Why are we afraid of criticism?

[NuclearKangaroo]

So what you're saying is it depends on the context? That thing I just said? And that, apparently, you get to judge whether a game is improved by something or not.

more like, sexist doesnt matter one bit, what matter if its a good character or not

EVA has a lot of traits that are considered sexist, but it only makes her character better

Not intentionally including a message doesn't mean there's no message. That developers might (somehow) just be unintentionally designing women with sexualization as a top priority says plenty.

And, not having seen or read Twilight, maybe? I mean I've heard it has plenty of horrible messages, but I can't speak towards whether it objectifies its characters.

Message:

A message is a discrete unit of communication intended by the source for consumption by some recipient or group of recipients.

Communication:

is the activity of conveying information through the exchange of ideas, feelings, intentions, attitudes, expectations, perceptions or commands, as by speech, non-verbal gestures, writings, behavior and possibly by other means such as electromagnetic, chemical or physical phenomena.

Communicating with others involves three primary steps:

Thought: First, information exists in the mind of the sender. This can be a concept, idea, information, or feeling.
Encoding: Next, a message is sent to a receiver in words or other symbols.
Decoding: Lastly, the receiver translates the words or symbols into a concept or information that a person can understand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication

if the sender has no intent or thought of the message you say their are trying to convey, it violates the first step of communication, is not communication, and if there is no communication, theres no message

so unless you can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that developers are sexist and they intent to communicate this sexism in their games, you are literally complaining over nothing

yes i actually think its possible to judge a piece of art separe from its message, thats why people can appreciate something like the birth of a nation

Okay? Congratulations on being able to look at a pretty picture and say it's pretty. You do know that there's more to art than that though, right? And I doubt all the people who dislike the sexualized female designs just dislike it because of the messages they convey.

again they convey no message

and if you hate games with sexualized characters for reasons that have nothing to do with sexualization and more to do with the merits of the game AS A GAME, thats all fair criticism

bad criticism:

this character wears a skimpy suit

good criticism:

the character that wear a skimpy suit is poorly developed and his/her dialogue is a joke

i bet prohobitionists argued something similar, dont assume history will be fond of you, none of us knows how we will be remembered

You seem pretty confident that anyone daring to say "hey, let's treat women better/equally" will be regarded in the same way as prohibitionists.

i treawomen equally in real life all the time, that doesnt mean i support your point of view does it?

is not the message, is the actions that could generate contempt in the future

heres the thing, the fundamental flaw in your argument, you are rallying for the rights of virtual, non-existent women, remember how everyone laughed at PETA when they were protesting agaisnt Pokemon and Super Meat Boy?

I'm not rallying for the rights of non-existent people. I'm rallying for my preferences in entertainment and my right to criticize what I don't like and ask for what I want. When have I ever said "virtual women have rights too!" or anything in that regard?

you havent but you have insulted developer for how they decide to portray fictitious beings

women IN REAL LIFE, in most western countries are treated roughtly the same, they have the same rights and duties as men, if you see some actual injustice where real life women are treated poorly based only on their gender, fantastic, protest agaisnt that, i will stand by your side, but asking artists to compromise their work so they fit your political views? no, absolutely not

How about asking artists to compromise their work because I'm their damn customer and I don't give money to people who make something I don't want? If they feel like they can disregard my patronage then good for them, but I'm still not giving them my money and I'm going to tell them why in case they feel like making something I'll want later on.

thats fine and amazing, please understand, im not agaisnt you as a customers, ive told you many times now to give your feedback to develoers, im only critizing the shaming and insulting of developers

sharing your tastes without insulting people is a thing you can do

in my opinion any criticism that wont make a piece of art better is a silly and worthless criticism

And you've still not told me who gets to decide what makes a piece of art better. I think designing men and women to have equal levels of sexualization (either they all get real armor or they all get sexualized armor) would make a work better. It'd better fit whatever style they're going for to have everyone dressed similarly and it'd look fucking interesting for once. So... hooray for my worthwhile criticism.

are you honestly saying that a character is good or bad depending on what they are wearing?

