Jimquisition: Objectification And... Men?

[TAdamson]

Internet-"Hey! There is a problem"

Me- "What is it?"

Internet-"Women in games are over sexualized!!!"

Me-"Why is that a problem?"

Internet-"because some people don't like it"

Me-"Well I don't like tomatoes on my tacos"

Internet-"Derp,Derp'Derp"

Me-"Is it hurting people?"

Internet-"Well there is absolutely no evidence but we say it is... so yes it is hurting people."

Me-"Ohh, so what do you plan to do about your problem?

Internet-"Just another wave of over entitled bitching about someone's art form and how things have to change"

Me-"Really? I just don't buy tacos that have tomatoes on them, some people like tomatoes on their tacos so I don't think it has to change"

Internet-"Derp,Derp,Derp"


**Disclaimer**
This was a fictional dramatization of a typical conversation with the internet.

Is there a solution in this mire of sexism in video games that doesn't trample all over an artists creative design? Or is it nothing more than a whine about stuff people don't like. I hear thousands of people AGAINST sexism in video games and AGAINST over sexualized women and now even the idealization of men. Never once have I heard someone FOR a solution to this supposed problem, just whiners and the supposed moderates that say we should have discussions about it which is just a cowards way of supporting the whiners by giving credence to their argument.

There 3 things to take issue with here.

1st is the idea that anybody is really suggesting that the industry courting and service of heterosexual teenage male gamer fantasy "hurts anyone". It doesn't but when that is the only thing provided it excludes others, and that is worth complaining about.

2nd is the idea that complaining that a media is exclusively designed for the teenage male mind-set is somehow being entitled. Entitlement is a word that has been bandied around a lot recently to effectively belittle opinions without addressing them. In this case it effectively says that those of us that are repulsed by, vexed by, or even just plain bored by the current state of gaming are so entitled that we are not even entitled to express that opinion and that we should just shut up and play what we've been granted by the lords of the industry.

3rd is the idea that "artist design" isn't already being trampled over by the commercial demands of publishers and designers. When you have publishing houses actively denying designers female protagonists or Ken Levine refusing to put Elizabeth on the cover of her own game because it "won't sell as well" then isn't artistic freedom already compromised? Is it still "art" if the artist wanted to draw a sensible or interesting female character but gets told by a designer/publisher to put bigger tits on it?

 

[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).

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.

I respectfully disagree. Having a culture that glorifies and fetishizes violence is certainly problematic. I agree that making physically strong men the ideal is a problem. But there are two key differences:
1) Not all male characters fit this archetype, or to be more precise, there is a smaller percentage of female characters who are not sexually objectified than there are male characters who are not physically capable. Gordon Freeman is a scientist who has to save security guards. Even in terms of characters who don't use physical violence, such as wizards, there is a stark difference between male and female portrayals.
2) The more important point is that you say that often, weaker male characters need to be saved by stronger male characters. Thus, there are both types of male characters in games, even if one is often depicted as superior in some way. The problem is that there are no options for female characters. It's sexually objectified or the highway. That's why the problem is sexism. Women as a whole are depicted a certain way. If you have different types of male characters, but some are portrayed as the ideal, that is difference in kind from the sort of issue facing female characters.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

Oh female gamers like myself ARE trying to let developers know that we want certain things from our games. I'm a backer of various kickstarter projects and I provide input on what I would like to see. I talk to people like CliffyB and Rhianna Pratchett on twitter.

We have been receiving pushback from *some* guys though and when we complain about certain portrayals of women and say they outright offend us, some gamers are quick the defense of those portrayals sometimes to a very vicious extent.

 

[runic knight]

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.

This guy seems to understand my point of view well. Especially with the idea of looking to the source of where the games come from in the first place.

I would add 2 things though. First, how companies are lazy, but also aim for profit. This would be why they copy successful ideas and why tropes repeat themselves on and on. Secondly would be a rebuttal to an obvious comment that would be raised. If companies are lazy, gamers still reward them by buying the game, thus supporting the project. My rebuttal is every DRM practice out there and how it would be like claim that is the fault of the consumer as well, since buying games with it supports DRM. It doesn't, it is rather sludge people have to wade through in either case to enjoy the game, but till the decision of the companies themselves.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Theres some other issues that need to be addressed in this debate. Like the fact that Senran Kagura might never make it outside of Japan due to the west being prudish and crying sexist at anyything that has boobs.

