• Study: Using A Sexy Video Game Avatar Makes Women Start Perceiving Themselves In A Sexually Objectif
    105 replies, posted
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;42492202]Why do they insist that rape is not victim's fault? It's not right. The victim can provoke the rapist too. Not like the victim is to blame - both victim and rapist might be the cause.[/QUOTE] Oh fuck, now you've done it.
[QUOTE=Wizards Court;42494618]oh boy, not this again, for the zillionth time, women tend to(keyword "tend", its not a rule) prefer men with leaner bodies, not muscular superdudes, thats male power fantasy. [url]http://kotaku.com/5873885/nerds-and-male-privilege-part-2-deconstructing-the-arguments[/url] if you notice, there is a distinct lack of this in japanese gaming, thats because men are actually sometimes sexually objectified in japan games(althrough to a vastly lower extend than women, plus men think overly muscular dudes look ridiculous in japan).[/QUOTE] Relevant: [img]http://www.shortpacked.com/comics/2011-12-02-sexy.png[/img]
[QUOTE=gman003-main;42496253]Relevant: [img]http://www.shortpacked.com/comics/2011-12-02-sexy.png[/img][/QUOTE] Not the worst strawman around but still up there. Still, they are right that women only like Bishōnen, not hard to prove. [t]http://i.imgur.com/bE6pucB.jpg[/t] Wait no, that's not right. Surely some women's magazines written by women will give the answer. [t]http://i.imgur.com/EeOQ3mN.png[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/CdNsfBN.png[/t] Ok that's not right. What about those who write romance novels solely for women, gotta be some slim, fish lipped, bug eyed pretty boys there. [t]http://i.imgur.com/FKNJFxF.jpg[/t] Well shit, what now? You think women might actually like the idealised male form? Obviously not a man/fridge hybrid, but how many of them are there outside franchises abbreviating to GoW?
[QUOTE=Devodiere;42496667]Not the worst strawman around but still up there. Still, they are right that women only like Bishōnen, not hard to prove. [t]http://i.imgur.com/bE6pucB.jpg[/t] Wait no, that's not right. Surely some women's magazines written by women will give the answer. [t]http://i.imgur.com/EeOQ3mN.png[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/CdNsfBN.png[/t] Ok that's not right. What about those who write romance novels solely for women, gotta be some slim, fish lipped, bug eyed pretty boys there. [t]http://i.imgur.com/FKNJFxF.jpg[/t] Well shit, what now? You think women might actually like the idealised male form? Obviously not a man/fridge hybrid, but how many of them are there outside franchises abbreviating to GoW?[/QUOTE] amusing, but you failed to realise that i said, not EVERY women likes it, of course there are some who do, also you'll notice that [B]most[/B] of these men on the covers, specially if you scroll down, are not SUPERbuff, but simply toned/strong, there is a very big difference. plus most of the "buff dudes" are on the fantasy covers, have you seen the average women in a fantasy cover lol? [T]http://i43.tinypic.com/16izjeq.jpg[/T] "perfect/incredible" people are something of a staple of fantasy(which is falling out of favor recently actually). edit: fuck i don't know to how to use thumbnails(welp i managed to fix it)
[QUOTE=Wizards Court;42496983]amusing, but you failed to realise that i said, not EVERY women likes it, of course there are some who do, also you'll notice that [B]most[/B] of these men on the covers, specially if you scroll down, are not SUPERbuff, but simply toned/strong, there is a very big difference.[/QUOTE] Most of those guys are totally ripped, and the ones who aren't are well above average.
[QUOTE=JustGman;42497080]Most of those guys are totally ripped, and the ones who aren't are well above average.[/QUOTE] its not that hard for a man to become "ripped", you just need to workout, now a woman has to "insert shitload of crap here" like creams, surgery, insane diets, the list goes on. let's admit, the idealised form of a man tends to easier to attain than a woman's. plus most men actually WANT to be like that, whereas women fell they NEED because they're otherwise worthless, thats key the difference, thats why you have women dying of anorexia out there for instance.
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;42492202]Why do they insist that rape is not victim's fault? It's not right. The victim can provoke the rapist too. Not like the victim is to blame - both victim and rapist might be the cause.[/QUOTE] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDbNaLqVw8c[/media]
[QUOTE=Wizards Court;42497109]its not that hard for a man to become "ripped", you just need to workout, now a woman has to "insert shitload of crap here" like creams, surgery, insane diets, the list goes on. let's admit, the idealised form of a man tends to easier to attain than a woman's. plus most men actually WANT to be like that, whereas women fell they NEED because they're otherwise worthless, thats key the difference, thats why you have women dying of anorexia out there for instance.[/QUOTE] Getting ripped is something that takes years of hard work and dedication, it's not something you can get through some surgery or cosmetic product.
