Support NeoGAF

[Kinsei]

isn't that the purpose of classifying something sexist? that it is bad and needs to be changed and conform to some ideal standard.

Good things can have sexist element and pointing that out isn't an attack on the people that created said thing.

 

[Riposte]

Good things can have sexist element and pointing that out isn't an attack on the people that created said thing.

But it saying the sexist elements are bad, ergo the sexy parts that spawned this whole discussion are bad.

 

[Alpha Phoenix]

Sexist content can be created unknowingly. In an industry that is dominated by white straight men, their personal interests, likes, and biases will show in that content. In that sort of situation creating diverse content is a conscious effort because it is currently not the default. Therefore sexist content can be created if the people working on it aren't being aware of it.

Aside from the cheap remark made by Chinese Room, this is indeed very spot-on.

 

[Garrett Hawke]

isn't that the purpose of classifying something sexist? that it is bad and needs to be changed and conform to some ideal standard.

It's saying sexism is bad, yes, but there are more components to a product than just one facet. It's all a balance. In a game like Hatred, for example, the close-minded and misanthropic themes outweigh the (shit) gameplay and therefore are what that game is mostly derided for. Compare that to The Witcher 3, which many would say is one of 2015's best games - that's what The Witcher 3 is known for. It is in part sexist but there is more to the game than just sexism, and while it is a negative against it there are many positives to the game that allow people to enjoy it despite those aspects.

 

[mclem]

In Dragon Age 2 where the companions were playersexual a lot of guys were complaining when they got into into a situation where a male companion hit on them. The bolded in his post was basically word for word what they said.

There's a text adventure from the late 90's which does something interesting. At a millennium party you spy a person dressed in black; there's a mutual attraction, but Black also serves as an antagonist in an adventure that causes the pair of you to encounter each other repeatedly.

Throughout the whole adventure, neither your player nor Black are ever referred to with any gendered pronouns; you can infer whatever you like about the nature of the attraction.

Despite that, the author still got a few emails saying they were uncomfortable about the homosexual relationship portrayed in the game.

 

[RockTurtle]

Not necessarily! It's simply pointing out that there's a different representation between genders on display in a specific work. Sexism can be used as a plot device, or a framing element. It doesn't need to changed, but it does need to be acknowledged.

It's an idea in writing that if you do want to put something socially unacceptable on display you either need to provide a foil to that, or do a good ol' nudge nudge wink wink to your audience so they don't think it's okay in an out-of-context fashion.

so make more female gaze (which is good) to counteract male gaze (which is bad).

Gotcha! BALANCE!

equal opportunity cheesecake!

 

[Vincent Grayson]

Given that the Witcher is basically James Bond, Monster Hunter, I can't pretend this is totally off-base. But I also think it fits the world they've created, and nothing in the games (other than W1's cards) has struck me as particularly egregious.

 

[boskee]

The image put out by CDPR's... uh, PR representatives might've been in poor taste

For the love of God, they didn't put out that photo. Gamespot took it from Platige Image's making-of article. CDPR never used it in its marketing for the game.

 

[Audioboxer]

Good things can have sexist element and pointing that out isn't an attack on the people that created said thing.

What is a sexist element? Check my post at the end of the last page for a dictionary definition of sexist/sexism.

When you attach said "sexist element" to something simply having nudity, sex, or sex appeal that begins the genuinely dangerous game IMO.

I mean if the world at large wants to and adopts a different meaning for sexism then I guess we'll survive. However many look at the word how the dictionary defines it, which is very poorly, and that is what starts personal psychological difficulties and harm when they see themselves getting accused of it and they stick by the dictionary definition.

Basically people want the ability to call something/someone sexist and add the disclaimer "but it's maybe a fairly good sexist element, I just still want to say it's sexist".

 

[Sylas]

so make more female gaze (which is good) to counteract male gaze (which is bad).

Gotcha! BALANCE!

equal opportunity cheesecake!

No. This is intellectually dishonest and I genuinely hope you don't think this way. By providing a foil I meant you provide an element in-universe that calls the damaging elements as they are. You show a character that actively tries to dismantle the power imbalance, or you use it as a backdrop for change.

