British teaching unions say sexism is culturally maintained by women themselves. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;40125904]The characters you named aren't oversexualized and are decent characters though. No one is saying a character being attractive = bad character. Sexualization by itself isn't bad, it becomes a problem when the character is poorly written and uninteresting so the developers sexualize the hell out of it just to make the player pay attention to them (i.e. Bayonetta, Lollipop Chainsaw, etc). I wouldn't list the player character in Fallout/Elder Scrolls though, since the character's gender is purely cosmetical.[/QUOTE] Sure, it's cosmetic. But still - you have the choice of playing a character that is literally equal to her male counterpart, and can do absolutely everything that the male character can without fail. The same goes for almost any other open-world game: Saints Row, Mass Effect. It makes literally no difference in the writing. I mean, if you're actively searching for sexism in female characters, you'll find it. "The Thief in Trine is only a thief because these misogynist pigs think that women will steal everything! Even though her character only has small snippets of dialogue throughout the whole game, it's just reinforcing the patriarchy. Disgusting." "Alyx has an advantage over the male characters in the Half-Life universe. All the males are sterile! The writers put that in to say that females can only have power if males are deprived of their masculinity and therefore their oppressive ability! They're saying males are inherently better!" See? You'll invent something if you look hard enough.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;40125946]one of the many reasons faith is a good example of an attractive female lead that didn't exist solely for the sake of sex appeal[/QUOTE] faith is a good example but "if she was a man it would be the same" can be an issue because you sometimes get this "men with boobs" character issue where a female-driven character that appeals to women wasn't written at all, they just changed a character model and part of the script to shoehorn a "strong" woman into the game see: gears of war

[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;40126007]faith is a good example but "if she was a man it would be the same" can be an issue because you sometimes get this "men with boobs" character issue where a female-driven character that appeals to women wasn't written at all, they just changed a character model and part of the script to shoehorn a "strong" woman into the game see: gears of war[/QUOTE] That can be an issue, but for any well-written character it's a non-issue. Gears of War suffers from shitty character syndrome. Chell? Could be a male. Gordon never talks, could be a female. Faith's another example. Hell, even characters with slight romantic interests could change genders and you just have an LGBT relationship and who gives a damn. That's why I mentioned games where gender is a cosmetic choice rather than a true character - you actually CAN choose a gender and have zero impact on the game. Both are equal. If Skyrim gave you a -10 to Strength gender ability or something, sure, complain, that's bullshit. They don't. They're equal.

i don't really see the point of using gordan and chell as examples because they're not characters they're just avatars for the player but i agree with your point edit: although both of those rpgs have the issue that the character design isn't as neutral: the women get more form-fitting armour (or even much skimpier in the case of skyrim) with boob shapes n stuff (which are proven to actually be incredibly dangerous!)

[QUOTE=.Isak.;40126004]"The Thief in Trine is only a thief because these misogynist pigs think that women will steal everything! Even though her character only has small snippets of dialogue throughout the whole game, it's just reinforcing the patriarchy. Disgusting." "Alyx has an advantage over the male characters in the Half-Life universe. All the males are sterile! The writers put that in to say that females can only have power if males are deprived of their masculinity and therefore their oppressive ability! They're saying males are inherently better!" See? You'll invent something if you look hard enough.[/QUOTE] I find both of those rather unconvincing to be honest.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;40126067]I find both of those rather unconvincing to be honest.[/QUOTE] That was the point.

