Jimquisition: Accepting the Isms

Recommended Videos

Sylocat

Sci-Fi & Shakespeare
Nov 13, 2007
2,122
0
0
And of course, people who haven't actually watched the video are simply taking the video description and matching it to a pattern they've trained themselves to hate, and posting lengthy rebuttals to points that aren't actually made in this video, thus making the video's point for it.

So thank you, all you moronic misogynist trolls, for proving Jim's point (and the point of anyone with a brain) for him.
 

JudgeGame

New member
Jan 2, 2013
437
0
0
Hagi said:
JudgeGame said:
The litmus test is:
1) Choose character.
2) Check for fanfiction of character.
Results:
1) There's fanfiction: sexualized.
2) There's no fanfiction: not sexualized.
3) There's queer fanfiction: sexualized but possibly with a queer target market in mind.
Rule 34.

So everything is sexualized?

I mean the logical conclusion of your test is that My Little Pony is full of heavily sexualized characters and also has a queer target market in mind.

I think your test might be wrong.
I don't think anybody has ever argued the ponies aren't sexualized. They are given giant eyes, exagerated eyelashes and quaint, feminine gestures.

In any case, you are supposed to apply a gradient as there is no such concept as a 0% sexualized character or a 100% sexualized character. Dante, has about 5 times more more fanfiction and H-pics made about him than Kratos (very rough). Thus, Dante is about 5 times more sexualized than Kratos.

There are outliers. For example, people with rare fetishes or pedophiles, who are attracted to things most people can't relate to in any way. In that sense, furries are similar, which does explain why MLP is more popular than could be predicted.

I said litmus test and I guess I meant rule of thumb.
 

mrhateful

True Gamer
Apr 8, 2010
428
0
0
Look everything we humans make is offensive to somebody, the reason why we don't care is because the fact that someone got offended is so trivial so meaningless that there is no reason for us to care. Its not because we are afraid, like the game industry will continue nothing going to stop that. But to get riled up about someone thinking it was offending medieval people used sex to bully a woman in a game, doesn't even show up on my radar of caring.

The reason why some people get upset and flame is because the OP implied we should care and that is pretty stupid and if there is one thing that can get people flaming is when you're being stupid.
 

MatsVS

Tea & Grief
Nov 9, 2009
423
0
0
Dexter111 said:
Other than that, you will excuse me if I think that Jim Sterling is yet again not really voicing his actual opinion on the matter, but jumping on the latest bandwagon to what people want to be hearing as his new reformed self.
At least based on past conversations he's had with actual people and his manner of expression I'd rather not repeat here myself: http://borderhouseblog.com/?p=4298
Yes, because clearly, when one reads up on a subject and educates himself, and then gradually comes to see the other side as correct, that is nothing but "jumping on the latest bandwagon". Really? I mean, REALLY? Are we all shackled to the juvenile nonsense we spewed when we were younger and dumber?

And it is strange, isn't it, how most the video game writers who are worth a damn seem to reach the same conclusion: that these debates are worth having, and the gut reaction of privileged white troglodytes to silence those who disagree with them is a shitty thing and should be condemned.

We all need to be better at realizing that our favourite games can still be flawed, and we need to be willing to have these discussions. If anything, we owe it to the games themselves, so that they can become better, for everyone.
 

JudgeGame

New member
Jan 2, 2013
437
0
0
mrhateful said:
Look everything we humans make is offensive to somebody, the reason why we don't care is because the fact that someone got offended is so trivial so meaningless that there is no reason for us to care. Its not because we are afraid, like the game industry will continue nothing going to stop that. But to get riled up about someone thinking it was offending medieval people used sex to bully a woman in a game, doesn't even show up on my radar of caring.

The reason why some people get upset and flame is because the OP implied we should care and that is pretty stupid and if there is one thing that can get people flaming is when you're being stupid.
Do you listen to your own advice, or does it not apply?
 

Hagi

New member
Apr 10, 2011
2,739
0
0
JudgeGame said:
I don't think anybody has ever argued the ponies aren't sexualized. They are given giant eyes, exagerated eyelashes and quaint, feminine gestures.
Wait? What?

That's your definition of sexualization?

