Poll: (Another) feminism discussion

[generals3]

*claps* Yay! You've almost got it! Now imagine that 90% of male protagonists looked like that. Suddenly you don't really have that much of a choice. If you want to play a variety of games, you're just going to have to put up with having Larry's tight buns in your face all the time.

Would you still consider this your problem? Would you throw your hands up and say "I'm just not the target market for 90% of games, so I should just stick to Farmville"? When a sizable chunk of the gaming population feels the same way, is it still just a lot of individual problems? At what point DOES is become a "general problem"?

No, just no. First of all you make the incredibly wrong assumption that you can't play a variety of games without sexualized women except for farmville.

A: I played WoW and play EVE, neither sexualize anyone
B: None of the RTS's i played had sexualization issues
C: Neither did any of the simulation games i played (the tycoons, sim cities, etc.)
D: I can't recall civilization being guilty of throwing semi naked women at my face
E: And let's not forget the myriad of smaller games available

This would only be an issue for me if i were to only like violent AAA shooters/action games. And yes that's something anyone who limits his preference to one very specific sub segment may face.
Secondly i have huge doubts about the "90% of all male protagonists" as i doubt 90% of all female protagonists are hyper sexualized.

When does it become a general problem? NEVER. Everyone has his or her own preferences, an industry not satisfying your needs is not some kind of social problem. If you feel it is: go start your own business and make games. If there are that many people feeling the same you'd make millions, why wouldn't you want to make millions?

 

[Lieju]

"Those breast aren't realistic" as you punch a hole through a mythical beast while eating an apple to heal an arrow through the head.*(in other words realism wasn't even in the equation to begin with).

You can critique the lack of realism in anatomy, though, even if the world has magical elements.
I keep spiders and other invertebrates, and biology is my hobby, so it bothers me when spiders or other animals are drawn or modeled wrong in stuff, for example.

When people complain about art, its just taste and preference.

You made yourself look "offended" by comparing video game breast to your own while saying that the art is dumb when all you had to do is say you did not like it and move on.

I said that I WOULD be offended if the suggestion was that Sorceress is what female breasts look or should look. Do you think that's what they were going for? (I don't.)

I guess I was being rude and hurting the feelings of people who like that stuff when I used the word 'dumb', but that's my reaction to it. (And I think just saying 'I don't like it' without clarifying why isn't much of a criticism.)

 

[Abomination]

We know shockingly little about how society interacts and what does and what doesn't influence how people think. So I think you are quite justified in taking the "null hypothesis" stance that there is no correlation between games and society. I find it likely that there is one, given that almost everyone in the younger generations is heavily exposed to games, but I am obviously no expert onthe matter.

I think you WILL be right eventually. Just at this moment in time Video Games aren't quite the trend-setters of culture... but they're getting there.

Wreck-It Ralph showed us that there are video game tropes that can be applied to cinema audiences. World of Warcraft made business moguls raise their eyebrow and how much money the video game industry can make. In another 10 years where I can still see myself engaging with this hobby and potentially encouraging any children I might have too? Oh yes, it's going to become a very powerful social construct, but I also imagine that gender equality will also have been more realized in those 10 years... provided those who wish to be more progressive don't try and shove it down others' throats.

Feminism is unfortunately building for itself a bit of a stigma....

 

[NoeL]

snip

... I just don't care. I'm not going to get combative with someone whom I have to spell out that "video game sexiness" would obviously only be the Taki's, the Lulu's, the Zero Suit Samus's etc. and not extend to every attractive female game character ever. You're clearly only looking for a fight, so you can look elsewhere.

No, just no. First of all you make the incredibly wrong assumption that you can't play a variety of games without sexualized women except for farmville.

A: I played WoW and play EVE, neither sexualize anyone
B: None of the RTS's i played had sexualization issues
C: Neither did any of the simulation games i played (the tycoons, sim cities, etc.)
D: I can't recall civilization being guilty of throwing semi naked women at my face
E: And let's not forget the myriad of smaller games available

This would only be an issue for me if i were to only like violent AAA shooters/action games. And yes that's something anyone who limits his preference to one very specific sub segment may face.