[QUOTE=JustGman;42497180]Getting ripped is something that takes a hella lot of hard work and dedication, it's not something you can get through some surgery or cosmetic product.[/QUOTE] lol what? you basically gotta workout only, nevermind that working out releases endorphin. the more you do it, the more you enjoy it. i used to love working out 1-3h a day(which i started doing due to medical order), unfortunately i had to stop due to my condition worsening a bit for a while(althrough i still do a bit), if you work out while listening to music, its even better. also you make it sound as if surgery or tons of cosmetic crap is better than a natural thing. edit: also i lost count of folks i knew when i was a kid who were skinny/fat and got quite buff in only a few months, after getting around 16-18 years old, meanwhile several of the girls that i knew who were quite pretty, got fat when older lol and the ones that didn't have to try pretty hard to stay in shape, so meh, maybe i'm biased by personal experience i guess?
[QUOTE=Wizards Court;42497220]lol what? you basically gotta workout only, nevermind that working out releases endorphin. the more you do it, the more you enjoy it. i used to love working out 1-3h a day(which i started doing due to medical order), unfortunately i had to stop due to my condition worsening a bit for a while(althrough i still do a bit), if you work out while listening to music, its even better. also you make it sound as if surgery or tons of cosmetic crap is better than a natural thing. edit: also i lost count of folks i knew when i was a kid who were skinny/fat and got quite buff in only a few months, after getting around 16-18 years old, meanwhile several of the girls that i knew who were quite pretty, got fat when older lol and the ones that didn't have to try pretty hard to stay in shape, so meh, maybe i'm biased by personal experience i guess?[/QUOTE] personally I think that feeling you get after really working out your muscles is like liquid tin surging through my muscle fibers but hey diffrn't strokes and such
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;42497268]personally I think that feeling you get after really working out your muscles is like liquid tin surging through my muscle fibers but hey diffrn't strokes and such[/QUOTE] more or less, thats more because your body hasn't gotten used to it yet, after it gets accustomed, you start enjoying it. humanity is actually "geared" for endurance so to speak, so aerobic exercises especially like running, walking, swimming are quite easy to enjoy it. not a lot of people know, but for humans, one of the first forms of hunting was actually persistence hunting(driving an animal to exhaustion by pursuing it relentlessly), there are still some tribes in africa that practice it. high endurance is a very strong part of humans in general. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting[/url] its also a theory of why humans domesticated wolves, since they have similar hunting patterns too.
[QUOTE=Wizards Court;42497109]its not that hard for a man to become "ripped", you just need to workout, now a woman has to "insert shitload of crap here" like creams, surgery, insane diets, the list goes on. let's admit, the idealised form of a man tends to easier to attain than a woman's. plus most men actually WANT to be like that, whereas women fell they NEED because they're otherwise worthless, thats key the difference, thats why you have women dying of anorexia out there for instance.[/QUOTE] You are aware being "ripped" means drastically changing your lifestyle from dietary habits to what your hobbies are. Kind of like, I don't know, being a super model? A female super model? If you think this sort of culture doesn't go both ways have you ever seen a fat kid in school? He may be a decent guy but nothing is gonna stop the bile he gets for not looking like a greek god or thin as a flagpole. At some point modern culture conditioned people to thinking all men should be buff, athletic and perfectly symmetrical just like it conditioned people into thinking women should look thin, curvy and perfectly symmetrical. The "idealised" form of man is about the same hard work to attain as the "idealised" form of women. Funny thing about sexism is it's a two way argument. Even if one side has more to work with it's still a two way argument since it's a two way term.