You don't just add the female gaze. You use it as a plot element, or at the very least acknowledge that the world is supposed to be sexist and portray how that can be a negative thing.

It's not asking for conformation, it's asking for the writer to be self-aware.

For the love of God, they didn't put out that photo. Gamespot took it from Platige Image's making-of article. CDPR never used it in its marketing for the game.

My mistake! Though I'm a little disappointed that's the only point you had to take away from my post. Gotta get those corrections in without engaging anything else, right?

What is a sexist element? Check my post at the end of the last page for a dictionary definition of sexist/sexism.

When you attach said "sexist element" to something simply having nudity, sex, or sex appeal that begins the genuinely dangerous game IMO.

I mean if the world at large wants to and adopts a different meaning for sexism then I guess we'll survive. However many look at the word how the dictionary defines it, which is very poorly, and that is what starts personal psychological difficulties and harm when they see themselves getting accused of it and they stick by the dictionary definition.

A sexist element, in particular, is a character treating a woman poorly for being a woman and then the work proceeding to never acknowledge what the character did was morally reprehensible. They never receive a comeuppance, the work never does anything to show that what the character did was wrong.

That's a sexist element and it's one that does need to be challenged. Not nudity, sex or sex appeal.

 

[Velkyn]

I will never understand why people who play videogames as a hobby get so threatened when someone calls a game or, in this case, marketing material as being sexist.

Anita started doing her videos and people just got progressively madder and madder, but she's always been right. The Chinese Room is right to call this stuff sexist, too; because it is. Comments about how the Witcher is an adult game for adults don't hold up.

No, sexy doesn't mean sexist, but the Witcher series has always been filled with played up, cringey "sexy" moments. The collectible cards in the first game have always seemed like a teenage boy's masturbatory fantasy to me. There's less cringe in 2 and 3, but there's always some of that male gaze bullshit in all the games.

Some people need to realize; criticism of a thing doesn't mean dislike of a thing. I love the Witcher franchise to bits, but yeah, parts of it are sexist. I love Bayonetta, but she's such an obvious trope.

All of this is okay! Discussion is okay! Criticism of a medium we all love is okay!

What isn't okay is trying to discourage this kind of discussion by saying shit like "ugh can't we just enjoy games"

Of course you can just enjoy games. Just don't actively discourage discussion about this sort of thing, because it's extremely relevant and important if we want to keep interest in gaming alive for future generations.

 

[selfconfessedcynic]

This thread has been entertaining.

Just popped in to point out that so many people are misusing the word "sexism" or "sexist" that it's actually gotten to the point that I have seen people post a copy/pasted dictionary.com definition of the word "sexism" and gone on - within the same post - to apply the word to things clearly outside that definition.

If you need to go through multiple logical leaps in order to apply the label "sexism" to something, you really should stop butchering the meaning of that term and start actually calling things what they are. I've seen very few posts using correct terms for what they're descibing (like objectification or sexualisation, etc).

Sigh. I swear, half the arguments on here wouldn't even have occurred if people used the right words. I guess the desire to correct people who are wrong on the internet is too strong.

 

[FLAguy954]

 

[stuminus3]

Politics aside, it seems strange to me that this was posted on a company Twitter account and not a personal one.

 

[DJ Lushious]

To be frank I'm pretty tired of seeing female character designs/concepts like the one in the OP. Would be nice if a major game could be completely devoid of that, with creativity in costume and character design, but obviously that's not going to happen.

Three words for you:

Life Is Strange.

 

[boskee]

For example, it features consequence-free, uncritical and deliberately titillating prostitution that has no gameplay or plot value, and which does almost nothing to examine the status and conditions of medieval prostitutes (which were abysmal).

You forgot to mention that The Witcher 3 also includes male prostitutes (although you can't sleep with them).

I agree with the rest.

 

[Whiteblade999]

The Witcher games are sexist, along with being racist, and overall a terrible place to live. Its part of the world Andrzej Sapkowski wrote.

 

[twopenny]

For the love of God, they didn't put out that photo. Gamespot took it from Platige Image's making-of article. CDPR never used it in its marketing for the game.

wait, i'm confused; a similar image is used in the media section on cyperpunk 2077's website and the original trailer, just not the model one--what does this change?

