surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
If anyone seriously thinks this is a feminist gesture and is alright as one, that person is just plain misguided. If someone's conclusion after this Tomb Raider and Hitman controversies is "ok, women shouldn't be hurt in games", that person is pretty fucking sexist.
This is more pointed at gaming journalists reporting this all around, the person giving the interview doesn't really come off like that and it doesn't even seem it's mainly about women. I don't know much about God of War, but as I understand it's a revenge story, and this is before his reason for revenge, so it kinda makes sense from a story perspective.
This is more pointed at gaming journalists reporting this all around, the person giving the interview doesn't really come off like that and it doesn't even seem it's mainly about women. I don't know much about God of War, but as I understand it's a revenge story, and this is before his reason for revenge, so it kinda makes sense from a story perspective.
Wow, never thought we would be moving back to the fifties.
Is it OK to open the door for the woman again, or is that still taboo?
Is it OK to open the door for the woman again, or is that still taboo?
Yeah, because everyone was treated equally in ancient Greece. Time to re write all mythology and history while we are at it.
So feminism is affecting game development now? The results are that they will now face more exclusion for game (in any form)?
Truth is, nobody cares if males die. That's just not bad enough. Watch a story in the news about a mass killing, and you'll likely hear something like "among the dead women and children" as if a mass killing just wasn't all THAT bad... until women and children were killed too, or maybe killing a woman is as bad as killing a child?
So women are children?
I guess the takeaway is that at least killing men is okay.
Truth is, nobody cares if males die. That's just not bad enough. Watch a story in the news about a mass killing, and you'll likely hear something like "among the dead women and children" as if a mass killing just wasn't all THAT bad... until women and children were killed too, or maybe killing a woman is as bad as killing a child?
So women are children?
I guess the takeaway is that at least killing men is okay.
@Chi:
No, that's exactly what this is, ignoring the issue. If it's really about this, anyway. It basically says "let's just cut out women, so the feminists won't have anything to whine about". Gaming's and gamers' attempts at feminist are more sexist than what they are supposedly up against.
No, that's exactly what this is, ignoring the issue. If it's really about this, anyway. It basically says "let's just cut out women, so the feminists won't have anything to whine about". Gaming's and gamers' attempts at feminist are more sexist than what they are supposedly up against.
I'm not one to be overtly sensitive about violence towards women (I wrote a book that has a killer gutting and burning little girls alive, after all), but the violence directed towards women moreso than men in GoW III really perturbed me. Kratos just slaughters innocent women without any remorse whatsoever to solve certain puzzles, if I recall, which completely detracts from his character. After all, his original drive stemmed from blindly murdering his own wife and daughter. It reversed his motive and made him an all-around less likable character.
Then again, I hated the third GoW anyways, so maybe I'm in the minority.
Then again, I hated the third GoW anyways, so maybe I'm in the minority.
However, if this also counts towards Gorgons and Harpies, well, that would be a bit silly. Those are mythical creatures, not women or men. They're, well, they're THINGS. So it's okay to kill them. But enough of that. I'm not stepping into this sad, disparaging deathtrap of a comments sections.
I demand the God of War games to give you an option to chose between a man or a woman. That you kill women and men and have sex with sexy young men or sexy young women.
WHY ANGRY BOLD MEN ONLY HAVE SEX WITH SEXY YOUNG FEMALES!
Interesting how they'll tone down on that sort of violence but probably they will still objectify women sexually.
WHY ANGRY BOLD MEN ONLY HAVE SEX WITH SEXY YOUNG FEMALES!
Interesting how they'll tone down on that sort of violence but probably they will still objectify women sexually.
VicYoungblood
"Kratos just slaughters innocent women without any remorse whatsoever to solve certain puzzles."
Don't you mean men? I don't remember a single puzzle or even where he slaughters innocent women. Whenever there's women, he does something else completely, though "innocent" they are not.
Maybe on the PSP games? Haven't played those.
"Kratos just slaughters innocent women without any remorse whatsoever to solve certain puzzles."
