Support NeoGAF

[Rookhelm]

So this specifically is what got me thinking. There have been so many pieces of research proving video game violence doesn't cause people to be more violent. Would you not also assume that someone perving over a woman in a game is not necessarily more likely to objectify women in real life.

But of course that's not the point. The point is that it's offensive.

Violence, for the most part, is immediately known to be bad to most people. It's very black and white in that way. Killing = bad (self defense aside, if you wish).

But the objectifying of women and marginalization of minorities already happens, and in many cases, isn't even obvious because some people don't even realize they're doing it. It's something that is too normalized and isn't as clear-cut as violence. It's much more nuanced, so by encouraging it in games, it runs the risk of bleeding over. So, even if games don't "cause" people to do it, they can play a part in normalizing the behavior

so, basically this:

Most people won't kill people irl because they know it's wrong, but casual sexism is an everyday problem

 

[rjcc]

Also, on an aggregate level, it *is* troubling that violence is so prevalent in gaming. not because it will make gamers murderers, but because, like casual objectification, it seems like lazy game design.

 

[Budi]

Most people won't kill people irl because they know it's wrong, but casual sexism is an everyday problem

I'll just quote this too, because it's basically what I was about to say. There's much less defense for violence outside videogames, than there is for objectifying women. There are laws in place that try to prevent violence happening. People are very aware of the harm violence brings. And let's not pretend that nobody is complaining about video game violence, it's not okay for everyone.

And personally, I'd rather have my kid see a nude body in a film than graphical beheading for example. Ofcourse that depends on how the nudity is presented.

Edit: I've been rewatching first season of Leftovers recently. It doesn't shy away from graphical violence nor nudity. It has flaccid dicks, tits and butts from both men and women. But it's done quite naturally without objectifying. Wouldn't bother me if my kid saw that as much it would bother me them seeing the frightening images of

Spoiler

brutally stoning a character to death.

 

[Zakalwe]

There are others which state the opposite however.

I actually think this is a little beside the point.

The problem with games that objectify women is that they continue to make it seem okay to do so. And even if these games aren't making the people who play them more sexist, they're still perpetuating inequality and sexism simply by including these things or handling them badly.

I'm not saying this to dismiss what you wrote, more to say it really doesn't matter if they're causing people to be more sexist, these things need to change.

Violence in games is no doubt here to stay, but sexism and objectifying etc... is slowly on the way out.

 

[Crayon]

Because the usa is a mercenary state.

 

[David H Wong]

I don't have a problem with either but I can separate fantasy from real life.

No, you can't. Every single human is influenced by the culture they live in - whether it's peers, advertising, or fiction. The portrayal of women (or minorities, etc) in movies/songs/games absolutely affects how you see them in real life because they blur the line between what part is fiction and what part is reality. Example: People have vastly incorrect opinions on everything from the crime rate to what kind of apartment they could afford in New York to how dangerous sharks are, all based on fictional portrayals they've seen.

The reason you don't go out and murder after a session of GTA is because you have lots of socialization in the other direction, parents, schools, TV, movies and the law itself giving you incentive to not do it. There are no such safeguards against the objectification of women; from birth you're told that women are primarily decoration, and that a "normal" woman is a 20 year-old bikini model. Creators of pop culture need to understand that they have tremendous power to influence people and need to be responsible with it.

 

[Syril]

Violence does get a fair amount of protest on occasion. When The Last of Us was first shown it triggered a topic about the fact that such an overwhelming amount of big-budget productions had large amounts of violent content. I also remember that there were a lot of people both here and on other sites that were very vocal about Mortal Kombat X's fatalities.

 

[FinalAres]

So on the one hand I'm glad I made this thread because it's been interesting, and I can steal some of your arguments.

On the other hand, anyone looking at my thread history is going to think I'm a right douche.