[QUOTE=Wizards Court;42497109]its not that hard for a man to become "ripped", you just need to workout[/quote] Takes about two years with a bodybuilding routine (unless you are really committed doing a strength focused routine) to reach a good size and level of definition to be considered ripped. Those two years can potentially consist of either three days of one hour thirty minute workouts every other weekday or five days of on average one hour workouts every weekday or whatever bastard routine you wanna do. Note that if you actually wish to achieve anything you actually have to put in a lot of effort. You also have to follow a relatively strict diet, it is not that you can only eat oats and shit squats, but you can't go overboard with bad food and you really have to stick to lean food that is healthy and high in protein. [quote]now a woman has to "insert shitload of crap here" like creams, surgery, insane diets, the list goes on.[/quote] A woman has to do the same as a man but to a lesser degree because high levels of musculature is not what is commonly found beautiful on a woman. You need to workout and not go full retard with your diet, your body will be in shape and you'll look healthy and that's fine. If you are a man and you are ugly, short of getting plastic surgery you pretty much have nothing to do about that because makeup on men is not usually considered attractive, although you could probably get away with very basic makeup. Women have the advantage in that regard in that they have more of a choice. "Do I spend time putting makeup on and look better or do I save time at the cost of not looking that good?" [quote]let's admit, the idealised form of a man tends to easier to attain than a woman's.[/quote] By your standard both require constant maintenance, one requires physical exertion to maintain and the other is more dependent on your skill with lotions and potions which requires less effort but can still take up a lot of time. [quote]plus most men actually WANT to be like that[/quote] Far as I'm aware most men I know wanna spend all day inside playing videogames and while they'd rather be more physically attractive, aesthetic and stronger; the enjoyment they get out of doing the thing they want outweighs achieving the ideal form they want. I'm fortunate because I actually enjoy working out. [quote]whereas women fell they NEED because they're otherwise worthless[/quote] You are forgetting that men can feel worthless too, I am somewhat sure I have read about a rising number of men who feel insecure and of low value by being scrawny; that have turned to bodybuilding to help deal with that. You might say, "But lifting is healthy." But not the way some of these people do it my friend. #fightzyzzculture [quote]thats key the difference, thats why you have women dying of anorexia out there for instance[/quote] You'd be surprised at the rate of eating disorders in both men and women. It is true that women are much more likely to have an eating disorder than men are, however there is evidence that men still make up a pretty significant number of people with eating disorders. According to this site: [url]http://www.b-eat.co.uk/about-beat/media-centre/facts-and-figures/[/url] And then the study that it cites for the statistic about the rates of eating disorders in men and women: [url]https://catalogue.ic.nhs.uk/publications/mental-health/surveys/adul-psyc-morb-res-hou-sur-eng-2007/adul-psyc-morb-res-hou-sur-eng-2007-rep.pdf[/url] Of all people who have eating disorders, a quarter are men and three quarters are women, it's been suggested that men are less likely to admit they have an eating disorder and professionals doing diagnosis are more likely to dismiss eating disorders in men but I'm not going to go into that or include it as a valid argument because there is a lack of study of that. I'm sure if you spend a bit of time doing a little digging you'll probably find out a whole bunch of things I don't really give a shit to go look for. My point is, eating disorders are not exclusive to women. Additionally instead of trying to change how genders are portrayed in media as a means to combat eating disorders, we should instead actually get people rooted in reality as to what's attainable and what's not. For example, I really like how Letho looks in The Witcher 2, however I also recognise that he is probably 6 foot 8 and 300lbs at least judging by the sheer size of him. If I were someone who aspired to look like that because I am easily influenced by media I would have to undergo height reassignment surgery and juice harder than any man has dared to juice before. It's not feasible, it's not healthy, and I know this because I am rooted in reality, I have a decent understanding of what my body can become and what it cannot. Likewise on the other end of the scale I know that going below 8 percent bodyfat is the point where it starts being really hazardous to your health, I could be a hell of a lot more shredded if I dropped my bodyfat to that point, however as I know how unhealthy that is I don't dare. Or maybe let's look at Death from Darksiders 2, I like how he looks however I also know that his hip to shoulder ratio is utterly unrealistic to achieve through dieting and exercise alone, also that his forearm to bicep/tricep ratio is so out of whack it's unbelievable. Now I could kill myself trying to achieve this form which is likely only possible for very certain body shapes (people who have a very wide upper body naturally and can enhance it further with lifting and diet) or I could realise it's not possible and just enjoy how it looks knowing it's stylised and not realistic. Some people are getting on board with this teaching the difference between reality and photoshop/fiction thing, last I heard it's becoming a thing now but I don't follow it. I think if people had a greater understanding of what their own bodies are capable of though, that you'd probably see less environmentally caused eating disorders. In my personal opinion I don't think it's really a problem with society, media or culture. I think it's a problem that people are so socialised, so reliant on what others think of them that they change their life and behaviours accordingly. I see people tell me that I am getting too big and that women don't like men that size of whatever reason you can possibly think of, but I don't pay any mind to it because what they want or like is not what I want or like and what I want I know is within my grasp and feasible, so I do it regardless of what people tell me. [editline]12th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Wizards Court;42497220]edit: also i lost count of folks i knew when i was a kid who were skinny/fat and got quite buff in only a few months, after getting around 16-18 years old, meanwhile several of the girls that i knew who were quite pretty, got fat when older lol and the ones that didn't have to try pretty hard to stay in shape, so meh, maybe i'm biased by personal experience i guess?[/QUOTE] Depends on what you mean by buff, that is, people would probably consider me buff, however I'm pretty DYEL by my own standards. If you are suffering from the Edward Norton in American History X effect then it's entirely possible to get buff in a few months. If not though, it's probably steroid use or they were already pretty muscular and they just dropped some excess body fat while working out which made them look a lot more cut.
