Sexualization of women from a woman's perspective

ArchivedUser

Wow ... this is sad.

MADE said:

If you would really want equality, then you would just stfu and be equal, as everyone is. Only those so called SJW-s fight for some non existing "injustice".
In a game noone fucking cares whether you are man, woman, attack-helicopter or anything that you are. 

Point the first: Spoken as only someone who isn't female, and has highly misogynistic viewpoints, can speak. We should "just stfu and be equal," without regard to the fight we've actually had to fight to earn the right to be seen as equal. May your next life bring you back as a female, my dear. Best wish I can wish for you.

Additionally, yes, they do care; why? Because male players see female characters and instantly begin soliciting us for ERP. I can't count the number of times it's happened to me. Oh, wait, maybe the male players don't care, and they'll ERP with anyone wearing a female skin? Hmmm. Worth considering.

MADE said:

Why does some groups think that they want to purposely "sexually objectivize" the women in games? The world doesn't work like that...
You know how does this world works?
Money...
Someone creates something in order to earn money.
They want to maximize the money making.
So in order to do that, they do things that many customer wants.
End of story.

Point the second: Funny. Let's turn that around a bit, shall we? Money. So, in pursuit of money, we're told "Sex sells." Tell me that's incorrect, can you? I won't follow that thought to its logical conclusion, as I don't feel this forum is the correct place for that, but I'll just let you ponder that. In our culture, sex and violence sell, those are what make the money, and again, follow that to its logical conclusion.

And to the "do things that many customer [sic] wants" I must ask; are you, then, saying that because many customer want [sic] overly and overtly sexualized females, the companies that provide these are "just" catering to their market? Hm. What's that say about the market, and by that, I assume you're a happy little part of that market.

MADE said:

They don't fucking care if you are a woman, man or anything. They will do what most users want, to maximize the profit, that's all. There aren't any injustice, or purposed attack again race/gender, that's just capitalism. Money matter, other things aren't.

Point the third: "...what most users want..." isn't, in fact, accurate. It's more accurate to state "what most male users are willing to pay for." Why do I say this is more accurate? Because, over all, women won't throw our money at these types of things the same way men will. We'll throw money at things that we find attractive, but we'll throw that money at things that enhance our view of ourselves, not an external desire to see more T&A.

MADE said:

If 80% of players would be fat ugly feminist, then you can be 100% sure that they would make a games based on their fantasies.
But the games are different. Usually like 80% of the players are straight males, and they are usually even single yet horny guys, so you see, there are a market demand, and the capitalist company react to it that's all.
It's pointless to mystifice it. As barbies designed to be attractive to the females, games are designed to be attractive to males, that's how the market works.

Point the fourth: Thank you for enhancing the points I've spelled out above, but I must question your statement "...would be fat ugly feminist [sic]...". I mean, you're saying then all fat ugly people are feminist [sic]? All feminist [sic] are fat ugly? No, wait, I should just be clear here. That's exactly what you're saying. And that, along with your language, is why you are offensive.

Oh, and Barbies weren't designed to be attractive to females, lol. They were designed with physically impossible proportions to help teach little girls what they should aspire to. Please, get your facts straight.

MADE said:

You want less sexualization in games? Fine, then just start playing games, and if you reach 50-50 female-male ration in games(with equal spending on it), then you will going to have equal standards. 
But the limitless crying about some nonexisting thing only going to make look you ****, and will not going to solve anything. You can cry forever about they sexualize females and stuff, but it won't change shit, only going to create enemies...

Point the fifth: Is this, like, "Fake news? Your statement "...limitless crying about some nonexiting [sic] thing only going to make you ****..." sounds a great deal like someone saying "Hey, yeah, you bumped your head, but I don't feel it so it doesn't hurt." I realized, really, there were people like you out there, but just ... whoa. Wow.