 

[peakish]

There is a complicated history here regarding the normalisation of violence within societies - particularly with regards to the video game industry, European and American society - as a visible aspect of life, versus sex as a very private and intimate affair. Violence can be wrapped up in the cloak of necessity; you need to kill that guy to save someone from an attack; you need to break that guy's hand to stop the thief; you need to have your sword to defend against bandits. Indeed, the idea of the necessity of being able to defend one's self is expressly codified in the foundational document of the United States, who remain one of the most culturally influential nations on Earth. Even in instances where violence is not a necessary solution, the idea that it could be renders it ultimately visible and acceptable in other circumstances as well.

Sex - especially graphically - does not have that necessity; trying to dress it up as such is implicitly read as farce to any modern eye. Seeing some tits is very difficult to spin into a context where there was moral cause for it. Sexualisation is read as indulgence, and with the sexualisation of women in particular, an indulgence that has been used to oppress and belittle half the human population for what they naturally have. Thus it is at best frivolous, and at worst harmful.

Of course, this isn't necessarily how either of those things have to be, but that is where they are currently placed in the cultural context overall, not just video games. Video games just have the added bonus as a medium presumed especially aimed at a young male audience, and indulging their particular fantasies, which is thus the perspective with which most of the medium's output is analysed.

Edit: Quiet is a perfect example of such really, and probably an actual case of such indulgence. Hideo Kojima tried to find various excuses with which to justify her ridiculous outfit, and in so doing got a response that can be generally summed up as mocking laughter.

This to me is a key difference. Using violence is often a game's primary interaction. In those games your goal is to shoot dudes. One can discuss whether that's good or not in itself but there's a context to shooting dudes in Unreal 2 which is completely different from giving you this female character to oogle.

 

[Earthbound64]

People dismissing this by saying that people murdering others in games don't go out and murder people in person...
But, the topic is more broad than that. Violence takes many non-murderous forms. Just like sexism takes many forms that aren't rape. Dismissing it just because people don't murder is silly.

 

[Aaronrules380]

No, you can't. Every single human is influenced by the culture they live in - whether it's peers, advertising, or fiction. The portrayal of women (or minorities, etc) in movies/songs/games absolutely affects how you see them in real life because they blur the line between what part is fiction and what part is reality. Example: People have vastly incorrect opinions on everything from the crime rate to what kind of apartment they could afford in New York to how dangerous sharks are, all based on fictional portrayals they've seen.

The reason you don't go out and murder after a session of GTA is because you have lots of socialization in the other direction, parents, schools, TV, movies and the law itself giving you incentive to not do it. There are no such safeguards against the objectification of women; from birth you're told that women are primarily decoration, and that a "normal" woman is a 20 year-old bikini model. Creators of pop culture need to understand that they have tremendous power to influence people and need to be responsible with it.

Yep. The reason humans started telling stories in the first place was to educate and share cultural values more than it was to simply entertain. The idea that stories don't affect our perception of reality is ludicrous

 

[Johndoey]

There are actual easily identifiable punishments for committing acts of violence that serve to dissuade people from pulling shit and it's pounded into children that violence is wrong or at least an absolute last resort. Not so much when it comes to disrespecting women and minorities.

 

[Cat Party]

This is basically the original whataboutism in gaming.

"Objectifying women in games is stupid, lazy, and harmful."

"Oh yeah? Well what about violence in games? Huh? Checkmate SJWs."

 

[FinalAres]

This to me is a key difference. Using violence is often a game's primary interaction. In those games your goal is to shoot dudes. One can discuss whether that's good or not in itself but there's a context to shooting dudes in Unreal 2 which is completely different from giving you this female character to oogle.

I wouldn't have thought a game which sexualises women 'in context' would be any better than something like MGS. In fact I imagine it would be 10X worse.

 

[Spieler Eins]

Because the usa is a mercenary state.

Violence is much more shunned and criticized here in Europe, while barely nobody cares about sex and objectification in games. Different cultures care about different things.

Something along these lines. Europe only recently got more mild on censorship of violence and in Asia things like Resident Evil VII still come out with gore removed.

 

[Axass]

Violence is much more shunned and criticized here in Europe, while barely nobody cares about sex and objectification in games. Different cultures care about different things.

 

[YoRHa No.2 Type B]

In MGSV you're a super soldier killing people in the desert.
It makes sense for there to be violence.
It doesn't make sense for a sniper to be naked in the desert.