 

[GavinUK86]

What's the matter Chinese Room, no one buying your walking sim? The couple BAFTA's didn't help?

I don't get what they were hoping would happen by saying shit like this.

 

[Audioboxer]

No. This is intellectually dishonest and I genuinely hope you don't think this way. By providing a foil I meant you provide an element in-universe that calls the damaging elements as they are. You show a character that actively tries to dismantle the power imbalance, or you use it as a backdrop for change.

You don't just add the female gaze. You use it as a plot element, or at the very least acknowledge that the world is supposed to be sexist and portray how that can be a negative thing.

It's not asking for conformation, it's asking for the writer to be self-aware.



My mistake! Though I'm a little disappointed that's the only point you had to take away from my post. Gotta get those corrections in without engaging anything else, right?


A sexist element, in particular, is a character treating a woman poorly for being a woman and then the work proceeding to never acknowledge what the character did was morally reprehensible. They never receive a comeuppance, the work never does anything to show that what the character did was wrong.

That's a sexist element and it's one that does need to be challenged. Not nudity, sex or sex appeal.

Yes, this is true. So the evil character in TW3 is a sexist, but CDPR and The Witcher are not simply sexist. As I said people want to take the blanket and throw it over everything without accepting in the role of narrative/fantasy and entertainment there can be bad and good characters. Either animated, or in acting, and that is just the way it is. Doesn't mean the actors or writers should have to live with sexist claims thrown at them.

To be an adult is to have the ability to differentiate reality from fantasy. In fantasy we can create morally reprehensible characters without having to send someone real to jail. Said characters usually lose, or get killed, but even in fantasy where the bad guy/guys win, so what? It's written for entertainment, engagement and narrative discussion.

Why should we challenge fantasy to the point of it having to be 1:1 with morally correct real life? It's primarily fantasy to let us escape real life and blow steam off/relax. This is the arguments that plagued violence in games.

 

[Alpha Phoenix]

I guess the desire to correct people who are wrong on the internet is too strong.

Like so:

 

[Meier]

They should tell them to jog on, but The Chinese Room can only walk everywhere.

Great post.

 

[Shake Appeal]

Politics aside, it seems strange to me that this was posted on a company Twitter account and not a personal one.

The Chinese Room is a tiny, independent company with two very obvious, public principals (Pinchbeck, Curry). Their "company" account is more or less their personal one. I think at the time they were making Dear Esther, it was just those two and maybe one other person?

Also, it's not a particularly controversial or "political" remark, though you wouldn't know it from reading NeoGAF.

 

[Sylas]

Yes, this is true. So the evil character in TW3 is a sexist, but CDPR and The Witcher are not simply sexist. As I said people want to take the blanket and throw it over everything without accepting in the role of narrative/fantasy and entertainment there can be bad and good characters. Either animated, or in acting, and that is just the way it is. Doesn't mean the actors or writers should have to live with sexist claims thrown at them.

I don't think The Witcher 3 is a sexist game. I think it contains sexist elements and it does work to subvert some of them on occasion--even going so far as to explain why many of the Sorceresses dress as they do. I do think the point about prostitutes is a good one--and I'd also call that a sexist element, albeit a complicated one. There's something in there about normalizing sex work, but the point is buried too deep and the game doesn't provide enough nuance to make it worth going into.

I can see how people would be a little bothered by the game's lack of Geralt's full-frontal while we get it from female characters. I can see how people would be bothered by Geralt in general because he's literally Male Scruff McSquareJaw that can sleep with whomever he likes and everyone thinks he's charming (when he's quite literally not) and there are never any personal consequences for sleeping around. Oh, he's also surrounded by beautiful women and two of them want to fuck his brains out. Hell, Dandelion is a more nuanced and interesting male character.

In general Geralt is kind of a shitty character, but hey. That's not necessarily CDPR's fault since he isn't their character.

The Chinese Room is a tiny, independent company with two very obvious, public principals (Pinchbeck, Curry). Their "company" account is more or less their personal one. I think at the time they were making Dear Esther, it was just those two and maybe one other person?

