The Big Picture: Tropes vs. MovieBob

[yeti585]

What gender-specific problems that men face are "largely self-inflicted"?

The fact that we have so far failed to define what modern masculinity is on a widespread cultural level? The fact that we have too few mature masculine role models? The fact that we're so weak as men that we have to claim feminists are all out to get us?

How have we failed to define "modern masculinity"? Masculinity has not changed with time, neither has femininity. I guess male superheros cannot be role models to you, or you know, all the other male role models. Anyone that claims that "[men] have to claim feminists are all out to get us" Is as blind as the small minority of men that actually claim that.

Where did the Markus Fenix example come from? and what is the point of it? Okay so Markus isn't meant to embarrass me because he is big-strong-manly-man. He's a two-dimensional character but that should only embarrass Epic Games because they lacked the skill/resources/other to write a good character. How does that show Epic Games thinks that we are stupid?

It's an example from modern media. Would you have preferred I referenced "The Odyssey" and criticize Homer for crafting a hero according to Classical Greek ideals rather than modern American ones?

Well, you should criticize Homer and "classic Greek" culture because many of our characters and archetypes are influenced and based around them. But, that is not what this discussion is about.

The writers at Epic do need to answer for their bad characters and plots. But the fact that Markus is marketed as this masculine ideal is a reflection of what they think we want.

With this attitude you must have already forgiven Blizzard for the DRM in Diablo III or Electronic Arts for everything they have done. "Come on guys, you can't blame Electronic Arts for releasing the same game with minor tweaks! It's not like they're responsible for their work!" Markus is marketed this way because that is the only way he can be marketed. Unless you want to create a commercial of Markus dancing through flowers in a pretty dress and then in the game he has to fight his way through hordes of monsters?

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Also lol @ people who don't know that making a high-quality web series ACTUALLY TAKES TIME AND MONEY

Maybe we should ask MOvieBob how much the Escapist pays him every week? Is it a full time job?

Please don't tell me you believe they pay him 150k for 12 episodes. Noone gets payed that much for such amount of work.

$6000 for 12 episodes is pretty reasonable though. She never asked for $150k, and if you read her updates, she's going to be doing it to turn this into a full time scholarly thing with funding research materials, etc.

 

[Nexxis]

Thank you, Bob. Thank you.

so that's what i want to know, from the women who would like to see a change in the industry: is unrealistic portrayels in it entirity bothering you? or is it just the oversexualisation. and if so, is the constant idealisation the problem, or only when it's unrealistic, like if every character walked around with surgically enhanced lips?
what if female characters were all attractive, but in a real human being on the street looking way?

Personally, my problem is that females in games rarely tend to move away from the idea of being "pretty" or "attractive", even if it's in a realistic or oversexualized way. There is little to no variety. I tend to check out a lot of MMOs and, hell, there are times when I'd like to make a female that looks like she's been through hell and back, just like any grizzled veteran guy, but instead, I'm constantly stuck with a realistic or cartoony super model. I would like to see the industry create females outside of the "cute", "pretty", or "attractive" range. And not have them look different because of the art style or as a joke that's constantly referenced.

Edit
For those who are wonder if what she's tackling is an issue or not. It's apparently enough of an issue for people to donate WAY over the 6k that she asked for. It's an issue for somebody (I'm one of those people) and I'm glad she's tackling it. So instead of wasting your time on this, why not support something that is an issue to you?

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

You people and your strawmans. The reason Anita's "project" garnered this much hate in the first place isn't because the gaming community is full of sexist misogynistic pigs, like Anita and certain gaming "journalists" would have you believe, but because she asked for six thousand fucking dollars to produce a six part video series of her standing in front of a camera and talking about shit she doesn't know jack about.

The magic word here is money. She doesn't need equipment, she isn't making a feature length documentary, she's not flying in random developer Y to interview and she has zero fucking knowledge on the subject of sexism in videogames as evidenced by her "Bayonetta" critique. She got 160k to stand in front of a camera and talk, something which numerous other YouTubers in the past have been able to do without resorting to scamming their fucking audience. But you guys keep white knighting for her, I'm sure she'll eventually show a tit or something.

So novelists who get advances on their novels are scamming, too? So that they can eat/live/do stuff with their life while they work on their project? If, as you say, she "doesn't know jack about" the topic, she's going to need to heavily research things. Academic research takes time and money, and if you've actually bothered to look into things she's going to be doing stuff with the $152k she DIDNT ask for that might be worth the money.

But no, it actually was sexist misogynistic pigs who tried shutting her down before they'd even heard her arguments.

 

[Dastardly]

Nice boobs are great, but have no real bearing on combat ability.

