The Counterpoint

[JJShaw]

bullshit complaint, bullshit argument. (well, mostly)
when did video gaming get so goddamn serious?

 

[Taunta]

It is not a good counterpoint. Saying that females are presented unfairly in media does not negate the fact that men are portrayed unfairly in media, but just a statement about women. It is not a competition. Problems do not cease to exist when there are other problems.

If I told you that I was feeling depressed, and you told me that I shouldn't be depressed because there are starving kids in Africa, that'd be a pretty douchey thing to say, because again, this is not the Problem Olympics.

 

[Taunta]

Actually, it's an excellent counterpoint. The entire implied premise of the original assertion (Women are depicted badly in media) is that a gender disparity exists. Pointing out that it also happens to male characters disproves the inequality along gender lines.

This is my stance as well. People don't do it to say that it's okay, they do it because the vast majority of the time people talk about how women are misrepresented in the media, they do so with the opinion that it is down to gender inequality, and that it is sexist.

If both genders are misrepresented then yes, it sucks, but it isn't down to sexism or discrimination, so the argument is invalid. If people want to complain about poor portrayals in the media, then they need to do so without trying to play some sort of "victim" card. That's what people take issue with, not the idea that there are poor portrayals.

Let's take South Park for instance. It was once used as an example of people being discriminated against (Jews for example), but it makes fun of everyone and everything. It doesn't choose one group to make fun of and leave others alone, so you can't complain that your particular group is being "picked on", because it isn't.

Not to mention that comparing a woman being physically hurt (objectively bad) to women not liking large breasted fictional characters (subjectively bad) is a poor example. Obviously it was done for comedic value, but it helps when it works with the message you are trying to make, rather than against it.

I'm glad someone was able to put to word what I was thinking. These are both arguments I can get behind; unfair and degrading representation isn't a good thing, but feminists can't -really- claim that it only happens to women. I'll concede it's happened to more women than men, but it's still not exclusive. The only difference is more men tend to just shrug it off when a male character is made out to be a dumb-as-a-brick beefcake in a loincloth or jock strap, whereas more women tend to feel insulted when a female character has big breasts, a big butt and is a bubble-headed tease.

I think this is one of those cases where this argument only holds water with those who have the following mentality:

"I had a lousy morning; I was taking a shower and the hot water ran out while I was in it."

"That's nothing; yesterday I stepped in the shower, and I got a blast of ice cold water."

"But that's just what I said!"

"Yes, but my story's worse because it happened to ME."

This wouldn't be a problem if the argument was "ONLY females are portrayed negatively in media", but that's not the case. If it were the case, then yes, that would be a valid counterpoint, but the argument is simply "women are portrayed negatively in media". In which case "Uh yeah men are too" is completely irrelevant. It's not a competition, it's not a comparative or superlative statement, it's people trying to put down a problem by stating that other problems exist.

 

[Taunta]

somewhat relevant quote by some escapist forum user:


As much as girl gamers grouse about how terrible girl-targeted games are, the fact is that they sell better than games that actually respect women.

Beyond Good and Evil had a respectable female lead and a newbie-friendly learning curve and was generally ignored, despite a raving critical reception. Many combat-oriented games let players choose the genders of the characters in a non-exploitive fashion, so female gamers do have options to have a female lead.
Hell, the current trend of targetting fratboys with sex scenes and massive boobs is pretty recent. Through the '90s, games were youth-oriented... even games for more mature players seriously avoided sexuality. Things like DOA were the exception, not the rule.
Girls avoided games even then.
At some point you really shouldn't be surprised when the gaming industry gives up on you and says "screw it, let's just put in some naked ***** into the game - the people who would get offended aren't our customers anyways".
The only games that seem to qualify as girl-games are the ones that focus on social aspects with a fringe of hyper-tedious gameplay. When The Sims and Farmville are the things that break ground into the female gamer market - both known for little but drama and tedium - it's really no surprise that game developers don't have much interest in catering to you. I mean, it takes a miracle of timing and luck to get those games to take off (they cannot be promoted through traditional channels - they need to go entirely by word-of-mouth), and they're the kind of thing that would be repulsive to work on.

Really, the gaming industry extended the olive branch many, many times... and the results have been less than impressive. Even Nintendo's only real inroads into female gamers was with the WiiFit, which is the kind of approach that most of the industry doesn't even have as an option - Sony and MS don't have the kind of reputation to pull it off, and nobody else has the hardware ability. Despite their initial focus on being a family and party unit, Nintendo has obviously found that the biggest market was young children (of both genders). Those pictures of fashionable, hip women holding wiimotes and excitedly playing some non-depicted game? What game are they playing? Does anyone know?

They tried. They tried from every possible angle, and the only angle that seems to work is kinda repulsive (farmville).

You're really bringing up the "girls only play Sims/Farmville/WiiFit" bullshit? Really?

