Tropes vs Women

[TrashMan]

I have no wish to call you women-hating or anything of the sort. I did, however, wish to point out that by supporting the perpetuation of privileged viewpoints does nothing to serve your argument.

 

In other words, everyone who doesn't agree with you 100%?

 

Good to know that the overly vocal minorty isn't at all starting to terrorize the majority, abusing it's protected status to it's fullest...

[Badmojo]

<snip>

 

No and THIS is what pisses me off, any time someone tries to argue, you automatically get called women hating, sexist, rapist apologist..etc. Oh, you might not have said that, but that is what you were implying. Perhaps you should read what I wrote. I want games that do NOT try to pander to political correctness puritans. I want a game that is real and gritty. A lot of examples of great women in history in here, you know why they were great? Because they were RARE. Its because the background had sexism and racism. If eveybody got along and racism/sexism did not exist, they would not even be a foot note.

 

I have no problem with there being strong famale characters, but they should be rare, I do not want the world to be unrealistic where there is no difference between men and women. In all of human history there has been sexism and racism, but we are supposed to believe that everybody put aside their differences like that, even in a fantasy setting? Then there should be no war, no problems then. bah, whatever. Lets make another boring political correct game where men and women are treated exactly the same, we will have some token race to hate instead of having true racism in our on species. Yea, this is what I paid for, the same politically correct social crap that comes out of EAware. Pushing the envelope, yea right.

 

I was not commenting on what you want for women in the game. Personally, I don't really want politically correct, whitewashed, tropified women in games, either. They're unrealistic as all hell, which makes me hate them worse than damsels in distress. At least damsels in distress don't go around waving the 'look at me! I'm totally not a gratification object or anything!' flag at it.

 

I was commenting on how you said that RPGs are basically targeted towards men with few women playing them, which makes it fine to completely cater to men without addressing the concerns of women. i.e. women's concerns should not affect RPGs, which is men's entertainment. You suplemented your argument with the fact that romance novels are for women, and men are sexualized there as well, so 'to each their own'. Which is a fallacy. Romance novels are closer to porn for women, while the RPG argument is better served by comparisons to comic books and sport magazines. Traditionally geared for men, with no reason to do so beyond 'just because'.

 

I have no wish to call you women-hating or anything of the sort. I did, however, wish to point out that by supporting the perpetuation of privileged viewpoints does nothing to serve your argument.

 

Also, calling other statistics lies when your own statistics is conjecture also does not make your argument stronger.

 

If this happens every time you make such an argument, perhaps you should REALLY rethink what your argument looks like to other people. Others in the thread not wanting 'empowered women in the game because setting' did just fine. In fact, your first post before this was not bad. Wording is your friend.

 

Actually, I pointed out there is nothing wrong with targeting a particular group to cater too because there isn't. Trying to cater to everyone is a recipe for disaster, you simply cannot please everyone nor should you.

[Badmojo]

Not being actively misogynistic is not enough.

 

No.

 

*****

 

I'm sick and tired of these thread. Not just here but in every forum. I'm beginning to DESPISE Political Correctnes in all forms...simply because of posts like this.

People who want to force it everyhwere and insist that if you're not spreading their belief/value system like a Jehovas witenss on speed, you are a very bad and immoral person.

Peopel to whom everything is an issue and everything must be a platform for the mto express their dissatisfaction.

 

I still recall the Resident Evil "contraversy" with black zombies (becasue it was set in africa) adn the uproar. And no one complained about the previous several games with white zombies...

 

I'm sick of it.

 

Sick of it beyond conventional words to express it. I don't care which race/sex/belief/whatever you think is under attack or offended or misrepreted.

The next person to start preching PC to me and showing it in my face, will face a crusade against him so brural, that the God-Emperor and the Inquisiton will wince in horror and Khorne himself will loose his lust for blood.

 

 

I am with you, EVERY web forum has this exact topic up and it just poisons the forums with everybody getting into a shouting match and driving people away. This falls more into politics than game design and really needs to be moved to way off topic forum. I guess the mods are off today.

[Monte Carlo]

I did, however, wish to point out that by supporting the perpetuation of privileged viewpoints does nothing to serve your argument.

 

I mean no offence, I really don't... but you do realise that this is the language of the re-education camp, don't you?

