Support NeoGAF

[Sqorgar]

Okay sexism in games is over. Nothing to see here, folks. Everyone just go home.

Sexism in games is a different discussion than sexism in the game industry. The latter is a serious problem. The former is not. Art does not require boundaries.

And before anybody jumps on my case, the game industry is a boys club that is largely defined by Star Wars and Halo. If it creates towards its own insulated group, that's not a problem. It won't grow the industry and it won't make the world a better place, but it's still a far shot from being wrong. It's merely inconvenient.

 

[eot]

My position is stated clearly, you don't need to translate it in your own words.

I can disagree. You can agree.

My post betrayed nothing. Yours did. I didn't ask a question expecting an answer.

"lalalalalala I don't hear you"

 

[Moxx19]

False. People different from you don't have the same privileges as you. Systemic sexism and racism are demonstratively present in this day and age.

Ok, then what? What are these barriers that are stopping them?

 

[Stet]

I don't really see the issue TBH. At the end of the day the developers will write their narrative and design their characters the way they want. And people will buy it or not and decide if they will like it or not, but I doubt the defining reason for either view is because they saw a sexualised character model or a damsel in distress that they need to rescue.

Women have almost every field of opportunity open to them so they can get into games if they want to, there is nothing really stopping them.

Of course not. They can see the jobs and the people that hold the jobs. It's not like there's an invisible barrier that's socially created that prevents or dissuades them from succeeding at the same level of success as men in these industries. Some kind of object preventing their ascent from above them. It'd have to be made out of glass or something. Ludicrous.

 

[pixlexic]

False. People different from you don't have the same privileges as you. Systemic sexism and racism are demonstratively present in this day and age.

you forgot to add just not liking they way you look... friends of.. family of.. belongs to X club.. There are a lot of reasons people don't give other people the same privileges.

but they cant stop you from doing it yourself. Not everything has to be handed to you. It rarely is.

 

[Littlegator]

Ah, I think I see what you're saying. I guess my question would be that, despite the dumb masses latching onto it as a fad, is it intrinsically bad even if the end goal is an improvement? The previous fads are mindless parroting but latching onto a feminist movement even if it's just a popular thing at the time at least has the benefit of producing positive results.



Did you just literally shift the goal post?

No, you moved it forward, rather than I moving it back. The goal post was always misogyny. Claiming that there are successful games with female leads does nothing for the equality movement if those games sexualize those leads. That's especially true if they're popular BECAUSE they sexualize the leads (which is true in most female leads cases).

 

[jay]

My position is stated clearly, you don't need to translate it in your own words.

Your position is absurd so I was hoping you would be struck by this if you saw it in a slightly different form.

 

[Adam Blue]

Media representation matters.

Ha...well, I think that's funny. Only because the state government distills a disparity between a mother and father in order to ensure that the father pays a specific amount of child support to a mother. The state gets a bonus from the federal government for this. This inherently pushes fathers to work more/harder than mothers in order to afford the support and not go to jail. Mothers get first dibs on all the rights here.

Kids grow up with this. Media is only second and just a form of art. It takes the relationships of parents to discern the difference between media and social acceptability. Just like video game violence. I'm a strong advocate of teaching children about the accelerated growth in changes of society and to think outside the influence the government has on it. I mean, make girls grow up to think being a stripper isn't a choice. There shouldn't be anything wrong with it, but if we're going to call out people for sexism, we need to look at the whole picture.

And also, most of this 'sexism' is quite bullshit. It is so wrong to throw that word around. Megan Marie's blog is actually a perfect example of sexism she had to endure. She spoke up about the right thing! Others, it's just about society. It simply is. No one is trying to hurt another purposefully; this is when it becomes easy to anger men. Anyone accused of hate will get angry. Hate forms the idea of a separate 'group' and a need to defend.

To sum it up, sexism is getting thrown around when it shouldn't, Megan Marie's blog is spot-on of the real issue, and we need to educate children.

 

[Alexios]

Your position is absurd so I was hoping you would be struck by this if you saw it in a slightly different form.

I was hoping you'd realize your translation was off but you probably knew already and are just feeling confrontational. Too bad.

RPS (and its writers on every other site they're involved in, which is many, so they can influence from the inside if they want) would do better to just present a better standard rather than start flame wars and post about how amazing they are to do it out without their self interest in mind. You know, like they used to be. Game developers who also care can do the same. Make games like Portal, for example. By women, with women, without sexism and enough appeal to be successful in the market. And so on. Lead by example, not by wildly swinging pitchforks that cause collateral damage in the form of putting people who have no such views in the same pot just because they disagree with certain methods and in turn possibly cause those to get closer to the opposing side. Shit, if they're gonna swing pitchforks at least do it where it matters. When it's time to review a game, comment on a given publisher, and cause the reaction of those involved. Not start the whole thing just because a piece didn't get the reception they expected so it's suddenly an issue of sexism rather than standards.