This is completely and utterly untrue.

The bigger the breasts thee more hampered their ability to use a bow. Bigger decreases combat ability.

Well, I simply meant they don't enhance it.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Because she's a clueless dope who knows nothing about video games, misogyny and sexism?

Considering she's got a masters degree in social and political thought, and her master's thesis was written on the topic of the representation of women in science-fiction and fantasy media, between you and Anita Sarkeesian, who knows what they're talking about less?

-m

Pwned.

I love how people insinuate that a woman who's spent her adult academic life looking into this doesn't actually know what she's talking about.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

I think the problem with this specific case though is if she was actually as much of a champion of women's issues as she claims to be, why is she focusing on some imaginary woman with big boobs rather than the thousands of real woman who actually fall victim to outdated, sexist cultural ideals in certain parts of the globe every day. I don't see many people in our sheltered little existence being their champion right about now. So, actually, I'd say in relative terms this isn't an issue that really "needs" to be addressed like it's a matter of urgency, and it certainly doesn't require people to throw money at her which she will do nothing with.

The trouble is, while feminism is no doubt an admirable movement that, at it's heart, seeks a fairer society for all, the doesn't stop a lot of feminists from being idiots, in the same way that a lot of people period are idiots. However, in these enlightened times it seems you are unable to call someone who identifies themselves as feminist an idiot, without you being labeled a chauvinist pig, which is a large part what has led to the angry backlash against feminism in general. Does that make the comments on Youtube justified? Hell no, but who honestly cares about what Youtube trolls say anymore. If their opinions aren't worth noting then why are you acting like their petty insults are a big deal? They can spout all the unpleasant sexist comments they like and it will mean nothing because people know by now not to listen to Youtube.

Also, is it just me, or does her whining in her video's about how it's not fair that men get all the 'exciting' jobs in media and entertainment to be painfully immature. In the real world, these 'exciting' jobs, like fire-fighters and soldiers, get people killed, maimed for life and psychologically scarred. I'm not saying there shouldn't be more equality, quite the opposite, but she devolves the argument to 'we want to do all the cool shit too!' when, in the real world, the cool shit isn't cool at all, it's as messy as it comes. That argument, coming from a supposedly mature adult, really grates with me. I want equality, but on the basis of equality itself, not because it 'isn't fair' that more women don't get killed on battlefields or in burning buildings.

Oh jesus, here we go. Derailing 101: "There are ACTUALLY women being abused in (Country X)! Why aren't you going to help them instead of wasting time with this?"

#1 - how do you know she doesn't care about those women / hasn't donated money or done whatever to help?

#2 - That doesn't mean she shouldn't ALSO tackle the problems at home. And while it's true that these representations come from a problem in society, they also reinforce said problems. Tackling one and the other is the ideal method.

I'm not arguing that only one problem can be fixed at a time, I'm arguing if this is even a problem at all. Yes, some female characters in video games are ridiculously proportioned and overly sexualised. So? I'm missing the part where that is actually sexist. Like Bob said, this stuff is aimed at the male demographic (or at least what developers think the male demographic is, I'll get to that in a minute) and I think that makes a crucial difference as to whether or not it's sexist towards women. Are characters like Ivy a message to women that they must conform to this impossible body type, and that they have failed as a woman if they haven't? Are they specifically saying that just because this imaginary person has big tits that the only role a woman can play in life is to be a plinth on which breasts shall be placed? No. They're not implying anything to women because they're not aimed at women at all. These are completely imaginary notions that self-conscious people have placed on them without even bothering to try and gain a greater insight from the creators, and then chosen to blame everyone else for, something I believe is their problem, not mine.

I would actually argue that if these portrayals of women are sexist towards anyone, they are sexist towards men. Their sexualisation is so blatant and cheap that it borders on insulting the male intelligence. Stop me if i'm giving my gender too much credit, but we don't need titties galore to enjoy a game. However, rather than go to the people who are actually responsible for creating these characters, people like the 'Women vs Tropes' woman would prefer to just pin the blame on the abstract 'male demographic', who obviously all think with their cocks apparently, and would take to the streets in disgust if they were forced to confront a reasonable looking female character with actual depth and complexity.

I want a stronger emphasis on characterisation of women in video games. I also want to be able to look at certain characters without cringing at their body proportions, knowing that she looks the way she does because the game makers literally have that low an opinion of me, which is why I get particularly annoyed at why no-one seems to ever take up their grievances with the people who actually make the games, rather than just assume that we are all at fault. Or they could just realise that their is no agenda at work here to deliberately antagonise women, and go fix stuff like Barbie, which actually does preach outdated gender roles and unreasonable expectations to impressionable young females, something that seems to sell quite well among the girls it is specifically marketed to, oddly.