Secondly i have huge doubts about the "90% of all male protagonists" as i doubt 90% of all female protagonists are hyper sexualized.

It's called hyperbole.

When does it become a general problem? NEVER. Everyone has his or her own preferences, an industry not satisfying your needs is not some kind of social problem.

So how would you define a general/social problem if not a common perturbance?

If you feel it is: go start your own business and make games. If there are that many people feeling the same you'd make millions, why wouldn't you want to make millions?

I would want to make millions, which is why I'm undertaking a certificate 4 in small business operations with the goal of starting my own game studio. Bet you weren't expecting that! XD

 

[Vegosiux]

I just don't care. I'm not going to get combative with someone whom I have to spell out that "video game sexiness" would obviously only be the Taki's, the Lulu's, the Zero Suit Samus's etc. and not extend to every attractive female game character ever.

Well, if that's your opinion, fair enough. We'll just have to agree to disagree, since my opinion is obviously that any sexy character in a videogame is a case of "videogame sexiness". Because they're in a videogame, and they have sexiness; and "trashy skanky sexiness" isn't something videogames created. That stuff predates Shakespeare, so calling it "videogame sexiness" comes across as odd.

On that note, have a nice day; seeing as how I agree with you on the fact that "trashy skanky sexiness" is exasperatingly annoying.

 

[generals3]

No, just no. First of all you make the incredibly wrong assumption that you can't play a variety of games without sexualized women except for farmville.

A: I played WoW and play EVE, neither sexualize anyone
B: None of the RTS's i played had sexualization issues
C: Neither did any of the simulation games i played (the tycoons, sim cities, etc.)
D: I can't recall civilization being guilty of throwing semi naked women at my face
E: And let's not forget the myriad of smaller games available

This would only be an issue for me if i were to only like violent AAA shooters/action games. And yes that's something anyone who limits his preference to one very specific sub segment may face.

Secondly i have huge doubts about the "90% of all male protagonists" as i doubt 90% of all female protagonists are hyper sexualized.

It's called hyperbole.

When does it become a general problem? NEVER. Everyone has his or her own preferences, an industry not satisfying your needs is not some kind of social problem.

So how would you define a general/social problem if not a common perturbance?

If you feel it is: go start your own business and make games. If there are that many people feeling the same you'd make millions, why wouldn't you want to make millions?

I would want to make millions, which is why I'm undertaking a certificate 4 in small business operations with the goal of starting my own game studio. Bet you weren't expecting that! XD

I'll admit i wasn't expecting it but i'm pleasantly surprised. Finally someone doing something about it. Hopefully you'll make millions! (I'm being serious, the more gaming companies making millions the better)

And while I kind of expected it's a hyperbole the big issue is that even if the hyperbole was true it still wouldn't be a social issue, imagine what i'd think about if reality wasn't even as bad as the hyperbole...

And when is something a social issue? When something harms society or rights are being infringed. Thousands of women not being able to play video games they want because they don't exist is hardly a social issue. I wouldn't even call it a "1st world problem", it's at most a mild annoyance some people have to deal with. I wish i could afford a BMW, ain't gonna pretend it's a social issue though.

 

[NoeL]

I'll admit i wasn't expecting it but i'm pleasantly surprised. Finally someone doing something about it. Hopefully you'll make millions! (I'm being serious, the more gaming companies making millions the better)

Thanks.

And while I kind of expected it's a hyperbole the big issue is that even if the hyperbole was true it still wouldn't be a social issue, imagine what i'd think about if reality wasn't even as bad as the hyperbole...

And when is something a social issue? When something harms society or rights are being infringed. Thousands of women not being able to play video games they want because they don't exist is hardly a social issue. I wouldn't even call it a "1st world problem", it's at most a mild annoyance some people have to deal with. I wish i could afford a BMW, ain't gonna pretend it's a social issue though.