Like I said, I was never really defending Bayonetta's over-sexualization or even intending to base my whole argument solely on her. I used her and her over-sexualization on purpose to show you that you have a counter-productive bias. Is she needlessly sexualized, sure, but that aside she is a great character which is strong smart independent and likable, which you lot seem to be ignoring, or in some cases admitting that you have no knowledge of her character other than her appearance, and so you are judging her based solely on that. And you lot definitely blew that whole experiment out of the water by supporting my theory at every turn, evading the actual character and judging her appearance, coming up with other characters that are "better" simply because they look different or aren't as prominent, and applying double standards to characters based on sex. This is not a hard concept.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;40126077]That was the point.[/QUOTE] Then you didn't 'invent something if you look hard enough'.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;40126004]Sure, it's cosmetic. But still - you have the choice of playing a character that is literally equal to her male counterpart, and can do absolutely everything that the male character can without fail. The same goes for almost any other open-world game: Saints Row, Mass Effect. It makes literally no difference in the writing. I mean, if you're actively searching for sexism in female characters, you'll find it. "The Thief in Trine is only a thief because these misogynist pigs think that women will steal everything! Even though her character only has small snippets of dialogue throughout the whole game, it's just reinforcing the patriarchy. Disgusting." "Alyx has an advantage over the male characters in the Half-Life universe. All the males are sterile! The writers put that in to say that females can only have power if males are deprived of their masculinity and therefore their oppressive ability! They're saying males are inherently better!" See? You'll invent something if you look hard enough.[/QUOTE] I'm not disagreeing dude. I was just saying that you were arguing against something nobody said. That an attractive character = an overly sexualized character. That is not true. I just mentioned Fallout/TES because I don't think the player character could even be considered a character. They're just "suits" for the player to get in.

[QUOTE=Pretty Obscure;40126079]Like I said, I was never really defending Bayonetta's over-sexualization or even intending to base my whole argument solely on her. I used her and her over-sexualization on purpose to show you that you have a counter-productive bias. Is she needlessly sexualized, sure, but that aside she is a great character which is strong smart independent and likable, which you lot seem to be ignoring, or in some cases admitting that you have no knowledge of her character other than her appearance, and so you are judging her based solely on that. And you lot definitely blew that whole experiment out of the water by supporting my theory at every turn, evading the actual character and judging her appearance, coming up with other characters that are "better" simply because they look different or aren't as prominent, and applying double standards to characters based on sex. This is not a hard concept.[/QUOTE] well i didn't have anything to go off other than some gameplay footage i watched and what she looks like but your point still seems really silly to me because, and i may be interpreting you wrongly, but it seems like you're having a go at me for not looking past the surface of bayonetta and not understanding her as a person, as though that makes me sexist, even though she is a fictional character created by men and that her appearance was obviously of huge importance to the men who created her yeh it'd be awful of me to judge a person based on what they look like (but let's face it absolutely everyone does this and in a lot of ways it only makes sense to because what else are you gonna go off at first) but this isn't a real person: she was created for a purpose. the same argument of "you should be ignoring what she looks like" doesn't apply at all because she was created to be looked at

[QUOTE=Pretty Obscure;40126079]Like I said, I was never really defending Bayonetta's over-sexualization or even intending to base my whole argument solely on her. I used her and her over-sexualization on purpose to show you that you have a counter-productive bias. Is she needlessly sexualized, sure, but that aside she is a great character which is strong smart independent and likable, which you lot seem to be ignoring, or in some cases admitting that you have no knowledge of her character other than her appearance, and so you are judging her based solely on that.[/QUOTE] So she's a strong smart independent and likable hypersexualised character. But we're not allowed to be critical of the hypersexuality? Am I missing something?

Why is it that it seems the only people who complain about sexism towards women in video games are overly apologetic men? I've met some female gamers and none of them care even remotely as much as a lot of men online do.

[QUOTE=DinoJesus;40126140]Why is it that it seems the only people who complain about sexism towards women in video games are overly apologetic men? I've met some female gamers and none of them care even remotely as much as a lot of men online do.[/QUOTE] for the same reason a MRA can be married and have kids: women and men are not collective hiveminds, they have their own opinions about genders, their own gender, gender roles and other gender related goodies

[QUOTE=DinoJesus;40126140]Why is it that it seems the only people who complain about sexism towards women in video games are overly apologetic men? I've met some female gamers and none of them care even remotely as much as a lot of men online do.[/QUOTE] You mean men make up the majority of an overly male discourse environment. What a shock this is.