She breathes through her skin, duh.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Society generally agrees violence is wrong... Society does not generally agree that women being sex objects is wrong.

You aren't going to be made violent by video games, but how you perceive women can be influenced by media.

 

[calavera_jo]

That's how it is in "regular" US media as well. Kill 900 people...fine. Show a titty...hide yo kids.

Them titties gonna corrupt your youth yo

 

[Chainsawkitten]

Video game violence may or may not be okay depending on how it's portrayed. I think the portrayal of torture in fictional media (including, but not limited to, video games) is a major factor in making people apathetic toward its use (by portraying it as an effective means to get reliable information). I mean, we even had a senator argue for it by citing 24. "He may not be nice but he gets the job done!" Of course in real life torture is both evil and ineffective.

This isn't going to make people go out and torture others, but it is going to make them more likely to be apathetic about human rights abuses committed in the name of anti-terrorism.

 

[rjcc]

I wouldn't have thought a game which sexualises women 'in context' would be any better than something like MGS. In fact I imagine it would be 10X worse.

You seem to think there are negative connotations towards sexualized images of people. That's a personal thing.

There are infinite possibilities, but you think they're "worse" in an undefined way.

 

[Platy]

I wouldn't have thought a game which sexualises women 'in context' would be any better than something like MGS. In fact I imagine it would be 10X worse.

It would be better, IF it made sense.

It never makes sense

 

[FinalAres]

Video game violence may or may not be okay depending on how it's portrayed. I think the portrayal of torture in fictional media (including, but not limited to, video games) is a major factor in making people apathetic toward its use (by portraying it as an effective means to get reliable information). I mean, we even had a senator argue for it by citing 24. "He may not be nice but he gets the job done!" Of course in real life torture is both evil and ineffective.

This isn't going to make people go out and torture others, but it is going to make them more likely to be apathetic about human rights abuses committed in the name of anti-terrorism.

This is a good point, but I assume torture in videogames would also get a similarly negative (/divisive?) reaction. I remember seeing the MGSV trailer and thinking "too far".

 

[Johndoey]

Society generally agrees violence is wrong... Society does not generally agree that women being sex objects is wrong.

You aren't going to be made violent by video games, but how you perceive women can be influenced by media.

Exactly.

 

[Kinyou]

Violence is indiscriminate.

*Edit* (Sort of).

I'm pretty sure that if you'd analyze the violence in games you'd find that most characters that get killed are male.

It's only been very recently that devs have started to make random goons female as well.

People dismissing this by saying that people murdering others in games don't go out and murder people in person...
But, the topic is more broad than that. Violence takes many non-murderous forms. Just like sexism takes many forms that aren't rape. Dismissing it just because people don't murder is silly.

Agree with this. If people argue that there's a direct correlation it would help to post studies and explain why it makes peoples more sexist but not more violent.

 

[True Fire]

Most people don't commit mass murder, but misogyny is ingrained in our culture.

 

[stupei]

So this specifically is what got me thinking. There have been so many pieces of research proving video game violence doesn't cause people to be more violent. Would you not also assume that someone perving over a woman in a game is not necessarily more likely to objectify women in real life.

But of course that's not the point. The point is that it's offensive.

That same research usually suggests that while media does not directly influence behavior, it can influence our perception of what is acceptable or normal behavior amongst people at large. So while a person who is not inclined toward violent behavior will not become more violent by playing violent games, they may begin to consider violence a generally accepted and normal solution to specific forms of conflict, whether or not they engage in violent acts themselves. If the portrayal of women in games is primarily as victims or sex objects, the idea that this is the primary role women can serve becomes more subconsciously accepted as reality. Day-to-day instances of sexism appear increasingly normal and even inevitable.

And importantly, as others have noted: people do complain about violence in games all the time. It doesn't seem to get as many clicks, though.

 

[stephen08]

As others have said violence is kind of agreed to be this taboo thing that we all reject as a society as being wrong except in some specific instances. Objectification, misogyny, and other problems like racism are still very much a part of society and depending who you ask you get varying levels of how much of a problem it is.

