Women in games are not systematically oppressed - a vertical slice

[endtherapture]

The Witcher 2 has themes such as rape and the crimes of war but does not use them in a titillating manner like "this rape scene is so hot," but in a terrifying way.

Not having played the game, I can only speak in generalities, but I tend to be suspicious of rape in video games because there seems to be a disturbing tendency to treat rape as some kind of go-to for character development; like, "Hey, what's something bad that happens to women? Rape, right? Women get raped? Okay, I'll say the bad thing that happened to her is rape."

Given the game is set in a Eastern European medieval fantasy world, I would say there is a fair reason to include rape. It happens to several of the female characters, acts as motivation for the player and the characters, is portrayed negatively and as the ultimate crime. It acts to highlight the brutality of the setting. It happens to a couple of background characters however the main 3 female character in the game who drive the plot forward are not raped, so it's used as background dressing basically. Other female characters have love and revenge as their "crucibles" for instance.

As you've said you've never played the game so before you comment you should at least check out the ssenes in question.

If you buy these sexist products and then complain about them, why not just not buy them?

How do you expect people to know what is sexist without first buying and playing it?[/quote]

I dunno...read some reviews. With the huge amount of game journalism and feminist commentary out there for games I think that's fairly easy to do. If you buy a game before reviews come out you're an idiot anyway.

 

[nuclearday]

There seems to be this trend within the gaming community of trying to frame this debate as "these games are terrible, let's attack and demonize them" vs "hey, it's not so bad - look at a couple of these positive female character that make everything okay."

That's just not the case from what I've experienced. Even looking at Ms. Sarkeesian's videos - geez, she goes to great lengths to say that she doesn't hate these games for what they do, and specifically states that there's nothing wrong with enjoying a game while still being aware of it's flaws.

In the same way that I can enjoy Fallout 3 even though it wasn't the Fallout sequel I was hoping for, or Firaxis's XCom reboot even though I think the strategy layer is less than compelling - there's nothing wrong with enjoying Super Mario Bros or Double Dragon or what-have-you because they contribute to standard misogynistic tropes.

The feminist push in the gaming community is not about demonizing games that don't fit the ideal standard - it's about raising awareness of these issues and driving forward toward a better industry as a whole. It's not even about the individual games so much as it is the overall state of the industry and constantly striving to be better.

In the same way that we hope games will be released with fewer bugs and better production values, wanting better storytelling and narratives, and characters that aren't tired stereotypes but instead more fully-realized; a feminist gamer just wants better representation and inclusion of all characters in gaming.

A game with a white male protagonist on a path of revenge to save a helpless damsel in distress does not mean it's a bad game. The problem is when it becomes so prevalent. It's not about demonizing all games that don't meet the highest of standards, but quite simply aiming toward a world where it's not so often the default setup. And if you are going to make a game like that, to have an awareness that's what you are doing.

That's the point of defining and exploring these tropes (of all kinds.) You can still make a game that utilizes these elements, but a certain self-awareness is (I think) not too much to ask. I'm a guy, I like scantily-clad women in games. But I don't see anything wrong with a world where the occasional sex object is okay because it is the exception and not the rule. And we're getting better. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for even better.

So maybe we can stop moving the goal posts and arguing against false hypothesis that aren't even being forwarded by the strongest voices in the movement? Maybe that'd be a good place to start...

 

[Autumnflame]

Some people invent drama when there is none to be found.

Those people also generally are far more biased than the side they claim to fight

 

[Artaneius]

Most of those are RPG's. Compared to the rest of the gaming industry, RPG's are just some small part of the whole industry. A point, but not a very good one if your trying to talk about woman in gaming as a whole.

 

[Netrigan]

I think the mistake the OP is making is thinking this is about oppression. It's not.

It's more lazy narrative devices centered on female victimhood and a general lack of intelligent inclusion.

Alan Moore, a comic writer worth just about every video game writer put together and then some, has been on the receiving end of criticism over the portrayal of rape in his comics by Grant Morrison, another comic writer. Morrison isn't entirely wrong, but that isn't to say that Moore hasn't done his best to handle the subject of rape in an intelligent manner. It's just a tough subject and Moore has frequently come up short or failed to communicate the necessary nuance of situation. Swamp Thing, the book which put him on the map, does have a tendency to victimize Abby.

So you have these random stumble across missions in GTA and RDR where a woman is about to be raped and/or murdered, you just have an over-used abuse scenario.

