Jimquisition: Objectification And... Men?

[marurder]

If you want to make a message be heard and be taken seriously. Don't shit on your audience. Smart ass is the fashion of internet videos? Trying to prove you are smarter than people doing the same thing elsewhere by just acting it? Insecure much?

Captcha - peter out < or the viewership will do this

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Thanks Jim. Something to link when people bring this tired and completely false argument up. I've actually had people tell me I should find Kratos sexy and if I don't I must be doing it wrong.

No one actually told you this.

Omg I didn't realise you have been with me ALL OF MY LIFE. holy shit.

Do you have cameras in my room?!?!

 

[YoungZer0]

Hm. A bit disappointed to be honest, I thought you would be much more open-minded about that topic. It didn't go as deep into the topic as I was hoping.

You acknowledge the fact that men are objectified too, yet - for whatever reason - you decide it's less important than female objectification.

May I ask why? When it comes to objectification you can't simply say "This is worse!". It's all about the feels.

I think the problem runs much deeper than sexualisation, which is mostly what you've addressed. Sexualisation isn't the only form of objectification. Objectification also applies to actions of characters, i.e. We only care about that person as long as the person serves a purpose.

I really don't understand why you keep using Kratos and the bro-dudes from Gears. You're not helping your case. They are not men as much as they are things. Kratos is a killing machine. He has no ideals. He loves to get sidetracked whenever there's more violence to gain. Remember GoW3, he had no real reason to chop Gaias hand off but that didn't stop him. He's as empty and shallow as those walking boobs and every little character he had in GoW1 is gone. He became a caricature of what he was.

Kratos and the bro-dudes are things. They are machines. They have to work or they won't have any worth.

I also find it curious that you completely left out male characters like Dante or any male character from Final Fantasy. I'm sure you know the term bi-shonen. Remember that Cowboy dude from FF8? What was he if not a female fantasy? He could be on the cover of some sex-romance novel right now and you couldn't tell the difference. There is a reason why women are much more likely to feel attracted to games like Devil May Cry and Final Fantasy 8 and it's not just the combat system.

I played DMC3 in front of a female friend and she started forming a creepy smile on her face when she saw Dante fight off hordes of enemies half-naked. She went animalistic when she saw the new Dante flying completely naked through his trailer. Did you forget about that? That's male sexualisation right-fucking-there!

Do you think your idea of Idolization applies to any of the protagonists from the GTA series? Because I don't think so.

You continue to show DoA Beach Volleyball, but we all know that this is a game for a specific target audience. And that's what it all boils down to: Target Audience. Let's be serious here, female gamers are still few. They are not the 47%, unless we start counting Facebook game users and we shouldn't. Because those wouldn't touch a game like Tomb Raider even if you payed them too and these are the only games we care about.

I'm not a fan of the DoA series, but I remember the female characters had personality and not just boobs. But that was not the goal of the spin-off. Yes, DoA BV was a spin-off, not an AAA-Title. If you want to make a bigger point, you need to use bigger and more examples. I think games like DoA BV are terrible. Embarrassing even. I don't play them and I might even skip Dragon's Crown because of the design. I simply do not like this kind of design.

And you know what? That's okay. I'm not the target audience. That's all that this is about. Women who want to play videogames already play them. I'm not even mad at Vanillaware for their objectification, because their MALE characters are just as objectified as the female characters. I won't play it, but it's their right. They should do what they want.

We shouldn't let the Anita's, who barely cared about Videogames 2 years ago hijack videogames with their ideology that everything should bend to their needs and wants, that their voice is the only one that needs hearing. Which seems to be something you contribute to, Jim, as you said at the end "It's a different problem and it's not equal."

Why not? If we want the change, then we should attack the subject on both ends and not leave one group behind. We already did that in real life and it shows in the high suicide rate among men/boys.

We need to push games for more than just female characters that look ugly or male characters that look like the wet-dream of a 14 year old Bieber Fan. Games need better writing. They need better goals. They need to stop giving a fuck about numbers and stop listening to marketing people. Seriously fuck those rim-jobbers. They are ruining the creativity of the industry.

