[Xae]

Silencer, on 11 March 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

You will NOT personally attack each other. Each other's posts/ideas/opinions, fine. But not the other person. We put this shit in place because some people turned the religion forum into a slagging match about each other, and moreover some people take it, I dunno, personally, when they get called some very nasty things online. Go figure.

It would appear that your whomping stick has grown since I last saw it swung around. Would it be cool if I abbreviated your name to Silly when addressing you on the forums?

Nevertheless, this thread was an interesting read. I like me a good ol' heated argument about social issues. Sadly, I don't think I've got anything incendiary to contribute this time (although, damned if you wouldn't disagree with me just for the sake of it).

[Silencer]

Xae, on 06 May 2013 - 02:05 AM, said:

Silencer, on 11 March 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

You will NOT personally attack each other. Each other's posts/ideas/opinions, fine. But not the other person. We put this shit in place because some people turned the religion forum into a slagging match about each other, and moreover some people take it, I dunno, personally, when they get called some very nasty things online. Go figure.

It would appear that your whomping stick has grown since I last saw it swung around. Would it be cool if I abbreviated your name to Silly when addressing you on the forums?

Nevertheless, this thread was an interesting read. I like me a good ol' heated argument about social issues. Sadly, I don't think I've got anything incendiary to contribute this time (although, damned if you wouldn't disagree with me just for the sake of it).

My whomping stick has always been considerably larger in the Discussion Board here. Especially when I find myself having to repeat common sense over and over again! XD

I've been called "Sil" before...probably been addressed as "Silly" too, lol, but whatever floats your boat. XD

[Morgoth]

Silencer, on 06 May 2013 - 02:24 AM, said:

Xae, on 06 May 2013 - 02:05 AM, said:

Silencer, on 11 March 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

You will NOT personally attack each other. Each other's posts/ideas/opinions, fine. But not the other person. We put this shit in place because some people turned the religion forum into a slagging match about each other, and moreover some people take it, I dunno, personally, when they get called some very nasty things online. Go figure.

It would appear that your whomping stick has grown since I last saw it swung around. Would it be cool if I abbreviated your name to Silly when addressing you on the forums?

Nevertheless, this thread was an interesting read. I like me a good ol' heated argument about social issues. Sadly, I don't think I've got anything incendiary to contribute this time (although, damned if you wouldn't disagree with me just for the sake of it).

My whomping stick has always been considerably larger in the Discussion Board here. Especially when I find myself having to repeat common sense over and over again! XD

I've been called "Sil" before...probably been addressed as "Silly" too, lol, but whatever floats your boat. XD

Hah!

[LinearPhilosopher]

Silencer, on 06 May 2013 - 02:24 AM, said:

Xae, on 06 May 2013 - 02:05 AM, said:

Silencer, on 11 March 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

You will NOT personally attack each other. Each other's posts/ideas/opinions, fine. But not the other person. We put this shit in place because some people turned the religion forum into a slagging match about each other, and moreover some people take it, I dunno, personally, when they get called some very nasty things online. Go figure.

It would appear that your whomping stick has grown since I last saw it swung around. Would it be cool if I abbreviated your name to Silly when addressing you on the forums?

Nevertheless, this thread was an interesting read. I like me a good ol' heated argument about social issues. Sadly, I don't think I've got anything incendiary to contribute this time (although, damned if you wouldn't disagree with me just for the sake of it).

My whomping stick has always been considerably larger in the Discussion Board here. Especially when I find myself having to repeat common sense over and over again! XD

I've been called "Sil" before...probably been addressed as "Silly" too, lol, but whatever floats your boat. XD

Brilliant idea, i'm getting on this bandwagon

[Khellendros]

Part 2 of Sarkeesian's Tropes vs Women in Video Games is up.



It was actually taken down by Youtube because the flag function was abused to get the video removed. She had to appeal to Youtube to restore it and it now has been - with comments disabled.