i think you are confused, feminism overall is pretty much irrelevant to the discussion of video games, very few people use games to make a political statement, most people design games to entertain, to indulge in the escapism, to create any number of fantasies in any sort of abstract or contrived universes

And what happens when you're not entertained because you don't like seeing an entire gender (possibly your own gender) reduced to helpless eyecandy? Oh, right, you shut up because your opinion doesn't matter for some reason.

you find a different piece of art, there are games that have miraculously evaded the political correctness hurricane, play those if the other games offend you so much, im not shaming the creator of piss christ why should you?

fine, dont buy the freakin' game, is that easy

or you know, show them your opinion without shaming them, insulting them, calling them sexist, any stuff like that

If they behave like sexists I'll call them sexists and whatever else I feel fits. Granted I usually don't. I usually just say that something seems pretty sexist and that I dislike the design on its own, but got to keep my incredibly important freedom of speech open.

you are attempting to shame someone into submission and threaten his/her freedom of speech

also consider the following: the creator and his work are 2 separate things

"The creator treats men and women differently, that makes him pretty sexist."

so, if im attracted to women, but im not attracted to men, am i a sexist?

Kind of. There's a reason I added the whole "he designs women to appeal to the shallow male gaze just makes his sexism contemptible" part.

holy cow

are you honestly freakin' implying heterosexuality is inherently wrong?

if you are going to use the "audience" argument then your whole point dies there, since around 75%-80% of all non-casual gamers, atleast on PC, are male

Got it, so it's perfectly okay to disparage a group of people so long as they're a minority. What a wonderful sentiment. I can certainly see why the percentages aren't any different though, considering how adamant people seem to make women as uncomfortable as possible playing "non-casual" games.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.860239-Core-Gamers-Mostly-Male-Casual-Gamers-Mostly-Female-Says-NPD

those are not my words

im saying, if you are going to argue art should be made to please the market, isnt it doing so already?

the reason why his boss ordered him to change the design was because of the pointless backlash it generated, again from people who just want to censor what they dont like

That backlash was criticism and people saying they didn't like something. His boss, deciding that the opinions of potential customers was more important than one artist's barely-existent integrity and desire to design women as sexy first, took the criticism to heart and chose to change it. How horrible that people managed to change someone's view of something.

well yes shaming people for the content of their art and not their merits is a bad thing

 

[Six Ways]

I always have to laugh at this argument. Sexualized women are male fantasies and sexualized men are male fantasies. No matter what, males are the ones being served by this argument and it completely exonerates female sexuality as somehow non-existent and reinforces the radical feminist idea originating around Andrea Dworken that male sexuality is inherently prejudicial to women.

Women can be and are attracted to things like Kratos's costume.

so when its a male is a self-image fantasy?

im sorry but thats just moving the goal-post

If you think the main point of Kratos' design was to be sexually appealing to women, you're being naive. Sure, some women will find him such. But he was clearly designed with straight men in mind. As are women in boob-plate armour.

 

[generals3]

Often I have seen the refrain of, "Please stop talking about X. All this focus on social issues will suck the life and fun out of games."

This leads me to the following question:

WHAT!?

In what medium has criticism left art worse off? Are books terrible because there's literary criticism? Are movies worse because there are disciplines devoted to studying film? Is TV boring now that we analyze shows for social themes?

It boggles my mind that anyone could think that serious artistic criticism could be anything but good. Personally, some of the most enriching discussions I've had have been over some of the most trivial examples of entertainment. So what the hell are people afraid of?

All criticism is not equal. Games are about fun, therefor the criticism should be aimed at whether or not it is fun. Not at what social agenda it (doesn't) push(es). We're not discussing government messages of public interest here, it's video games.

 

[cainejw]

I always have to laugh at this argument. Sexualized women are male fantasies and sexualized men are male fantasies. No matter what, males are the ones being served by this argument and it completely exonerates female sexuality as somehow non-existent and reinforces the radical feminist idea originating around Andrea Dworken that male sexuality is inherently prejudicial to women.