We need to do things differently, ask new questions.

Why should Link save the princess? What if he refuses to do so? Is Zelda the object that needs to be saved, or is Link the object that constantly has to save her?

Maybe we should ask those questions.

Or maybe not. Maybe we should leave some games be the way they are. I hate Mario games. I think they are boring. I don't want to change them, because I'm not their target audience.

Oh and btw:

Instead of saying that publisher's claim that "Female main protagonists don't sell" is absurd, why don't we look at the reason of why they would believe that? What do the numbers look like? How much truth is behind that statement?

And what if some men enjoy playing as a man more? After all Gender seems to be important to the identity of a lot of people. So is it really bad? Is a man who rather plays Drake than Lara an asshat? Is a woman who rather plays Lara than Drake an asshat?

Why?

btw²:

Check out this website and guess the target audience of these novels:

www.romancenovelcovers.com

Let's hijack that shit.

 

[Gorrath]

Wanna be horribly depressed? Read all the, "I respectfully disagree" comments here. Then, go find a discussion about, "Tropes vs Women", and read all the angry comments. Then, realize that the arguments being made are extraordinarily similar. Sure, Jim is funnier, but something tells me that that isn't the reason for the lopsided outrage...

I can't say I'm familiar with the angry comments on the tropes vs women front, but what I am seeing mostly from this thread is some people disagreeing that males in games aren't objectified and the response to that disagreement bordering on ad hominem. I am not disagreeing with Jim out of outrage, and to suggest that I am is fallacious and dodging the point. Several individuals have tried to show where objectification of male characters is pretty blatant, and that idealism can be a form of objectification, and the largest part of the response to that has been to call into question the emotional state, the delusional state or the academic understanding of the poster. I am simply looking for answers and understanding, not claiming anything is or is not correct, and yet there seems to be this continued attempt to undermine persons disagreeing with Jim instead of their arguments. That's depressing enough for me.

 

[Scarecrow]

Well I took one look at the title and my reaction was "oh for f*** sake", watched it and like every "gender politics in games" jimquisition or anything on the internet my reaction was well founded. I am do sick of hearing about this "issue", I get it, I really do.

There comes a point where, if a child sticks his tongue in an electrical outlet enough times, we must ask if it's the child's fault he keeps involuntarily shitting his Teddy Ruxpin pajamas.

That...was...beautiful, Jim. Simply beautiful. ;w;

OT: I have being waiting for something like this. It might not do much to stop the arguments against it, and the same people will go on and on about wanting the debate over so they can crawl back into their safe forts of blankets and games, but at least something is going on, and hopefully the right people will do something. At least, I hope so.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

You acknowledge the fact that men are objectified too, yet - for whatever reason - you decide it's less important than female objectification.

No he didn't he said that males are 'idealised' which is probably why depression is increasing in young men.

So you think the standard of writing and visuals that games should aspire to is romance novels, usually just above fanfiction.

Oh goodie.

 

[Havoc Himself]

Jim, I understand that you feel for this issue and want to discuss it but god damn can we talk about something else for a bit? You have done four episodes on this subject. I understand you want things to change but at this point you are just kind of beating a dead horse.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

Spoiler: The gif has nothing to do with our chat. I just wanted to post it.

In video games, both are equally objectified in the sense male and female game characters are objects that do what we want for our entertainment and fantasies, whatever they may be because it's fictional escapism.

Women are pretty and nice to look at, and men are fodder for the player to wade through with any given weapon weilded by a perfect looking protagonist. Men are not evil for enjoying sexualized fictional characters, nor are we evil for enjoying laying waste to thousands of enemies that want to stop our character.

Now please, no more forced gender debates!

No one is evil for liking or hating these characters. The only bad thing about them is that they are used too much.

As for the "male, female, at the end of the day, we're just a bunch of dang avatars made of bits and polygons", while true, the problem is more with the art(how the characters look), and the story(how the characters act).

Things that are not always in control of the player.

Also, that is a cute cat(picture and your avatar).
You may like this user group: Catoholics anonymous. If you are in already, sorry, I didn't see your name when I looked at the members list.

