The rampant Sexualization in videogames

[Angus]

Men are, apparently, more likely to commit suicide. Your claim is apparently this is because society treats them as inherently worthless. I would instead argue that Men are encouraged to be self-sufficient and furthermore supporting their family. Inability to live up to these expectations can lead to severe depression and suicide. Again I see no clear link to a theme of "disposability".

The fact that neither of us was told of these statistics is a clear indicator that men are disposable- its not weird in evolutionary terms either that such a culture would inevatably arise.
This disposability is common in most males in most species.

Its not morally right to think that way, but its not just by chance that both you and I probably pictured a sad emo-chick with a razor when we thought of suicide, not an unemployed 20+ year old man, or a divorced father or husband.


In sweden newspapers there was great debate about "alvedon-girls" girls that killed themselves with painkillers, but never about the 80% of suicides that are amongst men because of depression, often caused due to not being needed.
Men would rather be drafted in WW1 than bear the shame of being given a white feather from a girl. That says a lot.

 

[Anthony Corrigan]

I absolutely adore how the men who try to shift the focus of female outrage by pointing out how male characters are sexualized too, seem to share the universal and utterly hilarious delusion that Kratos or Marcus Phoenix actually attract a significant number of female fans.

Sorry, boys. If you want to make your point, I'm afraid you're going to have to point out some of those androgynous japanese characters you hate so much, not the testosterone poisoned he-men you wish you were. Sephiroth makes more fangirls in a day than Marcus Phoenix will ever have in his entire existence.

Those that say that are screwing up the argument.

It's not that men are sexualised as well, it's that the portrayal of men is sexist as well.

Games reinforce the archaic notion that "Heroism" is about Physical strength and violence based on obsolete gender roles.

Now before you say "It's still designed for males", yes, It's for males, just as magazines like Vogue are for women.

[Ok maybe not vogue, but magazines targeted at girls, usually teen, that imply this is how you should look]
That doesn't mean they're any less harmful.

The Jock that is a jock because jocks get all the girls would probably like us all to hold onto these archaic notions.

While I would like to see our society trend away from vain and petty concerns, I don't see men suffering from the same degree of body disphoria that women do. Maybe that's because men are allowed to be things besides pretty. How often do non-pretty women get to be anything in any kind of media vs men that get to be ugly and- strong, brave, smart, diplomatic, cunning, crafty, etc...

Actually that's changing for the worse

http://www.msoe.edu/life_at_msoe/current_student_resources/student_resources/counseling_services/newsletters_for_mental_health/body_image_dissatisfaction.shtml

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/FY/FY96200.pdf

http://www.raderprograms.com/affected-groups/men-eating-disorders.html

 

[Stephen St.]

I'm not saying that these statistics directly are signs of male disposability, I'm saying the lack of focus on these issues is a sign of male disposability.
It's not like nobody knew about any of this before I posted it here, just that nobody cared enough to do anything about it.

Nothing is done about workplace security? Nothing is done about suicide prevention? I have the feeling that a lot of ground has been made with regards to workplace security and the prevention and subsequent therapy of suicides. Those programmes would, according to statistics, have predominantly benefited males, so I don't think your conclusion is warranted.

I assume you mean in some geographical areas, as in the western world, the "rape culture" found in prisons (prison rape was not factored in the CDC survey) and correctional facilities actually make men the most prevalent victims.

Yes, I mean in the western culture, because this entire discussion revolves around the western culture. This also excludes any "rape-sub-culture" that exists in prisons.

Here's a little extra:
94% of sexually abused youth in correctional facilities reported being abused by female staff. From: Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities, 2008-09. - http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svjfry09.pdf

Among inmates reporting staff sexual misconduct, ~ 65% reported a female aggressor. From: Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2008-09. - http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svpjri0809.pdf

50% of homeless youth reported being sexually abused by a female. From: It?s Not What You Think: Sexually Exploited Youth in British Columbia. - http://www.nursing.ubc.ca/PDFs/ItsNotWhatYouThink.pdf

There are some additional findings in those studies that I think need to be highlighted:
- The youth and other prisoners abused are primarily homosexual
- The abused persons were predominantly non-white, or minorities(at least concerning staff abuse)
- With regard to prisons, the net effects of prior sexual victimiazation and sexual orientation are higher than the effect of gender

I think that makes explanations other than "males are treated as disposable by society" more likely. It seems like it is predominantly people that are "different" that are victimized:
- The perpetrator is almost always of the other gender
- homosexuals are vastly more likely to be victimized
- People who have already experienced victimization are singled out due to damage done by the previous victimization
- if you have a higher education, you are more likely to be victimized.