 

[PoweD]

somewhat relevant quote by some escapist forum user:


As much as girl gamers grouse about how terrible girl-targeted games are, the fact is that they sell better than games that actually respect women.

Beyond Good and Evil had a respectable female lead and a newbie-friendly learning curve and was generally ignored, despite a raving critical reception. Many combat-oriented games let players choose the genders of the characters in a non-exploitive fashion, so female gamers do have options to have a female lead.
Hell, the current trend of targetting fratboys with sex scenes and massive boobs is pretty recent. Through the '90s, games were youth-oriented... even games for more mature players seriously avoided sexuality. Things like DOA were the exception, not the rule.
Girls avoided games even then.
At some point you really shouldn't be surprised when the gaming industry gives up on you and says "screw it, let's just put in some naked ***** into the game - the people who would get offended aren't our customers anyways".
The only games that seem to qualify as girl-games are the ones that focus on social aspects with a fringe of hyper-tedious gameplay. When The Sims and Farmville are the things that break ground into the female gamer market - both known for little but drama and tedium - it's really no surprise that game developers don't have much interest in catering to you. I mean, it takes a miracle of timing and luck to get those games to take off (they cannot be promoted through traditional channels - they need to go entirely by word-of-mouth), and they're the kind of thing that would be repulsive to work on.

Really, the gaming industry extended the olive branch many, many times... and the results have been less than impressive. Even Nintendo's only real inroads into female gamers was with the WiiFit, which is the kind of approach that most of the industry doesn't even have as an option - Sony and MS don't have the kind of reputation to pull it off, and nobody else has the hardware ability. Despite their initial focus on being a family and party unit, Nintendo has obviously found that the biggest market was young children (of both genders). Those pictures of fashionable, hip women holding wiimotes and excitedly playing some non-depicted game? What game are they playing? Does anyone know?

They tried. They tried from every possible angle, and the only angle that seems to work is kinda repulsive (farmville).

You're really bringing up the "girls only play Sims/Farmville/WiiFit" bullshit? Really?

I'm sorry, but its mostly true.
If most of those "gamer girls" played AAA games, DOA wouldn't be sold or made the way it is right now.

 

[Denamic]

Actually, it's an excellent counterpoint. The entire implied premise of the original assertion (Women are depicted badly in media) is that a gender disparity exists. Pointing out that it also happens to male characters disproves the inequality along gender lines.

This is my stance as well. People don't do it to say that it's okay, they do it because the vast majority of the time people talk about how women are misrepresented in the media, they do so with the opinion that it is down to gender inequality, and that it is sexist.

If both genders are misrepresented then yes, it sucks, but it isn't down to sexism or discrimination, so the argument is invalid. If people want to complain about poor portrayals in the media, then they need to do so without trying to play some sort of "victim" card. That's what people take issue with, not the idea that there are poor portrayals.

Let's take South Park for instance. It was once used as an example of people being discriminated against (Jews for example), but it makes fun of everyone and everything. It doesn't choose one group to make fun of and leave others alone, so you can't complain that your particular group is being "picked on", because it isn't.

Not to mention that comparing a woman being physically hurt (objectively bad) to women not liking large breasted fictional characters (subjectively bad) is a poor example. Obviously it was done for comedic value, but it helps when it works with the message you are trying to make, rather than against it.

I'm glad someone was able to put to word what I was thinking. These are both arguments I can get behind; unfair and degrading representation isn't a good thing, but feminists can't -really- claim that it only happens to women. I'll concede it's happened to more women than men, but it's still not exclusive. The only difference is more men tend to just shrug it off when a male character is made out to be a dumb-as-a-brick beefcake in a loincloth or jock strap, whereas more women tend to feel insulted when a female character has big breasts, a big butt and is a bubble-headed tease.

I think this is one of those cases where this argument only holds water with those who have the following mentality:

"I had a lousy morning; I was taking a shower and the hot water ran out while I was in it."

"That's nothing; yesterday I stepped in the shower, and I got a blast of ice cold water."

"But that's just what I said!"

"Yes, but my story's worse because it happened to ME."

This wouldn't be a problem if the argument was "ONLY females are portrayed negatively in media", but that's not the case. If it were the case, then yes, that would be a valid counterpoint, but the argument is simply "women are portrayed negatively in media". In which case "Uh yeah men are too" is completely irrelevant. It's not a competition, it's not a comparative or superlative statement, it's people trying to put down a problem by stating that other problems exist.

Why only argue about one gender's plight when both are subject to it? That's some pretty ironic sexism.

 

[Taunta]

Actually, it's an excellent counterpoint. The entire implied premise of the original assertion (Women are depicted badly in media) is that a gender disparity exists. Pointing out that it also happens to male characters disproves the inequality along gender lines.

This is my stance as well. People don't do it to say that it's okay, they do it because the vast majority of the time people talk about how women are misrepresented in the media, they do so with the opinion that it is down to gender inequality, and that it is sexist.

