Jimquisition: Sexual Failing

[TekMoney]

When American women expect men to pay for everything the only way to start a relationship with them is to spend money on them.

Yup, that sure is "all American women"
It's like you got your world view from a bad 90's stand-up comic or something.

That's still the expectation as a rule though, dude. There aren't many women initiating contact and asking for a first date and paying for it.

No it's more like the stand up comedy rule. Maybe it's because me and my friends are in our twenties and broke. But the way I've done it, and the way people I know do it is it's more often the person who got their paycheck most recently pays for the date. Or they each pay for their own part. Because a date isn't about getting treated to stuff, it's about spending time with the person you're on the date with. I can't believe I actually have to explain this, but if you're doing it right, the woman wants to be on the date too. And you don't have to bribe her to have a meal with you.

 

[wulf3n]

Well, if you're saying it's an outlier, then PROVE IT.

What have I said is an outlier? All i've said is people shouldn't make claims one form of influence is worse than another without proof.

I've said that the numbers are statistically insignificant but that the numbers in the United States should be the closest.

For arguments sake let's expand on the numbers you provided.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/1tabledatadecoverviewpdf/table_1_crime_in_the_united_states_by_volume_and_rate_per_100000_inhabitants_1993-2012.xls

Shows that there were 1,214,462 reports of Violent Crime in 2012 in the USA.

http://www.pewglobal.org/2010/07/01/gender-equality/ & http://www.pewglobal.org/about/

Say 97% of Americans surveyed think Women should not have equal rights.
Looking at the number of people surveyed we see that 26,210 people were interviewed across 21 nations. Assuming every other nation besided america only surveyed 1 person (best case scenario for your argument) we can say that 26,190 Americans were surveyed.

Based on that we can confirm that 3% of 26,190 Americans surveyed believe Women should not have equal rights.

So all we can really say is that 785.7 Americans believe Women should not have equal rights. Compare that to 1,214,462 violent crimes.

I'd say the difference isn't insignificant.

A survey looking at gender beliefs conducted over a greater set of Americans could show different results, but this data does not.

 

[krazykidd]

Why exactly would i want to talk and spend time with someone i'm sexually attracted if i'm not going to get sex? I'm serious. I could find plenty of guys to talk to and hang out with if i wanted platonic friendship . If i talk to a woman and spend time with her ( and especially if i buy her shit ) i'm going to expect sex at some point .

I do agree that this friedzone stuff is bullshit. Sure not every woman will want to sleep with me and that's okay . Once she says she's not interested, i say goodbye and move on.

 

[CBanana]

snip

Someone needs to do some homework on representative sample statistics. Here you go in case you're interested:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error

 

[Blaster395]

It's quite obvious that bioware is trying to recreate the gradual progression (or escallation) that many relationships follow. However, it falls flat because it's simply a repeated sequence of doing the right thing.

How do you fix this with current hardware? Do we require the player to, at some point, do something blatantly assholeish? Do we shovel the idea? Do we force the player through it regardless of choice? Do we remove everything but the sex itself? Remove the sex but keep everything else?

I don't think its something that will be done in a tasteful way until we have sentient AI. Otherwise, it will ALWAYS be a case of pressing the right buttons and performing the right actions because that is inherently what video games are.

 

[Nurb]

When American women expect men to pay for everything the only way to start a relationship with them is to spend money on them.

Yup, that sure is "all American women"
It's like you got your world view from a bad 90's stand-up comic or something.

That's still the expectation as a rule though, dude. There aren't many women initiating contact and asking for a first date and paying for it.

No it's more like the stand up comedy rule. Maybe it's because me and my friends are in our twenties and broke. But the way I've done it, and the way people I know do it is it's more often the person who got their paycheck most recently pays for the date. Or they each pay for their own part. Because a date isn't about getting treated to stuff, it's about spending time with the person you're on the date with. I can't believe I actually have to explain this, but if you're doing it right, the woman wants to be on the date too. And you don't have to bribe her to have a meal with you.

You missed the point too, as in women actually approaching to initiate contact and ask for a first date. Exceptions don't make the majority disappear.

 

[wulf3n]

snip

Someone needs to do some homework on representative sample statistics. Here you go in case you're interested:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error

Enlighten me. What's the margin of error when the sample size is 0.0000083% of the population?

 

[TekMoney]

Why exactly would i want to talk and spend time with someone i'm sexually attracted if i'm not going to get sex? I'm serious. I could find plenty of guys to talk to and hang out with if i wanted platonic friendship . If i talk to a woman and spend time with her ( and especially if i buy her shit ) i'm going to expect sex at some point .

