Sexuality in gaming, your stance?

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

I disagree completely. There's a difference between sexy and just objectifying and I will always consider exaggerated features to be extremely immature. There is no justification for a plate armor bikini and a male rogue needs to be as agile as a female rogue. There's no reason for her armor to be more revealing than his. But if we're going to talk about real life benefit of skimpy armor then let's also discuss the real life consequences of exaggerated features. It isn't a coincidence that most dancers have a small butt and small breasts. Large breasts hinder agility and more importantly, characters like Ivy would not only not be able to move around as freely as she does, she would likely suffer from crippling back pain

Ha. Arguing about realism, as If that were the goal...

The justification for 'plate armor bikini' is that people who aren't you like it. It's really that simple. You may not like that justification, but that's justification.

Out of curiosity, could you explain exactly why exaggerated features are 'extremely immature'?

 

[Islandbuffilo]

No, I'm pretty sure a penis flops around more than breasts. Unless covered up. Which brings us back to the cleavage problem.

Considering the flaccid penis size is affected by temperature, it wouldn't bounce around a lot like some larger breast do with simple movement, and even if it did its hardly ever as noticeable, if at all.

 

[Islandbuffilo]

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

Well people have different interpretations of what sexy is. Yes female characters can be sexy fully clothed, doesn't mean the less clothed ones are juvenile interpretations of sexy, exaggerated features have been in art for along time, and usually have meaning beyond sexual attraction. Also some the skimpy clothes are their less to be attractive but more of a way to emphasize agility, women are often depicted as more agile than man, thus their armor often reflects this.

I disagree completely. There's a difference between sexy and just objectifying and I will always consider exaggerated features to be extremely immature. There is no justification for a plate armor bikini and a male rogue needs to be as agile as a female rogue. There's no reason for her armor to be more revealing than his. But if we're going to talk about real life benefit of skimpy armor then let's also discuss the real life consequences of exaggerated features. It isn't a coincidence that most dancers have a small butt and small breasts. Large breasts hinder agility and more importantly, characters like Ivy would not only not be able to move around as freely as she does, she would likely suffer from crippling back pain

Well That's just your personal opinion, that's fine, but keep in mind that you can objectify anything and it really comes down to the person, you may find something objectifying that most people don't find objectifying, and thus the only one objectifying that something is you. More often than not the male rogue armor is just as revealing as the female rogue armor, and again these are not for practical purposes its just for artistic emphasis . Now if we were going to discuss real life consequences I can go into vast amount of detail about how impractical, deadly, and grossly inaccurate A LOT of character designs are, but you have to understand that in most games what the character is wearing is largely aesthetic and holds no practical purpose what so ever, and comparing it with practical reasoning in the real world is just pointless, unless the game is steeped in realism, and most games that claim to be, really aren't.

The only reason I mentioned real world consequences is because you were arguing that skimpy female armor made sense because women often need to be more agile in games. If you're coming up with rationale for why skimpy armor makes sense then it's only fair that I do the same for why exaggerated features don't make sense. Also, if you're arguing the male characters are dressed skimpy to the same degree and frequency as female characters...well I'm going to have to ask you to back that up. I can think of a few examples, like Kratos, where men are extremely under dressed, but I can think of far more examples for women. The reason people joke about chainmail bikinis is because it's so common in fantasy games for men to be covered in armor from head to foot and women to have armor covering their nipples and crotch and not much else. Even in the case of Kratos, you don't see his dick bouncing around when he runs and yet breast physics have become the standard for female characters

No, I never used the word NEED, and I was arguing that part of the purpose of skimpy armor is to emphasize agility, not to make one agile but to appear as such. I said more often than not male rogues are often just as skimpy compared to the female rogue, I was not speak in terms of anything else, Kratos is not a rogue. As for chainmail bikinis that varies from game to game, Going off of the MMOs, and other RPGs I've played, a big bulky set for men rarely translates to nipple caps, and plated thongs. It usually translates to more midriff, cleavage, maybe thigh, but the shoulders, head, and boots are usually just as bulky. In any case its usually a type of exaggerated sexual dimorphism, emphasizing masculine and feminine features of the characters. On the subject of breast physics vs penis physics, breast tend to usually move around a bit more than a penis, not every good comparison.

