Is Street Fighter Sexist/Racist?

[Savagezion]

Is it a guilty pleasure? Probably, coming from a westerner. However, remember its a whole culture separate from ours. I ain't saying that is an excuse.

They don't need an excuse to be who they are. With as much as we hear how vastly important historical context is to the way characters are portrayed in media, why on Earth would we expect a country with a completely different historical context to be held to the same standards of character portrayal in media? Something like blackface has a huge negative historical context in the U.S. and is considered taboo (and rightly so) in media produced here. Japan has no such historical context on which to find the concept offensive. But if we were to see black characters in anime who look like a blackface stereotype, we judge those characters based on the historical context of our own society, which is nonsense.

I agree. However, some people would say that I may be making excuses for Capcom and/or the game industry. I added that in for insurance purposes.

Oddly, I don't think blackface is a big deal as a U.S. citizen. I am white, but I would like to know why. I never see why, I just see "it is". What if my nephew wants to be Diego for Halloween. Why is it so bad to tan his skin to a darker complexion. Why is it not cool for a black guy to go so far as to white-wash his face to impersonate Elvis? Why is it not cool for a white guy to black-face to impersonate Michael Jackson's Billy Jean? I am curious.

 

[chikusho]

Street fighter characters are based off of fighting styles from different parts of the world, with character design usually based on real practitioners or influenced by recognizable cultural expressions.

We have Sagat, a Muay Thai fighter who's possibly based on real life fighter Sagat Petchyindee.
There's Balrog (M.Bison), an american boxer based off of Mike Tyson.
Dhalsim seems to be partially based on the indian assassin from Master of the flying guillotine, etc.

Granted, Capcom has gone quite silly with their designs lately, and go more for creating unique characters than instantly recognizeable stereotypes. I don't think there's any malice behind their missteps, but with increased graphical fidelity there's less reason to resort to that kind of character building.

 

[Gorrath]

Is it a guilty pleasure? Probably, coming from a westerner. However, remember its a whole culture separate from ours. I ain't saying that is an excuse.

They don't need an excuse to be who they are. With as much as we hear how vastly important historical context is to the way characters are portrayed in media, why on Earth would we expect a country with a completely different historical context to be held to the same standards of character portrayal in media? Something like blackface has a huge negative historical context in the U.S. and is considered taboo (and rightly so) in media produced here. Japan has no such historical context on which to find the concept offensive. But if we were to see black characters in anime who look like a blackface stereotype, we judge those characters based on the historical context of our own society, which is nonsense.

I agree. However, some people would say that I may be making excuses for Capcom and/or the game industry. I added that in for insurance purposes.

Oddly, I don't think blackface is a big deal as a U.S. citizen. I am white, but I would like to know why. I never see why, I just see "it is". What if my nephew wants to be Diego for Halloween. Why is it so bad to tan his skin to a darker complexion. Why is it not cool for a black guy to go so far as to white-wash his face to impersonate Elvis? Why is it not cool for a white guy to black-face to impersonate Michael Jackson's Billy Jean? I am curious.

I did read your post that way, that you were defending yourself from possible criticism and I understand that. You wouldn't want to come off sounding like you're insensitive to race issues, and that is appreciable. I just called it out because I don't feel that you need to hedge your bet there. You were right in what you were saying and that little hedge seemed to undermine your own argument.

As for why blackface is bad, it is because of the historical context in which it was used. In the U.S. black actors were denied work, and instead, black characters were portrayed by white actors. Add to that the nature of the ridiculously negative stereotyping that often went along with the blackface, and you ended up with something extremely offensive. As for the examples you gave, I personally wouldn't find any of them offensive. If a child wants to dress up as a black character for Halloween, this should be encouraged if anything! Same with a black person wanting to be an Elvis impersonator. Though I imagine many in our culture might not see the difference, there is absolutely a massive distinction between a person choosing to dress up as a character they like, and a Hollywood production dressing a white person up to play a black stereotype. The former is a path to people sharing culture, the latter is steeped in horrible historical context. I know a lot of people wouldn't give it too much thought and probably conflate the two as being the same, even though they aren't even close.