Erm... okay... Sure...

I mean if simply having some female attributes is considered sexualization by you then I can understand where you're coming from. But sure, almost all female character, having female attributes, can most surely be considered sexualized by your definition whilst many male characters, having no female attributes, can not be considered sexualized by your definition.
 

Lieju

New member
Jan 4, 2009
3,042
0
0
TwiZtah said:
boo fucking hoo, someone gets offended. So what? people who get offended are weak human beings.
So, the next time some misinformed politician rambles on about how video-games makes kiddies violent, all the gamers who protest are weak human beings?
 

mrhateful

True Gamer
Apr 8, 2010
428
0
0
JudgeGame said:
mrhateful said:
Look everything we humans make is offensive to somebody, the reason why we don't care is because the fact that someone got offended is so trivial so meaningless that there is no reason for us to care. Its not because we are afraid, like the game industry will continue nothing going to stop that. But to get riled up about someone thinking it was offending medieval people used sex to bully a woman in a game, doesn't even show up on my radar of caring.

The reason why some people get upset and flame is because the OP implied we should care and that is pretty stupid and if there is one thing that can get people flaming is when you're being stupid.
Do you listen to your own advice, or does it not apply?
I didn't give any advice, I merely stated why things occur as they do.

Also I wanna add that not everything offensive is meaningless. For instance misinformation is always good cause to be offended whether its a game stating all homosexuals are dumb or a politician stating games cause people to become violent. Doesn't matter both equally bad, however a game with some content people dislike is not something I care about since it doesn't impact anyone.
 

Hagi

New member
Apr 10, 2011
2,739
0
0
MatsVS said:
Dexter111 said:
Other than that, you will excuse me if I think that Jim Sterling is yet again not really voicing his actual opinion on the matter, but jumping on the latest bandwagon to what people want to be hearing as his new reformed self.
At least based on past conversations he's had with actual people and his manner of expression I'd rather not repeat here myself: http://borderhouseblog.com/?p=4298
Yes, because clearly, when one reads up on a subject and educates himself, and then gradually comes to see the other side as correct, that is nothing but "jumping on the latest bandwagon". Really? I mean, REALLY? Are we all shackled to the juvenile nonsense we spewed when we were younger and dumber?

And it is strange, isn't it, how most the video game writers who are worth a damn seem to reach the same conclusion: that these debates are worth having, and the gut reaction of privileged white troglodytes to silence those who disagree with them is a shitty thing and should be condemned.

We all need to be better at realizing that our favourite games can still be flawed, and we need to be willing to have these discussions. If anything, we owe it to the games themselves, so that they can become better, for everyone.
So...

We should silence the 'privileged white troglodytes' instead since we disagree with them?

See, that's the problem with this video. It doesn't take the side of having these issues open to debate. It takes the side of having these issues open to debate but only for everyone who agrees that they're sexist/racist/homophobic.

If someone attempts to silence your point of view then the appropriate reaction is to ignore them, you have a right to your opinion that nobody can take away. The appropriate reaction is not to attempt to silence them in turn, they also have a right to their opinion that you can't take away.
 

JudgeGame

New member
Jan 2, 2013
437
0
0
Hagi said:
JudgeGame said:
I don't think anybody has ever argued the ponies aren't sexualized. They are given giant eyes, exagerated eyelashes and quaint, feminine gestures.
Wait? What?

That's your definition of sexualization?

Erm... okay... Sure...

I mean if simply having some female attributes is considered sexualization by you then I can understand where you're coming from. But sure, almost all female character, having female attributes, can most surely be considered sexualized by your definition whilst many male characters, having no female attributes, can not be considered sexualized by your definition.
Last time I checked, women didn't have giant eyes, their eyelashes are the same length as a man and they can choose to express themselves in a quaint, femenine manner. Oh, I forgot to mention the ponies have massive asses that jiggle like crazy. Most women don't have asses like that.
 

