They're book OK. But the fact that such crazy, organized, batshit derp came out of the woodwork against this documentary shows that there's something particularly shitty about gaming culture.
They're book OK. But the fact that such crazy, organized, batshit derp came out of the woodwork against this documentary shows that there's something particularly shitty about gaming culture.
Yeah I was waiting for her to say something borderline antagonistic, and then the video ended.
They're book OK. But the fact that such crazy, organized, batshit derp came out of the woodwork against this documentary shows that there's something particularly shitty about gaming culture.
I think the main problem isn't that games are sexist or not. The main problem is people refusing to admit that it's sexist, or alternately that it doesn't matter that it's sexist. People can entertain ideas without accepting them. It's when they accept them that it becomes a problem.
The same thing exists for females too, I'm not excusing anything so don't put words in my mouth. I'm just saying both sexes have things marketed towards them and they both contain stereotypes.
You may not have meant to, but you said a damn sight more than that. Let's start at the beginning:
Americans create cliche sexist stuff. But a large majority of the games that Americans make that have macho fuck yeah guys kicking ass and damsels in distress are very specifically pointed at men.
You state a pair of well-known (and probably correct) statements here: that American media is sexist, and that many American games have a certain sense of machismo and are pointed at men. However, that "But" colors your entire post. By using it there, you are implying that it is okay for American games to be sexist machismo fantasies because they're aimed at men.
What I'm trying to explain to you is that my issue with this is that within all realms of American media there is always the girls side and the guys side. Girls don't really want to play guy games and guys don't really want to play girl games. Same with movies.
Welcome to the land of sexism, population: you. This is a bullshit generalization and you damn well know it. There are plenty of guys who like "girl" media and girls who like "guy" media, and media that's aimed at both genders. And second, don't try to equivocate based on how there are "two sides of the story" in American media: There's the story of the cis upper-middle-class usually-white monogamous heterosexual couple where the man is the head of household and the woman is ultimately obedient, and that's ~98% of American media. The stereotypes of "female-aimed" media perpetrate this just as strongly as the "male-aimed" media does, with romance protagonists in essence for a man (or something acting in the role of a man) who will make their life "perfect." Let's continue:
Japanese games tend to create these games for both sexes and still they retain the sort of hot helpless blonde cliche that are oft seen in games. Women are going to get more exposure to those sort of games because they appeal to both sexes.
And here's the kicker: by bringing up that women get more exposure to these stereotypes in Japanese games in conjunction with that troublesome "But" from earlier, you're implying that sexism is only a problem in Japanese games because women are seeing negative stereotypes of themselves. Because it's obviously okay for men to play these machismo games that put them into the habit of treating women like sex objects, as long as the women don't see it!
The other issue is that if she is going to discuss this with english gamers she may need to discuss it in a different fashion for Japanese gamers, who have a different culture than our own. Also I'm no expert on Japanese culture but I do understand from some experience that they view things much differently than Americans. One being that nakedness is not as big an issue to their culture as it is over here, etc.
This last bit is a kind of pointless appeal to cultural relativism. The message "hey dude this stuff is really actually sexist" doesn't actually require much cultural translation.
So, all in all, while you claim you meant to just say "stereotypes exist in media," what you wound up saying was that sexism in media is okay as long as only certain audiences are exposed to certain kinds of sexism. Good job.
How do you feel about BDSM? Is submissive roleplay OK but submissive fiction is not, or are they both not OK? Both can reinforce gender stereotypes.
Consent is sexy, my friend. As long as it's portrayed such that both parties are consenting and aware of the fact that they're taking on roles, I have no problem with BDSM.
They're book OK. But the fact that such crazy, organized, batshit derp came out of the woodwork against this documentary shows that there's something particularly shitty about gaming culture.
AGREED.
How do you feel about BDSM? Is submissive roleplay OK but submissive fiction is not, or are they both not OK? Both can reinforce gender stereotypes.
Consent is sexy, my friend. As long as it's portrayed such that both parties are consenting and aware of the fact that they're taking on roles, I have no problem with BDSM.