 

[Diddy_Mao]

From a character design stand point I've usually praised the Street Fighter series.

The less time or opportunity a game has to flesh out a character the more it has to fall back on visual shorthand to tell the viewer what they need to know. For a game like Street Fighter where the entire purpose of the game is an international tournament, each character has to be visually representative of their nationality as well as their character concept and play style.

For example Balrog and Dudley are essentially the same concept in that they're both obviously boxers, but their manner of dress and their body language give away a lot about their respective nationalities, personalities and play style.

A more extreme example would be Zangief, Rainbow Mika and El Fuerte. They share almost no similarities in design but you can easily assume each of them is meant to be a professional wrestler, and once again their body language lets the player safely assume what kind of fighter they are choosing.


Trust me, I get that these designs can be cartoonishly over the top to the point of being offensive.
Characters like Thunderhawk, Nightwolf and Chief Thunder are the only representations I'm going to get of my own heritage in these types of games.

But I get it. Like I said there's a need to rely on costume and stereotype when trying to convey all of the information about a character strictly though their design.

 

[Savagezion]

Is it a guilty pleasure? Probably, coming from a westerner. However, remember its a whole culture separate from ours. I ain't saying that is an excuse.

They don't need an excuse to be who they are. With as much as we hear how vastly important historical context is to the way characters are portrayed in media, why on Earth would we expect a country with a completely different historical context to be held to the same standards of character portrayal in media? Something like blackface has a huge negative historical context in the U.S. and is considered taboo (and rightly so) in media produced here. Japan has no such historical context on which to find the concept offensive. But if we were to see black characters in anime who look like a blackface stereotype, we judge those characters based on the historical context of our own society, which is nonsense.

I agree. However, some people would say that I may be making excuses for Capcom and/or the game industry. I added that in for insurance purposes.

Oddly, I don't think blackface is a big deal as a U.S. citizen. I am white, but I would like to know why. I never see why, I just see "it is". What if my nephew wants to be Diego for Halloween. Why is it so bad to tan his skin to a darker complexion. Why is it not cool for a black guy to go so far as to white-wash his face to impersonate Elvis? Why is it not cool for a white guy to black-face to impersonate Michael Jackson's Billy Jean? I am curious.

I did read your post that way, that you were defending yourself from possible criticism and I understand that. You wouldn't want to come off sounding like you're insensitive to race issues, and that is appreciable. I just called it out because I don't feel that you need to hedge your bet there. You were right in what you were saying and that little hedge seemed to undermine your own argument.

As for why blackface is bad, it is because of the historical context in which it was used. In the U.S. black actors were denied work, and instead, black characters were portrayed by white actors instead. Add to that the nature of the ridiculously negative stereotyping that often went along with the blackface, and you ended up with something extremely offensive. As for the examples you gave, I personally wouldn't find any of them offensive. If a child wants to dress up as a black character for Halloween, this should be encouraged if anything! Same with a black person wanting to be an Elvis impersonator. Though I imagine many in our culture might not see the difference, there is absolutely a massive distinction between a person choosing to dress up as a character they like, and a Hollywood production dressing a white person up to play a black stereotype. The former is a path to people sharing culture, the latter is steeped in horrible historical context. I know a lot of people wouldn't give it too much thought and probably conflate the two as being the same, even though they aren't even close.

Thanks, and good looking out.

 

[Something Amyss]

I mean, as far as I know...he is THE original black guy in street fighter.

Birdie Predates Balrog, and so does the character Mike. Unless you consider Mike and Balrog (M. Bison originally) to be the same person, but as far as I know their only similarities are being black and boxers.

Which brings me to the other reason I quoted you and brought that up: Capcom are really uncreative.

The problem is, that doesn't make their game not racist and/or sexist, it just means it's because they're idiots. I doubt there's any malice involved, but it's still what it is.