[Morgoth]

Khellendros, on 29 May 2013 - 12:29 AM, said:

It was actually taken down by Youtube because the flag function was abused to get the video removed. She had to appeal to Youtube to restore it and it now has been - with comments disabled.

A good summary of the problem with the gaming community, that.

[Spoilsport Stonny]

Some humorous insight from the folks at cracked.com.

[Morgoth]

The comments section made me want to kill myself. Or all of the posters. More of the latter, really.

[Spoilsport Stonny]

Morgoth, on 19 September 2013 - 05:34 PM, said:

The comments section made me want to kill myself. Or all of the posters. More of the latter, really.

I've given up on ever reading comment sections of any article. Its kinda why I like hanging out on this board, because people here don't engage in that kind of stupidity. The sad thing is, most of those people confuse their emotions with the message that is being presented to them. Of course IF a child is kidnapped, threatened and then has to kill in real life and then seeks the solace of a paternal figure, there is nothing wrong with that. But sending the message that it is a model behavior to want and need to be rescued by a stereotype of a man, is harmful to singular young men and women and to our culture as a whole.

[Macros]

comment sections on basically anything just show how many idiots there are in the world.
They depress me. More so because discussing an issue at work usually elicits the same idiotic response from my co workers.

[Dolmen 2.0]

This was written by a female artist in regards to her experience of overly critical commenters...

http://goldentigers....e-art-400197252

Honestly this is where I find myself on the whole debate. Its tiring to see people argue about "what" Sexism is when there is so much more to it. Not many people speak to all the subtleties at play. Not many people engage the issue with respect and due consideration to all the parties at play.

[amphibian]

Dolmen+, on 24 September 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:

This was written by a female artist in regards to her experience of overly critical commenters...

http://goldentigers....e-art-400197252

Honestly this is where I find myself on the whole debate. Its tiring to see people argue about "what" Sexism is when there is so much more to it. Not many people speak to all the subtleties at play. Not many people engage the issue with respect and due consideration to all the parties at play.

While I can understand the imperatives of making a living with art means that sometimes you're going to make art you don't find to be awesome, this woman (if she is such) absolutely deserves some scrutiny (politely delivered, of course) for her sexist poses, character design choices and more in her art.

The artist is not pure evil or 1000% sexist, but her character designs are not awesome, poorly posed, occasionally break the laws of sensible anatomy and are created to expose the sex attributes of the character, rather than anything significant. That's fine if she's doing the art just to play around with erotic stuff or to purposely create sexy art, but if she's trying to create actual characters for a dungeon slog game or whatever, this is bogus and her post is a whiny "I can't take criticism" clueless waste of time.

[Dolmen 2.0]

amphibian, on 24 September 2013 - 07:15 PM, said:

Dolmen+, on 24 September 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:

This was written by a female artist in regards to her experience of overly critical commenters...

http://goldentigers....e-art-400197252

Honestly this is where I find myself on the whole debate. Its tiring to see people argue about "what" Sexism is when there is so much more to it. Not many people speak to all the subtleties at play. Not many people engage the issue with respect and due consideration to all the parties at play.

While I can understand the imperatives of making a living with art means that sometimes you're going to make art you don't find to be awesome, this woman (if she is such) absolutely deserves some scrutiny (politely delivered, of course) for her sexist poses, character design choices and more in her art.

The artist is not pure evil or 1000% sexist, but her character designs are not awesome, poorly posed, occasionally break the laws of sensible anatomy and are created to expose the sex attributes of the character, rather than anything significant. That's fine if she's doing the art just to play around with erotic stuff or to purposely create sexy art, but if she's trying to create actual characters for a dungeon slog game or whatever, this is bogus and her post is a whiny "I can't take criticism" clueless waste of time.

That is the issue. I have talked to the artist on several occasions, she knows how to make her art deliver a potent messege, see "Fake wings" for example. A couple of her works got her Daily Deviation awards and those images are pretty intelligent and well executed. The thing is normally an artist would get criticism over the main message and the technique employed. Since the advent on discussions about sexism we find posts that call on a need to dress a character up when really thats the authors perrogative? We don't tell writers what they should write on, we simply choose not to read their stuff and let that be that.

