I agree with most of your points, especially this being fascinating, but I don’t think it should be ignored that she is/was not being objective. She already established a tone and received the (sadly) expected reaction to her action, which I’m sure she calculated.
The legs, jiggly boobies on display, ultra short skirt, win pose with the thermometer in the boobs, actual friggin’ PANTY SHOTS during gameplay?
Yeahhhh…Mike Z or whomever created this character knew what they were going for. This character is as guilty as any out there.
Peacock: “Helllloooo Fan service!”
Valentine actually has a more legit fighting pose. Nothing wrong with it really.
Mai on the other hand has no excuses… just jiggling and nothing more.
$150k to play video games?
I respect the hustle.
Too bad I don’t have the mind of a troll, so I can’t think up crap like this. I wish I’d have thought of this. I’ve got more than enough attractive female friends. I could have done a much better write-up, and that would’ve been an easy $130K. I may need to have a confab with the trolls of SRK…
what a surprise, a thread made by xes where he express his opinions as absolutes and dismiss any pov that differs to him :rolleyes:
on topic
what amount of crap, only on america
What the fuck is a Trope?
It’s a reoccurring theme
i know you are tolling but
i love what she did with the Legacy of Kain Series, a woman that truly understands how vampire should be portrayed
and her work with Uncharted is great to
i guess that the problem is that she is not part of the action as the rated m for manly members of the cast
That’s actually true. She’s trying to analyze an emotional response to common media portrayals, which isn’t going to be very objective. I’ve not seen a lot of objectivity on any sides, tbh. She might very well have expected the reaction she got. “If I state my opinions about this issue, I bet some dudes on the internet will threaten to rape me or whine at length about how I must be jealous and/or suck in bed, and hopefully throw my name around enough to = profit.” If that’s the case, then her point has already been made, and the community response is just as predictable and childish as she wanted/needed it to be. Someone figured out how to profit off of stupid on the internet, and feel like their opinions are being validated by doing so. Good for her, I guess.
Even in this thread, flags go up immediately when people respond to this woman’s pointing out of common female tropes with this irrational fear that she, or women in general, want everyone to remove all boobs from their games, and then it becomes a “can’t see the forest for the boobs” situation that gets fixated purely on aesthetics (which are* always* going to be subjective and rooted in personal opinion). I’m not even convinced that the main thrust of her argument is that common female portrayals need to be removed or drastically altered, just that they’re there and she believes that it’s worth examining what they are, why they’re there and - hopefully - what effect they might be having rather than just shrugging and saying “well, that’s how it is.” I do think pushing for more awareness and discussion with a series of self-starring video rants is somewhat egotistical and self-serving, and in that sense comes across to me as misguided, but that’s why I didn’t toss her any money. I don’t think that should undermine the topic as a whole, though, it’s just my opinion about that one particular woman’s way of addressing it.
(We have a science thread? …Does it have breasts?)
Well, I certainly expected this thread to explode, but this seems a bit much.
For the record, I don’t agree with Skullgirls character designs for half of those characters, but I haven’t played the game and am still willing to give it a chance despite the fact that Valentine makes me roll my eyes.
Regardless, there are some other things I want to reply to, but pretty much this entire post is going to be xes outside of me quoting Mr. X by necessity. I’ll get around to the other posts later today. (Maybe.)
I wasn’t aware I was Kingpin, Daredevil. Since I’m such a spiteful person, I’m going to fisk even more now.
gasping noises
Seriously, though, I need to address something you said at the end of your post before anything else. You don’t want to multi-quote? I’m fine with that. I kinda have to since, at least at present, your argument is more ill-defined to me than you currently seem to think it is.
Oh, I’m aware that almost nothing is ever absolute; I just wasn’t aware if you were aware of that given how much you were focusing on the sex object part (and still are) without really defining that.
That said, I can agree that her breasts are the central part of her (visual) design because…“c’mon”. It’s a given, especially due to where her breasts are located and how big her are (though they’re actually still realistic in size unlike…Ivy’s breasts).
Actually, let’s talk about that more.
It’s kinda difficult to have counterarguments when the person you’re arguing with fails to properly define the initial argument. You keep using “sex object”, but as I said in my last post–the one you’re responding!–last night, you still really haven’t defined what that is. Sure, it might be self-evident you, despite the fact that you can’t even tell me what it is to you or how to solve it, but it obviously isn’t to me. Is it really that difficult to establish an argument on common ground without being condescending, especially on a topic that’s obviously controversial, fractious and not agreed upon as it is?