 

[peakish]

I don't really see the issue TBH. At the end of the day the developers will write their narrative and design their characters the way they want. And people will buy it or not and decide if they will like it or not, but I doubt the defining reason for either view is because they saw a sexualised character model or a damsel in distress that they need to rescue.

Women have almost every field of opportunity open to them so they can get into games if they want to, there is nothing really stopping them.

The way I see it, discussing sexism and stupid tropes might make developers think twice when developing their games, perhaps changing them in some small or big ways because they found a perspective they hadn't considered previously (maybe even in ways that don't sacrifice their artistic integrity, lol). After enough small steps have been taken the problem might have vanished.

 

[GrizzNKev]

I'm not sure how you compare an argumentative statement, supported by sociological theory and a web of examples and evidence, to a content-free meme that conveys no more information or complexity than the sentence containing it. They're not even remotely similar.

The discussion about sexism in video games has more in common with things like "EA is a terrible company," or "Games these days are too violent for their stories." Naturally, not everyone taking up a certain stance is going to be equally capable of defending it, but it's pretty insulting to the people who try to have thoughtful discussions about these topics to call them mindless parrots.

I'm not doing that. I'm saying that the same people who mindlessly parrot those things or consume braindead entertainment from braindead content creators, are the same kinds of people who latch onto this as a "popular gaming topic" and ruin the discussion for everyone else by imitating and multiplying the levels of useless outrage.

 

[AlimNassor]

At least on 4chan you get to discuss things with people who have varying opinions. On GAF you're instantly banned if you disagree with the hive mind. Also, this topic is going to be around for a long time, if we like it or not, it's the new cool fad.

Really now? last I checked on 4chan if you go against them, they'll crucify you. Go into a feminist hate thread and say something pro-women, and you're a dead man. Go to /a/ and say you like naruto and have a girlfriend, or like real women and they'll call you and disgusting 3D loving normal. Go to /pol/ and say you don't hate jews/blacks, and they'll go ballistic. Point is they don't discuss anything on 4chan. You are not allowed to argue or have a dissenting view.

 

[DangerousDave]

Women are mistreated and misrepresented in and by the games industry. It’s not a matter of opinion, a political position, or claim made to reinforce previous bias. It’s the demonstrable, sad truth.

Maybe women are misrepresented in the game industry because there are less womens interested in games industry.

For example, you can see easily on indie developers.

You can see that most of the indie game developers are men. But there isn't a "high counseil of indie developers" that ban female indie developers, or high corporations that try to misrepresent the female indie developers...

Is simply that there are less women than mens interested in this specific market.

 

[jay]

I was hoping you'd realize your translation was off but you probably knew already and are just feeling confrontational. Too bad.

Let me know when you are done stroking your internet ego by posting snappy retorts. Then if you have any interest in discussing the topic of the thread, you can explain how you came to the knowledge that people writing for gaming sites are doing so only for hits.

 

[Sqorgar]

Media representation matters.

Mou & Peng (2008, p. 929)
Dunlop (2007, p. 409):
Shaw (2009, p. 231):
Couldry (2000, p. 2):
Galeotti (2002, p. 9):

Good quotes, but they seem a bit more assumptive than measurable. People are not machines. They do not simply absorb external stimuli and regurgitate it verbatim. And even if they did, I'd think that role models in the form of parents, teachers, and peers would have a far greater influence on a girl's sense of self worth than having to play as Mario instead of Pauline. I just don't think video games are as influential in this way as people think. This is the same argument that violent video games make kids violent.

 

[GrizzNKev]

Really now? last I checked on 4chan if you go against them, they'll crucify you. Go into a feminist hate thread and say something pro-women, and you're a dead man. Go to /a/ and say you like naruto and have a girlfriend, or like real women and they'll call you and disgusting 3D loving normal. Go to /pol/ and say you don't hate jews/blacks, and they'll go ballistic. Point is they don't discuss anything on 4chan. You are not allowed to argue or have a dissenting view.

You do realize they do this as a parody of stupidity, and that it's effectively hilarious... right?

If you're taking 4chan seriously you've missed the point and should reevaluate your perspective.

Plus on /v/ I've seen plenty of threads like "women who have actually contributed to games" where they honor talented programmers, designers, writers, artists, and composers rather than people who are internet famous and make accusations all the time.

 

[Odrion]

edit

 

[BeesEight]

Every game on the market is not a shooter. Games are diverse, although not so diverse that they can please everyone and likely unsatisfactory for those who care more about themes than how they play (there are a host of themes which currently make for simplistic and uninteresting games, outside whatever novelty they may hold as an uncommon idea). (If someone cares more about narrative themes than mechanics, then they are perhaps not a good fit for videogames in the first place.)

