[QUOTE=Dori;40937003][img]http://fi.somethingawful.com/safs/smilies/2/0/biotruths.001.gif[/img]
heterosexuality is not the One True Sexuality[/QUOTE]
It is if you believe life is built for reproduction as it's final goal. BUT, you could also consider that we have gained significant intellectual gains that grows our wants and needs past simple sexual reproduction. However, sexual selection occurs in homosexuality as well.
I posted this a while back on a different thread but I feel it applies to the whole "biotruths" discussion.
What people don't understand is that "genetically hardwired" traits (aka instinct) are not nearly as big a factor when making choices as you guys seem to think. No gene changes behavior on it's own, genes are just part of the story, and not nearly as influential as our environment ([URL="http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/behavior.shtml#influence"]source[/URL]).
Our instincts influence our actions every day, but that doesn't mean we should embrace them fully and be dominated by them. We are not just animals. Like it's been said countless, countless times, we humans have evolved past purely animalistic behavior and have built complex social systems based around concepts that are sometimes in conflict with our instinct (i.e. altruism vs. self preservation).
What I'm saying, basically, is that even if we were to accept that both sexes have differentiated "built-in" psychological traits and whatnot (something for which no significant empirical evidence has been found and is contradicted daily for the simple fact that many men and women do not follow that supposedly built-in, genetically hardwired gender programming), they are irrelevant in a modern society based around the concepts of personal freedom and equality.
It simply doesn't matter.
[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;40937025]We are not just animals. Like it's been said countless, countless times, we humans have evolved past purely animalistic behavior and have built complex social systems based around concepts that are sometimes in conflict with our instinct (i.e. altruism vs. self preservation).
[/QUOTE]
All these go out the window in events that truly matter. Life and death decisions, catastrophes, ect. The ease of simple life has toned down our instincts but they are ALWAYS there, a framework for our basic survival. This is starting to get a little detached form the subject, but society really is holding instinct back. Without a society, how much rape and violence towards women do you think there would be? A ton.
Video games and media aren't those events so that's not really a point towards anything relevant though.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;40937059]Video games and media aren't those events so that's not really a point towards anything relevant though.[/QUOTE]
but it has everything to do with it! We play video games to do things that we can't do in society. Get in life or death shoot-outs, travel to exotic places and survive all odds. It's appealing to the instincts we can't experience in real life without danger and consequences. And that's why video games try to apply to the MALE instincts, over the female. Demographic.
sure the SIMS are fun for both genders, but females I know who play video games tend to play that type of game. Why? What is the female instinct?
At this point, I'm saying this isn't a matter of what's right or wrong. It's a matter of "it is what it is because _____" and I truly believe it wont change for a very, very, long time.
[QUOTE=Glitchman;40937078]but it has everything to do with it! We play video games to do things that we can't do in society. Get in life or death shoot-outs, travel to exotic places and survive all odds. It's appealing to the instincts we can't experience in real life without danger and consequences. And that's why video games try to apply to the MALE instincts, over the female. Demographic.[/QUOTE]
The only video game that invoked any sort of instinct in me was Penumbra and for that matter Amnesia.
Are you saying then that the Cooking Mama games appeal to women?
[QUOTE=Glitchman;40937047]All these go out the window in events that truly matter. Life and death decisions, catastrophes, ect. The ease of simple life has toned down our instincts but they are ALWAYS there, a framework for our basic survival.[/QUOTE]
If that's really the case why do people help eachother in catastrophes while their own lives are in danger? Doesn't this go against our base instincts? Why do we decide not to bash someone's head in after making us angry? Instinct is a but a suggestion, not this dormant machine-like "command" you make it up to be. There's no gene that tells men "guns are cool" or one that tells women "you like pink stuff."
No one human being is the same, and instinct doesn't have the same influence in all of us. And even then, this isn't a matter of life and death, this is a matter of what is fair and what isn't. Instinct has no say on that.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;40937102]The only video game that invoked any sort of instinct in me was Penumbra and for that matter Amnesia.
