Sexuality in gaming, your stance?

[Izanagi009_v1legacy]

We have one female that looks more or less normal, one extremely muscular half-naked girl and one with over exaggerated tits and ass.
We have one dude that looks almost normal, one extremely muscular half-naked dude and one armored bishonen type guy with gigantic shoulders.

I'd say it's almost equaled out.

The Fighter isn't really "bishonen". His entire face and head is almost always covered, so he's in no way sexualised in-game. As for the Dwarf, as I said above, hypermasculinity is not the same as sexualisation.

The fact is, the only truly sexualised character (to a ludicrous degree) is female. That's not even counting the Amazon, whose natural stance has her shaking her bare ass at the camera, and whose bonus artwork looks like this [http://static2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130508225147/dragons-crown/images/thumb/0/00/Tokuten_p4_0510.png/269px-Tokuten_p4_0510.png]. It's not equalled out at all.

I think that's the only amazon picture i ever saw that gives her almost normal proportions.

If we count npcs and bonus artwork we also have to count fighter, who never has a helmet in artwork.

If you want to see sexualization you will see it everywhere. I'm sure someone out there has a fetish for overproportioned muscles, there is even an entire subgenre of yaoi manga called bara that is focused on muscular dudes. People have fetishes for everything, from tits and ass, to outfits, to different weights, even to animals and inanimate objects. But thinking that was the intent with either gender in Dragons Crown is reading a bit much into it.

Ultimately i guess we would have to ask the artist.

Bara is actually yaoi manga created and made for gay men, not for straight women (not saying you're wrong, but lets pay attention to who this is traditionally made for). Yaoi, however, is made for straight women and almost never has that same level of over-the-top muscles but instead thin, spindly young males and slightly larger/taller guys who really don't have the same level of muscle as say, the dwarf ALTHOUGH in yaoi it isn't uncommon for the 'male' of the sexual pairing to be large or much bigger to a level of 'bara'ness. (Example: Klaus from Maiden Rose)

I'd also like to note that on average serialized Yaoi often has emotional subplots, drama and sometimes even violence (Example: Loveless, Maiden Rose and Okane ga Nai (aka No Money)). Due to a lack of experience on the matter, I can't quite say much for Bara.

Just thought I would point that out.

I will admit it's odd that the country most gamers hammer on for having "sexualized and objectified" characters also has some of it's most sexy and cute characters in a few dramatic, comedic, or touching stories. Yume Miru Kusuri, Katawa Shoujo, and various other light novels and eroge have their females go through either rough stories or have stories that hit the player hard (if I bring up Key, I think you know what I mean).

Doesn't excuse Japan for it's more blatant fanservice but it does show that it is possible to have sexy/cute without objectified; just takes a lot of effort to actually pull it off.

 

[aozgolo]

Well first of all, at least one of those pictures is from Queen's Blade, an Ecchi Harem Fighter anime, not a game. Queen's Blade however I think well illustrates a valid point however. Nobody, and I mean nobody, who dislikes over the top fan-service style ecchi harem animes is going to watch Queen's Blade. It has a decent enough story, and the characters are actually well developed and likable, but the whole package has a presentation that screams fan-service, and it doesn't detract or break the story because it was designed to be that way right from the beginning.

I don't think there's an issue of sexuality in gaming being too overt, I think it's a problem of mindset. Psychologically speaking we live in an age where most first world societies treat sex as a far greater taboo than violence. It's become ridiculous to the point of people asserting sexism anytime you show a slight bit of cleavage. The thing is, sexualizing a character is not the equivalent of objectifying their gender. I genuinely like women, my best friends are women, I treat them all as equals with respect and courtesy, and yet strangely I enjoy the hell out of "giant boobs in your face" fan service in games and other media.

I get that some people think it's distracting, and that's fine, don't play it, don't watch it. I hate horror slasher films because I dislike gore or cheap jump-scares, so I don't watch them. We all have personal tastes and I have no issue with that, but I do take issue when people try to impose their personal tastes as a platform for reforming an entire medium based around their own sensibilities.

That level of thinking will only lead to the equivalent of The Hays Code for videogames.