If both genders are misrepresented then yes, it sucks, but it isn't down to sexism or discrimination, so the argument is invalid. If people want to complain about poor portrayals in the media, then they need to do so without trying to play some sort of "victim" card. That's what people take issue with, not the idea that there are poor portrayals.

Let's take South Park for instance. It was once used as an example of people being discriminated against (Jews for example), but it makes fun of everyone and everything. It doesn't choose one group to make fun of and leave others alone, so you can't complain that your particular group is being "picked on", because it isn't.

Not to mention that comparing a woman being physically hurt (objectively bad) to women not liking large breasted fictional characters (subjectively bad) is a poor example. Obviously it was done for comedic value, but it helps when it works with the message you are trying to make, rather than against it.

I'm glad someone was able to put to word what I was thinking. These are both arguments I can get behind; unfair and degrading representation isn't a good thing, but feminists can't -really- claim that it only happens to women. I'll concede it's happened to more women than men, but it's still not exclusive. The only difference is more men tend to just shrug it off when a male character is made out to be a dumb-as-a-brick beefcake in a loincloth or jock strap, whereas more women tend to feel insulted when a female character has big breasts, a big butt and is a bubble-headed tease.

I think this is one of those cases where this argument only holds water with those who have the following mentality:

"I had a lousy morning; I was taking a shower and the hot water ran out while I was in it."

"That's nothing; yesterday I stepped in the shower, and I got a blast of ice cold water."

"But that's just what I said!"

"Yes, but my story's worse because it happened to ME."

This wouldn't be a problem if the argument was "ONLY females are portrayed negatively in media", but that's not the case. If it were the case, then yes, that would be a valid counterpoint, but the argument is simply "women are portrayed negatively in media". In which case "Uh yeah men are too" is completely irrelevant. It's not a competition, it's not a comparative or superlative statement, it's people trying to put down a problem by stating that other problems exist.

Why only argue about one gender's plight when both are subject to it? That's some pretty ironic sexism.

That's not sexism. That's called focusing on a single subject. Once again, the existence of one problem does not diminish or negate another problem.

 

[Taunta]

somewhat relevant quote by some escapist forum user:


As much as girl gamers grouse about how terrible girl-targeted games are, the fact is that they sell better than games that actually respect women.

Beyond Good and Evil had a respectable female lead and a newbie-friendly learning curve and was generally ignored, despite a raving critical reception. Many combat-oriented games let players choose the genders of the characters in a non-exploitive fashion, so female gamers do have options to have a female lead.
Hell, the current trend of targetting fratboys with sex scenes and massive boobs is pretty recent. Through the '90s, games were youth-oriented... even games for more mature players seriously avoided sexuality. Things like DOA were the exception, not the rule.
Girls avoided games even then.
At some point you really shouldn't be surprised when the gaming industry gives up on you and says "screw it, let's just put in some naked ***** into the game - the people who would get offended aren't our customers anyways".
The only games that seem to qualify as girl-games are the ones that focus on social aspects with a fringe of hyper-tedious gameplay. When The Sims and Farmville are the things that break ground into the female gamer market - both known for little but drama and tedium - it's really no surprise that game developers don't have much interest in catering to you. I mean, it takes a miracle of timing and luck to get those games to take off (they cannot be promoted through traditional channels - they need to go entirely by word-of-mouth), and they're the kind of thing that would be repulsive to work on.

Really, the gaming industry extended the olive branch many, many times... and the results have been less than impressive. Even Nintendo's only real inroads into female gamers was with the WiiFit, which is the kind of approach that most of the industry doesn't even have as an option - Sony and MS don't have the kind of reputation to pull it off, and nobody else has the hardware ability. Despite their initial focus on being a family and party unit, Nintendo has obviously found that the biggest market was young children (of both genders). Those pictures of fashionable, hip women holding wiimotes and excitedly playing some non-depicted game? What game are they playing? Does anyone know?

They tried. They tried from every possible angle, and the only angle that seems to work is kinda repulsive (farmville).

You're really bringing up the "girls only play Sims/Farmville/WiiFit" bullshit? Really?

I'm sorry, but its mostly true.
If most of those "gamer girls" played AAA games, DOA wouldn't be sold or made the way it is right now.

You wanna cite any demographics for that?

 

[PoweD]

somewhat relevant quote by some escapist forum user:


As much as girl gamers grouse about how terrible girl-targeted games are, the fact is that they sell better than games that actually respect women.