And why does appearing more agile translate to skimpy outfits for women but not for men? You still haven't backed up your statement about male rogues dressed just as skimpy as female rogues. Give me some examples of male rogue characters that dress as skantily clad as their female counterparts. I mentioned Kratos because he is among the few male characters I can think of that has an outfit comparable to the kinds that are standard for female characters. As I said before, an outfit does not need to be skimpy in order to look feminine or sexy and there is no reason why a male knight is a wall of armor and a female knight has so much more exposed skin. They exist to pander to adolescent male gamers. So you're saying breasts bounce more than penises and thus breast physics make more sense than dick physics? Well if you're going to throw realistic limitations in to this debate again then I will again say that the absurdly busty women wouldn't be doing much running in the first place because of the pain their large breast size would be causing them. But taking realism out of this debate, breast physics are often extremely exaggerated so if we're going to exaggerate breast physics, why not exaggerate dick physics as well?

It often does translate to less clothing or often tighter for agile men, but more often than not the agile characters are female. I was going to start up tera and do the armor preview for rangers male and female for all races, but I realized I haven't played in a good while and I'd probably missed a lot of patches, I went into WoW and looked at some of the rogue armor, most the time the only variations between the armor sets is the characters body shape, and maybe midriff showing on the female, but often time its comparable with the male midriff. Guild wars assassin armor is also pretty even in regards to gender, except the seitung, canthan, and elite canthan sets. Your right skimpy clothes aren't the only way to appear famine and sexy nor does being a giant refrigerator the only way to depict strength , and that's not the only method used in games, however its not only used for pandering is just a simple way to give a woman a sleek agile look. I don't know why you're relating large breast with skimpy clothes, that's not always the case. Large breast are often used to signify maturity in women, or motherhood, or for sexual comedic effect its not just pandering its just symbolism. I'm not really using the realism thing I'm just saying you'd have to exaggerate the penis a lot to make it physics worthy, not to mention, unlike breast, penises are genitals, and would most likely garner a Ao rating, but if a developer can be cheeky and have a big black censor bar dangling between a male character's legs, by all means do it.

 

[MammothBlade]

There's nothing wrong with sexuality in gaming, except when it's used as a crutch.

"This game is shit, the plot sucks, gameplay is horrid, the characters are terrible - OH LOOK TITTIES!"

In fact, I'd like to see more sexuality in gaming, albeit in a mature way. Instead of a plot substitute and an aside, make it an interwoven part of the plot. The important thing is that it's not added in just to increase the appeal.

Right now, games are generally classified as pornographic if they actually show graphic sexuality, but that shouldn't even be an ISSUE with anyone over the age of consent.

 

[King Zeal]

^ This. I agree with most of this.

Also, "sexiness" shouldn't be synonymous with "What dudes find sexy". If you want a game to be sexy, more examples for women can help. None of this "big muscles" stuff, either--big muscles are usually made for male power fantasy than female sex fantasy. Real women seem to prefer leaner, more limber guys.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Well I just want to bring in an aspect that most people seem to not bring up often in these discussions. Okay so, everyone always talks about physical things in these discussions but has anyone ever discussed the personality aspect of sexuality? There's more to sexuality and attracting someone than just having a certain kind of body, the kind of personality of the person can make a huge difference. One person might find someone that's kind to be very attractive, another one could find someone that's very assertive to "turn them on", yet another might find someone with a regal bearing to be attractive. There's a difference between the sexuality someone gets from looking at women/men they don't know anything about in a porn magazine and the sexuality you get from characters that people know the personality of.

Let me give an example. Take Tomoko from WataMote.

She doesn't have things about her that seem stereotypically attractive but that doesn't stop people from finding her attractive. You can't even explain all of it as just being people that find her particular physical appearance as attractive, there's more going on with this. Something about her personality or how she carries herself causes people to find her attractive.

As a final note to this, I'm not introducing this as an argument for either "side" in this debate, I'm just trying to inject something new to it because this issue has been trampled on so much and so hard that if it were coal then we'd have a diamond by now.