[novander]

I was aware of the Resi 5 controversy but since I'm not a resi fan, I didn't pay that much attention to it. I'd guess, however, that nobody complained about white zombies because there is no history of white oppresion pretty much anywhere in the world. I'm not saying everyone loves white dudes, in fact there's quite a lot of people who don't love white dudes, but I can't think of anywhere in the world where white people make up a sizable chunk of the population and are so openly treated as second class citizens.

 

Oh man, I did not mean to join this forum to bring down the patriachy. I don't even identify as a feminist, I just can't stand it when feminism is dismissed out of hand as unnecessary. Gaming often falls back on tired old tropes, often reinforcing the idea of women as secondary characters. It's pretty easy to see why that might put off female gamers and that's an issue that the OP and myself both feel should be addressed. The actual number of female gamers doesn't really matter, whether they're a large minority or a small one.

 

Monte Carlo, if you think the thread isn't important, stop commenting. Let it die. Though I would like to thank you for commenting often because your signature means I don't have to check the kickstarter page to see how much has been pledged. Edit: sorry, it was BadMojo complaining most recently about the thread existing. Still, I like your sig.

Edited September 23, 2012 by novander

[Water]

In "historically misogynist" societies, women were second-class citizens because they're, on average, weaker than men, and thus less capable of defending themselves (thank you, captain!).

But in a fantasy world, where people can develop magical abilities which a) are equally frequent in both sexes and b) make their wielders able to raze a city to the ground... well, they are not so defenseless.

Yes, this. Magical ability always seems to be equal across the genders in videogames. (In fact, if anything, there's more games that tend toward showing the caster classes as women rather than men (which is a trope in itself, but I digress).) And yet, I can't think of a game that examined what that shift in the balance in power would do to the gender politics of the world. Why should sexism still be a thing in the interests of "realism" if magic has equalized the sexes?

 

If anything, I'd think that in this society Obsidian is crafting, it'd be more that those with weak/fragmented souls who would be discriminated against (men and women).

 

---

 

As for the thread topic: tropes are not inherently bad. The problem with them is mostly due to inexperienced/poor writers using them without thinking. And I'm pretty sure we can count on the writers at Obsidian to keep these kinds of things in mind. And if not, well that's why we have topics like these: to show that people feel pretty strongly about things like this.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Water

[Badmojo]

In "historically misogynist" societies, women were second-class citizens because they're, on average, weaker than men, and thus less capable of defending themselves (thank you, captain!).

But in a fantasy world, where people can develop magical abilities which a) are equally frequent in both sexes and b) make their wielders able to raze a city to the ground... well, they are not so defenseless.

Yes, this. Magical ability always seems to be equal across the genders in videogames. (In fact, if anything, there's more games that tend toward showing the caster classes as women rather than men (which is a trope in itself, but I digress).) And yet, I can't think of a game that examined what that shift in the balance in power would do to the gender politics of the world. Why should sexism still be a thing in the interests of "realism" if magic has equalized the sexes?

 

If anything, I'd think that in this society Obsidian is crafting, it'd be more that those with weak/fragmented souls who would be discriminated against (men and women).

 

---

 

As for the thread topic: tropes are not inherently bad. The problem with them is mostly due to inexperienced/poor writers using them without thinking. And I'm pretty sure we can count on the writers at Obsidian to keep these kinds of things in mind. And if not, well that's why we have topics like these: to show that people feel pretty strongly about things like this.

 

having another disgriminated group is fine. Like full souls and partial, but they should not be the token group to replace the other discriminated groups. I hate games that do that, oh we are racist...against pointed eard elves, but all humans get along...ladeda. Yea right. Also, why should magic equilize anything unless EVERYBODY can use magic, then it would be like everybody carrying a gun. Only those who have magic would be "privilaged" the rest would be second class citizens, but even among the serfs, there would be sexism and racism.

[Longknife]

This might be sorta off topic, but any women on here wanna explain how in the HELL this trope allegedy "demeans and exploits women:"

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rhH_QGXtgQ

 

 

Not saying all women consider this trope offensive, nor am I trying to say "stupid opinion!11" But in all honesty, how a sci-fi trope about pregnancy could be considered exploitation or demeaning? That's beyond me. If someone considers it so, please explain, cause I'm curious to hear what the perspective that agrees with her sounds like.