I can agree that actively stifling diversity doesn't make sense, but I think you'll find most people don't feel that way (a misinterpretation of the kind both sides deal with). On the surface the argument that "games should be more inclusive" is a hard one to disagree with and on the surface anyone who disagrees with comes off looking bad. However once we dig a little deeper, there are a ton of potential snags and the answers to this can quickly escalate "stop being a bigot!" because on the surface the argument looks so agreeable. Things like being bothered by an absolute, moralistic approach to "cliches" or linking it to the also controversial anti-violence argument or perhaps generally disagreeing with the extent people feel they should have power over what developers make. People feel differently on how games should be more inclusive (or what "inclusive" looks like) and they feel differently on how games should reach this level of inclusion (or whether this a "special" matter that should overstep the bounds of the usual developer's vision or developer-audience relationship).

And of course, like I said, I feel this is a different issue with dealing with things like sexual harassment, limited job prospects, or whatever disadvantages the videogame industry may hold for women or other minorities.

I agree that comments on content is different than the discrimination faced in the actual industry. And I think cleaning up one will help to broaden the other since I feel that the lack of diversity in representation helps to promote or even maintain the negative attitudes that lead to the sexual harassment and whatnot.

But I feel that there is a very clear attitude that rejects diversity. The very post I was responding to suggested that homogenization of games is "just fine." There is lots of evidence of developers being forced to change their design because anything deviating from the standard is seen as a detriment to the product's success. I don't think the biggest snags are people's disagreements about how to be more diverse as it is an issue of a false perception of the publishers/industry that creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. We don't think games with female protagonists sell, so we make and promote games with male protagonists which then go on to be the games that sell thus re-inforcing our belief that women don't sell.

I do think that the topic is a hot button issue with can lead to false claims of bigotry but I also see a lot of disgusting opinions and attitudes in this very thread.

Except that the vast majority of people involved in this discussion are the ones who latched onto it because it's a fad, and are totally unaware that they're hurting the issue rather than helping resolve it. Like someone said earlier, they're turning feminism + gaming into a wild circus of shouting back and forth while the people who actually think enough to care are stuck on the sidelines shaking their heads.

I'm not sure I agree that the only result is the discussion devolves into shouting. Before Anita and the "fad" sexism in gaming was still being discussed and you could still see a lot of the same issues coming up again and again. I think, with more voices joining the mix, there's greater chances that these fad seekers will get educated on the issue than if it had never been popular and was simply ignored.

No, you moved it forward, rather than I moving it back. The goal post was always misogyny. Claiming that there are successful games with female leads does nothing for the equality movement if those games sexualize those leads. That's especially true if they're popular BECAUSE they sexualize the leads (which is true in most female leads cases).

If that was your point, then you are not very good at stating it:

I really, really feel that this is an issue because women honestly just aren't as likely to like video games.

It's like saying it's sexist that WNBA players are paid less. No, they draw in less viewers, so they're paid less. That's how economies work. Video games featuring female leads draw in less customers, so less of them exist.

Booth babes and sexualization in advertising are a symptom of American culture that can be seen in pretty much every single entertainment industry, but it WOULD be nice for them to go.

Investors weight their options heavily, already. It's not like they just DON'T consider the option of a female lead. It's just that they're investors, and investors look for a return on investment.

Aside from your one off-handed comment on sexualization, this post seems very clearly devoted to the economics. And the premise, that video games feature female leads draws less customers is, as I said, false.

 

[pakkit]

Like racism and homophobia, the only real solution is time. The sexists will die off and be replaced by those who don't share those feelings. In the meantime, some of us just want to play good video games. They can be made by women, men, transgendered, eunichs, whatever, just make some fucking good video games.

Time isn't what pushed racial and homophobic issues forward though, it was public outcry and media attention. The more forefront the issue, the more likely Joe Shmoe is going to have an opinion onhand regarding the issue. Though it may seem minor, covering the problem signify change in the industry and the world at large. I will say our culture has gotten a little "privileged guilt" happy - but oversensitivity is still preferable to steadfast ignorance.

Maybe women are misrepresented in the game industry because there are less womens interested in games industry.

For example, you can see easily on indie developers.

You can see that most of the indie game developers are men. But there isn't a "high counseil of indie developers" that ban female indie developers, or high corporations that try to misrepresent the female indie developers...

Is simply that there are less women than mens interested in this specific market.

That doesn't forgive the problem, you're just offering up a possible reason that these issues are so prevalent.

 

[Lime]

Sexism in games is a different discussion than sexism in the game industry. The latter is a serious problem. The former is not. Art does not require boundaries.

Yet a lot of arbitrary decisions made by business suits about what type of AAA game is going to be created. Yet the next AAA game is being adjusted and modified thanks to consumer demand. Yet the next AAA game is influenced by a focus group test.

