Tropes vs Women in Video Games

It still seems like mostly men will know about it. And even if women see the cover and get informed that she is a video game character, it doesn't really reflect that bad on the medium, considering how many real women known from other media are shown in the Playboy. It was just a minor complain anyway though, so we probably shouldn't argue too much about this one example.

No, that's a cop-out. Don't deflect a relevant example.

Even if women do not regularly read Playboy or have exposure to it, marketing is not a focused exercise. The entire point to marketing is to be seen by as many people within your target demographic as possible, and often that means people outside of that demographic have to see it, too. A spread in Playboy, by itself, may not reach women who don't read it, but a Playboy cover can be seen in a bookstore or a magazine stand, and the appearance (while a form of marketing itself) was heavily marketed as well. And that's not even getting into the media hype that surrounded Rayne from Bloodrayne being the first game girl in Playboy.

edited 14th Dec '12 6:35:01 AM by KingZeal

Well, I guess there is some value to that example. However, my whole argument was that it wasn't the best example there is. While there was some cross-demographic attention regarding this, men were obviously the primary target. There have to be better examples than this, is all I'm saying.

Also, I don't really blame developers for targeting their main audience. While there is such a thing as too much, I wouldn't and shouldn't be insulted when men are used to advertise products aimed towards women. I think part of blame also lie with women themselves, when they let ads in the Playboy about one game decide about a whole medium (yes, I'm exagerrating here). And there should and actually are games marketed towards women, so I don't see as much problems with this all.

Yes, you will sometimes be exposed to or learn about things you'd rather not be. That's part of living in a free society.

You brought up Lloyd's observation of women in sexualized media for the purposes of marketing. As this is Playboy we're talking about here, that's a pretty damn significant example.

But apparently you are. You've complained numerous times about men being portrayed as idiots or hyper-sexual perverts.

I can name quite a few. For one thing, it reinforces gender roles and stereotypes.

You know the whole Pink Is for Sissies thing? That started with marketing. Pink was a color like any other until the early 20th Century, where clothing stores started marketing pink as the color for girls and blue as the color for boys. Strictly because of marketing, we have Pink Means Feminine as the default mindset.

What's your point?

edited 14th Dec '12 6:58:10 AM by KingZeal

I must have kinda missed the part where he talked specifically about ads in sexualized media. The issue seemed more about women being sexualized. Now I have to rewatch it. That was about portayal of men in general media, not as eye-candy in ads geared towards women. Those are seperate issues.

Women actually want to buy products because the advertising features stupid/perverted men?

No it isn't. It's about gender roles. The whole Men Are Uncultured, Women Are Wiser and Men Are Strong, Women Are Pretty problem.

Yes. Men being portrayed as uncivilized, drooling neanderthals is a common tactic to make women feel empowered. In my advertising class, for example, we watched a shampoo commercial which used several subtle, subconscious tropes to immediately identify the man as little else but a Manchild while his girlfriend/wife was making all the smart choices.

edited 14th Dec '12 7:11:45 AM by KingZeal

Being sexualized is still different then being portrayed in an objectively negative manner.

That's what I was thinking. Women being sexualised emphasises their positive attributes while men being incompetent, bumbling buffoons emphasises their negative ones. It's apples and oranges.

Except that it's not so "objective". Guys embrace these stereotypes as well.

The Man Show, Married With Children, and other commercials portray men just as thick-headed and sex-obsessed.

edited 14th Dec '12 7:22:03 AM by KingZeal

Well, maybe not then. The point is that both issues aren't the same and I'm not a hypocrite for criticizing one, while stating my doubts about complaints of the latter as you seem to imply.

Except they are the same, as they both embody positive and negative gender role traits. Guys being portrayed as dim sexhounds that can benchpress a tree trunk and women being portrayed as complicated fuck toys is equally dismissive of both genders.

Also, I never called you a hypocrite.

edited 14th Dec '12 7:36:38 AM by KingZeal

That's a bit like saying it's completely fine to sexualise women because some women like to dress provocatively themselves (or pose sexually in advertisements, adult publications, etc).

This just sounds like the "male power fantasy" argument all over again; trying to justify negative portrayals of men through flimsy reasoning while decrying the same portrayals of women.

Except I'm saying the exact opposite. I'm saying neither portrayal is good.

Right, sorry. You're right.

Going back to that video, and this is something that occurred to me during the #1reasonwhy movement too, since women do make up around half of all gamers now, isn't it unreasonable to ask the industry to cater to them more?

They don't make half of the AAA audience.

Donate money to Skullgirls, get a sweet poster.

But they make up a huge chunk of the casual game audience. I would think that would balance things out.

The question being asked is how to integrate the two audiences.

Pretty much, yeah.

Donate money to Skullgirls, get a sweet poster.

Technically, Edward's the one with the glistening abs. Jacob's a werewolf, not a vampire, so his abs aren't shiny.

Insert witty and clever quip here. My page, as the database hates my handle.

He isn't a werewolf.

Even if he was, he doesn't spend a lot of time in that form./off topic

Donate money to Skullgirls, get a sweet poster.

Just going by Twilight's own established canon here.

Although this diversion might be a good avenue for discussion here as well. How can we compare the sexualization of men in romance novels to that of women in video games, or can we even?

Insert witty and clever quip here. My page, as the database hates my handle.

What are the books that are popular with the female audience?

Twilight, 50 shades of gray, hunger games...

List more and find what all of those books have in common.

Donate money to Skullgirls, get a sweet poster.

You could even just take the entirety of Harlequin romance novels as a whole.

Insert witty and clever quip here. My page, as the database hates my handle.