As for the lack of intelligent inclusion, this isn't every game. Quite a few publishers do what they can to make sure everyone has an avatar they can call their own. Here I think the problem is just money. Publishers don't want to risk huge budgets if gamers aren't fully behind a non-white, non-straight, not-male protagonist. We're seeing developers put these characters at the fore in stand-alone DLC such as Assassin's Creed IV and Infamous: Second Son.

But mostly this is about the quality of writing in video games. I'm happy the developers of Borderlands and Saints Row have not acted defensively about their inclusion in these criticisms, understanding they can and should do a better job of presenting female characters.

 

[Zeluron89]

I'll bite.

Elements in Baldur's Gate are sexist. Shar-Teel: "Men are pathetic".

It doesn't bother me though, in fact I like it. It works because she has a reason and cause to think that way. In my opinion sexism and racism in a dark fantasy setting is realistic and to be expected. Do I think that the game would be less immersive without that? Yes. Do I agree with sexism in real life? No. It's a game, a fantasy world. I don't agree with murdering people in real life either but I expect it in a fantasy setting.

It all comes down to one question...

Are you able to make the distinction between a game world and reality?

 

[Netrigan]

Also I think a good deal of the problem in video games is a thoughtless adolescent attitude to women. Hitman is a game which I think would do well to grow a bit up, because it's a great concept... but you can see in the ads and some of the content, it wants to be this tittering little school boy who's excited because he got a glimpse of a boob.

The main story of the most recent game has some issues, but it doesn't strike me as dehumanizing. But every so often it reverts to giggling school boy mode and those bits really don't fit in with the rest of the game.

 

[Lieju]

If you buy these sexist products and then complain about them...why not just not buy them? Consumer boycotts are an old practise.

It's possible to like something and want to play it and still think it has flaws.
Especially if you like something, it might bother you it has some troublesome elements.

Or are you saying you should never criticize anything you like?

Besides, if you don't speak up, how are the publishers supposed to know why you didn't buy it?
Let's say people boycotted the new Tomb Raider because they were bothered by the developer comments about protecting Lara, for example.

Wanna bet the message they would have taken from it would have been 'I guess games with female protagonists don't sell!'

I'll bite.

Elements in Baldur's Gate are sexist. Shar-Teel: "Men are pathetic".

It doesn't bother me though, in fact I like it. It works because she has a reason and cause to think that way. In my opinion sexism and racism in a dark fantasy setting is realistic and to be expected. Do I think that the game would be less immersive without that? Yes. Do I agree with sexism in real life? No. It's a game, a fantasy world. I don't agree with murdering people in real life either but I expect it in a fantasy setting.

It all comes down to one question...

Are you able to make the distinction between a game world and reality?

You are confusing portraying sexism and being sexist.

A game (or a story) can portray and tackle issues such as sexism, racism, homophobia and not support those views.

 

[Story]

I can't really speak for the other franchises listed but The Witcher 2? Really?
I can really speak from personal preferences, but that was the first game I stopped playing because of the way the game portrayed women. And I'm not usually so sensitive about such things.

I mean this is a game with collectable sex or romance cards.
http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/Romance_cards

Like women were some kind of collectable or something.

That's the first Witcher game, the second game is a lot more progressive. It still has sex scene but female characters drive the entire plot along and are strong supporting characters who are female.

There are also no collectible sex cards. Please check your facts before posting.

Ah fair enough, my mistake then.
I'm kinda bothered by the way the franchise treats women in general it can be pretty troubling. That is partly why I can't feel excited for the next Witcher game.
And I guess that's fine, the game just isn't for me.

But the point still stands about the poor ways women are treated in the franchise and you would be better off listing another game to support your thesis. Perhaps the Portal franchise?

 

[endtherapture]

I can't really speak for the other franchises listed but The Witcher 2? Really?
I can really speak from personal preferences, but that was the first game I stopped playing because of the way the game portrayed women. And I'm not usually so sensitive about such things.

I mean this is a game with collectable sex or romance cards.
http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/Romance_cards

Like women were some kind of collectable or something.

That's the first Witcher game, the second game is a lot more progressive. It still has sex scene but female characters drive the entire plot along and are strong supporting characters who are female.

There are also no collectible sex cards. Please check your facts before posting.

Ah fair enough, my mistake then.
I'm kinda bothered by the way the franchise treats women in general it can be pretty troubling. That is partly why I can't feel excited for the next Witcher game.
And I guess that's fine, the game just isn't for me.

But the point still stands about the poor ways women are treated in the franchise and you would be better off listing another game to support your thesis. Perhaps the Portal franchise?