I see your point, but with all due respect this is getting completely away from the core issue, which is whether or not the games industry has an issue with sexism. Call it what you will, there's a not insignificant portion of gamers that take issue with the way women have generally been portrayed in the medium. That's a sexist issue by definition.

 

[Batou667]

Some of my hang-ups with Sarkeesian's arguments (and by extension, a lot of the objections made about "sexist" or "misogynistic" games).

1 - Nobody has demonstrated how sexy, sexualised, or even outright misogynistic content in games actually presents a real problem - i.e. a problem that can't be solved by simply turning off the monitor and ejecting the disc. If you have an objection to X and yet can't substantiate that beyond simply repeating "X is bad, I don't like X" over and over, then what you have is just an opinion. It's fine to have an opinion, but don't expect the world to change to pander to it, and don't get upset when not everyone shares your opinion.

2 - Even if a game did contain content that was objectively, provably misogynistic, lobbying against the game would be fruitless, because:

...2a) Games, like the rest of entertainment media, are self-justifying. They don't have to demonstrate a certain level of artistic merit or tick a certain number of "cultural importance" boxes before they're "allowed" to come into existence. Consider the fact that Freddy Got Fingered is a real film that actually got green-lighted and made, and the fact that on Xbox 360 you can buy an Indie game called Monkey Poo Flinger. Don't like it? Don't buy/play/watch it!

...2b) Media reflects society more often than it influences it. Violence in games is only a problem inasmuch that it reflects society's problems. "Sexist" content in games is only a bad thing within the context of real-life sexism.

3 - The eagerness to equate sexy with sexist and sexist with misogynist. This only makes sense if you're some kind of puritan or sex-negative. Plenty of female gamers like to play as attractive - even sexualised - female characters in an analogue to the pandering to male power fantasy that gives us all the Captain Bicep McBulgecrotch male player characters.

...3a) Nor does the fact that male players may (gasp!) enjoy sexy female characters make their inclusion an inherently negative thing. Unless, again, we're operating on the assumption that (male, hetero-) sexuality is an inherently negative thing too.

4 - What about teh wimminz? You know, the female fans who not only play games with un-PC depictions of women, but also like the characters, draw fanart of them, even cosplay as them (complete with revealing outfits). Are they being sexist too, and supporting patriarchy, and so on?

I used to be part of a Dead or Alive community back in the day (mis-spent youth, etc) and it was notable how many of the fans were female. I gather Mortal Kombat also has a strong female fanbase. Similarly, Gears of War has been criticised for it's females being variously sidelined, tokenistic, useful only when displaying macho characteristics (and so on, ad nauseum) and yet GoW has a much bigger female fanbase than, say, the much more safe and unsexy Halo games.

Basically, it's my observation that female gamers generally identify with even non-PC depictions of women in games, and prefer games where women are actively represented (even in a stumbling, clumsy kind of way) rather than games that have safe, sexless and inoffensive (and therefore arbitrary and shallow) depictions of women.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

I do not think it is possible to have sexism within fiction that has any meaning outside of the fiction itself. A game filled with sexism isn't a template on how to live your real life, it's a template for you to do some virtual things you wouldn't normally do in real life. Infact, under these circumstances i think it important to have MORE of this kind of thing, for both genders. Live out your fantasy in the virtual world and maybe you won't be such a twat in the real world

It isn't really an issue about how it affects people or whether it influences them. That something that is debated in and of itself, but it does feed into an already present, sexist culture.

Personally, I agree, I don't think media has such direct influencing affects on people. IT certainly won't make a person a criminal (GTA) or brutal murderer (hitman) but in those examples it does feed into a very pro-violent culture (we're in an era of revenge fantasies and vigilante justice fantasies... people crave blood but claim to do so in the interest of personal justice). You won't win anyone over but the most unhinged individuals by making your PC the most callous and cold blooded of maniacs... though it can be morbidly fascinating (Hot Line Miami) and you most certainly won't make them killers.

