Sadly since Anita is such a hot-topic around the internet, there was more than one person who were trying to claim that there actually isn't ANY issue with the game industry involving sexism at all. To them, this whole idea that women are marginalized or objectified or treated badly both in the gaming industry and in geek culture is just false. It doesn't exist. And any attempt to explain why we need to change things is inherently flawed because there's no reason to do so.
So in the interest of trying to debunk that bullshit, I made a list of sources I accumulated around the internet to prove that this is indeed a problem. I think everyone can benefit from this list, so I'm gonna repost it below for anyone who doubts that this is a thing to look at. Of course you should all just google things on your own, but since I already did most of the leg-work, maybe this will make things easier for all of us to reach the same understanding.
And keep in mind, this list of links is just a small fraction of what's actually out there. Please if you view any of these and want to learn more, go to google and search for it. It's out there. It's very much out there.
Anyway, on with the links!
Business website talking about the sexism in the gaming industry specifically about booth babes employed at E3 to attract the attention of men while 45-50% of the attendees are actually women: www.nzherald.co.nz/business/ne…
A woman working in the industry created a hashtag for twitter to expose reasons why the game industry is sexist and to let other women in the industry speak out about it: kotaku.com/5963528/heres-a-dev… and if Kotaku isn't a reliable enough source for you, here's the huffington post: www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11…
A news article talking about why we can't seem to move beyond the sexism in the industry: www.slate.com/blogs/future_ten… and an article about how women are treated at geek conventions: www.slate.com/articles/double_…
Documentary kickstarted funded for talking about sexism in the gaming industry: www.polygon.com/2013/5/5/43028…
Naughty Dog demanding female members for a focus group about having a woman on the cover of their game: www.gameinformer.com/b/news/ar…
New York Times criticizing Last of Us for having male lead: www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/art…
An article about how Remember Me was rejected by publishers because it had a female lead: www.joystiq.com/2013/03/20/pub… and an article about why they chose a female character instead of male: www.vg247.com/2013/04/16/remem…
Video Vlog about why it's "not okay" to harass women in nerd culture: www.escapistmagazine.com/video…
Blog about sexism in nerd culture: girlygeekygaming.blogspot.com/…
Controversy surrounding Capcom's Cross Assault video game competition where a game coach harasses his female player to the point of her quitting and refuses to apologize for it because "that's just how things are" kotaku.com/5889066/competitive…
An article about a cosplayer who was sexually harassed at Comic Con who fought back: www.dailydot.com/news/black-ca…
Vlog about the Fake Geek Girl: www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0ggK9…
TED-Talk about harassment of women in gaming: www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPYcAS…
Keep in mind that these are only just SOME of the examples that exist out there to show that this is a PROBLEM. Also, please remember that acknowledging that there is a problem doesn't mean you have to stop liking video games or comics or geek culture at all. On the contrary. Continue to enjoy your video games and your cosplay and comic cons and E3 presentations, just be aware that this is a thing going on and to call it out if you ever stumble across it on your own. The more people who are aware it's a problem, the more likely we'll be able to clean it up and get rid of it.
- Listening to: Escapist Podcats
- Watching: The Simpsons Season 13
- Playing: King Arthur's Gold
- Eating: Hamburgers
- Drinking: Earl Grey Tea
Princess Peach HAS been playable in many games, but Anita just gave the bullshit response of, "Oh, there aren't part of the main series so they don't count" like some ungrateful child.
Female lead? Wait, she has boos I can see. Sexulized!
Female lead? Oh, she hasn't got any boobs I can see. It's just a male character with a female skin!
I don't care if I get shit for this. I am gay and you don't see me crying about the lack of gay characters in video games. I am far more concered with the treatment of them in the real world, not a virtual world meant for fun and entrainment.
And don’t give me the “check your privileges” bullshit. Anita has her work showed and praised in schools, has raised a shit ton of money, owns expensive equipment, and is allowed on TV and news shows to play her “I am a victim, feel sorry for me” card and there are male and females who support her.
What bothers me is when there's a obvious sexualisation of female characters (it's just as wrong to do it with males) like in Soul Calibur, for example. Gravity defying, atrociously huge boobs with super obvious niples and a suit of armor that is pretty much a g-string made out of metal. THAT bothers me.
It's a good book, thought not directly based upon the topic here at hand, it provides a similar and useful bit of insight into a similar topic. Violence in gaming.
This is a great read for anyone who is into this type of debate.