Focusing on just the body type is a massive, massive oversimplification and I will buy a hat to eat it if that's all Sarkeesian does. It has somewhat to do with the physical depictions, yes, but more to do with the characters / their roles / how they're used.

 

[ad5x5]

I'm saying that immersion/relation works better when the character represents you/an ideal. most people don't view themselves as unattractive. Ergo, most characters in games are not going to be unattractive.

By that standard, I'm so enlightened I glow in the dark, because I recognize that physical appearances are not characterization. Also, I quite enjoyed Human Revolution despite every character in the game having a serious Uncanny Valley face going on and Adam Jensen looking a bit like a ferret with sunglasses.

Not saying physical appearance is the entirety of characterisation, but it does help.
I also quite enjoyed DE:HR, but I can't say the characters really drew me in. I never really cared about any of them. Gameplay was good enough to keep me coming back.

The example I was thinking of was a love interest (maybe should have been clearer). Love interests tend to be more common as a target for rescue as it will appear to a broader audience.

Well, what standard of beauty are we using then? Let's take figure as an example. I think anything more than a handful is a waste.

And quite a lot of people agree with you, however some african tribes view having a long neck as an attractive thing so they wear rings round their neck to stretch them. Can't say I'd be moving heaven and earth for someone with a foot-long neck. /hyperbole

This is why female characters will be within the cultural norms, possibly with desirable physical characteristics emphasised. Some small and slight, others lithe and tall.
There won't be any that are too far from the accepted boundaries of attractiveness for a society.

 

[mronoc]

This is a world view completely lacking in any sense of nuance, there's no reason everything has to be one extreme or the other. Expecting people to be prudent and responsible in their behavior and in the creative works they produce isn't advocating censorship.

Censorship is a cold, binary thing, "Material X contains content Y, content Y is inappropriate, material X is banned." This is a call for conversation: Rather than deciding that something is objectionable based solely on content, we should be looking at the context of that content, and what the overall works says about that content, and then not ban something if we decide that what it's saying is objectionable, but simply be aware of the potentially harmful messages to which we're being exposed.

As far as a solution to objectification, that should be fairly obvious: Creators should treat female characters as they would any other, give them fully developed personalities, and have them act (and dress) logically within that personality. Objectification doesn't come from sexualization, but through sexualization lacking any other context, i.e. a female characters with no defining characteristics beyond their body and their sexuality.

We have to live in reality, and it has a hard time balancing out things humans find sexual.
Your options are only to accept it for what it is or to censor it. That is the only way this particular argument ends.

Their are far better arguments about Sexism and Womens Rights then this one.
The right to vote, the right not to be bartered and traded as property, the right to work, the right for equal pay, and so on.

The argument of Women shouldn't be seen sexually is one that only has two outcomes. The only 3rd option is to ignore the argument entirely because the outcomes are unacceptable.

The issues you bring up, while deserving of more acknowledgement than they receive, and certainly more worth taking political action over, are not more interesting conversations to have. These are morally unambiguous conversations that would end up boiling down to moral masturbation. A nuanced conversation is always a more interesting one, and is more likely to result in participants growing as people. This is one of those situations where the conversation is the solution. It's a matter of having an open conversation about what's behind these representations, so we as a society can be more aware of the underlying issue, and ultimately end up holding the creative work we produce to higher standards of understanding what it's saying. There's no clear solution to the problem other than to understand it, and when you decide to simply ignore the conversation, you're not helping. When you actively encourage others to do the same, you're contributing to the problem.

 

[longboardfan]

Thank god there's reason on here. Man Moviebob screwed up on this one, its like he missed the point, the landing strip, the state, and ended up in the ocean somewhere. I don't understand his opinions. This chick wanted money to talk about something she clearly doesn't know much about and didn't mention doing any research other than buying all the new systems and games from the last year. How about interviewing the marketing departments of the AAA studios or even indie devs? Or talking to real gamers. Its not like you need to buy all the systems, there's Lets Plays of almost every game ever made online. Just watch those for free.

captcha: zero tolerance

 

[Rarhnor]

I noticed Bob conveniently ignored that men are indeed objectified in much the same way as women in things like trashy romance novels, daytime soap operas, TV shows like Desperate Housewives and Gray's Anatomy, or even movies like Twilight and I could go on. Last I checked there aren't hordes of men getting in line to buy soap boxes to stand on while they get all indignant on the internet about that though.

It's because men generally accept their objectification. Don't really know why, though.

It's fiction designed to pander to people. They're not insulting men or anything so why should we give a crap?

Oh yeah...