Women being treated piss poor as a part of a setting is not a problem. The women in the game are well written characters with motivations and complex character backgrounds. A medieval society with entirely politically and sexually liberated modern style women is not appropriate for the setting and you can't hold that against it.

Unless you think that films like Mississippi Burning or Malcolm X are inherently racist due to the fact they're set in America at a certain time period.

 

[ForumSafari]

I can't really speak for the other franchises listed but The Witcher 2? Really?
I can really speak from personal preferences, but that was the first game I stopped playing because of the way the game portrayed women. And I'm not usually so sensitive about such things.

I mean this is a game with collectable sex or romance cards.
http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/Romance_cards

Like women were some kind of collectable or something.

That doesn't make a game sexist and it doesn't make a developer sexist any more than the lead in American History X makes Edward Norton or the film racist. It makes his character racist in the same way that you can argue that Geralt is sexist but that doesn't make the Witcher or CD Projekt sexist.

For reference he's not sexist, he just doesn't put any weight on sex and a lot of the women he associates with are sexually comfortable, in setting the sorceresses are all conspicuously physical and attractive because it's an advertisement for their craft. The women are also choosing to behave as they do, what's the problem with them being conspicuously attractive and up for sex?

The point of the sex cards is to differentiate Geralt from, say, a Bioware lead that treats sex as part of a romance. Geralt is unloved, infertile due to his mutations and burnt on love from a previous tumultuous relationship. He views sex as nothing of any importance. He doesn't 'collect women' because he doesn't view sex as anything more than a fun activity and a memory. Why would a woman having sex with him mean he has collected or that he owns them? It means nothing to him.

Now say what you will but those cards get you into his mindset effectively in a way that neither Bioware "romances" or GTA prostitutes simply don't.

Incidentally Geralt is not particularly admirable as a character, nor is he intended to be. In fact he's kind of an asshole. He's a bit more admirable in the book but not by much.

The Witcher 2: A series with a history of treating women weird, if not downright bad. Like the fact that only ugly women (Who then use magic to become pretty) can be magic users, as pretty women just have better things to do, like get married. Sexist.

Eh, I don't know whether that is actually a valid critique. Incidentally I love this point because it's not quite as clear cut as that, it's about the fact that becoming a magician renders you infertile so the only women who would become magicians, particularly from the landed class who use marriage for alliance, would be those so deformed or ugly that they would never get married. It's not a matter of them having 'better things to do', it's about the dynamics of their society.

Anyway back on point, that makes it a game about a sexist society but not a sexist game.

Mount and Blade: Penalizes you for playing as a woman. Sexist.

This is again a game involving sexism, not a sexist game. It's also pretty funny. Too many settings have chauvinists who are conspicuously gender equal in terms of their actual actions, as in they may say sexist things but very few games will actually treat the sexes differently through fear of penalising a player for an early choice. This and Ceasar's Legion from Fallout: New Vegas actually made me feel that playing as a woman was a significantly unusual event for women in the setting rather than being yet another 'trailblaser' proving myself to men that frankly didn't give a shit.

Sexism, but interesting sexism.

 

[Story]

I can't really speak for the other franchises listed but The Witcher 2? Really?
I can really speak from personal preferences, but that was the first game I stopped playing because of the way the game portrayed women. And I'm not usually so sensitive about such things.

I mean this is a game with collectable sex or romance cards.
http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/Romance_cards

Like women were some kind of collectable or something.

That doesn't make a game sexist and it doesn't make a developer sexist any more than the lead in American History X makes Edward Norton or the film racist. It makes his character racist in the same way that you can argue that Geralt is sexist but that doesn't make the Witcher or CD Projekt sexist.

For reference he's not sexist, he just doesn't put any weight on sex and a lot of the women he associates with are sexually comfortable, in setting the sorceresses are all conspicuously physical and attractive because it's an advertisement for their craft. The women are also choosing to behave as they do, what's the problem with them being conspicuously attractive and up for sex?

The point of the sex cards is to differentiate Geralt from, say, a Bioware lead that treats sex as part of a romance. Geralt is unloved, infertile due to his mutations and burnt on love from a previous tumultuous relationship. He views sex as nothing of any importance. He doesn't 'collect women' because he doesn't view sex as anything more than a fun activity and a memory. Why would a woman having sex with him mean he has collected or that he owns them? It means nothing to him.

Now say what you will but those cards get you into his mindset effectively in a way that neither Bioware "romances" or GTA prostitutes simply don't.

Incidentally Geralt is not particularly admirable as a character, nor is he intended to be. In fact he's kind of an asshole.