That's the point of fantasy, though. Not all games do this depending on what they are of course, but in some, a busty, sexy female character or being a perfect looking guy that can do damn near anything is just nice to imagine. Games are ment to get away from reality.

Though there's also this false presumption that because men enjoy video games in a larger number than women, it must be because developers and gamers are actively trying to keep women out of the hobby, which just isn't true. We're talking demographics, and some things appeal to some people more than others for whatever reason. Just as there's not a huge number of guys into romance novels, and it's not that authors and fans want are trying to keep guys from young guys from reading them and why "But vampires don't sparkle!" falls on the deaf ears of fans and Twilight Moms. XD

and if you're on the internet you're suppost to like cats. It's a rule I think.

That last part is without a doubt true. On this we can agree.

Spoiler: The other stuff.

However, I think the false presumption is that not enough women like games/buy/play them to be thought of when making/marketing a game. Jim stated a few known facts that show some people (to many if you ask me) don't want to care about what women think of their game, or what they will think of it's characters. This is a mistake. They are not trying to keep them out, but they(some not all) are not trying that had to get them into gaming.

Even if it were true that women are less interested in games than men, to outright ignore about 51% of our population as a possible market is stupid. Few enough people can afford(in terms of money/time) to play games as it is. To ignore the opinions of such a large group is a bad business move. The whole point of marketing is to tell people your product exists, and then convince them to by it. Saying that women just aren't as interested in games would not only be wrong, but a bad/lazy business decision.

Women are interested in games, however, like many other things, the people producing/marketing them are stuck with the idea that they don't have to care. And as I said, even if women weren't interested, it is their job to find out why, and get them interested. As they should, with anyone who may not be into games.

All that said, I will repeat that the overused characters(idolized males/over sexualized females) simply existing are not bad or a problem, but rather that they are being used to much.

As you said, most games are suppose to be a fantasy, but not always the same fantasy(being a big strong guy with many sexy ladies around just to be sexy). Not every game is the same, nor should there be. At the end of the day, that's all it's about. The way to "fix" the "problem" is just to have a larger array of characters. Fantasies of all possible consumers should be under consideration. Not just the majorities(or rather what companies think the majorities want).

Heck, It's not just women who want change, there are many people who are being ignored in favor of what the "majority" wants. In fact, technically I'm a part of that "majority of gamers". I'm white, male, straight, and I have good internet. That said, I want things to change, because I am bored of just the same old same old. I don't want it all to go away, but something new, something not just "made for me" would be pretty nice.

 

[Chemical Alia]

From this moment forward, I will model all video game characters as 75-year-old female bodybuilders, just to ruin your fun. Even the male ones, and there's nothing you can do to stop me. I have convinced all other industry artists I know to do the same (way more than 15+). The plan has been set in motion. Watch out, I'm coming for your fun.

Go ahead. I know how to use modelling programmes, so I can easily make a mod to replace the default models and textures with more aesthetically appeasing ones.

And then I will make mods of your mods that turn them back into beefcake grannies and post them online for all my friends to see, thus furthering my agenda.

 

[plainlake]

I have noticed how women in games really lack flaws, in physiche obviously but in personality as well, or what would be considered flaws in real life like over-dependancy and submissiveness are portrayed as something that is almost good, because they can be considered feminine qualities.

 

[Abomination]

This whole thing isn't the fight of sexism in the industry, it's the fight of market forces.

Despite the claim that 50 of gamers are women, less than 50% of AAA gamers are women. The market is currently exploring the female demographic but there are inherent risks with dropping a AAA budget on something that isn't tried and true. There's also the issue of a game that might focus too much on having a female lead that it comes off as pretentious.

Then again, I haven't bought Gears of War, DoA Beach Volleyball, God of War, Beyonetta or any other game that has had this sexism controversy surrounding it - though I am looking at Dragons Crown because I loved the arcade Dungeons and Dragons games and I actually like the bombastic art-style... I think the worst 'offender' in my library is the recent Mars: War Logs where a female companion insists on wearing nothing more than shredded garments despite the protagonist insisting how impractical it is. Oh, she also wants to have sex with you... a lot. It's also a French game so maybe there's some culture I'm not picking up on.