My answer would be "no".

But this forum asks me to elaborate. So I'll explain.

First thing: I'm a woman and also a rampant feminist.
Second thing: I'm an English teacher and I graduated in Japanese language - I know foreign cultures and can tell racism.

Therefore I think I'm pretty qualified in my opinion.

Check out the dlc costumes, and you'll see lots of sexy and skimpy outfits... for the males!

Funny, I just did that. Most of the costumes I saw for the dudes added clothes, and none of them were what would reasonably be considered sexualised. This looks like the superhero argument rehashed.

The only gender difference is that some male characters are allowed to be fat or old or not so pretty, but no female characters are allowed to (with a couple notable exceptions).

That's....A pretty big difference and pretty telling in direct contradiction to what you claimed about them not being sexist.

It sounds to me like you're trying to rationalise away cognitive dissonance. Something to the effect of "I'm a feminist, but I like Street Fighter, so it can't be sexist."

As for the racist thing. It's not racist. It's playful stereotyping.

They said the same sort of thing about black face.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I never got the controversy behind Resident Evil 5. Africa + Zombies = African Zombies. You shoot them because they're undead, not because they're black. The only offensive thing I can think of is the portrayal of the Ndipaya tribe, and you might argue they're taking the Indiana Jones route of caricature (never heard a peep about the portrayal of Peruvian tribesmen in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, not even from my Peruvian buddies). There's a general concensus it's dumb and harmless.

Because there are only black people in africa right? I was actually talking aboutthis yesterday with a dude at work. I don't know how little people know about africa, but there are other ethnicities than black, black, and really black. Africa is a ( really big) continent. There are black people, white people, Middle eastern people, hell even asian people. But for some reason everyone think that Africa is full of poor black people. Also fuck that tribal stage.

I think a large percentage of enemies in the game are of white/arab ethnicity, though this is later dropped past the (incredibly stupid) tribal stage of the game. The three main bad guys are white though, and if you step back to look at the plot, it's about a white European pharmaceutical company exploiting and terrorizing Africa. Capcom is about as tactful as the iceberg that sunk the Titanic but I don't think there's ill will behind their game. Just poor taste.

I never got the controversy behind Resident Evil 5. Africa + Zombies = African Zombies. You shoot them because they're undead, not because they're black. The only offensive thing I can think of is the portrayal of the Ndipaya tribe, and you might argue they're taking the Indiana Jones route of caricature (never heard a peep about the portrayal of Peruvian tribesmen in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, not even from my Peruvian buddies). There's a general concensus it's dumb and harmless.

I agree, but to explain my feelings towards the subject, I suggest going back and seeing Yahtzee's view at the end of his review. It's pretty much word for word that.

And I agree, Capcom has an idiotic outlook on the subject. Like Roger Ebert pointed elsewhere, some thing go beyond ideology and are offensive on account of the subject matter alone.

The environments were kinda odd to me too. Like what region of Africa were they even in? They seemed to jump from region to region. Like there was the grasslands, then a swamp, then a volcano....like a volcano.

Last time I checked the people in the game speak Swahili, and the money is Naira, which is the Nigerian currency (yet Swahili is not their language). Clearly "Kijuju" is a pastiche of nonsense.

 

[feeqmatic]

Reading discussions about race on this board is always amusing. It is great to see some people black and white who understand the complexity of these issues, and then you have others... who are not so knowledgeable and it shows.

As ANOTHER BLACK MAN, ill throw in my 2 cents real quick.


The problem with RE5 was it's ridiculous portrayal of Africa, most significantly the trial stage. Although surely there are some African tribes still in existence, they are very very rarely still wearing Tiki masks and throwing spears. The depiction of Africa plays into classic stereotypes and misinformed views that Africa is some huge jungle full of backward people shouting OBONGA! It wasnt the worst thing I had seen but it was pretty bad. Also lets not forget Sheva whom you could dress up in a tribal loincloth. Also if you notice her face is like 3 shades lighter than the rest of her body. This was done on purpose to make her look more "charming" I cant remember where i read that quote from but i shouldnt have to explain why that is screwed up. Yahtzee said it best when he said she looked like a white woman dipped in tea.