But the next AAA or market-driven game shouldn't listen to and be influenced by egalitarian values of promoting equality?

And before anybody jumps on my case, the game industry is a boys club that is largely defined by Star Wars and Halo. If it creates towards its own insulated group, that's not a problem. It won't grow the industry and it won't make the world a better place, but it's still a far shot from being wrong. It's merely inconvenient.

Almost half of the gaming population is women. Why ignore and sometimes discriminate against this half?

And why do this "insulated group" automatically require that the characters in their consumed games should be harmful and discriminatory?

 

[JoeInky]

You do realize they do this as a parody of stupidity, and that it's effectively hilarious... right?

90% of GAF doesn't seem to know this.

 

[G-Fex]

That was the turning point where it became the in thing. The number one topic to be outraged over. Always outraged. Over culture. Gaming culture.

You know, gaming "culture" is utter shit and every person on this planet should stay the fuck away from it. It's full of dumbasses who just want to be a part of whever is the most popular. Portal, Call of Duty, Skyrim... all great games in their own right but the people who play them and take them out of their own context as GAMES and turn them into this, I don't know, societal item, this plaything, a reference, I don't know. That stuff is not why I'm involved in video games and I'm so damn tired of it being ruined by all of that shit.

So tired.

I'm aware the large amount of gaming culture and 4chan and reddit are fucking idiots but just cause the 'mainstream' is , doesn't mean there's some of us like us on here who aren't complete one line spouting morons who just post pics from imgur. Give some credit, it's not like we're anime fans.

 

[sechsterangriff]

I don't really see the issue TBH. At the end of the day the developers will write their narrative and design their characters the way they want. And people will buy it or not and decide if they will like it or not, but I doubt the defining reason for either view is because they saw a sexualised character model or a damsel in distress that they need to rescue.

That's not to say that women don't enjoy sexualised characters. There's a market for that segment of the public in other mediums, I don't know why it can't exist for games too.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Sent an email to John Walker saying how much I enjoyed his article. I hope he doesn't end up with an email box filled with bigots.

 

[Boss Man]

That doesn't forgive the problem, you're just offering up a possible reason that these issues are so prevalent.

Again, doesn't excuse it, but let's be realistic about this:

How many markets that are dominated by a particular gender do not have a problem with misrepresenting the other one?

Ever watched a Lifetime movie? All men are murderers!

 

[Charoncaori]

I'm aware the large amount of gaming culture and 4chan and reddit are fucking idiots but just cause the 'mainstream' is , doesn't mean there's some of us like us on here who aren't complete one line spouting morons who just post pics from imgur. Give some credit, it's not like we're anime fans.

Avatar quote.

 

[ronito]

Ok, I get you RPS, not only did I get you I got you like 6 months ago and so too did a good plenty people.

So, what is "victory" defined as? At what point have you won? Eliminate sexism? Yeah that wont happen. Film's been around for decades longer had a bunch more women involved in it than gaming and it's still damned sexist.

More women in the industry? I worked for a client where all the top leadership in IT were all women. That group was far more sexist against each other than any group of male leaders I saw. We need the right kind of women in the industry. And like EA said, they can't get enough women to hire on. We need more female executives. Ok, but let's be honest executives in almost any company is just an "old boys club" not just videogames. We need to change that.

What is the state of affairs you're trying to accomplish? No booth babes? We're working on that. More female main characters? There's Lightning, Lara, Samus, Jade, Faith, not to mention gender agnostic games like Mass Effect and Skyrim. I know it's not ideal but it's not the days of "Save the princess from the native." and we're making progress there. Want people to be more aware? People just paid like 150k for that tropes vs women thing.

There comes a point where shouting about an issue is just more shouting. I think we've got shouting covered. We need to focus now on what victory would be and take steps towards that.

 

[G-Fex]

Avatar quote.

That's a inside joke, I hate anime.

 

[Dachande]

Sexism in games is a different discussion than sexism in the game industry. The latter is a serious problem. The former is not. Art does not require boundaries.

And before anybody jumps on my case, the game industry is a boys club that is largely defined by Star Wars and Halo. If it creates towards its own insulated group, that's not a problem. It won't grow the industry and it won't make the world a better place, but it's still a far shot from being wrong. It's merely inconvenient.

Saying we want more women in games and better representation of them within is not a boundary. It is the opposite.

 

[sonicmj1]

I'm not doing that. I'm saying that the same people who mindlessly parrot those things or consume braindead entertainment from braindead content creators, are the same kinds of people who latch onto this as a "popular gaming topic" and ruin the discussion for everyone else by imitating and multiplying the levels of useless outrage.

I'm not sure who you're thinking of with that kind of statement. Do you think John Walker is one of those people?