Women can be and are attracted to things like Kratos's costume.

so when its a male is a self-image fantasy?

im sorry but thats just moving the goal-post

If you think the main point of Kratos' design was to be sexually appealing to women, you're being naive. Sure, some women will find him such. But he was clearly designed with straight men in mind. As are women in boob-plate armour.

So do you find heterosexual men to often be sexually attracted to half-naked men with bulging muscles? I tend to find they're not too turned on by that sexually. They tend to be attracted to, say, the three women who were in bed with him.

I find that I, as a gay man, am much more apt to be attracted to that sexually than my straight male friends. Most of them tend to be attracted to the powerful abilities of Kratos as they allow, to some degree, an escape through fantastic abilities.

As for the idea that muscled characters are somehow a template for men to achieve, you should ask yourself WHY they achieve that. It's, in part, because women are sexually attracted to muscled men. Again, I point you to popular actors. How many popular male actors are obese? Not many.

That's because Ryan Gossling or Channing Tatum appeal to women as much as any female star appeals to men. That's the nature of sexuality. It's not so laughably simplistic as to say men derive sexual pleasure from Kratos because he's muscle and powerful, and it's equally laughable to think that men have some magical power fantasy that, again, is derived from Dworkin's work.

In fact, when polled about features women like in men, women named shoulders, penis, the neck, hair, height, leg length, eyes, a flats tomach, slimness, and good buttocks. (http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/most-popular/the-10-male-features-women-like-best , http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/relationships/man-woman/6-Things-women-notice-about-men-right-away/articleshow/11804689.cms)

Women are not above craving physical traits in men. Saying anything otherwise is, as you put it so respectfully, naive.

 

[Terminal Blue]

and why dont you guys make your own games instead of trying to force people to abide by your personal moral standards?

This is based on the really, really sad and highly mistaken assumption that women actually work in the creative industries in Japan in significant numbers.

Posting it just shows enormous intellectual dishonesty and no genuine interest in improving anything, merely a desire to shut down any debate by lying.

Sexualized women are male fantasies and sexualized men are male fantasies. No matter what, males are the ones being served by this argument and it completely exonerates female sexuality as somehow non-existent and reinforces the radical feminist idea originating around Andrea Dworken that male sexuality is inherently prejudicial to women.

It's not so laughably simplistic as to say men derive sexual pleasure from Kratos because he's muscle and powerful, and it's equally laughable to think that men have some magical power fantasy that, again, is derived from Dworkin's work.

You guys should actually read Dworkin sometime.

Her argument is actually that sexuality (heterosexuality at least) is inherently prejudicial towards women. For Dworkin, female (hetero)sexuality is as much bound up in the commitment to being victimized as male (hetero)sexuality is the desire to victimize. Also, calling that desire to victimize a "power fantasy" would be to her woefully inadequate. It's not a power fantasy, it's the reflection of a reality of unequal power masquerading as neutrality.

Whether this is truly an inescapable fact and whether it's possible for people living in a sexist society to develop forms of sexuality which are not inherently prejudicial towards women is actually something she expresses a great deal of uncertainty about, but that isn't reflected in the small number of cherry picked quotes through people tend to encounter Dworkin.

She's very much a product of her time, but she really doesn't deserve how the internet treats her.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

You seem to be ignoring the part about your opinion not being fact. That's not very surprising, but I figured I should let you know, just in case.

so? neither is yours, thats why we are discussing, because we have different points of view

Oh no! You used a dictionary on me! What ever will I do in the face of this semantic bullshit!?

Fine, don't call it a message. Find another word that means showcasing one's views or something like that and substitute it out. I don't have enough enthusiasm for this conversation to dig through thesauruses and dictionaries looking for a word to placate semantic nonsense.

so i proved you wrong... and you are trying to make fun of me...

look mate things might be getting a little bit heated here, lets try to be civil and reasonable

its not comunication, therefore its not a message, any meaning you are trying to convey on these despiction of women is, until proven otherwise, pure baseless speculation, and you are insulting people other that, that is all flavors of wrong

Sure you do, and I don't care what you support. You're also still pretending that you can see the future. Didn't you just tell me not to do that? And considering the "actions" amount to criticism, I dare say that the evil SJW hivemind will be displeased that we haven't reached prohibitionist levels of control and haven't been able to outlaw art we don't like yet.

