nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Damsel in Distress - Tropes vs Women in Video Games

KeRbDoG

Via Broadsheet.ie

Part 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6p5AZp7r_Q

Part 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toa_vH6xGqs

"Feminism versus FACTS (RE Damsel in distress)"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJeX6F-Q63I

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

fergalr

I think the series is very good, and very even handed.
I think the reaction of a lot of gamers to it has been very bad.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Unfortunately she does, and never focuses on any times videogames did it right making it far less of a critical analysis and more of a rant..

The videos released so far are the first two parts of a series.
She has specific sections dedicated to the times video games do it right, later on.

Maybe you didn't know she was going to that, although she was pretty upfront about it.
Its ironic that you accuse her of only selectively looking at the times videogames, while only selectively looking at certain parts of her project.

wandatowell wrote: »

I was enjoying the second video, until

wtf woman?

Yeah, there's a lot of violence against women; its pretty terrible.
Is there another point you were making?

EnterNow wrote: »

When the player's princess/girlfriend is taken & the gameplay is the task to rescue her, it essentially means that the characters property was taken & he wants his possession back. Oh ffs, have you ever heard such tripe in all your life? Maybe the character, actually, yknow, loves his girl & wants to save her? God no, that wouldn't be likely.

When the only purpose of a female character is to be stolen by a baddie, in order to give the hero motivation to retrieve her, and when there's nothing in the game about the relationship, and no characterisation of the female, then the female has basically been relegated to the role of a possession. That's the point thats being made, and its a pretty good one. If instead of a girlfriend, it was the hero's favorite trophy, or [insert other possession here] nothing would change.

Andrew76 wrote: »

I disagree with her main point that female characters needing to be rescued is "regressive crap" and that it has a negative impact outside games or for women in society. That's complete rubbish.

How many Mario or Zelda games have you played in your life? Have you grown up to be a male chauvinist pig because you were trying to save a female? Do you treat women as second class citizens because of it? I hope not.

Wait, are you saying that in order for a work to be 'regressive crap', or to have a negative impact, it has to transform people into chauvinist pigs?
It couldn't just be bad, and make people think 'oh thats bad', or influence them, but only in a subtle way?

Andrew76 wrote: »

What about Bayonetta, she has a nice set of tits, tiny waist and a great ass, hardly representative of the 'average' female figure - did you protest this and not buy the game? I bet you didn't.

You are saying that if you buy a game, you can't object to any part of it?

Andrew76 wrote: »

How many humans/animals/zombies/civilisations have you killed in games? How many have you kiiled in real life (zombies excluded)?

So, basically I disagree with the points she made in that first video.

I missed the part where she said that everyone who had killed a zombie in a video game had turned into a homicidal maniac?

Anyway, that's a stupid argument.
It'd be like if you were saying that high fructose corn syrup couldn't be bad for you, because it doesn't kill everyone who eats it.

Her argument is much more nuanced than that. She's saying that the portrayal of women in video games might be influencing us in a subtle way. She points out this is bad, because there's already a lot of bad attitudes towards women.

Andrew76 wrote: »

On the wider point you make of not enough people critiquing games (and hence praising her for trying) - what benefit do you think will come of games being critiqued more? Will it improve the 'quality' of games according to your own standards?

Yes, hopefully. Criticism of a medium serves to point out the stuff thats going wrong with it, hopefully makes people demand better stuff in future, and then developers will make better stuff in future.

Andrew76 wrote: »

Do you feel games aren't represented correctly in society? Why does that bother you (if it does)?

I don't see how thats relevant, but it really annoys me whenever they show games on TV and its people hammering the controllers which make pew-pew noises :-)

Separately, I feel games isn't taken seriously as a medium, and isnt held to high standards, by gamers, by game developers, and, as a consequence, by everyone else. Thats why the occasional games that come along and really are something special are also ignored.

Andrew76 wrote: »

I've mentioned before that for me personally games are a form of entertainment, no different to a film - a few minutes/hours break from reality.

Yes, they are entertainment for me, too.
You'd be in a pretty tough spot if you were looking to games as more than entertainment at the moment.
But I hope it won't always be like that. I hope some day we'll learn stuff about the human condition from playing games. You occasionally find a game that can be beautiful, or artistic, or teach you something new about life, its just very rare.

In the meanwhile, I'd like to see more interesting characters, of every sex.

Andrew76 wrote: »

They've become much less important to me as I've got older as I've less time for them. But I am interested in hearing other people's opinions on the gaming industry and what games mean to them and to see how it's evolved since the '80s when I first encountered it.

The best has evolved a lot, but there's a lot of room for improvement, imo.

ancapailldorcha

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I hope whenshe does come around to it she actually remembers that her character and her look was designed by a woman.