Also, it's not a particularly controversial or "political" remark, though you wouldn't know it from reading NeoGAF.

Curry is no longer with The Chinese Room as far as I remember--and it's due to being treated poorly because she's a woman. The salient takeaway was that her partner also didn't stand up for her, so it's sorta the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[John Kowalski]

The Witcher games are sexist, along with being racist, and overall a terrible place to live. Its part of the world Andrzej Sapkowski wrote.

Racism and sexism existing in the historicity of the world presented in the games isn't what's being transmitted when the game itself as a text is sexist. They are two different things. A degree of self awareness would help to indicate the former but the game is by no means a champion of acknowledging the poor ways it represents the female gender.

Curry is no longer with The Chinese Room as far as I remember--and it's due to being treated poorly because she's a woman. The salient takeaway was that her partner also didn't stand up for her, so it's sorta the pot calling the kettle black.

She's still in their website's page about their company members though, so i would suspect she remains part of the team in some capacity.

 

[selfconfessedcynic]

Like so:

Haha, that was literally the image I was thinking of when posting

 

[Audioboxer]

I don't think The Witcher 3 is a sexist game. I think it contains sexist elements and it does work to subvert them on occasion--even going so far as to explain why many of the Sorceresses dress as they do. I do think the point about prostitutes is a good one--and I'd also call that a sexist element, albeit a complicated one. There's something in there about normalizing sex work, but the point is buried too deep and the game doesn't provide enough nuance to make it worth going into.

I can see how people would be a little bothered by the game's lack of Geralt's full-frontal while we get it from female characters. I can see how people would be bothered by Geralt in general because he's literally Male Scruff McSquareJaw that can sleep with whomever he likes and everyone thinks he's charming and there are never any personal consequences for sleeping around. Oh, he's also surrounded by beautiful women and two of them want to fuck his brains out.

In general he's kind of a shitty character, but hey.

It isn't every games purpose to have some moral life lesson, as I expanded on above it is fantasy. Brothel work is legalized in some countries and debated in others. That is a heavy discussion to get involved in, via law, and public discourse, but we shouldn't try to be learning our real life lessons from a video game.

Again it is fantasy, all the characters, sorcerers, protagonist and brothel workers alike. Not something taught or shown in class as a guide for real life. These aren't real people, nor is it based off a true story. And even if something is based off a true story, whatever the facts are is what the material is written based upon. Doesn't mean the writers or actual story itself need to be compromised to teach a moral lesson. We should be learning our morals from elsewhere.

 

[Steve.1981]

I'm ok with CDPR being called out like this.

Wild Hunt is an incredible game with strong female characters (a couple of whom directly address sexism and "a woman's place" in society) and they have quite rightly enjoyed some well deserved praise and acclaim for what they achieved with it...but they do have a history, with the infamous sex cards...and now I find myself questioning why the image in the OP is the main promotional material we have for Cyberpunk. Why this image of a scantily-clad sexy woman? What's the reason for it, does it say anything about the game?

So yeah, I think there's no harm in anybody giving CDPR a little nudge. I want them to keep moving in the right direction.

(Full disclosure, I loved Everybody's Gone to The Rapture and Wild Hunt. I think they're both brilliant in different ways)

 

[Kinsei]

What is a sexist element? Check my post at the end of the last page for a dictionary definition of sexist/sexism.

When you attach said "sexist element" to something simply having nudity, sex, or sex appeal that begins the genuinely dangerous game IMO.

I mean if the world at large wants to and adopts a different meaning for sexism then I guess we'll survive. However many look at the word how the dictionary defines it, which is very poorly, and that is what starts personal psychological difficulties and harm when they see themselves getting accused of it and they stick by the dictionary definition.

Basically people want the ability to call something/someone sexist and add the disclaimer "but it's maybe a fairly good sexist element, I just still want to say it's sexist".

A sexist element? That's saying that one (or more) parts of something are sexist, but not the work as a whole.