ArchivedUser

Drypht said:

But it's complete lunacy to create a male character, then dress him like a female claiming to be a male who identifies as a female.  (I'm surprised some SJW hasn't thought of this already)

This is an interesting point for me. I detest seeing male characters in frilly dresses; mainly because I know that most of them are doing it because they find it amusing, not actually for the reason you state above.

However. What gives you the right to declare something as "lunacy" just because it goes against what you think is right and true and proper? And why in all Hades do you believe that it would be a "SJW" (you say that like it's a bad thing ... ) who'd do this, rather than someone who actually identifies with that life?

ArchivedUser

Something else I'd like to add; I rather wish I'd thought to add this earlier.

Games have changed, over the last 20 years, in a remarkable way. They've begun recognizing that females play them, and adding in female PCs. Believe it or not, while this is something that's used by male players so they can "watch an attractive backside while they game," this came about because of women just like me. Complainers, I think we were called.

Women who did exactly what I did, over the last couple of decades. And that was to contact game development companies, as they were developing games, and asking "Do you intend to make this game with a female PC? I'm asking because so far, in your marketing, I haven't seen any." Upon getting the same response, over and over -- "No, at this time we will not be making a female PC," I always said the same thing. "Pity. I'm sorry to say then, that as a female, I won't be buying this game because I don't feel it actually represents me, as I see myself."

Things do change because we ask for them to change, and because we state, unequivocally, that we won't be throwing our money at things that don't reflect us, or allow us to feel represented.

This is an important fact. This discussion, while it has degenerated into name-calling, is important. It is important because no change can begin without a voice, or many voices, asking for it.

ArchivedUser

ruairidh said:

Enrif said:

@ruairidh
i know of gambesons, i mentioned them and i also own one myself
And Gambesons are not Leather Armor. they are quilted linen or wool, so would count as cloth armor. But the thing about gambesons is, they are thick and densely layered.

You're right, I was pretty much convinced they were leather for some reason, my bad.
Then no proof at all? I hardly think that people could be all able to afford metal armour outside of statal systems like the roman empire, which provided soldiers with it.
Besides pressed cloth, surely hardened leather should have been used, maybe not as depicted in movies and games but... 

well the problem with leather is, its an organic material and doesn't survive time that well. And then we have to think back, the ancient greek and romans used metal armor, and before that the bronze age used also metal armor made of bronze.

The only thing similar to leather armor i ever saw was this. A west and cap made out of crocodile leather from around 200AD. And this was a really rare find







P.S: Romans were not outfitted with armor, the soldiers had to buy it themself. But there was a flourishing second hand armor market from the soldiers who finished their time in the legions.

ArchivedUser

Enrif said:

well the problem with leather is, its an organic material and doesn't survive time that well. And then we have to think back, the ancient greek and romans used metal armor, and before that the bronze age used also metal armor made of bronze.

The only thing similar to leather armor i ever saw was this. A west and cap made out of crocodile leather from around 200AD. And this was a really rare find


P.S: Romans were not outfitted with armor, the soldiers had to buy it themself. But there was a flourishing second hand armor market from the soldiers who finished their time in the legions.

Marian reforms should have done something about the soldier's equipment, as far as late Republic and early Empire is concerned at least, didn't they?

However, I am going to start this month my master degree dissertation on celtic armours, I may find some hints about organic armament in iconography or such (Hallstatt's scabbard, Glauberg statue and flagon...), maybe rawhide or cuir builli.

ArchivedUser

ruairidh said:

Enrif said:

well the problem with leather is, its an organic material and doesn't survive time that well. And then we have to think back, the ancient greek and romans used metal armor, and before that the bronze age used also metal armor made of bronze.

The only thing similar to leather armor i ever saw was this. A west and cap made out of crocodile leather from around 200AD. And this was a really rare find


P.S: Romans were not outfitted with armor, the soldiers had to buy it themself. But there was a flourishing second hand armor market from the soldiers who finished their time in the legions.

Marian reforms should have done something about the soldier's equipment, as far as late Republic and early Empire is concerned at least, didn't they?