Likewise, you won't MAKE people bigots or sexists by including bigoted or sexist material. But it FEEDS the culture that is already there. This isn't kosher. We don't entertain the fantasies of rapists and paedophiles (outside of porn), why should we entertain the fantasies of of racists and sexists. (Unfortunately we do and frequently entertain the fantasies of callously violent individuals, but that is a separate issue)

Perhaps a little less extreme would be homophobia. Games rarely (in mainstream gaming) have notable anti-gay subtext and we most certainly don't condone games that reinforce anti-gay attitudes (a separate issue is gay representation in games, which ties into the way we have a predominately straight white male character roster across the entire medium). So why do we have such prevalence in racist and sexist attitudes in games? There is no coincidence that the gaming community has an obnoxious and offensive population and who are also extremely vocal WITHIN the communities of offending games (in forums and Live in games). This is their last bastion in the entertainment world, outside of the seedy underbelly of the internet, where they can indulge their fantasies... and it DOES affect people.

There is already a notable homophobic element in the gaming community, we don't feed it and rightly so. We also have a notable racist and sexist element, but we do feed it; and people want to defend it? If your reasoning is to be taken to it's logical conclusion, then games that degrade or demonise homosexuals should also be safe from scrutiny in mass media too, and we should let the perverse among us indulge in their fantasy from the same stores kids and socially well adjusted individuals use too. Since it's after all, just fantasy. It's a slippery slope fallacy and I'm sure most people would actively prevent it, but the point remains... who draws the line?


If homophobes, racists and sexists want to make games, power to them. What they do within the realms of fantasy is a-ok with me. Society does not like it and it will be received as well as a flaming bag of shit and will probably never see public release outside of the regressive dens of the net. So why do we (the gamer community) give the derogatory subtext present in games RIGHT NOW, ON YOUR HARDRIVE/CONSOLE, a free pass? Because it doesn't harm anyone? Or because it doesn't harm you?

My money is on the latter.

Captcha: Berlin Wall. Captcha is talking in metaphor now? That's disturbing.

A very well thought out reply, far better than my rather frivolous first post deserved.

I agree with quite a lot of what you say but i think internet anonimity is the root cause of most problems to do with communities, not the games people are playing and then voicing their mindless abuse about. I don't think people who spend all day calling people faggots while they are playing games with them think they are either gay or that gay people are actually bad...it's just a word to try and upset your opposition through. I go with the same opinion on racism. Racist words are generally used to upset someone for something they have done, not because of who they are.


You are correct that we do tolerate racist and sexist elements in games (find me a space war game that isn't easilly described as racist) but games companies target their audiences by gender and most young males want large breasted, petite and weak women to save or to mock. They want to be man-mountains of pure physical domination and not have to think...thats why male stereotypes are all square men with no brains and abusive one-liners.

When i look to other forms of entertainment i find all these racist, sexist and other '-ist' stereotypes built in. I've seen women raped, men raped, children murdered, black people oppressed, white people oppressed...i've seen it all. The problem isn't confined to games, it's the whole of society thats the problem. We are looking at the symptom of the problem as though it is the problem itself.

If we sort out our society then our fiction will follow suit...changing the fiction will ultimately do nothing but hide the problem. It's good we are discussing this but we need to spread the net far wider if we are going to reach a point where the problem is solved, rather than pushing it into a different format.

 

[CloudAtlas]

2 - Even if a game did contain content that was objectively, provably misogynistic, lobbying against the game would be fruitless, because:
(...)
...2b) Media reflects society more often than it influences it. Violence in games is only a problem inasmuch that it reflects society's problems. "Sexist" content in games is only a bad thing within the context of real-life sexism.

Yet you see more sexism in games than you see in, say, movies. The portrayal of female characters in many games would put even most action B-movies to shame. Can't explain that!

3 - The eagerness to equate sexy with sexist and sexist with misogynist. This only makes sense if you're some kind of puritan or sex-negative. Plenty of female gamers like to play as attractive - even sexualised - female characters in an analogue to the pandering to male power fantasy that gives us all the Captain Bicep McBulgecrotch male player characters.