Are you saying then that the Cooking Mama games appeal to women?[/QUOTE]
exactly. but as I said in my first post, it isn't black or white. If all women were forced to play games, the majority would enjoy the SIMs or something more than Call of Duty, just as more males would enjoy Call of Duty over the SIMs, but there would be overlap
[editline]7th June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;40937110]If that's really the case why do people help eachother in catastrophes while their own lives are in danger? Doesn't this go against our base instincts? Why do we decide not to bash someone's head in after making us angry? Instinct is a but a suggestion, not this dormant machine-like "command" you make it up to be. There's no gene that tells men "guns are cool" or one that tells women "you like pink stuff."
No one human being is the same, and instinct doesn't have the same influence in all of us. And even then, this isn't a matter of life and death, this is a matter of what is fair and what isn't. Instinct has no say on that.[/QUOTE]
because this stuff wouldn't help us survive. We help each other due to instinct as well!
[QUOTE=Glitchman;40937117]exactly. but as I said in my first post, it isn't black or white. If all women were forced to play games, the majority would enjoy the SIMs or something more than Call of Duty, just as more males would enjoy Call of Duty over the SIMs, but there would be overlap[/QUOTE]
wow it's almost as if a person's personality and preferences are dependent on environmental factors and not biotruth instinctual bullshit
[QUOTE=Dori;40937147]wow it's almost as if a person's personality and preferences are dependent on environmental factors and not biotruth instinctual bullshit[/QUOTE]
Not really? You ever hear about that study where they gave really young children, from birth, the opposite gender's toys? Boys got dolls and such, and girls got cars and trucks.
What happened?
The boys played with the toys as you'd expecting, smashing them together and making them fight or go on adventure or whatnot, and the girls lined up all the cars in neat rows and took care of them. almost like... children?
and here's the real big thing: I'm not even really taking sides on this issue. I want women to be equal, have equal opportunities, equal pay, ect. but there are some things we can't change, and will never be able to, [b]because we are different[/b] and these difference should be celebrated in an equal way, because we are all special, and all human. But once things get so nit-picky that all things (like our video games or art) are criticized for appealing to a certain gender, I get upset. Certain things are designed for men to like and women to like. Video games are having more and more games females enjoy, but there will always be games designed for and by men.
So don't make me out as a bad guy just because of my perspective on why things are the way they are. I love women, have many female friends and wonderful girlfriend, and would never want to see them mistreated or treated un-equally because they are women.
This is a lot like the game 'Insert Name Here'
there's two options, if you're a male or a female. If you go in male. It lets you go. If you're female. It sends you into a pit and you have to restart.
[QUOTE=Glitchman;40937190]The boys played with the toys as you'd expecting, smashing them together and making them fight or go on adventure or whatnot, and the girls lined up all the cars in neat rows and took care of them. almost like... children?[/QUOTE]
this study doesn't mean shit if the children weren't kept in completely insular conditions for the entire study because the moment the test started they were going to have societal influences bombarding them from every direction
giving a girl an action man isn't going to mean shit if by the time she's conscious (or, arguably, even before that) she lives in a home where mum is cooking and dad is a builder and rides a motorcycle at the weekend
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;40937330]this study doesn't mean shit if the children weren't kept in completely insular conditions for the entire study because the moment the test started they were going to have societal influences bombarding them from every direction
giving a girl an action man isn't going to mean shit if by the time she's conscious (or, arguably, even before that) she lives in a home where mum is cooking and dad is a builder and rides a motorcycle at the weekend[/QUOTE]
But even then, why was her mother cooking and her dad a builder in the first place? this all had to come from somewhere. Didn't mean for this to be a smart-ass response, just a critical question.
[QUOTE=Glitchman;40937374]But even then, why was her mother cooking and her dad a builder in the first place? this all had to come from somewhere.[/QUOTE]
those are patriarchal societal standards. they have absolutely no biological basis
[QUOTE=Glitchman;40937374]But even then, why was her mother cooking and her dad a builder in the first place? this all had to come from somewhere[/QUOTE]
the last 4000 years of society?
[QUOTE=Glitchman;40937374]But even then, why was her mother cooking and her dad a builder in the first place? this all had to come from somewhere. Didn't mean for this to be a smart-ass response, just a critical question.[/QUOTE]
You really should read Dr. Gestapo's post that he had on the last page.
[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;40937025]I posted this a while back on a different thread but I feel it applies to the whole "biotruths" discussion.