Who was probably told to design her that way.

o1s1n

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Who was probably told to design her that way.

Yeah, poor women, forces to design sexist things because theyre too weak to have their own opinions.

You do realize that line of thinking is equally as detrimental to women?

ancapailldorcha

o1s1n wrote: »

Yeah, poor women, forces to design sexist things because theyre too weak to have their own opinions.

You do realize that line of thinking is equally as detrimental to women?

That's not what I said. I doubt that the woman who created the character had much freedom in how she would be designed. Of course, the call to make the character that way could have come from a woman. I've not played the game and know little or nothing about how it was designed.

Retr0gamer

According to her she had a lot of freedom and Kamiya went with her very first design. His only big contribution was the glasses.

Myrddin

fergalr wrote: »

When the only purpose of a female character is to be stolen by a baddie, in order to give the hero motivation to retrieve her, and when there's nothing in the game about the relationship, and no characterisation of the female, then the female has basically been relegated to the role of a possession. That's the point thats being made, and its a pretty good one. If instead of a girlfriend, it was the hero's favorite trophy, or [insert other possession here] nothing would change.

Sometimes a game is just a game. Sometimes, there's barely any space for music on some carts let alone characterisation. Should Double Dragon have included a narrative, detailing the girlfriend going through her early teens, losing her Grandma to cancer, then dealing with the breakup of her parents, all the while studying to better herself?

Obviously I'm looking at this from a retro gaming perspective, characterisation wasn't a big deal back then. Should men be offended at the lack of characterisation of Bimmy & Jimmy? Doesn't it paint men as knuckleheads who just want to fight? Why didn't they negotiate peacefully with the bad guys? Tsk tsk.

I agree in modern gaming, the role of women in games isn't portrayed, expanded on, or utilized well at all. There is a lot of pandering to teenage male stuff going on, & it's perfectly valid for this to be brought up & debated. I'd agree with the author of the vids completely there. What I disagree with strongly though, is this whole possession thing. Just because I free'd Zelda from the castle in Hyrule, doesn't mean in real life that I perceive women as people who need saving etc. I find that notion, well, frankly, complete nonsense.

OwaynOTT

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That's not what I said. I doubt that the woman who created the character had much freedom in how she would be designed. Of course, the call to make the character that way could have come from a woman. I've not played the game and know little or nothing about how it was designed.

Shouldn't really be commenting on the game so, if you know so little about the subject.

Retr0gamer

I don't get her whole dinosaur planet tirade either. In that one she is really making a lot of stuff up. It only makes sense if the game was changed due to the main character being unmarketable. There is absolutely no evidence of this and the real reason is more than likely due to the fact that Nintendo were desperate to get a franchise on to the Gamecube since they had no Mario at Launch and changing Dinosaur Planet to a Starfox game was a better candidate. She really pulled that one out of her ass.

o1s1n

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That's not what I said. I doubt that the woman who created the character had much freedom in how she would be designed. Of course, the call to make the character that way could have come from a woman. I've not played the game and know little or nothing about how it was designed.

How can you assume she didn't have much freedom in how she was designing the character when you know nothing about the game or the design process for the game?

The only thing you had to work on was that she was a woman. Therefore because she was a woman and the character is shapely, she 'obviously didn't have any control over the design because a woman would never have designed that'. That's all someone could take from your post if you don't know anything about the game itself.

Bayonetta is actually a kick ass female character who takes no **** from anyone. On the surface it might appear to be a shapely design for teen boys to fap over (and what I thought myself before playing and one of the reasons I stayed away from it for ages) - but it's far from the case.

blag

Here's a video of her talking about Bayonetta. Half the video is dedicated to discussing the Japanese Subway advertising and what she has to say about the actual game suggests that she hasn't played it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbihPTgAql4

ancapailldorcha

o1s1n wrote: »

How can you assume she didn't have much freedom in how she was designing the character when you know nothing about the game or the design process for the game?

The only thing you had to work on was that she was a woman. Therefore because she was a woman and the character is shapely, she 'obviously didn't have any control over the design because a woman would never have designed that'. That's all someone could take from your post if you don't know anything about the game itself.

Bayonetta is actually a kick ass female character who takes no **** from anyone. On the surface it might appear to be a shapely design for teen boys to fap over (and what I thought myself before playing and one of the reasons I stayed away from it for ages) - but it's far from the case.