 

[Icehearted]

We have one female that looks more or less normal, one extremely muscular half-naked girl and one with over exaggerated tits and ass.

We have one dude that looks almost normal, one extremely muscular half-naked dude and one armored bishonen type guy with gigantic shoulders.

I'd say it's almost equaled out.

But the only point I was making is that the amount of sexualized women is still two out of three. And that's not including the other NPC examples, including the ones you can grope.

Also, as has been mentioned before, the men aren't really sexualized. They're idealized, which is its own problem, but not this problem. I can elaborate later if you wish.

Part of the problem with Male vs female sexualization is that the genders do not perceive sexuality the same way, societally, psychologically, or physically. The idea that a man can be objectified like women is nonsense because our sex drives do not operate the same way, so the arguments made in cases of attempting to find a level area upon which both may be exemplified is futile.

Further I would argue that in many cases outside a vocal and for some reason humored minority our perception of sexuality and gender roles involved with it are largely accepted or even welcome. I have never known a woman to reject sexuality in a medium like video games, never known anyone that had felt threatened or as if an unrealistic standard was being imposed upon them by characters like Ivy Valentine or Lara Croft. On the contrary many of them seemed to find the characters sexy and cool as well (their words). I realize this is subjective, but in my experience outside of personal friends and relations the criticism is mostly from a small group of people rather than society at large, exceptions of course when it's crudely gratuitous and deliberately offensive, or sensationalized like that Fox news report that called Mass Effect a pornographic game.

Women are not attracted to men the way men are attracted to women, that's just how it is. Attempting to shame men into thinking differently about how they feel themselves is destructive and hypocritical.

 

[King Zeal]

Part of the problem with Male vs female sexualization is that the genders do not perceive sexuality the same way, societally, psychologically, or physically. The idea that a man can be objectified like women is nonsense because our sex drives do not operate the same way, so the arguments made in cases of attempting to find a level area upon which both may be exemplified is futile.

Further I would argue that in many cases outside a vocal and for some reason humored minority our perception of sexuality and gender roles involved with it are largely accepted or even welcome. I have never known a woman to reject sexuality in a medium like video games, never known anyone that had felt threatened or as if an unrealistic standard was being imposed upon them by characters like Ivy Valentine or Lara Croft. On the contrary many of them seemed to find the characters sexy and cool as well (their words). I realize this is subjective, but in my experience outside of personal friends and relations the criticism is mostly from a small group of people rather than society at large, exceptions of course when it's crudely gratuitous and deliberately offensive, or sensationalized like that Fox news report that called Mass Effect a pornographic game.

Women are not attracted to men the way men are attracted to women, that's just how it is. Attempting to shame men into thinking differently about how they feel themselves is destructive and hypocritical.

Men and women are not that different. And again, whether they are or not means nothing when it comes to gender roles. Hell, even accepting a gender binary in the first place is already a falsity. Most of what media uses as examples of "sexiness" today (high heels, short skirts, cleavage) are not universal across the human race. Many of those tropes didn't exist a few hundred years ago, and even something like big breasts has come, gone, and come back as an indication of sexiness. The Greeks, for example, thought big breasts were "meh". In short, regardless of what men and women are "wired" to think (and I have yet to come across conclusive evidence that it's significantly different so as to replace nurture with nature), the content we create in fiction has nothing to do with it.

Your anecdotal experience is not a good indication of society, either, although you seem to be aware of that. I can easily counter it by saying that, in my time studying, lecturing, and hearing about gender roles, I've met many women who have felt pressured by society and its notions of gender conformity. And frankly, I'd argue that if even one person doesn't want to conform to gender roles, society shouldn't force it upon them.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

Sexuality in games should evolve naturally. People should make the games they want to make.
Whether it's depictions of rape or sexy women.

I play all sorts of games and watch all sorts of anime.

 

[Qtastic]

Evolutionary psychology is problematic, though.

That's a vague response. How so? This is not to say the it isn't flawed in some ways (most of psychology is, as it is young), but dismissing the study with "evolutionary psychology is problematic" is...problematic .

And regardless, it has little to do with how media portrays women.

What are brains wired to do (or may be hardwired to do) has nothing to do the media's portrayal of women how? Who makes media? People. Who has brains wired to objectify women? People.

