Jimquisition: Objectification And... Men?

[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.

 

[Voulan]

Finally, someone who understands the difference between objectification and idealization! Hopefully one day this will actually become a well-known thing, instead of someone like me being told to "get the f*** over it, men have this problem too, so shut the f*** up," or "not this topic again!" It's like they haven't considered that my problem or their problems might be different, or that if topics keep reoccurring its because they have yet to be solved or are still in debate.

And yes, someone has actually said that to me. I've also been told that I'm "over-sensitive" for not liking what they like.

The problem also is that this isn't exclusive to video games, but also permeates in every media, and even in daily society. One day, they'll look back on this day like we do the 1950s now, and wonder why we were so backwards.

 

[Gorrath]

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).

But, as has been argued, simply having agency does not preclude one from being objectified either. A tin soldier may have agency, but it is still an object. What's more, there are endless male characters in games that lack agency on a consistent basis. How often do we see the less physically capable male scientist who needs saving? Objectifying men who have brains instead of brawn happens constantly, and the argument in Jim's video is that male characters don't get objectified. Sexual objectification isn't the only form of objectification there is and 'nerds' are almost never given agency in games, are desirable to save/acquire by the protagonist, and are simply goals to be gathered in a mission more times than not. Based on that I think we can throw out this notion that male characters are not objectified.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

I have a problem with it *waves*

Because I'm a gamer and I have been for a long time. I want to experience the fun of the gameplay without having to sit in a stripclub to do it...I also want games where I feel empowered. I don't think that's so bad.

 

[Hakazaba]

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.

I concur you're excellency. /Thread

 

[Sticky]

snip

I have a problem with it *waves*

Because I'm a gamer and I have been for a long time. I want to experience the fun of the gameplay without having to sit in a stripclub to do it...I also want games where I feel empowered. I don't think that's so bad.

Then don't play those games, don't give them attention, don't give them money, don't chastise the people who do.

Just ignore them. Were you really going to buy Dragon's Crown, Code of Princess (I think that's the name? I don't actually know for sure?), or any of the material that you would deem sexist and offensive anyway? Because if you didn't, then you don't have much say into how they conduct their business or not. And that's okay, that's how consumerism should work.

I find it far more offensive as a whole that we're perfectly okay with a new CoD every year that glorifies the genocide of people who the game considers "foreigners". I voice this opinion by not playing the game.

Can I suggest some other games which may be empowering to you? Perhaps Serious Sam 3 if shooters are your thing? Or how about Alpha Protocol if you can look past a couple of flaws the game has? if RPGs are more your thing, I've never gone wrong recommending Baldur's Gate to someone.

 

[Gorrath]

snip

I have a problem with it *waves*

Because I'm a gamer and I have been for a long time. I want to experience the fun of the gameplay without having to sit in a stripclub to do it...I also want games where I feel empowered. I don't think that's so bad.

who is asking you to sit in a strip club?

Perhaps my brain operates differently from yours, but i can feel empowered regardless of my main character's gender.
Why does a single dis-empowered female automatically mean YOU are dis-empowered? if a game was release that featured a society in which all females were slaves, i would agree, that can't feel good to play. Are you incapable of not internalizing everything as indicative of yourself?

The problem with society is that in striving for perfect equality, gender differences are demonized, thus destroying any efforts at equality. some things are clearly designed for men, some things are clearly designed for women. an example as jim is so...oddly insistent on using is DOA beach volleyball. i don't find it appealing myself, but some men do. AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. no-one is telling you that you need to be like them.

While I agree with some of what you say, I must disagree on one point in particular. I don't think we should look at these things as designed for men or for women, but for people that like x and people that like y. For all I know, lots of women might LIKE a game where every woman is a slave and some men might find it creepy as hell or boring, or whatever. I only object here because I'd like people to think of things less as x is for men, y is for women and more, people can enjoy x regardless of gender and people can enjoy y regardless of gender.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

SNIP

I'd buy Dragon's Crown, mostly because I can tolerate the elf.