There's nothing wrong with nudity and sex in the Witcher games, but rather the problem way they are framed. The way they are shot feels really male gaze-y and there's also never a time when we see Geralt naked from the front. They have no issue pushing breasts and vagina's in or face, but Geralt's dick? That's too far.

In this instance it's not the shot, but rather how little we've seen combined with the shot. It just reeks of those awful old gaming magazine ads where it consisted of a naked/almost naked woman alongside the games they were trying to promote.

Of course these are just my views on it. There's no way to extrapolate what the tweet meant because of how vague it was.

 

[Garrett Hawke]

Racism and sexism existing in the historicity of the world presented in the games isn't what's being transmitted when the game itself as a text is is sexist. They are two different things. a degree of selfawareness would help to indicate the former but the game is by no means a champion of acknowledging the poor ways it represents the female gender.

This is also important. There's sexist content then sexist framing.

For example presenting a sexist world in which women are treated poorly is different to presenting a sexist world in which women are consistently objectified by the camera, their design, or animations. Alternatively you could present a game with a very sexist world but frame it from the perspective of women; focusing on the emotions and struggles of women within that world - and the product would not be sexist.

 

[User 73706]

Phrased like that it makes much more sense. I definitely see your point but I also think it's as much as a byproduct of just plain shitty writing than any kind of sexist / racist culture. I don't think most novels or TV shows are any better about this stuff just because, like most games, the majority of them aren't really that good. That doesn't excuse anything, mind you, it's just how it's going to be because most writing is inherently not great.

Oh no, yeah, I'm totally with you on that. The biggest thing is that with how forward-looking games have to be in order to survive, I just feel as though it has some of the largest room for improvement in the immediate future.

Politics aside, it seems strange to me that this was posted on a company Twitter account and not a personal one.

"""politics"""

wait, i'm confused; a similar image is used in the media section on cyperpunk 2077's website and the original trailer, just not the model one--what does this change?

Context. Compare a half-naked woman with CGI cyber hands slapped onto the image in what's clearly a photoshoot to an all-CGI scene of a woman directly and physically augmented with mechanical weaponry, caked in blood and surrounded by bodies in a cyberpunk aesthetic. While the latter still isn't perfect, mind you, the trailer imagery is a lot more clear in its intent, whereas the image on twitter feels a lot more disembodied and just eye candy for the sake of it (relatively speaking; drawing in clicks on social media, that is).

 

[Wulfram]

The problem with that scene in DA2 was that Anders would always hit on the player and every single dialogue option apart from one would cause his approval rating to fall dawn significantly. The other would lead to romance. The execution was really bad and Bioware was rightfully criticised for that.

Actually he only hit on you if you picked very supportive dialogue options.

I tended to be a bit more sceptical of the whole abomination thing and thus never got hit on.

 

[twobear]

what's wrong with being sexy

 

[Audioboxer]

A sexist element? That's saying that one (or more) parts of something are sexist, but not the work as a whole.

There's nothing wrong with nudity and sex in the Witcher games, but rather the problem way they are framed. The way they are shot feels really male gaze-y and there's also never a time when we see Geralt naked from the front. They have no issue pushing breasts and vagina's in or face, but Geralt's dick? That's too far.

In this instance it's not the shot, but rather how little we've seen combined with the shot. It just reeks of those awful old gaming magazine ads where it consisted of a naked/almost naked woman alongside the games they were trying to promote.

Of course these are just my views on it. There's no way to extrapolate what the tweet meant because of how vague it was.

I respect that and thanks for following up.

Maybe the studio just found it hard to animate a real penis? Haha. In reality but either their choice, which in no way reflects on them personally, or possibly even because full frontal nudity and genitalia still gets unnecessary flak from the media versus boobs and bums.

This is also important. There's sexist content then sexist framing.

For example presenting a sexist world in which women are treated poorly is different to presenting a sexist world in which women are consistently objectified by the camera, their design, or animations. Alternatively you could present a game with a very sexist world but frame it from the perspective of women; focusing on the emotions and struggles of women within that world - and the product would not be sexist.

Remember it is a video game, these aren't real women being portrayed... The game doesn't exist to teach a moral lesson about the struggles of women in real life.