Don't you mean men? I don't remember a single puzzle or even where he slaughters innocent women. Whenever there's women, he does something else completely, though "innocent" they are not.
Maybe on the PSP games? Haven't played those.
@El Conrado
Yeah, I think the first PSP game there were women bound to walls and you could (but didn't have to) kill them. It wasn't a cut scene, or a QTE, it was just like mashing clay pots, except these clay pots screamed before giving up loot.
I wonder if they'll further cement the insignificance of male slaughter by just swapping genders to protect women. Funny funny stuff, that.
Yeah, I think the first PSP game there were women bound to walls and you could (but didn't have to) kill them. It wasn't a cut scene, or a QTE, it was just like mashing clay pots, except these clay pots screamed before giving up loot.
I wonder if they'll further cement the insignificance of male slaughter by just swapping genders to protect women. Funny funny stuff, that.
@El Conrado
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=R8iMphY-8oo&NR=1
There's that and Kratos chokes a bitch(Hera) as well and gets her wine cup to solve the garden puzzle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=R8iMphY-8oo&NR=1
There's that and Kratos chokes a bitch(Hera) as well and gets her wine cup to solve the garden puzzle.
You don't know what type of violence they pulled back. You assume that it means just open combat in some arena between two warriors or fighting s female monster, instead of something like showing murder of peasant women in some village.
This is exactly what self-censorship looks like. This is the direct result of the media's intimate relationship with feminism.
Instead of Jim making light of all the predictable comments claiming that this is sexist, he should be saying it himself. But he's not. So much for neutrality.
"I never found the imagery too troubling, but I can definitely see why Sony wants to steer clear of the powder keg altogether"
So, there was no issue - but you realize that they're self-censoring themselves because of how indiscriminately feminists and the media make a shitstorm these days? Is this analysis, or you declaring victory? I honestly can't tell.
Instead of Jim making light of all the predictable comments claiming that this is sexist, he should be saying it himself. But he's not. So much for neutrality.
"I never found the imagery too troubling, but I can definitely see why Sony wants to steer clear of the powder keg altogether"
So, there was no issue - but you realize that they're self-censoring themselves because of how indiscriminately feminists and the media make a shitstorm these days? Is this analysis, or you declaring victory? I honestly can't tell.
Next up: racial minorities.
Before too long, we'll be shooting nothing but straight white men... MY DREAM COME TRUE.
Before too long, we'll be shooting nothing but straight white men... MY DREAM COME TRUE.
@ flaszlo
Like I said, I don't agree with how Sony is approaching the issue. I'm happy that at least the triple A industry acknowledges that there is one. And I have hope that industry will grown up enough to not resort to these types of methods to correct it in the future. Again, for the sake of clarity.
>Not ok with cutting women out of games.
>Thinks it's great that the issue is starting to be addressed by the major publishers.
Like I said, I don't agree with how Sony is approaching the issue. I'm happy that at least the triple A industry acknowledges that there is one. And I have hope that industry will grown up enough to not resort to these types of methods to correct it in the future. Again, for the sake of clarity.
>Not ok with cutting women out of games.
>Thinks it's great that the issue is starting to be addressed by the major publishers.
Icehearted: "Truth is, nobody cares if males die. That's just not bad enough. Watch a story in the news about a mass killing, and you'll likely hear something like "among the dead women and children" as if a mass killing just wasn't all THAT bad... until women and children were killed too, or maybe killing a woman is as bad as killing a child?"
Yep, you completely nailed it. Also, this really highlights how blatantly feminism is not interested in equality, or in gender issues for both genders. If it was, we would see an analysis of this phenomenon you pointed out. It's worth discussing, if we're all focused on gender issues right?
But nope, you will never see a feminist discuss what you're talking about - male disposability. They can never admit that it's real, because it makes the entire idea of "the patriarchy" seem like complete nonsense.
Here's what gender studies would look like, if they really were about equality - and cared about both genders.
Feminism and the Disposable Male
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA
Yep, you completely nailed it. Also, this really highlights how blatantly feminism is not interested in equality, or in gender issues for both genders. If it was, we would see an analysis of this phenomenon you pointed out. It's worth discussing, if we're all focused on gender issues right?