Overall, the "male disposability" conclusion seems weak and only take a snapshot of the evidence into account.

According to the 2009 United States National Crime Victimization Survey estimates, only 55% of rapes and sexual assaults were reported to law enforcement officials. When a male is raped, less than 10% are believed to be reported. Female-male and female-female rape are ignored altogether in this survey.

There are estimated to be over 300,000 male rapes per year in American prisons and jails.
Meanwhile A United Nations statistical report compiled from government sources showed that more than 250,000 cases of male-female rape or attempted rape were recorded by police annually. The reported data covered 65 countries... as opposed to the prisons and jails of ONE country.


I don't think I've ever heard of research into prostate cancer being criticized either, but I have heard petty criticisms leveled at the only fundraising even I know to be dedicated to it.

There is certainly a huge problem with unreported incidents with regard to sexual victimization. The studies you linked earlier do not use reports, however.
Yeah, being in a prison is bad, and the american penal system is apprently horribly. Certainly a problem that needs to be adressed. Prison reform has been a hot topic for a while now, the problem being that no-one has any idea of how to possibly improve the system. Whats the relevance regarding the discussion about videogames, though?

 

[Someone Depressing]

Everyone gets sexualised in media - particuarly video games. Look at Soul Calibur. Astaroth, and so many others that exist just for fanservice. And then there's Voldo. They gave him buttocks physics... ew.

While it's probably plausible to say that women are sexualised more, looking closer, it's not the case. Men are just considered "less sexualisable or sexy" in the first place, so no one cares as much. I think the reason why anyone cares nowadays is because feminists have been plaging it and stirring shit up.

 

[Stephen St.]

You're right, my bad, I got my studies and surveys mixed up.
This is my source for the stats on male victims of domestic violence:
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-with-gramham-Kevan-Method%208-.pdf

When I was a kid, boys did significantly better with the models of learning in school that were used then, and I'm only 26. This would indicate that something has indeed changed in the education system to benefit girls at the cost of boys.

The reason I'm bringing all of this up in a video-game discussion, is the claim that the objectification and depiction of men as disposable, is either not perpetuating a real life phenomenon, or at least not one that is as damaging as the objectification/sexualisation of women as seen in games and other media.
I'm bringing all this up to support my argument that the objectification of men in gaming is at least as damaging as the objectification of women in gaming. Not saying that men are committing suicide in droves over being objectified and dehumanized in games and movies, I'm just saying that the depictions of men in said media is somewhat representative of the collective zeitgeist in the western world.

Wow, you are well prepared. Kudos to you for actually conducting a reasonable discussion.
I think you actually have me convinced that sexism against men has actually taken some alarming proportions in some sectors.

I just can't follow your conclusion. I see there are problems, but relating everything to "male disposability" just seems flimsy to me. I will adress that together with another quote:

The fact that neither of us was told of these statistics is a clear indicator that men are disposable- its not weird in evolutionary terms either that such a culture would inevatably arise.
This disposability is common in most males in most species.

Its not morally right to think that way, but its not just by chance that both you and I probably pictured a sad emo-chick with a razor when we thought of suicide, not an unemployed 20+ year old man, or a divorced father or husband.


In sweden newspapers there was great debate about "alvedon-girls" girls that killed themselves with painkillers, but never about the 80% of suicides that are amongst men because of depression, often caused due to not being needed.
Men would rather be drafted in WW1 than bear the shame of being given a white feather from a girl. That says a lot.

I do agree with the premise that, biologically speaking, in a human population males are more expendable than females due to reproduction. That certainly also has informed human society to a big extent. But thats not the whole picture.

Our current society is also heavily influenced by the ideals of enlightenment. And that particular period saw men in positions of power pretty much everywhere. That seems a little bit counter-intuitive: How is the group of people with most of the political and social power also the "disposable" group? Or is the disposable culture something very recent? In that case, what has created it?

 

[Stephen St.]

When you claim to be concerned with gender equality you have to actually give a crap about both genders.

