The Big Picture: Gender Games

[Ramzal]

Honestly, if a woman is not what is being portrayed than why does it bother you? This is a stupid subject to think you've won "equal rights" in anyways! Get back to me when you feel like fighting for women who get their fingers cut off for looking at another man.

 

[Ashley Blalock]

Given this cover to a Japanese magazine for homosexual men, yes female characters are the only characters ever sexually exploited in video games. You never ever see male video game characters that would be appealing to gay men. If the cartoon character on the cover had his pants buttoned up you might have to wonder which game he was from.

 

[I forgot]

About the sexy clothing of Cammy, I may not be a SF player, that sure looks like a decent distraction for her hapless opponents ... like poor Balrog.

Sounds good to me! The female characters can win fights by taking off their shirts and stunning their opponents with a look at the twins, and male characters can win fights by being excellent fighters! Why are all those feminists complaining? That's game balance!

Your opinions are terrible, and you are too.

I didn't say they were sluts and whores, you did and to me this is what's representative of the problem. That a woman striking a sexy pose immediately makes them a whore or a slut and any woman who can be attributed to sex or sexuality is immediately demonized.

They're not just striking a pose because someone's taking a picture or they're trying to impress a romantic interest. They're striking a sexy pose at all times, it is their default activity. About to engage in a life or death struggle? Just got a powerup? Your home town just got set on fire? Waiting for the bus? Sounds like a great time to squeeze their tits together, yay!

Oh no, this building is burning down! But is anyone watching me? I better strike a vogue just in case!

Your argument is already crumbling.

"They're striking sexy poses at all times, it is their default activity"
That's such a huge overgeneralization with no support and painting with waaay too broad a brush. You're trying to stereotype that character, all games and the entire industry with that single GIF. As I said before, this is blowing things way out of proportion; this should be a narrow topic with specific games in discussion, not a broad one pointing fingers and making assumptions at the whole damn industry in general.

 

[go-10]

video game sales have been going up for years now, WAY higher than the movies, or any other form of entertainment media. If you look up when this trend started to appear you'll see that when over sexual character poses/costumes was the same time video games took off. So why would you kill part of what feeds you? I agree they can tone it down a little bit in games in more serious tone games (Silent Hill, Allan Wake, etc.) but overall they help sell games
I won't buy a game exclusively for say Felicia from MvC3 but I do appreciate her being there! the same goes for comics and anime, I won't buy a series for TNA but I'd be lying if I said it bothered me or that I would have it any other way

and I know most gamers, both male and female think the same way too. Even if they don't admit it among their group of friends they probably talk about it

 

[TokenRupee]

IMO, this issue won't change until the gaming landscape, or demographic changes more then it has. Yes, not ALL games are hetrosexual males between the ages of 13-35, but the overwheling majority is... And companies will contiune to market to that demographic. And so long as 13-35 year old hetorsexual males ACT like typical 13-35 year old hetrosexual males, it's going to contuine to work. So either you work on changing how boys/young men think and act...(good luck with that, dispite the fact I firmly belive they SHOULD have more respect for women...) or the demograpic of gamers has to shift to a more balance one...(again, good luck with that...) Either way, i don't see is changing anytime soon. *shrug*

Or companies could take a risk and try to make games that don't do it. People will buy games if they're good, regardless of how sexualized the women are or aren't.

So your saying that the underlying problem is that games are generally made specifically for guys, with no regard for a female audience? I can't say I disagree. I was reading something similar about TV shows and movies the other day. Someone was saying that the prevailing notion was that girls would watch "guy" shows, but guys wouldn't watch "girl" shows. As a result everyone defaults to making movies, shows, whatever with male leads and the like. Its probably even worse with games because producers may assume that there aren't even any girls to sell games to (something patently untrue, but whatever).

(heavy sarcasm) That's not true! There's the Barbie/Bratz games and tons of other games that totally should appeal to them because they're covered in pink! (heavy sarcasm)

 

[Starke]

...but it's just the way things are.

With respect to the rest of your post, this is probably one of the worst phrases to use in a gender discussion. It's the long running argument for people who don't want to have the argument. And for a lot of people it's an effective way to scuttle your argument before you even get going.

I don't always agree with you, but honestly, you're doing yourself a disservice here, and I figured someone should warn you before anyone takes your teeth out.