But nope, you will never see a feminist discuss what you're talking about - male disposability. They can never admit that it's real, because it makes the entire idea of "the patriarchy" seem like complete nonsense.
Here's what gender studies would look like, if they really were about equality - and cared about both genders.
Feminism and the Disposable Male
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA
I really don't see why is this an issue that has to be discussed. It's an extremely violent game, if they "pull back" on the violence against women they are essentially discriminating them, considering them an inferior enemy not worthy of one of Kratos's ultra-bloody combos.
In real life I find violence against women more disturbing. Some people would call me a "white knight" for saying that but any normal person would agree with me. So I wouldn't mind if some games toned down the violence against women a bit.
I have no problem with Kratos fighting women who are on equal footing. Meaning they're powerful bosses or mighty amazonian warriors. What I dislike is when Kratos comes across a helpless women who is pleading for her life and then he kills her.
@ VicYoungblood
"but the violence directed towards women moreso than men in GoW III really perturbed me. Kratos just slaughters innocent women without any remorse whatsoever to solve certain puzzles, if I recall, which completely detracts from his character."
Actually, it doesn't "detract" from his character, it reinforces his character. Kratos has been killing innocent people (men and women) to solve puzzles since the first stage of the first game. The problem is, people are conditioned not to give a fuck until it's a woman (see: "disposable male"). If this part of his character agitates you, the game is not for you, because the thing that differentiated Kratos from other action protagonists was that he never cared about sacrificing innocent people in order to progress.
"but the violence directed towards women moreso than men in GoW III really perturbed me. Kratos just slaughters innocent women without any remorse whatsoever to solve certain puzzles, if I recall, which completely detracts from his character."
Actually, it doesn't "detract" from his character, it reinforces his character. Kratos has been killing innocent people (men and women) to solve puzzles since the first stage of the first game. The problem is, people are conditioned not to give a fuck until it's a woman (see: "disposable male"). If this part of his character agitates you, the game is not for you, because the thing that differentiated Kratos from other action protagonists was that he never cared about sacrificing innocent people in order to progress.
Are they serious!?!?! Is this because of the whole Tomb Raider issue of her being abused by men in the reboot? A great chunk of Greek mythological creatures are female. Taking away the female factor completely kills the list of potential mythological creatures to fight in the game. I don't think anyone ever had a problem with the previous God War Games. I'm going to say they are destroying a formula that is not broken due to some people being sensitive now due to the Tomb Raider reboot. Geez politics is killing art.
Are they serious!?!?! Is this because of the whole Tomb Raider issue of her being abused by men in the reboot? A great chunk of Greek mythological creatures are female. Taking away the female factor completely kills the list of potential mythological creatures to fight in the game. I don't think anyone ever had a problem with the previous God War Games. I'm going to say they are destroying a formula that is not broken due to some people being sensitive now due to the Tomb Raider reboot. Geez politics is killing art.
@ Nihilist
"In real life I find violence against women more disturbing. Some people would call me a "white knight" for saying that but any normal person would agree with me."
Then you are a sexist. There really isn't any way around it.
"In real life I find violence against women more disturbing. Some people would call me a "white knight" for saying that but any normal person would agree with me."
Then you are a sexist. There really isn't any way around it.
@Shinta
I really hope you and others don't really believe the things you say, or at least not what you're saying on here. Feminist and Feminism are not anti equality or anti male. No more then the gay rights movement is anti hetero or the human rights movement is against white people. There are extremist in every movement but they don't represent the group.
I under stand the feeling that you have to protect your own image or the image of something you like, but acknowledging that there is a problem isn't admitting that you or the thing you like is bad just that there are things that need to be changed for the benefit of everyone.
I really hope you and others don't really believe the things you say, or at least not what you're saying on here. Feminist and Feminism are not anti equality or anti male. No more then the gay rights movement is anti hetero or the human rights movement is against white people. There are extremist in every movement but they don't represent the group.
