Solving sexism in games: Fat/ugly human female characters

[fvgazi]

Solving sexism in games: will not get done by changing a character's appearance - as this just perpetuates the problem. The problem with sexism is the unequal power of the gender or sex in question.

The treatment of Women should not be reduced to how a man physically perceives them, whether they are physically attractive or not. This can be a problem in "retro" video games - especially arcade games because the characters are more or less place holders with little to no character development.

The issue of sexism seems to be popping up more nowadays due to the fact that new games rely more on character development(even if it isn't quite up to snuff yet). Of course there are a ton of other relative factors, but the thread seems to be focusing on characters specifically. Typically female roles are either negatively stereotyped (helpless) or so obviously trying to break gender roles that sexist male gamers do not take them seriously.

The "screw it it's just a video game" mentality is just avoiding the problem. It doesn't matter if it doesn't effect you... you're a male - of course you might have a hard time wrapping your head around it. No one is asking male gamers to champion the feminist movement - it would be nice if female gamers just got the respect that any human being would ask for.

--kudos to Perriot. I don't think anyone has explained the argument as well as you have in this thread.

[Gunstar Green]

I'm going to play the devil's advocate here:

Princess Peach, enemy of feminism.

Why?

Because she's a victim? Would it be alright for a male character to be a victim instead? Would it be more or less reprehensible for a male character to not rescue a female character that they love? Does the damsel in distress really denote some kind of sexual prize at the end? Does it really relegate the female to property? Are women in real life never victims? Are victimized women in video games the cause of female victimhood or a reflection of a society that has a lot of female victims? Does every character in fiction have to be a role model?

I struggle with these sorts things as a writer because political correctness is severely limiting to creativity. Should a story not be told because someone, or an entire group of people, might take offense?

In the context of video games, let's face it. Most gamers are male and most game designers are male. The market is male-centric. Certain games will continue to be made to appeal to certain demographics. I'm not saying any of that is right or wrong but the point is it's an industry out to make a profit.

I feel like this has changed somewhat thanks to the resurgence of popularity in western style roleplaying games and the continued rise in popularity of MMO games where people can create avatars of any gender or race and be treated the same by the characters in game.

But not every game is that homogenized and not every game should be that homogenized. Not every story should be inoffensive. The marketplace of ideas should not be held to some official standard of political correctness because it upsets someone.

Our popular entertainment and our media is, and always will be, a carnival mirror reflection of our society. People will vote for what they want with their wallets and the entertainment industry will deliver it. This is where you get the two opposing arguments from; either society must change in order for media to change or media must change in order for society to change. While I think the case is a little bit of both I am more in the camp of the former than the latter. I feel like we should be spending more time worrying about the community and less time worrying about the games themselves.

My ultimate opinion is that demanding that media change to fit a specific moral standard, no matter how right or wrong it is, is not progress. It's censorship.

Real progress takes a lot more time and effort than getting mad about the MacGuffin of the Mario series.

[AppleQueso]

I've never seen the argument as "eliminate all cases of trope X" or even necessarily that "trope X, in itself and in isolation, is an inherently terrible thing."

It's the prevalence of those sorts of tropes that's the issue. It's the fact that there is a disproportionate number of them in comparison to more positive examples. It's why we generally don't make a big deal about tropes that paint men in a bad light, such as the "doofus sitcom husband." You don't have to look anywhere at all to find other good examples of positive portrayals of men, because they're everywhere.

By contrast, when a genuinely good and positive portrayal of a woman shows up in video games, it's kind of a big deal because they're so comparatively rare. It shouldn't be.

[dsheinem]

I've never seen the argument as "eliminate all cases of trope X" or even necessarily that "trope X, in itself and in isolation, is an inherently terrible thing."

It's the prevalence of those sorts of tropes that's the issue. It's the fact that there is a disproportionate number of them in comparison to more positive examples. It's why we generally don't make a big deal about tropes that paint men in a bad light, such as the "doofus sitcom husband." You don't have to look anywhere at all to find other good examples of positive portrayals of men, because they're everywhere.

By contrast, when a genuinely good and positive portrayal of a woman shows up in video games, it's kind of a big deal because they're so comparatively rare. It shouldn't be.

I spent like 20 minutes of blabbering on the podcast last night trying to say this. In the end I did, but not as concisely.

[Gunstar Green]

I've never seen the argument as "eliminate all cases of trope X" or even necessarily that "trope X, in itself and in isolation, is an inherently terrible thing."