Beyond Good and Evil had a respectable female lead and a newbie-friendly learning curve and was generally ignored, despite a raving critical reception. Many combat-oriented games let players choose the genders of the characters in a non-exploitive fashion, so female gamers do have options to have a female lead.
Hell, the current trend of targetting fratboys with sex scenes and massive boobs is pretty recent. Through the '90s, games were youth-oriented... even games for more mature players seriously avoided sexuality. Things like DOA were the exception, not the rule.
Girls avoided games even then.
At some point you really shouldn't be surprised when the gaming industry gives up on you and says "screw it, let's just put in some naked ***** into the game - the people who would get offended aren't our customers anyways".
The only games that seem to qualify as girl-games are the ones that focus on social aspects with a fringe of hyper-tedious gameplay. When The Sims and Farmville are the things that break ground into the female gamer market - both known for little but drama and tedium - it's really no surprise that game developers don't have much interest in catering to you. I mean, it takes a miracle of timing and luck to get those games to take off (they cannot be promoted through traditional channels - they need to go entirely by word-of-mouth), and they're the kind of thing that would be repulsive to work on.

Really, the gaming industry extended the olive branch many, many times... and the results have been less than impressive. Even Nintendo's only real inroads into female gamers was with the WiiFit, which is the kind of approach that most of the industry doesn't even have as an option - Sony and MS don't have the kind of reputation to pull it off, and nobody else has the hardware ability. Despite their initial focus on being a family and party unit, Nintendo has obviously found that the biggest market was young children (of both genders). Those pictures of fashionable, hip women holding wiimotes and excitedly playing some non-depicted game? What game are they playing? Does anyone know?

They tried. They tried from every possible angle, and the only angle that seems to work is kinda repulsive (farmville).

You're really bringing up the "girls only play Sims/Farmville/WiiFit" bullshit? Really?

I'm sorry, but its mostly true.
If most of those "gamer girls" played AAA games, DOA wouldn't be sold or made the way it is right now.

You wanna cite any demographics for that?

Why should i?
Game sales show it themselves.

 

[lacktheknack]

Actually, it's an excellent counterpoint. The entire implied premise of the original assertion (Women are depicted badly in media) is that a gender disparity exists. Pointing out that it also happens to male characters disproves the inequality along gender lines.

This is my stance as well. People don't do it to say that it's okay, they do it because the vast majority of the time people talk about how women are misrepresented in the media, they do so with the opinion that it is down to gender inequality, and that it is sexist.

If both genders are misrepresented then yes, it sucks, but it isn't down to sexism or discrimination, so the argument is invalid. If people want to complain about poor portrayals in the media, then they need to do so without trying to play some sort of "victim" card. That's what people take issue with, not the idea that there are poor portrayals.

Let's take South Park for instance. It was once used as an example of people being discriminated against (Jews for example), but it makes fun of everyone and everything. It doesn't choose one group to make fun of and leave others alone, so you can't complain that your particular group is being "picked on", because it isn't.

Not to mention that comparing a woman being physically hurt (objectively bad) to women not liking large breasted fictional characters (subjectively bad) is a poor example. Obviously it was done for comedic value, but it helps when it works with the message you are trying to make, rather than against it.

I'm glad someone was able to put to word what I was thinking. These are both arguments I can get behind; unfair and degrading representation isn't a good thing, but feminists can't -really- claim that it only happens to women. I'll concede it's happened to more women than men, but it's still not exclusive. The only difference is more men tend to just shrug it off when a male character is made out to be a dumb-as-a-brick beefcake in a loincloth or jock strap, whereas more women tend to feel insulted when a female character has big breasts, a big butt and is a bubble-headed tease.

I think this is one of those cases where this argument only holds water with those who have the following mentality:

"I had a lousy morning; I was taking a shower and the hot water ran out while I was in it."

"That's nothing; yesterday I stepped in the shower, and I got a blast of ice cold water."

"But that's just what I said!"

"Yes, but my story's worse because it happened to ME."

This wouldn't be a problem if the argument was "ONLY females are portrayed negatively in media", but that's not the case. If it were the case, then yes, that would be a valid counterpoint, but the argument is simply "women are portrayed negatively in media". In which case "Uh yeah men are too" is completely irrelevant. It's not a competition, it's not a comparative or superlative statement, it's people trying to put down a problem by stating that other problems exist.

Why only argue about one gender's plight when both are subject to it? That's some pretty ironic sexism.

That's not sexism. That's called focusing on a single subject. Once again, the existence of one problem does not diminish or negate another problem.

Actually, the single subject should be "People are portrayed negatively in media". If both men and women are subject to it, then gender shouldn't matter one way or the other, as they're coming from the same direction.

 

[Taunta]

somewhat relevant quote by some escapist forum user:


As much as girl gamers grouse about how terrible girl-targeted games are, the fact is that they sell better than games that actually respect women.

Beyond Good and Evil had a respectable female lead and a newbie-friendly learning curve and was generally ignored, despite a raving critical reception. Many combat-oriented games let players choose the genders of the characters in a non-exploitive fashion, so female gamers do have options to have a female lead.
Hell, the current trend of targetting fratboys with sex scenes and massive boobs is pretty recent. Through the '90s, games were youth-oriented... even games for more mature players seriously avoided sexuality. Things like DOA were the exception, not the rule.
Girls avoided games even then.
At some point you really shouldn't be surprised when the gaming industry gives up on you and says "screw it, let's just put in some naked ***** into the game - the people who would get offended aren't our customers anyways".
The only games that seem to qualify as girl-games are the ones that focus on social aspects with a fringe of hyper-tedious gameplay. When The Sims and Farmville are the things that break ground into the female gamer market - both known for little but drama and tedium - it's really no surprise that game developers don't have much interest in catering to you. I mean, it takes a miracle of timing and luck to get those games to take off (they cannot be promoted through traditional channels - they need to go entirely by word-of-mouth), and they're the kind of thing that would be repulsive to work on.