I can only speak for GAF discussion about this sort of thing, but most of the people who post a lot about this are people who legitimately care about this issue. I can understand taking issue with the tone that some people use to discuss it, but I wouldn't think of them as mindless parrots.

It's become a large topic that some have become very attuned to, and as a result, they're seeing problems in a lot of places. Maybe sometimes people overreact or respond strongly to something that isn't really problematic (are you thinking of something like the Notch party Twitter fiasco?), but that happens with every kind of topic.

 

[Kintaro]

Almost half of the gaming population is women. Why ignore and sometimes discriminate against this half?

What are they playing? I'm not offering any counter-argument by asking this, I'm just simply asking.

 

[Lime]

Ok, then what? What are these barriers that are stopping them?

People sometimes don't get hired because they are Black. Some people sometimes don't feel welcome in an work environment filled with only men discussing breasts, dicks, and pussy. Some people don't want to learn programming, because they get told by others that programming isn't for women. Some people don't get to play with a doll because it is only for girls. Some people get overly protected by men, because of their gender.

And on and on and on and on. Look up the many stories of racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.

 

[Vibri]

There seems to be a heck of a lot of discussion recently about women being objectified in the games industry.

And the author questions the morality of Jessica Chobot being called 'daringly beautiful' in an article.

Did he remember that Chobot's very first claim to fame was her own posting this photo?

And in her younger days, say around the time she was producing A GAME FOR PLAYBOY INC. Brenda Romero could barely be seen in an interview without half her ass or cleavage showing.

Sorry but as sympathetic as I am to misogyny, women in the gaming business have been happily using their sexuality as a tool for decades. And that aspect of this discussion cannot suddenly be utterly ignored because a group of women-in-games doth protested loudly at the most recent GDC.

 

[Alexios]

Let me know when you are done stroking your internet ego by posting snappy retorts.

So you feel my responses that imitate your tone against me are ego stroking snappy retorts... Translate that to yourself.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

That is a different discussion altogether. We can increase the variety of games we play by increasing the variety of influences for the people who make them. Increasing the number of women would do it, but then, so would increasing the number of poets or opera buffs. That is not a woman's issue, but a simply case of influence inbreeding. It's like how JJ Abrams just remakes Godzilla, Alias, Star Wars, X-Files, or the Prisoner. Too few influences leads to too many clones.

Honestly, the best thing that we can do is to not buy the next Call of Duty and instead buy the next indie game instead. It's not just about rewarding difference, it's also about increasing the variety of influences that people talk about and compare games to.

It is a women's issue because women are one of the groups that feel misrepresented in games. I agree that it is not only a womens issue, but they are a key group in the expansion of the medium, because of how large of a population they are and how vocal they've become in recent years. Assuring that we can garner the interest of women WOULD BE increasing the variety of influences in the people who make video games.

And again, as you said this is not solely a women's issue, but in every medium, every minority group; be it women or different race, has gotten the same equal rights or respect by their peers different times. They're still not completely resolved in some respects, but they're all slowly getting better over time, and all of the changes for those individual groups began at different times. So just because we are focusing on one problem with women at the moment doesn't mean we won't focus on the other inequalities (that could add even more variety to the creative pool of the art) too. In fact, it will probably open the floodgates on discussion on all those other issues even sooner then they would have been dealt with before.

So trying to chastise people for focusing on one thing at a time doesn't make any sense, as this discussion could easily snowball into tackling all of the other issues in the medium and how we could get even more people to enjoy games. And with that enjoyment will come different influences that will spread the creativity and content of games even wider, making it even more broadly appealing for even more reasons then we enjoy games now.

 

[GrizzNKev]

90% of GAF doesn't seem to know this.

People who miss things like this are missing out on a much more enjoyable life and an informed view of humanity and society.
I think most people just don't get it.

The same people who think 4chan is full of sexism, racism, and evil people in general are the same people who think video games are oppressive.

 

[Stet]

Jessica Chobot isn't in the gaming industry. Brenda Romero is Brenda Romero. Other examples?

 

[Sqorgar]

Yet a lot of arbitrary decisions made by business suits are made about what type of AAA game is going to be created. Yet the next AAA game is being adjusted and modified thanks to consumer demand. Yet the next AAA game is influenced by a focus group test.

But the next AAA game shouldn't listen to and be influenced by egalitarian values of promoting equality?

AAA is its own beast. That's like saying movies are sexist because all the summer blockbusters target 15 year old boys with disposable income.

Almost half of the gaming population is women. Why ignore and sometimes discriminate against this half?

If the number of female gamers has been growing (it certainly wasn't anywhere near half a decade ago), then where's the problem?

And why do this "insulated group" automatically require that the characters in their consumed games should be harmful and discriminatory?

I think we disagree that they are harmful and discriminatory. The truth of the matter is that guys like boobies. When given the chance to create anything without repercussion, they are going to create something with boobies. That's not a commentary on women as people.