Never once in that quote did I say it made the game sexist.
It was just something that bothered me as a player to the point that didn't want to play any longer. If it didn't bother you than you know, more power to you.
And this is when I was playing the first Witcher, as was corrected by the OP. I can not remember if I did play the 2nd Witcher, seeing as I didn't enjoy the first one. So I will no longer try to refute using that as an example to support the OP's ideas especially since there were quite a few people already who have commented above me and played the game saying pretty the same point. I simply feel if the OP wanted to choose games that in their definition are considered "not sexist" that they would be better off choosing another example. Perhaps one not as controversial.

But if I may argue this position you presented. I would say your examples are not equivalent. For a number of reasons, but chiefly this one: Geranlt might not say that the women were collectables as cards but the game is mechanically saying that by having the system in the first place. Or at the very least is implying that, it which is troubling. And the women are choosing to be that way, because they were written/coded to be this way from the developers. It is not like these NPCs have their own free will, we as players are only as free as the game allows us to be.

 

[ForumSafari]

But if I may argue this position you presented. I would say your examples are not equivalent. For a number of reasons, but chiefly this one: Geranlt might not say that the women were collectables as cards but the game is mechanically saying that by having the system in the first place. Or at the very least is implying that, it which is troubling.

It's only sexist if you consider him to be collecting women. To me it seems more like he's collecting experiences or memories. To put it in perspective each of the women he has sex with (which it bears pointing out is as few or as many as you choose) would probably also receive a Geralt card.

And the women are choosing to be that way, because they were written/coded to be this way from the developers. It is not like these NPCs have their own free will, we as players are only as free as the game allows us to be.

You can't argue that they're being forced to behave that way and simultaneously argue that they're being treated like objects. Either argue IRL or in setting. In setting they're women who choose to dress as they do, choose to behave as they do and who engage in mutually enjoyable sex with the protagonist. Out of setting the player is treating objects like objects whilst remotely controlling an object. Either they're women to be disrespected or they're objects with no free will.

Out of setting it's also worth pointing out that you don't have to have sex with anyone in that game. If you choose to have sex with them why would you mind seeing them in a seductive and nude pose? You're roleplaying sex so you get a view of them naked to keep. If you don't want to see the character naked? Don't fuck them.

 

[Piorn]

Complaining about the current state of the industry is kind of like complaining about microwaved food. At the beginning it's cold, you microwave it for a minute and then the parts on top are hot and the rest is still cold. That doesn't mean the microwave is discriminating the noodles. That means it needs to be stirred around and needs some more time.
The industry is not sexist, but most of the senior staff is male because that's how it used to be.
Women working in the industry is "relatively new", and you don't become senior staff right away.
That is all there is to it.
It just needs time.

 

[JimB]

Given that the game is set in a Eastern European medieval fantasy world, I would say there is a fair reason to include rape.

Given that the game is set in an eastern European, medieval, fantasy world, there's also a fair reason for the game to include the main character dying at age 8 of cholera. Kind of makes a person wonder why, if verisimilitude was the goal, they chose to draw the line at female characters being subjected to sexual violations.

As you've said, you've never played the game, so before you comment you should at least check out the scenes in question.

I will be certain to do so if I ever start talking about the Witcher 2 specifically rather than in generalities, which I mentioned quite explicitly is what I was doing.

I dunno...read some reviews.

Which reviewers do you recommend for a discussion of whether a given game is sexist? Which reviewers tackle that subject in their reviews, and have good standards for it?

 

[endtherapture]

Given that the game is set in a Eastern European medieval fantasy world, I would say there is a fair reason to include rape.

Given that the game is set in an eastern European, medieval, fantasy world, there's also a fair reason for the game to include the main character dying at age 8 of cholera. Kind of makes a person wonder why, if verisimilitude was the goal, they chose to draw the line at female characters being subjected to sexual violations.

As you've said, you've never played the game, so before you comment you should at least check out the scenes in question.

I will be certain to do so if I ever start talking about the Witcher 2 specifically rather than in generalities, which I mentioned quite explicitly is what I was doing.

I dunno...read some reviews.

Which reviewers do you recommend for a discussion of whether a given game is sexist? Which reviewers tackle that subject in their reviews, and have good standards for it?

Given you play as a supernatural mutant then ... actually I'm not even going to, that is just stupid. Your argument is so stupid it deserves the facepalm but nothing else. The setting of the game includes death, disease, famine and war...but the main character is not going to die at age 8 because there would be no game. Jesus christ, so stupid.

I don't know...because I don't really care about it, but I'm sure that you can find a reviewer who reviews the game based on sexism. Do some research yourself.