Even if it's "hardwired" into our brains, we aren't animals.

Oh we most certainly are. You cannot prevent hardwired reactions. Try not to smile when you are happy. People the world over have a universal, unbreakable reaction to smile when happy. We can certainly reteach ourselves many things, and consciousness makes us special, but retraining hardwired behavior is not promising work. Thankfully, this perspective on women might not be hardwired.

There's nothing forcing us to make jiggle physics or dress a female soldier in a bikini and nylons.

Isn't there? It depends on how you define "force." I don't think we have no other choice, but we do seem to be predisposed, or at least socialized to objectify women.

Men and women are not that different.

Agreed. Many if not most perceived differences in the sexes seems to be things internalized by individuals from society and upbringing. There is some speculation in evolutionary psychology that suggests that women are more naturally nurturing IN GENERAL and men are more competitive IN GENERAL, but yeah. Also, the aforementioned tendencies fall off with a more diverse gene pool vis-a-vis modern society.

 

[Icehearted]

Part of the problem with Male vs female sexualization is that the genders do not perceive sexuality the same way, societally, psychologically, or physically. The idea that a man can be objectified like women is nonsense because our sex drives do not operate the same way, so the arguments made in cases of attempting to find a level area upon which both may be exemplified is futile.

Further I would argue that in many cases outside a vocal and for some reason humored minority our perception of sexuality and gender roles involved with it are largely accepted or even welcome. I have never known a woman to reject sexuality in a medium like video games, never known anyone that had felt threatened or as if an unrealistic standard was being imposed upon them by characters like Ivy Valentine or Lara Croft. On the contrary many of them seemed to find the characters sexy and cool as well (their words). I realize this is subjective, but in my experience outside of personal friends and relations the criticism is mostly from a small group of people rather than society at large, exceptions of course when it's crudely gratuitous and deliberately offensive, or sensationalized like that Fox news report that called Mass Effect a pornographic game.

Women are not attracted to men the way men are attracted to women, that's just how it is. Attempting to shame men into thinking differently about how they feel themselves is destructive and hypocritical.

Men and women are not that different. And again, whether they are or not means nothing when it comes to gender roles. Hell, even accepting a gender binary in the first place is already a falsity. Most of what media uses as examples of "sexiness" today (high heels, short skirts, cleavage) are not universal across the human race. Many of those tropes didn't exist a few hundred years ago, and even something like big breasts has come, gone, and come back as an indication of sexiness. The Greeks, for example, thought big breasts were "meh". In short, regardless of what men and women are "wired" to think (and I have yet to come across conclusive evidence that it's significantly different so as to replace nurture with nature), the content we create in fiction has nothing to do with it.

Your anecdotal experience is not a good indication of society, either, although you seem to be aware of that. I can easily counter it by saying that, in my time studying, lecturing, and hearing about gender roles, I've met many women who have felt pressured by society and its notions of gender conformity. And frankly, I'd argue that if even one person doesn't want to conform to gender roles, society shouldn't force it upon them.

Hence my preemptive remark, an attempt on my part to simply avoid the usual "anecdotal" strawman reply these sorts of things often boil down to, marked in spicy red.

I know that we cannot hear all sides, that in any case there are exceptions and considerations, but that goes both ways. You seem aware of as much, your final remark demonstrates that, but again I would offer that due to this not being a majority issue outside of extremes the position that society does not view this as a serious detriment to either gender seems well indicated. Gay rights is a problem in need of fixing, and we're on it, same as civil rights and the right for women to vote and seek equal employment and educational opportunities, redundantly a matter of civil and gay rights as well. Video games are, on the other hand, no where near the issue, again, with exceptions from a radical portion of our communities. By extremes I mean people like Anita Sarkeesian and her supporters that, rather than addressing issues honestly or constructively, often choose misrepresentation and counterproductive exploitation to engender misguided support from people that typically don't appear to have the facts. I could point out that this in itself is a matter of foisting a personal agenda/principles upon other people, rather than being at all about equality or mutual respect of preferences and individuality, but this already feels circular, and again you seem to already understand this anyway.

Technically I'm not arguing or even disagreeing with you, though I do not exactly agree with you either.