It is because of this that I can feel comfortable in knowing that the devs of Mortal Kombat know it is wrong to rip out a spinal cord but bridle at the fact that their idea of a strong, powerful female warrior fights in essentially lingerie and heels. They are both ridiculous, over the top things to be sure but do we all know that as a society? If we could agree and had stamped out sexism ages ago then I wouldn't see as much of a problem. That being said though...

Games should be for everyone. I don't begrudge people their DOA volleyball games where the whole point is to ogle women. It is, however, a little bit disconcerting that sexism and objectification issues are as common as they are in gaming. This is a similar problem with violence I feel. We should want to have a wide variety of topics, genres, and tones in gaming. That would welcome people in and open the hobby to more and more people. I could see women coming into gaming though and seeing how problematic many of the female characters are and getting discouraged and leaving. That does kind of suck and is something that should probably change.

 

[KonradLaw]

Who says objectified female characters are bad? It only becomes a problem if that's all there is in a medium.

 

[MrDoctor]

it's not, and both see heavy criticism in media that's not video games. we all have our guilty pleasures, though

 

[peakish]

I wouldn't have thought a game which sexualises women 'in context' would be any better than something like MGS. In fact I imagine it would be 10X worse.

I don't fully agree. When they made a Playboy game I wasn't upset that it featured Playmates in next to no clothing because hey, it's a smut game. When the same designs crop up in more "neutral" contexts I take notice.

 

[JonnyDBrit]

I wouldn't have thought a game which sexualises women 'in context' would be any better than something like MGS. In fact I imagine it would be 10X worse.

Well, that gets into my point on how largely, you would probably read that attempt to justify the sexualisation as farcical. That however necessary it thinks it is, it really isn't, and so it would not work. I suspect it's part of why people can oddly give Yoko Taro praise when he pretty much upfront admits that 2B was designed the way she was as fetish fuel - it comes off as honest instead of deceitful, even if the subject should otherwise raise questions.

There's also the matter that in reality of course, people willingly sexualise themselves* all the time, whether for the sake of their own identity, as an aspect of ritual, for the sake of a career, or as part of the act of intimacy. To deny the idea of sex and sexualisation as part of the human experience is just absurd; the way it's so often done in video games is just poorly executed though, especially giving itself away as an unnecessary act of indulgence, rather than character. Which is also why I think there was such a positive reception when say, Chun-Li was revealed to have her black dress in SFV. Because she has a number of other outfits, it wasn't assumed as what she necessarily wears to a fight, and so was not read in the context of being what would be practical (by anime logic at least) for a martial artist; it was read as what an attractive woman would wear if she was trying to impress at a formal affair, and so did well in that context.

*This also gets into a wider debate about the nature of agency in fiction, with video games blurring the line as the player has some degree of agency, and is an individual audience. Ie, when Bayonetta flaunts for the camera, is 'she' really flaunting for the camera as an actual woman would be able to, or is she no better than a digital blow up doll responding on command, whether to the player's button prompt or the developer's programming?

 

[rochellepaws]

I don't think there's anything wrong with overly sexualised or objectified characters if the stated intent of the game is titillation. I have no problem with Akiba's Trip, Rumble Roses, BMX XXX and such existing or with the people who enjoy them.
The issue is when a game is attempting to create a balanced story and multi dimensional characters and they meticulously craft a selection of well designed and represented male characters with sophisticated personalities and then churn out someone like Quiet to represent women.

 

[Afrodium]

I wouldn't have thought a game which sexualises women 'in context' would be any better than something like MGS. In fact I imagine it would be 10X worse.

Sexualization =/= objectification

If a game had a female character that enjoyed sex as one of her personality traits (as most people do) and had sex at some point in the game and there was even nudity, it would not be as objectifying as having hot sniper wearing a bikini and torn fishnets as a game's sole female character.

That's how it is in "regular" US media as well. Kill 900 people...fine. Show a titty...hide yo kids.

Objectification isn't about showing titties, it's about a character existing specifically to show us her titties.