What people don't understand is that "genetically hardwired" traits (aka instinct) are not nearly as big a factor when making choices as you guys seem to think. No gene changes behavior on it's own, genes are just part of the story, and not nearly as influential as our environment ([URL="http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/behavior.shtml#influence"]source[/URL]).
Our instincts influence our actions every day, but that doesn't mean we should embrace them fully and be dominated by them. We are not just animals. Like it's been said countless, countless times, we humans have evolved past purely animalistic behavior and have built complex social systems based around concepts that are sometimes in conflict with our instinct (i.e. altruism vs. self preservation).
What I'm saying, basically, is that even if we were to accept that both sexes have differentiated "built-in" psychological traits and whatnot (something for which no significant empirical evidence has been found and is contradicted daily for the simple fact that many men and women do not follow that supposedly built-in, genetically hardwired gender programming), they are irrelevant in a modern society based around the concepts of personal freedom and equality.
It simply doesn't matter.[/QUOTE]
Woah watch out Glitchman I'm about to throw a curveball
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Ramsay"]Male chefs[/URL]
[URL="http://www.mndaily.com/2012/06/06/female-construction-workers-prove-themselves-%E2%80%98man%E2%80%99s-field%E2%80%99"]Female builders[/URL]
Weird huh
[QUOTE=Protocol7;40937426]Woah watch out Glitchman I'm about to throw a curveball
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Ramsay"]Male chefs[/URL]
[URL="http://www.mndaily.com/2012/06/06/female-construction-workers-prove-themselves-%E2%80%98man%E2%80%99s-field%E2%80%99"]Female builders[/URL]
Weird huh[/QUOTE]
their biology is obviously fucked and they're a useless waste of potential to procreate
protocol euthanise initiated
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;40937442]their biology is obviously fucked and they're a useless waste of potential to procreate
protocol euthanise initiated[/QUOTE]
no they're transvestites and/or crossdressers
[I]~biotruths~[/I]
[QUOTE=Glitchman;40937117]exactly. but as I said in my first post, it isn't black or white. If all women were forced to play games, the majority would enjoy the SIMs or something more than Call of Duty, just as more males would enjoy Call of Duty over the SIMs, but there would be overlap
[editline]7th June 2013[/editline]
because this stuff wouldn't help us survive. We help each other due to instinct as well![/QUOTE]
Well, you've already made up you mind, nothing I say will change it at this point.
But just let me say one thing. Almost everyone in Facepunch has said that the gaming industry has been going downhill, that it's in stagnation and that it primarily keeps producing the same cookie cutter games over and over for the sake of profiting over the lowest common denominator. Do we not want to change this? Do we not want better games?
We don't criticize sexism in the gaming industry because we hate videogames or because we think the developers are sexist, but because just like you, we love videogames and it's extremely disheartening to see an industry that is in complete stagnation and that still relies on extremely old, stereotyped cheap tricks to appeal to it's customers and makes potential developers turn away from it as a result.
Saying that "it won't change in a very long time" is just conforming and validating what the industry is currently doing, when we should be demanding a more creative and diverse medium that doesn't alienate it's userbase. We shouldn't turn away from critical discussion that aims to improve things, just as we shouldn't shun criticism after we've revealed a finished work of art to the public.
Like I said before, there isn't a wrong way to go about dealing with this issue as long as we're all willing to compromise. Developers can band together and make games that will make a difference, and everyone else can use their ability to think critically to think of ways how to improve games as a whole, as long as we are willing to listen to those critiques and not dismiss them as just "bitching." This is how art works.
In the end, by embracing critical thought and creating a demand for better games, everyone wins. This is why it's all the more painful when any sort of criticism (especially if it concerns sexism in the industry) is met with such hostility from the very people who claim to love videogames and want them to be considered as an art form (which they are!). Even if you don't think men are women are the same, even if you think that we're hardwired to like different things, at least accept that we need those critical voices to be heard for the sake of the art form that we all enjoy.
Well, that's my pretentious spiel. Sorry if it's a bit long.
[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;40937499]Well, you've already made up you mind, nothing I say will change it at this point.
But just let me say one thing. Almost everyone in Facepunch has said that the gaming industry has been going downhill, that it's in stagnation and that it primarily keeps producing the same cookie cutter games over and over for the sake of profiting over the lowest common denominator. Do we not want to change this? Do we not want better games?