[QUOTE=mchapra;42497436]You are aware being "ripped" means drastically changing your lifestyle from dietary habits to what your hobbies are. Kind of like, I don't know, being a super model? A female super model? If you think this sort of culture doesn't go both ways have you ever seen a fat kid in school? He may be a decent guy but nothing is gonna stop the bile he gets for not looking like a greek god or thin as a flagpole. At some point modern culture conditioned people to thinking all men should be buff, athletic and perfectly symmetrical just like it conditioned people into thinking women should look thin, curvy and perfectly symmetrical. The "idealised" form of man is about the same hard work to attain as the "idealised" form of women. Funny thing about sexism is it's a two way argument. Even if one side has more to work with it's still a two way argument since it's a two way term.[/QUOTE] i'm starting to get the idea, people have a different view of what "ripped" means, i talking about a healthy lifestyle which will lead you plus workout to being toned/somewhat buff at least, plus men don't even need to change its diet that much, you can just burn what you eat by working out and being fat isn't really good for anyone's health, that of course doesn't mean shaming fat people is correct, but that doesn't change the fact that the ideal form a woman must have is actually HARMFUL to her health, being super skinny, having to do surgeries, is not in any way healthy. you got women athletes out there that are actually mocked for being strong and healthy(cause women can't be that), a good example is serena williams. [url]http://frugivoremag.com/2012/07/black-female-athletes-still-too-big-for-the-mainstream/[/url] to attempt to claim men have just as bad as women is kinda of a joke, men are required to be aestheticaly pleasing in a way that essentially mostly requires them be healthy so to speak, its not perfect, but it sure has hell doesn't come close to what women go through. some people in this thread are also making it sound as if working out is some horrible thing, welp, i don't know what to say to that.
[QUOTE=Wizards Court;42497545] plus men don't even need to change its diet that much, you can just burn what you eat by working out[/quote] To adopt a healthy lifestyle requires an amount of change which varies from person to person. For example with me, I was pretty much dining on pizza and soda for a long time, I was skinnyfat and no doubt I probably had a bunch of health problems related to my high saturated fat diet. Now of course I could have just started working out on this diet, and I'd probably put on some mass but I would still be very unhealthy and would have much more bodyfat than muscle than I have right now. In order to get enough protein to make decent gains and improve my health I had to drastically change my diet. Some people probably already eat a decent diet and just need to make a few adjustments and take up exercise, but everyone is different and you can't really just say it will be the same way for every person. [quote]you got women athletes out there that are actually mocked for being strong and healthy(cause women can't be that), a good example is serena williams.[/quote] "For those of us who are not athletes, just black women who want to move often and eat well, it is important that our inspiration comes from our own desire for health and longevity, not in response to the cacophony of hand-wringing over black bodies. " Apart from the whole "we strong black women who don't need no man" shtick, this is pretty much in accord with my opinion of individuality and personal wishes being most important. [quote]to attempt to claim men have just as bad as women is kinda of a joke, men are required to be aestheticaly pleasing in a way that essentially mostly requires them be healthy so to speak, its not perfect, but it sure has hell doesn't come close to what women go through.[/quote] Steroid abuse isn't really healthy, but it's what a lot of people turn to. But not everyone. Likewise, anorexia and bulimia aren't healthy, but it's what a lot of people turn to. But not everyone. I agree that women's physiques in media are usually more unrealistic than men's, however of the physiques that are not shopped; a lot are attainable while still being healthy, they just require effort in the same way that a muscled physique requires effort. Size 0 models are straight out of System Shock though. [quote]some people in this thread are also making it sound as if working out is some horrible thing, welp, i don't know what to say to that.[/QUOTE] This is one of those personal preference things. I know people who hate it and either don't do it because of that or they suffer through it because they want a better physique. I personally enjoy it (except for how I feel right after deadlifts), but you must understand that a lot of people don't.