 

[Hilbert]

Violence is much more shunned and criticized here in Europe, while barely nobody cares about sex and objectification in games. Different cultures care about different things.

These kind of comments make me think people are missing the point. The problem doesn't come from a prudish attitude about sex, it is about treating women as more then a sex object.

 

[komarkaze]

Joke answer is between video game violence and female objectification, one of these leads to the actual spilling of body fluids and the other doesn't.

Serious answer is American culture has long had a special relationship with violence; guns in particular. Media that depicts and glorified the use of firearms have been deeply ingrained in American laws and pop culture for a very long time, so it's been more accepted.

 

[obeast]

My impulse is to view both objectification and violence as non-problems in principle but -- crucially -- not in practice. Both are outlets for evolutionary impulses (sexual selection, tribal violence) with imperfect roles in modern societies. In theory, I think both are perfectly acceptable in gaming, just as they are widely accepted in every other medium, from action movies to romance novels.

However, objectification plays a large role in a persistent problem in gaming, which is that whole genres of games are unfriendly to nearly everyone but men, or even straight men. A game with a female avatar or NPC who has been designed with men's erections in mind is not a female character of the type that will typically appeal to women. Historically, games have ether had dude-ish male heroes or female heroes clearly designed to appeal to teenage boys (Tomb Raider's earlier incarnations, for example). This has no doubt had alienated huge swaths of the population, giving "serious" gaming a somewhat deserved reputation as the province of boys and immature men.

That kind of one-sided objectification is bad. But I don't think the permanent solution is to label objectification as per se sexist. Instead, I'd suggest that the medium simply needs balance - if women are objectified, so should be men. Consider, for example, the evolution of The Witcher series: to a first approximation the first two games objectified women (a lot) but not men, and it was kinda embarrassing. The Witcher 3 has a number of scenes in which the camera pans lovingly over Geralt's glistening muscles, and as silly as that may sound it really helps make the overall experience feel "adult," a place in which sexuality is treated casually, as opposed to a wish-fulfillment playground for straight men. It's not at all perfect in that respect (see Ciri's "armor"), but the attempt at balance, as weak as it may be, goes a long way.

I think balance and a certain degree of taste is a better end goal than stamping out objectification in the abstract.

 

[Kin5290]

I think it's mostly from the US, a very prudish country mostly due to religion. Showing people on TV getting their heads blown off is fine but if a nipple is shown the whole world implodes.

Quiet is kinda ridiculous though, but I just shrug it off as silly, people getting outraged by it is silly.

Most objectivized female characters have nothing to do with sex, they are just meant to be consumable sexual titillation for the presumably straight, male, teenaged player to chastely consume. There's a vast difference Quiet, who wears a bikini and gives you a lap dance for completely arbitrary and ridiculous Watsonian reasons, and Anya from the newest Wolfenstein game. Anya isn't objectified, because the game actually delves into the emotional intimacy between her and BJ.

 

[petran79]

Even violence is not ok

Name me games where you can kill babies, pregnant women, gays and children.

Unless its an obscure PC game

 

[Savitar]

Anything sexual tends to be frowned upon more heavily than actual violence, blowing peoples brains out, no one blinks an eye, show a nipple and people lose their shit. It's partly due to how American was settled, they thought Britain was too immodest, so they went and settled their new land. That mentality has carried through for the longest time, again you can buy tickets for a raffle that will get you an AK-47 but have nudity in a paper and people will flip the hell out. What is the truly most dangerous? I remember seeing a nude woman on a newspaper in Germany and it surprised me since even in Canada that's just not done.

As for objectifying females, the female form has been objectified for ages. It's why we got a ton of classic nude paintings. Yeah, that's considered art but they could have put them in dresses or whatever as well. They didn't for a reason, people like the nude form, it's true of any age no matter what century. When it comes to gaming sex is often used to target the male buyer, especially teenagers who are younger and more into lusting over certain imagery when their hormones are firing on all cylinders. It works. It works towards other age groups as well but normally you only hear and see talk about the teenager demographic.