 

[jay]

So you feel my responses that imitate your tone against me are ego stroking snappy retorts...

I am sorry my initial post was overly confrontational. I am offended by the idea that people only care about this issue for monetary concerns, or worse, because they are hoping to get laid, and this came out in my post.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Jessica Chobot isn't in the gaming industry. Brenda Romero is Brenda Romero. Other examples?

Chobot is currently writing a game (Daylight). Doesn't that make her part of the industry?

 

[Tummi Gummi]

No, that actually is fine.

Yup. Anyone can sympathize with someone who isn't a white, heterosexual male being steamed over games not pandering to their looks or worldview. That sucks. But when you get some people claiming that game developers have a moral imperative to pander to them instead of the core demographic, ugh. Which leads into...

I think we disagree that they are harmful and discriminatory. The truth of the matter is that guys like boobies. When given the chance to create anything without repercussion, they are going to create something with boobies. That's not a commentary on women as people.

Well, that's great, because no one is proposing developers be forced to include female protagonists. The message isn't "HEY, YOU HAVE TO DO THIS NOW OR ELSE," but "Hey, could you take a look at this situation and consider your options?"

You're right. The message from a few posts in this thread alone is, without a hint of strawmanning, "HEY, YOU HAVE TO DO THIS NOW OR YOU'RE A HORRIBLE DEVELOPER WHO WANTS WOMEN AND GAYS TO BE OPPRESSED". People are quite openly posting that they think having a sexy woman with big boobs in a game is actively injuring real-life women, and therefore a developer's failure to pander to them is an evil that must be stamped out. That's why these threads always (d)evolve into arguments over socialization, and why the "artistic vision" of developers is dismissed as secondary to ideological concerns.

Equality means the people creating games don't feel forced to make 90% of their lead characters rugged muscled straight white males because that's all publishers will fund. It means they are free to express themselves in the creation of a game without preconceived limitations as to what their game should be.

You do realize that games developers are already free to express themselves how they like? There are plenty of indie games that deal with such themes. It's ridiculous for a developer to expect full creative control over a project when they expect a publisher to give them several million dollars in investment. If Ken Levine wanted to quit and make Transphoshock he could do so tomorrow, but I doubt he'd be getting the same level of funding. Game developers are not entitled to other people's money.

If anything, I think modern games are being improved by it. Portal has a female protagonist in an industry that says "female leads don't sell." Skyrim has same sex marriage. I'm not familiar with CoD but from what I can tell these military shooter games are starting to become more narratively complex like Spec Ops: The Line.

CoD games are becoming more narratively complex in the sense that they're ramping up the number of absurd plot twists because a lot of reviewers fawned over it that one time in Modern Warfare 2. That's not a positive development and it's nothing like what Spec Ops is doing (which I didn't like either, but they're still totally different). It's generally irrelevent to this discussion though.

And yet thread whining and complaining about "THE GAF HIVEMIND" are still explicitly bannable offenses, probably because they contribute nothing to discussion.

Also, threads like the Notch "prostitutes" bullshit prove that social justice evangelists can get banned just as easily as anyone else.

That is a different discussion altogether. We can increase the variety of games we play by increasing the variety of influences for the people who make them. Increasing the number of women would do it, but then, so would increasing the number of poets or opera buffs. That is not a woman's issue, but a simply case of influence inbreeding. It's like how JJ Abrams just remakes Godzilla, Alias, Star Wars, X-Files, or the Prisoner. Too few influences leads to too many clones.

Honestly, the best thing that we can do is to not buy the next Call of Duty and instead buy the next indie game instead. It's not just about rewarding difference, it's also about increasing the variety of influences that people talk about and compare games to.

Films go after the big-budget 18-32 white male demographic-pleasers as much as games. The difference is that in cinema, you have plenty of major genres aimed primarily at women and a comparatively healthy indie scene that doesn't suffer the same obvious quality-gap as in games (it's harder to pick out an indie film from a single shot than it is an indie game). But there's currently no parallel in games to the romance or drama genres. The closest to those would be The Sims and social/facebook gaming. I believe both Zynga and Popcap attributed over 60% of their paying audience to women.

 

[Stet]

Chobot is currently writing a game (Daylight). Doesn't that make her part of the industry?

Her fame up until now is based on being an on-camera personality. We don't know how she'll "happily use her sexuality" as an industry professional because she hasn't really become one yet.

 

[Lime]

You do realize they do this as a parody of stupidity, and that it's effectively hilarious... right?

People who miss things like this are missing out on a much more enjoyable life and an informed view of humanity and society.
I think most people just don't get it.

I completely and utterly fail to see how racial, misogynistic, ethnic, and religious slurs equal "effectively hilarious", amount to a "a much more enjoyable life" and provide "an informed view of humanity and society".