I under stand the feeling that you have to protect your own image or the image of something you like, but acknowledging that there is a problem isn't admitting that you or the thing you like is bad just that there are things that need to be changed for the benefit of everyone.
ammoelf3: Kratos did similar things to other people in every GOW whats your point it had nothing to do with gender so why bring it up.
Feminism is, by its nature, divisive, which is why I am not a feminist, nor am I masculist. I am an egalitarian.
Get these stupid politically correct idea the hell out of my video games!! And Jim, if you support this PC shit, you're a moron. Please do a Jimquisition on how you support artistic freedom and do not support politically correct idiocy.
You people need to chill the fuck out. The game is still going to end up being Kratos murdering his wife and daughter for no apparent reason then murdering the fuck out of anything that stands in his way has he tries to avenge the wife and daughter he murdered in the 1st place. We are still going to end up murdering shit so who the fuck cares if we murder slightly less women than before.
It's not like they are taking a strong female lead and rapping her for pathos and kudos.
It's not like they are taking a strong female lead and rapping her for pathos and kudos.
Also something important to Kratos character is that he is an irredeemable monster gender doesn't matter to him he just does whatever he can to progress with his goals.
@timtheterrible
Why did you begin the sentence with "But"? I swear I wasn't making a point for either side, I was just saying there was a thing that happened!
Please don't be mad at me! Would it help you be less mad at me if I said I was a woman?
Why did you begin the sentence with "But"? I swear I wasn't making a point for either side, I was just saying there was a thing that happened!
Please don't be mad at me! Would it help you be less mad at me if I said I was a woman?
@timtheterrible: "Then you are a sexist. There really isn't any way around it."
You're over-simplifying it too much. Violence against women is seen as more disturbing because throughout all of our evolutionary history, from primate to early humans, females were physically weaker, and the limiting factor in reproduction. Seeing violence against women as worse is one of the key reasons that we have been successful as a species. It's instinctual, as much as the fact that they are biologically equipped to bear children.
The only reason this gets tricky is because feminism has sought out to erase all gender identity completely in the name of equality. But actually they never advocate for equality, because they preserve every single double standard that benefits them - such as seeing violence against women as worse. Feminism instead is about female self-interest. They want the equality that benefits them, and the inequality that benefits them.
I think the right answer is realizing that we have different gender roles, and gender identities that are complimentary, different but still equal when looked at as a whole.
This video gets into these theories showing how evolution could have potentially lead to various sexist attitudes that were actually crucial to survival of the species, and crucial to protecting women and children.
Benevolent sexism?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VupEC0cAWo
So yes ... it IS sexism. But, it's a kind of sexism that almost everyone is in favor of keeping. When people post up a picture of a male with a bruised face, no one cares. When people post up a picture of Anita Sarkeesian with a bruised face, multiple people feel physically ill and ask for it to be taken down or hidden behind trigger warnings. That is benevolent sexism. Both men and women feel this way.
So if you prefer keeping ideas of benevolent sexism in place, then gender studies and gender activism is more complicated than just simply asking for "equality." No one wants full equality, clearly.
You're over-simplifying it too much. Violence against women is seen as more disturbing because throughout all of our evolutionary history, from primate to early humans, females were physically weaker, and the limiting factor in reproduction. Seeing violence against women as worse is one of the key reasons that we have been successful as a species. It's instinctual, as much as the fact that they are biologically equipped to bear children.
The only reason this gets tricky is because feminism has sought out to erase all gender identity completely in the name of equality. But actually they never advocate for equality, because they preserve every single double standard that benefits them - such as seeing violence against women as worse. Feminism instead is about female self-interest. They want the equality that benefits them, and the inequality that benefits them.
I think the right answer is realizing that we have different gender roles, and gender identities that are complimentary, different but still equal when looked at as a whole.
This video gets into these theories showing how evolution could have potentially lead to various sexist attitudes that were actually crucial to survival of the species, and crucial to protecting women and children.