JudgeGame

New member
Jan 2, 2013
437
0
0
Hagi said:
MatsVS said:
Dexter111 said:
Other than that, you will excuse me if I think that Jim Sterling is yet again not really voicing his actual opinion on the matter, but jumping on the latest bandwagon to what people want to be hearing as his new reformed self.
At least based on past conversations he's had with actual people and his manner of expression I'd rather not repeat here myself: http://borderhouseblog.com/?p=4298
Yes, because clearly, when one reads up on a subject and educates himself, and then gradually comes to see the other side as correct, that is nothing but "jumping on the latest bandwagon". Really? I mean, REALLY? Are we all shackled to the juvenile nonsense we spewed when we were younger and dumber?

And it is strange, isn't it, how most the video game writers who are worth a damn seem to reach the same conclusion: that these debates are worth having, and the gut reaction of privileged white troglodytes to silence those who disagree with them is a shitty thing and should be condemned.

We all need to be better at realizing that our favourite games can still be flawed, and we need to be willing to have these discussions. If anything, we owe it to the games themselves, so that they can become better, for everyone.
So...

We should silence the 'privileged white troglodytes' instead since we disagree with them?

See, that's the problem with this video. It doesn't take the side of having these issues open to debate. It takes the side of having these issues open to debate but only for everyone who agrees that they're sexist/racist/homophobic.

If someone attempts to silence your point of view then the appropriate reaction is to ignore them, you have a right to your opinion that nobody can take away. The appropriate reaction is not to attempt to silence them in turn, they also have a right to their opinion that you can't take away.
I for one have no problem letting somebody talk as long as they are going to be civil about it, no matter how wrong their ideas may be. I know a lot of people who are willing to do this.
 

Hagi

New member
Apr 10, 2011
2,739
0
0
JudgeGame said:
Hagi said:
JudgeGame said:
I don't think anybody has ever argued the ponies aren't sexualized. They are given giant eyes, exagerated eyelashes and quaint, feminine gestures.
Wait? What?

That's your definition of sexualization?

Erm... okay... Sure...

I mean if simply having some female attributes is considered sexualization by you then I can understand where you're coming from. But sure, almost all female character, having female attributes, can most surely be considered sexualized by your definition whilst many male characters, having no female attributes, can not be considered sexualized by your definition.
Last time I checked, women didn't have giant eyes, their eyelashes are the same length as a man and they can choose to express themselves in a quaint, femenine manner. Oh, I forgot to mention the ponies have massive asses that jiggle like crazy. Most women don't have asses like that.
Last time I checked commercials for products to make a woman's eyes appear bigger and their lashes longer through careful application of make-up where pretty common.

As for pony asses I fear I haven't got the faintest clue, it's not something I find myself paying attention to. I'll take your word for it that they're apparently very big and very jiggly and thus highly sexualized.
 

Devin Barker

New member
Aug 10, 2012
168
0
0
i am somehow blissfully ignorent of the problems with earthworm jims creator... any one have a link to anything i can read up on?
 

Fiairflair

Polymath
Oct 16, 2012
94
0
11
wizzy555 said:
People don't seem to understand that not all stories are moral messages. Skyrim has a mission to abduct a priest into a cannibal cult and EAT him, this is not a "pro-cannibal" message. Like-wise the "slut-shaming" quest in skyrim is not "pro slut-shaming". Skyrim is a true RPG in that it gives you the option to be entirely unethical but lets you stop and do something else should you decide to.

Skyrim is a good example of one of the more gender equalised games on the market. The women (in the unmodded versions) are hardly sexualised and you find people of different genders in most professions.

BTW I'm not telling anyone to shut up, I'm disagreeing with you.
Certainly, RPGs should give gamers a diverse selection of roles to act out. But the "The Taste of Death" quest and the "Boethiah's Calling" quest are different to the "Mark of Dibella" quest (these are Skyrim, naturally) in that they present recognizably unrealistic scenarios. I'm not suggesting that the selection of 'bad' options in RPGs must be unrealistic. Rather, it is reasonable that people want to discuss the broader implications of the "Mark of Dibella" quest and not the others. Nobody is concerned that a game will popularize cannibalism or human sacrifice, but the condemnation of women for having sex is real and happens around the world. I agree with Jim that we should be open to discussing it.
 