Really, the gaming industry extended the olive branch many, many times... and the results have been less than impressive. Even Nintendo's only real inroads into female gamers was with the WiiFit, which is the kind of approach that most of the industry doesn't even have as an option - Sony and MS don't have the kind of reputation to pull it off, and nobody else has the hardware ability. Despite their initial focus on being a family and party unit, Nintendo has obviously found that the biggest market was young children (of both genders). Those pictures of fashionable, hip women holding wiimotes and excitedly playing some non-depicted game? What game are they playing? Does anyone know?

They tried. They tried from every possible angle, and the only angle that seems to work is kinda repulsive (farmville).

You're really bringing up the "girls only play Sims/Farmville/WiiFit" bullshit? Really?

I'm sorry, but its mostly true.
If most of those "gamer girls" played AAA games, DOA wouldn't be sold or made the way it is right now.

You wanna cite any demographics for that?

Why should i?
Game sales show it themselves.

Because the burden of proof falls upon the accuser.

 

[PoweD]

somewhat relevant quote by some escapist forum user:


As much as girl gamers grouse about how terrible girl-targeted games are, the fact is that they sell better than games that actually respect women.

Beyond Good and Evil had a respectable female lead and a newbie-friendly learning curve and was generally ignored, despite a raving critical reception. Many combat-oriented games let players choose the genders of the characters in a non-exploitive fashion, so female gamers do have options to have a female lead.
Hell, the current trend of targetting fratboys with sex scenes and massive boobs is pretty recent. Through the '90s, games were youth-oriented... even games for more mature players seriously avoided sexuality. Things like DOA were the exception, not the rule.
Girls avoided games even then.
At some point you really shouldn't be surprised when the gaming industry gives up on you and says "screw it, let's just put in some naked ***** into the game - the people who would get offended aren't our customers anyways".
The only games that seem to qualify as girl-games are the ones that focus on social aspects with a fringe of hyper-tedious gameplay. When The Sims and Farmville are the things that break ground into the female gamer market - both known for little but drama and tedium - it's really no surprise that game developers don't have much interest in catering to you. I mean, it takes a miracle of timing and luck to get those games to take off (they cannot be promoted through traditional channels - they need to go entirely by word-of-mouth), and they're the kind of thing that would be repulsive to work on.

Really, the gaming industry extended the olive branch many, many times... and the results have been less than impressive. Even Nintendo's only real inroads into female gamers was with the WiiFit, which is the kind of approach that most of the industry doesn't even have as an option - Sony and MS don't have the kind of reputation to pull it off, and nobody else has the hardware ability. Despite their initial focus on being a family and party unit, Nintendo has obviously found that the biggest market was young children (of both genders). Those pictures of fashionable, hip women holding wiimotes and excitedly playing some non-depicted game? What game are they playing? Does anyone know?

They tried. They tried from every possible angle, and the only angle that seems to work is kinda repulsive (farmville).

You're really bringing up the "girls only play Sims/Farmville/WiiFit" bullshit? Really?

I'm sorry, but its mostly true.
If most of those "gamer girls" played AAA games, DOA wouldn't be sold or made the way it is right now.

You wanna cite any demographics for that?

Why should i?
Game sales show it themselves.

Because the burden of proof falls upon the accuser.

Read the bolded part carefully.

 

[rbstewart7263]

somewhat relevant quote by some escapist forum user:


As much as girl gamers grouse about how terrible girl-targeted games are, the fact is that they sell better than games that actually respect women.

Beyond Good and Evil had a respectable female lead and a newbie-friendly learning curve and was generally ignored, despite a raving critical reception. Many combat-oriented games let players choose the genders of the characters in a non-exploitive fashion, so female gamers do have options to have a female lead.
Hell, the current trend of targetting fratboys with sex scenes and massive boobs is pretty recent. Through the '90s, games were youth-oriented... even games for more mature players seriously avoided sexuality. Things like DOA were the exception, not the rule.
Girls avoided games even then.
At some point you really shouldn't be surprised when the gaming industry gives up on you and says "screw it, let's just put in some naked ***** into the game - the people who would get offended aren't our customers anyways".
The only games that seem to qualify as girl-games are the ones that focus on social aspects with a fringe of hyper-tedious gameplay. When The Sims and Farmville are the things that break ground into the female gamer market - both known for little but drama and tedium - it's really no surprise that game developers don't have much interest in catering to you. I mean, it takes a miracle of timing and luck to get those games to take off (they cannot be promoted through traditional channels - they need to go entirely by word-of-mouth), and they're the kind of thing that would be repulsive to work on.