 

[Shadowstar38]

You used the example, not me. Your intention was to apparently show that it was giving critics what they wanted. I was just letting you know where you were wrong, and the poster above added more context.

It shows inclusiveness. People who want normal character designs and sexualized ones both got something.

 

[Trivun]

My game idea, that I probably won't be making if I can't find like-minded people with the skills I lack (art and programming mainly), has a female main character whose default outfit she wears in the first episode of the game is a pair of walking boots, jeans, and a t-shirt. She happens to be camping on a Scottish island, although it is July. In the second episode, when she's in her normal home town, she wears black shoes, stockings and a skirt and an oversized jumper. In both instances the character wears clothes that would suit the scenario, and are sensible and normal, yet at no point is she ever not considered to be attractive. She spends part of the game searching for her missing ex-boyfriend along with her other best friends, and a lesbian friend of hers is attracted to her throughout, and it's clear to the player she is meant to be an attractive young woman.

Yet at no point is my character overly sexualised or seen as anything but a strong, independent, and above all else, normal, person.

This is what I want to see more characters be like. You know who my favourite female character in video games is, of all time? April Ryan, of The Longest Journey. She's attractive but never sexualised, and although it's clear there are at least two male characters in the game who fancy her she's never treated as a sex object, but rather as, again, a strong and independent person in her own right. And there's a reason why characters like ALyx Vance, Heather Mason, Zoey (L4D) or Jade (Beyond Good and Evil) keep beating out characters like Lara Croft (pre-reboot), Cammy, Bayonetta and Chun-Li (equally famous, bearing in mind) in terms of who gamers see as strong and well-written/well-presented female characters. After all, women aren't sex objects in real life, why make them sex objects in video games, when we're trying to move towards a more mature and well-respected industry? If I want to see a video of sexy women I'll search for porn on Google, thanks. And on that note... xD (j/k)

 

[King Zeal]

Evolutionary psychology is problematic, though.

That's a vague response. How so? This is not to say the it isn't flawed in some ways (most of psychology is, as it is young), but dismissing the study with "evolutionary psychology is problematic" is...problematic .

Well, for one, there's the question of whether or not the data is prescriptive or descriptive. Most studies I've researched regarding sexuality, sexual preference, and titillation have indicated that a lot of what people consider to be "inherent" to both genders merely describes current trends, but it can't reliably pre--scribe what a gender will desire. In other words, nurture almost always beats out nature. At least when it comes to what people find attractive.

What are brains wired to do (or may be hardwired to do) has nothing to do the media's portrayal of women how? Who makes media? People. Who has brains wired to objectify women? People.

Media is, more accurately, made by a culture. A person is influenced by their individual experiences to create based on values their culture has taught them. For example, if I decide to have my heroine in fishnet stockings and high heels, I didn't formulate the idea that this was sexy on my own--society has already decided it is, and I'm just following along. If "sexy" were an aggregate, objective fact between genders, then people of completely different cultures would agree on what is sexy. But, that rarely is the case. Societies ebb and flow like tides on what sexiness is and means, and different cultures can look at what their neighbors think of as the pinnacle of sexiness and go "meh".

Oh we most certainly are. You cannot prevent hardwired reactions. Try not to smile when you are happy. People the world over have a universal, unbreakable reaction to smile when happy. We can certainly reteach ourselves many things, and consciousness makes us special, but retraining hardwired behavior is not promising work. Thankfully, this perspective on women might not be hardwired.

Smiling is a reaction, not a value. It's not the same as a "hardwired" assumption of what sexiness is. One problem with trying to determine whether or not people are "hardwired" to assume that certain things are sexy is the fact that many people develop sexual awareness at varying ages and from varying stimuli. And because people are not raised in vacuum, the values of parents and the adults around them trickles down. That doesn't mean people have the same tastes as the others around them (there would be no differences between hetero/bi/homosexuality if there were), but it means that as people build their lifetime checklist of what they find sexy, influences from the outside world will shape them in some form or fashion.

We as humans may have similar ideas of what is attractive, but a lot of it is still nurture rather than nature.

Isn't there? It depends on how you define "force." I don't think we have no other choice, but we do seem to be predisposed, or at least socialized to objectify women.