 

[Starke]

Oh no, this building is burning down! But is anyone watching me? I better strike a vogue just in case!

What the hell am I looking at!?

 

[nightwolf667]

It's not the complete lack of differances, but the degree to which those differances appear and the number of them. It's not a popular point, and I understand you don't like it, but it's just the way things are.

Excuse me? "That's just the way things are", when did that become a valid argument. It's one I see lots of people making in this thread, mostly men but one I've heard women make in the past. "That's just the way things are so why bother trying to change." You realize that if this argument rang true women wouldn't be wearing pants, going to work, or voting. The Civil Rights movement wouldn't have happened, we would still have slavery.

The reason why you don't have lady versions of Hulk Hogan in pro-wrestling is because that's not how girls develop. You get a guy who pumps iron and gets into an ideal body-muscle ratio he's going to wind up a lot differant than a girl who does the same thing, and can simply put do a lot more differant things with his body and form it in differant ways.

Give me a break, the reason why we don't have lady versions of Hulk Hogan in pro wrestling is because the vast majority of male viewers are turned off by the female body builder. Some of them are what you'd expect from the female form, as you stated below. The others... not so much no. There's a wide variety of what a woman can do with her muscles depending on what she decides to focus on. The fact that you're calling up Pro Wrestling as an example is actually pretty silly. Like the men, it's not an honest representation of variety. Why? Pro Wrestling is not a sport, it's an entertainment medium. They can work their body and be extensively physically fit, but not push it to the point where it becomes unattractive.

Likewise due to the way guys are structured a sumo-type regime can produce a very powerful if odd-looking physique that is functional for what it's intended for, a girl really isn't going to be able to support and function that way.

Possibly. I'd like you to support actual evidence of that first, before deciding it's so. After all, the Sumo profession in Japan is a man's profession and a man's sport. Japanese culture dictates certain behavior sets along with class and gender differentiations that would make it impossible for a woman to try to break into that field.

Women come in a wide range and variety of body types and builds just like men do, depending on genetics, eating habits, and work out types. Now, there is a certain build that is ascribed as "feminine perfection" which is pushed by the media. That includes a specific facial feature set.

Wait, this isn't one of those: this is why men are superior to women in terms of combat arguments is it?

Now in an ideal world, this wouldn't be true, but we don't live in one, and guys and girls have some substantial differances in our physical makeups. Men are simply more capable and varied physically, maxxing out much higher. This basic truth comes out in heroic fantasy.

Oh dear god... no. To argue what real women look like we're going to argue over what fantasy women look like? Fantasy women. Right.

Never mind that a large portion of fantasy literature is written as coming of age stories, which may in fact have absolutely nothing to do with the author deciding when they are planning on writing their character.

When it comes to the AGE of characters in video games, there is some truth to that, but again I think it comes down to reality and the way both genders age. Men tend to remain physically viable/imposing a lot longer than women for a lot of differant reasons.

Wait, what? I was actually going to try to argue with you seriously, but no. Not when you're using fantasy as a depiction for the way things are in real life. It's not. Yes, younger women are more flexible, no this does not mean they are in their prime. Women can remain extremely flexible a lot longer than men. The Olympics is based around the competition of non-professional athletes, not professional ones, and there are many, many, many women in their thirties and forties who are just as capable now as when they were in their prime. Some, in fact, are better.

Women have a higher pain tolerance than men. This is a known fact. Women have a lower center of gravity than men which means it's harder to knock them off their feet. Ask any professional and most will tell you: the toughest people to grapple with are the ones who are short. Women have a longer life expectancy than men. Women can be absolutely vicious in combat, I know, I've fought them. I've met women who were exceedingly rotund and still exceptionally capable fighters. She was also well into her thirties.

Basing your opinions of women, combat (because you are), and their bodies on fantasy or mass media or even the Olympics is only going to get you in trouble. There are many different sports out there and billions of women with many different body types, the vast majority of which are not presented as "ideal". Yes, they may seem similar but they really are different in fundamentally important ways. If you can't see why, then I really can't help you.

 

[Oroboros]

Once again, you missed a large part of the previous conversation. I was saying that if 40% of the market for video games are women, as cited by the person I was arguing with, and those women forgo games that objectify them, then the market will correct itself. 40% is NOT a niche market.