Games are starting to have more developed female characters as the market is hesitantly dipping its toe into those uncommon waters. If female or feminist gamers show they are very interested in those games and vote with their wallets we'll see even more of them. They might also be good enough games that the "dudebro" crowd pick them up also, and we'll have a new market to exploit.

But at the moment, people complaining on the internet about female sexual objectification is not a pledge to buy a game. It is still a risky endeavor and under intense scrutiny.

 

[Gorrath]

I have noticed how women in games really lack flaws, in physiche obviously but in personality as well, or what would be considered flaws in real life like over-dependancy and submissiveness are portrayed as something that is almost good, because they can be considered feminine qualities.

I'm not so certain about that. Certainly female antagonists are very often flawed and usually in the same ways male antagonists are. Portraying submissiveness might offend some, though I'll be the first to caution anyone that automatically assumes submissiveness somehow makes a person inferior. Over-dependency might be used as a trait for any character who lacks agency, female or male. But even with those two out, other flaws often bubble up. Racism (speciesism) is a part of Ash from ME3 just as an example. I can cite more if you'd like but I'm mostly just wanting to throw out there that it does exist to some degree.

 

[acosn]

Objectification And... Men?

A common argument in the ongoing debate over gender and videogames is that women and men both are equally objectified. Is that really true?

Watch Video

When did Dragon's Crown become the face of objectified women?

I mean, over-sexualized / objectified women are as old as the video game industry (Custer's Revenge anyone?) but Dragon's Crown? Really? Do we really need to lob one of the few games that actually tries to do something with it's art direction in with the rest of them which are far more overt about what they intend to do?

 

[AyaReiko]

I'll just chime in here and point out the one BIG logical fallacy that, when you realize it, Jim's argument completely falls apart. And that is this:

Objectification is a reflection of desire, and, generally speaking, what men want and what women want are two very different things. By having men as portrayed in a way that puts Fabio to shame and thinking this will result in some form of equality is, at best, complete and utter bullshit.

 

[Mr F.]

I mean to say, Brienne in a computer game would come across as female and utterly, UTTERLY badass.

Considering Brienne herself pretty much tries to not be female as much as she's capable of doing so, I'm not sure that's the case.

Maybe I misread, but from what I remember of the story Bri pretty much would be a male character with a female skin if she were in a video game. It's what she'd try to be at the very least.

Well, yes, which is why she would be an awesome character.

A woman whos sole motivation is trying to be accepted for who she is, not trying to do something womanly. You know, an actually deep character. Would be good.

 

[Izzyisme]

I'll just chime in here and point out the one BIG logical fallacy that, when you realize it, Jim's argument completely falls apart. And that is this:

Objectification is a reflection of desire, and, generally speaking, what men want and what women want are two very different things. By having men as portrayed in a way that puts Fabio to shame and thinking this will result in some form of equality is, at best, complete and utter bullshit.

You are missing the point. Objectification is not just about desirability. It's about agency. While the male characters are usually heroic and in control, the female character are just objects to be oggled and acquired (with exceptions obviously).

 

[irishda]

I think a big problem is people are confusing objectification and idealization. The big difference is one is attached to something else. One is the object of another. Women are objectified to appear sexual to men, they're entire appearance is a subtle call to their purpose of being there to serve the wants of the male audience. Meanwhile, men like Kratos are idealized for the male audience, presenting a standard for the male audience to want to strive for. One is an attempt to elevate the gender by setting the standard, or by presenting an antithesis in the form of antagonists or characters having traits clearly marked undesirable by the narrative. Just because a male character is big and buff doesn't necessarily mean he's being objectified, it's also a form of idealization created by men, for men that a man should be big and buff and strong, yada yada. Meanwhile, the typical female video game character is created by men, for women, that present an "ideal" of being solely for the purpose of male sexual gratification (at least for the eyes of the audience, regardless of the female's actions in game). That's why it's objectification instead of the male idealization.