[QUOTE=Devodiere;42496667][t]http://i.imgur.com/FKNJFxF.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] I wonder if that might have to do with the book industry being owned at 99% by men :v: [QUOTE=Rubs10;42494603]I guess I should have said that the purpose isn't to sexualize. Women are made to look "sexy". Men are made to look "powerful".[/QUOTE] Here's an excellent example! Classic men's magazine, classic women's magazine, [I]same guy on both covers[/I] [IMG]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/3797350/hosting/2013-10/2013-10-12_11-39-26.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;42497693]Here's an excellent example! Classic men's magazine, classic women's magazine, [I]same guy on both covers[/I] [IMG]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/3797350/hosting/2013-10/2013-10-12_11-39-26.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] This is unfair. Because Hugh Jackman is both sexy AND powerful.
[QUOTE=Wizards Court;42497545]i'm starting to get the idea, people have a different view of what "ripped" means, i talking about a healthy lifestyle which will lead you plus workout to being toned/somewhat buff at least, plus men don't even need to change its diet that much, you can just burn what you eat by working out and being fat isn't really good for anyone's health, that of course doesn't mean shaming fat people is correct, but that doesn't change the fact that the ideal form a woman must have is actually HARMFUL to her health, being super skinny, having to do surgeries, is not in any way healthy. you got women athletes out there that are actually mocked for being strong and healthy(cause women can't be that), a good example is serena williams. [url]http://frugivoremag.com/2012/07/black-female-athletes-still-too-big-for-the-mainstream/[/url] to attempt to claim men have just as bad as women is kinda of a joke, men are required to be aestheticaly pleasing in a way that essentially mostly requires them be healthy so to speak, its not perfect, but it sure has hell doesn't come close to what women go through. some people in this thread are also making it sound as if working out is some horrible thing, welp, i don't know what to say to that.[/QUOTE] Lmao I hate to break it to you, but female athletes aren't healthy. No professional athlete competing a power event, is healthy, the men too. Especially the sprinters. You have to use drugs or [B]you will lose[/B]. It is not an option. "to attempt to claim men have just as bad as women is kinda of a joke, men are required to be aestheticaly pleasing in a way that essentially mostly requires them be healthy so to speak, its not perfect, but it sure has hell doesn't come close to what women go through." Oh please, do you exist on this plane of reality? The average woman is not starving herself to look healthy, and she is not getting cosmetic surgery done. Stop being melodramatic. If you actually believe women are forced to starve themselves and get boob jobs to be considered beautiful, all I can say is you are spending far too much time on fat pride blogs where they project negative qualities and rationalizations onto people they are jealous of. [editline]12th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;42497693]I wonder if that might have to do with the book industry being owned at 99% by men :v: Here's an excellent example! Classic men's magazine, classic women's magazine, [I]same guy on both covers[/I] [IMG]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/3797350/hosting/2013-10/2013-10-12_11-39-26.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] I like how you specifically went out of your way to find a shot where he looks skinny, despite him still being bigger than 98% of men.
I've always found that the muscular, strong, tall, handsome, emotionless stereotypes of male's in video-games are being set out that way for male gamers to idealise them, to want to be them and feel powerful. Not for women to [I]want[/I] them since game companies like to ignore their female audience (it's surely changing and much better than it was but still a lot of the "can't have female lead, sales will plummet" shit around.) Where as female's in video-games that are designed to be in a "sexual outfit" is for the male audience to want them, not for women to look up to them. Both are being glorified for vanity. I suggest watching [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR9UMgOFeLw"]this[/URL] (starts around 1:00)
[QUOTE=MarlaCouture;42498027]I've always found that the muscular, strong, tall, handsome, emotionless stereotypes of male's in video-games are being set out that way for male gamers to idealise them, to want to be them and feel powerful. Not for women to [I]want[/I] them since game companies like to ignore their female audience (it's surely changing and much better than it was but still a lot of "can't have female lead, sales will plummet.") Where as female's in video-games that are designed to be in a "sexual outfit" is for the male audience to want them, not for women to look up to them. Both are being glorified for vanity. I suggest watching [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR9UMgOFeLw"]this[/URL].[/QUOTE] Well yeah, the target audience for most of that shit is men and they do make up a huge percentage of that audience. I wouldn't say they like to ignore the female audience just because, but would you complain that the Fast and Furious movies don't have enough for women? And we are talking about very vague and general stereotypes here, they're not exactly accurate accounts. Look at the games released for this year and see how many of them have that kind of aesthetic let along a bland stereotype for a protagonist.