On the note of the topic at hand... If sexism *isn't* an issue in games, then why is it that the more armor that is worn by a female character, the less protection it has? Or, in the case for male armor, the more spikes and badass it looks (instead of sexy, or what has been dubbed sexy.) the more protection it offers.
I recall some games where the armor was interchangeable between male and female characters. Great idea! ...until you realized that the armor seemed to change drastically depending upon who wore it.
There are other games which include, and I quote, "breast physics" where a specific algorithm and equation is used JUST for the sole purpose adding a little "bounce" to the games that are played. I'm pretty sure that male "breasts" move too when they move, so why hasn't there been any addition in that?
To make the final bit, it isn't hard to see just from the covers of games how bad sexism is used..not just to attract more players, but to keep them roped in.
I'm a guy...and it sickens me to see this type thing used repeatedly. So much for moving forward in society, eh?
Uh... the latter is true... but the first... not really. The first is men putting on what their dream is.
If you want to know what sexualising men would ACTUALLY look like... please, read every slash fiction on ff.n... look at everything Po-Ju has done (I fucking love that asshole--dude saved my life)... then just go on a Yaoi binge.
Then you'll look at those burly men, and realise: those are more just men putting their dream on... it is not sexualisation.
Women putting their dream on would probably look closer to Sailor Moon or Puella Magi Madoka Magicka. As women do dress up to try to look nice. Not for anybody else really... but because looking nice is something having large amounts of estrogen in your system forces you to want to have to do. Characters in those series are a mix of brave, competent, emotionally beautiful, skillful and physically beautiful... more so in the Japanese version than... everything that happened in the American version. They go through whole ranges of emotions... and end up stronger from it. Yeah... there are outfits that do come across as striperriffic, generally there is a minimum level of dressing formal style that is met... and most girls stick to the levels of formality required.
If the men were really being sexualised in the industry... they'd all look like designs that would today are mostly not seen much outside of the works of Po-Ju and a few other Cross Dressing character artists in Japan. Yes, Po-Ju has them prepubescent... but that is mostly to have them being feminized before the issues of male puberty start changing them. Which, if you've ever talked with transgender... that probably is the best notion ever. But then... most of the sexualised women tend to be depicted as being in an illegal looking age range as well (for their target look).
I mean... considering I have to look to Japan to find anything to counter it, and even then I have to look specifically into a porn industry that the main purchasers are female for sexualised male... and a magazine market that is a form of coming of age story for women. I guess in Japan when women go menstrual sparkles, hearts, flowers, butterflies and ribbons fly out of their cooch... as otherwise the metaphor is a bit lost on me. Yes... magical girl stories are a metaphorical story for a woman having Aunt Flo bring her monster of the month for a week. No... it is only doing terrible things in my head.
Though in sports industries and construction worker industries the first areas of inspiration to allow women to get their foot in the door was also inspiration brought about by mother nature being a fucking bitch. Seriously... toss trash into the oceans... to get her back. >.>'
Oh right... uh... burly men are not sexualised men. And fixing the women isn't necessarily about putting "sensible clothing" onto them. It is more making them more emotionally warm and receptive characters who deal with issues and come out stronger. A female character could be wearing pasties and a fig leaf, and provided she was emotionally receptive and matured over the course of the story... then it would actually work.
But now I am studying in the Games section at university, in their technology campus, where the ratio has been up to 21 men to every women (I think it's 14:1 this year), and the sexism I've seen sickens me. I've never really been one for feminism, because I have broader views about gender that amount to the same result in a different way, but I am finding myself more and more aware of what goes on around me each time someone does something in my classes. And it's horrifically often. The video game industry only seems to be supporting these views.
I couldn't believe the resistance I got when I told my friends - all male- about why I thought that they should change their designs for our final project, when all of them drew burly, Game of Thrones-eque men, and skinny passive women who would be naked at a sneeze. I got every response under the sun, from 'sex sells' to 'quit being a pussy'. The most offensive one I got was 'I through you were attracted to women to', which I am, but is utterly irrelevant. Not one of them believe themselves to be sexist, despite making comments nearly every day which show sexism towards both men and women.
I am amazed that people can be so blind to these things.
"I AM attracted to women. What you drew there isn't a woman... it is some kind of alien fish creature. Draw me what a real woman looks like."
To the "sex sells" tell him to make the guys look more like what would work in Yaoi... so that the guys can add to the sex selling quotient... rather than women doing all the work in the game. Essentially DracoInLeatherPants with near Bishonen type rankings... and BishieSparkle EVERYWHERE.
To the "quit being a pussy" reply to "take that back! Or we shall roshambo over it! With me kicking first! You pussy!"... or something similar to that.