I think we find that all things are transferred in training, learning from sexist subject matter makes the idea of sexism less offensive to some. some times there is an allure to this. my remedial argument is simply to keep it balanced. If you're gonna have thongs on the women slap em on the men too etc.

Edit: (mind I don't adhere to this, I think some roles are heavily biased and must be redressed regardless of teaching history or allure....but that's my opinion, I just think its best to acknowledge others get to choose otherwise.)

I don't think its just a whine about criticism, I think its a valid right to also give people freedom to express themselves. There is not as much danger in shunning overly sexualized game art as there is in ignoring rampant sexist ideology but I think society should make an allowance for the exploration of the wacky and the zany. I fear it may lead to a stiffling of creativity and worse a conformational attitude towards individuals that choose to do things a group doesnt particularly like. That's really thin ice and I think it should be avoided.

This post has been edited by Dolmen+: 24 September 2013 - 07:47 PM

[amphibian]

For sure, I agree that stifling the exploration of the zany and the things other than "depressingly common grey suits for everybody" normality is a bad thing and leads to the decrease of creativity - a very valuable and fun thing to have and to engage in.

However, I think that if the writer or the artist is getting a ton of feedback (positive or negative) about something they've created, that's a potential opportunity to make more converts/followers (and thus more money) right there. If an artist has skills and the "luck" to create images that a ton of people are seeing, but finding to be sexist or wrong or could be better in some way, why not try and mold the next piece in response to the criticism to see if it sells or moves people? The art is already good enough or notorious enough to get attention and people are caring enough to give the artist feedback.

There's tons of exceptionally bad "artists" out there making absurdly awful art in all kinds of ways and few of them actually get any feedback other than from their small circle of real life or online friends. They can't get the traction to get anything serious going (which is often a good thing) because nobody pays attention to their work. Their stuff doesn't get bought or looked at and the blanket feedback of "Your stuff isn't good enough" is kind of not-helpful. Specific criticisms like "I like your linework or your prose, but do you have to clothe your barbarian warrior in a gourd sheath and make his special move a magic laser beam with a super boost of humping the air towards the enemy?" helps much more in terms of improvement and feedback.

Obviously, I don't mean that the writer or the artist should cater to the audience entire, but the process of the criticism can create a stronger artist with a better sense of what does and doesn't catch attention and a better sense of where they stand in the artistic world or the world in general.

[D'rek]

Dolmen+, on 24 September 2013 - 07:42 PM, said:

amphibian, on 24 September 2013 - 07:15 PM, said:

Dolmen+, on 24 September 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:

This was written by a female artist in regards to her experience of overly critical commenters...

http://goldentigers....e-art-400197252

Honestly this is where I find myself on the whole debate. Its tiring to see people argue about "what" Sexism is when there is so much more to it. Not many people speak to all the subtleties at play. Not many people engage the issue with respect and due consideration to all the parties at play.

While I can understand the imperatives of making a living with art means that sometimes you're going to make art you don't find to be awesome, this woman (if she is such) absolutely deserves some scrutiny (politely delivered, of course) for her sexist poses, character design choices and more in her art.

The artist is not pure evil or 1000% sexist, but her character designs are not awesome, poorly posed, occasionally break the laws of sensible anatomy and are created to expose the sex attributes of the character, rather than anything significant. That's fine if she's doing the art just to play around with erotic stuff or to purposely create sexy art, but if she's trying to create actual characters for a dungeon slog game or whatever, this is bogus and her post is a whiny "I can't take criticism" clueless waste of time.

That is the issue. I have talked to the artist on several occasions, she knows how to make her art deliver a potent messege, see "Fake wings" for example. A couple of her works got her Daily Deviation awards and those images are pretty intelligent and well executed. The thing is normally an artist would get criticism over the main message and the technique employed. Since the advent on discussions about sexism we find posts that call on a need to dress a character up when really thats the authors perrogative? We don't tell writers what they should write on, we simply choose not to read their stuff and let that be that.