It's the prevalence of those sorts of tropes that's the issue. It's the fact that there is a disproportionate number of them in comparison to more positive examples. It's why we generally don't make a big deal about tropes that paint men in a bad light, such as the "doofus sitcom husband." You don't have to look anywhere at all to find other good examples of positive portrayals of men, because they're everywhere.

By contrast, when a genuinely good and positive portrayal of a woman shows up in video games, it's kind of a big deal because they're so comparatively rare. It shouldn't be.

I'm not in total agreement with that honestly. If it were the case then why are we skewering the tropes for exaggerated implications?

It feels like a misdirection. If the real issue is that there needs to be more female role models, the solution should be more female role models.

The only way that's going to happen is more female role models becoming marketable and other tropes becoming less marketable. It's something that will have to happen within the community, not something that can be forced.

[dsheinem]

I've never seen the argument as "eliminate all cases of trope X" or even necessarily that "trope X, in itself and in isolation, is an inherently terrible thing."

It's the prevalence of those sorts of tropes that's the issue. It's the fact that there is a disproportionate number of them in comparison to more positive examples. It's why we generally don't make a big deal about tropes that paint men in a bad light, such as the "doofus sitcom husband." You don't have to look anywhere at all to find other good examples of positive portrayals of men, because they're everywhere.

By contrast, when a genuinely good and positive portrayal of a woman shows up in video games, it's kind of a big deal because they're so comparatively rare. It shouldn't be.

I'm not in total agreement with that honestly. If it were the case then why are we skewering the tropes for exaggerated implications?

It feels like a misdirection. If the real issue is that there needs to be more female role models, the solution should be more female role models.

The only way that's going to happen is more female role models becoming marketable and other tropes becoming less marketable. It's something that will have to happen within the community, not something that can be forced.

What's been forced? Consciousness raising is not censorship.

[AppleQueso]

I've never seen the argument as "eliminate all cases of trope X" or even necessarily that "trope X, in itself and in isolation, is an inherently terrible thing."

It's the prevalence of those sorts of tropes that's the issue. It's the fact that there is a disproportionate number of them in comparison to more positive examples. It's why we generally don't make a big deal about tropes that paint men in a bad light, such as the "doofus sitcom husband." You don't have to look anywhere at all to find other good examples of positive portrayals of men, because they're everywhere.

By contrast, when a genuinely good and positive portrayal of a woman shows up in video games, it's kind of a big deal because they're so comparatively rare. It shouldn't be.

I'm not in total agreement with that honestly. If it were the case then why are we skewering the tropes for exaggerated implications?

It feels like a misdirection. If the real issue is that there needs to be more female role models, the solution should be more female role models.

I think you need to illustrate the problems with the status quo before you can effectively make a case for change.

The only way that's going to happen is more female role models becoming marketable and other tropes becoming less marketable. It's something that will have to happen within the community, not something that can be forced.

I'm not even sure the industry itself knows what is and isn't "marketable" these days.

FWIW, I think things have been steadily improving, but there's a long way to go.

[Erik_Twice]

I've never seen the argument as "eliminate all cases of trope X" or even necessarily that "trope X, in itself and in isolation, is an inherently terrible thing."

Being frank there's plenty of people that have issues with the content itself, not just the prevalence of it. In fact, I would say complaints about the content itself are more common than complaints about the prevalence.

But perhaps it's my perception since I strive to treat each game for itself not for what other games do, dunno.

Consciousness raising is not censorship.

Well, if you say something is objectionable on moral grounds, you are censoring it, by definition.

[dsheinem]

Consciousness raising is not censorship.

Well, if you say something is objectionable on moral grounds, you are censoring it, by definition.

no, you are censuring it.

[Gunstar Green]

What's been forced? Consciousness raising is not censorship.

You're right. Forced isn't the word I should have used since no one is forcing creators to do anything.

I do agree about the frequency being an issue, to a point considering there is still the question of demographics and who a specific game is being made for, and that's why I don't really get why layering implications onto particular tropes does much to raise awareness.

Showing me dozens of women who need rescue next to one strong heroine is a more compelling argument to me than hammering on about why Peach is the bane of all women. I'm not trying to take anything away from that point. My issue is with the people who have an issue with the content of fiction and not with the people who are taking notice of specific trends.

Another question I have rolling around in my head is what makes a strong woman and what makes a good female role model?

For instance, I've seen Sarkeesian argue outside of her "Tropes vs. Women" series that a strong female character is not necessarily feminist because a female character using violence to solve problems is displaying male traits.

While I have to strongly disagree with that, at the same time she has a point about video game violence and in that sense, which male characters are good role models?