I do agree that this friedzone stuff is bullshit. Sure not every woman will want to sleep with me and that's okay . Once she says she's not interested, i say goodbye and move on.

"What? You mean my mom's not going to fuck me? Bye!"

That's a really healthy attitude you've got there. Only viewing half the population by their sexual value.

 

[Gunjester]

There comes a time in every man's life when he must be nit-picky with his heroes.

In short: Jim, you've done it again! Lay it on those delusional fucks that love and sex and so forth are either intertwined at all times or completely separate, depending on the relationship, and thus, yes, gifts and nice words should not equal sex.

But don't rope in Dragon Age entirely with this. Yes, when it comes to Anders, Fenris, Merril, Leliana, Alistair, and to some extent Zevran, this is true. However play either the Isabelle or Morrigan, and this is not the case. Both of these characters you can only have one sex scene with, both of these characters, the sex scene is halfway through the romance. Morrigan sleeps with purely out of curiousity, from her point of view, this isn't just "the guy who's nice to me" it's also "the guy who respects me despite our separation in cultures." True, this is still not that far off, but it is distinct, and other players will remember she refuses to sleep with you until it has something to do with the war itself. Furthermore, Isabella sleeps with, like, everyone. She does so recreationally, putting her on-par with players who treat it as the end-game, but like Morrigan, that's only if you choose to end it there. If you don't come on strong enough and keep trying at her in a romantic fashion, if you don't keep sticking up for her and protecting her, she'll start sleeping with Fenris instead for more fun. If you do, and you try and earn it, then you can win her over eventually. This may make it into a bit of a shallow romance, i.e. man eeps trying to win woman, but at least Hawke is now trying to wed her, not bed her, and that is at least a bit more mature and tasteful than a fuckfest.

 

[CBanana]

Enlighten me. What's the margin of error when the sample size is 0.0000083% of the population?

For the USA? +/- 0.61% 19 times out of 20.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

Uh, dude? Jim? Women talk about the 'friendzone' too. In fact, a quick search will reveal to you that some of them are not at all averse to writing blog posts and articles and webcomics asking everyone to remember that women get 'friendzoned' too. Whatever you read on Tumblr, a lot of the people who moan about that don't believe, or even suggest, that the people they want to get involved with are obligated to like them back in the same way; they just wish that a person they like romantically who only likes them as a friend would like them in the same way. There is a world of difference between 'I wish that person was sexually attracted to me' and 'that person is obligated to be sexually attracted to me.' It's basically a word people made up because 'unrequited love' sounded too pretentious. I think the people you were actually talking about are generally called Nice Guy (TM)s. Not all of those are men, either. I mean, I realize that sticking to facts kind of puts a damper on your whole 'I am alpha-nerd, hear me roar' routine, but you could at least be accurate to the people you're parroting. I get that the posturing and shouting and hyperbole is kind of your schtick, but lately you've let it get to the point of seriously undermining your arguments. I really think you'd benefit a lot from spacing out episodes on social issues more and giving yourself some time to seriously hit the books in preparation.

While I applaud you for calling out the awfulness of David Cage sex scenes, I would just like to point out the sheer unbelievability of the situation leading up to that scene in Heavy Rain is far worse than the awkwardness of the scene itself.

 

[sweetylnumb]

Anyone who defends the "friend zone" without irony is part of the problem.

If someone doesn't find you sexually attractive, and they do not want to fuck you, THATS IT, THATS ALL OF IT, for both genders,' and the fallacy of the freindzone is that it makes out that it is some failing on their part, that they are somehow to shallow or to greedy to accept how amazing you are. And its total bullshit.

And Yes, some girls are attracted exclusively to "bad boys" and ignore the good hearted and plain best boyfriends (which im pretty sure is where this shit started) but this is hardly universal, and if your motivation to be kind to someone is that they might someday magically want to get in your pants, its YOU that should feel ashamed, not them.

Go make moony eyes at someone else, its that simple.

 

[wulf3n]

Enlighten me. What's the margin of error when the sample size is 0.0000083% of the population?

For the USA? +/- 0.61% 19 times out of 20.

Assuming a random sample and a probability of 50%

 

[sumanoskae]

I agree with the argument, if not with all the examples.

It's true that from a mechanical perspective the romance in games like Dragon Age is pretty simplistic (Say or do the right thing and get friendly), but it isn't so simplistic from a narrative perspective.