 

[King Zeal]

Well, the personality aspect has been brought up before, for sure. But that's more difficult to explain. Like, if you look at most games with an optional romance encounter, the romance is treated like a minigame: "Do X Things, and You Win Sex". Often, the characters are thus boiled down to really simplistic and stereotypical shells in order to make the win condition clear for players. Even worse is when sex is just an end result and little else is done after that. There isn't really a "sexual relationship" so much as there's just a walking minigame where you get sex at the end. Garrus being really the only clear exception (which is why his is really well done).

For example, in Mass Effect, there's no main character you can have casual sex (although only implied) with except Kelly Chambers, and even then, Kelly does not count as a "Romance option" officially. And even with her, there's really nothing left to talk about once she starts strip dancing for you. The only other thing that comes close is in the first game, where you can have a one-night-stand with the asari consort, but you never really get to know her personality.

 

[UberPubert]

That's your opinion others, such as many of the people being excluded, don't agree.

So long as we accept exclusion is a neutral term and that their opinions to their implications are no less relevant than mine.

What does finished content have to do with anything? I'm talking about a publisher telling a developer flat out what to and not to put in their games.

But that content is still created by the artist on the team. The publisher can control which of it goes in but in the case of the "sexy characters" we're talking about nearly all of what the player sees was created by someone on the developer team, therefore the complaint lies with individual artist - not the publisher.

32 states lacking transgender discrimination statutes IS bad. It's not AS bad as 0 out of 50, but "not bad" is stretching it. And unfortunately, transgender harassment is a constant problem when it comes to restroom rights. As I said, it's changing, but it's still pretty terrible.

It's not terrible, it's just been slow to change because it's a relatively new phenomenon. Have long have we really had hormone therapy and plastic surgery that was commonly available to the public? How long has some confusion or harassment really been a problem to those affected? It's a problem, sure, and they deserve the same rights as anyone but like you just said it's already happening. It's not even a matter of exclusion it's a matter of time.

Believe what you want. But again, Jim Sterling, the guys at Extra Credits, and other people here and there have spoken out about it. I'd love to give more specific citations, but like I said, I lack the time.

But as a general rule publishers oversee trends and protect investments, when people like Sterling bring it up it's usually to rail against microtransactions, when Yahtzee does it it's to complain about quick-time events, and when Extra Credits take to the podium it's usually to point out something that still isn't publishers looking over the concept artists shoulder and scribbling in a lower cut top or shortening skirts, which is where great error is made in trying to blame publishers for character sexualization.

Well, that's your unique experience. Sites like Fatuglyorslutty.com has hundreds of examples different ones.

I'm glad you brought them up. Hell - and I don't mean to sound prescient - but I was almost counting on it. Which is why I looked it up earlier and the About page had this to say:

"Some players like to send creepy, disturbing, insulting, degrading and/or just plain rude messages to other online players, usually women.

We think this is funny.

Why do they send them? There are a few theories. But instead of getting offended, we offer a method for people to share these messages and laugh together.

If having these messages posted online makes someone think twice about writing and sending a detailed description of their genitals, great!"

So, this site you're calling the proof of a toxic gaming community is actually one that isn't actually offended by it and thinks it's funny. They even turned it around into what they see to be a force of good, and you're trying to use this to convince me women are being excluded from gaming? Maybe you should ask them how they really feel instead of assuming a loud minority of players is enough to keep them away from their hobby.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Well, the personality aspect has been brought up before, for sure. But that's more difficult to explain. Like, if you look at most games with an optional romance encounter, the romance is treated like a minigame: "Do X Things, and You Win Sex". Often, the characters are thus boiled down to really simplistic and stereotypical shells in order to make the win condition clear for players. Even worse is when sex is just an end result and little else is done after that. There isn't really a "sexual relationship" so much as there's just a walking minigame where you get sex at the end. Garrus being really the only clear exception (which is why his is really well done).