i already said we both DONT KNOW how we will be remembered, this includes me, im not ignoring any posibility

assuming your site is going to be historically right can be one of the worst possible things you can assume

And how is that in anyway equivalent to rallying behind the rights of fictional characters? In case that's too difficult for you, I'll help you out: it's not. So... anything else you want to pull out of your ass and present to me as an actual argument?

it was a figure of speech because, again: you are insulting people over fictitious beings

Sure, I can do that. But I don't have to do that. If they feel shamed or insulted or hurt by me calling their work sexist, they can put that criticism to work and make something less sexist next time, or this time if it's early enough.

isnt that harassment? insulting and shaming people so they do what you want?

No. I would ask where you got that idea, but you've already showed me from your insistence that I'm rallying behind the rights of fictional characters where you got it from. A "character" is good or bad depending upon the summation of all their traits. I mean, if a character's outfit is really fucking dumb I'll like that character less, but it's not the sole basis of my evaluation.

A character's design is good or bad depending highly on what they're wearing though.

so what if a character is weak?, are there not weak women just like there are weak men?

what if the character is promiscuous?, are there not promiscuous women just like there are promiscuous men?

Maybe because I want more games? Maybe because I want the AAA HD FPS blockbuster thing to appeal to me more? Here's the thing: I do play games that already appeal to me, but that doesn't stop me from criticizing games that don't, especially when the reason they don't is something so easily remedied as "treat female characters the same as male characters from a design perspective."

then help MAKE more games, i can assure you 99.99% of the people wont stop you, they wont care if the character is gay, women, colored

one of the main characters in borderlands 2 is bi, nobody cares, there are tons of games with female leads, nobody cares, there are tons of characters of different races, nobody cares

look, the thing is, i could just as easily act like you, except the total oposite, i could protest agasint female/gay/colored charactes in games, i could refuse to act calmly and insult everyone involved in making these games, calling them anti-white, misandrist, heterophobic, or some of the most colorful insults in the arsenal of intolerant people

what would that make me? you are not better than those intolerant people if you act exactly like them

Unless I've somehow gotten the power to silence someone by criticizing them, I am absolutely no threat to someone's freedom of speech. If they feel ashamed of my criticism that's on them, because all criticism, if taken as valid, should bring a bit of shame upon a creator who thought they're work was better than it was.

yes you can if people like you harass the developer in enough numbers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-censorship

You're not even trying to understand now are you? I said it's kind of sexist. I then went on to imply that sexism isn't always bad by describing the artist's sexism as contemptible. Nowhere did I say sexism, or heterosexuality or anything else was "inherently wrong."

you have constantly critized sexism up to this point and then you argue heterosexuality is sexist, what conclusion should i draw from this?

If the only way to please a market is to disparage a minority group, that's pretty bad. The thing is, appealing to women or really anything other than straight white men doesn't mean you have to start ignoring straight white men. If a developer put the female characters in real armor instead of fetish gear, the only people he's stopped pleasing are those who buy games for the sole purpose of those outfits, which I'll assume are an incredible minority if they exist at all.

And considering the straight white male market is pretty locked in, someone trying to market their art should try to expand his market to groups who currently aren't being appealed to all that much and bring them into the fold.

and how do you know that the case? the human species is sexually dimorphic, men and women both have physical and psychological differences, and while there are tons of aspects where both genders overlap, the reality of things is that men show certain predilection towards some things and women show certain predilection towards other things

if you cant prove women are being disparaged and instead might simply show less interest in more competitive games, then why try to solve a problem that might not even exist?

also for the record, im a straight NON-WHITE male, and i have never felt alineated by gaming, i was, in fact raised in a country where racism pretty much doesnt exists, and honestly i find it kind of blaffing that people who consider themselves anti-racism keep giving race way more importance than it deserves

One's merit as an artist is based upon the content of their artwork. If you make shitty art you are very likely a shitty artist. If you are ashamed of how people don't like your art, do better next time or stop creating art for other people.

but thats the thing, the art these people create is not shitty, it simply does not appeal to you, theres a difference

 

[Robert B. Marks]

Well, to start, it's not censorship. The first case is of an artist who was commissioned to provide something being told that it needed to be changed by the person who paid for it. Regardless of the reasons of why that decision was made, or whether he thought it was right or wrong, he had a professional obligation to his client. In his own time in art he has not been commissioned to produce, he remains free to depict women however he likes. And, frankly, his article is pretty tone-deaf, up to and including failing to recognize that Kratos and his costume is a MALE sexual self-image fantasy.