I'd respect the people complaining a lot more if they just admitted it's a matter of personal taste, but nope they have to act like it's a gender issue.

It is a gender issue though, because depiction is obviously tied to gender, no-one has denied that yet. Sure there are also problems with male depiction in videogames. It's just not the same problems. You can adress one of the two without invalidating the other. If there are two problems standing in the way of equal and realistic depiction, adressing one of the two furthers that goal, whether or not you adress the other.

B is definitely true. Since all their activism in the area amounts to complaining about it (which is really all they can do without asking for government censorship). And there's nothing stopping them from complaining about both instances.

Really, is it "definetly" true? Do you think that a single group can simultaneously detangle the entire culture and adress all problems simultaneously? Even then, A is still not true: No-one is preventing anyone to adress the other issues just as well. No-one is helpless in this situation.

 

[CloudAtlas]

Yes, I think we will. And maybe that's the real reason some folks are so butthurt? Sucks to be on the losing side of history.

But who's losing here? If gaming becomes more inclusive, then surely that can only be a good thing? I always thought it was a joke that there were men who thought girls were coming to take their games away, surely people don't actually think like that?

Who's losing here? I don't know. Adolescent guys who don't know that they need to answer the question "Are you over 18?" with yes?

But seriously, I don't know either who's losing anything. Sure, there'd be some fewer T&A slapped into your face. But other than that, fighting the perceived "feminist agenda" means fighting against better storytelling itself. And guess what? If games, as a medium, grow up a bit, we'll even probably get real sex scenes, with actually nude women (and men) in them, in return! Just like we get in movies. And isn't that kinda better? But if some folks are so bent on preventing the medium to grow up, women might still shower wearing underwear in Mass Effect 13.

 

[Duskflamer]

Yes, I think we will. And maybe that's the real reason some folks are so butthurt? Sucks to be on the losing side of history.

But who's losing here? If gaming becomes more inclusive, then surely that can only be a good thing? I always thought it was a joke that there were men who thought girls were coming to take their games away, surely people don't actually think like that?

A lot of it is a matter of the language surrounding the whole Sexism in Games debate. Many people on the side of wanting more variety in women want just that, more variety while still letting sexy women stay around. But you also have a number of rather loud voices who are effectively saying (either on purpose or accidentally implying through their language) that games like Dead or Alive: Beach Volleyball should not be allowed to exist, which triggers a defensive reaction from people who like such games.

That's where the line draws for me personally. I'm all for having better representation of women in games (And better representation of Men, better characters overall really), but you can't take it to the level where a game that would otherwise be made isn't allowed to come into existence for fear that its sexualized female characters will incite bad press from the feminist crowd.

 

[dashiz94]

Utterly out of control! I mean, look at the dwarf in Dragon's crown! Dante in DMC? Kratos in god of war!

These musclebound men skew the public opinion of men, vastly oversexualizing us and making more realistically proportioned men feel both inadequate and disgusted, while women in turn expect that all men should be 6 foot tall, muscle bound, scantily clad giants grunting lustily from exertion upon opening doors, lifting heavy objects and defending them from potential rivals.

I for one demand realistic and proper portrayal of men in video games that gives realistic expectations, who's with me!?!

The significant difference between male sexualization and female sexualization is that both feed into fantasies of men: big tittied women with nice asses and little clothing is a male fantasy. Big muscled, chiseled jaw-line, deep voiced men is a power fantasy that every guy at some point wishes they could be. There's an ad below this post of Sam Fisher looking down at the ground, grim look on his face, with a pose exuding confidence and strength. That isn't sexualization. That's a power fantasy.

Also if this was a serious post your satire needs heavy work, I could practically scoop it off my screen it was so thick.

 

[generals3]

Yes, I think we will. And maybe that's the real reason some folks are so butthurt? Sucks to be on the losing side of history.

But who's losing here? If gaming becomes more inclusive, then surely that can only be a good thing? I always thought it was a joke that there were men who thought girls were coming to take their games away, surely people don't actually think like that?

Games are 100% inclusive. Inclusive doesn't mean: pandering to everyone's desire. It means not excluding. No woman is being told: you can't play this or that (at least not by devs and publishers).

But if with inclusive you mean pleasing everyone: because labor supply isn't infinite you are in fact demanding to take away people's toys.