For example, in Mass Effect, there's no main character you can have casual sex (although only implied) with except Kelly Chambers, and even then, Kelly does not count as a "Romance option" officially. And even with her, there's really nothing left to talk about once she starts strip dancing for you. The only other thing that comes close is in the first game, where you can have a one-night-stand with the asari consort, but you never really get to know her personality.

Well that's not really what I'm getting at. I was directing my post towards people talking about why this or that character is in a game. A person doesn't just find Soul Caliber's Ivy, sexy just because of her body, the person would also have to find her demeanor appealing in some way. I'm not talking about the relationship aspect, I'm talking about character appeal, you don't need dialogue choices to find a character's personality attractive. Or to put it another way, a person doesn't just find someone attractive because of sex appeal, they can also find them attractive because they are cool or smart or funny.

 

[King Zeal]

So long as we accept exclusion is a neutral term and that their opinions to their implications are no less relevant than mine.

Of course it isn't. What I have a problem with is all the "Why are we even talking about this?" rhetoric. (Not from you, I mean.)

But that content is still created by the artist on the team. The publisher can control which of it goes in but in the case of the "sexy characters" we're talking about nearly all of what the player sees was created by someone on the developer team, therefore the complaint lies with individual artist - not the publisher.

No, the publisher can and will do things like demand a change to the design, or reject a design because it doesn't fit their requirement.

That's not say there should never be any overhead, but commercial art (speaking as someone who's done it before) is not merely an artistic endeavor. Marketing and corporate interference are a constant reality.

It's not terrible, it's just been slow to change because it's a relatively new phenomenon. Have long have we really had hormone therapy and plastic surgery that was commonly available to the public? How long has some confusion or harassment really been a problem to those affected? It's a problem, sure, and they deserve the same rights as anyone but like you just said it's already happening.

Hold on. There's a bit of confusion here. "Transgender" isn't about hormone treatments or surgery--it's about self-identity. A biological male that identifies as a woman is a transgender. A transsexual (the terms are not the same) is a person who either already has, or plans to have, reassignment procedures. One of the reason the law is slow to change is that many people don't know the difference, and they think any man who acts or dresses like a woman, but has not had a procedure is just a pervert.

Transgender people have existed since the beginning of time, also. This isn't a new problem--the only thing that's truly new is that people have started talking about it. (Which is why I'm so against issues not being talked about.)

It's not even a matter of exclusion it's a matter of time.

Those two are not mutually-exclusive points, though. It's currently a matter of exclusion that will become (hopefully) less of one over time. But, until it's fixed completely, it's still exclusion.

But as a general rule publishers oversee trends and protect investments, when people like Sterling bring it up it's usually to rail against microtransactions, when Yahtzee does it it's to complain about quick-time events, and when Extra Credits take to the podium it's usually to point out something that still isn't publishers looking over the concept artists shoulder and scribbling in a lower cut top or shortening skirts, which is where great error is made in trying to blame publishers for character sexualization.

No, Jim has certainly brought up the constant demands publishers make on developers. He's also mentioned before about how publishers let developers take the blame for a bad design decision that was wholly the publisher's ultimatum. I think Yahtzee has mentioned it before as well, and I think I read (so yeah, take this with a total grain of salt) a similar article about waaaaaaaaay back in like 2002 (so it's nothing new).

Also, similar phenomena happen in other mass media, like comics, movies, and television. They're not the same as the game industry of course, but I'm only mentioning it for context.

I'm glad you brought them up. Hell - and I don't mean to sound prescient - but I was almost counting on it. Which is why I looked it up earlier and the About page had this to say:

So, this site you're calling the proof of a toxic gaming community is actually one that isn't actually offended by it and thinks it's funny. They even turned it around into what they see to be a force of good, and you're trying to use this to convince me women are being excluded from gaming? Maybe you should ask them how they really feel instead of assuming a loud minority of players is enough to keep them away from their hobby.

I have. I talk with women about it all the time. It's kind of my life's work.

As for FUoS, they think it's "funny" not in the way you're making it seem.

http://holygrenade.com/2013/02/interview-the-founders-of-fat-ugly-or-slutty/

That is an interview with the founders of the site who talk more in depth about why the site is started, how alone they felt at first, how harrowing their experiences were at times, and how they actively hid their genders to avoid harassment. They may laugh about it, but it's to let other women feel they're not alone. Feeling like you're alone and unwanted is pretty much the definition of feeling excluded.