We don't criticize sexism in the gaming industry because we hate videogames or because we think the developers are sexist, but because just like you, we love videogames and it's extremely disheartening to see an industry that is in complete stagnation and that still relies on extremely old, stereotyped cheap tricks to appeal to it's customers and makes potential developers turn away from it as a result.
Saying that "it won't change in a very long time" is just conforming and validating what the industry is currently doing, when we should be demanding a more creative and diverse medium that doesn't alienate it's userbase. We shouldn't turn away from critical discussion that aims to improve things, just as we shouldn't shun criticism after we've revealed a finished work of art to the public.
Like I said before, there isn't a wrong way to go about dealing with this issue as long as we're all willing to compromise. Developers can band together and make games that will make a difference, and everyone else can use their ability to think critically to think of ways how to improve games as a whole, as long as we are willing to listen to those critiques and not dismiss them as just "bitching." This is how art works.
In the end, by embracing critical thought and creating a demand for better games, everyone wins. This is why it's all the more painful when any sort of criticism (especially if it concerns sexism in the industry) is met with such hostility from the very people who claim to love videogames and want them to be considered as an art form (which they are!). Even if you don't think men are women are the same, even if you think that we're hardwired to like different things, at least accept that we need those critical voices to be heard for the sake of the art form that we all enjoy.
Well, that's my pretentious spiel. Sorry if it's a bit long.[/QUOTE]
well I took the time to read it, and I have to say I appreciate your point of view, and although I don't 100% agree I definitely agree with you on more things than not.
I just get irritated and defensive when people throw the ~biotruths~ things out at me, especially when I'm not using that logic to stir controversy or anti-women stuff. Just trying to throw out my perspective, that's all. I don't really strongly disagree with any of you.
nice debating with y'all as always :)
[QUOTE=Glitchman;40937620]well I took the time to read it, and I have to say I appreciate your point of view, and although I don't 100% agree I definitely agree with you on more things than not.
I just get irritated and defensive when people throw the ~biotruths~ things out at me, especially when I'm not using that logic to stir controversy or anti-women stuff. Just trying to throw out my perspective, that's all. I don't really strongly disagree with any of you.
nice debating with y'all as always :)[/QUOTE]
I appreciate that you took the time look at things differently.
About the biotruths thing, though, I do agree that sometimes it does get thrown around with little elaboration, but consider this: let's say that you're right, and that both sexes have this built-in gender programming. Do we just tell a person "These are things you like, these are the jobs you're gonna take, it's in your DNA" or do we give them a choice?
Millions of men and women everywhere challenge this alleged "gender programming" everyday, in the career paths they choose, the things they like, the way they behave, etc. Do we just pretend those people don't exist? Don't you think we should make it easier for them to do what they want to do?
The ballet dancer should be able to practice his art without being branded as a "fag" or being ostracized, just as the game developer should be able to practice hers without being degraded by her peers. Everyone should have an equal chance to succeed in whatever it is they decide to do, regardless of their race, sexuality, gender or whatever.
That's what I mean when I say "biotruths" shouldn't matter, if they turn out to be true, we should definitely acknowledge them, but we shouldn't use them as a way to justify inequality.
[editline]:v:[/editline]
ok now that's my last post i swear :v:
[QUOTE=Nikita;40933400]Boobies on the wind~[/QUOTE]
You called?
[IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66313298/lel/Boobs%20flapping%20in%20the%20wind.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;40931316]Words.[/QUOTE]
Why are you so angry?
I found his view on the whole subject to be the best one put forward so far.
[QUOTE=Vedicardi;40936201]1. "making shit up" [/QUOTE]
He said "impossible", maddox did not, hence making shit up.
[QUOTE=Vedicardi;40936201]that's ridiculous to assume a female could writer a female character better than a male by nature regardless of situation. That is completely subjective. however, writing is not the only thing that keeps women away from certain games, etc, it is much larger than just the character writing.[/QUOTE]
How is it ridiculous to assume? Men and women have different experiences throughout their lives and sometimes we can't fully relate. It's much easier for a man to write a male oriented story and for a woman to write female oriented story. Same way it's gonna be easier for a soldier to write a story about a life of a soldier than for someone who has never been in a war no? There's no nature here, just different experiences.
