Jimquisition: Accepting the Isms
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
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.Fiairflair said:
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.
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.
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.
Agree so much with the end of the video about how you can talk about a part of a game being shitty without calling the entire game shit. Not just about the isms, but about ANYTHING. Point out that any game isn't perfect even though you really like it, and there's always a legion of fanboys waiting to pounce on you with the tired old bullshit "Go back to CoD" or the like. Example, I really like my PS3, but Sony and many aspects about the PS3 are far far FAR from perfect. Call out the things that should be improved though (for example, the new Playstation Store is an abomination, a complete downgrade from the previous store in every way. the store itself has its own patches like games do now, the load times are horrendous, and the store is organized so poorly that the specific games section is filled with avatars and going to the "new this week" section doesn't show you everything that came out this week just to name a couple of massive problems that piss me off every time I go on there), and all the Sony fanboys care to say is "get the fuck out here you 360 fanboy". Because, you know, anyone who points out anything wrong with the PS3 can only be an evil 360 lover out to make the PS3 look bad. I hate fanboys so much.
Then why did you come to a thread for a video that's saying it's okay to talk about when games do something wrong? In fact, you're not even discussing the video at all. You're just pointlessly derailing the thread, which is another thing the people of this forum do far too often.erttheking said:
I find it particularly sad when people take criticism at a game or a film as a personal criticism. Like, they completely identify with that thing and are prepared to proclaim "This is who I am."the Dept of Science said:
That's sad. You are a complete human being with millions of thoughts, emotions and opinions. You aren't a videogame. You are much more complex than that and as a developed mind you can identify things about you in a videogame and things not about you. Don't let the side down, please.
Attractive is aesthetically pleasing.JudgeGame said:
A waterfall can be attractive. An abstract statue can be attractive. A man can be attractive. A woman can be attractive.
Sexualized means, to me, arousing.
As I'm personally straight I've thus far only found women to be arousing.
The entire zombie genre dehumanizes people. Literally. It's horror, it's kind of the point. If you think all but a very few men actually get off on this then maybe you are the sick one.JudgeGame said:I have a hard time convincing myself this question even deserves an answer.
Intent is important.
Bravo. Then tell me, what is the intent of the large breasts?m19 said:The entire zombie genre dehumanizes people. Literally. It's horror, it's kind of the point. If you think all but a very few men actually get off on this then maybe you are the sick one.JudgeGame said:I have a hard time convincing myself this question even deserves an answer.
Intent is important.
I didn't know other developers had spoken and they were against this, glad to see this was the ramblings of one person. It is still pretty bad that he spoke for the game at one point.erttheking said:
From what can be seen in this trailer it does look more like sexual assault and she repels the attacker. But still, I have to ask is this the only way to make us care about the character? Since this version of Lara is not the ridiculous version of the past, with gravity defying boobs and playboy poses, couldn't they find other ways that we saw how difficult her journey is? Must it always be sexual?erttheking said:
I have to stand corrected and will stop using this as an example of sexism and exploitation, but I still think it looks like they could think of something better than just having her assaulted.
Well, if she's so competent, why was she captured? I guess we can only answer this after playing the game.erttheking said:
This really sheds some light on the subject, thanks. I'm really looking forward to this game, I'm just afraid they went too quickly to the T&A option in some parts of it.erttheking said:
(This assumes the majority of people silencing others are American or British)
This is a sociological issue. American and British culture, compared to other cultures is highly individualist. The "Free Market" and fighting among brands has created a culture based around competition and distrust of things that are different.
When someone has a problem, the people bred with individualism and brand loyalty instantly get defensive for 2 reasons, first, they didn't personally find X thing offensive, so selfishly they declare X is not offensive. Anyone who finds X offensive is a potential enemy and threat to X, so that's why they silence the competition.
The contrary point, finding everything upsetting and offensive is a creation of Hugboxes, mostly on the Internet and best exemplified by Tumblr SJ and Fandom culture. This pampers people into believing X thing is wrong if they didn't like it a 100% or when they interpret it wrong, and while rarely they want X censored or removed they should understand that they may be attacking is not as serious as it is or may even not exist at all. Case in point, people attacking ATLUS for P4's Naoto when it was revealed she was not a trans* character, and how dare ATLUS not make her trans*, well she never was intended to be that.
Strangely enough, most silencers on the Internet have both of these aspects.
This is known as being a narrow-minded prick fanboy.
This is a sociological issue. American and British culture, compared to other cultures is highly individualist. The "Free Market" and fighting among brands has created a culture based around competition and distrust of things that are different.
When someone has a problem, the people bred with individualism and brand loyalty instantly get defensive for 2 reasons, first, they didn't personally find X thing offensive, so selfishly they declare X is not offensive. Anyone who finds X offensive is a potential enemy and threat to X, so that's why they silence the competition.
The contrary point, finding everything upsetting and offensive is a creation of Hugboxes, mostly on the Internet and best exemplified by Tumblr SJ and Fandom culture. This pampers people into believing X thing is wrong if they didn't like it a 100% or when they interpret it wrong, and while rarely they want X censored or removed they should understand that they may be attacking is not as serious as it is or may even not exist at all. Case in point, people attacking ATLUS for P4's Naoto when it was revealed she was not a trans* character, and how dare ATLUS not make her trans*, well she never was intended to be that.
Strangely enough, most silencers on the Internet have both of these aspects.
This is known as being a narrow-minded prick fanboy.