As for the rest of the issue. I personally don't get too offended because I recognize this as a natural state of Japan. By American standards Japan is one of the most racially insensitive xenophobic countries in the world. Almost every game the have is riddled with racial/regional stereotypes. While American media has to a great extent stopped relying on such antics in the last 20 years, Japan has not changed.

My personal favorite fighting game Tekken also features a really fat American that can fight with a cheeseburger on his head, Bruce Lee, A Brazillian that you can dress like a slave, and Black American that you can dress like a gangster or pimp that has a secret move where he throws a basketball... And unlike Streetfighter, most of these tekken characters are less than 5 years old. It is a classic tactic where people use images that are easily associated with certain ideas, whether it is offensive or not.

 

[Gorrath]

They said the same sort of thing about black face.

Funny thing, that we've just been talking about that and how without the same historical context regarding race relations a character designed by a company with a different culture can't be judged on the same criteria. Black face, which has strong negative cultural implications for those in the west, particularly the U.S., does not have the same context in Japan. Judging Japanese media in a western cultural context can very much be folly.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I mean, as far as I know...he is THE original black guy in street fighter.

Birdie Predates Balrog, and so does the character Mike. Unless you consider Mike and Balrog (M. Bison originally) to be the same person, but as far as I know their only similarities are being black and boxers.

Which brings me to the other reason I quoted you and brought that up: Capcom are really uncreative.

The problem is, that doesn't make their game not racist and/or sexist, it just means it's because they're idiots. I doubt there's any malice involved, but it's still what it is.

ah I forgot about birdie, don't play the games much anymore so didn't think about him.

and yes, I generally put mike and balrog together considering the only reason they changed the names was fear of likeness rights coming from mike tyson due to the similarities.

(There are possibly more credible sources out there, but here: http://streetfighter.wikia.com/wiki/Balrog )

and yes they are idiots about it, and there certainly isn't any malice involved, but when EVERY character is a stereotype, I find it hard to argue about any of them really. (now sexist on the other hand, is a decent argument considering stats and exposure and whatnot. but I don't really have an opinion here or there on that.)

 

[Ragsnstitches]

I always got the impression that it was meant affectionately. Every country has affectionate stereotypes of their own and other countries. I mean, when us Brits describe Aussies as lazy beach bums who spend all day drinking beer and throwing more shrimp on the barbie, that's not meant to be insulting (in fact it's usually said with more than a hint of jealousy). I always got the impression that that was what Capcom was getting at, but I could be wrong.

I'm going to echo this part. I was thinking about whether I would call the stereotypes in SF racist and/or sexist. In truth all the characters, even the villains, are rendered affectionately if only superficially (not much depth to them to begin with). Given that it's a Japanese game made by primarily Japanese developers, and the japanese have vastly different sensibilities then the west when it comes to race and gender politics, I wouldn't say it's too far a stretch that some depictions are insensitive or ill conceived.

However, I can't say there is any malice behind them... at all. They all have endearing qualities. As shallow as their narratives can be there is an obvious effort to make all the characters likeable (mileage may vary). There is no attempt to single out one nationality or one race and make them look worse (or better) then the rest, at least in terms of aesthetics and gameplay. In terms of Narrative, Ryu and Ken are the poster boys and receive more attention for it, but even then they only occupy a small portion of the entire franchise.

I would be very hesitant to call the creators bigoted. Now, would I say there is no racism or sexism in the series at all? No, I can't say there isn't. While I see no malice behind it, I can't say they are totally inoffensive either. After all, I'm pretty sure when blackface* was a thing, there were folks who did it affectionately with no trace of hatred.

*Before anyone jumps at me for "false equivalence", I'm not equating one to the other. Just iterating a point. I'm suggesting that "racism and sexism" does not stem entirely from hatred and fear. Simple ignorance towards those you are making caricatures of, even affectionate ones, can have racist/sexist connotations.