JudgeGame

New member
Jan 2, 2013
437
0
0
Hagi said:
JudgeGame said:
Hagi said:
JudgeGame said:
I don't think anybody has ever argued the ponies aren't sexualized. They are given giant eyes, exagerated eyelashes and quaint, feminine gestures.
Wait? What?

That's your definition of sexualization?

Erm... okay... Sure...

I mean if simply having some female attributes is considered sexualization by you then I can understand where you're coming from. But sure, almost all female character, having female attributes, can most surely be considered sexualized by your definition whilst many male characters, having no female attributes, can not be considered sexualized by your definition.
Last time I checked, women didn't have giant eyes, their eyelashes are the same length as a man and they can choose to express themselves in a quaint, femenine manner. Oh, I forgot to mention the ponies have massive asses that jiggle like crazy. Most women don't have asses like that.
Last time I checked commercials for products to make a woman's eyes appear bigger and their lashes longer through careful application of make-up where pretty common.

As for pony asses I fear I haven't got the faintest clue, it's not something I find myself paying attention to. I'll take your word for it that they're apparently very big and very jiggly and thus highly sexualized.
Well duh, why did you think women put make-up on? To look less sexually attractive? I think there's been some comic misunderstanding here.
 

Hagi

New member
Apr 10, 2011
2,739
0
0
JudgeGame said:
Hagi said:
JudgeGame said:
Hagi said:
JudgeGame said:
I don't think anybody has ever argued the ponies aren't sexualized. They are given giant eyes, exagerated eyelashes and quaint, feminine gestures.
Wait? What?

That's your definition of sexualization?

Erm... okay... Sure...

I mean if simply having some female attributes is considered sexualization by you then I can understand where you're coming from. But sure, almost all female character, having female attributes, can most surely be considered sexualized by your definition whilst many male characters, having no female attributes, can not be considered sexualized by your definition.
Last time I checked, women didn't have giant eyes, their eyelashes are the same length as a man and they can choose to express themselves in a quaint, femenine manner. Oh, I forgot to mention the ponies have massive asses that jiggle like crazy. Most women don't have asses like that.
Last time I checked commercials for products to make a woman's eyes appear bigger and their lashes longer through careful application of make-up where pretty common.

As for pony asses I fear I haven't got the faintest clue, it's not something I find myself paying attention to. I'll take your word for it that they're apparently very big and very jiggly and thus highly sexualized.
Well duh, why did you think women put make-up on? To look less sexually attractive? I think there's been some comic misunderstanding here.
They put make-up on to look attractive. That does not automatically make it sexual.

Not everything considered feminine is sexual. That's your misunderstanding.
 

Deadagent

New member
Sep 14, 2011
62
0
0
JudgeGame said:
Last time I checked, women didn't have giant eyes, their eyelashes are the same length as a man and they can choose to express themselves in a quaint, femenine manner. Oh, I forgot to mention the ponies have massive asses that jiggle like crazy. Most women don't have asses like that.
Wow, just Wow. I tought I heard it all. Big eyes = sexualization. And jiggling asses, oh boy. To be fair I havent watched MLP much at all (seen random clips online, dont care for it personally) but I never noticed any jiggling asses.
 

wizzy555

New member
Oct 14, 2010
637
0
0
Fiairflair said:
wizzy555 said:
People don't seem to understand that not all stories are moral messages. Skyrim has a mission to abduct a priest into a cannibal cult and EAT him, this is not a "pro-cannibal" message. Like-wise the "slut-shaming" quest in skyrim is not "pro slut-shaming". Skyrim is a true RPG in that it gives you the option to be entirely unethical but lets you stop and do something else should you decide to.

Skyrim is a good example of one of the more gender equalised games on the market. The women (in the unmodded versions) are hardly sexualised and you find people of different genders in most professions.

BTW I'm not telling anyone to shut up, I'm disagreeing with you.
Certainly, RPGs should give gamers a diverse selection of roles to act out. But the "The Taste of Death" quest and the "Boethiah's Calling" quest are different to the "Mark of Dibella" quest (these are Skyrim, naturally) in that they present recognizably unrealistic scenarios. I'm not suggesting that the selection of 'bad' options in RPGs must be unrealistic. Rather, it is reasonable that people want to discuss the broader implications of the "Mark of Dibella" quest and not the others. Nobody is concerned that a game will popularize cannibalism or human sacrifice, but the condemnation of women for having sex is real and happens around the world. I agree with Jim that we should be open to discussing it.
Absolutely, we can say "skyrim contains a reference to slut-shaming, slut-shaming is blah blah". But that doesn't make the game "bad" or "sexist" or the designers misogynistic.