I just assumed that whoever was in charge of the project wanted an attractive female lead. I can imagine the head of the Uncharted project walking into the designers' office and asking for a rugged, muscular lead for the project with feedback given and alterations made on various designs before Nathan Drake as we know him emerged. My comment wasn't suggesting that women can't design these characters, I was stating that a designer wouldn't have a huge amount of autonomy in designing art assets. The final say can come from anyone of any gender, race, creed, sexual orientation, etc...
As far as the game itself goes, I've heard the rave reviews and bought it several months ago but never got round to playing it. It's still sealed in my living room beside by recently deceased PS3. I'm questioning whether or not it's worth replacing so it's unlikely I'll ever get to play it.

Andrew76

blag wrote: »

Here's a video of her talking about Bayonetta. Half the video is dedicated to discussing the Japanese Subway advertising and what she has to say about the actual game suggests that she hasn't played it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbihPTgAql4

"Pornographic poses..."

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcROhXysi22EqkrKElkeHfzCsK9FVMLEAUEkjsnCBou3RJDVFlct

fergalr

EnterNow wrote: »

Sometimes a game is just a game. Sometimes, there's barely any space for music on some carts let alone characterisation.

I'm not sure the space on the cart is relevant.
Anyway, text, narrative, is cheap/small compared to music.

EnterNow wrote: »

Should Double Dragon have included a narrative, detailing the girlfriend going through her early teens, losing her Grandma to cancer, then dealing with the breakup of her parents, all the while studying to better herself?

But double dragon did have a narrative, albeit brief. The girl got punched in the stomach and 'stolen'. Yes, it was brief - she is only there to give the guys a reason to fight. Which is one of the points made in the Tropes video.

At the end, the two guys, after fighting off all those baddies together, then fight to the death to see who gets the girl.
I enjoyed playing double dragon when I was like ten or something, but the narrative is pretty bad stuff.

EnterNow wrote: »

Obviously I'm looking at this from a retro gaming perspective, characterisation wasn't a big deal back then.

Even if it wasnt a big deal, someone went through the trouble of making that opening scene. It didn't happen automatically; decisions were made, time and money was spent on it.

EnterNow wrote: »

Should men be offended at the lack of characterisation of Bimmy & Jimmy? Doesn't it paint men as knuckleheads who just want to fight? Why didn't they negotiate peacefully with the bad guys? Tsk tsk.

But the point is that its not about individual games in isolation. The point is that there's a widespread trend to portray of women in video games as not real characters, just as things to fight over, etc.
Its not just about one game.
If it was just one game, or a small number of games that portrayed women in that way, then it wouldn't be a systemic issue. Small things can become big issues when they are systemic.

If the characterisation of males as knuckleheads who only want to fight was as widespread, that would also be bad - and you could probably make that point.

EnterNow wrote: »

I agree in modern gaming, the role of women in games isn't portrayed, expanded on, or utilized well at all. There is a lot of pandering to teenage male stuff going on, & it's perfectly valid for this to be brought up & debated. I'd agree with the author of the vids completely there. What I disagree with strongly though, is this whole possession thing. Just because I free'd Zelda from the castle in Hyrule, doesn't mean in real life that I perceive women as people who need saving etc. I find that notion, well, frankly, complete nonsense.

No one is saying that just because you played a single game where you saved a princess that you perceive women as possessions.

The argument is that people are influenced by the cultural stereotypes that appear in the media they interact with, and that women are heavily stereotyped as 'things that need saving' in video games, and that this is probably a bad thing, and, set against the backdrop of a world where there is a lot of violence against women, is something we might want to improve.

And, like, thats a much subtler, but much stronger argument; maybe uncomfortably strong.

If the videos were some crazy person saying "Oh, you will turn into a woman hater if you've played zelda once" then we could all just say "that person is being crazy".

But thats not what her videos are saying.

I played a lot of games as a kid. Like the books I read, or the movies I watched, they probably did influence me. Did they completely determine my personality, and views on things? No, of course not. But thats not the argument.

Were they an influence that might have negatively effected the stereotypes of women that I took on board? Maybe. Probably?

Now that wouldnt really be something we'd worry about, if everything in the wider world was fine when it came to how men see women. But everything isn't fine - there's a lot of domestic violence towards women, for example.

So, given that there are a lot of men that don't treat women very well, its logical to ask 'hmm, why dont they treat women well?'.
If there was just one guy who beat his wife, we might say 'oh, hes just a bad guy'.
But when its widespread, you start to worry that theres a cultural problem.

And then its logical to think 'gosh, maybe the cultural influences that stereotype women as posessions, such as those video games, are worth thinking about. Maybe, as gamers, we should demand games that portray women better'.

Now, sure, there are loads of other cultural influences, too, many of which might be bigger - but that doesnt mean that video games should get a free pass. And of course, there are also games where women are portrayed well.