Tell me, then, if any of this applies to Mai being a sex object:
-
She’s a “sex object” because she was designed to be attractive despite there being few depictions of heroic, “unattractive” characters of either sex in fiction as a whole.
-
She’s a “sex object” because she was designed after “porn stars” measurement-wise despite the fact that she herself isn’t a porn star and is a fighting game character who is rather wholesome and single-targeted in her (visually present) sexuality.
-
She’s a “sex object” because of her outfit, which lacks a bra despite the fact some women find them genuinely uncomfortable and that giving her a bra, even if it made her breasts jiggle less, would probably draw just much attention to the area (if not more) due to the color contrast between the fabric and her skin assuming she kept the same outfit.
-
She’s a “sex object” because, despite all the attempts at positive characterization that SNK has given her, she’s an attractive female and thus can be nothing more.
You can see where I’m going with this, I would think. If you’re going to claim I’m not giving you counterarguments, despite the fact that I’m actively asking you to better define things and trying to make sure that we’re actually talking about the same thing, then that’s because your own argument is still quite hazy in that “we don’t want to actually solve the problem, just talk about it” type way.
Oh, come on. For someone who was throwing around the word “hypersexual” earlier, you’re ignoring how “hypersexual” the Internet as a whole is here.
Do we even need to talk about how easy it is to find porn of anything on the Internet? Rule 34 and all that jazz. Just because there’s a bunch of discussions on the web about how hard people want to do Mai doesn’t really prove anything if that’s what you’re getting at. Pretty much any woman gets lusted after by someone on the Internet, even if they’re “hideous”; hell, any man too since you know, women lust after people too as do gay people of both sexes and, of course, bisexuals.
I know you’re talking more about official media of Mai from SNK’s promotions and such, but, honestly, nothing comes to mind that’s been over-sexualized of her. Again, I’m not saying that there isn’t such media; I’m just not aware of it. When I think of Mai’s depiction, I think of those excellent CvS2 drawings of her and the rest of the cast where her breasts really aren’t the focal point at all or, at least, they aren’t given undue attention; they’re just big like, you know, they actually are.
Again, what would be a “proper” depiction of her promotion-wise? Obviously not bending over like her horrible KOFXIII posture, but are they forbidden from showing her breasts? Her ass (even if it’s something innocent as because she’s seated and shown from behind or the side talking to someone else like King)? Her legs?
“C’mon” what? You do obviously find Mai’s outfit “silly” in some respect if you want to change it, even if you only want to change because she’s a presented as a sex object to you and it should be something more “respectable”. I never said that you didn’t like it, especially since I don’t know your tastes, but liking something and finding it silly aren’t mutually exclusive.
Is redesigning her in a way that’s less sexualized to you, that you think would actually work, that difficult? Why is it so difficult if she’s clearly being presented as a sex object?
It’s not like I’m going to be grading you on this–you must design Sheng Long to stand a chance! I was just asking since it seemed like you would be able to do it easily. Apparently not since you couldn’t get beyond “give her a bra”. This despite, as you said, SNK having tons of more female designs that work that aren’t nearly as “hypersexual”.
You said it yourself. I saw the “that’s her entire purpose” line with you harping on it and thought you meant “solely”. That part’s cleared up now. Everything else…
Purpose? You mean visually? Because that’s rather a trick question, but I’m guessing that’s what you’re talking about since “purpose” seems a weird to ask about when I’m talking about personality.
But if you want to play that game, then her purpose is to fight. Again, she’s a fighting game character. As sexualized as her visual design might be, if we’re going to ascribe something as silly as “purpose” to this argument, then she’s literally in the game to fight because that’s what the engine is designed around and she’s not a background character.
There. Game over. Thank you for playing. Please put your initials here.
…Obviously, that’s not what you’re asking though. But you’re being transparent in asking me to affirm that she’s purposely designed to be sexy visually, especially when I never disputed that since it’s obvious. I’ve been disputing, again, that she’s a sex object solely because she’s designed attractively and who she’s designed after. I’ve already said I don’t agree with the KOFXIII posture, but that seems to be the only thing you’re taking away from what I’ve said here.