Once Again, you accuse me of not understanding your position, due to a lack of reading comprehension. My Argument was that the market will NOT correct itself.

The point was that the objectification of women cannot be corrected merely by censoring the media, because its primary cause is the male sex drive. It's been happening before the first printing press.

You don't get it do you? It's not about captialism being good for society, it's about society being free. If people want to buy smut or insipid crap, that's their business. If you don't like it, don't buy it. And you're dead wrong about men, they're affected JUST as much as women. All the crap about suppressing your emotions and acting like a mindless jock is a good example. You're basically suggesting that no one can think for themselves so the government has to step in and do their thinking for them and censor the crap out of everything. While I agree that very few people can think for themselves, I don't care to have that type of government thank you very much.

Get your posters and march if you have to. Get the word out to as many people as you can. Boycott industries and protest. But if you can't change peoples minds it doesn't mean that you have the right to force them or take away their freedom.

I do agree that education is the best way to counter this though.

Not once have I advocated government intervention on this matter. Go ahead trying to smear me as being favor of some sort of repressive socialist society though, I'm sure it's easier to just ignore what I say and fill in the blanks. Makes it easier to strawman me, I suppose.

I'm not arguing that men hiding their emotions and being bombarded with images of hypermuscualar athletic macho men is not bad. It is also bad, but as I have stated before, muscular men do not solely represent sexuality, but also a heroic ideal of sorts. Women characters are typically denied this sort of representation in favor of a solely sexualized one, the implications should be obvious.

You excuse sexual exploitation of women in games again and again as being 'natural', and say that it is fine that men buy and consume this material, but you ignore that the brand of sexuality being marketed to men does not represent a form of beauty that has been historically eternal or universal. (hint: Teenage boys are *not* biologically hardwired to enjoy the sight of breasts, different cultures have historically emphasized different aspects of the human body as desirable) The sexuality marketed in today's games is a more or less recent development, and treats women as objects. This consumption is not limited to personal fantasies or to the game world being marketed, it effects perceptions in the real world, which is why it is important to raise awareness on the subject.

 

[Ashley Blalock]

...but it's just the way things are.

With respect to the rest of your post, this is probably one of the worst phrases to use in a gender discussion. It's the long running argument for people who don't want to have the argument. And for a lot of people it's an effective way to scuttle your argument before you even get going.

I don't always agree with you, but honestly, you're doing yourself a disservice here, and I figured someone should warn you before anyone takes your teeth out.

"...but it's just the way things are" also would imply that somehow things are static and unchanging.

That's just not true of gender and gender relations in our culture. It's constantly evolving so what was considered a gender taboo in one decade might be a gender norm in the next decade. Gender roles are also changing so that a male nurse and a female doctor are just a normal part of life today while those same roles would have been shocking in the past.

Games are also constantly evolving. Back in my 8-bit days you almost never saw female characters in games, but now it's the norm to have a choice of several female characters in something like a fighting game.

In ten years this same topic would get different replies because society and gaming are never going sit still because "it's just the way things are".

 

[Therumancer]

It's not the complete lack of differances, but the degree to which those differances appear and the number of them. It's not a popular point, and I understand you don't like it, but it's just the way things are.

Excuse me? "That's just the way things are", when did that become a valid argument. It's one I see lots of people making in this thread, mostly men but one I've heard women make in the past. "That's just the way things are so why bother trying to change." You realize that if this argument rang true women wouldn't be wearing pants, going to work, or voting. The Civil Rights movement wouldn't have happened, we would still have slavery.

.

Pretty much everything else your saying comes down to this. As I said myself, a lot of people don't like the truth, and I kind of expected it. For you and the other responder who took exception to this statement, I do however stand by what I said. The rest of your strawman BS about civil rights, wearing pants, and the rest of it has no relevency to discussions about physical development.

It's also important to note that we're talking about heroic fantasy here, so yes, fighting DOES tend to be the focus of what we're discussing, though that is not the sum total of the point.

Also, understand that we're talking about practical builds for the kinds of roles presented in this game, not whether there are other builds in existance that would not work, and thus we do not see represented.