Oh yeah, "the West" is so prudish and upset over boobs... much more so than Japan. Because, as all of us who have been to the country know, Japan is such a haven for sexual liberation and empowered women. There's certainly no sexual repression or misogyny in Japan.

WTF?

Also, who the hell is Senran Kagura?

 

[Lilani]

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.

At what point did Jim ask for the problem to be fixed by turning male characters into Fabio clones? He isn't asking for male characters to be brought down to where female characters are. It's just the opposite: he's asking for female characters to be given the same amount of agency, purpose, and character as male characters. He never said the fact that male characters tend to be more developed and complex is bad. He said the fact that female characters aren't given the same treatment is bad.

 

[Dastardly]

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

To your detractors, there is something I wish could be adequately conveyed:

Something doesn't get knocked off the "talk about" list simply because it got talked about. It gets knocked off the "talk about" list when it gets something DONE about it.

If you're hungry, and I have all of the food, and you tell me, "I'm hungry," and I give you no food... do I then get to say, "Oh, please, you've already covered that," the next time you say you're hungry? No, because it's still completely true because I did something between Jack and Shit about it.

Saying, "Oh, please. Dead Horse, dead horse," is counter-productive, especially if the discussion is specifically about finding out who murdered the damned horse. It's a non-commital vote for the status quo, cast by people two weak in their convictions to simply say, "I love things just as they are, because this reality reflects my personal value set."

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

You can list empowered females in games in a single post in an internet forum? You don't see that as a problem at all?

As for other women's issues? Just because your fence is broken doesn't mean you can't fix the hole in your roof.

Good job not really listening to anything I had to say at all though. I'm really glad I wrote that post...

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

Men aren't objectified though they are idealised as Jim pointed out.

This is as harmful as female objectification and it's just as insidious. It's probably the reason a lot of young men, I know a lot do on this site, have depression.

I never see any guys complain about it outside sexism threads though. If you want to see more normal guy heroes you (male gamers) should say. There's no shame in it.

 

[Sticky]

snip

We have been receiving pushback from *some* guys though and when we complain about certain portrayals of women and say they outright offend us, some gamers are quick the defense of those portrayals sometimes to a very vicious extent.

It's because they have every right to like those games and those portrayals. And they have every right to defend their point of view from people they deem are encroaching on it.

It doesn't mean you should stop or even not try to communicate and try to make the games industry more friendly to your tastes, absolutely not. But you have to always remember that you're not alone in the industry, that people of all genders from all walks of life enjoy all different kinds of games. And they deserve a say in this just as much as you do.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

SNIP

And yet you are trying to negate and distract from my problems by saying you have it worse.

Did I say anywhere that guys don't have problems? No.

All I said was that I think games developers could try to portray women better and I would like to see that. I didn't say that negates any and all complaints male gamers may have about the world around them did I?

 

[Izzyisme]

You can list empowered females in games in a single post in an internet forum? You don't see that as a problem at all?

Of course it's a problem, I don't get the feeling that he was saying it wasn't a problem. The issue is that the objectification of men is either ignored or the very idea ridiculed. There's a deep-rooted idea ingrained into our culture that men aren't worth protecting or fighting for. Imagine how well a homosexual main protagonist fighting to save his very male life-partner would go over? Hell, imagine a male character fighting to save his transwoman love interest. Aside from the publishers shooting down such an idea because focus-test groups allegedly said "ew das gay", you don't get the feeling that society looks down on men who can't help themselves?

If I understand you, you're saying that societal expectations of men having agency are just as problematic as societal expectations of women not having agency. I have to disagree with that, unless you think agency isn't an important value. Also, there are many cases in video games of men rescuing other men. Even physically strong men saving other physically strong men.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

It's because they have every right to like those games and those portrayals.

Sometimes they really are harmful and exclusionary though. Surely you can see that? Women aren't just their body. They are people. They can be attractive without that attractiveness being their only or central quality and being posed and animated solely for male titillation.

To women it's as jarring as seeing Marcus Fenix fighting in just his speedo giving it the wiggle waggle at the screen now and again and winking.

 

[Nicy]

Thank you for this video, Mr. Sterling.

 

[Sticky]

It's because they have every right to like those games and those portrayals.

Sometimes they really are harmful and exclusionary though.

Harmful to whom? Who are these mystical people who are harmed by video games?

If people are seeing things like Code of Princess (which btw, I find waaay worse than Dragon's Crown because they are at least attempting to wear clothes there) and being harmed psychologically by them, how is this not a sign of a much more urgent problem with that individual?