Example: in Origins, a character who is initially very difficult to get close to is Sten. Sten doesn't respond well to the standard interview style of questioning, he only becomes annoyed if you pester him with inquiries about his past, and he despises false kindness even more.

One of the first opportunities to earn Sten's approval, however, lasts all of six lines of dialogue;

Player: Are you going to return to your own land?

Sten: No

P: Why not?

S: I cannot go home

P: Well, you can stay here if you want

S:... Thank you

+12 approval

See this? Your reward for performing the correct action is simple, but understanding the feelings and motivations of the character isn't so straightforward. Sten doesn't value your interest or your kind words, he values your actions. He responds not because you were nice in some trivial, scaring way, but because you offered him a home; although you barely know him, you allow him to travel with you without questioning his motives or his past, simply as an act of charity.

This is true of the other characters as well. Some of them do respond to compliments (As humans often do), but you get far more approval by earning their respect, and sometimes that means standing up to them or disagreeing with them.

Sex is also handled differently than Jim suggested; only one or two of the four potential romantic partners in the game is intimate with you at the highest point in your relationship. In fact, two of them don't view your sexual encounters as particularly important, and one of them may actually kill you at a point later in the game, regardless of whether or not you had sex with them. Getting that particular person to trust you enough to tell you the story of their past is far more difficult then sleeping with them.

One of the other characters is actually less likely to have sex with you if your relationship becomes deeper; they approach sex casually but turn away from intimacy.

In Dragon Age: Origins you are not simply rewarded with sex for being agreeable, you are rewarded for growing to understand the motivations and psychology of your party members with their trust. Of course, you can say whatever you want, so you can simply say what you think they want to hear (In other words, you can manipulate them and lie to them), and you can buy them gifts, but unless you've invested in the stupid Gift Day DLC (Which breaks the immersion of the game over it's knee with a sickeing crack), you can't earn their trust with gifts alone, especially since they all respond differently to different sort of gifts (Sten enjoys baked goods and paintings). But they don't turn a blind eye to your actions, and those are not so easily hidden; no matter how much beer you've bought somebody, they won't forgive you violating the ashes of their prophet (You know who you are).

The mechanics of Origins are simplistic, but the characters are not. What would be a simple guessing game is elevated by the complexity of the people playing it.

 

[Callate]

I actually thought the sex scene in Cage's Indigo Prophecy/Fahrenheit between the protagonist and his ex-girlfriend wasn't bad (at least the basic concept behind the scene wasn't bad; the QTE sex in the more explicit version was kind of embarrassing.) These people have a history, they're at an emotionally vulnerable moment, something occurs- that's not implausible. Nor, in the context of the game, inevitable.

Too bad everything else in Cage's games seems to be out of the basic cable movie handbook. There's been action, we've been through some intense moments, it's two-thirds to three-quarters of the way through the material- let's bone.

To that extent, though, I don't know how much of the relative immaturity of, say, Bioware's sex scenes/romantic subplots can be lain directly at the feet of the developers and how much has to be mollified by the fact that they're imitating tropes inherited from action movies and television. It only seems more puerile because rather than watching the male action hero have sex with the only female character significance at the two-thirds to three-quarters completion point, we're choosing, through our avatar, to have sex with one of a small harem of all peculiarly and equally willing sex partners at pretty much the same two-thirds to three-quarters "plot acceptable" point in the story. It's not really that different.

Which is not to say the original trope exactly presents a realistic and enlightened view of sexual relations.

What does pain me about Bioware's relationships in particular is that the dialogue that says "do you want to cozy up to this character" practically comes with neon signs and flashing lights attached, and applies to just about every significant character you spend significant amounts of time conversing with. I mean, heaven forefend that characters' feelings actually come up because, say, their feelings cause them to take an otherwise unwarranted risk to keep someone they care about safe... Or they discover through a third party that they have common interests... Or, hell, that they make a strictly physical connection with someone because it might be their last chance for any kind of intimacy before they put their lives on the line.

And, you know, maybe we're grown up enough that not every romantic overture has to be delivered towards the player? It might be kind of refreshing if Your SaveTheWorldness wasn't so magnetic that their comrades ignore all the other people around who supposedly have their own qualities that make them attractive options to the player. Wouldn't it actually be kind of great to have someone say, "Look, I got the living @#$% beaten out of me five times in the last battle because I was following your orders, but Garrus always had my back, so I'm hooking up with him?"