She has more going on than just being a big pair of tits and being in love with Andy. (Is being in love with one person who returns your feelings actually that bad of a thing? Her relationship with Andy actually kinda undermines the sex object argument a bit given that she’s arguably a parody of it given how relatively ineffective her looks are on Andy, who likes her more for her personality, despite him obviously being attracted to her and him & her being together.)
Aside from her relationship with Andy, she has good relationships with a bunch of the characters like Terry, Joe, King, Yuri and a good many of the characters from Fatal Fury, including Blue Mary and (I think) Xiangfei. Hell, a lot of her endings are her just talking with people about how fun the year has been or making sure they’re okay rather than talking about how great & sexy Andy is and only that. Given that a lot of the time she’s talking with her all-female team, that means at least one conversation of hers has passed that overrated Bedechel Test.
She’s also basically Hokutomaru’s foster mother in Garou IIRC.
If she was a sex object and SNK was interested as presenting her as only–emphasis on mine now–a sex object, then why bother including any of that? Why not just have all of her endings allude to how much she wants to jump Andy? Why even have her in the game as a character who gets to fight than a jiggling background character? It’s not like SNK was devoid of attractive females, so…?
That’s a (faulty) tautology and you know it. Thanks for at least admitting it, though. It helps me realize how pointless this argument is; however, I like to hear myself talk/type and destroy people’s eyes, so I’ll finish this up.
I concur. Shouldn’t it be easy to redesign Mai along the lines of Mature, Blue Mary or even Shermie then?
Again, that’s a rather self-serving paragraph, at least if you’re going to argue that it’s “obviously” egregious.
It’s conspicuous. That’s obvious given…big breasts. KOF XIII pandering aside, since those people are actually speaking with their money unlike the women who, legitimately or not, feel they’re being “victimized” here, it being “egregious” is debatable, especially when there are quite a few other, worse examples. Yes, I’m aware that numbers don’t by stop something from being “egregious” by themselves, but Mai doesn’t really “stand out” to me in that (negative) light despite her popularity.
Basically, Mr. X brought up the point I was trying to get at and the reason, besides your continued lack of definition of “sex object”, that I just can’t really see Mai in this light outside of our agreement upon her KOFXIII posture being terrible.
So, basically, this is what I want to know from you, xes. If you answer nothing else, then please answer this.
Fair warning, I’m about to be a bitch.
Fuck you you ignorant piece of shit. You don’t know shit about the military and you’re going to judge me? If you don’t understand what Intel does you need to straight up shut the fuck up.
My ass was on the line every time I was on duty. If I fucked up not only could I be directly responsible for the death of thousands of troops, but breaching national security if you fuck up an encryption code gets you sent to this lovely place called Leavenworth, a military prison that makes federal pound me in the ass prison look like Disneyland.
What in the holy fuck have you ever done to give you the right to judge anyone in uniform? Keep enjoying the freedom we provide.
Now then, back on topic.
I’m actually really proud of a good deal of you and your points. Good job SRK!
Me personally I see human beings as sexual creatures, so of course sex is going to be used to sell products. Anything that is appealing to the human mind is going to be used to market a product. If it’s not sex being used, it’s humor, action, etc.
And yes, many females depicted in games aren’t realistic for the most part. But there are a lot of things that are depicted in games that aren’t realistic, and I would argue that it is this departure from reality that makes them fun. We’re not flying or shooting fireballs out of our hands either.
Games, like any other creative or artistic expression, reflects the human condition. So if men want to see T&A I see that as just nature. It’s the same reason why romance novels have protective and handsome guys that are often sexualized on the cover of the book. So if men want to see T&A and you want to limit that, I see that as censorship. Who are you to deny them?
As long as an individual is not being forced into a hypersexualized role I see no issue with this. Again, humans are sexual creatures and it’s our freedom to express that sexuality. So if I want to work at Hooters and sell wings in tiny orange shorts then that’s my choice. No one is twisting my arm. And since a game character isn’t a real individual and the creation of another, they can do with them as they please. It’s the same reason why Trey Parker and Matt Stone get to kill Kenny over and over even though many people probably find no comedic value in a child repeatedly dying (I do, cause I’m a sadistic bitch).