Benevolent sexism?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VupEC0cAWo
So yes ... it IS sexism. But, it's a kind of sexism that almost everyone is in favor of keeping. When people post up a picture of a male with a bruised face, no one cares. When people post up a picture of Anita Sarkeesian with a bruised face, multiple people feel physically ill and ask for it to be taken down or hidden behind trigger warnings. That is benevolent sexism. Both men and women feel this way.
So if you prefer keeping ideas of benevolent sexism in place, then gender studies and gender activism is more complicated than just simply asking for "equality." No one wants full equality, clearly.
@ Fugly
You might have misread my comment, or perhaps I didn't convey it as well as I should have. I wasn't accusing you of anything, but I was offering a directly comparable example to the one you mentioned.
You might have misread my comment, or perhaps I didn't convey it as well as I should have. I wasn't accusing you of anything, but I was offering a directly comparable example to the one you mentioned.
When I think about violence against women, I think about spousal abuse, I think about sexual violence, I think about the woman in Saudi Arabia who was arrested for driving her uncle to the hospital (women aren't even allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia), I think about women being told they will never be anything more than wives and mothers because that's what women are supposed to be.
But this? This doesn't pull back anything. It is just pathetic. And horribly sexist.
But this? This doesn't pull back anything. It is just pathetic. And horribly sexist.
@Shinta
I will just say this: there is no such thing as "benevolent" sexism, racism, slavery or oppression of any kind. These things are only benevolent in the mind of the oppressors or those trying to rationalize their own attitudes. In fact, the benevolence argument is exactly how oppressors of all stripes have tried to justify their oppression throughout history.
I will just say this: there is no such thing as "benevolent" sexism, racism, slavery or oppression of any kind. These things are only benevolent in the mind of the oppressors or those trying to rationalize their own attitudes. In fact, the benevolence argument is exactly how oppressors of all stripes have tried to justify their oppression throughout history.
@ Shinta
I often agree with you, and I've been subscribed to girlwriteswhat for quite a while (she is excellent, by the way), but I think that if a person truly aims to be egalitarian, one can't just brush of these implications hypocritical ways of thinking because our instincts tell us otherwise, especially when those instincts are exploited by radical feminists.
People are people, whether they be men or women, and both should be treated equally. I KNOW no one would have made a peep if someone made a similar game featuring Jim Sterling, but that's because violence against men is normalized, just as is their disposability (see "Prostate Cancer and Breast Cancer" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vx8ZzGuIkY TRIGGER WARNING--If you are a man, this will severely piss you the fuck off). Either we agree that both genders are equal, or we continue to perpetuate the idea that they aren't.
I often agree with you, and I've been subscribed to girlwriteswhat for quite a while (she is excellent, by the way), but I think that if a person truly aims to be egalitarian, one can't just brush of these implications hypocritical ways of thinking because our instincts tell us otherwise, especially when those instincts are exploited by radical feminists.
People are people, whether they be men or women, and both should be treated equally. I KNOW no one would have made a peep if someone made a similar game featuring Jim Sterling, but that's because violence against men is normalized, just as is their disposability (see "Prostate Cancer and Breast Cancer" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vx8ZzGuIkY TRIGGER WARNING--If you are a man, this will severely piss you the fuck off). Either we agree that both genders are equal, or we continue to perpetuate the idea that they aren't.
Nice that this is a decision they made for themselves, rather than being pressured into it by some specific outrage.
@Shinta
I don't see how there is anything benevolent in that line of thinking. If you are valuing the life of one person over another because of something they have no control over (in this case, their sex) than how is that equal when looked at as a whole? One side is clearly being given more of the whole than the other without having done anything to deserve it.
Limited reproduction is not an argument because people don't reproduce like animals. We saw that after WWI in Europe. There was a lack of available men and the population had trouble comeing back in some cases (and I'm sure the decrease in genetic diversity doesn't help things either).
If my life and physical well being is some how less important than that of a women, than there can never be any sort of moral justification for "complimentary equality". This whole line of thinking implies that individuals are only deserving of life in relation to someone else. In other words, I don't want my worth as a person decided on something I have no control over in relation to a "complimentary whole" I never agreed to.