TL;DR: It's objectification for women because they're only there for the purposes of the men. It's idealization for men because they're presenting a standard men should live up to (for better or worse) that doesn't turn the character into the object of another.

 

[gamegod25]

We certainly still have a long way to go as a culture and industry. It's sad to see that the norm is still "lol ur gay har har" and women are just a pretty trophy or tool for the strong male lead. It's a shame that the metroid games went from "Samus is a kick ass merc who just happens to be a female, no biggie" to turning the strong female lead into a whiny bimbo obsessed with her baby. It's pathetic that both companies and focus groups are so afraid of even having anything but a strong man with his big powerful gun on the box cover.

It's not just a game (or gamer) problem...it's a problem with our society as a whole that needs to just grow up.

 

[Thistlehart]

Regretful snip

Huh.

This is an idea that I had not considered.

Very interesting. Thank you for posing this view.

Heh heh, "Your fantasies are horrible and you should feel bad for having them. Don't like that? Toughen up!"

Oh the martyrs this will spawn.

 

[Sticky]

Jim, every time you make one of these videos, you seem to miss the mark. Other posts have already tackled this, but there's more to objectification than sexual.

And you do no favors to the argument, yours or the argument feminists have as a whole, when you try to make up statistics or pretend that the same thing happened to a different group of people isn't as bad because it's a different group of people.

Jim, the reason people bring up the objectification of men is because the objectification of women isn't unique. It's not part of some evil patriarchal conspiracy to destroy womenkind. It's simply the result of lazy character development. It's just laziness, it's just developers working for less when they make their characters.

Why is this distinction important? Because you seem to make this argument that this problem would just disappear, or become a minority if only there were more enlightened developers or better female characters as a whole. But it's not, this problem is never going away, because it's not a problem with video game women or portrayals of women, it's a problem of shoddy characterization.

And that is always always always going to be around. This idea that a character only needs a motive (if that) and a few hastily made drawings to be manifested inside of a game is not going to just disappear one day. As more games are made, it's really only going to get worse, we're really only going to see worse and worse examples of characters.

And not framing it in the light of developers being lazy and instead trying to frame it in the light that it's a symptom of something wrong with the demographic as a whole really bothers me Jim, it's the ultimate act of victim blaming to say that the developers being lazy jackasses is somehow my fault and that I should feel ashamed that it's happening. I really can't put into words my disgust this past year of being told that everything wrong with the games industry is somehow my fault over and over again.

If this continues, I can easily see myself canceling my internet service and just playing Doom for the rest of my days. At least there I don't have to think about gender politics or social justice or how it's my fault when I'm just trying to enjoy my hobby. Feel free to call me a "dudebro" if you think that it will somehow help your argument.

Wanna be horribly depressed? Read all the, "I respectfully disagree" comments here. Then, go find a discussion about, "Tropes vs Women", and read all the angry comments. Then, realize that the arguments being made are extraordinarily similar. Sure, Jim is funnier, but something tells me that that isn't the reason for the lopsided outrage...

Congratulations, it wasn't the Dragon's Crown fiasco, the deal with Tropes vs Women, or even this video which made me register an account after all these years of lurking.

It was the sheer ignorance and disdain expressed in your very post that finally did it. You should feel accomplished, this is something not too many internet trolls have managed to do.

I'm actually pleased that you were here to flaunt around this little red herring. Like somehow because angry, fuming internet trolls in an Anita thread made the argument, that it somehow has no weight or isn't a very valid criticism.

Sound ridiculous? This is the argument you're pushing. When you say that somehow my argument isn't a valid argument because it's been brought up before by someone you deem to be a lesser person for holding an opposing viewpoint, you're displaying the true scope of how closed minded that you are.

I feel the entire thread is a little worse with you having shared that bit of insight to your personal beliefs, I certainly hope that you don't share these sentiments in real-life because posts like these are the reasons I hate discussing this, it's the reason I hate even thinking about it. And that's not what your posts should be doing if you want to convince the industry at large that there is a problem with how women are portrayed in games. You're not going to win any friends telling the other side that they're a bunch of jerks and then just thinking that this somehow vindicates your dumb, childish argument.