 

[King Zeal]

Well that's not really what I'm getting at. I was directing my post towards people talking about why this or that character is in a game. A person doesn't just find Soul Caliber's Ivy, sexy just because of her body, the person would also have to find her demeanor appealing in some way. I'm not talking about the relationship aspect, I'm talking about character appeal, you don't need dialogue choices to find a character's personality attractive. Or to put it another way, a person doesn't just find someone attractive because of sex appeal, they can also find them attractive because they are cool or smart or funny.

What I was trying to get at is that there's a gray area between the two, though. Being attracted to a person or character based on personality is a good thing, but sometimes a personality is scraped to the bare bones in order to entice the most basic and pedantic sexual desires.

Considering the flaccid penis size is affected by temperature, it wouldn't bounce around a lot like some larger breast do with simple movement, and even if it did its hardly ever as noticeable, if at all.

So why are you comparing large breasts to small penises, then? Let's assume that both are abnormally large so this is a fair comparison.

Also, that only applies in particularly cold weather. The type of cold where it would be just as dumb to show off boobs as it would be to walk around with your dick hanging out.

 

[UberPubert]

No, the publisher can and will do things like demand a change to the design, or reject a design because it doesn't fit their requirement.

That's not say there should never be any overhead, but commercial art (speaking as someone who's done it before) is not merely an artistic endeavor. Marketing and corporate interference are a constant reality.

You're not reading closely enough: I keep saying the publisher can control what goes into the game and request the developers put certain things in, but all of it is made by the developer. Sexy designs and costume orders come down from on high but how the artist chooses to express that is entirely up to them, it's why they were hired in the first place. The publishers choose what gets into the game, but the developers are always the ones who have made it, and when talking about something as subjective as sexual appeal in video game characters the safe bet is on the artist's own input. Give a scroll through deviantart sometime to see it in action.

This isn't a new problem--the only thing that's truly new is that people have started talking about it. (Which is why I'm so against issues not being talked about.)

Transgender people aren't a "new problem", I'm sure, but their legality status as it applies to public bathrooms almost certainly is because the concept of gender/sex discrimination in public bathrooms is relatively new.

Those two are not mutually-exclusive points, though. It's currently a matter of exclusion that will become (hopefully) less of one over time. But, until it's fixed completely, it's still exclusion.

Unintentional, passive exclusion - the benign kind I keep bringing up that's less of a social justice struggle and more of an item on a to-do (or to-don't) list.

No, Jim has certainly brought up the constant demands publishers make on developers. He's also mentioned before about how publishers let developers take the blame for a bad design decision that was wholly the publisher's.

But the problems he's mentioned that have clear examples (DRM, microstransactions, always-online, etc) are not the same as forcing artistic choices made by artists on the developer team.

As for FUoS, they think it's "funny" not in the way you're making it seem.

That is an interview with the founders of the site who talk more in depth about why the site is started, how alone they felt at first, how harrowing their experiences were at times, and how they actively hid their genders to avoid harassment. They may laugh about it, but it's to let other women feel they're not alone. Feeling like you're alone and unwanted is pretty much the definition of feeling excluded.

They seem like they think it's pretty funny in the way I made it seem like they think it's funny. I don't think the fresh prince of bel-aire opening is a compelling narrative of their harrowing trials and the rest of the interview seems to support that. I don't see two people scared to identify as women online, I see two friends who wanted to share their experiences with others and while it's a good thing it's not unique. Bullying happens, and being able to laugh it off is a part of life that they seem to have come to accept and joke about. Why do you think other women would be precluded from doing the same?

 

[Islandbuffilo]

Well that's not really what I'm getting at. I was directing my post towards people talking about why this or that character is in a game. A person doesn't just find Soul Caliber's Ivy, sexy just because of her body, the person would also have to find her demeanor appealing in some way. I'm not talking about the relationship aspect, I'm talking about character appeal, you don't need dialogue choices to find a character's personality attractive. Or to put it another way, a person doesn't just find someone attractive because of sex appeal, they can also find them attractive because they are cool or smart or funny.