[QUOTE=Devodiere;42498282]Well yeah, the target audience for most of that shit is men and they do make up a huge percentage of that audience. I wouldn't say they like to ignore the female audience just because, but would you complain that the Fast and Furious movies don't have enough for women? And we are talking about very vague and general stereotypes here, they're not exactly accurate accounts. Look at the games released for this year and see how many of them have that kind of aesthetic let along a bland stereotype for a protagonist.[/QUOTE] The male to female gamer ratio is roughly 50/50. They don't necessarily ignore their female audience, rather some simply deplete any relevance or targeting to females. That's why I mentioned that things are thankfully changing and developers are becoming aware of the fact that you don't need to objectify women/make them a 'thing' to be wanted to have a successful outcome in this industry. There are also more problematic elements in the industry and distribution/marketing of video-games to be addressed but I won't get into that. The video that I linked sums up what I have to say.
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;42497693]I wonder if that might have to do with the book industry being owned at 99% by men :v:[/QUOTE] That's on par with claiming the media is pro-Israel because it's all owned by Jews. Do you really think people who owned publishing industries would care that much about enforcing their worldview? What matters is what sells and if women buy a romance novel with Fabio on the cover then that's what they get. It really is handwaving bullshit of the highest magnitude to claim "Men are involved so that's why it's that way".
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;42497693]I wonder if that might have to do with the book industry being owned at 99% by men :v: Here's an excellent example! Classic men's magazine, classic women's magazine, [I]same guy on both covers[/I] [IMG]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/3797350/hosting/2013-10/2013-10-12_11-39-26.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] Like I already said: one magazine is called "muscle and fitness" and the other one is called "good housekeeping". What do you expect? Here for example is a fitness magazine for women. [t]http://media16.onsugar.com/files/2011/08/33/2/1873/18733718/43f30a1d23b59c60_Womens_Fitness_B.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=MarlaCouture;42498310]The male to female gamer ratio is roughly 50/50. They don't necessarily ignore their female audience, rather some simply deplete any relevance or targeting to females. That's why I mentioned that things are thankfully changing and developers are becoming aware of the fact that you don't need to objectify women/make them a 'thing' to be wanted to have a successful outcome in this industry. There are also more problematic elements in the industry and distribution/marketing of video-games to be addressed but I won't get into that. The video that I linked sums up what I have to say.[/QUOTE] And any kind of further breakdown of that demographic finds women far more in puzzle and casual gaming genres than FPSs. The female audience may be there, but the female CoD fan audience is significantly smaller. Let's not start on some of those "problematic" issues though because we all know how that will end. I will say the idea that they felt the need to objectify women was nothing but a cheap trick in a juvenile industry and proved unsuccessful, rather any moral epiphany. FUcks sake, twice in a row my automerge broke?
[QUOTE=Devodiere;42498351]And any kind of further breakdown of that demographic finds women far more in puzzle and casual gaming genres than FPSs. The female audience may be there, but the female CoD fan audience is significantly smaller. Let's not start on some of those "problematic" issues though because we all know how that will end. I will say the idea that they felt the need to objectify women was nothing but a cheap trick in a juvenile industry and proved unsuccessful, rather any moral epiphany. FUcks sake, twice in a row my automerge broke?[/QUOTE] While I agree with the second half, that "further breakdown of demographics" are a stereotype, not a statistic. (just my continuing thoughts) idk this is why I hate the entire stigma behind calling ourselves "gamers" because it always has to lead to whose a "real gamer" or a "casual gamer" and other silly labels that we use which just cause more problems and anger than anything.