I know this is a long response. I just think your reaction to modern feminism (or an aspect of it) is going to far in the other direction. Morality seems to fall apart when we start deciding the right to life of human beings based on one chromosome. Even if it is a natural instinct, that does not mean it is still rational and relevent.
Also, justifying behavior on animal instinct seems dangerous since it seems like you could justify just about anything.
I don't see how there is anything benevolent in that line of thinking. If you are valuing the life of one person over another because of something they have no control over (in this case, their sex) than how is that equal when looked at as a whole? One side is clearly being given more of the whole than the other without having done anything to deserve it.
Limited reproduction is not an argument because people don't reproduce like animals. We saw that after WWI in Europe. There was a lack of available men and the population had trouble comeing back in some cases (and I'm sure the decrease in genetic diversity doesn't help things either).
If my life and physical well being is some how less important than that of a women, than there can never be any sort of moral justification for "complimentary equality". This whole line of thinking implies that individuals are only deserving of life in relation to someone else. In other words, I don't want my worth as a person decided on something I have no control over in relation to a "complimentary whole" I never agreed to.
I know this is a long response. I just think your reaction to modern feminism (or an aspect of it) is going to far in the other direction. Morality seems to fall apart when we start deciding the right to life of human beings based on one chromosome. Even if it is a natural instinct, that does not mean it is still rational and relevent.
Also, justifying behavior on animal instinct seems dangerous since it seems like you could justify just about anything.
@CaimDark: That's not true at all. First of all, no one said anything about slavery. That's a complete non-sequitor.
Benevolent racism: Black history month, but there is no arab-american history month, no white history month, no jewish history month and so on. The same could be said about affirmative action. I'm not commenting at all on the value or legitimacy of these programs, but they both qualify as benevolent racism. No one would ever call it that, because the word is so charged, but it is clearly treating people differently specifically because of race, in a non-offensive way that is not perfectly equal.
Benevolent sexism: Viewing violence against women as more repulsive than violence against men. That's very obviously not treating both sexes perfectly equally. Do you think that's not benevolent? Is it oppressive?
I'm not talking about racism throughout all of history. I'm also not talking about all sexism throughout all of history. Even in that video, she says right at the beginning that it's - at best - a double edged sword that has produced a long list of oppressive forms of sexism to go along with it. But that does not at all mean that it can't, or doesn't exist.
I just honestly don't even know if you bothered to watch the video. Here's another example of benevolent sexism. Let's say that a "beat up" flash game came out for Jack Thompson during the "ban-GTA" scandal he was pushing. Do you think anyone would ask for the image to get removed because it's painful to look at? Be honest.
Or another example of benevolent sexism. This article. Do you think the God of War creator is being "the oppressor" here? To me, he seems more like the victim, struggling to accommodate vocal criticism and populist feminism in the media.
Benevolent racism: Black history month, but there is no arab-american history month, no white history month, no jewish history month and so on. The same could be said about affirmative action. I'm not commenting at all on the value or legitimacy of these programs, but they both qualify as benevolent racism. No one would ever call it that, because the word is so charged, but it is clearly treating people differently specifically because of race, in a non-offensive way that is not perfectly equal.
Benevolent sexism: Viewing violence against women as more repulsive than violence against men. That's very obviously not treating both sexes perfectly equally. Do you think that's not benevolent? Is it oppressive?
I'm not talking about racism throughout all of history. I'm also not talking about all sexism throughout all of history. Even in that video, she says right at the beginning that it's - at best - a double edged sword that has produced a long list of oppressive forms of sexism to go along with it. But that does not at all mean that it can't, or doesn't exist.
I just honestly don't even know if you bothered to watch the video. Here's another example of benevolent sexism. Let's say that a "beat up" flash game came out for Jack Thompson during the "ban-GTA" scandal he was pushing. Do you think anyone would ask for the image to get removed because it's painful to look at? Be honest.
Or another example of benevolent sexism. This article. Do you think the God of War creator is being "the oppressor" here? To me, he seems more like the victim, struggling to accommodate vocal criticism and populist feminism in the media.
follow