Haven't seen a "gaming feminist" yet who equates sexy with sexist. That's nothing but a strawman.

4 - What about teh wimminz? You know, the female fans who not only play games with un-PC depictions of women, but also like the characters, draw fanart of them, even cosplay as them (complete with revealing outfits). Are they being sexist too, and supporting patriarchy, and so on?

Yes, women can be misogynistic too. Nothing new.

 

[Adeptus Aspartem]

Women always tell me games are pandering to me and then i always have to answer: If that's the case, they're doing it wrong.

I've never seen any of those meat-bags as a power fantasy - often quite the contrary. And titillation doesn't sell me a game either, if i want to fap there's enough porn out there to satisfy that need, no need to play a game because of this.

Also people are always saying: There are to little good written women in games.
I answer: So are men.

Seriously, most characters are either shallow, stereotypical or boring. Most of the time more than one of these characteristics fit.
Jensen was boring, Bastion was great the character not relevant, Dishonored guy was boring as fuck.. The only half-way decent characters were the ones which only served as a template like Shepard and could be played male or female.

 

[Batou667]

Yet you see more sexism in games than you see in, say, movies. The portrayal of female characters in many games would put even most action B-movies to shame. Can't explain that!

Really? Sure, game females are often shallower characters than a well-acted and characterised movie female (and of course you could say the same about males - it wasn't so long ago that videogames didn't have dedicated writers, the programmers decided on the story and characters, often as they went along). Depends what we mean by "sexist" (an absence of representation? Misrepresentation? Objectification?) and also what games we're comparing with which movies.

Haven't seen a "gaming feminist" yet who equates sexy with sexist. That's nothing but a strawman.

I don't think so. What about the recent Dragon's Crown furore? People were lining up to condemn the game based on nothing more than character designs and a preconception about how exploitative and misogynist they were. A year or so back we had the same knee-jerk reaction to Skullgirls, many of the frothing social justice warriors becoming suspiciously quiet when it became apparent that most of the design team on the game were female. We have our own svelte and loveable Jim Sterling who rolls out stock footage of Dead or Alive, an intentionally campy series that's built on fanservice, whenever he wants to make a point about videogame sexism. Strawman? He's a remarkably lifelike one.

Yes, women can be misogynistic too. Nothing new.

How can they be called misogynist if a) they're women themselves b) they don't hate other women and c) their actions are harming no one?

 

[generals3]

I see your point, but with all due respect this is getting completely away from the core issue, which is whether or not the games industry has an issue with sexism. Call it what you will, there's a not insignificant portion of gamers that take issue with the way women have generally been portrayed in the medium. That's a sexist issue by definition.

But is it really:

"1
: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women"

=> There is no prejudice. (unless one can prove me the devs think all women have big tits and don't like clothes)
=> There is no discrimination based on sex of actual people. Now one could argue there is discrimination based on sex towards the female characters. To which i say: Who-Gives-A-F*ck-About-Pixels?! I kill pixels on a daily basis, so really if we're gonna defend the pixel's rights we should start there!

If you ask me there is no sexism problem. Just people angry they don't get what they want and others bandwagonning to be PC or to be a White Knight.

 

[CloudAtlas]

I don't think so. What about the recent Dragon's Crown furore? People were lining up to condemn the game based on nothing more than character designs and a preconception about how exploitative and misogynist they were.

What about it... to be honest, I can't remember having read the words you're using that much. Aren't they usually just saying that almost all female characters, playable or not, in the game are very sexualized, and are often presented in very suggestive poses? And, yea, of course they don't regard those as positive things, but I've seen much fiercer debates.

Yes, women can be misogynistic too. Nothing new.

How can they be called misogynist if a) they're women themselves b) they don't hate other women and c) their actions are harming no one?

For statements or actions to be misogynous (or racist or homophobic), ill intent is not required. You'll find many women who have the same prejudices about their own gender as many men do.