But the argument made in the videos is rational, and solid, and worth gamers taking seriously, imo.

Andrew76

fergalr wrote: »

But thats not what her videos are saying.

I played a lot of games as a kid. Like the books I read, or the movies I watched, they probably did influence me. Did they completely determine my personality, and views on things? No, of course not. But thats not the argument.

Were they an influence that might have negatively effected the stereotypes of women that I took on board? Maybe. Probably?

Now that wouldnt really be something we'd worry about, if everything in the wider world was fine when it came to how men see women. But everything isn't fine - there's a lot of domestic violence towards women, for example.

So, given that there are a lot of men that don't treat women very well, its logical to ask 'hmm, why dont they treat women well?'.
If there was just one guy who beat his wife, we might say 'oh, hes just a bad guy'.
But when its widespread, you start to worry that theres a cultural problem.

And then its logical to think 'gosh, maybe the cultural influences that stereotype women as posessions, such as those video games, are worth thinking about. Maybe, as gamers, we should demand games that portray women better'.

Now, sure, there are loads of other cultural influences, too, many of which might be bigger - but that doesnt mean that video games should get a free pass. And of course, there are also games where women are portrayed well.

But the argument made in the videos is rational, and solid, and worth gamers taking seriously, imo.

Just to be clear, are you saying that playing video games is one cause of domestic violence towards women? If you are saying this, do you have any links to studies that show evidence of this?

fergalr

Andrew76 wrote: »

Just to be clear, are you saying that playing video games is one cause of domestic violence towards women? If you are saying this, do you have any links to studies that show evidence of this?

What do you mean by 'cause' in this context?

Andrew76

fergalr wrote: »

What do you mean by 'cause' in this context?

Cause as in 'the reason why something happens'.

Are you saying that playing video games where females are portrayed negatively (in your opinion) is one cause or one reason, why domestic violence towards women happens?

Basically I haven't understood the link you are making with video games and domestic violence towards women, if you are making any such link.

fergalr

Andrew76 wrote: »

Cause as in 'the reason why something happens'.

'Cause' often isnt a simple thing.

Consider:
a "The german attack on poland on sept 1st caused WW2"
b "Hitler caused WW2"
c "Poor economic conditions in germany caused WW2"
d "The punititive terms of the treaty of Versailles caused WW2"
e "The unification of the german states into a really big single country caused WW2"
f "The fact that germany was in europe caused WW2"
g "The fact that humans are aggressive caused WW2"
h "The value of the cosmological constants caused WW2"

You could say they are all 'causes'. People might generally be looking for something like b,c,d when asking 'did X cause WW2'.
A lot of people would say that 'h' is unhelpful.

But you could discuss any of the above.

Andrew76 wrote: »

Are you saying that playing video games where females are portrayed negatively (in your opinion) is one cause or one reason, why domestic violence towards women happens?

I'm saying it might be a contributing factor. Maybe only a small factor. Its very hard to tell.

I guess I'd be willing to believe that widespread negative stereotypes of women, in the content we consume, might affect how people later treat women.

I'd be surprised if video games had a big role. But they might be one part of a cultural trend that affects how people see women. Its hard to know. But its plausible to me.

If they are having a negative influence, then probably we should try and fix them, even if we can't be sure.

I don't know if you want to call that a 'cause'.

I don't even know how important it is to establish whether its a 'cause'.
Its something thats not good, and should probably be improved, especially if its plausible that it might be contributing to a serious social problem.

Not by banning video games or anything, but by taking videos like this seriously, and thinking critically about what we consume, and, if a game has a lot of bad messages in it, maybe not buying it, or asking the developers to do better next time.

deathrider

fergalr wrote: »

Not by banning video games or anything, but by taking videos like this seriously, and thinking critically about what we consume, and, if a game has a lot of bad messages in it, maybe not buying it, or asking the developers to do better next time.

Would this not just boil down to the individual in question though? For example, I'm a huge Mortal Kombat fan that pretty much plays violence as up-scale an in-the-spotlight as can be. I've merrily beaten up it's characters for the last twenty years, yet I'm not a violent person by any stretch of the imagination. I could be one of the most chilled out people you're ever likely to meet. It's covered in fairly bad messages- using violence to get what you want, reagrdless of the price- all wrapped up in a pretty little Good Vs Evil tale. Yet, again, I'm not a violent person. Could the same thing not be said for this sexism storm surrounding video games? That if you allow it to influence you in a sexist nature, just the same as if you were to allow it to influence you in a violent nature, then it's you who has the issues. Not the games, movies, books, music or whatever else you may consume.