[QUOTE=DinoJesus;40126140]I've met some female gamers and none of them care even remotely as much as a lot of men online do.[/QUOTE] i love this argument. it's as old as feminism or any other issue "i've met some women, and they don't even care!" "i've met some black guys, and they don't even care!" "i've bet some gay people, and they don't even care!" it reminds me of something someone in a sociology class of mine once said: "miss? why are these marxists always finding something to moan about?" oh i guess we should just drop everything and ignore all the sociological and political study and statistics that shows there is an issue with gender-rolls and equal opportunities and expectations of genders because a few middle-class people i've met don't care!

[QUOTE=DinoJesus;40126140]Why is it that it seems the only people who complain about sexism towards women in video games are overly apologetic men? I've met some female gamers and none of them care even remotely as much as a lot of men online do.[/QUOTE] There are men and women who don't care, doesn't mean none of them do. Besides, women who play videogames and are active in gaming communities will rarely speak up about those issues because of the reaction they might get from the male members. Just look at what happened with Anita Sarkessian. It wasn't exactly encouraging, you might say.

[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;40126099]I'm not disagreeing dude. I was just saying that you were arguing against something nobody said. That an attractive character = an overly sexualized character. That is not true. I just mentioned Fallout/TES because I don't think the player character could even be considered a character. They're just "suits" for the player to get in.[/QUOTE] Fair enough. However, they do have dialogue. I could understand that argument for the typical Valve character, especially. Gordon and Chell are literally suits with little characterization. Valve still manages to make them appear as characters through situational magic though. Skyrim and Fallout, yeah, less so. And NoDachi, I didn't say that it needed to be convincing. I purposefully exaggerated them to be ridiculous, but you can find a few real life examples that are similar. There were people complaining that the new Lara Croft has apparently oversized tits. They ignored any and all aspects of her character, and focused immediately on the fact that she has slightly large breasts, which isn't even true when you compare it to the old Lara Croft's head-sized shit. If anything, it's more sexist to come up with these complaints rather than accept the fact that the character is a damn excellent character. When people do that, they're focusing on the body and ignoring the personality, which is exactly what sexualization is. It's hypocritical, I guess my point is. The Thief in Trine is obviously not meant to represent women as a whole. It's just a pretty one-sided character that has a few lines of dialogue. Alyx obviously isn't representing that women can only be strong when men are robbed of masculinity. Lara Croft obviously isn't representing that all people care about in video games are tits. My examples were just exaggerated.

[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;40126174]There are men and women who don't care, doesn't mean none of them do. Besides, women who play videogames and are active in gaming communities will rarely speak up about those issues because of the reaction they might get from the male members. Just look at what happened with Anita Sarkessian.[/QUOTE] I mean it almost a legitimate complaint of his, I remember reading a criticism of post-colonial studies which in its self is really deep into that ~liberal humanities~ scene was that in the end it consists of "white men, talking to other white men about black women". Which is a fair comment. But then you look at what happens when the 'subaltern speaks' in the case of Anita. Its quite horrific. [editline]2nd April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=.Isak.;40126241]When people do that, they're focusing on the body and ignoring the personality, which is exactly what sexualization is. It's hypocritical, I guess my point is.[/QUOTE] But you see, in my opinion I don't think its 'hypocritical' when you deconstruct a constructed character. Her personality is just a mirror, its artifice. Or back to Zizek: [I]"It is the servant, therefore, who writes the screenplay—that is, who actually pulls the strings and dictates the activity."[/I]

[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;40126121]well i didn't have anything to go off other than some gameplay footage i watched and what she looks like but your point still seems really silly to me because, and i may be interpreting you wrongly, but it seems like you're having a go at me for not looking past the surface of bayonetta and not understanding her as a person, as though that makes me sexist, even though she is a fictional character created by men and that her appearance was obviously of huge importance to the men who created her yeh it'd be awful of me to judge a person based on what they look like (but let's face it absolutely everyone does this and in a lot of ways it only makes sense to because what else are you gonna go off at first) but this isn't a real person: she was created for a purpose. the same argument of "you should be ignoring what she looks like" doesn't apply at all because she was created to be looked at[/QUOTE] But can't you see that you are only reinforcing what I am saying? "the men who made Bayonetta are sexist as are the people who like her because of how she looks, but I'm not being sexist when I judge her solely based on her appearance, and it's okay for me to judge her only by her looks because she's a made up videogame character, but men that I claim do so are sexist because it is demeaning to women and perpetuates stereotypes because they supposedly only like her for her looks even though they know more about her personality than I do, that is at all." If anyone on the opposite side used those arguments against you, you'd flip your lid.

