games?

And the topic of romance novels isn't really relevant here. We're talking about sexism in video games, not sexism in media. Just because there might be something that could be deemed as offensive to males in other forms of media, doesn't suddenly make all criticisms of sexism in video games irrelevant or unfounded.
And Mr.Perfect, man reduced to exactly what woman wnats isn't objefication by that definition? I don't really see the difference. And, no. There are basically no specifically for female Mr.Perfects in video games, I agree. And I can only guess why that is and can't support it with evidence so i will keep my opinions for myself for the time being. Never the less, it shows that both genders enjoy distilled versions of gender they are attracted to. It's just that we are attracted to different things. As covered it here

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.826049-I-used-to-dislike-Anita-Sarkeesian-but?page=6#20053425

Scott Rothman said:
There is also not a history of oppression towards males as there is females. Males have been 'dominant' since the beginning of time, putting women into second class citizen positions. There isn't that history with men.
And that i covered here,

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/9.826049.20054644

from middle ages on. If you want to go before that, to the basis why it turned out so bitter towards women i said few things about that here.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/9.826049.20053261

I'm sorry if I seem hostile, but during long debates on whatever I develped this steamroller aproach and it's really bloody hard to avoid it now.

P.S.
"You are can't see that I'm right" is always a converation breaker. Try to explain how and why he is wrong in your opinion. Theese are all opinions backed (or not) by facts and researches.
Everything as a place. Everything. Romance novels don't get criticized for portraying men the way that they do because its the romance genre. It's a genre about "love" and sex, so it makes perfect sense that fantasies surrounding "love" and sex are front and center. There is also the fact that female protagonists are sexualized within the romance genre, and even on the covers. You are just as likely to find a romance novel cover that looks like this
as you are this.

Its called truth in advertizing...The books are basically about if the protagonist will get in/stay a relationship with their love interest. There may be some action thrown in to make it a swashbuckler(woo hoo smexy pirates) but over all the romantic elements are the writers first concern. The romance elements will make a larger percentage of that story than the actiony parts. No one expects the mystery genre to conform to the same "rules" as the fantasy genre...Otherwise what is the point of having multiple genres?

Meanwhile...for video games about action and adventuring (because there are video games about romance, you'd notice that the Japanese eroge genre isn't really brought up in these discussions)"love" and sex may be a part of the narrative but it is at most a secondary plot. Just to take a sterotypical action and adventury plot. Lets us say that the main point of the story is overthrowing the evil overlord...at what point does overt sexualization have anything to do with overthrowing evil overlords? Unless it's been previously explained that the "warrior chick" has some magical reason for wearing that chain mail bikini folks are gonna give the character the side eye.
 

carnex

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2008
828
0
21
@mecegirl

I already said this. We are different, we seek different things. I don't judge your tastes. My opinion is that you should take the same stance.

Women seek, even in casual men, romance. Men don't. It's as simple as that. Maybe we should stop to apply our mesuring sticks to others? Both of those images imply romance, not sex. Female preference. It's basically same to me.

It's not some evil scheme to dehumanize women. It's simply what is pleasing to males.

And again, if women, at my work, in large goverment company, I barely, or absolutely don't know are free to keep their barely covered breasts so close to my face that I have to turn head, why women object to them being drawn in same way?

P.S.

I don't play games for love seeking. But I do it for pleasure and unwiding. Casual female body is, for many men highly pleasurable sight. Even without any added toughts like lust.
 

Rutskarn

New member
Feb 20, 2010
243
0
0
Skops said:
*sigh*... With all due respect, I just don't care. And have never cared about this 'sexism' issue. How many bloody threads are we gunna have about this before we put this to bed? I'm not upset, I'm exhausted of this topic and I wonder when this community will have some ELSE to talk about.
I have to wonder at this sort of thing. It's like if a bunch of professional wrestling clubs sprung up on campus, where people would go to certain rooms at certain times and discuss professional wrestling, because that's something they care about.

And then someone walks into a room labeled "Professional Wrestling Club," sits down next to all the professional wrestling fans, and says, "Oh my GOD when are you going to talk about something else? I don't care about any of this shit."

You probably don't care about sexism in video games. If I had to guess, I'd say it's probably because it doesn't affect you. And yes, you are totally at liberty not to care about things that don't affect you. But if you see a thread labeled "HEY LET'S TALK ABOUT SEXISM AND VIDEO GAMES," and go into the thread just to say it shouldn't exist, then the people talking about sexism are not the people who should be moving on. You are.

This is a big forum, and believe it or not, a handful of the thousands of threads on it aren't about Sarkeesian. You should give one of those a try.
 

Aramis Night

New member
Mar 31, 2013
535
0
0
decapode said:
carnex said:
If we compare monetary compensation for the same jobs in the same positions males and female earn roughly (or as I have seen it put, within the margin of statistical error) the same. Adjusted for less work time clocked in by females on average they actually earn more.
The main problem when it comes to the wage gap in scientific feminist discourse is the glass ceiling. Wage gaps are vastly overdiscussed; the main problem is how responsibility of the home is divided and the "risks" involved in hiring female workers. I skipped the rest of your comment, as I think you oversimplify things, but felt that it was neccessary to clear this up. Also, no, women do not earn more. They earn as much, with some very small exceptions in "third world" countries.
Let's put this wage gap nonsense to bed around here in a hurry if we can. Tired of seeing that myth pop up. http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

Also if Time isn't credible enough for you, how about a report commissioned by the us dept. of labor: http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html
 

spartandude

New member
Nov 24, 2009
2,721
0
0
mecegirl said:
[

Everything as a place. Everything. Romance novels don't get criticized for portraying men the way that they do because its the romance genre. It's a genre about "love" and sex, so it makes perfect sense that fantasies surrounding "love" and sex are front and center. There is also the fact that female protagonists are sexualized within the romance genre, and even on the covers. You are just as likely to find a romance novel cover that looks like this
as you are this.
Man you think those are objectified?



I know ive just contributed nothing to the argument but it had to be done.