The irritating part is they are ESPECIALLY blind to what sexualising the male would look like. Throw a copy of Twilight on their desk, the Gravitation series and some printed off DracoInLeatherPants fan fictions... "look, if you are going to sexualise the women... at least do so consistently with the men" sort of thing.
My argument is: lets see more man candy in selling with sex. Like really really twinkish gay guy looking people all (twink) gayed the fuck up. They don't have to be twink gay... they just have to know... I WILL be shipping them in my head with the other male candy booth babe... and writing slash fiction... that I might possibly choose to not shout from the top of my lungs as I recite to them.
Also... let's see more "slutty men" costumes at Halloween. Considering most of the female costumes look like stuff that is just normally in my wardrobe (but overpriced versions of it)... it is irritating that the men's costumes look like fucking burkas drapped over men. Just by comparison. Let's start having men be able to have Chippendale dancer look costumes for Halloween... and have that slowly become more and more common.
Seriously... if I were to NOT dress like a whore for Halloween... I'd actually be wearing far more clothing than I usually feel comfortable doing (seriously... the stores look like they were taking inspiration from stuff that is just normal wardrobe outfits for me). What we need to stop stop having men wearing those fucking hijeeb type outfits on Halloween... seriously, look at how loose and baggy and stuff they are.
Now then... to go look at more terrible slash fiction... and just think about how this isn't any different from men looking at lesbian porn... and expecting women to be able to be gay/bi for them... and think, "how much better the world would be... if men also had to deal with that same complaint."
When we start having places men frequent and have money spent at, without the purpose of getting into people pants... like maybe a bowling ally, or something... I don't fucking know... start suggesting men look like fucking twink ass gay guys and have the people saying, "that is stupid" become the whiny minority... then it will be the same.
Right now, in various places women frequent and spend money at, without the purpose of getting into people's pants... are filled with media and publication to try to look like E.T. from the Steven Spielberg movie, as if you don't look like one of them creatures that will anal probe you, you won't get on the cover of Cosmo magazine, and you will be called hideous.
Essentially, men don't have to deal with the same complaint being targetted onto their gender... as when it happens there, most people recognise it is fucking special. Like, "Mrs. Kraboble, I'm not allowed scissors, special"
We need to get to a point where people look at it happening to women, and associate it with being as much of a special kid as Ralph Wiggum.
He is a character without any depth whatsoever designed to please the average undersexed person needing an outlet for lust.
Edward represents EVERYTHING about what a male version of how women get portrayed.
Look at all the "sexist displays of women" and realise that 9 times out of 10, those are "female Edwards"... and understand THIS IS WHAT THE PROBLEM EXACTLY IS.
Imagine how upset you'd be if everywhere was presenting Edward as "the ultimate man" and everybody was compared on a scale of how close they were to being Edward... and if you weren't close, you weren't worth being a person. Even without that, you are pretty much upset over the matter.
Now add that any time you brought up how Edward kind of is the most useless tool in the shed of useless tools lowest class society of terrible tools. Any time you brought up what a terrible 8x10 Toolshed Edward is, people would come up with terrible reasons to justify it. "Oh... Edward is too polite to point out when Bella is menstruating" , "Edward is perfect for caring", "Edward is strong and stuff". Terrible terrible ways to justify this depiction of a person shaped thing.
Then, you might understand what the whole issue with sexism and the sexual stereotypes women deal with are actually about.
Edward is the male version... of what is everywhere in what women are told to be. If men did deal with it... Edward would be fucking everywhere.
You're obviously not a guy.
You'd be surprised at how often people miss that...
Is that by other guys... or by girls?
Also Pattinson, DiCaprio and Brad Pitt are not interesting because they have chests... it is their eyelashes that have girls into them. Except for Brad Pitt it is the nonthreatening appearance.
Edward is just a badly designed character, and worthy of no interest whatsoever.
So is nearly every overly sexualised female character. Just going to say that.
Would you want to join in on something where every guy is Edward?
If the character is shallow, if the show is shallow, we should ignore them.
Okay... perhaps you should think about why women don't really enjoy checking out video games then?
He definitely isn't your supercharged muscle monster, in a world full of warriors and fighters. He's a man of wits and sexiness and seduction and elegance, using make-up and jewels and silk and secrecy and perfume and soft words. He's also one of the archetypes of the Seducer. Sexism, come to think of it, is just a limitation of those who can't see that they are not bound to what society pretends they have to be.
Dude... or maybe you don't get my point here.
My point is: male supercharged muscle monsters are NOT what women are sexually after.