So people can't consent to the type of media they consume? Do we need the consent of fictional characters in order to portray them in a particular light?
Hahaha you may have been the first person to claim I was sexist ever. Also if you interpret my argument that way that's fine but I'm not saying it's okay to display women as sex objects so please don't accuse me of such. Whether you construed my argument as such is your own interpretation.
There's a DNA service that tests your partner's underwear to see if they've been faithful. My faith in humanity is at an all time low.
Is it a DNA test now? They used to only offer a test for the presence of semen in a woman's underwear. You had to abstain for a period of time in order for it to be considered reliable.
Did anyone else get a check for a hilariously low amount due to a lawsuit called "Hanson v Google"? I can't find anything online about what the suit was about, because every result is someone talking about the check.
Did anyone else get a check for a hilariously low amount due to a lawsuit called "Hanson v Google"? I can't find anything online about what the suit was about, because every result is someone talking about the check.
Because it's obviously okay for men to play these machismo games that put them into the habit of treating women like sex objects, as long as the women don't see it!
Also this is a generalization as well. Not all guys play macho, women degrading games and say "Bitches only be good for lookin' pretty and sexy time." Who plays a game called God of War and doesn't expect there to be some machismo bullshit in there? What I was getting at, but didn't say very well was that in America it is very superficial, not so much in Japanese games. Like muppet said you still consent to media. Within American culture it tends to be way more what-you-see-is-what-you-get mentality.
Well, careful how you "quote" me because you're implying I said a little more than I did...
Sorry, I was thinking one thing and said another. Fixed.
How do you feel about BDSM? Is submissive roleplay OK but submissive fiction is not, or are they both not OK? Both can reinforce gender stereotypes.
Consent is sexy, my friend. As long as it's portrayed such that both parties are consenting and aware of the fact that they're taking on roles, I have no problem with BDSM.
So people can't consent to the type of media they consume? Do we need the consent of fictional characters in order to portray them in a particular light?
I'm not seeing how those are analogous to consenting to BDSM roleplay. As for your earlier comment about submissive fiction (which I realize I didn't address), the fiction should better be damn well aware (and make sure the reader is aware) that it's a fantasy.
How do you feel about BDSM? Is submissive roleplay OK but submissive fiction is not, or are they both not OK? Both can reinforce gender stereotypes.
Consent is sexy, my friend. As long as it's portrayed such that both parties are consenting and aware of the fact that they're taking on roles, I have no problem with BDSM.
So people can't consent to the type of media they consume? Do we need the consent of fictional characters in order to portray them in a particular light?
I'm not seeing how those are analogous to consenting to BDSM roleplay. As for your earlier comment about submissive fiction (which I realize I didn't address), the fiction should better be damn well aware (and make sure the reader is aware) that it's a fantasy.
This is a nanny state viewpoint. You're assuming viewers/consumers haven't got any wherewithal of their own to make these distinctions and need spoon-feeding. It's an elitist position.
There's a DNA service that tests your partner's underwear to see if they've been faithful. My faith in humanity is at an all time low.
Is it a DNA test now? They used to only offer a test for the presence of semen in a woman's underwear. You had to abstain for a period of time in order for it to be considered reliable.
Yeah they can compare the DNA in the undies now, so if there's a third party's DNA then that can confirm suspicions. But at $600 total for every step of the process, can't you just have a talk about your mistrust?
Yeah they can compare the DNA in the undies now, so if there's a third party's DNA then that can confirm suspicions. But at $600 total for every step of the process, can't you just have a talk about your mistrust?
How do you feel about BDSM? Is submissive roleplay OK but submissive fiction is not, or are they both not OK? Both can reinforce gender stereotypes.
Consent is sexy, my friend. As long as it's portrayed such that both parties are consenting and aware of the fact that they're taking on roles, I have no problem with BDSM.
So people can't consent to the type of media they consume? Do we need the consent of fictional characters in order to portray them in a particular light?