I always have to laugh at this argument. Sexualized women are male fantasies and sexualized men are male fantasies. No matter what, males are the ones being served by this argument and it completely exonerates female sexuality as somehow non-existent and reinforces the radical feminist idea originating around Andrea Dworken that male sexuality is inherently prejudicial to women.

Sorry, but that's a discussion marred in sexism. Women have sexuality, and it can be just as visual as men's sexuality.

That's a fair point. However, I would argue that something like Kratos (or Conan, Hercules, etc.) is based on the heterosexual male fantasy of being powerful and built like a muscleman. What other sexualities may see in it were unlikely to be part of the consideration when the game was made.

 

[Robert B. Marks]

Now, freedom of speech includes the freedom to be sexist. It also includes the freedom to call that sexism out and demand better. It includes the right to say "yes," to that demand, and also to say "no" to it. It only becomes shameful when that turns into threats and harassment.

And as far as your comments about "SJW"s and their place in history goes, I just want to point something out. Back about a dozen years ago, video games lost their freedom of speech rights. I am not joking - a court ruling declared that they could not receive First Amendment protection. It was "SJW"s like me and a number of other people who fought that decision and helped regain video games their basic freedom of speech.

We fought hard for the right to talk about video games and their content. We also fought hard for people like you to be able to disagree with us. Please keep that in mind.

arent you giving yourself too much credit there? dont you think it was just a group of gamers that earned that right back?

You know, I only need three words to answer that:

I. Was. There.

http://garwulf.livejournal.com/36045.html

Where were YOU when back in April 2002 when it all went down?

plus i could also argue that SJW are right now enforcing censorship, hate speech, corruption and nepotism across game journalism

That would be an impressive argument, considering that the only ones trying to actually silence people were using the #GamerGate hashtag. Further, the only ones issuing threats were issuing them AGAINST the "SJW"s. And, blaming the "SJW"s for corruption when they were the ones criticizing the game industry, as opposed to the editors who were allowing their reviewers to, say, accept free tablets from game companies, is quite rich.

You know, hate speech, corruption, censorship, all those words mean something. NONE of them mean "saying things I don't like." I don't think you have used a single one of those words correctly.

Oh yes, and when it comes to the avatar you use, you may want to read this: http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/meet-the-female-gamer-mascot-created-by-anti-feminists-828

This thread is about why gamers seem to be afraid of criticism. As I recall, your first post in this was basically to tell somebody who was complaining about games they didn't like to just "play another game." Those aren't bad words to live by, particularly when put another way, they amount to "live and let live."

There's room for everybody in this community, even those "SJW"s you keep complaining about. You're allowed to disagree with them, just as they're allowed to disagree with you. That's the right that freedom of speech gives everybody. Freedom of speech to say anything one wants, so long as it isn't something you disagree with, is no freedom at all. The price of that freedom is that sometimes, people will disagree with you. Sometimes they'll condemn you - and sometimes they'll be right to do so.

Whether you want to take it personally and get angry or just take it in stride and use the criticism that is warranted to improve is ultimately up to you. But if you take it personally, let me tell you, you're in for a lot of being angry over a lot of stuff that just isn't worth the anger. Life's just too short to spend it pissed off.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

and why dont you guys make your own games instead of trying to force people to abide by your personal moral standards?

This is based on the really, really sad and highly mistaken assumption that women actually work in the creative industries in Japan in significant numbers.

