Males of Games

NO SERIOUSLY GUYS THERE'S A LEAK WHY ISN'T ANYONE HELPING ME*

edited 2nd Dec '12 10:08:30 PM by Oroboro

You don't get to decide what's an "immediate danger" when it's a problem that bothers other people.

Doesn't this just fallout back to the "stop making me feel guilty, feminists" thing?

If you aren't part of the problem then why do they make you feel guilty?

I've seen quite a few feminists, and activists in general cast incredibly broad nets with their accusations of the problem, so it often comes off as including even the innocent bystanders. That and an attitude sometimes of "If you're not fighting with us, you're against us."

edited 2nd Dec '12 10:37:17 PM by Oroboro

for awhile now, I've been trying to think up a comment to the current flow of conversation, but for the life of me, I can't even understand what the discussion was on about anymore X_X

hmm... lets see... positive and/or negative depictions of men in videogames...

I know theres something there about men being type-cast as instinctively violent, but I can't think of any examples :< I play too many games with girl ghettos :( anyone else?

As I mentioned a few pages ago:

• The Accidental Pervert and All Men Are Perverts trope.
• The lack of fathers who do any parenting other than make themselves suffer and/or kill people.
• Overly idealized physiques and Heroic Build in general.

edited 2nd Dec '12 10:50:53 PM by KingZeal

There's the Bumbling Dad tropes, as well, which is different from the absentee father.

This is more prevalent in other forms of entertainment besides video games, though.

I just had an epiphany about Aliens, while I thought about a post made here earlier. Someone said how the way the aliens reproduce their species is an allegory for rape. But men and women are both victims of this, if only symbolically. That makes the series really progressive, as rape is often portrayed very differently depending on who is the victim and who is the perpetrator (the latter not really being affected by the series).

Yeah. That was actually intended by the creators. They wanted to make a monster that invoked every human fear imaginable—being killed, raped, impregnated and eaten.

It's why it's one of the most innovative sci-fi horrors in history.

Didn't realize being impregnated was a horror on the same level as being eaten alive.

For some people, maybe. If it was rape, you have to carry a constant reminder of it for nine months.

Actually it is more like two days in the movie. But yes the allegory does work.

Something hit me today that I had been thinking about but didn't quite know how to say. It's about the notion that the problems of portrayals of men in society and the idea that many of the problems would be solved by giving women more agency.

I still hold this to be true, but I wanted to remind everyone involved that this is not universally a "good" thing (good meaning enjoyable) for the "fairer" sex at the same time. For example, let's examine the problem of All Men Are Perverts.

The stereotype has two versions: the unilateral version (a man is inherently perverted and is less of a man if he doesn't have sex or want it) and the bilateral version (men are more perverted than women, and even the more reasonable ones are ultimately less chaste than the opposite gender and are eager to consume them). Every stereotype has this; usually the bilateral versions are exaggerated and used to justify the lateral version.

One obstacle to this is the barrier of "comfort" for women. Since women are assumed, or assume themselves to be more vulnerable than men, there's a sort of easy way out. Let the man initiate things. Let him ask you out. Let him make the first move. Let him take control in bed. Let him control the finances. (Not saying all women do this, but it seems to be a common thought.) This is a facade many women choose to wear because it makes them less responsible for their actions; they're not the instigators, so they don't feel bad when things go wrong.

As I said, I know not all women are this way, and I wouldn't even say "most" are. But it's a common conception. Personal anecdote

But that's part of the unfairness: men are more often seen as the aggressors and women as the victims, which makes every other Double Standard possible. Men are always sexual aggressors, so they're perverts. Men are always making the decisions, so everything's sexist. The only way I can see to repair these ideas is for the responsibility to be equally in both genders' hands.

edited 3rd Dec '12 8:28:23 AM by KingZeal

Sure. Remember my point above about men (male writers, directors, programmers, etc.) willingly promoting certain negative male stereotypes because of the accompanying benefits? Women aren't immune to that temptation.

And the thing is, if an individual opts to surrender agency to another individual, strictly in their interpersonal relationship, and the second individual is not abusive, that's not inherently an evil thing*

Agreed.

-Puts away bondage gear-

Yeah, everything Zeal said is true. Some people don't want any responsibility. Too bad for them. They don't really deserve catering of any kind.

edited 3rd Dec '12 10:12:09 AM by ShirowShirow

Out of all the questions and put forth arguments, you all spend four pages on the one liner. Stay predictable tropers, prove the point put forward in the videos people link too instead of explaining their beliefs with their own words!