[QUOTE=MarlaCouture;42498391](just my continuing thoughts) idk this is why I hate the the entire stigma behind calling ourselves "gamers" because it always has to lead to whose a "real gamer" or a "casual gamer" and other silly labels that we use which just cause more problems and anger than anything.[/QUOTE] It's important to stratify between types of players because one type of player buys a completely different type of game to the other. If we're going off of the typical casual/hardcore tag then a casual gamer you would likely find playing with a Wii, a handheld or phone, facebook, sticking to casual games on PC and sticking to casual games on PS3 and 360 more than anything else. The "hardcore" gamer meanwhile would most likely to be found playing on PC, PS3, 360 and occasionally playing games on the other platforms prior mentioned, more than anything else. The games that usually are available for PC and it's familiars are typically more involved, more complex and more difficult, have a much bigger budget attached to them, but not necessarily. Vice versa games that come out for the Wii and your average flash/handheld game are typically less complex, less involved, less difficult and fairly low budget, but not necessarily. As someone who plays videogames and usually prefers the types of game that come out for PC and some of the consoles, I can honestly say that the market we are referring to as casual is not for me, with the odd exception. Alternatively if we were to take someone like my mother, she likes to play a lot of casual games on her phone like Candy Crush Saga, them quasi-point n click adventure games and similar games, but she has absolutely no interest in any of the games I play, or even any of the games I don't play but are on PC and consoles. We're two completely different markets, as we play games we are both technically gamers, and you could reasonably say (if you wish to be "that guy") that I am a hardcore gamer and that my mother is a casual gamer and that if someone tries to appeal to the latter with a game more suited to the former, me, then it would probably be a failure, and vice versa. I don't really agree with the terms "real gamer" and "casual gamer" but I recognise that the connotation is actually fairly accurate while the denotation can lead to confusion; the connotation is simply referring to the type of games a player is more likely to be attracted to, like differentiating between someone who prefers real time strategy over first person shooters, except in a much broader sense. Generally I just prefer to call "casual gamers", casual gamers. And call "hardcore gamers", traditional gamers. It gets over the whole real gamer mess without losing it's accuracy as a description of particular markets. [quote]While I agree with the second half, that "further breakdown of demographics" are a stereotype, not a statistic.[/quote] The ESA never actually shows you the raw data for what women generally play and what men generally play. They always show you the broad statistic that 45 percent of gamers are women and 55 percent are men which has changed the past few years from 40/60. As they do not do this, you cannot say it's a stereotype not a statistic while not having access to the statistics which directly support this statement, as much as I cannot say it is the other way around; although I do have the suspicion that the raw data will reveal that the numbers of women playing the types of game which fall into the traditional videogame category are significantly less than those who play games which are in the casual videogame category. If you can find me a link to a PDF or something which shows the data I am talking about I would be appreciative because I am looking and I can't find it (I remember seeing something like it not long ago though).
[QUOTE=MarlaCouture;42498391]While I agree with the second half, that "further breakdown of demographics" are a stereotype, not a statistic. (just my continuing thoughts) idk this is why I hate the the entire stigma behind calling ourselves "gamers" because it always has to lead to whose a "real gamer" or a "casual gamer" and other silly labels that we use which just cause more problems and anger than anything.[/QUOTE] Well [url=http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2013.pdf]women over 30 make up 31% of the market[/url], [url=http://gizmodo.com/5448959/the-statistics-of-game-consoles-summed-up-in-one-big-graphic]80% of women with consoles use a Wii[/url] so not in most core audiences, [url=http://gaia.adage.com/images/bin/pdf/1114WP.pdf]a piece on women and tech[/url] showing at the very least, phone, tablet and social gaming is very high amongst women and a [url=http://gigaom.com/2012/01/06/quarter-of-women-play-more-than-3-hours-of-mobile-games-daily/]piece about how men play far fewer mobile games[/url], and [url=http://www.icmresearch.com/2-in-3-facebook-gamers-are-women]a few[/url] more [url=http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Demographics-of-Social-Gamers-Home-On-Go/1008627]that show[/url] very high [url=http://www.factbrowser.com/search/?q=social+gaming+women]rates of social gaming[/url] rather than on AAA shooters and the like. It's hard to find concrete statistics on this kind of thing, but the numbers don't really add up for that much social gaming as well as getting the newest CoD. The simple solution to stigma is don't call yourself a gamer, it's a faux-pas whether you're into dwarf fortress or just installed angry birds. [QUOTE=Riutet;42498655]If you can find me a link to a PDF or something which shows the data I am talking about I would be appreciative because I am looking and I can't find it (I remember seeing something like it not long ago though).[/QUOTE] No dice on the full pdf but you can get the general idea.