That's actually kinda what I said in my larger post. Didn't really catch the connection until now though. Thanks!

 

[Draconalis]

Well, I simply meant they don't enhance it.

I unno... they could be used as pretty good distractions while their respective owners make with the stabbie and/or shootie.

 

[Lilani]

I noticed Bob conveniently ignored that men are indeed objectified in much the same way as women in things like trashy romance novels, daytime soap operas, TV shows like Desperate Housewives and Gray's Anatomy, or even movies like Twilight and I could go on. Last I checked there aren't hordes of men getting in line to buy soap boxes to stand on while they get all indignant on the internet about that though.

Last I checked, the people who make trashy romance novels aren't trying to market to both genders. And also last I checked, they aren't trying to avidly defend their portrayals of men as "fair."

It's not that things can't be geared toward one gender or another. It's that many games nowadays are trying to appeal to a gender-neutral audience, but they still greatly favor the male side of things, portraying women only as men want to see them. That is why there gets to be so much outrage about this stuff. The fact that they make something that clearly panders to a male audience, and then try to tell us women we should like it too. It's just insulting.

 

[kingmob]

Apparently this fact is not really heard, so I'll keep repeating it. no, gaming does not have a problem with its treatment of women, society does. And focusing the attention on games, or 'tropes' in games, or whatever, serves to divert attention from the very real problem that is pervasive in society.

in addition, linking the objectification of women to sexism is a bit silly. You have already mentioned it yourself Bob, objectification of men is totally fine and they hardly ever have problem with sexism in the places where it matters, so apparently this objectification has little to do with anything. There is nothing inherently wrong with catering to your target audience and contrary to popular belief, most kids grow up in a social environment and will not be heavily influenced by the depiction of women in games, much in the same way they are not influenced by the depiction of men in said games.

This generalizing approach you call a 'community' but what is in reality a hobby shared by many people who differ widely in age, sex, background, etc. needs to die. 'Gamers' are not a homogeneous group, they do not have a central authority and noone carries any form of responsibility because of that hobby.

Change your argument to porn and the depiction of women there and you will suddenly sound like a prude, even though your argument would be exactly the same. Now I'm assuming you are totally ok with porn existing of course, but I hope that gets you thinking. People are fighting windmills here, innocent designers who just want to make some cash with tits and ass, while we should be fighting sexists, racists and whatnot, especially the ones that get away with it.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Considering she's got a masters degree in social and political thought

Yeah those served her well. Here's a preview of her upcoming hit series.

Spoiler

Hey, she's making a video about the role of women in video games. I thought she needed at least six grand to do that? What the hell?!

She got her master's from York University, by the way. Interesting read.
http://www.yorku.ca/gradspth/

However, this is all a bit besides the point. My beef with her is the way she used Kickstarter to scam people out of their money. She is perfectly capable of making videos, why does she need 160 grand then?

and her master's thesis was written on the topic of the representation of women in science-fiction and fantasy media

I'm going to ignore the obvious appeal to authority.

between you and Anita Sarkeesian, who knows what they're talking about less?

I'm guessing you're implying it's me but I'm going to go with her on this one.

She asked for 6k, not 160k. People donated of their own free will to support a cause they believe in. And contrary to what you believe, making a video series--the capture, the writing, the research, the editing--is not free, especially if you are doing that instead of, say, freelance writing, which is what she's been making a living off of thus far.

And yes, someone who has actively been researching this stuff PROBABLY knows more than you do, which is obvious in your posts.

 

[Matt_LRR]

Hey, she's making a video about the role of women in video games. I thought she needed at least six grand to do that? What the hell?!

Yeah, how dare people profit off of projects that make use of their academic backgrounds.

She got her master's from York University, by the way. Interesting read.

You realize that York is among the top-rated universities in Canada, right?

However, this is all a bit besides the point. My beef with her is the way she used Kickstarter to scam people out of their money. She is perfectly capable of making videos, why does she need 160 grand then?

People GAVE her 160 grand. She asked for SIX. Six thousand dollars is pretty inline for the creation of a video series. Maybe a little low, actually. Funny enough, people liked the idea, and decided they wanted to pledge more support than that. Fucking supply and demand, man. Demand is apparent, and consumers evendently value the project far beyond the $6000 she asked for.

and her master's thesis was written on the topic of the representation of women in science-fiction and fantasy media

I'm going to ignore the obvious appeal to authority.

1. An appeal to authority is not a fallacy when the authority being referenced is speaking in their field of expertise and their claim is non-controversial to other authorities in the same field.

2. It's not an appeal to authority to point out that someone is credentialed in a field when you call into question whether or not they're credentialed in that field.