I'm not seeing how those are analogous to consenting to BDSM roleplay. As for your earlier comment about submissive fiction (which I realize I didn't address), the fiction should better be damn well aware (and make sure the reader is aware) that it's a fantasy.
This is a nanny state viewpoint. You're assuming viewers/consumers haven't got any wherewithal of their own to make these distinctions and need spoon-feeding. It's an elitist position.
Yeah, and why don't we take the safety labels off everything because it's also elitist to assume people need to be told when something is dangerous?
I'm not arguing for a nanny state. I'm arguing for my right to call out people on sexist bullshit, and demand something better. Something that doesn't reduce women to objects of desire, and that respects the experiences of minorities without tokenizing them.
Safety labels on drugs and products are NOT analogous to including politically correct couching in all media to make sure the message is delivered in a way acceptable to you.
Guess what? Women are desirable! So are men! It's OK to be desirable, and a well rounded, comprehensive picture need not be conveyed in every 5 minute increment of film, game, novel, etc.
It's human nature that "getting the girl" is considered a prize. So is "getting the guy". Good luck programming that out of the human psyche. In fact, why would you want to?
You want some sort of sterile utopian censorship state where everybody is equal and no one has preferences, personalities, or failings that might be considered not empowering enough. You're trying to dress it up but what you really want is a Handicapper General situation. Androgyny and sterile politeness in all things.
There's a spectrum as with most things. Too far on either side is bad.
Back to random comments, I'm going to be 35 in a week and my eyebrows are becoming bushy. Seriously, I have like, 3 or 4 hairs in each that exceed 2 inches in length and are curly and can't be smoothed down with the rest.
It's some sort of motherfucking Gandalf shit going on up there. What the hell?
Oh yes, "politically correct." The universal code for "I can't believe you're getting on my case for being a racist!"
This comment proves that it's not worth debating this topic with you. How ridiculous.
He's arguing the extreme of his side, you're arguing the extreme of yours. Neither of you are worth debating with.
Arguing the extreme of mine? I think you'd better back that up. The extreme of my position is porn in every game and Hooters style waitresses in every restaurant.
No, the extreme of your position is total apathy to whatever goes in the media.
Which I'm not arguing for.
For example, I think movies like "Hostel" and "Saw" are disgusting and should be illegal. They're simulated snuff films with absolutely no redeeming value.
Comments
Let's continue: And here's the kicker: by bringing up that women get more exposure to these stereotypes in Japanese games in conjunction with that troublesome "But" from earlier, you're implying that sexism is only a problem in Japanese games because women are seeing negative stereotypes of themselves. Because it's obviously okay for men to play these machismo games that put them into the habit of treating women like sex objects, as long as the women don't see it! This last bit is a kind of pointless appeal to cultural relativism. The message "hey dude this stuff is really actually sexist" doesn't actually require much cultural translation.
So, all in all, while you claim you meant to just say "stereotypes exist in media," what you wound up saying was that sexism in media is okay as long as only certain audiences are exposed to certain kinds of sexism. Good job.
EDIT: Okay, the Maxie Zeus episode of Batman: the Animated Series is now one of my favourites.
I'm not arguing for a nanny state. I'm arguing for my right to call out people on sexist bullshit, and demand something better. Something that doesn't reduce women to objects of desire, and that respects the experiences of minorities without tokenizing them.
It's human nature that "getting the girl" is considered a prize. So is "getting the guy". Good luck programming that out of the human psyche. In fact, why would you want to?
You want some sort of sterile utopian censorship state where everybody is equal and no one has preferences, personalities, or failings that might be considered not empowering enough. You're trying to dress it up but what you really want is a Handicapper General situation. Androgyny and sterile politeness in all things.
There's a spectrum as with most things. Too far on either side is bad.
It's some sort of motherfucking Gandalf shit going on up there. What the hell?
For example, I think movies like "Hostel" and "Saw" are disgusting and should be illegal. They're simulated snuff films with absolutely no redeeming value.