Posting it just shows enormous intellectual dishonesty and no genuine interest in improving anything, merely a desire to shut down any debate by lying.

well there seems to be enough women involed with gaming in japan to make their own games and have a genre aimed directly at them, otome games

 

[QuietlyListening]

Just found an interesting article, as a response to those who don't think this sort of criticism happens in other media:

http://www.vox.com/2014/9/12/6126429/ban-meghan-trainor?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=article-share-top


A similar debate was had when Nicki Minaj came out with her Anaconda album cover, when a record producer criticized the overt sexuality of the art, sparking a debate about sexism within the music industry.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

http://massively.joystiq.com/2014/01/17/wildstar-to-reduce-character-breast-size/

what do you call that?

Oh did someone FORCE Carbine to do that, then? Did they break in and point guns at heads? Because I recall them doing that in response to community feedback.

Because if someone DID force them to do it, maybe they should have forced them to make a less shitty MMO in the process. That would've been a better use of everyone's time.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

You proved me wrong on a theoretical level, which is like saying a criminal got off on a technicality. You've found that the way I used the word "message" doesn't fit that one particular definition you found and have decided that that such a thing proves me wrong in some way. If you want to focus on semantics go right ahead, but don't expect me to just give up and admit I was totally and completely wrong because I didn't use a word in the exact way that one definition said I should.

For fun though, let's look at some definitions of "message":
an underlying theme or idea [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/message]
the point, moral, or meaning of a gesture, utterance, novel, motion picture, etc. [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/message]
an implicit meaning or moral, as in a work of art [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/message]

See, I can quote dictionaries to.

all those definitions are based on the assumption that these devs have an intent when they design their characters, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, you hevnt proved these people are trying to convey something and yet you are insulting them

they are also all based around comunication

I assume my side is right because it seems the most reasonable and tends towards the progressive. Considering that history has a habit of progressing, it seems reasonable to assume that the future might be a bit more progressive than the present. And, if I'm wrong, the future's got enough problems to worry about without focusing on how I made an artist feel bad about his depiction of women.

dont, thousands upon thousand of people have thought the same throughout history and proven wrong time and time again

maybe the future will hold freedom of speech at a higher standard than political correctness, we dont know

That's not really a figure of speech. You made a specific accusation against me and, if you want to distance yourself from that you're going to have to come out and admit you made it up, because I'm not going to let it go. And there's nothing wrong with criticizing people over the fictitious beings they created. They created them and are therefore responsible for them.

ok you have a problem with the term "rally up", fine i made a mistake

you are insulting people over the way they treat fictional beings, there you go, not critizing, insulting

If you consider criticism harassment, that's on you.

i consider calling someone sexist until they change their art for you harassment yes

Harassment covers a wide range of behaviours of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behaviour intended to disturb or upset, and it is characteristically repetitive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harassment

I'm going to have to bring it back to context. If every woman is shown to be weak and helpless that's kind of a problem, as would every women being shown to be hyper-promiscuous. Not sure what this has to do with the clothing they're wearing though.

every woman in a given game is shown to be weak and helpless, and for the sake of argument lets all pretent they are all well developed

hell lets just image MGS3 where The Boss is a man instead of a woman, did EVA just became a worse character because theres not a strong female character in the same game she is?

So is this the "if you don't like it make your own" argument? Because, if it is, no. I will not go out and learn how to make video games for the sake of being able to play video games that appeal to me, because that's bullshit.

why not? im learning to make video games because, hell, there are certain types of video games i want to play that dont exist

you dont even have to make then, how about support projects that encourage more diverse characters? like The Fine Young Capitalists IndieGoGo campaign

So you're going to pretend that asking for more diversity is the same as asking for less diversity? Because that's exactly what attacking non-white straight male characters for their non-white heterosexual maleness is. The reason I want something other than straight white men is because I'm fucking tired of all the straight white men. What's the person who's tired of all the other types of characters reasoning, because it's not going to be their overrepresentation in the medium.

you want more diversity by being intolerant, that was my point

A commercial artist doesn't really have the right to complain about having to self-censor his commercial work. His work exists to be sold to the masses and if the masses make it clear they don't want it he can either make it anyway and watch his work potentially flop or change it ever so slightly and improve your chances.

yes they do, nearly all professional art is commercial

and you are bringing again the masses argument when the masses you are talking about are composed largely of men