 

[generals3]

I see your point, but with all due respect this is getting completely away from the core issue, which is whether or not the games industry has an issue with sexism. Call it what you will, there's a not insignificant portion of gamers that take issue with the way women have generally been portrayed in the medium. That's a sexist issue by definition.

But is it really:

"1
: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women"

=> There is no prejudice. (unless one can prove me the devs think all women have big tits and don't like clothes)
=> There is no discrimination based on sex of actual people. Now one could argue there is discrimination based on sex towards the female characters. To which i say: Who-Gives-A-F*ck-About-Pixels?! I kill pixels on a daily basis, so really if we're gonna defend the pixel's rights we should start there!

If you ask me there is no sexism problem. Just people angry they don't get what they want and others bandwagonning to be PC or to be a White Knight.

I think it's pretty amusing there's no link to your definition when there's clearly more to it, as shown by the fact you only showed entry 1.

I went for the one used by everyone? (well at least that's usually the definition used in social issue debates). Tell me what is your problem with games? How are games sexist according to you?

 

[Rebel_Raven]

I see your point, but with all due respect this is getting completely away from the core issue, which is whether or not the games industry has an issue with sexism. Call it what you will, there's a not insignificant portion of gamers that take issue with the way women have generally been portrayed in the medium. That's a sexist issue by definition.

But is it really:

"1
: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women"

=> There is no prejudice. (unless one can prove me the devs think all women have big tits and don't like clothes)
=> There is no discrimination based on sex of actual people. Now one could argue there is discrimination based on sex towards the female characters. To which i say: Who-Gives-A-F*ck-About-Pixels?! I kill pixels on a daily basis, so really if we're gonna defend the pixel's rights we should start there!

If you ask me there is no sexism problem. Just people angry they don't get what they want and others bandwagonning to be PC or to be a White Knight.

Not all devs need to fall under the definition for sexism to exist in the industry, but if some do, then there's sexism in the industry.
You can't pretend that there's zero sexism regarding the portrayal of women in the industry.
I've provided massive amounts of links where the female protagonist has been replaced by a male one. We've treateded that topic pretty well.

But you seem to be talking about the sexialuzation factor. It's really simple. Protagonists are usually designed for the target audience you say the games are aimed at. Men.
That means protagonists of either gender are made for men first, women second...if ever. The easiest way to get a guy's attention is generally a woman's T&A, looking attractive, and guns, especially regarding women.
Bad games are built on this idea like X-Blades.
Even playable games are built on this.

I'm hard pressed to think of a AAA where the female protagonist was actually designed to be ugly. Guys generally aren't restrained by looks at all.
Most female protagonsits are at least inoffensive to look at. In fact more than a few are actually based on models. Generally this is not for the benefit of women, mind you. While guys can be based on models, it's sure not for the benefit of women for the most part.

I'll end that bit of rant with this. The sexualization of characters is discriminatory towards women. Not only in the reliance on T&A, but in who the sexualization is aimed at. It's not universal across the industry, but pretending it's thre seems like a bad joke to me.

 

[generals3]

[
You went for half a definition. There's only a '1' there. Where's the 2 entry?

When you want to say something doesn't fit a definition, no honest person only provides a single entry when there are multiple. And the 1 means there's at least a 2.

Brilliant. So you just admitted you're cornered. I've correctly refuted the claims there was sexism based on the commonly used definition and instead of disproving me you are using cheap politician rhetoric which consists of dodging and trying to attack credibility. I couldn't have dreamed of a better "victory".

 

[ghostrider409895]

When I consider the idea that games might have sexist tendencies, I really do not consider the art style or character drawings as an issue. I know some games might blatantly have women as sex objects, but I think it isn't just the fact that they look like sex objects - it is that they are treated some times as just objects. The person that posted this thread mentioned that he did actually watch the videos of tropes vs women in games, and while I do not agree with all that she says, some of what she mentioned does ring as a valid point - mainly when women are used as no more than a plot device. I think that often when playing a game, or reading a story, I do see that a woman was taken away and that the goal is to either get her back or avenger her. I know essentially anyone can be taken away as with any possession, but often women are the default reason and motivation. I know that often I do care about the people who were taken, but it does seem kind of cheap when see all the repeated examples set side by side.