Really, the gaming industry extended the olive branch many, many times... and the results have been less than impressive. Even Nintendo's only real inroads into female gamers was with the WiiFit, which is the kind of approach that most of the industry doesn't even have as an option - Sony and MS don't have the kind of reputation to pull it off, and nobody else has the hardware ability. Despite their initial focus on being a family and party unit, Nintendo has obviously found that the biggest market was young children (of both genders). Those pictures of fashionable, hip women holding wiimotes and excitedly playing some non-depicted game? What game are they playing? Does anyone know?

They tried. They tried from every possible angle, and the only angle that seems to work is kinda repulsive (farmville).

You're really bringing up the "girls only play Sims/Farmville/WiiFit" bullshit? Really?

Now I have a question for you guys. what on average do girls actually play? I have female friends that play ass creed and your average bioware rpg but what are the numbers? I know 50 percent play videogames but how many of those are farmville and such? Because while I love to see games break the mold I know the publishers are going to go chasing after the fattest piece of meat. thats basic survivalism you cant fault them for that.

edit: That said hollywood has proven that niche markets are worth the extra effort put into them.

 

[AniThari]

Let's see. I'm a woman and what have I played and would I replay? Well...

Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect, Soul Calibur, Legend of Zelda, Smash Brothers, God of War, Minecraft, Warcraft, Mortal Kombat, Dragon Age, Deus Ex, Portal, Saint's Row, Tomb Raider, Star War's Republic Commando, Katamari Damacy, Pokémon, YuGiOh, Devil May Cry, Mace: The Dark Age, Sphinx and the Cursed Mummy, Sims, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Bioshock, Prince of Persia, Shadow of the Colossus, Kingdom Hearts, Final Fantasy X-2 & Crystal Chronicles, Metal Gear Solid, and Resident Evil 4.

There were probably more games but I can't remember them all (I do remember having a few PS2 Lord of the Rings games I popped in from time to time). Those series either stuck out in my mind or I can remember something awesome about them. And no I didn't have an XBox, we had a very sore loser in my house and controllers were routinely thrown at my head when I won. My thinking was this when it came to classic XBox controllers:

"I WON! *controller slams against skull* ... o_o *wakes up in hospital*"

So, yeah, can I just say, "Better characterization for all"? Please? Why are we fighting? We should point out when something is wrong so the developers can fix it this time or in the next go around. I've played Ivy and Taki of SC and I like their mechanics. They're both fun to play - but I can't really look at them anymore. I have this really strange relationship going with Ivy where I'm saying, "Hunny it's not your weapon style, or your soul - it's that I know you've been adding something to that bust line and I can't take the bouncy anymore." I end up playing Sigfried when I can't use a custom character now.

I haven't got a problem with the sexualization of females, it's still happening in every other media in the world. What I have a problem with is the characterization of everyone, male, female, or other. Men being all action and no talk, women being all talk and mostly posing, isn't an accurate portrayal of either group, is it?

My questions are why are we still asking about female models in multiplayer and where did the relatable males go? When did all these snarky, empty headed, mother- *coughs* nevermind where did these guys come from? Why is it a silent protagonist makes a better story than a talking one? Why can't everyone understand that there will always be "fun" games but sometimes, people just want a little scary, a little heartwarming, sprinkled with a pinch of awesome.

But overall doesn't everyone just want to get so lost in a character that you care about who you're playing and the world they live in? Is something wrong with that?

 

[rbstewart7263]

Let's see. I'm a woman and what have I played and would I replay? Well...

Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect, Soul Calibur, Legend of Zelda, Smash Brothers, God of War, Minecraft, Warcraft, Mortal Kombat, Dragon Age, Deus Ex, Portal, Saint's Row, Tomb Raider, Star War's Republic Commando, Katamari Damacy, Pokémon, YuGiOh, Devil May Cry, Mace: The Dark Age, Sphinx and the Cursed Mummy, Sims, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Bioshock, Prince of Persia, Shadow of the Colossus, Kingdom Hearts, Final Fantasy X-2 & Crystal Chronicles, Metal Gear Solid, and Resident Evil 4.

There were probably more games but I can't remember them all (I do remember having a few PS2 Lord of the Rings games I popped in from time to time). Those series either stuck out in my mind or I can remember something awesome about them. And no I didn't have an XBox, we had a very sore loser in my house and controllers were routinely thrown at my head when I won. My thinking was this when it came to classic XBox controllers:

"I WON! *controller slams against skull* ... o_o *wakes up in hospital*"

So, yeah, can I just say, "Better characterization for all"? Please? Why are we fighting? We should point out when something is wrong so the developers can fix it this time or in the next go around. I've played Ivy and Taki of SC and I like their mechanics. They're both fun to play - but I can't really look at them anymore. I have this really strange relationship going with Ivy where I'm saying, "Hunny it's not your weapon style, or your soul - it's that I know you've been adding something to that bust line and I can't take the bouncy anymore." I end up playing Sigfried when I can't use a custom character now.