People should learn that acknowledging something bad or potentially offensive does not mean damning the entire thing. Critical thought is meant to be used for precision. It's not meant to bludgeon the subject into oblivion.

 

[Something Amyss]

Funny thing, that we've just been talking about that and how without the same historical context regarding race relations a character designed by a company with a different culture can't be judged on the same criteria. Black face, which has strong negative cultural implications for those in the west, particularly the U.S., does not have the same context in Japan. Judging Japanese media in a western cultural context can very much be folly.

I was talking about blackface in America.

So yeah.

However, since you brought up blackface in Japan (which, ironically, I'd forgotten about), it does reflect a racist culture. Even if it's not meant negatively, it reflects their perception of black people and "black culture." Yeah, sorry, it doesn't make them not racist any more than it made America not racist simply because of cultural norms.

Trying to argue culture is a hard sell because it has the end effect of excusing everyone.

and yes they are idiots about it, and there certainly isn't any malice involved, but when EVERY character is a stereotype, I find it hard to argue about any of them really. (now sexist on the other hand, is a decent argument considering stats and exposure and whatnot. but I don't really have an opinion here or there on that.)

It's hard not to call the end result what it is, though. You can say they perform the same way towards everyone, but making everyone a racial stereotype doesn't make them not racial stereotypes.

I'll say this, though: I don't honestly care much. At the end of the day I didn't stop playing Street Fighter games because of racism, I stopped playing because I just didn't have the interest to keep up with people who were memorising every pixel/polygon, every microsecond of animation, every exploit available.

Allow me to offer a similar example: There's a lot of evidence pointing to Doctor Who headwriter Steven Moffat being a sexist bastard, much of it in his own words. I accept this, but I still watch and adore both Doctor Who and Sherlock, both Moffat's projects. But just because I'm still watching the shows doesn't make him or potentially them not sexist, it simply means I'm not going to particularly alter anything. Now, I might do otherwise if, say, Moffat was donating money to the "rape ugly birds" foundation or something (as the owner of Chick Fil-a and Orson Scott Card have drawn controversy for their financial applications), but otherwise, what difference does it really make?

To paraphrase the most evil, vile person to have ever lived--Anita Sarkesian--it is not only alright to enjoy bigoted media, but sometimes completely impossible to avoid. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be aware of it, however.

 

[Gorrath]

*Before anyone jumps at me for "false equivalence", I'm not equating one to the other. Just iterating a point. I'm suggesting that "racism and sexism" does not stem entirely from hatred and fear. Simple ignorance towards those you are making caricatures of, even affectionate ones, can have racist/sexist connotations.

And in the case of character portrayal in media, connotation is derived from culture. The differences in culture between the U.S. and Japan mean that the connotation of certain character traits may be offensive/racist/sexist in one and not the other. This is why I think it's not a good idea to lend too much weight to accusations of racism in regards to character portrayals produced in other cultures. The whole issue with black face actually illustrates that point perfectly.

People should learn that acknowledging something bad or potentially offensive does not mean damning the entire thing. Critical thought is meant to be used for precision. It's not meant to bludgeon the subject into oblivion.

Indeed, though the term potentially offensive might as well be a useless term. As far as media goes, anything and everything is potentially offensive. Acknowledging that a piece of media is potentially offensive might as well be automatic with acknowledging that said media exists. That's why I don't put much stock in people saying a thing is "offensive" or that they were "offended" by something, and doubly so when they are viewing a piece of media from a different culture through the lens of their own cultural taboos. Subjects like these are a great test of critical thought. That's why I relish them.

 

[RJ 17]

And fucking hell, right then and there I just figured out my sister is going to be a feminist...
Cammy's main attribute (besides me kicking ass with her character every time) is her as-athletic abilities. And also that booty don't lie!

I'd highly recommend not picking the Dead or Alive series as the next fighting game to play with your sister.