 

[Kai Dracon]

You do realize they do this as a parody of stupidity, and that it's effectively hilarious... right?

If you're taking 4chan seriously you've missed the point and should reevaluate your perspective.

Plus on /v/ I've seen plenty of threads like "women who have actually contributed to games" where they honor talented programmers, designers, writers, artists, and composers rather than people who are internet famous and make accusations all the time.

Since the dawn of the internet, groups, websites, and culture cliques devoted to displaying base stupidity have been defended with "it's all just irony, don't take it seriously".

The problem being it's impossible to tell which people are wallowing in pretending to be wretched human beings, and which are actually horrible human beings wallowing in the supposedly ironic people's wallowing.

Which seems to effectively neuter the "it's irony" defense. If you make yourself indistinguishable from a bunch of complete morons and hide among them, I am not sure you can protest being painted as a moron.

 

[ronito]

If I ever believed what I read on reddit or 4chan was the average person's thoughts. I'd be in a fetal position in a corner somewhere.

 

[staticneuron]

Having games with white guys shooting people to save a girl is fine. Having basically every single game out there being that is not.

Except the fact that doesn't happen in every single game out there.

Equality means the people creating games don't feel forced to make 90% of their lead characters rugged muscled straight white males because that's all publishers will fund. It means they are free to express themselves in the creation of a game without preconceived limitations as to what their game should be.

It means women in the industry get pay and advancement opportunities commensurate to their experience and position. It means they get treated like normal human beings at conventions instead of everyone assuming all females are booth babes or PR.

It means girls on the internet don't get abused because they're girls and this site no longer has examples to post: http://fatuglyorslutty.com/

Several issues. Pubs didn't create the idea of rugged white male as a lead they are reacting to the market. Doesn't stop them from taking chances but they haven't been met with great success every time chances are taken so they default on what is known to sell. Why? Because large pubs are not making games as a social or educational tool. It is a piece of entertainment made to gather profit so the can make more titles and make even more money. The idea that they should care or have a social responsibility is empty. That is not how it has ever worked. All entertainment industries react because it is within their very definition. They entertain. They will change when the audience stops finding particular things entertaining.

The reason I imagine alot of women get treated like booth babes or PR people was simply because for a long time that was mainly defined females presence in these shows. It certainly should be that way anymore but it shouldn't come of as an act of of being hostile because some in the industry are simply not paying attention.

Girls being abused on the internet doesn't have to do with treatment in a particular industry. I assure you.

You can't approach this like it is the beginning of the discussion. This is middle, and everything that came before it hasn't been forgotten. That's why understanding and patience is more important to this discussion than anything else. You will never change people's behaviors by calling them assholes (or rather, strongly implying that their behavior is the manifestation of a deep seated hatred of women).

You must start from the assumption that these people are not wrong but that there is a better way of acting that will benefit them and everyone else more. But especially them. Because that's how you make a persuasive argument for a hostile audience.

And that is mainly the reason for alot of hostility because it is being waved around that certain tropes and topics are made to enhance negatives instead of positives. The Women in distress trope, was being complained about that it wasn't empowering and or that women are mere objects but I highly doubt that is why the trope exists. In the old stories, guys risked life and lime to save the princess not because they wanted to put the princess on a mantle or show all the other counts and knights what they acquired on the latest dungeon raid. Normally the end of these tales happen in marriage. The female is always a person. Someone cared for. Once you change the perceived intent of that trope then it looks like we are heading down a path where the negatives are being created and the points presented are contorted through a form of confirmation bias.

From the article

Then less in-your-face, arguably more insidious, is an article like Complex Tech’s “The 40 Hottest Women In Tech“.

and

None is ever introduced based on their aesthetic appeal, but rather their personal achievements. This is the very patriarchy the article pretends to lament.

Both these examples are demonstrative of what a hostile, alienating industry gaming can be to so many.

But both are equally powerful in communicating a simple message to women: this isn’t your place. Whether it’s being put off by the suggestion that a woman’s role in gaming is to be a physically harmed victim, or told that in order to be acceptable in tech you must first be “beautiful” – or at least be photographed in your underwear – the message is loud, and all-permeating.

Wait what? What IS Complex?

Complex is a young men's style/lifestyle magazine founded by Marc Ecko in 2002.

So in this young males magazine, we are to believe that it is nothing but pure "hostility" or boys club within a specific industry that mad a list like this to be created? It is just a things that only males...

http://www.businessinsider.com/hot-tech-guys-2012-2?op=1

The other day, BI senior editor Jay Yarow and I were in a meeting.
In the meeting: six women, two men.
One of the men on this list came up.
One of the women made a comment about his looks.
Then another woman in the meeting chimed in.
Then another said something about another guy they thought was even cuter.
Oh boy.
It went on like this.
Me being me, I decided this topic would obviously make for a good slideshow.
So a couple weeks later, I brought some of the women from my office back into a room, and they gave me comments on each of the guys listed here.