Look, until someone brings us some male video game focus I am suggesting we go with the movie series brought up by Jotun Of Boredom on blip.

remember it?

I think it's more gray than that. I think it's fine to not seek responsibility or culpability, and you can surrender it if you like. That's how social contracts work (I'm not responsible for avenging my family if they're murdered—that's the police's job.) But in exchange, this gives you responsibilities in other respects. (I'm liable if I lie to the police or hinder their investigation in any way).

I don't really care if women, men, or anyone else decide they want to be demure flowers to avoid the cruel world. I have a problem if they do this while at the same time abusing it or failing to realize when it isn't appropriate.

Half the time, Cider, I have no idea what you're saying.

edited 3rd Dec '12 10:34:34 AM by KingZeal

In this case it is likely because you have not been paying attention. Lots of points I thought were fairly interesting were raised but rather than further discuss any of them it was deemed more fulfilling to type at thorn. So I decided to bring something back, even though it requires watching a video for an idea that could have just been explained in a post on this forum.

He's just saying the videos I posted are more worthy of discussion than the last few pages.

And maybe poking fun at me for not explaining the points in those videos better?

I spent four pages on the one-liner because it was spoken by someone in this thread, as opposed to someone whom I'll likely never meet or have contact with (meaning Thorn, if that's what you were talking about). I don't mind going back over the video after I'm home, and not at work, where I can be fired for watching a video.

I agree with the agency thing, but I feel like the issue today is more so about women accepting agency than needing it to be given to them. This is a pretty gross overgeneralization, but yeah.

In the other thread you talked about how Twilight is today's high profile female power fantasy, and how so much of it revolved around Bella placing herself up to avoid responsibility. If men resist giving up their power fantasies, I'd say it stands to reason that women would similarly avoid giving up their own power fantasy.

Well, what I got out of it, was that complaining about the portrayals of straight white men in any media is just as valid as any other, because they are often done very poorly.

On the other hand, because of the large variety of examples you will inevitably find something better. When someone has so few representations of themselves however, they are less likely to find any positive alternative and may give up on the media all together.

That rooting out the widespread negative stereotypes of even the "majority" group is important because it helps you understand everyone else's gripes too. That is what I got from it why I am guessing Jotun was initially going to put it in another thread but I can only really project because no one expressed anything really.

I figure if the video is going to be referenced it should be like here is what I think and here is the example I am leaving to support myself. I could maybe see just "Video:thoughts?" if that was something we could base the entire thread around but we are on games...

So, are there any game parallels to says a She's out of control" dad or "Sam Whitwickey" of Transformers''. To the surreal level of objectification of 300 to the point some people find it hard to be offended by?(Lots of people were offended by 300 but to the video makers point objectification has never been a complaint I have heard even though it is blatantly used)

Of course. I work in a university full of teenagers and young adults who will defend Twilight to the death and acted with complete disgust when I suggested that a girl should be just as willing to approach a guy to ask them out as a man should be. The university is also very diverse and filled with people of various nationalities and ethnicities. Some of them have very defined gender roles made from busted myths that they still believe in fiercely. For example, a Nigerian girl I spoke with disliked the idea of marrying a man who couldn't pay a bride price because "how else would I know I was marrying a good man?"

Internalization of stereotypes is every bit as much of a problem, and every bit as sexist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, etc, as overt racism or bias.

I was gonna make a post summing up some of those points, but yeah.

I think you made a point in the other thread(though only in regards to the whole "but male superheroes are sexualized too" fallacy) related to another point he made in the video(though not directly).

In particular, that marginalizing portrayals of female/minority characters aren't just relatively more frequent, but actively different from marginalizing portrayals of straight white male characters. Since most media is seen through Male Gaze and most media is marketed to straight white males, most bad portrayals of men are made from the viewpoint of a men and for men.

As for examples from games, most would probably be closer to the guys from 300. Sam Witwickys should exist, but not nearly as high in number, and Doug Simpsons(the "She's Out of Control" guy) are probably nonexistent as far a protagonists go.

Edit: Vincent is sort of a Doug Simpson(sort of...), though definitely more passive. Also relevant because the themes Catherine wants to portray can only be told through Male Gaze.

edited 3rd Dec '12 1:57:44 PM by JotunofBoredom