[QUOTE=Pretty Obscure;40126360]But can't you see that you are only reinforcing what I am saying? "the men who made Bayonetta are sexist as are the people who like her because of how she looks, but I'm not being sexist when I judge her solely based on her appearance, and it's okay for me to judge her only by her looks because she's a made up videogame character, but men that I claim do so are sexist because it is demeaning to women and perpetuates stereotypes because they supposedly only like her for her looks even though they know more about her personality than I do, that is at all." If anyone on the opposite side used those arguments against you, you'd flip your lid.[/QUOTE] hypersexualism is a facet of sexism, and if you seriously can look at those bayonetta pics and not say she is hypersexualized then i don't even know

[QUOTE=NoDachi;40126263] But you see, in my opinion I don't think its 'hypocritical' when you deconstruct a constructed character.[/QUOTE] I think that sexualizing a character that was not created as a sexualized character is just reaching for straws. It's stupid for someone to say that sexualization in video games reinforces sexualization in culture, and then have that someone proceed to deconstruct an obviously non-sexualized character in order to point out some obscure way that it could be sexualized. If the character isn't sexualized, you're MAKING her sexualized by inventing ways that she could be. It's part of the problem. Really, I really wouldn't have even thought about Lara Croft's tits other than a passing glance until I read a blog post saying "LOOK AT HER TITS SEE HOW THEY'RE MARGINALLY LARGER THAN AVERAGE LOOK AT THEM IT'S SEXUALIZATION THIS IS THE PROBLEM." The same goes for most non-blatantly-sexualized character. I mean, if I see the Lollipop Chainsaw character or Bayonetta, it's completely obvious that they were meant to be pandering to the male audience. Deconstructing a non-sexualized character is literally inventing sexualization and contributing to the problem.

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;40126385]hypersexualism is a facet of sexism, and if you seriously can look at those bayonetta pics and not say she is hypersexualized then i don't even know[/QUOTE] See... [QUOTE=Pretty Obscure;40126079]Like I said, I was never really defending Bayonetta's over-sexualization or even intending to base my whole argument solely on her. I used her and her over-sexualization on purpose to show you that you have a counter-productive bias. Is she needlessly sexualized, sure, but that aside she is a great character which is strong smart independent and likable, which you lot seem to be ignoring, or in some cases admitting that you have no knowledge of her character other than her appearance, and so you are judging her based solely on that. And you lot definitely blew that whole experiment out of the water by supporting my theory at every turn, evading the actual character and judging her appearance, coming up with other characters that are "better" simply because they look different or aren't as prominent, and applying double standards to characters based on sex.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Pretty Obscure;40126411]See...[/QUOTE] except he's criticizing her because of her hypersexualism not the other shit