I haven't got a problem with the sexualization of females, it's still happening in every other media in the world. What I have a problem with is the characterization of everyone, male, female, or other. Men being all action and no talk, women being all talk and mostly posing, isn't an accurate portrayal of either group, is it?

My questions are why are we still asking about female models in multiplayer and where did the relatable males go? When did all these snarky, empty headed, mother- *coughs* nevermind where did these guys come from? Why is it a silent protagonist makes a better story than a talking one? Why can't everyone understand that there will always be "fun" games but sometimes, people just want a little scary, a little heartwarming, sprinkled with a pinch of awesome.

But overall doesn't everyone just want to get so lost in a character that you care about who you're playing and the world they live in? Is something wrong with that?

Agreeably so and I do want more of that but I dont feel that shaming anything that can be considered fan service is the way to do it. I shouldnt and dont feel ashamed by liking games like doa5. Its the same with female fanservice like the twilight films. I dont shame them for there tastes in media and the portrayal of men with there perfect bodies and all that.

 

[theultimateend]

The reason why DOA girls are all jiggly, wasp-waisted waifs is the same reason why Kratos is 7 feet of steel-reinforced steroid.

No, actually, it really isn't.

The DOA chicks look like that because that's what guys (at least, the guys who play those games) want to look at.

Kratos is the way he is because that's what guys want to look like, and therefor play as.

I used to play DOA because it was my favorite fighting game, similar situation with Soul Calibur, so it was always strange for me when folks started pointing out the tits in both games.

Mostly because I wondered who had the problem, the game developers or the people obsessing over it.

But the general consensus of these forums is the former, so I'll say that's the case to save myself internet arguments .

Edit: I guess my problem with relating is that I see nothing wrong with men being used in films and media because they are sexy. If folks want to see sexy people they'll see them, if they want to see unrealistically sexy people they'll see them, in the end it falls on the consumer to not buy what they don't agree with.

Complaining about it like Jim says is all well and good but if I make a game with models as characters and it makes 90 million dollars I'm probably not going to listen to a few thousand people complaining online. Because my game just made enough to buy an island and supply it would food, water, and internet for the rest of my life and then some.

 

[Taunta]

somewhat relevant quote by some escapist forum user:


As much as girl gamers grouse about how terrible girl-targeted games are, the fact is that they sell better than games that actually respect women.

Beyond Good and Evil had a respectable female lead and a newbie-friendly learning curve and was generally ignored, despite a raving critical reception. Many combat-oriented games let players choose the genders of the characters in a non-exploitive fashion, so female gamers do have options to have a female lead.
Hell, the current trend of targetting fratboys with sex scenes and massive boobs is pretty recent. Through the '90s, games were youth-oriented... even games for more mature players seriously avoided sexuality. Things like DOA were the exception, not the rule.
Girls avoided games even then.
At some point you really shouldn't be surprised when the gaming industry gives up on you and says "screw it, let's just put in some naked ***** into the game - the people who would get offended aren't our customers anyways".
The only games that seem to qualify as girl-games are the ones that focus on social aspects with a fringe of hyper-tedious gameplay. When The Sims and Farmville are the things that break ground into the female gamer market - both known for little but drama and tedium - it's really no surprise that game developers don't have much interest in catering to you. I mean, it takes a miracle of timing and luck to get those games to take off (they cannot be promoted through traditional channels - they need to go entirely by word-of-mouth), and they're the kind of thing that would be repulsive to work on.

Really, the gaming industry extended the olive branch many, many times... and the results have been less than impressive. Even Nintendo's only real inroads into female gamers was with the WiiFit, which is the kind of approach that most of the industry doesn't even have as an option - Sony and MS don't have the kind of reputation to pull it off, and nobody else has the hardware ability. Despite their initial focus on being a family and party unit, Nintendo has obviously found that the biggest market was young children (of both genders). Those pictures of fashionable, hip women holding wiimotes and excitedly playing some non-depicted game? What game are they playing? Does anyone know?

They tried. They tried from every possible angle, and the only angle that seems to work is kinda repulsive (farmville).

You're really bringing up the "girls only play Sims/Farmville/WiiFit" bullshit? Really?

I'm sorry, but its mostly true.
If most of those "gamer girls" played AAA games, DOA wouldn't be sold or made the way it is right now.

You wanna cite any demographics for that?

Why should i?
Game sales show it themselves.

Because the burden of proof falls upon the accuser.

Read the bolded part carefully.

Yeah that's still a statement with no evidence for it whatsoever besides your own assertions. If you would like to provide proof of said game sales, that's a different matter.

 

[Lieju]

It's not really just the fact that the argument is used (and I agree, there's also a lot of problems with the way male characters are depicted), but that it's used in that way.