That you are really bad at comprehending other people's arguments? That the sexism I was referring to previously was implicitly referring to the specific instances of sexism that I don't like? Really anything that's not being intentionally obtuse would be okay.

i think someone who called me out and insulted me for using the widely accepted definition of a word has no right to call me obtuse

be more consistent with your argument if you want want this kind of thing to happen

And I honestly don't care what you are or where you came from. Racism is an issue and people give it importance because, outside of your magic bubble, race has been made to be important. If racism disappeared and something other than the legions of white men starred in video games I wouldn't really care about race, but that's not reality.

so the moment more white males started appearing in games youd care about race again? that doesnt seem too anti-racism to me

To me it's shitty, which means that, to me, they're a shitty artist. Considering the subjective nature of art, I kind of thought that was obvious.

so you could take say, the mona lisa, and not like it, and just because of your opinion you are going to argue its a shitty painting?

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

Now, freedom of speech includes the freedom to be sexist. It also includes the freedom to call that sexism out and demand better. It includes the right to say "yes," to that demand, and also to say "no" to it. It only becomes shameful when that turns into threats and harassment.

And as far as your comments about "SJW"s and their place in history goes, I just want to point something out. Back about a dozen years ago, video games lost their freedom of speech rights. I am not joking - a court ruling declared that they could not receive First Amendment protection. It was "SJW"s like me and a number of other people who fought that decision and helped regain video games their basic freedom of speech.

We fought hard for the right to talk about video games and their content. We also fought hard for people like you to be able to disagree with us. Please keep that in mind.

arent you giving yourself too much credit there? dont you think it was just a group of gamers that earned that right back?

You know, I only need three words to answer that:

I. Was. There.

http://garwulf.livejournal.com/36045.html

Where were YOU when back in April 2002 when it all went down?

plus i could also argue that SJW are right now enforcing censorship, hate speech, corruption and nepotism across game journalism

That would be an impressive argument, considering that the only ones trying to actually silence people were using the #GamerGate hashtag. Further, the only ones issuing threats were issuing them AGAINST the "SJW"s. And, blaming the "SJW"s for corruption when they were the ones criticizing the game industry, as opposed to the editors who were allowing their reviewers to, say, accept free tablets from game companies, is quite rich.

You know, hate speech, corruption, censorship, all those words mean something. NONE of them mean "saying things I don't like." I don't think you have used a single one of those words correctly.

Oh yes, and when it comes to the avatar you use, you may want to read this: http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/meet-the-female-gamer-mascot-created-by-anti-feminists-828

This thread is about why gamers seem to be afraid of criticism. As I recall, your first post in this was basically to tell somebody who was complaining about games they didn't like to just "play another game." Those aren't bad words to live by, particularly when put another way, they amount to "live and let live."

There's room for everybody in this community, even those "SJW"s you keep complaining about. You're allowed to disagree with them, just as they're allowed to disagree with you. That's the right that freedom of speech gives everybody. Freedom of speech to say anything one wants, so long as it isn't something you disagree with, is no freedom at all. The price of that freedom is that sometimes, people will disagree with you. Sometimes they'll condemn you - and sometimes they'll be right to do so.

Whether you want to take it personally and get angry or just take it in stride and use the criticism that is warranted to improve is ultimately up to you. But if you take it personally, let me tell you, you're in for a lot of being angry over a lot of stuff that just isn't worth the anger. Life's just too short to spend it pissed off.

i dont want to go off on a tangent here no ill just say 3 thing

1) just because you defended a noble cause there doesnt mean you are always going to be right
2) so the censorship across most mayor gaming sites is false? how about all those closed threads and banned accounts on reddit and neogaf?
3) "plus i could also argue that SJW are right now enforcing censorship... i could but im not"

 

[Techno Squidgy]

Like I've said before i don't really consider this a 'sides' issue, that was part of the problem with the rhetoric coming out of the press. I'm just an individual gamer who has his own opinion, just like you. If people would stop being so adversarial and have a rigorous but respectful debate i think most would concede that there are points that need to be sorted in many areas and move on.