[QUOTE=Riutet;42498655]It's important to stratify between types of players because one type of player buys a completely different type of game to the other. If we're going off of the typical casual/hardcore tag then a casual gamer you would likely find playing with a Wii, a handheld or phone, facebook, sticking to casual games on PC and sticking to casual games on PS3 and 360 more than anything else. The "hardcore" gamer meanwhile would most likely to be found playing on PC, PS3, 360 and occasionally playing games on the other platforms prior mentioned, more than anything else. The games that usually are available for PC and it's familiars are typically more involved, more complex and more difficult, have a much bigger budget attached to them, but not necessarily. Vice versa games that come out for the Wii and your average flash/handheld game are typically less complex, less involved, less difficult and fairly low budget, but not necessarily. As someone who plays videogames and usually prefers the types of game that come out for PC and some of the consoles, I can honestly say that the market we are referring to as casual is not for me, with the odd exception. Alternatively if we were to take someone like my mother, she likes to play a lot of casual games on her phone like Candy Crush Saga, them quasi-point n click adventure games and similar games, but she has absolutely no interest in any of the games I play, or even any of the games I don't play but are on PC and consoles. We're two completely different markets, as we play games we are both technically gamers, and you could reasonably say (if you wish to be "that guy") that I am a hardcore gamer and that my mother is a casual gamer and that if someone tries to appeal to the latter with a game more suited to the former, me, then it would probably be a failure, and vice versa. I don't really agree with the terms "real gamer" and "casual gamer" but I recognise that the connotation is actually fairly accurate while the denotation can lead to confusion; the connotation is simply referring to the type of games a player is more likely to be attracted to, like differentiating between someone who prefers real time strategy over first person shooters, except in a much broader sense. Generally I just prefer to call "casual gamers", casual gamers. And call "hardcore gamers", traditional gamers. It gets over the whole real gamer mess without losing it's accuracy as a description of particular markets. The ESA never actually shows you the raw data for what women generally play and what men generally play. They always show you the broad statistic that 45 percent of gamers are women and 55 percent are men which has changed the past few years from 40/60. As they do not do this, you cannot say it's a stereotype not a statistic while not having access to the statistics which directly support this statement, as much as I cannot say it is the other way around; although I do have the suspicion that the raw data will reveal that the numbers of women playing the types of game which fall into the traditional videogame category are significantly less than those who play games which are in the casual videogame category. If you can find me a link to a PDF or something which shows the data I am talking about I would be appreciative because I am looking and I can't find it (I remember seeing something like it not long ago though).[/QUOTE] Was [URL="http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2012.pdf"]this[/URL] what you were referring to? Also, I agree with you and acknlowedge that but I was just trying to point out that the use of labels for gamers such as "casual gamer" are usually used by other elitist gamers to devalue someone as a gamer opposed to "true gamers" y'know, the whole hierarchy of being a gamer thing ie, playing a lot of games on xbox doesn't make you better or more of a gamer than someone who plays on the wii [QUOTE]The simple solution to stigma is don't call yourself a gamer, it's a faux-pas whether you're into dwarf fortress or just installed angry birds.[/QUOTE] Exactly [B]Edit:[/B] Nevermind about link then
[QUOTE=Devodiere;42498676]Well [url=http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2013.pdf]women over 30 make up 31% of the market[/url], [url=http://gizmodo.com/5448959/the-statistics-of-game-consoles-summed-up-in-one-big-graphic]80% of women with consoles use a Wii[/url] so not in most core audiences, [url=http://gaia.adage.com/images/bin/pdf/1114WP.pdf]a piece on women and tech[/url] showing at the very least, phone, tablet and social gaming is very high amongst women and a [url=http://gigaom.com/2012/01/06/quarter-of-women-play-more-than-3-hours-of-mobile-games-daily/]piece about how men play far fewer mobile games[/url], and [url=http://www.icmresearch.com/2-in-3-facebook-gamers-are-women]a few[/url] more [url=http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Demographics-of-Social-Gamers-Home-On-Go/1008627]that show[/url] very high [url=http://www.factbrowser.com/search/?q=social+gaming+women]rates of social gaming[/url] rather than on AAA shooters and the like. It's hard to find concrete statistics on this kind of thing, but the numbers don't really add up for that much social gaming as well as getting the newest CoD.[/QUOTE] In regards to this: [url]http://www.onlineeducation.net/videogame[/url] It should be noted that it only specifies what console a person of either gender owns. This is useful for figuring out the range of games someone is capable of playing but not actually what they use their console to play. Why is this a problem? Well generally PC games are associated with being the most "hardcore" of all of them, what with it having the highest amount of RTS/ARTS/traditional RPGs/fast paced FPS games/grand strategy/simulation etc. However if you give it some thought, you would realise that if the PC was considered in that chart, you'd probably see a very high number of female gamers who play on PC; which would leave some people scratching their heads. A lot of casual games like the type you find on Facebook are technically PC games, so if PC was being considered you would have everyone who plays Farmville thrown in with everyone who plays Europa Universalis or Dorf Fortress. It's kind of silly. Likewise, without knowing what type of games the people who own the each console play, you can't know whether the person is usually playing games like Dark Souls or games like LittleBigPlanet. However ignoring this problem, it seems as if twice as many women play on Wii than men, 4 times as many men play on 360 as women, and twice as many men play on PS3.
I've been devalued as a gamer, specifically by guys who play xbox 360, so many times in highschool because I play on PC. I literally don't even understand what they were trying to get at.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.