Men and women have a different sexuality. Men it appears to be entirely the physical appearance... which is why they confuse women for sexualising the same way as them.
Much like how anything on the cover of Cosmo is a cheap rip off of Marilyn Monroe, Edward is the modern day cheap rip off Giacoma Casanova.
Casanova could have caved in, turned into the average muscle-monster bearing uniforms and a moustache and draping in their battle-earned bravado. He also would have faded into history.
Because that isn't what women want.
Simply put, that would never be viewed as a "sexualised male" from the female standpoint.
Hollywood is the issue. Not us, and definitely not "displays of women (and men)".
Well, the fact people also enable Hollywood is ALSO the issue here as well.
As enabling people being jerks is kind of a thing.
Edward is the Justin Bieber of vampires: a shallow product, with lots of shine and no point whatsoever.
You clearly missed my point.
To reinterate what I was getting at here: men are not sexualised in society, and do not have to deal with the same issues women do there, as the "sexualised version of a man" is not anywhere near as prevalent as the "sexualised version of a woman"
Discounting homosexuality as that will only confuse the point even further...
Women are not into the physical presence of men, as what men believe the sexualised version of them is.
Edward and Justin Bieber are wonderful examples of the sort of images that would be required to be everywhere for men to say they deal with the same issue as women.
You clearly don't.
As what you are defining is more men doing powerfantasies... not being sexualised.
The female power fantasy is being super confident, competant and good looking at whatever it is we do. Able to walk around like we own the fucking place, able to do well in any skill based endevour--and possible strength based ones too... and be able to look attractive while doing this. Attractive by females competing with other females to look nice.
Women DO compete with each other to look nice. We'd do it even if all the men just disappeared.
The female super competant, super confident and good looking girl is the power fantasy equivalent to men with super muscles being manly and shit.
The male being Edward and Justin Beiber is the sexualised equivalent to women being depicted how we tend to be depicted.
The most confusing part of the whole thing is: men forget that women DO think different. A lot of women forget that as well. Usually around the time they call all men idiots. As typically when you don't understand how somebody things, it is easy to think they are just stupid.
So yeah... that macho muscle man thing? That is not men being sexualised. That is a male power fantasy. The two are different concepts. If men WERE being sexualised... Justin Beiber and Edward would be the normal depiction of men in the media and everywhere. With magazines telling men how to be more like that.
Now that you mentioned Hollywood, I remember hearing that certain genres of games were getting old pretty fast.
About this topic, though, I think the only place for sex is in the bedroom of a loving couple.
There should be little or no place in it for video games. Yet, look at some games that feature hyperbolic women, or sexually desirable women, or extremely titillating clothing. Such clothing was inspired by actresses, or actors, in sexualizing attire.
In short, outside sources, like Hollywood, inspires games, and in this age, vice versa. Therefore, Hollywood seems to be the biggest factor in this equation.
It isn't just in Video Gaming.
The WHOLE Geekdom is the most repressed held back style of doing things in all social styling and areas. As much as geeks talk about being forward thinking, I have no idea how that could be the truth when "they changed it, it sucks" is so rampant.
When Garth in Wayne's World said the lines, "We fear change" is probably the most accurate snap shot for the forward thinking that geek culture contains.
It certainly does not surprise me that when you can expect the jocks and the construction workers to be okay with women. The jocks mostly just to join the Women's Field Hockey Team for a single game to get them to stop being jerks to women. The construction workers just needed gay rights and to be questioned, "do you only want to look at sausage all day? Okay, maybe you enjoy that homosexual stuff, the rest of us don't" and a few whipped towels.
With Geeks the main issue is: many of them expect they will be alone and nobody will like them. That exists in the head of too many geeks. In fact for some reason the geeks have this notion of being single much higher and harder than the emo/scene kids. Which does irritating things in my head. Add a bit of an ego to the matter.
Jocks you pit them in with the Women's Field Hockey Team... and... you've pretty much humbled the ego. Geeks (in games) and they can accuse the women of hacks, crit-hit wins, luck based wins, it being a bad day, their sexual appeal distracting them, being a whore--and if that is if being just not plain abusive and sabotaging didn't work.
The geeks are all about Garth's Quote "We Fear Change" and the Tv Trope TheyChangedItNowItSucks... add how a lot of geeks are so neurotic that if you have the potatoes touching the peas on their dinner tray you've doomed them to starvation... and you pretty much have shown how backwards all areas that Geeks have control over really stands as being.