Look at Lara Craft, she was a massive sex symbol at one point and was on magazine covers everywhere that had nothing to do with video games. But she was also considered an empowered female and women adored her and her ability to stand up for herself and kick ass. There are other characters that are definitely sexual objects first and foremost, you typically saw these in the 90's with bathing suit style clothing if not mostly running around in thongs.

Is it ever going to go away in games? No. Because there is always an audience and sex sells. Society as a whole would have to go through a huge massive shift in how it thinks and operates and that's just not going to happen any time soon. It can easily be criticized how sex and women are treated in various ads and has been, in gaming and otherwise but you look at almost anything in the world, be it clothing, drinking, movies, comics or cars. Chances are there are ads that do in some fashion have women being objectified in some manner, even if as prize to be gained.

It's a certain mentality wired into brains and like I said, that's not going to fade away over night. But given time, who knows. You certainly do see a lot more discussion and even consequences these days with those who may go over board when it comes to objectifying women or treating them poorly.

It really goes beyond gaming.

In so many ways it depends on the context and view point of the person as well, not everyone will consider the same thing objectifying. There was a good thread that portrayed this here some months back, forget about what but there was quite a bit debate on the issue where some people had no issue and others thought the woman was being objectified. In the end there was debate if it was simply their own way of thinking that was creating the objectifying.

 

[psyfi]

I gotta run to class and don't have time to read through the thread, so this has hopefully been said already, but sexism in games helps reinforce and legitimize real life sexism, while violence in games is less specifically problematic. For more context, check out this image:

https://gendereq.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/makethelink-pmvaw-pyramid-poster.jpg

 

[Budi]

Violence is much more shunned and criticized here in Europe, while barely nobody cares about sex and objectification in games. Different cultures care about different things.

I doubt that's true. From Finland myself.

 

[John Kowalski]

I mean there's always some discussion about how games should avoid being about violent conflict, and in many ways we really are moving away from that kind of violence for violence's sake image of video games.

But i think the concept of sexual objectification (and the representation of women in general) is in many ways a much more contemporary subject, there's heightened general awareness and a lot of good texts on the subject are coming our with a frequency that feels unprecedented in the context of videogames.

 

[FinalAres]

I gotta run to class and don't have time to read through the thread, so this has hopefully been said already, but sexism in games helps reinforce and legitimize real life sexism, while violence in games is less specifically problematic. For more context, check out this image:

https://gendereq.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/makethelink-pmvaw-pyramid-poster.jpg

I hope you at least had time to read my opening thread that made it clear that I in no way support the objectification of women, and was asking for interests sake, as a devil's advocate.

 

[daTRUballin]

Because we suck as a human race.

This should be the only answer.

 

[obeast]

I gotta run to class and don't have time to read through the thread, so this has hopefully been said already, but sexism in games helps reinforce and legitimize real life sexism, while violence in games is less specifically problematic. For more context, check out this image:

https://gendereq.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/makethelink-pmvaw-pyramid-poster.jpg

I simply don't buy this. This is akin to hand-waving arguments that GTA creates real-life mass shootings. A straight line drawn from, say, sexist jokes or traditional gender roles (or stupid videogames) to rape or misogynistic murders seems like an argument missing every important step, and badly in need of empirical support.

As I say above, I fully agree that gender representation and presentation in gaming needs a lot of work, but I really doubt the stakes are this high.

 

[rjcc]

I hope you at least had time to read my opening thread that made it clear that I in no way support the objectification of women, and was asking for interests sake, as a devil's advocate.

so you took a position that you know is incorrect and poorly considered. Good job!

 

[Budi]

Who says objectified female characters are bad? It only becomes a problem if that's all there is in a medium.

I think there's truth to this too. The scales just have been way off balance. Through critique things have started to get corrected a bit.

 

[pronk420]

Violence is much more shunned and criticized here in Europe, while barely nobody cares about sex and objectification in games. Different cultures care about different things.

I don't think this is true in the UK. Its also not a prudish US/liberal europeans thing. Objectification is not the same as sex.

 

[FinalAres]

so you took a position that you know is incorrect and poorly considered. Good job!

Yeah but I wanted to know the detail, and the quality of responses that have come from it justify the thread.