"Yeah, you have a problem, but we have the same problem too, and we aren't doing anything about it"

Isn't that what the comic is about?

If you really have a problem (like being on fire), shouldn't you try to solve it? If you aren't, it doesn't seem to bother you all that much.

I think the main problem with this comic....other than "oh boy, is it feminism tuesday already?"...is the way they're illustrating it.

The illustration that they use is one of a woman getting burned and the two guys shrugging it off. In this case, this is actually an excellent counterpoint almost to the point of shutting down the conversation.

Why?

Because, without going to TV Tropes, violence against males has been a long accepted practice in our media whether it is video games or movies. Since Kratos has been mentioned, we can see that the next game is going to back away from violence against women or any female creatures. Males, on the other hand, are going to continue to have Kratos expose their insides to the outsides. Females are quite often the minority in the cannon fodder section usually only coming in as sub-bosses/bosses if at all.

If the comic had addressed the sexual portrayal of females vs males or even sexualizing violence against women, it may have had a point. As it is, the last panel should have had roughly 20-30 males on fire with 4 also having katanas stuck through their abdomen and 15 having taken a shotgun blast to the chest for it to actually be proportional. Under those circumstances, it is absolutely appropriate to make the counterpoint of how men are far more likely to have violence inflicted on them in any form of media than women.

Isn't that the part of the argument for why women are depicted badly in media?
There are no female enemies because it's the assumption that being 'male' is the standard.

If you kill a man, that just killing.
If you kill a woman, their femininity is something that apparently cannot be ignored. Either the violence against them will be avoided, or it will be sexualised.

I'd love to have cool female villains you get to kick the shit out of, as long as them being female isn't the main point. You said it yourself, there aren't many female bosses. Why? I love a good villain and would absolutely love to see more great villains that are women.

The women being badly portrayed, and men being badly portrayed aren't totally unrelated.
The same sexist opinions that lead to the lack of good female characters also lead to things like violence against men being more acceptable.

I mean, why do you think that is?
Doesn't it have to do with the fact that men are more viewed as active participants in conflicts while women are more viewed as victims?

 

[The Lugz]

Actually, it's an excellent counterpoint. The entire implied premise of the original assertion (Women are depicted badly in media) is that a gender disparity exists. Pointing out that it also happens to male characters disproves the inequality along gender lines

^This, exactly.
basically the media sucks universally and bitching about being misrepresented frankly
comes off as being whiny when literally every demographic is misrepresented for the purposes of sensationalizing them for viewers attention
THE MEDIA is the problem not everyone else just stop listening to it, it's all bs and lies

join the club, they hate on everyone
is the most positive statement i could possibly come up with in this situation

what i have to say, however is:
go fourth flaming hipsters, lay down your pyrotechnic law!
'Holy Choir'

 

[Schadrach]

1) We weren't talking about men, we were talking about women. Start a thread about men if you genuinely give a shit. (The fact that there are comparatively few male portrayal threads implies they don't).

...

I was actually going to start a thread about male portrayals, just to see if those who make the "whataboutthemen" arguments actually chip in and have a proper discussion that needs to be had. Guess there is no point now.

There's a problem with doing that -- namely that there's a significant cadre of people who like to reframe it so men's problems are really women's problems no matter how strained that argument is (usually as a lead in to how the solution is more feminism). Unless you made a point of arguing that the thread existed to make that point, then that reframing is going to happen. After that reframing happens, then it becomes a matter of bringing up men's issues being that "we aren't talking about men" again. It's happened more than once, and it's a clever trick.

If a family was starving to death due to extreme poverty conditions that were the fault of their government's harsh conditions and they complained and tried to reason with the government. The government pointing out that the families neighbors are also starving along side them does not make everything okay. That makes it even worse.

But this is the flawed logic those who use this argument are taking.

That depends, is the family's argumenty that they're starving, therefore they need to be taken care of, while the other family starving is OK because they're really enacting an "appetite fantasy" in which they're gaining power over their need to eat? Because that's what the most common counterargument amounts to.

That's not sexism. That's called focusing on a single subject. Once again, the existence of one problem does not diminish or negate another problem.

The core problem is really just poor writing in video games though. What typically happens in cases where you want to gender a problem that isn't necessarily gendered is that you end up making a big to-do about women's problems and basically ignoring men. Intimate partner violence is a good example -- there's evidence that most of it goes both ways and that in cases where it doesn't that women are perpetrators about as often as men, which is why we refer to it as "violence against women" and have explicit legal discrimination in the services available for dealing with it.

I could literally find a problem for which 80+% of those effected are men, and someone would suggest "gender-focused" solutions meaning solutions focused on women, because that's who really needs help. Actually, I don't have to go to far -- 80% of all suicides are men, most suicide prevention programs are focused on women.

Or just go with quoting Hillary Clinton: "Women have always been the primary victims of war."