Part of the mindset is the refusal to want to expand and change their current mindsets and to learn new things. Geeks are not about "learning new stuff and experiencing new things"... it is about "knowing a lot on the one subject that I've looked into and specialize into, and bitching anytime something new enters that subject matter to learn"
Pretty much any geek guy that lost a game to a girl.
The reason why sexism exist;
It's just SEX.
I guess a lot of this would also go with the whole 'Gamer Girl' thing we have. Girls who pretend to be like boys and who act like boys. Who are called 'fake'.
Then there are girls who actually devote just as much of their lives to gaming as men do.
Like me and my sister.
We play some mean Druids on WoW. We can beat her husband and his guy friends for hours on end.
* Accusations of being a feminazi
* Accusations of being a misandrist
* Pointing to the exceptions to the general state (there is a reason these are exceptions, as they are not the normal)
* Ad homin attacks on intellect of the writer... also all terribly spelled
* Generalisation and belittling the argument
* Statements the story is fake
* Accusations that the girl lied about being raped.
Dude mang... now to actually hit the biggest part. The TWO games you gave as examples of the exceptions to the general sexism in games are:
Super Mario 2 USA... which I'll note Luigi was made into a Male in the USA version. In Doki Doki Panic that character was a girl.
In Paper Mario... Princess Peach is still a damsel in distress. She never made an effort to escape the castle. She snuck around, but if they spotted her, she was back in her room. Mario never had the same "sneak mission" based setup. Well, there was one part that could be done as a sneak mission... but you could also face those enemies in combat if you knew what you were doing.
Even then... in the entire Mario Bros series... Luigi has gotten more screen time than Peach... and even then Luigi is considered getting the fucking short end of the stick. You are arguing that it is not sexist as the games treat Peach worse than Luigi? Really?
ahem super paper Mario: Luigi isn't seen for like forever yet you get peach for the second character
now with quotes from you: "Ad homin attacks on intellect of the writer... also all terribly spelled" really? is the smarts on me or you? cause I don't like being made fun of you ass
It is hard not to laugh when you see a clown. The question is: whether you are a clown on purpose.
Total games Peach is playable in:
* Super Mario USA 2
* Super Mario RPG
* Paper Mario
* Super Princess Peach
* Super Paper Mario
About five games there, without taking into account Super Smash Bros.
Is Luigi playable in more than five games? Hell, the Mario and Luigi games has four entries in them alone, where Luigi has title status.
Peach gets handled WORSE than Luigi by Nintendo.
Hell, Luigi even is depicted as a decent character in his games.
In Super Princess Peach I just decided that Princess Peach was transgender as she was acting like a drag queen that was taking hormones... and not really much of a woman. If it wasn't made my Nintendo, I half imagine she'd be giving a trail of blood throughout the whole game: even on a pacifist run.
When your counter point revolves around a character whose title game looks like something that would barely pass in a bad drag queen show... you just have to realise, "wait... maybe... when the character acts like something that irritates both cisgender women AND transgender women alike... that she might be a good example of why the industry does terrible depictions of women."
I kind of like how you work... you argue against the sexism... but you do it in a way that only validates that the sexism exists.
But if you cannot even recognise how Peach played TERRIBLY in Super Princess Peach... then you obvious have no fucking clue about women, and need to start realising you are an idiot.
Once you realise you are an idiot, then we can begin working on you not being so stupid about this stuff.
The New Yorker also did a publication on Dwarf Fortress being brought into a major museum as part of a piece on video games as literature, and they focused on the games people would know like... Pacman and Space Invaders.
Then to justify the article being in the New Yorker, the ended up having to explain to people what a Sim City was. Sim City--luckily was also being featured in that same display. Lucky for them. As it allowed a simple way to explain to their audience what a Dwarf Fortress was.
The same exhibit had a few PS3 games being featured, but The New Yorker did not mention them apart from a brief part of a paragraph listing "other modern games".
The general target audience for The New Yorker does not know enough about video games, for the articles to refer to them within the context of the article.
Due to space restrictions, they cannot give an indepth explanation to their target audience enough about video games to go beyond stuff that has been around long enough for people to know it is there.
She stuck with Mario because of Brand Awareness. That is all. She couldn't mention Portal or Bioshock as the publication she was posting to would have no clue what she was on about, and her article would not get published.
Same reason that the news still uses really old clips of Doom running on a crappy 486... the target audience would not be able to understand what was going on, in any of the events present.
As much fun as having the news give out information on subjects, the news FAILS if people at home cannot comprehend what the people on the news are talking about.
It is more she is in a media area that she cannot mention that stuff within.