What I was trying to get at is that there's a gray area between the two, though. Being attracted to a person or character based on personality is a good thing, but sometimes a personality is scraped to the bare bones in order to entice the most basic and pedantic sexual desires.

Considering the flaccid penis size is affected by temperature, it wouldn't bounce around a lot like some larger breast do with simple movement, and even if it did its hardly ever as noticeable, if at all.

So why are you comparing large breasts to small penises, then? Let's assume that both are abnormally large so this is a fair comparison.

Also, that only applies in particularly cold weather. The type of cold where it would be just as dumb to show off boobs as it would be to walk around with your dick hanging out.

I'm not comparing large breast to small penises, I'm saying that penis size alters by temperature, and no it does not only applies to particularly cold weather, it just has to be cold, getting out of the shower wet in a 60 degree house can cause it to happen. In general penises are harder to notice than breast, and large breast are often used to signify maturity, or motherhood. Phallic objects are more common to represent masculinity rather than extremely exaggerated penises.

 

[King Zeal]

Again, then why are we talking about penis sizes that are small enough for the shrinkage to affect bounce? Not all tits bounce easily, either, and there are even MORE things that can reduce a breast's shape or size. Why are we talking about jiggling breasts like all sizes have a hefty bounce, while dismissing dongs that would qualify just the same?

Also you're making my point for me: large penises are also symbolic of manliness and sexual prowess. But we prefer to use phallic OBJECTS rather than phalluses themselves, whereas we show jiggling breasts with no problem.

Also, penises are not that hard to notice. If a dude walked up to you with crotchless pants on, I have a hard time buying that anyone wouldn't notice the nudity.

 

[King Zeal]

You're not reading closely enough: I keep saying the publisher can control what goes into the game and request the developers put certain things in, but all of it is made by the developer. Sexy designs and costume orders come down from on high but how the artist chooses to express that is entirely up to them, it's why they were hired in the first place. The publishers choose what gets into the game, but the developers are always the ones who have made it, and when talking about something as subjective as sexual appeal in video game characters the safe bet is on the artist's own input. Give a scroll through deviantart sometime to see it in action.

No I read you clearly. As I said, publishers can and will flat out tell a developer what to put in a design. It's not always a blanket directive.

Unintentional, passive exclusion - the benign kind I keep bringing up that's less of a social justice struggle and more of an item on a to-do (or to-don't) list.

I assume we're still talking about transgender. It's not "benign", it affects real lives everyday (indirectly) through violence and, in some places, arrests. That's why it's a social justice issue.

But the problems he's mentioned that have clear examples (DRM, microstransactions, always-online, etc) are not the same as forcing artistic choices made by artists on the developer team.

Okay, point taken there.

They seem like they think it's pretty funny in the way I made it seem like they think it's funny. I don't think the fresh prince of bel-aire opening is a compelling narrative of their harrowing trials and the rest of the interview seems to support that. I don't see two people scared to identify as women online, I see two friends who wanted to share their experiences with others and while it's a good thing it's not unique. Bullying happens, and being able to laugh it off is a part of life that they seem to have come to accept and joke about. Why do you think other women would be precluded from doing the same?

GTZ flat out said she doesn't like to identify as a woman online. They also say that they find many of these experiences as "negative" or "harrowing".

Besides that, being able to laugh off bullying is a good thing. That doesn't make bullying a good thing. And it certainly doesn't mean that the people coping with humor are fine with it. Jaspir, who is the one who says she snarks right back, makes it damn clear in the interview that one of the reasons she's doing this is so that things will change. So it doesn't seem like she's fine with it at all, really.

 

[UberPubert]

No I read you clearly. As I said, publishers can and will flat out tell a developer what to put in a design. It's not always a blanket directive.

But it almost always is. The same article from the anonymous source you linked earlier just said that most publishers don't actually care about the game or game design process enough to even play it, how could they be so concerned about the character design to practically take the artists hand and do it for them?