 

[Sylas]

It isn't every games purpose to have some moral life lesson, as I expanded on above it is fantasy. Brothel work is legalized in some countries and debated in others. That is a heavy discussion to get involved in, via law, and public discourse, but we shouldn't try to be learning our real life lessons from a video game.

Again it is fantasy, all the characters, sorcerers, protagonist and brothel workers alike. Not something taught or shown in class as a guide for real life.

I agree! Somewhat. Context is important--as I've said several times, but even if a game doesn't purposefully have a moral life lesson, everything is political and everything influences people. It's not as direct as, "Geralt did <x> so I can do it too!" (Even if many children say that precise thing, and often go uncorrected.)

But it is important for people to at least acknowledge that sexist elements exist. There's absolutely nothing harmful in that. Asking for the removal of all content that's perceived as sexist? That's terrifying and morally wrong. It can be a good tool and when it's used as such it's a strong narrative element.

The problem is when people don't acknowledge it and instead try to play it off as, "Oh! It's just fantasy!"

Because fantasy has never influenced anything ever.

 

[Gbraga]

To be frank I'm pretty tired of seeing female character designs/concepts like the one in the OP. Would be nice if a major game could be completely devoid of that, with creativity in costume and character design, but obviously that's not going to happen.

How do you feel about this one, then?

Because that's the exact same character, at the end of the trailer. The costume you see in the OP's picture is pretty much just her background. She won't be like that during the whole game, if she's even part of the game.

The idea is that people are addicted to "braindancing", which allows them to relive other people's experiences, but abusing it and using certain kinds of braindances (especially illegal ones) makes them go berserk. She loses it and starts killing people. The squad goes in, to either retrieve her or kill her. The trailer ends with her looking like the pictures I posted, now a part of the squad. Presumably brainwashed (or perhaps just like her proper self, without the influence of braindancing).

Sorry I took your post in particular to make this point, as it's not made torwards you in specific, but I'm seeing way too many people, from "both sides", that seem to think that watching a 2 minute trailer for proper context before making walls of text analyzing the situation is too hard.

 

[hemo memo]

The Witcher games are sexist, along with being racist, and overall a terrible place to live. Its part of the world Andrzej Sapkowski wrote.

That doesn't mean the developer is sexist or thier next project that is not releated to the old series will be sexist by default.

 

[John Kowalski]

what's wrong with being sexy

You say that like the lady in the game has any choice in the matter.

This is also important. There's sexist content then sexist framing.

For example presenting a sexist world in which women are treated poorly is different to presenting a sexist world in which women are consistently objectified by the camera, their design, or animations. Alternatively you could present a game with a very sexist world but frame it from the perspective of women; focusing on the emotions and struggles of women within that world - and the product would not be sexist.

It would, however, be accused of being sexist merit of simply acknowledging that sexism exists.

 

[Sylas]

Context. Compare a half-naked woman with CGI cyber hands slapped onto the image in what's clearly a photoshoot to an all-CGI scene of a woman directly and physically augmented with mechanical weaponry, caked in blood and surrounded by bodies in a cyberpunk aesthetic. While the latter still isn't perfect, mind you, the trailer imagery is a lot more clear in its intent, whereas the image on twitter feels a lot more disembodied and just eye candy for the sake of it (relatively speaking; drawing in clicks on social media, that is).

I think this photo was taken out of context. It's clearly from a photoshoot and not a finalized image for marketing. I honestly expect them to recreate the scene from the CGI shot and add in most of those elements.

It'd be... silly, I guess, not to.

 

[Velkyn]

Remember it is a video game, these aren't real women being portrayed... The game doesn't exist to teach a moral lesson about the struggles of women in real life.

Sorry, but it doesn't have to depict real women to be considered sexist. It doesn't have to overtly be about women's issues to reflect our attitudes towards women in the gaming space overall.

 

[User 73706]

I think this photo was taken out of context. It's clearly from a photoshoot and not a finalized image for marketing. I honestly expect them to recreate the scene from the CGI shot and add in most of those elements.

It'd be... silly, I guess, not to.

That's what I'm saying, lol. They might as well have gone with this:

because there's actually information to glean from the still beyond "chick in skimpy clothes has CGI robo-hands".