All I would really ask that some of you please realize that in the truest sense feminism is about gender equality. And some people will try and exploit any movement (whether against sexism, racism, etc.) for their own gain. Often this means stirring up shit to bring attention to themselves. So please don’t look down on feminism because of selfish actions. I would argue people like this aren’t feminists, but using the movement against sexism for their own gain.
that slut leveled up her game and you dont see her complaining about female portrayal. :bravo: 
I personally always thought the theory of the male gaze was a way for feminist to vilify male sexuality, not to mention its also rather hyprocritical especially with feminist like noami wolf who talks about how the male gaze can"harm a woman’s self image"yet wolf goes out of her way to always appear in a manner that is sexy and attractive…it’s like saying"I’m going to look sexy but don’t you dare look at me".
As far as the topic is concerned I thinks it’s already ran its course. Feminist theory is easily 1 of the most flawed ideologies I’ve ever come across so I think applying it to gaming isn’t a good idea, no need to over think things in this regard. In truth gaming is a business that is aiming towards a particular demographic, if insecure attention whores like this woman is so offended by the presence of sexy computer generated women then quite simply stop playin the games or try make a effort to involve more women in the community…but bitching and complaining till you get your way won’t change things and more importantly no one will respect you for it.
Here:
This site tracks and composes a multitude of character archetypes, cliches, and plot devices commonly found in fiction (and sometimes IRL) and transforms them into engaging articles; cleverly named in reference to the work they most prominently appear in.
Welcome to your new homepage.
Ryu doesn’t mind showing weakness. In fact, his defining trait (maybe his only trait, thank you very much Capcom storytelling wizards) is that he views his own weaknesses as a chance to get better.
Of course, that doesn’t mean you’re wrong in general. There are a lot of idealized men depicted in the media. They’re even sexualized to a degree. The difference is, the depictions don’t tend to be so one-note about the sex angle.
Except Ryu. No homo, but there’s just something about his “I haven’t had a bath in a week” way of carrying himself…
I don’t think so at all. I think he would get the same reaction that the idiot husband on a shitty sitcom would get.
“Aw, gee, that darn Jim Belushi screwed everything up again!”
audience laughs
“Now let’s all get together in the living room for a heartfelt discussion about family values.”
audience awwws
On next week’s episode, Jim gets caught committing tax fraud and manages to keep his job, while one of his subordinates gets outed as gay and gets fired because of it.
Wow.
The second part of this post is downright, outright sensible.
And the first part merely, albeit severely, misguided.
Wished I figured out how to profit off the stupid on the internet >:[
When she uses the topic for her soap box, it’s kind of difficult for the uninformed internet user or gamer to not undermine it or separate the content from the opinion. She should be treating the topic more seriously.
Yes, it is incredibly annoying when people in a topic like this act like the objectification/sexualization is a test that ends if the question “Does this character make my pants tight?” is answered “yes”. If the character purpose goes beyond that, doesn’t it stop being objectification/sexualization?
I understood in the context of hiphop/rap videos when that was brought because that’s literally all they were. They had no story, no personality in the video, they were just there to be eye candy.
But for video game characters, when these females have stories, pasts, dreams, ideologies, personalities, goals, relatable traits we can connect with, doesn’t that stop the idea that the purpose of the character to be objectified? That her being sexy is a physical trait or her sexiness is a personality trait along with everything else?
The first minute of the video sets the tone for her “project” that something is “wrong” and the hypothesis is “Have you ever noticed that, with a few notable exceptions, basically all female characters in video games fall into a small handful of cliches and stereotypes?” That doesn’t look bad on paper, but watch the video and her body language and voice and comes off different (maybe that’s just her).
Oh man someone seriously talking up TVTropes. It’s a harmless enough site, if you never visit the forums and stay away from most of the “works” pages, but there’s a lot of pretty creepy stuff there, and the forums are famous for sheltering pedophiles (as long as they don’t explicitly say yes I’m a pedophile, because the administration is incapable of reading between the lines) and almost strictly disallowing any sort of negativity, meaning anyone who calls anyone out on their terrible opinions gets banned. One could also take the stance that the entire site is pointless and leads to serious pigeonholing, actively discouraging analysis (There is an analysis tab on every page and I think less than 1% of articles have anything written on them) and thus is a terrible resource even ignoring the unbelievably awful forums. But I still think it can be sorta fun sometimes.
On topic, uh, sexism is a serious problem, viewing sexualized depictions of women gives positive feedback to people who are likely to objectify women and generally acts as a corrupting influence on those people that leads to more extreme thought, and uh, some other crap I guess
I disagree because critical theory is pretty awesome.
I like sex.