I assume we're still talking about transgender. It's not "benign", it affects real lives everyday (indirectly) through violence and, in some places, arrests. That's why it's a social justice issue.

Who is being indirectly (how does that even work?) violated and harassed every day because of a bathroom discrimination law? Where has this actually happened?

GTZ flat out said she doesn't like to identify as a woman online. They also say that they find many of these experiences as "negative" or "harrowing".

I don't like to identify as a man online either but okay, what gtz actually says is she hasn't personally recieved the hate mail because she usually just plays with friends and was shocked to hear about it. Hiding her gender identity online - note, she says online, not just for videogames - and mentions her having a self-described "weird guilt-complex". Jaspir is your stronger case who explicitly states she'd been harasses but even she doesn't state she's being harmed, she describes herself as shooting a comeback at the speaker or playing, both of which are frequent gamer tactics from what I've encountered.

That doesn't make bullying a good thing. And it certainly doesn't mean that the people coping with humor are fine with it. Jaspir, who is the one who says she snarks right back, makes it damn clear in the interview that one of the reasons she's doing this is so that things will change. So it doesn't seem like she's fine with it at all, really.

That's a heck of a conclusion to draw from me saying that sharing experiences is a good thing - yes, of course bullying isn't a good thing, that's insanity - but I don't think it's a gamer problem, it's just a people being rude problem, and it's not as pervasive as most people seem to think it is and it's certainly not one that has gone unnoticed. How long have moderation and flagging systems been around? How long has there been the ability to kick or ban abusive players? There's already a means to deal with these people, there's filters and mutes and ignores - the only way you could actually stop this kind of thing any harder is if went back in time and stopped them even saying it.

 

[Dragonlayer]

Personally, I am simply outraged and disgusted at the shameful state of sexuality in video games these days.

Where the hell are the games that pander to my disgusting fetishes!?

Sexual equality my arse!

 

[King Zeal]

But it almost always is. The same article from the anonymous source you linked earlier just said that most publishers don't actually care about the game or game design process enough to even play it, how could they be so concerned about the character design to practically take the artists hand and do it for them?

That isn't what I said. I said that they mandate that the artist change it or tell the artists specifically what to put in. That's a far cry from "doing it for them".

There's a difference in not caring about game design and not caring about character design.

Who is being indirectly violated and harassed every day because of a bathroom discrimination law? Where has this actually happened?

According to the site here: http://www.transgenderlaw.org/resources/tlcschools.htm

?For transgender and gender non-conforming people, the lack of safe bathroom access is ?the most frequent form of discrimination faced but the least acknowledged by policy makers?

It also lists places where it has happened or is common.

(how does that even work?)

Again, lack of statutes, laws, or enforcement protecting them. A lawmaker that ignores trans issues isn't directly harming them, but is indirectly contributing to an environment which is unsafe.

I don't like to identify as a man online either but okay, what gtz actually says is she hasn't personally recieved the hate mail because she usually just plays with friends and was shocked to hear about it. Hiding her gender identity online - note, she says online, not just for videogames - and mentions her having a self-described "weird guilt-complex". Jaspir is your stronger case who explicitly states she'd been harasses but even she doesn't state she's being harmed, she describes herself as shooting a comeback at the speaker or playing, both of which are frequent gamer tactics from what I've encountered.

If this was supposed to refute my point, I'm not seeing it.

That's a heck of a conclusion to draw from me saying that sharing experiences is a good thing - yes, of course bullying isn't a good thing, that's insanity - but I don't think it's a gamer problem, it's just a people being rude problem, and it's not as pervasive as most people seem to think it is and it's certainly not one that has gone unnoticed. How long have moderation and flagging systems been around? How long has there been the ability to kick or ban abusive players? There's already a means to deal with these people, there's filters and mutes and ignores - the only way you could actually stop this kind of thing any harder is if went back in time and stopped them even saying it.

I don't recall saying anything about stopping it. (Although, of course, I would support attempts to.) The original point being made was about how harassment, combined with gender-binary market tactics contributes to a problem. The interviewees clearly state that gender incusion is still in its baby steps. GTZ evens says,"even the people who are absolutely furious that she mentions her gender are at least acknowledging that it?s normal for women to play games. Baby steps, right?"