But instead people just want to fucking scream at each other and those who consider themselves professionals want the right to sling as much shit as possible. But as a community I'm very hopeful about gaming enthusiasts, that's why it irks me to see them get shit on so much by the people who are supposed to speak for them and that many look up to. As a community we have very diverse voices and I've spoken to people from every background you can think of. As a community we really don't have a problem because from what I've seen we are just a bunch of decent people, with a few awful people. You know, like the rest of society.

You are probably right to simply disregard the gaming press though. Seems like the safe choice. Write the fuckers off entirely.

[sub]Captcha: "Streams of Oceanus". That would be a wonderful name for a prog rock band [/sub]

I agree with you on the whole USvsTHEM thing that's been going around lately. Some people seem all too keen to boil things down to black and white terms, and sort everyone in to 'teams' whenever things like this happen and it really does nothing to help. As you said we are all individuals with our own opinions and perspectives on situations and by taking the time to discuss, understand and share ideas with open minds we might actually be able to come to solutions where everyone benefits. At the very least we can identify areas where there are problems so that those who are in a position to do so can make positive changes.

I think we should collectively take action against the awful parts of our community. Games and social media provide us with tools to report terms of service violations. For most of them, hate speech, harassment, and bullying are all terms of service violations. We should start using them, and I don't mean specifically going out of your way to hunt down trolls and shitlords with the banhammer, but simply being vigilant, and doing your part to clean up your communities when you happen across shitlords and trolls.

Sometimes I wonder if people forget that they're interacting with real people.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

http://massively.joystiq.com/2014/01/17/wildstar-to-reduce-character-breast-size/

what do you call that?

Oh did someone FORCE Carbine to do that, then? Did they break in and point guns at heads? Because I recall them doing that in response to community feedback.

Because if someone DID force them to do it, maybe they should have forced them to make a less shitty MMO in the process. That would've been a better use of everyone's time.

are we going to ignore that self-censorship is a thing now? that people are getting publicly shamed and insulted by their artistic choices?

 

[cainejw]

You guys should actually read Dworkin sometime.

Her argument is actually that sexuality (heterosexuality at least) is inherently prejudicial towards women. For Dworkin, female (hetero)sexuality is as much bound up in the commitment to being victimized as male (hetero)sexuality is the desire to victimize. Also, calling that desire to victimize a "power fantasy" would be to her woefully inadequate. It's not a power fantasy, it's the reflection of a reality of unequal power masquerading as neutrality.

Whether this is truly an inescapable fact and whether it's possible for people living in a sexist society to develop forms of sexuality which are not inherently prejudicial towards women is actually something she expresses a great deal of uncertainty about, but that isn't reflected in the small number of cherry picked quotes through people tend to encounter Dworkin.

She's very much a product of her time, but she really doesn't deserve how the internet treats her.

I have, thanks. Dworkin's work was not about power fantasies, and it was never my intention to say so. It's about her perception that penetration of a woman is, at the core, a misogynistic action due to power differentials in society playing out in sexual intercourse. As a result, she says the proper sexual behavior is vibration against the male. Her work is one of the largest bases from which modern radical feminism draws its sex-negative attitudes. That was my point: Dworkin's work is a pillar of sex-negative radical feminism.

For the record, "You guys should read X sometime" is pedantic. Next time just talk about Dworkin's work and your opinion of it.

And she deserves to be dismissed as yet another radical feminist writer who attempted to assign malicious intent of all people.

 

[Robert B. Marks]

i dont want to go off on a tangent here no ill just say 3 thing

1) just because you defended a noble cause there doesnt mean you are always going to be right
2) so the censorship across most mayor gaming sites is false? how about all those closed threads and banned accounts on reddit and neogaf?
3) "plus i could also argue that SJW are right now enforcing censorship... i could but im not"

1. Never said I was always right. I am pretty sure I'm in the right on this one, though.

2. Three words: "Terms of Service." If you break the TOS of a website or forum, they reserve the right to shut down your account. It helps keep everything civil.

3. Actually, your full quote was "plus i could also argue that SJW are right now enforcing censorship, hate speech, corruption and nepotism across game journalism...i could but im not, because not all SJW are doing it."