I think we find that all things are transferred in training, learning from sexist subject matter makes the idea of sexism less offensive to some. some times there is an allure to this. my remedial argument is simply to keep it balanced. If you're gonna have thongs on the women slap em on the men too etc.

Edit: (mind I don't adhere to this, I think some roles are heavily biased and must be redressed regardless of teaching history or allure....but that's my opinion, I just think its best to acknowledge others get to choose otherwise.)

I don't think its just a whine about criticism, I think its a valid right to also give people freedom to express themselves. There is not as much danger in shunning overly sexualized game art as there is in ignoring rampant sexist ideology but I think society should make an allowance for the exploration of the wacky and the zany. I fear it may lead to a stiffling of creativity and worse a conformational attitude towards individuals that choose to do things a group doesnt particularly like. That's really thin ice and I think it should be avoided.

I agree with the underline, and I think that's the main thrust of what this artist is trying to get across. The solution to gender imbalances in game is not about censoring games and their art from never portraying a scantily-clad female character, or never having a damsel in distress, or whatever. Taking the "My pretty lady is such a badass warrior she even could run around naked and still nobody would dare to say a single word about it. She lives in a world where clothes are not an issue!" example from that article, there should be nothing wrong with that if that's the world she wants to create. Of course, there are lots of people who will not be interested in that art because they don't like naked female protaganists, and the author shouldn't expect this art to appeal to them. And that's fine. Part of the solution to artistic gender inequality would be that those people can go play a different game that has whatever does appeal to them (that those alternatives might not exist is the other gender inequality problem).

On the other hand, a game or other art where her badass pretty lady warrior is only one of several characters, and the other characters are all men who wear full body armour, that is where the "That's just how my artistic world is!" argument starts to break down due to inequal portrayal and rules between genders, and at that point I feel it is quite fair to levy sexist criticism against art like that.

amphibian, on 24 September 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

However, I think that if the writer or the artist is getting a ton of feedback (positive or negative) about something they've created, that's a potential opportunity to make more converts/followers (and thus more money) right there. If an artist has skills and the "luck" to create images that a ton of people are seeing, but finding to be sexist or wrong or could be better in some way, why not try and mold the next piece in response to the criticism to see if it sells or moves people? The art is already good enough or notorious enough to get attention and people are caring enough to give the artist feedback.

There's tons of exceptionally bad "artists" out there making absurdly awful art in all kinds of ways and few of them actually get any feedback other than from their small circle of real life or online friends. They can't get the traction to get anything serious going (which is often a good thing) because nobody pays attention to their work. Their stuff doesn't get bought or looked at and the blanket feedback of "Your stuff isn't good enough" is kind of not-helpful. Specific criticisms like "I like your linework or your prose, but do you have to clothe your barbarian warrior in a gourd sheath and make his special move a magic laser beam with a super boost of humping the air towards the enemy?" helps much more in terms of improvement and feedback.

If the artist is hoping to become a financial success or have lots of fans, sure. But many artists don't care about that at all, and are only looking for niche success with one group, especially if it is just a hobby to them. So if an artist is only looking to appeal to fans of gourd sheathed barbarians with magic laser humping and not expecting success elsewhere I see no problem with it.

I smart, rational and reasonable artist who *is* hoping for widespread fame and financial success would listen to all the criticisms they receive and try to figure out what they can make that will appeal to the most people. But as we can see in every artistic industry, there are plenty of artists who want widespread fame and financial succes, but are not smart, rational or reasonable and will therefore whine a lot about their hardships while ignoring advice on how to go beyond their extremely niche audience. I don't think that's really a problem though?

This post has been edited by D'rek: 24 September 2013 - 08:11 PM

[QuickTidal]

I'd like to just make a quick comment on this VIA recent comics.