"We actually got a lot of feedback from people who were playing it, saying, 'We want bigger breasts. Make the characters more like that.' That was kind of surprising."

"There's definitely still room for having sexualized aspects," Shimbori concludes. "If you have a solid fighting game system there, there's nothing wrong with having beautiful characters as a layer on top of that -- that's another layer of entertainment that there's a need for. If there wasn't a need for it, people wouldn't have responded to the alpha demo like they did, and send us feedback."

By saying: less sexualized women. You're indeed saying: less toys for those who like it.

The only way to avoid this dilemma is by starting up your own gaming company and adding new non sexualized women to the market without forcing devs/pubs to substitute one for another.

 

[CFriis87]

Men are, apparently, more likely to commit suicide. Your claim is apparently this is because society treats them as inherently worthless. I would instead argue that Men are encouraged to be self-sufficient and furthermore supporting their family. Inability to live up to these expectations can lead to severe depression and suicide. Again I see no clear link to a theme of "disposability".

The fact that neither of us was told of these statistics is a clear indicator that men are disposable- its not weird in evolutionary terms either that such a culture would inevatably arise.
This disposability is common in most males in most species.

Its not morally right to think that way, but its not just by chance that both you and I probably pictured a sad emo-chick with a razor when we thought of suicide, not an unemployed 20+ year old man, or a divorced father or husband.


In sweden newspapers there was great debate about "alvedon-girls" girls that killed themselves with painkillers, but never about the 80% of suicides that are amongst men because of depression, often caused due to not being needed.
Men would rather be drafted in WW1 than bear the shame of being given a white feather from a girl. That says a lot.

Oooh! Nice to see I'm not the only one here who knows about the white feather girls.
It'd be great to see something like a WW1 FPS game that starts you off as a 16-year-old civilian boy being handed a white feather and shamed into enlisting to the war effort. Let's see how feminists would react to something like that.

 

[Verlander]

It's underdevelopment as characters that makes the sexualisation of women in videogames so demeaning, not simply because they look good.

 

[CloudAtlas]

(...)Sure, but if someone is complaining about the ubiquity of gruffy white bulky male one-liner loving protagonists in their 30s, do you see all these "feminists" joining in the discussion with "...but what about the women?!?" No? Me neither.

Edit: I meant that I doubt anyone could bring up that 'issue' without people talking about how women have it bad too.

I know this was meant as a counter argument but if it wasn't I doubt the topic would really go in a different direction.

Yea, I was surely exaggerating. Sure some folks will bring this up too, but in my experience, nowhere as often in debates about the portrayal of female characters. Either way, don't derail, just start a new discussion.

 

[rob_simple]

Yes, I think we will. And maybe that's the real reason some folks are so butthurt? Sucks to be on the losing side of history.

But who's losing here? If gaming becomes more inclusive, then surely that can only be a good thing? I always thought it was a joke that there were men who thought girls were coming to take their games away, surely people don't actually think like that?

Games are 100% inclusive. Inclusive doesn't mean: pandering to everyone's desire. It means not excluding. No woman is being told: you can't play this or that (at least not by devs and publishers).

But if with inclusive you mean pleasing everyone: because labor supply isn't infinite you are in fact demanding to take away people's toys.

"We actually got a lot of feedback from people who were playing it, saying, 'We want bigger breasts. Make the characters more like that.' That was kind of surprising."

"There's definitely still room for having sexualized aspects," Shimbori concludes. "If you have a solid fighting game system there, there's nothing wrong with having beautiful characters as a layer on top of that -- that's another layer of entertainment that there's a need for. If there wasn't a need for it, people wouldn't have responded to the alpha demo like they did, and send us feedback."

By saying: less sexualized women. You're indeed saying: less toys for those who like it.

The only way to avoid this dilemma is by starting up your own gaming company and adding new non sexualized women to the market without forcing devs/pubs to substitute one for another.

Uh huh, here's the thing, though: we have plenty of games that already pander to the male teen-to-late-twenties demographic. In fact, just about every game is tweaked at least a little to fall more on the male side of things.

How many games can you think of, outside of Barbie Horse Adventures, that could claim to be geared exclusively towards girls? And no, just having a female protagonist doesn't count as being geared towards women; not when most of them are still being written by men who got all their knowledge of the female of the species by watching re-runs of Married With Children.