 

 

There's two groups that I think, while their causes are just at their core values, they're polluted with TONS of extremists who release fringe videos like this that only work to alienate the entire group from popular opinion. Those groups? PETA and feminists. PETA with their "hey instead of informing people about the atrocities that occur on test animals for haircare products and perfumes, where the animals will sometimes have some of their legs broken to keep them from resisting too much and then have the perfume sprayed in their eyes and basically every orifice they have to see how sick it makes them, let's attack delicious Kentucky Fried Chicken, complain about a dog being shot in order to save a woman it was attacking and throw paint on fur coats. People will love us." And feminists with....well, vids like the above. All it does is leave the general populace scratching their heads thinking "wtf" as they develop a tendency to NOT listen to those groups because they have a habit of making stupid points and arguments.

But that's also why I ask for a perspective that agrees with the vid: because I've met plenty of respectable PETA members and feminists, just wtf the dramatic end of the spectrum (any spectrum) is generally not pretty, and unfortunately there's lots of extreme feminists.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Longknife

[Monkcrab]

<snip>

 

Actually, I pointed out there is nothing wrong with targeting a particular group to cater too because there isn't. Trying to cater to everyone is a recipe for disaster, you simply cannot please everyone nor should you.

 

"Women don't play RPGs, so there's no need to make RPGs that (contain features which) cater to women."

 

Go back in time a little bit, and this becomes :

 

"Women don't read books, so there's no need to write books that (contains elements which) cater to women."

 

"Women don't do activity X, so there's no need for activity X to cater listen to the concerns of women."

 

I don't want to prolong the point, but really, THIS is one of the reasons why yes, you should try to cater to women. They're 50% of the population, after all, and perhaps once more women has figured out that they don't have to like barbies because all games for girls are about barbies and Babysittingz, RPGs might find a new market, sell more, and we might be in less of a predicament where 90% of games are made solely---not just cater---to the whims of teenaged males. Older, wiser males benefit, too! Opening genres up to women has led to diversification of said genre through the ages, while closing off a genre tends to simplify it to a greater degree. It's got to start SOMEWHERE.

[evdk]

This might be sorta off topic, but any women on here wanna explain how in the HELL this trope allegedy "demeans and exploits women:"

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rhH_QGXtgQ

 

 

Not saying all women consider this trope offensive, nor am I trying to say "stupid opinion!11" But in all honesty, how a sci-fi trope about pregnancy could be considered exploitation or demeaning? That's beyond me. If someone considers it so, please explain, cause I'm curious to hear what the perspective that agrees with her sounds like.

 

 

There's two groups that I think, while their causes are just at their core values, they're polluted with TONS of extremists who release fringe videos like this that only work to alienate the entire group from popular opinion. Those groups? PETA and feminists. PETA with their "hey instead of informing people about the atrocities that occur on test animals for haircare products and perfumes, where the animals will sometimes have some of their legs broken to keep them from resisting too much and then have the perfume sprayed in their eyes and basically every orifice they have to see how sick it makes them, let's attack delicious Kentucky Fried Chicken, complain about a dog being shot in order to save a woman it was attacking and throw paint on fur coats. People will love us." And feminists with....well, vids like the above. All it does is leave the general populace scratching their heads thinking "wtf" as they develop a tendency to NOT listen to those groups because they have a habit of making stupid points and arguments.

But that's also why I ask for a perspective that agrees with the vid: because I've met plenty of respectable PETA members and feminists, just wtf the dramatic end of the spectrum (any spectrum) is generally not pretty, and unfortunately there's lots of extreme feminists.

Feminist Frequency on the fringe of feminism? HAHAHAHA

Friend, I guarantee you that you do no want to see the fringe of feminism. Radfems are a whole different sport.

[AwesomeOcelot]

This is not about equality, this is not about feminism, this is about people and what they like. Apparently these people don't like to see female skin, and absolutely hate that others do for instance, as if there's something wrong with sexuality. They hate that women are portrayed with masculine qualities, but love when men are portrayed with feminine qualities, they want all characters to be based on their ideals. The solution to this is that they can fund their own games on Kickstarter, but they'd rather whine about games made for other people where they nitpick and project all manner of nonsense.