 

[Garrett Hawke]

Remember it is a video game, these aren't real women being portrayed... The game doesn't exist to teach a moral lesson about the struggles of women in real life.

It is a video game, but no media exists in a vacuum. It is a product of and an influence on culture - particularly popular media. There have been multiple studies (Video Game Characters and the Socialization of Gender Roles: Young People’s Perceptions Mirror Sexist Media Depictions to name one) done to show that unlike violence in video games, which generally does not encourage nor influence people to commit violent acts in the real world, presentation of women, PoCs, LGBT+ individuals etc can have a much more noticeable effect on perspectives and attitudes adopted by consumers.

 

[Audioboxer]

I agree! Somewhat. Context is important--as I've said several times, but even if a game doesn't purposefully have a moral life lesson, everything is political and everything influences people. It's not as direct as, "Geralt did <x> so I can do it too!" (Even if many children say that precise thing, and often go uncorrected.)

But it is important for people to at least acknowledge that sexist elements exist. There's absolutely nothing harmful in that. Asking for the removal of all content that's perceived as sexist? That's terrifying and morally wrong. It can be a good tool and when it's used as such it's a strong narrative element.

The problem is when people don't acknowledge it and instead try to play it off as, "Oh! It's just fantasy!"

Because fantasy has never influenced anything ever.

The devs cannot be held responsible for morally reprehensible people in the real world. We live in a world of fear if we cannot allow normal adults to enjoy adult content without the fear some whack job plays TW3 and thinks they can assault a women.

Sexist elements exist in many stories, but it's key to differentiate from calling a game, movie or book outright sexist/creators sexist and simply saying "bad guy X is a sexist".

It is a video game, but no media exists in a vacuum. It is a product of and an influence on culture - particularly popular media. There have been multiple studies (Video Game Characters and the Socialization of Gender Roles: Young People&#8217;s Perceptions Mirror Sexist Media Depictions to name one) done to show that unlike violence in video games, which generally does not encourage nor influence people to commit violent acts in the real world, presentation of women, PoCs, LGBT+ individuals etc can have a much more noticeable effect on perspectives and attitudes adopted by consumers.

And we get the arguments porn causes young males to want to treat their partners like the pornos. Education has to exist to teach moral practices alongside said entertainment videos without pushing said videos into categories and ostracizing them. Like it or not some porn, and porn actors are all consenting and enjoy their lines of work.

As I said to the poster above living in a world of fear where sane people cannot enjoy media because of the whackjobs is as bad as saying we can't live our lives normally due to terrorists. Fear is a worthless tool. Education and teaching openly is the key to success.

 

[War Peaceman]

The world of the Witcher is a sexist and racist one. Women are treated like shit, dwarves, elves, witches are discriminated against.

Part of what makes Geralt an engaging protagonist is that he is an outsider - a freak - and he is able to be sympathetic and empathetic towards the various downtrodden people he encounters and assists.

Also, the female characters in the series are typically the ones pulling the strings (although they don't have explicit power) and are usually the ones manipulating/using/enticing Geralt.

 

[Sylas]

The devs cannot be held responsible for morally reprehensible people in the real world. We live in a world of fear if we cannot allow normal adults to enjoy adult content without the fear some whack job plays TW3 and thinks they can assault a women.

Sexist elements exist in many stories, but it's key to differentiate from calling a game, movie or book outright sexist/creators sexist and simply saying "bad guy X is a sexist".

And I'm not saying the developers are sexist. I don't think many people are. The game they created has elements that need to be acknowledged--and often are! Still, pointing out that something is sexist while also providing context and criticism is integral, and it's why I can't stand The Chinese Room. Pot shots just put people on the defensive.

The game is not sexist because it isn't as a whole. The game has sexist things in it. That's the key difference and it's a difference a lot of "gamers" can't seem to handle. If they want to break things down in "objectivity" like graphics, sound, gameplay, story--they seem incapable of breaking it down to a more granular level.

 

[Flipyap]

On the other hand, why the studio should make a game where everybody is treated equal? That's practically limiting creating freedom.