... oh wait.....

I think what alot of these arguments do not understand is tone and focus of attention. When these hottest lists comes out about males or females it is not about diminishing any individual capability or role in a particular industry. It is simply because many cultures (especially western) are obsessed with image. These articles are celebrating looks first, then any personal success story is an added bonus.

That top ten list of guys of course wouldn't be construed as something meant to make it hostile for guys but why is it considered so for women? Now before we talk about how much of a boys club certain industries are, let us talk about what is presented and the face value of what is presented. If these lists are a celebration of looks then any hostile intent is either fabricated or assigned.

Now this is not to say that women haven't been treated badly at some of these trade shows and conventions. They have. Some guys are complete jerks. What I am pointing out is that the growing chatter is that any and everything of this nature is a tool to oppress instead of one to celebrate. That simply strikes me as false and turns this discussion into a shooting gallery.

Edit: even worse Sarkeesian is being mentioned in this article. I mentioned before in the tropes article that here presentation is skewed, which will lead to reasoning like this. That is going to become a problem. "Why are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?" because in America the history of racial tension was palpable and in most cases very negative. Drawing comparisons is not valid at all.

 

[Orayn]

You're right. The message from a few posts in this thread alone is, without a hint of strawmanning, "HEY, YOU HAVE TO DO THIS NOW OR YOU'RE A HORRIBLE DEVELOPER WHO WANTS WOMEN AND GAYS TO BE OPPRESSED". People are quite openly posting that they think having a sexy woman with big boobs in a game is actively injuring real-life women, and therefore a developer's failure to pander to them is an evil that must be stamped out. That's why these threads always (d)evolve into arguments over socialization, and why the "artistic vision" of developers is dismissed as secondary to ideological concerns.

Link to those posts, if you don't mind. Most of the arguments I hear tend to focus on the net effect of how women are depicted across all games, rather than drawing a line in the sand and saying that a game is instantly, irredeemably sexist and evil if it does some specific thing.

Also, threads like the Notch "prostitutes" bullshit prove that social justice evangelists can get banned just as easily as anyone else.

I don't disagree. People can have good intentions and still cry wolf and/or get completely carried away.

 

[BeesEight]

I think we disagree that they are harmful and discriminatory. The truth of the matter is that guys like boobies. When given the chance to create anything without repercussion, they are going to create something with boobies. That's not a commentary on women as people.

[Citation Needed]
I know this is a throw-away comment but I don't feel this is anywhere near accurate. Just take a look at the history of art. My objection to this line of thinking is that it almost insidiously purports that man is inherently sexist which I think can be a dangerous attitude to take.

I apologize in advance if this was meant to be ironic.

CoD games are becoming more narratively complex in the sense that they're ramping up the number of absurd plot twists because a lot of reviewers fawned over it that one time in Modern Warfare 2. That's not a positive development and it's nothing like what Spec Ops is doing (which I didn't like either, but they're still totally different). It's generally irrelevent to this discussion though.

Er, thanks? But I don't think you get to decide what is relevant to the discussion. Also, I thought I made it quite clear in my response why it was relevant but here's the abridged: diversity is good for the industry and the product.

 

[GrizzNKev]

Since the dawn of the internet, groups, websites, and culture cliques devoted to displaying base stupidity have been defended with "it's all just irony, don't take it seriously".

The problem being it's impossible to tell which people are wallowing in pretending to be wretched human beings, and which are actually horrible human beings wallowing in the supposedly ironic people's wallowing.

Which seems to effectively neuter the "it's irony" defense. If you make yourself indistinguishable from a bunch of complete morons and hide among them, I am not sure you can protest being painted as a moron.

It seems pretty easy to pick out the ones who actually believe those things because they tend to eventually expose themselves anyway.

If I ever believed what I read on reddit or 4chan was the average person's thoughts. I'd be in a fetal position in a corner somewhere.

4chan no. Reddit yes. Reddit prides itself on that fact, even. It's why I'm so distraught by the concept of the average person. Other social media, like Facebook and twitter, seem to uphold that observation.

 

[DangerousDave]

That doesn't forgive the problem, you're just offering up a possible reason that these issues are so prevalent.

But if there are less womens than men interested in entering into the videogame industry... we have to force women to enter in the industry? We have to chose women with worse resumee over men with bether resumee?

I studied in a programming university where there was 1 girl for each 10 boys, and there wasn't any kind of discrimination to enter in the university. I work in a videogame where there are much more mens that women (in some areas, like programming, there are no women, and in other, like graphical artists, there are nearly as many women than men), and there isn't any kind of discrimination when hiring people.

So... I still don't see the issue in the "misrepresentation". There may be sexism issues in some games, but I don't see that womens are banned to enter in game development.