 

You can go the Star Trek (at least NG, DS9, and Voyager) route and portray a society where sexism and racism are a thing of the past, or you can portray a society where sexism and racism exists, neither of these options are themselves racist or sexist. Art is art, people need to remember this, it's up to Obsidian how they want to create this, they don't have to be representative of anything as if that's the best thing to do, they are in charge. I prefer to be confronted with wrongs and complex situations, I prefer to watch The Wire over utopian shows to be provoked into thinking about all manner of issues.

 

These people would be poison to this game, and their opinions aren't worth any more than others when it comes to this. If you prefer more realism in your armour, fine, good for you. If you prefer mail bikinis, that's fine too. I'd prefer more realistic armour but I'm not going to start elaborately deluding myself into believing that's morally wrong or a form of discrimination. Nor am I going to start confusing fantasy with reality, and is with ought, just because it's in the game doesn't mean the creator is advocating it in the real world. I'm probably going to be stealing and killing my way through a world in at least one play through.

 

This Sarkesian person seems to be ignorant and devoid of valid arguments.

Edited September 23, 2012 by AwesomeOcelot

[Longknife]

Feminist Frequency on the fringe of feminism? HAHAHAHA

Friend, I guarantee you that you do no want to see the fringe of feminism. Radfems are a whole different sport.

 

No, trust me I have.

 

Nevertheless, for me that video is pretty fringe because....well wtf I can't make sense of it.

She's arguing a sci-fi trope that shows horror pregnancies somehow victimizes women? With that argument, any mythological or fantasy setting that shows dudes being hopelessly lured to their death by the alluring call of a siren is victimizing men. I'd never draw that conclusion though, so all I can do is watch that vid and think "wat."

[kenup]

Feminist Frequency on the fringe of feminism? HAHAHAHA

Friend, I guarantee you that you do no want to see the fringe of feminism. Radfems are a whole different sport.

 

No, trust me I have.

 

Nevertheless, for me that video is pretty fringe because....well wtf I can't make sense of it.

She's arguing a sci-fi trope that shows horror pregnancies somehow victimizes women? With that argument, any mythological or fantasy setting that shows dudes being hopelessly lured to their death by the alluring call of a siren is victimizing men. I'd never draw that conclusion though, so all I can do is watch that vid and think "wat."

She only starts with horror pregnancies. She then expands to every pregnancy that is not "normal" and/or happy ending. She has a problem with pregnancies in fiction. When I saw that about a month ago, I was like WHAAAAAT?

Edited September 23, 2012 by kenup

[hellslayer]

I personally like if a world reacts different to my character when I play as female then as male. I just don't like if people try to hide differences or weaknesses just to avoid controversial statements.

So I like full armor for females, but I would love to see (at least partly) different conversations depending on the gender. Obsidian said they want a lot of different cultures, so the game should probably also reflect whats the roll of men and woman in these cultures.

[anek]

In "historically misogynist" societies, women were second-class citizens because they're, on average, weaker than men, and thus less capable of defending themselves (thank you, captain!).

But in a fantasy world, where people can develop magical abilities which a) are equally frequent in both sexes and b) make their wielders able to raze a city to the ground... well, they are not so defenseless.

Thus, there is no reason not to treat them with somewhat more respect (of course, non-magic user women may still be subject to abuse, but the core cultural reason such abuse was justified in such societies is men's perceived superiority; and when women have this power, the cultural basis for such beliefs is somewhat diminished).

 

Well, that's what I think, anyway. Feel free to point out any logical fallacies if I'm wrong.

 

No logical fallacies, just an incorrect premise... )

 

Gender inequality in human societies did not arise due to differences in average muscle mass, but rather can be traced back to the simple biological fact that it is not men, but only women who can get pregnant and birth children and breast-feed them while they're young - and that this (pregnancy and child raising) takes a long time.

 

In ancient tribal society, the death rate was very high, so in order to survive, a tribe needed to "employ" every single one of its women for the purposes of producing offspring and put a lot of effort into keeping them safe as precious "property" of the tribe. Men, on the other hand, were much more expendable and could thus be "deployed" as hunters, gatherers and warriors where they would get killed easily.