Not predisposed. Culturally incepted. Even if I agreed with you and assumed that men were predisposed, behavior can be modified. No one has to be perfect, but we are certainly sapient enough to change.

Agreed. Many if not most perceived differences in the sexes seems to be things internalized by individuals from society and upbringing. There is some speculation in evolutionary psychology that suggests that women are more naturally nurturing IN GENERAL and men are more competitive IN GENERAL, but yeah. Also, the aforementioned tendencies fall off with a more diverse gene pool vis-a-vis modern society.

Well, that may be true for outliers, but the majority are not that far apart from each other.

Video games are, on the other hand, no where near the issue, again, with exceptions from a radical portion of our communities.

Videogames, by becoming what is now the new pop culture, is very much a part of it, though. As I mentioned before, culture defines how we see everything, and if videogames are now a driving force of it, they are front and center in the gender and sexuality issues.

By extremes I mean people like Anita Sarkeesian and her supporters that, rather than addressing issues honestly or constructively, often choose misrepresentation and counterproductive exploitation to engender misguided support from people that typically don't appear to have the facts.

I have no problem with Sarkeesian. I think her arguments are sometimes flawed, but I largely agree with the spirit of what she says. I've been studying social justice in general and sex and sexuality in specific for a few years now, and she's usually pretty close to the mark. She just tends to flub an argument.

 

[King Zeal]

You used the example, not me. Your intention was to apparently show that it was giving critics what they wanted. I was just letting you know where you were wrong, and the poster above added more context.

It shows inclusiveness. People who want normal character designs and sexualized ones both got something.

But as myself and others have pointed out, it's hardly egalitarian.

 

[theproductofboredom]

The issue isn't with sexualization itself. Men and Women are both sexualized in gaming, and in all media. The problem is with how they are sexualized.

There are two types of sexualization, and it extends beyond physical appearance. Dominant Sexualization, characters who are sexy because they are strong, aggressive, and in control. Female characters that qualify include the likes of Bayonetta, Nikita (tv), and Lara Croft (pre-2013 reboot). Male characters include Dante (DmC), and every other example of male sexualization MRA members have pelted me with.

Then there is submissive sexualization, characters who are weak, reliant, and can't defend themselves. And this is what makes them sexy. Female characters that apply include the likes of thankless love interests, damsels, etc. Male examples of this include... well..that's awkward.

On their own, there's nothing inherently wrong with either, its the ratios between male and female sexualization that needs fixing. It goes deeper than a juvenile fixation on physical attributes, its about power.

 

[cikame]

As a man i like good looking women, if i'm going to play a game to relax and escape from real life i want beautiful people, not average boring/disappointing people i see every day.

 

[King Zeal]

It would you play a game where you play as Edward from Twilight?

 

[Angelblaze]

It would you play a game where you play as Edward from Twilight?

On a side note, I'd like to note that no I would not.

It sounds incredibly obnoxious.
Playing Loki from the Avengers or Sherlock from BBC's Sherlock whoever...

 

[00slash00]

I'm fine with sexuality in gaming. I'm not fine with a character's sexuality looking like it was designed by a 13 year old boy, between masturbation sessions. A well designed character can look sexy while still being fully clothed

 

[King Zeal]

It would you play a game where you play as Edward from Twilight?

On a side note, I'd like to note that no I would not.

It sounds incredibly obnoxious.
Playing Loki from the Avengers or Sherlock from BBC's Sherlock whoever...

More like dat iPhone.

 

[Shadowstar38]

You used the example, not me. Your intention was to apparently show that it was giving critics what they wanted. I was just letting you know where you were wrong, and the poster above added more context.

It shows inclusiveness. People who want normal character designs and sexualized ones both got something.

But as myself and others have pointed out, it's hardly egalitarian.

Not everything in the creative process ends up on a 50/50 scale.

 

[King Zeal]

Then you can't use it as an example of fairness and inclusivity.

 

[gargantual]

As a man i like good looking women, if i'm going to play a game to relax and escape from real life i want beautiful people, not average boring/disappointing people i see every day.

Especially if they're disturbing, and getting-in-the-way NPCs.