They don't have to do that, but whatever they choose in a case like this won't be motivated by real world history.

Making licensed games published within a system with fairly strict content guidelines probably isn't the best place for someone who needs to have complete creative freedom.
As far as such limitations go, they really wouldn't have to sacrifice much and it would be better for everyone if the game itself treated everyone equally, despite the quirks of its setting.
The Witcher games kinda do the opposite - their female leads are generally treated equally within its setting, but they're viewed through the games' blatantly objectifying lens.

 

[Audioboxer]

And I'm not saying the developers are sexist. I don't think many people are. The game they created has elements that need to be acknowledged--and often are! Still, pointing out that something is sexist while also providing context and criticism is integral, and it's why I can't stand The Chinese Room. Pot shots just put people on the defensive.

The game is not sexist because it isn't as a whole. The game has sexist things in it. That's the key difference.

This I can happily agree with.

 

[YankeeDonB]

My fairly old-school, de Beauvoirian feminist take on this:

Much of the concern over "male gaze" is that it objectifies women, and any objectification is taken by some to be irredeemable.

But this is obviously an oversimplification. Physical sexual interaction has a fundamental/inescapable element of objectification. Sex happens between two bodies, and the specific mechanical interactions between them are important.

There are all sorts of ways that sex can be abstracted and the more specific physical elements veiled, and all sorts of complicated and potentially rich cultural and emotional factors that may be related, but sexual attraction exerts a pull toward interacting with a body as an object.

There's nothing inherently "problematic" about this pull, its a biological endowment as a certain brand of chordate animal, and no amount of hand-wringing or self castigation can scrub this from the species.

Where we run into problems is in treating other people wholly as objects -- that is, denying that they are a subjective self with thoughts/feelings/goals/agency that are just as real, important, and unassailable as our own. When we let our desire to treat another as an object override our sense of their own valid agency, that's a problem. So if a man lets a woman's physical characteristics, and their specificity to his own interest in treating her as an object, rule his conception of her, yes, he's being sexist.

Does inviting "male gaze" in art automatically presuppose this type of sexism? I'd say not necessarily. Yes, presenting women as appealing visual objects may reinforce sexist habits of mind, and the ways in which women are used in media often do just this. But adults should be able to entertain multiple representations of an imaginary character that operate on multiple levels.

The cards in Witcher 1 would be, I think, a strong case of a fundamentally sexist approach to female representation. Although some of those characters are richly portrayed in the game, they are reduced to their physical affordances when rendered as sexual "collectibles."

But take Yennefer in W3. She is certainly inviting to the male gaze. But is her character reduced to just that, functionally? From her many roles in the world of the Witcher (friend, mother figure, romantic partner, political power broker, etc.) and the multiple ways these can play out, and from the subtle depictions of complex emotional ties between her and Geralt that may make her a sympathetic character wholly separate from her bust/hemline (consider the great discussion on the mountain-top boat), I'd argue that she is not reduced to a simply representational object. She invites consideration as a multidimensional agent in the fictional world in which she exists.

Could she do so without so flagrantly inviting the male gaze? Of course! And it would behoove the Witcher to include more female characters doing just that. But scrubbing all male-gaze inviting characters isn't clearly the answer to the problem of art reinforcing sexism. Are only physically unappealing women capable of agency? Obviously not. So, to the extent that art mirrors real life, it should be able to represent attractive and unattractive characters with equal depth and richness, and a reasonably thoughtful consumer of art should be able to engage with different layers of characterization in different ways irrespective of their friendliness to male gaze.

None of this is to say that many designers of consumer art don't go overboard in uncritically using male gaze bait to get attention/sales. This type of representation is potentially harmful on a societal level, both in driving male entitlement and in enforcing in women a false sense that their primary value is as visual object (as someone with a young daughter growing up in this bizarre and cruel world, I'm very sensitive to these issues). But including an overtly sexually attractive woman in a game does not presuppose sexism.

 

[dave is ok]

Are Chinese Room games ableist because all you do is walk in them?

 

[CyberPunked]

Well this post simply highlights your maturity or the lack thereof.
.

It's because it's the level of maturity that this topic deserves. It's such a non-issue.