 

Over generations, this became very ingrained into the fabric of most cultures. For women, it meant that while their lives were highly valued and protected, they were given almost no choice about how to live it. For men, the opposite: They got much more decision power and could make more varied experiences and achieve more personal "dignity" - however, their lives were given little value and they were sent to their deaths by the thousands (and later, millions) without much consideration in dangerous jobs and brutal wars.

 

This duality is also why characterizing those societies with the catchphrase "misogynist" (direct translation: "hating women"), does not really provide an accurate and full picture. But I digress.

 

Anyhow, nowadays the basis for social gender inequality described above no longer applies: Advances in medicine and nutrition and technology and economics and politics allow societies to survive even with few pregnancies, and allow women to contribute to society in any imaginable way even during pregnancies and after.

 

However, it is still propagated through cultural norms to some extend. And again, it still goes both ways:

• In various circumstances even today, women find themselves having less options and less of a say than men, and being objectified as sex objects.
  
  • Objectification of women in films and games - the topic of this thread - is one example.
    
  • I don't think I need to give more example, this theme is thoroughly covered in the media and on the Internet.
    

• In various circumstances even today, men find their sexuality, their presence, their bodily integrity, and their lives being valued less than those of women.
  
  • Look at pretty much any product of Wester pop culture... While female sexuality is idolized and portrayed as beautiful and valuable, heterosexual male sexuality is only ever portrayed in one of two ways: As something to be feared (rape etc.), or as something to be ridiculed.
    
  • Menial and exhausting jobs that ensure an earlier-than-average death are still almost exclusively performed by men.
    
  • The "Women and children first" protocol in life-or-death situations has more or less survived into the present day.
    
  • We are taught to feel outrage about violence against women, and indifference about violence against men ("boys don't cry"). You can do a simple self-test: When watching TV, look for 1) a scene in which a woman slaps a man in the face, and then b) a scene in which a man slaps a woman in the face, and note your impulsive emotional reaction. In my case it is this: a) "Meh, maybe he deserved it." b) "[shock].. Ah wait, they're just actors [Heart rate slows down again]". Why? I can't help it. This is how we have been raised in today's societies.
    

What does this all have to to with Project Eternity?

 

One of the (honorable) functions that art can have is to bring attention to, or reflect on, pertinent social issues - and this of course includes the aforementioned modern remnant of prehistoric gender inequality.

But it has to be the artist's choice to do so - it needs to fit in with his ideas for the particular work of art in question. And it simply doesn't always make sense.

 

Bullying artists into superficial "political correctness", especially when pursuing a very one-sided and ideologized perspective of the issue in question (like in my opinion Anita Sarkeesian and others are doing), is not helpful in any way.

Edited September 23, 2012 by anek

[lord of flies]

Nevertheless, for me that video is pretty fringe because....well wtf I can't make sense of it.

It's just really bad feminism. It's the kind of thing that I would post if I was trolling as a pretend feminist: all the language, none of the comprehension or relevance.

[novander]

What does this all have to to with Project Eternity?

 

One of the (honorable) functions that art can have is to bring attention to, or reflect on, pertinent social issues - and this of course includes the aforementioned modern remnant of prehistoric gender inequality.

But is has to be the artist's choice do so - it needs to fit in with his ideas for the particular work of art in question. And it simply doesn't always make sense.

And with that, Anek found a sensible middle ground and won the thread.

[Dragoonlordz]

 

But is has to be the artist's choice do so - it needs to fit in with his ideas for the particular work of art in question. And it simply doesn't always make sense.

 

Bullying artists into superficial "political correctness", especially when pursuing a very one-sided and ideologized perspective of the issue in question (like in my opinion Anita Sarkeesian and others are doing), is not helpful in any way.

 

 

I agree with this.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Dragoonlordz

[Gurkog]

I don't see how anyone who has played any of Obsidian's games can be worried about them treating women unfairly. They are marvelous crafters of stories in games. I didn't think this topic needed to be discussed.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Gurkog

[walkir]

Nah, save us the forced feminism.^^

[Giantevilhead]

For all the people saying that they don't want this kind of thing in "fantasy" or a "game," why not? Why is OK for entertainment and games to deal with other issues of politics, culture, philosophy, and science but this subject is excluded? And why are you against the people who are pushing for this subject to be included in the games? When someone starts topic about wanting to include issues of ethics, metaphysics, different cultures in the world, the nature of a man, etc., in the game, no one goes in there and says, "stop pushing your agenda on the developers, let them put what they want in the game." No one in this topic is forcing the developers to do anything, any more than the people in the topic about how they want intelligent evil choices are forcing the developers to implement those ideas.