[QUOTE=DinoJesus;40126140]Why is it that it seems the only people who complain about sexism towards women in video games are overly apologetic men? I've met some female gamers and none of them care even remotely as much as a lot of men online do.[/QUOTE] I can't really speak for all of them, but some I've talked with refused to touch the next-gen/"hardcore" medium since it alienated them. They immediately lose interest when they see "lures" like sexualization. I think that this alienation may cause hardcore gaming to lessen and micro-transaction apps to rise. The same thing happened with Classical and Pop music.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;40126386]I think that sexualizing a character that was not created as a sexualized character is just reaching for straws. It's stupid for someone to say that sexualization in video games reinforces sexualization in culture, and then have that someone proceed to deconstruct an obviously non-sexualized character in order to point out some obscure way that it could be sexualized. If the character isn't sexualized, you're MAKING her sexualized by inventing ways that she could be. It's part of the problem. Really, I really wouldn't have even thought about Lara Croft's tits other than a passing glance until I read a blog post saying "LOOK AT HER TITS SEE HOW THEY'RE MARGINALLY LARGER THAN AVERAGE LOOK AT THEM IT'S SEXUALIZATION THIS IS THE PROBLEM." The same goes for most non-blatantly-sexualized character. I mean, if I see the Lollipop Chainsaw character or Bayonetta, it's completely obvious that they were meant to be pandering to the male audience. Deconstructing a non-sexualized character is literally inventing sexualization and contributing to the problem.[/QUOTE] But we're entering some strange feedback loop here. No one has suggested every female character in the history of fiction has been sexualised. And by suggesting that having discourse on sexualisation in constructed female character (when did we stop talking about real women again heh?) has created this projection that is forcing all characters to therefore be sexualised under the microscope is ironic - because only you have suggested that, as if its something you're trying to create.

[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;40126168]it reminds me of something someone in a sociology class of mine once said: "miss? why are these marxists always finding something to moan about?"[/QUOTE] Probably because every time Marxism is used to interpret anything at all, it somehow confirms Marxism in the process.

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;40126457]except he's criticizing her because of her hypersexualism not the other shit[/QUOTE] Stop bloody focusing on the sexualization, I am not defending it, I am showing all of you how unbelievably hypocritical and shallow you are being.

[QUOTE=Pretty Obscure;40126495]Stop bloody focusing on the sexualization, I am not defending it, I am showing all of you how unbelievably hypocritical and shallow you are being.[/QUOTE] Breaking news: You can't be critical on how females have been presented if they've been given some positive attributes as well. Source: Pretty Obscure.

[QUOTE=Pretty Obscure;40126495]Stop bloody focusing on the sexualization, I am not defending it, I am showing all of you how unbelievably hypocritical and shallow you are being.[/QUOTE] HOW CAN YOU NOT FOCUS ON SEXUALIZATION IF THAT IS THE THING YOU ARE CRITICIZING ABOUT A CHARACTER???? far out!

[QUOTE=Zeke129;40125622]Personality development in games requires linearity, we don't have the processing power to procedurally develop characters yet.[/QUOTE] That's not the point. Valve is fucking bad at making characters appear useful because their usefulness comes from the linear level design. Valve HAS to take control out of the players hands in order for the NPCs to do something for the player, and even then its usually done with some simple device that Gordon's not allowed to use (sometimes for good reasons, others times for really dumb ones). In cutscenes Alyx is usually helpful by having a device that allows her to open doors, and going ahead of the player, causing her to narrowly avoid some obstacle that appears to inconvenience the player who was forced to lag behind, or not being trapped inside/under heavy junk. Her best display was fighting two distracted CPs unarmed (probably taking the stunstick from one). On the other hand many roadblocks and setbacks come from her being prioritized over Gordon in important situations for ambiguous reasons, and needing protection due to her refusal to use a better weapon than the one she has. EP2 stands out most, however, due to the fact that your extremely critical mission where the only important thing is getting some data to a certian location gets sidetracked because she, who is not needed to peform this task, nearly dies. The Gman doesn't even tell you to protect her until after she's healed, you literally do it because some vortigaunt that doesn't know what's going on told you and you're supposed to care enough to set aside your extremely important task where time is of the essence. There'as a reason why people don't feel remorse for killing video game characters unless the game tells you that you should: Video game characters don't resemble human beings. They can only influence gameplay through basic intellectual function, when they're using higher intelligence it only influences story. Valve has frequently tried to mix the two levels of intelligence together, but to do so they need to take control away from the player. In a typical cutscene the protagonist can still be compared to NPCs through their scripted interactions, but since Gordon is basically a non-person in HL2's cutscenes that means this never happens. But hey, she's wearing a jacket, so she must be progressive, right?