[QUOTE=Vedicardi;40936201]2. YOU are missing the point that there are not enough female game designers to facilitate said change, that's why there are so many games targeted towards men! It's a problem with the industry. THAT is why we need to encourage girls to make and play games, because there are not enough to continue encouraging this growth.
3. he does understand that, and once again look at point two. To "get" more female gamers we need games designed by females for females.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't work like that. You can't have supply before demand. First there need to be more people asking for well written females, female oriented and gender neutral stories for devs to make those games. There is no problem with the industry, there's a large demand for male oriented stories and they fulfill it. It's exactly what it has to be to get most profit. If you want to change the industry, there has to be a demand for something else.
my point is you need BOTH SUPPLY AND DEMAND. You can't just say "people aren't asking for it!" or "girls don't want to play games" when there aren't any made or tailored to them for them to play. Of course they aren't asking for it! They aren't aware it is an enjoyable form of media because they have not been properly exposed to it and there is no content in the medium properly developed for them!
Obviously it's "EASIER" for a man to write a male character but to say one can do better than the other based solely on their gender is absurd. A solider might write a more ACCURATE story about a war but that doesn't necessarily mean it will be told in a way that is as entertaining or in a way that feels as honest as an author by trade could.
I skimmed through the 5 pages of comments, and feel like writing a little something something..
bear with me a second-
The old and widespread meaning of the term patriarchy is 'model of society in which the power is held by adult men' (Source- wikipedia)
In feminist theory, patriarchy is a 'culture in which men and masculinity are valued above women and femininity'. (Source- America on Film-Glossary)
While one could, in a way, argue that the western modern society is patriarchal in the new meaning of the term (many traits our culture relates to femininity, as impulsiveness amd emotiveness, are considered negative in most occasions) I dare anyone say that the western world is patriarchal in the former meaning of the term, as of the woman and children belong to the man as possesions and cannot question his will.
This of course can, did and will lead to misunderstandings even here on fp. I wrote this because I saw you debate over terms from a linguistic point of view, but didn't come to an agreement. Well- the misunderstanding lies on a deeper, hard-as-rocket-science basis: communication. 'My meaning of the term is not your meaning of the term thus the message you are trying to convey in the way you percieve it will never reach me, not even if I try as hard as I can to listen to you without projecting onto you my previous negative experiences on the matter'. and I'm not talking about anyone here, It's just how it works!
I feel a little inadequate as I write this, I hope the language wall won't hinder me and that this will be as constructive to you as it has been to me, even if watered down to just a post.
you're a cool guy lapsus (srs)
[QUOTE=Vedicardi;40939947]my point is you need BOTH SUPPLY AND DEMAND. You can't just say "people aren't asking for it!" or "girls don't want to play games" when there aren't any made or tailored to them for them to play. Of course they aren't asking for it! They aren't aware it is an enjoyable form of media because they have not been properly exposed to it and there is no content in the medium properly developed for them![/QUOTE]
You get supply when there's demand. That's how it works. If there's money to earn, people will supply the product. The market just isn't big enough for female oriented or gender neutral stories to be produced one after another. Get more people demanding that, you'll get more of it.
[QUOTE=Vedicardi;40939947]Obviously it's "EASIER" for a man to write a male character but to say one can do better than the other based solely on their gender is absurd. A solider might write a more ACCURATE story about a war but that doesn't necessarily mean it will be told in a way that is as entertaining or in a way that feels as honest as an author by trade could.[/QUOTE]
Sigh. If a story is supposed to be female oriented, women have to be able to relate to the story. It's gonna be much easier to write a story that women can relate to for a woman that it would be for a man. How entertaining or well written the story will be is a different manner. And I told you, which you seem to have missed, it's not based on what we have between our legs or some biotruths, it's based on how different the experiences men and women have, that's what the soldier example was supposed to show you. Different experiences. It's easier for women to relate to female oriented story than to male oriented story, and so is writing one that can be related to by other women. Of course women will do better in that aspect when it comes to female oriented stories.
the market isn't big enough? You don't know anything about economics if that is what you believe, frankly.
and again, females will relate to a female story more, I'm saying a woman does not have to write said female oriented story for it to be good, and I KNOW that it's "easier" for a women to right about women I already agreed with you on that. did you even read the post?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