Actually people are concerned that video games promote violence, (a broader interpretation of human sacrifice).

I actually think my little pony raises issues of feudalism and institutionalised social inequality. But I don't yell at people about it.
 

the Dept of Science

New member
Nov 9, 2009
1,007
0
0
I agree overall apart from one point. In the video, Jim said that gamers lash out against these arguments because they "fear that games will be taken away from them". I think that people lash out against accusations of sexism/racism/whatever because its easier than having to admit that you might be a little bit sexist/racist/whatever.

Put it this way. We all like to think of ourselves as educated, rational and generally kind hearted people. We live in the 21st century, we all have a vague idea about what sexism is and that its wrong. We know that buses shouldn't be segregated and that women should be allowed to work and vote. However, just because we understand it intellectually, doesn't mean that it translates into our everyday actions.
Its quite rare that we actually step back and evaluate our everyday behaviours. Let's imagine you watch a movie and chat with your friends about it afterwards. You'll probably talk about the acting, the action scenes, the script. If its a movie with an explicit Big Idea, like the Matrix, you may even talk about that. However, unless you've just watched The Hours, how often do you leave the movie and discussed the portrayal of the female characters?

Each one of us probably commits a number of minor sexist/racist/ageist actions in our everyday lives without really calling them into question. If someone makes a joke about women getting back in the kitchen, they aren't going to stop and think "how does this joke reinforce negative stereotypes?". When someone points out that a movie or a game we enjoyed might be sexist or racist, then we have to face up to the uncomfortable truth that we may be sexist or racist.
This isn't a nice thing for anyone to admit, so instead a lot of people just attack the source. Whenever someone is told they said something inappropriate, its always "it's political correctness gone mad" or "oh, you can't take a joke" rather than "that was ill thought out and offensive, I'm sorry".
I doubt that very few of the people that attacked Sarkeesian would say "yes, I'm sexist, I believe in the subjugation of women".

We've all experienced similar phenomena, when people would rather criticise us when they are clearly in the wrong. People criticise you for working/studying hard because its easier than to admit they aren't working/studying hard enough. Or if you tell someone that you are on a diet, they are likely to say something along the lines of "all that fad diet stuff is mumbo jumbo and snake oil", because they don't want to face up to the fact that they eat badly.
 

JudgeGame

New member
Jan 2, 2013
437
0
0
Hagi said:
JudgeGame said:
Hagi said:
JudgeGame said:
Hagi said:
JudgeGame said:
I don't think anybody has ever argued the ponies aren't sexualized. They are given giant eyes, exagerated eyelashes and quaint, feminine gestures.
Wait? What?

That's your definition of sexualization?

Erm... okay... Sure...

I mean if simply having some female attributes is considered sexualization by you then I can understand where you're coming from. But sure, almost all female character, having female attributes, can most surely be considered sexualized by your definition whilst many male characters, having no female attributes, can not be considered sexualized by your definition.
Last time I checked, women didn't have giant eyes, their eyelashes are the same length as a man and they can choose to express themselves in a quaint, femenine manner. Oh, I forgot to mention the ponies have massive asses that jiggle like crazy. Most women don't have asses like that.
Last time I checked commercials for products to make a woman's eyes appear bigger and their lashes longer through careful application of make-up where pretty common.

As for pony asses I fear I haven't got the faintest clue, it's not something I find myself paying attention to. I'll take your word for it that they're apparently very big and very jiggly and thus highly sexualized.
Well duh, why did you think women put make-up on? To look less sexually attractive? I think there's been some comic misunderstanding here.
They put make-up on to look attractive. That does not automatically make it sexual.

Not everything considered feminine is sexual. That's your misunderstanding.
I have no idea what you define as attractive. This is highly amusing to me. I'm also curious about your sexual orientation if you don't mind me asking.