You can say it's 100% inclusive just because both men and women can physically play the games all you want, but to say that the content is 100% inclusive is complete bullshit.

As to the whole, 'people asked for bigger tits so we gave it to them,' well, that just smacks of the old adage, 'just because you can, doesn't mean you should'.

 

[Genocidicles]

But who's losing here? If gaming becomes more inclusive, then surely that can only be a good thing? I always thought it was a joke that there were men who thought girls were coming to take their games away, surely people don't actually think like that?

Well it could mean less games being made with men in mind. We could end up with the gaming equivalent of summer romcoms being made for women.

Sort of like when the Wii took off with the casual crowd, and there was less harcore titles being developed for it.

 

[CloudAtlas]

Games are 100% inclusive. Inclusive doesn't mean: pandering to everyone's desire. It means not excluding. No woman is being told: you can't play this or that (at least not by devs and publishers).

Yes, 100%. And the Republican Party is 100% inclusive of gays, because, hey, no gay is told, you can't join us. Sure, we think you are a lesser human being, we'll marginalize you as best we can, we crap on your rights, but you're not prohibited join us.

The only way to avoid this dilemma is by starting up your own gaming company and adding new non sexualized women to the market without forcing devs/pubs to substitute one for another.

Yea, that's really the only way. It would be, for instance, totally absurd to send letters to developers demanding smaller breasts. Because that's totally different from sending letters to developers demanding larger breasts, right? No one in their right mind would even consider that! What am I even doing here? Stating my preferences about how games should be in a gaming forum? I must be utterly insane!

 

[rob_simple]

But who's losing here? If gaming becomes more inclusive, then surely that can only be a good thing? I always thought it was a joke that there were men who thought girls were coming to take their games away, surely people don't actually think like that?

Well it could mean less games being made with men in mind. We could end up with the gaming equivalent of summer romcoms being made for women.

Sort of like when the Wii took off with the casual crowd, and there was less harcore titles being developed for it.

There's something a lot of people don't or refuse to understand about all this: games will only get made if they sell. If developers start making games with women in mind and those games start selling, yes we will probably see more of them. But the idea that developers would decide to start catering to women and immediately stop making games for anyone else is ludicrous.

The reason the Wii had so many casual games is because that is what was selling on the Wii, there was still the occasional hardcore title, but since they didn't sell nearly as well there was no sense in making more. It's just simple business strategy: you don't make what doesn't sell; as evidenced by the fact that both Microsoft and Sony had their own motion control gimmick shit but we still got hardcore games on those platforms because the demographics were different.

Anyone who genuinely...GENUINELY believes that as soon as games start being made with women as the target audience that suddenly there will be no more games for men --you know...just like how there are no action movies since the romcom was invented-- has got to be insane, or severely taking the piss.

Honestly, every single argument I have heard against leveling the scales just comes off as a bunch of entitled little brats who don't want to share their toys with anyone else.

 

[CFriis87]

You're right, my bad, I got my studies and surveys mixed up.
This is my source for the stats on male victims of domestic violence:
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-with-gramham-Kevan-Method%208-.pdf

When I was a kid, boys did significantly better with the models of learning in school that were used then, and I'm only 26. This would indicate that something has indeed changed in the education system to benefit girls at the cost of boys.

The reason I'm bringing all of this up in a video-game discussion, is the claim that the objectification and depiction of men as disposable, is either not perpetuating a real life phenomenon, or at least not one that is as damaging as the objectification/sexualisation of women as seen in games and other media.
I'm bringing all this up to support my argument that the objectification of men in gaming is at least as damaging as the objectification of women in gaming. Not saying that men are committing suicide in droves over being objectified and dehumanized in games and movies, I'm just saying that the depictions of men in said media is somewhat representative of the collective zeitgeist in the western world.

Wow, you are well prepared. Kudos to you for actually conducting a reasonable discussion.
I think you actually have me convinced that sexism against men has actually taken some alarming proportions in some sectors.

I just can't follow your conclusion. I see there are problems, but relating everything to "male disposability" just seems flimsy to me. I will adress that together with another quote:

The fact that neither of us was told of these statistics is a clear indicator that men are disposable- its not weird in evolutionary terms either that such a culture would inevatably arise.
This disposability is common in most males in most species.