As far as female body builders go, and how women present them, take a look at the work of artists like Julie Belle as an example. Not to mention people like "Zap" from American Gladiators, who also made an apperance in the movie "Skin Deep". You'll notice those ladies again, fit the same basic profile as the girls we're seeing in this artwork, the big differance is that they are usually oiled up (or presented as they are) to show the muscle definition, where in most fantasy art they aren't. Someone like say "Sable" back in her heyday probably could have shown off the same level of muscle definition, but only with a lot more work to present it than most guys will because guys and girls are built differantly.

Whether you like the point or not, men are simply a lot more physically powerful than women and develop that way far better. A girl in her physical peak will look differant from a guy, and be less varied, and furthermore will never have the raw power and performance of an equally peaked guy. Whether it's fair or not, or politically correct or not, that IS how things are. None of that however means that women shouldn't vote, or be prevented from wearing pants, or whatever kind of nonsense you want to try and associate with it.

The point is that the artwork developed the way it has for a reason, sexploitation is not the only reason behind it, and even if it WAS the major reason, it still wouldn't be a valid point because it's a two way street with sex being aimed at both genders more or less equally. Sex sells, and not just to men.

 

[Caverat]

Eh, the portrayal of women in games doesn't bother me, neither does the betrayal of men. The hobby is about fantasy, and I think I'm with a lot of folk that simply don't care how realistic games are with their presentation of people.

I mean, I have the ability to recognize the difference between fantasy and reality, and don't let fantasy sway my expectations. If there are people who can't, that seems to be the problem more than how characters are written/animated.

 

[Something Amyss]

I don't think academia is the problems so much as a lot of the sort of casual, "lay-feminists." People who often are generally feminist but repeat the mantras without context or thought to the same. Repeating an ideology is dangerous when there's no consideration to the momentum behind it.

A lot of the people crying sexism do so as a reflex, just like the gamers who bray when it happens.

I'm not saying there's nothing coming from academia, but I don't think it's the learnin' types who are the main problem. People are blanket offended on both sides. Granted, there is more cause to take a feminist standpoint, but that does not mean each and every person who believes something does so for the right reasons or reflects nobly on it.

 

[Avistew]

It's hard to take seriously your claims that girls are portrayed that way only out of realism, Therumancer, when quite obviously they tend to be given huge breasts, even though female athletes have smaller breasts than the average.

Either they're going for the realism and they should be realist with that too. Or they're using fantasy portrayals of characters and then they don't have to be limited to real life stuff.

Not saying you're right about women, mind you, but if my pictures of various body types in women athletes didn't convince you, I don't think anything I say will.

 

[Muphin_Mann]

Best Big Picture, in my opinion.

 

[Steady Drain]

i love bob

 

[Lun]

I'm a woman, and the only thing I have to say is.... I agree with everything that's been stated in that video. The author really nailed it PERFECTLY.

 

[Lun]

Specifically, let's look at the pre-fight introduction poses.

There's Juri. Yes, like every other female character she's slender and young. Yes, she wears a shirt that is a handkerchief tied in place over her chest. But her pose tells us a lot about her. It says she's ready to fight, and that she's quite confident--the wide, aggressive stance, and the fact she's leaning into the challenge says she's excited about the upcoming fight. She looks cruel, she looks evil, and her eye thing is eye thinging, which tells us she's a borderline crazy person. So we've got a violent fighter who's about to hurl herself into the fray, and if you're not careful she'll probably eat one of your ears.

This is a fine pose for a fighter.

This is Cammy. Like Juri, she's a genetically engineered supersoldier with a sexy body and not very much in the way of clothing. Unlike Juri, this pose doesn't suggest her attitude about the upcoming fight, or how she's going to act in that fight. It does suggest that she's sexually available. Look at my ass, this pose says. I bet you could insert something into it. Can you think of anything fun to put in my ass?

This is a fine pose for a porn star.

Both are dangerous, sexy women with ludicrous backstories and not very much clothing. But one is being presented as a threat, and one is being presented as a fantasy.

I was browsing through the thread, and I want to quote this. You see guys, THIS is what we "feminists" mean!!!

Look at Juri. Now, don't tell me she's not sexy. Don't tell me she's not meanting to be titillating (she even is a declared bisexual/lesbian, as if that mattered in a fighting game). Yet, in this example, Juri is a female character that a feminist like me can definitely like. Because she's not presented as a generical slut. She IS a threat; she has a personality beyond "having a nice body".