Retr0gamer

I heard Ike Turner was mad for a bit of Bayonetta.

fergalr

deathrider wrote: »

Would this not just boil down to the individual in question though? For example, I'm a huge Mortal Kombat fan that pretty much plays violence as up-scale an in-the-spotlight as can be. I've merrily beaten up it's characters for the last twenty years, yet I'm not a violent person by any stretch of the imagination. I could be one of the most chilled out people you're ever likely to meet. It's covered in fairly bad messages- using violence to get what you want, reagrdless of the price- all wrapped up in a pretty little Good Vs Evil tale. Yet, again, I'm not a violent person. Could the same thing not be said for this sexism storm surrounding video games? That if you allow it to influence you in a sexist nature, just the same as if you were to allow it to influence you in a violent nature, then it's you who has the issues. Not the games, movies, books, music or whatever else you may consume.

That's a tricky subject; all I can do is give my personal opinion.

Its close to a hard area: when do you hold someone personally accountable for their actions, and when do you look at what influences them?

If someone is violent when they are drunk, is the fact that they were drunk a mitigating factor? Is it their fault for getting drunk, because they should have known they'd get violent? Or maybe we say 'no, its you that has the problem, not the alcohol'. Or maybe we say 'lots of people drink, and dont have problems, so the problem is with you'.
What if their drink is spiked, and they then make a bad decision? Is that different?
What if a bad person puts a powerful hallucinogenic in their drink, and they then do mad stuff?

Personal responsibility is a tough topic to reason about.

If someone hits another person, should we take into account if they were beaten as a child, and learned that pattern of behaviour? Or perhaps if they grew up in a culture of violence? Or do we just say that its them that has the problem?

If a dog goes to bite you when you reach out to pet it, you'll say its a bad dog, and be angry with it.
But if you discover that the same dog has been abused as a puppy, your heart would probably soften.

Violence in games is a tough topic.

1) One possibility to consider, is that there's someone who is crazy, and looking for something bad to do, and is looking for inspiration, and is inspired by what they see in a video game to do something bad in a particular way thats depicted in a game. And if there wasn't a violent game, they'd have chosen a movie, or some other form.
I don't think you can blame the game much there.

2) Another possibility is that there's someone who is a bit crazy, and has no strong moral code, and is somehow influenced by what they see in a game they play a lot. If the game is about cake, they'd give people cake; but its about killing, so they kill people - or otherwise become violent, in some less extreme way. Do people like that exist? I don't know. If they did, can you blame the game? Hard to say - but it seems more rational than in the previous case.

3) I think are people who can play a game that involves killing, but know clearly that its just a game, and because they are consciously aware of this, the fictional aspects of the game don't have any effect on their actions. I hope I'm one of those people. If everyone is like that, then clearly there's no problem with games.

4) But, what if, instead, its the case that playing violent games influences us in some small way to be slightly more violent or slightly more angry, or to reach for confrontational solutions to problems slightly quicker, than if we played games about negotiation and co-operation? Perhaps this is actually the case? In which case, if most of the games our culture produces involve violence, then things have now gotten a little murkier.

While I'd hope the reality is closer to 3, and while I'd hope that I'm at least personally close to 3, I suspect there are people out there who are closer to 4, or even 2. And sometimes I wonder if perhaps we are all a bit more like 4.

If so, then we should be thinking hard about this stuff.

While you could measure 2, and perhaps detect it in studies, I suspect it would be very hard to measure 4. But that doesnt mean 4 isn't the case.

That's the topic of violence.

How does the topic of sexism compare?
I suspect that relatively subtle sexism is more socially acceptable than violence. I'd guess that 4 is even more likely than 3, with sexism, as compared to with violence.

I don't know, though. I don't think anyone knows.

Even if its only plausible that games are having a mass - though perhaps slight - negative influence, then we should probably demand better as gamers.

Also, selfishly as an individual, I want games that have better and more varied characters ad plots, regardless of their sexes.

Andrew76

fergalr wrote: »

'Cause' often isnt a simple thing.

Consider:
a "The german attack on poland on sept 1st caused WW2"
b "Hitler caused WW2"
c "Poor economic conditions in germany caused WW2"
d "The punititive terms of the treaty of Versailles caused WW2"
e "The unification of the german states into a really big single country caused WW2"
f "The fact that germany was in europe caused WW2"
g "The fact that humans are aggressive caused WW2"
h "The value of the cosmological constants caused WW2"

You could say they are all 'causes'. People might generally be looking for something like b,c,d when asking 'did X cause WW2'.
A lot of people would say that 'h' is unhelpful.

But you could discuss any of the above.