As for Streetfighter...eh, at least they're equal-opportunity idiots. Who's the guy from Brazil: Blanka, a rampaging savage beast-man. Who comes from Japan? A karate master (Ryu) and a sumo wrestler (Honda). It should be noted that since fighting games don't traditionally have the greatest actual "stories" for their backing (which is why I actually liked the remake of Mortal Kombat since it actually did attempt a story in a series where the story has been pretty loose at best). Since most fighting games contain little to no story telling, there's little to no chance for actual character developement.

As such, it's much easier to simply make a caricature rather than a character. Thus we get the cast from Street Fighter, and many other fighting games for that matter.

 

[Gorrath]

I was talking about blackface in America.

So yeah.

However, since you brought up blackface in Japan (which, ironically, I'd forgotten about), it does reflect a racist culture. Even if it's not meant negatively, it reflects their perception of black people and "black culture." Yeah, sorry, it doesn't make them not racist any more than it made America not racist simply because of cultural norms.

Trying to argue culture is a hard sell because it has the end effect of excusing everyone.

I'll need you to define what you mean by racism, as I don't think you and I are functioning on the same definition of it and that'll make talking about this issue very difficult. The problem with black face is based in its historical context, not simply in the act of one person dressing up as a different race. In the U.S., the historical context is not just one of bad stereotypes, but actual economic harm brought to black actors unable to find work and systemic racism in Hollywood with regards to movie production. Japan does not have that same historical context, and so judging black face done by Japanese people through the lens of U.S. culture and context is folly.

You say that even if it isn't negative, it reflects their perceptions of black people and "black culture". And my answer to that is, of course it does, but so what? Again, this depends on which definition of "racism" we are using here, but having a view of people that is in part informed by stereotypes is not what I would call racist. Also, arguing culture does not excuse everyone. The systemic oppression of minorities in Hollywood productions is not excused by culture. However, being that there is no similar historical context in Japan(that I know of, I am willing to be educated on this), the use of black face by the Japanese has a totally different connotation than it does for the U.S.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

and yes they are idiots about it, and there certainly isn't any malice involved, but when EVERY character is a stereotype, I find it hard to argue about any of them really. (now sexist on the other hand, is a decent argument considering stats and exposure and whatnot. but I don't really have an opinion here or there on that.)

It's hard not to call the end result what it is, though. You can say they perform the same way towards everyone, but making everyone a racial stereotype doesn't make them not racial stereotypes.

I'll say this, though: I don't honestly care much. At the end of the day I didn't stop playing Street Fighter games because of racism, I stopped playing because I just didn't have the interest to keep up with people who were memorising every pixel/polygon, every microsecond of animation, every exploit available.

Allow me to offer a similar example: There's a lot of evidence pointing to Doctor Who headwriter Steven Moffat being a sexist bastard, much of it in his own words. I accept this, but I still watch and adore both Doctor Who and Sherlock, both Moffat's projects. But just because I'm still watching the shows doesn't make him or potentially them not sexist, it simply means I'm not going to particularly alter anything. Now, I might do otherwise if, say, Moffat was donating money to the "rape ugly birds" foundation or something (as the owner of Chick Fil-a and Orson Scott Card have drawn controversy for their financial applications), but otherwise, what difference does it really make?

To paraphrase the most evil, vile person to have ever lived--Anita Sarkesian--it is not only alright to enjoy bigoted media, but sometimes completely impossible to avoid. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be aware of it, however.

true, and that is my opinion as well, I don't care much because it didn't deter me from enjoying the game (for the shallow amount of time I did as well) and I feel it's an all or nothing argument due to all of them being racially based stereotypes. (Also agree, I respect the skills it takes to play the game, but the insane strategies and cheesing your opponent every punishing second you get just irks me the wrong way.)

Hah my first thought went right to orson scott card as well, I greatly enjoyed enders game and enders shadow growing up, but that doesn't change my opinion that he is an absolute asshat.

you just....you just quoted anita?

Imminent nuclear thread in 3..2...1...