That's what this is mostly about, choice. GT5 ignores my gender so I'm going to buy Saints Row 4 instead. Yes I enjoy Baldur's Gate, I played it when it came out. Games existing where you can get away from certain portrayals of women is great. However, it does bother me when there are certain situations where I can't feel comfortable in a game. The Witcher was a good example. I loved the gameplay and the premise...they way it portrayed women? Made me feel ill. To me that seems unfair and exclusionary as that series seems pretty epic. Fighting games seem like a problem lately too. I used to play Tekken, Street Fighter and Soul Calibur but I don't anymore because I find it hard to see myself playing the female characters in those games. Lara Croft is one of the only female characters I identify with outside of gender swappable games. That's one character...out of all games since the early 1980's. :S

I have giant tits... I don't find the sorceress figure from Dragon's Crown offensive because of that. What I find offensive is how she is portrayed. As something to titillate men rather than a kickass spell caster who just happens to be curvaceous.

It's easy for you guys to say this isn't a such a big deal because you are the ones being catered to. You don't *see* the problem.

 

[ManInRed]

Society imposes certain expectations for men and women, which we feel we are judge for so we judge ourselves by these qualities. These are completely different things between men and women, but that doesn't mean everyone is not equally molded apart from the opposite gender. It's also important to remember that every one of us is part of the society we live in, no one is innocent of these expectation even if we do not agree with them or are the gender these unfair roles have been thrust upon.

There is nothing inherently wrong with any of the qualities society wants for either gender. A woman needs to beautiful, nurturing and kind. A man need to be strong, tough, and brave. These are all nice qualities in anyone, its the unbalance focus that puts unfair pressure on everyone.

It doesn't take much observation to see how many sources tell girls they need to look pretty, how many products exists to help them look better, or how much of the activities and even thoughts of women must be devoted on their physical self-image compared to men. However, just because this treatment is more exposed doesn't mean its more pervasive than the expectations men face. Men are down right stoic about it, and wouldn't complain even if they were shown unfairly, but cause that would show weakness. It's much quieter, but the amount of effort and practice boys spend learning to save face is remarkable. Ask yourself would you rather see a man you respect die or break down and cry?

The world is unfair, and we're all unfair to each other. It's easy to point out an industry seems to be genderly imbalance, but the truth is we make our own demons, these roles are as much a fault of our own gender as it is our opposite. Sure, the other gender probably isn't going to understand why you behave the way you do, especially when filling in the harsh role, but that's because they didn't grow up with the expectation and reminder from all their childhood friends and fictional programing every day of their life. We are difference and exploring those differences in art is something I think makes it more interesting. As for society, the more freedom anyone has the better off we all are. The less women need to feel they have to fit into some objectified sexual role, the better. Sure it won't make it more acceptable for men to wear dresses, but one step at a time, soon we will be a society of people who can be whatever they want to be.

The fact is the most offensive portrayals of women are in games with the shallowest characters in general, so it is kind of unfair they get judge for having hollow female characters, when I can usually point to a token race character or any other stereotype. And while I would like to dismiss these hack designers for games I've never played as proof of Sturgeon's Law, there is some truth that this bad art is still resonant of what the current state of our society is. These poor arts just aren't capable of crafting an illusion the hides what they see us as. So don't blame the industry, or its dumb fans, or any particular group, because this art came from all of us. Whatever poor depiction it displays reflects on what we are are lacking, because when have you had the courage to nurture anything more from the people around you than what society expected?

I am not much of a motivational speaking, but even if I only get through to one person who reads this post I ask you to be more than what the world thinks you can be. I know we never move past the expectations people have for us, but I expect more from you and you should too.

 

[Sticky]

It's easy for you guys to say this isn't a such a big deal because you are the ones being catered to. You don't *see* the problem.

Not once did I say this was not a big deal, or even that I didn't *see* the problem. Please do not attempt to sweep my argument under the rug with the pretense that I'm somehow numb to it because I'm the one who is being privileged.

I'm saying that *you already have the tools needed to tell the developer that you do not approve of the game*. You can use those tools by posting on the internet (which I am not against) or not buying the game.

The wrong approach that causes so much hate and confusion on internet forums is blaming the opposite gender or the people who have different opinions on the game, which is something both sides are equally guilty of doing every time one of these arguments come up.


Hate the product, not the consumer.