Its not morally right to think that way, but its not just by chance that both you and I probably pictured a sad emo-chick with a razor when we thought of suicide, not an unemployed 20+ year old man, or a divorced father or husband.


In sweden newspapers there was great debate about "alvedon-girls" girls that killed themselves with painkillers, but never about the 80% of suicides that are amongst men because of depression, often caused due to not being needed.
Men would rather be drafted in WW1 than bear the shame of being given a white feather from a girl. That says a lot.

I do agree with the premise that, biologically speaking, in a human population males are more expendable than females due to reproduction. That certainly also has informed human society to a big extent. But thats not the whole picture.

Our current society is also heavily influenced by the ideals of enlightenment. And that particular period saw men in positions of power pretty much everywhere. That seems a little bit counter-intuitive: How is the group of people with most of the political and social power also the "disposable" group? Or is the disposable culture something very recent? In that case, what has created it?

The power that men had in the past was a necessity for them to fulfill the societal obligations that came with the rights they had. Men were solely responsible for building up society (not saying they did it without women, just that they were the ones held responsible), as well as supporting for their families.
The right to vote was initially something men had to earn through military service, the reasoning being that men should at least have a say in the affairs of the government and country that they were sent to die for.
Even the most powerful man today is valued more for his usefulness than his humanity, this is what makes men the "disposable" group, despite their social and political power.
Women have an inherent worth in our society, but when a man is no longer useful, he becomes worthless.
This culture of disposability is as ancient as mankind itself and has to do with evolutionary psychology, Karen Straughan on YouTube explains it a lot better than I can here, so here's one of the first of her videos I have seen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA

I'm not asking you to see things my way, I'm just hoping to have more people see the things I see.

 

[generals3]

Uh huh, here's the thing, though: we have plenty of games that already pander to the male teen-to-late-twenties demographic. In fact, just about every game is tweaked at least a little to fall more on the male side of things.

So what? How is that even an argument to counter my point? It doesn't matter if they already have plenty of toys, you're still taking toys away. And guess what not everyone who likes T&A likes the same kind of genre. Maybe you're removing T&A from a game in a genre where it isn't very present.

How many games can you think of, outside of Barbie Horse Adventures, that could claim to be geared exclusively towards girls? And no, just having a female protagonist doesn't count as being geared towards women; not when most of them are still being written by men who got all their knowledge of the female of the species by watching re-runs of Married With Children.

See now you're asking the wrong person. Not being a woman and not seeking women targeted games I don't come into contact with them. And it's not only with female oriented games. I can't name you a lot of indy games either.

You can say it's 100% inclusive just because both men and women can physically play the games all you want, but to say that the content is 100% inclusive is complete bullshit.

How so? And if you think women are repulsed by T&A guess again. I've linked to a topic in the Scarlet Blade forum where people presented themselves: plenty of women present. And I dare you to find any game that is more T&A oriented than the scarlet blade with the exception of pure porn games.

As to the whole, 'people asked for bigger tits so we gave it to them,' well, that just smacks of the old adage, 'just because you can, doesn't mean you should'.

And the same can be said about your request... That adage really doesn't belong in this conversation.

Yes, 100%. And the Republican Party is 100% inclusive of gays, because, hey, no gay is told, you can't join us. Sure, we think you are a lesser human being, we'll marginalize you as best we can, we crap on your rights, but you're not prohibited join us.

Yes they are inclusive. And the "lesser human being" part is purely subjective. While their actions may lead people to think they think that it isn't set on stone and I doubt most think that. (never thought i'd be defending repubs ...)

I would also like to add that if you can name me ONE game that craps on the rights of women i'll give you a cookie. You may just as well go full godwin while you're at it.

Yea, that's really the only way. It would be, for instance, totally absurd to send letters to developers demanding smaller breasts. Because that's totally different from sending letters to developers demanding larger breasts, right? No one in their right mind would even consider that! What am I even doing here? Stating my preferences about how games should be in a gaming forum? I must be utterly insane!

I don't know what you were trying to reply to because it sure as hell wasn't to my post. By doing what you suggest you're still demanding a substitution. As such the point of "yes you're asking to take away toys" still stands.

 

[Genocidicles]

snip

If that hypothetical situation where gaming becomes like Hollywod does happen they will still make games with men in mind.

However they will make less of them, so why am I supposed to be happy about that?