However, I am going to start this month my master degree dissertation on celtic armours, I may find some hints about organic armament in iconography or such (Hallstatt's scabbard, Glauberg statue and flagon...), maybe rawhide or cuir builli.

hey that sounds cool. Not much into celtic so i don't know stuff about them. Though alot of stuff i know hints that early celts usually didn't used armor similar to tribes in sub saharan africa

ArchivedUser

Enrif said:

hey that sounds cool. Not much into celtic so i don't know stuff about them. Though alot of stuff i know hints that early celts usually didn't used armor similar to tribes in sub saharan africa

That is exactly what I would like to inquire. It seems quite unlikely, due to the fact that both the climate of sub-atlantic central Europe was colder than it is now and surely colder than saharan's. 

There could have been episodes of devotio or, similarly, young warriors showing their bravery or proving themselves to the tribes by going into battle without an armour, but as far as the analysis of traces of usage and the kind of weapons we find go, there should have been some kind of formation style combat since the final parts of bronze age.

I think is a little more than propaganda the use of the roman sources to state that Celts fought naked. Maybe something's true, maybe sometimes, for particular groups and in circumscribed occasions, for precise reasons, most likely religious, it happened, but always...? I'm not convinced.

Surely nobles and rich celts could afford metal armours but, at least since III b.C. large armies were built, surely not made by only nobles. There should have surely been farmers and poorer people. So how did the go into battle? Pressed cloth? Boiled leather? Rawhide?

Archaeological finds don't help, it's difficult to find organic materals intact. I hope that iconography helps more.

ArchivedUser

Isende said:

Wow ... this is sad.

MADE said:

If you would really want equality, then you would just stfu and be equal, as everyone is. Only those so called SJW-s fight for some non existing "injustice".
In a game noone fucking cares whether you are man, woman, attack-helicopter or anything that you are. 

Point the first: Spoken as only someone who isn't female, and has highly misogynistic viewpoints, can speak. We should "just stfu and be equal," without regard to the fight we've actually had to fight to earn the right to be seen as equal. May your next life bring you back as a female, my dear. Best wish I can wish for you.

Did you just assume my gender?

ArchivedUser

MADE said:

Isende said:

Wow ... this is sad.

MADE said:

If you would really want equality, then you would just stfu and be equal, as everyone is. Only those so called SJW-s fight for some non existing "injustice".
In a game noone fucking cares whether you are man, woman, attack-helicopter or anything that you are. 

Point the first: Spoken as only someone who isn't female, and has highly misogynistic viewpoints, can speak. We should "just stfu and be equal," without regard to the fight we've actually had to fight to earn the right to be seen as equal. May your next life bring you back as a female, my dear. Best wish I can wish for you.

Did you just assume my gender?

Sure did. Am I incorrect?

ArchivedUser

ruairidh said:

Enrif said:

hey that sounds cool. Not much into celtic so i don't know stuff about them. Though alot of stuff i know hints that early celts usually didn't used armor similar to tribes in sub saharan africa

That is exactly what I would like to inquire. It seems quite unlikely, due to the fact that both the climate of sub-atlantic central Europe was colder than it is now and surely colder than saharan's. 

There could have been episodes of devotio or, similarly, young warriors showing their bravery or proving themselves to the tribes by going into battle without an armour, but as far as the analysis of traces of usage and the kind of weapons we find go, there should have been some kind of formation style combat since the final parts of bronze age.

I think is a little more than propaganda the use of the roman sources to state that Celts fought naked. Maybe something's true, maybe sometimes, for particular groups and in circumscribed occasions, for precise reasons, most likely religious, it happened, but always...? I'm not convinced.

Surely nobles and rich celts could afford metal armours but, at least since III b.C. large armies were built, surely not made by only nobles. There should have surely been farmers and poorer people. So how did the go into battle? Pressed cloth? Boiled leather? Rawhide?