Valkyrie (from Asgard, where Thor is from) in Mervel comics...has been prototypically shown in variations of this skimpy outfit since her inception. Ridiculous boob-cups and all.



And no one ever really challenged it...but then the book FEARLESS DEFENDERS in which she's a protag (along with another female hero) written by the Sixth Gun's Cullen Bunn...(who's other main comic also has a strong female protag)...the new artist gave her a redesign which is as follows.



Why I bring this up is because if you look at the redesign, she still gets to be sexy, but without resorting to ridiculous skin on display, or usseless boob-cups ect. of her old costume. We take the strong female hero and we give her clothes that match her to Thor's coverage, and she becomes less of a sex object allowing her to be a compelling character without the baggage of ridiculous skimpy outfits to sell her.

I truly think this is the way forward in video games as well, for design of characters (at the very least).

Just my two cents. I think Sarkeesian was doing the video game world a great service by making those videos and drawing stark and harsh light on the industry as it stands. The only way that's going to change is if people take a stand about it and demand more equity in these tropes.

Oh, and anyone who thinks that men play Video games more than women is stuck in the misogynistic 1980's. My whole generation consists of women my age who have grown up with video games as well, and love playing them....this includes my Fiancee who actually owns more video games than I do...the numbers for which gender plays more video games in 2013 are MUCH more equal than anyone believes and saying otherwise shows a marked lack of actually looking at such stats.

[Dolmen 2.0]

Thats a fair point, criticism is important, I guess the point of criticism of all creativity, Game art included is a need to develop something beyond what it is, hopefully inspiring the creative individual/team to really bring about something fundamentally inspiring and original. That is important and being criticized on overly sexist material can, I have no doubt, egg an individual to create better more inclusive art that can be appreciated by people of all sensitivities.

Its a fine line though, too many intricate issues that we need to address first. and its being quick to offer criticism that's dangerous here. We all can call on personal experiences involving sexism,racism,classicism and general attempts to subdivide "us from them". Its a failing of the real world. But not all of us have the express knowledge to lob truly insightful criticism. In the case of poorly put together attacks on "Sexist art" people harm the creativity rather than augment it? I think then you get responses like the one above. Bad criticism is leading to angry creatives. Angry creatives do not make good art.

Edit: by above I mean my link. QT thats an awesome redesign!

This post has been edited by Dolmen+: 24 September 2013 - 08:42 PM

[Morgoth]

Dolmen+, on 24 September 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:

This was written by a female artist in regards to her experience of overly critical commenters...

http://goldentigers....e-art-400197252

Honestly this is where I find myself on the whole debate. Its tiring to see people argue about "what" Sexism is when there is so much more to it. Not many people speak to all the subtleties at play. Not many people engage the issue with respect and due consideration to all the parties at play.

Whenever someone start arguing against the use of "force" and "censorship" in these discussions on sexism you immediatly know there's no real value to what they are saying. Why do you know this? Because no one are arguing for censorship! The only people who talk about censorship are the ones accused of sexism. It's easier to make up some moral high ground, no matter how weakly built, rather than actually considering whether there's some sort of validity to the criticism received.

Everyone have the right to express themselves the way they want, using art, literature, or whatever. I have the same right to express myself however, and one of the ways I employ that right is to talk about art that I like and art that I dislike. When I do so I am not applying force or censorship (People really should learn the meaning of the words they use), I'm using my right to present my opinions.

So yeah, the only thing I'm seeing here is someone whining about having to suffer criticism for the art they upload to the internet.

[amphibian]

Tiste doesn't whine about the jokes we've lobbed his way. He's been a true pillar of stoicism and I actually respect him much more for taking it all with equanimity.

And that redesign of Valkryie is awesome - for exactly the reasons QuickTidal says: she looks competent and capable as heck, which makes her more attractive than just showing skin.

D'rek's point about the non-rational nature and non-ideal communication of both the people pointing out problems and the people causing the problems is a very good one. Are there particular ideas, analogies or stories that are more effective at showing sexism to people producing art that can be used?

[Gust Hubb]