Not to be overly pedantic but there's only a single cosmological constant. Maybe you were referring to the fundamental physical contants of Nature like Planck's constant, the Electron charge or the Proton mass etc. Or maybe it was just a typo. Also, you forgot:

i "For those of a certain belief, God is the cause of everything"

Ok, so you disagree with my use of the term 'one cause', that's fair enough.

fergalr wrote: »

I'm saying it might be a contributing factor. Maybe only a small factor. Its very hard to tell.

I guess I'd be willing to believe that widespread negative stereotypes of women, in the content we consume, might affect how people later treat women.

I'd be surprised if video games had a big role. But they might be one part of a cultural trend that affects how people see women. Its hard to know. But its plausible to me.

If they are having a negative influence, then probably we should try and fix them, even if we can't be sure.

I don't know if you want to call that a 'cause'.

I don't even know how important it is to establish whether its a 'cause'.
Its something thats not good, and should probably be improved, especially if its plausible that it might be contributing to a serious social problem.

Not by banning video games or anything, but by taking videos like this seriously, and thinking critically about what we consume, and, if a game has a lot of bad messages in it, maybe not buying it, or asking the developers to do better next time.

Until I see some sort of scientific evidence saying otherwise; I personally don't believe the portrayal of women in video games contributes to domestic violence towards women. I don't believe it's plausible to say there might be a link, not without some sort of evidence to back it up. No more plausible than me saying the number of Neutrinos passing through my body at any point in time might contribute to my mood at that time.

I do think that while we are growing up; how we are raised, where we are raised and our genetic make up predominately determines how we act. But for impressionable children growing up and playing video games involving Zelda, Princess Peach or whatever 'negative' female portrayal - I don't think those games implant a negative view of women in that child that would in anyway contribute to domestic violence.

I've no problem about thinking critically about what we consume or about games preaching better messages but I can't take her videos seriously when she comes out with such phrases as "pornographic poses" when talking about Bayonetta's acrobatics.

fergalr

Andrew76 wrote: »

Not to be overly pedantic but there's only a single cosmological constant. Maybe you were referring to the fundamental physical contants of Nature like Planck's constant, the Electron charge or the Proton mass etc. Or maybe it was just a typo. Also, you forgot:

Its not really relevant, as you say - but I can't claim it was a typo.
Im not very knowledgeable about fundamental physics at that level, so I was referring to those fundamental physical constants you mention as cosmological constants, and wasn't aware it'd cause confusion with the singlular 'cosmological constant'.

In my defense, when I googled it, I found this (a bit out of date, though!):
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v139/n3512/abs/139323a0.html

Andrew76 wrote: »

i "For those of a certain belief, God is the cause of everything"

Ok, so you disagree with my use of the term 'one cause', that's fair enough.

Its more so that I didn't want to have to deal with the counter argument, that runs along the lines of "well, I played doom and I havent shot anyone, therefore doom doesnt cause you to shoot anyone" - which would be a fine definition of 'cause' sometimes, but not useful here, as we aren't saying that the causality is so strong, that everyone that plays a game that has a sexist message will be sexist.

Andrew76 wrote: »

Until I see some sort of scientific evidence saying otherwise; I personally don't believe the portrayal of women in video games contributes to domestic violence towards women.

Im not sure such evidence - or at least open-and-shut evidence - will be forthcoming, because its such a hard thing to study. But I can understand your position.

Andrew76 wrote: »

I don't believe it's plausible to say there might be a link, not without some sort of evidence to back it up. No more plausible than me saying the number of Neutrinos passing through my body at any point in time might contribute to my mood at that time.

I don't think those two statements are of the same level of plausibility. The neutrinos shouldnt even interact with you, right? Like, given what we know of physics, its exceeding improbable they should have interactions that manifest at the level of your neural activity? Again, Im not a physicist?

Whereas there seems to be a pretty common belief that observed cultural norms influence people, in the disciplines that study these things?

Andrew76 wrote: »

I do think that while we are growing up; how we are raised, where we are raised and our genetic make up predominately determines how we act. But for impressionable children growing up and playing video games involving Zelda, Princess Peach or whatever 'negative' female portrayal - I don't think those games implant a negative view of women in that child that would in anyway contribute to domestic violence.

Well, Im not so sure about this. If people spend a lot of time playing video games, and if all the female characters they say are very poor role models, I'd understand that influencing them.

Influencing them as much as their parents behaviour, or the role models they see in every day life? I doubt it. But it could still be significant.

Andrew76 wrote: »

I've no problem about thinking critically about what we consume or about games preaching better messages but I can't take her videos seriously when she comes out with such phrases as "pornographic poses" when talking about Bayonetta's acrobatics.

I haven't played bayonetta - and Im not even sure that Bayonetta was mentioned in her tropes-vs-women series?