Archaeological finds don't help, it's difficult to find organic materals intact. I hope that iconography helps more.

sounds plausible. But don't get to hung up on iconography as it in it self can be very inaccurate. I don't know the times i tried the techniques of old manuscript and it didn't seemed to work until there was a slight adjustment to what was depicted.
Best would be of course historical findings of old armor

ArchivedUser

Ok, back to the original topic.

Female gamers are fed up with our only options being 'idealised' fantasies.
all we would like is the same variety of clothing and body shapes that real life presents us with.

Some If us will wear itsy bitsy, come over here clothing, on our oversized breasts...and some of us will also wear nothing but a wisp of cotton on our mahoosive gentleman's package.

Is there anyone here who strongly feels that choice SHOULDN'T be available to all genders?

Yep I'm a feminist, but that's second to me being a humanist, i also feel strongly that men shouldn't be forced to all be superheroes with six packs and arms like barrels... the incidents of eating disorders arising among young men is outrageous, as a society we've known about the of social images on people's self esteem for generations, but society hasn't moved forward enough to do anything about it.

so yes. I'm going to fight for variety and choice for all, and if men want to wear dresses, or young girls want burkhas let them. 

All That's being asked for is for games to stop telling us...this idealised female character, wearing very little is 'how a woman should be' skinny, polished and always ready for sex.

Let us CHOOSE to be that way.

ArchivedUser

bringing this feminazi bs into gaming forums is just stupid. leave the rl bs to rl. games arent telling anyone how to be. someone creates a game,you play their game.you customize what they give you because its what exists in that games world. we dont need, this men and women equality irl arguments. this whole let us be nude/wear close to nothing to be equal shit is really getting old. theres no need to drag rl woes into a game.

ArchivedUser

O.o

No words

ArchivedUser

The sad case is no, games are not "telling anyone how to be," yet children and young adults are trying to find out "how to be." So when our culture (I am American) only depicts women in a certain way, than that's what way little girls and boys see women in the "future" (when they will be grown up). The same is also true for boys, as a famous comedian once said "He-Man is literally 'He' and 'Man'."

Not all youth fall for this, but some do. Adults should not be concerned as much with "I have to look like this b/c it's what everyone thinks I should look like" but it happens. Sometimes due to disorders and sometimes do to the desire of belonging or possibly negative feedback from their environment. If a little boy with heavy set parents, sees himself happily in the future as being heavy set or idolizes his father, why not allow him to make a heavy set adult character?

People in this thread are asking, if possible, that IS creates a game where they can be short & chubby, tall & lanky, or any combination in between. I don't feel like anyone is trying to force their opinions, unless I missed the post where people indicated w/o said option they will boycott game.

Just to be clear, this is my opinion. I know there is a lot of back and forth in the Ashes forums about "you said ___ so you are wrong." I am not giving an ultimatum. I am just expressing my confusion as to why people refuse to let others build the body they want.

I would be stating an opinion for "perfect body image" in this argument if I was being told "I CAN NOT have a super attractive avatar." I want one! But, I don't think others should have to have one.

Also, I want a variety of Armor skimpy and not. I don't want to show up to a tavern and every female avatar is wearing the same skimpy thing I am!

ArchivedUser

Megs said:

Ok, back to the original topic.
*snip*
All That's being asked for is for games to stop telling us...this idealised female character, wearing very little is 'how a woman should be' skinny, polished and always ready for sex.

Let us CHOOSE to be that way.

I agree to what Megs said. Now its up to the DEVS to make sure we get the sliders to make the character types we want and yes having silly armor types does not make any sense at all. I really dont care if its high fantasy make the armors more realistic. Like guys you dont go pig shooting just wearing boxer shorts. AOC has a chance to change the MMO paradigm if they so desire.

ArchivedUser

its been confirmed that we will have the ability for fat/skinny/ugly/hot/exc characters way before this thread wasn't it???? equal/better than BDOs customization. (i think bdos sliders sucked. def coulda been better. unless u wanna just be a barbie/ken)