 

And it's easy to be OK with the status quo when you aren't being negatively affected. Privileged people have the erroneous belief that everyone has those same privileges and that attempts to achieve greater equality are attempts to gain an unfair advantage over them. It's just like when white men in America complain about how there's a Black History Month and a Women History Month and a Hispanic History Month, etc. but there's no White Men History Month. They simply don't see that the society itself constantly celebrates the achievements of white men and that the history of America being taught in schools focuses mainly on the history of white men.

[Badmojo]

<snip>

 

Actually, I pointed out there is nothing wrong with targeting a particular group to cater too because there isn't. Trying to cater to everyone is a recipe for disaster, you simply cannot please everyone nor should you.

 

"Women don't play RPGs, so there's no need to make RPGs that (contain features which) cater to women."

 

Go back in time a little bit, and this becomes :

 

"Women don't read books, so there's no need to write books that (contains elements which) cater to women."

 

"Women don't do activity X, so there's no need for activity X to cater listen to the concerns of women."

 

I don't want to prolong the point, but really, THIS is one of the reasons why yes, you should try to cater to women. They're 50% of the population, after all, and perhaps once more women has figured out that they don't have to like barbies because all games for girls are about barbies and Babysittingz, RPGs might find a new market, sell more, and we might be in less of a predicament where 90% of games are made solely---not just cater---to the whims of teenaged males. Older, wiser males benefit, too! Opening genres up to women has led to diversification of said genre through the ages, while closing off a genre tends to simplify it to a greater degree. It's got to start SOMEWHERE.

 

See this is the other examples I hate. Oh, we are supressing women by not making them anything but equel in EVERY piece of work. Regardless if its real or fictional. Then we have the argument that opening up games will have more women interested in it...um, games are already open to women. There are whole gaming sections that are dedicated to it, in fact there are gaming groups that only make games for women. Now, the argument that if rpgs were more open to women they will magically come is just silly. I see this argument used in every debate like this and its nothing more than wishful thinking. There are more women playing hardcore games, but not by much, until we get some real numbers its debatable. However, I love that to get these *potential* women players, we have to take stuff away that a lot of *real* old school players like.

[licketysplit]

Yes, lets make sure they're politically correct on this.

 

*gags*

Edited September 23, 2012 by licketysplit

[JadedWolf]

Hey, maybe this time it's a Prince in need of rescuing instead of the princess! Yes? No? Maybe..?

 

Yes! Like in Monty Python and the Holy Grail!

[Dragoonlordz]

For all the people saying that they don't want this kind of thing in "fantasy" or a "game," why not? Why is OK for entertainment and games to deal with other issues of politics, culture, philosophy, and science but this subject is excluded? And why are you against the people who are pushing for this subject to be included in the games? When someone starts topic about wanting to include issues of ethics, metaphysics, different cultures in the world, the nature of a man, etc., in the game, no one goes in there and says, "stop pushing your agenda on the developers, let them put what they want in the game." No one in this topic is forcing the developers to do anything, any more than the people in the topic about how they want intelligent evil choices are forcing the developers to implement those ideas.

 

And it's easy to be OK with the status quo when you aren't being negatively affected. Privileged people have the erroneous belief that everyone has those same privileges and that attempts to achieve greater equality are attempts to gain an unfair advantage over them. It's just like when white men in America complain about how there's a Black History Month and a Women History Month and a Hispanic History Month, etc. but there's no White Men History Month. They simply don't see that the society itself constantly celebrates the achievements of white men and that the history of America being taught in schools focuses mainly on the history of white men.

 

If you want to make a game that makes a political statement, force your view of right and wrong on the world (whatever the aspect is) then more power to you. But you should not be bullying or trying to force other developers and every game into furthering your own political and social agenda. If you want to make something for that yourself then do so, but this game is not a tool of your political and social panderings.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Dragoonlordz