But even if it was, her point that Bayonetta is a highly sexualised character design seems pretty solid to me. Pornographic poses? I dunno. Is there really a camera shutter noise when bayonetta lands? Does that make sense in the sense of the game? Or is it just done to make it seem like a photo shoot or something? I havent played the game, so I've only got what was in the linked video to go on.

deathrider

fergalr wrote: »

I haven't played bayonetta - and Im not even sure that Bayonetta was mentioned in her tropes-vs-women series?

But even if it was, her point that Bayonetta is a highly sexualised character design seems pretty solid to me. Pornographic poses? I dunno. Is there really a camera shutter noise when bayonetta lands? Does that make sense in the sense of the game? Or is it just done to make it seem like a photo shoot or something? I havent played the game, so I've only got what was in the linked video to go on.

Nope, Bayonetta wasn't mentioned so far in her Tropes Vs Women vids, but she has been in the linked video you watched. I'd also imagine she'll have her part to play in future episodes when the lady starts her "Fighting F*ck Toy" (which I believe was the phrase she coined in her Kickstarter ad last year) episodes.

unky chop chop

fergalr wrote: »

But even if it was, her point that Bayonetta is a highly sexualised character design seems pretty solid to me. Pornographic poses? I dunno. Is there really a camera shutter noise when bayonetta lands? Does that make sense in the sense of the game? Or is it just done to make it seem like a photo shoot or something? I havent played the game, so I've only got what was in the linked video to go on.

There is a camera shutter noise,encompassing multiple angles of her after she pulls off a mad combo on a bad ass demon, does six backflips and lands on her feet,finally taking a suck of a lollypop.
F**k me whats the problem,no different to many other films or media where the heroine/hero is the main character.

Bullsh1t feminist crap I'm sorry.I mean they complain when the female protagonist is the victim and equally they find faults when they are the heroine....you can't win.
No bloke gives a flying f**k about male stereo types in games/films,we realize it for what it is and move on

CosmicSmash

EnterNow wrote: »

When the player's princess/girlfriend is taken & the gameplay is the task to rescue her, it essentially means that the characters property was taken & he wants his possession back. Oh ffs, have you ever heard such tripe in all your life? Maybe the character, actually, yknow, loves his girl & wants to save her? God no, that wouldn't be likely.

That sort of sh1t never happens in games.:rolleyes:

unky chop chop

blag wrote: »

Here's a video of her talking about Bayonetta. Half the video is dedicated to discussing the Japanese Subway advertising and what she has to say about the actual game suggests that she hasn't played it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbihPTgAql4

Only watched this now..so bayonetta encourages Misogyny!!!
Good grief..actually she may be right,She has the same glasses as Bayonetta and i want to punch her square in the face

fergalr

unky chop chop wrote: »

There is a camera shutter noise,encompassing multiple angles of her after she pulls off a mad combo on a bad ass demon, does six backflips and lands on her feet,finally taking a suck of a lollypop.
F**k me whats the problem,no different to many other films or media where the heroine/hero is the main character.

Well, as I said, I haven't played bayonetta, so I guess I shouldnt discuss it too much.

Maybe she got it wrong about Bayonetta.

That said:
1) She was also specifically mentioning Bayonetta, to talk about the advertising campaign. She does have a point, an advertising campaign where people gradually remove stuff covering the nearly naked body of the CG character is a bit weird. She's saying that makes the character into a bit of a sexual object - I can see where she's coming from.

2) Even if she's wrong about Bayonetta, that doesnt mean her general argument in the separate tropes-vs-women series, and specifically in the videos she has made so far, is wrong.

unky chop chop wrote: »

Bullsh1t feminist crap I'm sorry.

Look, feminists aren't a single bunch of people, all of whom have the exact same views. Some people say they are feminists, and say really crazy things. Other people say they are feminists, and make quite reasonable points about things that need improvement in our culture.

Taking an attitude like 'typical feminists' isnt very accurate, or helpful.

Based on my experience of Sarkeesian's videos, she generally makes points I think are pretty good and reasonable. Also, she has also clearly spent a lot of time playing video games, and she sees good points in the medium, too - she's not out with an agenda to get all games banned, or anything like that.

unky chop chop wrote: »

I mean they complain when the female protagonist is the victim and equally they find faults when they are the heroine....you can't win.

Its ok to complain when the female is an accessory to the protagonist, but then also complain when they make a female protagonist thats also done badly. That isnt contradictory.

Is it so wrong to want characters that occasionally offer a realistic portrayal of women, and that aren't exploitative in some way?

What if nearly every male video game character was really effeminate? Would it be so wrong to say 'lets have an occasional masculine action hero type, too?'