That's a system. It's not an intentional system (meaning marketers and most consumers don't mean for it to happen), but as I said, a system is a series of things that contribute to an end result. Acknowledging the things that contribute to it are the first steps to improved solutions.

 

[UberPubert]

That isn't what I said. I said that they mandate that the artist change it or tell the artists specifically what to put in. That's a far cry from "doing it for them".

Then do you agree that artists on the development are the ones who create the content and are responsible for it or not?

It also lists places where it has happened or is common.

Okay, so I read your link, followed the citation, looked up the survey and found out some of the respondents describe horror stories about trying to use the bathrooms as a transgender, with every claim of harassment up to an including "I almost got killed". Last I checked, attempted murder of people for using the wrong bathroom is still illegal, no matter which state you're in, and that if this had really happened we'd have heard something about it and of course the attacker (near-attacker?) would be in prison.

I have a strong feeling these claims are somewhere between hyperbolic and completely hysterical, but regardless of their validity if we saw this occur outside of anonymous surveys do we really expect that a court would resolve in a way that is not in their favor? You say this issue is being resolved anyway but can we really hold the law accountable for issues not taken to court?

Again, lack of statutes, laws, or enforcement protecting them. A lawmaker that ignores trans issues isn't directly harming them, but is indirectly contributing to an environment which is unsafe.

As we expand the legal lexicon on sex and gender discrimination of course we should expect there to be a lack of visibility in a growing number of extreme minority exceptions, but I don't equate a waiting list to "indirect harm" or an unsafe environment.

If this was supposed to refute my point, I'm not seeing it.

You provided the case as black and white, I refuted it as being far less so by paraphrasing the interview you provided. Yours is a weak point in the least, dishonest at it's worst.

The original point being made was about how harassment, combined with gender-binary market tactics contributes to a problem. The interviewees clearly state that gender incusion is still in its baby steps. GTZ evens says,"even the people who are absolutely furious that she mentions her gender are at least acknowledging that it?s normal for women to play games. Baby steps, right?"

That's a system. It's not an intentional system (meaning marketers and most consumers don't mean for it to happen), but as I said, a system is a series of things that contribute to an end result. Acknowledging the things that contribute to it are the first steps to improved solutions.

I've already pointed out most of it's not a gender binary market, there are *so* many different factors besides gender that go in marketing decisions, that they might inevitably end up one side of the gender scale more than the other comes down almost entirely to personal taste.

But the actual system - the stronger system, the majority system - is about re-actively thwarting the unintentional, structureless system you've perceived the industry to be in. We already have the solution, at least community-side, that's why I brought it up in the first place. Short of complete retroactive censorship, anonymous people are being policed about as well as we can manage.

 

[Izanagi009_v1legacy]

Well, the personality aspect has been brought up before, for sure. But that's more difficult to explain. Like, if you look at most games with an optional romance encounter, the romance is treated like a minigame: "Do X Things, and You Win Sex". Often, the characters are thus boiled down to really simplistic and stereotypical shells in order to make the win condition clear for players. Even worse is when sex is just an end result and little else is done after that. There isn't really a "sexual relationship" so much as there's just a walking minigame where you get sex at the end. Garrus being really the only clear exception (which is why his is really well done).

For example, in Mass Effect, there's no main character you can have casual sex (although only implied) with except Kelly Chambers, and even then, Kelly does not count as a "Romance option" officially. And even with her, there's really nothing left to talk about once she starts strip dancing for you. The only other thing that comes close is in the first game, where you can have a one-night-stand with the asari consort, but you never really get to know her personality.

This is a good point. I know it's a stupid example but don't some of the good eroge have the sex as sort of a solidification of romance, not an end. A shift like that could definably help our romance narratives in games improve greatly. Why is it that a company like Bioware with a crack team of professonal writers can't seem to make the romances real and the sex more than a reward but small doujin game companies can make compelling stories like (and you will bag on me for using this example over and over again) Katawa Shoujo?