 

[michael87cn]

IMO, sexism, racism, nationalism, etc, if you add an -ism at the end it means hatred is present.

I believe you can joke about women, different races, different nations without meaning you hate them, it might make you a bit of an asshole, though that's not as bad as being a racist, a sexist or a nationalist...

People throw around words they don't understand, and people get offended easily.

Anita Sharkeesian, or hoever you spell her name, is what I call a fire starter. She gets offended or upset about something, and she deems it a crime, or villainous, or basically WRONG to do at all. Are video games like Mario, Skyrim, GTA, Saints Row racist? Are they REALLY sexist? Of course not. They do in no way, advocate the hatred of ANY kind of person. Are they representations of REAL LIFE? Of course not, they are NOT SUPPOSED TO BE.

Why then do people like Anita, claim that its harmful to real people? Fear, ignorance, it can be a multitude of reasons, whats important is that you educate yourself. Anyone who spends a good deal of time playing video games knows that whenever video games appear on the news and they claim we're being brainwashed into killing, that it's ridiculous. People need to likewise stop listening to people like Anita when she says we're being brainwashed into being sexist. It's just not true. We give her far too much attention, money, etc. and I suppose it stems from not properly thinking about and understanding these issues ourselves enough, and for that maybe we have fire starters like her to blame. She may only be making things worse, but at least she is making people stop and think. Once we all figure our as a society that games are Okay, that will be the end of it.

A movie, a book, a video game can have something in it that's not real. That's not normal. That's not ethical, that's not moral, that doesn't make it wrong. An artistic work usually aims to do one thing, tell a story, or, entertain you.

Anything that is made by people will be loved by certain people and hated by others, video games are not the exception. If you dislike a movie, book or game you shouldn't try to get it banned, censored or changed. That's not your right. Your right is to use that product and like it or not like it. You also have the right to make your own product. The imagination is a wonderful thing. Get to work.

 

[JimB]

Your argument is so stupid it deserves the facepalm but nothing else.

Yes, yes, I'm sure we're all positively in stitches that you can refuse to talk to me and post funny pictures. It is the very height of hilarity, no doubt. However, I personally interpret it as a lack of anything to actually say on the topic, prompted by a perhaps deliberate attempt to take my words to an illogical extreme of literalness. My low opinion of your approach probably means nothing to you, of course, but for all it's worth, I am not impressed.

I don't know...because I don't really care about it, but I'm sure that you can find a reviewer who reviews the game based on sexism. Do some research yourself.

You are the one who said such a reviewer exists. I did not. Therefore, it is your burden to prove that the thing you said is true. It is not my burden to prove that for you.

 

[Story]

But if I may argue this position you presented. I would say your examples are not equivalent. For a number of reasons, but chiefly this one: Geranlt might not say that the women were collectables as cards but the game is mechanically saying that by having the system in the first place. Or at the very least is implying that, it which is troubling.

It's only sexist if you consider him to be collecting women. To me it seems more like he's collecting experiences or memories. To put it in perspective each of the women he has sex with (which it bears pointing out is as few or as many as you choose) would probably also receive a Geralt card.

And the women are choosing to be that way, because they were written/coded to be this way from the developers. It is not like these NPCs have their own free will, we as players are only as free as the game allows us to be.

You can't argue that they're being forced to behave that way and simultaneously argue that they're being treated like objects. Either argue IRL or in setting. In setting they're women who choose to dress as they do, choose to behave as they do and who engage in mutually enjoyable sex with the protagonist. Out of setting the player is treating objects like objects whilst remotely controlling an object. Either they're women to be disrespected or they're objects with no free will.

Out of setting it's also worth pointing out that you don't have to have sex with anyone in that game. If you choose to have sex with them why would you mind seeing them in a seductive and nude pose? You're roleplaying sex so you get a view of them naked to keep. If you don't want to see the character naked? Don't fuck them.

That's just it though, you keep referring to things you as a player got of it and that's good! That's just not what I got from that system, which is again, why I personally find it troubling and why I choose to not play the game any longer. That's also why I'm baffled that someone would use the Witcher series as an example of a non-sexist franchise. When I can, again personally, think of a few more that better fit that critique.

And well, I can't completely argue against your second point. Well, expect it seems like you are implying that the objects that reflect things in real life shouldn't be critiqued more than just objects outside of their universe. (Which as a person interested in Art History I find troubling.) I'll just say that I choose games whose universes reflect my interests in real life and especially in RPGs where I play a mostly blank player avatar. And a game which one mechanic has female sex cards as a side mission has no real appeal to me. By hey, neither does heterosexual female porn.