Also, women are not often made a main character. I know RPGs have that - and they should since it is a role playing game where you live on in that world - but most any games beyond that lack female protagonists. They are sometimes set into the background if at all. I cannot talk for women, so I don't know if it is fine playing as man for several games, but I know if it was reversed I would want to see a few more games with a male as the protagonist.

In my opinion we just need to have better character portrayal and work done to eliminate sexism if there are going to be women as part of the main plot. I don't think it is too hard. We just need to have more imagination than repeating the rather old and used "she was killed/kidnapped so go save/avenger her" story line.

 

[generals3]

Not all devs need to fall under the definition for sexism to exist in the industry, but if some do, then there's sexism in the industry.
You can't pretend that there's zero sexism regarding the portrayal of women in the industry.
I've provided massive amounts of links where the female protagonist has been replaced by a male one. We've treateded that topic pretty well.

But you seem to be talking about the sexialuzation factor. It's really simple. Protagonists are usually designed for the target audience you say the games are aimed at. Men.
That means protagonists of either gender are made for men first, women second...if ever. The easiest way to get a guy's attention is generally a woman's T&A, looking attractive, and guns, especially regarding women.
Bad games are built on this idea like X-Blades.
Even playable games are built on this.

I'm hard pressed to think of a AAA where the female protagonist was actually designed to be ugly. Guys generally aren't restrained by looks at all.
Most female protagonsits are at least inoffensive to look at. In fact more than a few are actually based on models. Generally this is not for the benefit of women, mind you. While guys can be based on models, it's sure not for the benefit of women for the most part.

I'll end that bit of rant with this. The sexualization of characters is discriminatory towards women. Not only in the reliance on T&A, but in who the sexualization is aimed at. It's not universal across the industry, but pretending it's thre seems like a bad joke to me.

Look Raven we two have been over this a lot together. I won't convince you what you call sexism is what i call free market in a capitalistic system and vice versa.

You say sexism, i say targeted marketing.

And male characters don't look bad either btw. They may not look "pwetty" but they look appealing for their audience. On that aspect both female and male characters are equal. Both are made to appear appealing towards the target market.

That your demographic happens not to spend enough to warrant targeting is not their fault, it's your demographic's fault. Marketing is about making money not losing it to please social justice crusaders.

 

[generals3]

Actually I'm pointing out that you have provided half the definition of a word and tried to proclaim you refuted something based on that. And now you're going around declaring victory because I asked you to provide the full definition. I'm pretty sure I don't need to use 'cheap politician rhetoric' to attack your credibility, you seem to have a distaste for having any.

It's not cheap rhetoric to ask you to provide the full definition instead of only part of it. And it would be so easy for you to provide the rest, provided you actually got that from a dictionary. So where's the rest?

And admitted I was cornered? You're the one evading. I pointed out at the start you provided at most half a definition and instead of just providing the rest you start diverting by asking me questions that have nothing to do with you providing the rest of it.

Again all but relevant. Let me tell you why i only put number 1.
A: it's the one everyone uses
B: Instead of going for good dictionaries like the oxford i took the lazy route this time and just clicked the first link and when i saw number 2 i was like "never saw that one" and never saw anyone use it that way.
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/sexism?q=sexism => Here on oxford only the one i presented is given there
C: I'm not the kind of guy who puts extra efforts in refuting something he doesn't have to. Why would i refute a definition never used? Just to make you happy? My point was to refute arguments made, not fictional ones.
D: Your attack was 100% pointless because you couldn't give me any other definition used in this context. You knew I correctly refuted everyone's claims because that's the definition everyone uses.
E: Now please ask me for number 2 again. (i know you're going to)