There can still be sexy female characters, or women being rescued - its just there should also be plenty of females in games who arent either of those two categories.

unky chop chop wrote: »

No bloke gives a flying f**k about male stereo types in games/films,we realize it for what it is and move on

Thats not true.

unky chop chop wrote: »

Only watched this now..so bayonetta encourages Misogyny!!!
Good grief..actually she may be right,She has the same glasses as Bayonetta and i want to punch her square in the face

You know, thats not a very nice thing to write.

She's a real person. She's doing her best to try and improve culture, and improve video games.

I don't know if you are aware, but she got some pretty horrible abuse, and threats of violence - people threatening to come and attack her in person, maybe seriously. I think someone posted the address of her house online - psycho crazy stuff.
Maybe you are only joking, but in the context, I dont think its a very nice joke.
She obviously cares a lot about video games, and she's trying to make them better.

unky chop chop

1. We all know this argument isn't about video games, It's about how you feel about how women are portrayed in media in general.
Nothing at all to do with Video games, Its culture in general, to single out video games as the prime example and root cause is idiotic.
this Sh1t has been going on since the birth of media in the 50's.
This argument isn't for the Retro gamers forum at all just another case of people trying to pin the donkey on modern day society..
What it does highlight is that some people,who when unable to comprehend or understand the "darkness of MANS heart"(not that i claim to do) have a need to project their blame on something/someone else.

2. feminism is an Ideal..what else is it!!!! and they ARE a bunch of people.
Don't get me wrong I'm all for equal rights but that type of Ideology is bull.
Your points about female protagonists are null and void.
There are millions of films/games where the lead heroine is a strong character to be revered, again you are just focusing on a small %

Men don't care if male protagonists are portrayed as musclebound brainless halfwits..we all know its crap and move on
I don't see groups of meminists parading around demanding more emotional feelings in 300 and less airbrushed abs.

Anyway I have Red dead redemption on pause and I have a whore tied to the back of me saddle ready to straddle...must dash

fergalr

unky chop chop wrote: »

1. We all know this argument isn't about video games, It's about how you feel about how women are portrayed in media in general.

?
Are you confusing me with the person who made the video.

unky chop chop wrote: »

Nothing at all to do with Video games, Its culture in general, to single out video games as the prime example and root cause is idiotic.

Video games aren't nearly important enough in popular culture to be a root cause for pretty much anything, so yeah. I think thats a pity, but thats another story.

unky chop chop wrote: »

this Sh1t has been going on since the birth of media in the 50's.
This argument isn't for the Retro gamers forum at all just another case of people trying to pin the donkey on modern day society..
What it does highlight is that some people,who when unable to comprehend or understand the "darkness of MANS heart"(not that i claim to do) have a need to project their blame on something/someone else.

Are you saying that when people do bad things, everyone else tries find a scapegoat? I'd agree with that point.
I grew up playing video games in the 90s (and even 80s) so I remember all the over blown hype about violence in video games poisoning the youth; and I'd agree it was pretty much as ridiculous as when people used to talk about rock music corrupting people.

unky chop chop wrote: »

There are millions of films/games where the lead heroine is a strong character to be revered, again you are just focusing on a small %

Films, yeah, there are many films with strong female leads.

Although maybe not enough; but games?

You really think its common for games to have strong lead female characters? Like, I play a lot of games, and there honestly arent that many. Even fewer if you remove the games where the strong female is really there to be a sexual object for guys.

unky chop chop wrote: »

Men don't care if male protagonists are portrayed as musclebound brainless halfwits..we all know its crap and move on
I don't see groups of meminists parading around demanding more emotional feelings in 300 and less airbrushed abs.

So, I really enjoyed the movie 300. It glorifies one really particular aspect of masculinity, and its violent, and you could say it glorifies violence. But I still think its a very entertaining movie, and a great telling of an old tale.

But if the majority of movies characterised men like 300 did, there'd be a problem.
It'd be boring.
But it'd also get to the point where the a particular stereotype was blown out of proportion.
Can you not see that?

That's sort of where most games are, in their treatment of women.

unky chop chop wrote: »

Anyway I have Red dead redemption on pause and I have a whore tied to the back of me saddle ready to straddle...must dash

Oh, you wicked troll you, I feel so trolled by that comment

deathrider

fergalr wrote: »

You really think its common for games to have strong lead female characters? Like, I play a lot of games, and there honestly arent that many. Even fewer if you remove the games where the strong female is really there to be a sexual object for guys.

Maybe it's because it's late and my brain ain't functioning right, buy I really can't think of any leading ladies that are just there to be eye candy. Who exactly are we talking about here?