Slashdot Mirror
Sexism Still a Problem At E3
An anonymous reader writes "Now that E3 has wound down and the big product announcements are out of the way, its time to take a step back and look at the culture represented by the giant gaming show. 'The presence of scantily clad women hawking games and gizmos seemed in particular contrast to a report released this week by the Entertainment Software Association, which organizes the gaming industry's annual trade show. It found that 45 percent of the entire gaming population is now women, and women make up 46 percent of the most frequent game buyers.' While there are fewer 'booth babes' than in earlier shows (and while some are trying to bring balance by adding 'booth bros'), the conference organizers are happy to let exhibitors make their own policy. By contrast, the Penny Arcade Expo forbids 'booth babes,' a controversial but widely lauded stance. A recent article in Kotaku about this year's E3 notes, 'For every confident cosplayer who might do the job at a con, I am seeing dozens of companies trying to sell me hundreds of women. They are not drawing my attention to the content of their games, or to their tactics or techniques. They are drawing my attention to thigh-high boots, to low-cut shirts, and, frankly, to the hard work of a really expensive bra. So much of what I see here at E3 is aimed directly at the lizard hindbrain of a 13-year-old boy. But you have to be 18 to get into the show, and it's nominally for industry professionals. Perhaps someday we—men and women alike—can all be treated like the grown-ups we theoretically are, and be trusted to judge a game by its content... not its double-D cover.'"
If the industry's most prominent trade show looks like it was organized by teenage boys, it's not going to do much to dispel the stereotype that games are just something for teenage boys.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Every industry does the same thing, it's just the gaming industry folk live in caves and don't have any clue what happens outside their cave.
They are just pandering to the target audience. Maybe you are very mature, but let's face it, most gamers do act like 13 year old boys. It's all in good fun. E3 exists to show off games and try to get people into the idea of buying them, not to pander to feminist sensibilities.
I have no problem with scantily clad women. I know many women who have no problem (and rather enjoy) scantily clad women. Just cause it's a problem to you doesn't mean it's a problem to everyone else.
While there are fewer 'booth babes' than in earlier shows (and while some are trying to bring balance by adding 'booth bros')
Now that is a solution I can get behind. I'm not a hot guy. But I'm not full of shit either -- I know that straight women like hot guys, just like straight men like hot women. There's a hundred thousand years of evolution behind it. Pretending it is not true is stupid. Women are naturally drawn to men with a pronounced V shape from their waist to their shoulders -- a trait I do not posess. And men are naturally drawn to big chests. That is reality.
You can argue that it is not sound economic policy, because it directs consumer spending in ways that are not reflective of product quality. Fine, let's talk about that, and maybe start by making advertising not count as a business expense for tax purposes. But if you are upset because it is objectification (or, more realistically, because you are, like me, not hot) -- you've got to get over it. Pretending it is not true is just lying to yourself. It will not change reality.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
It's a perfect match. Tweaking the libido is entertainment. Games are entertainment. The age group here is largely young adult, sexually aware.
So, several things. First, the idea that the female psyche isn't tweaked by up front sexuality? That's dead at the door. It's a social thing right now to pretend that sexuality is "mommy magic" and shouldn't be in play, but that is, and has been for decades, just a toxic result of radical women's lib propaganda. Now that is not saying that women shouldn't have equal opportunity in jobs, salary, medical care, marriage, etc -- not at all. Equal opportunity in matters that are not themselves tied to one's sexuality is good (I don't need equal access to an obstetrician, women don't need equal access to a dick doctor. Few will hire a fellow to strip for other fellows, likewise few would hire women to strip for other women. Etc.) But it is saying that the sexes are different, and that's a good thing, and an interesting thing, and altogether something to be celebrated, elevated, emphasized and above all enjoyed.
Next, and standing all by itself, there's *nothing* wrong with marketing one's natural advantages. We do it with minds that are able to wrap around programming and engineering. Athletes do it with bodies that are able to excel under the stresses of sports, pro and amateur. Actors and models do it with looks that please the audience. And so on, ad infinitum. What's absolutely disgusting is when some idiot steps in and decides that some characteristic, sensuality and looks being perfect examples, isn't "appropriate" for someone to use, either personally, or by employing a third party to "bring" it.
Do people with natural advantages have an easier time going down various roads in life? Yes, they do. Do we have *any* right to say that they should not, or cannot, use those advantages to travel those roads? No, we don't -- there's nowhere to derive such a right from.
Here's an important tip on the term "liberation": When you find yourself saying "sure, you can choose to do that if you like", most probably, you're engaged in something along the lines of liberation. However, when you find yourself saying "you can't do that", you really need to look hard at what you're saying because most likely, what you're engaged in is repression, probably direct and senseless repression at that.
If there's something to question about the marketing here, it might be raised as, "Where are the handsome guys as marketing tweaks for the ladies"? If the buying audience is truly equally distributed between the sexes, then if the game companies have any sense (debatable, where's my new MechAssault?) then they'll hit the women in the same nerve centers. You think they don't enjoy interacting with hunky guys? Oh, silly, silly you. :)
And of course, if good looking people, highly sexual people, or people with moles offend ye, then avoid them, by all means. Just don't tell the rest of us what it is we can, should, or will enjoy.
I raise my glass to those who make personal, informed choices.
I raise my middle finger to those who would interfere with them.
Now, let the politically correct bunk commence.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Pardon my ignorance, by why is it repulsive to see attractive people at product promotion booths? As a man, I buy products all the time with attractive, often partially clad men advertising them all the time. Personal grooming products, cars, clothing, sports equipment etc.. all promoted by over idealized men. Why are women so offended when they see over idealized, attractive women advertising products?
I don't hear cries of sexist when Wendy's advertises their latest salad offering with a shirtless man at poolside on national TV. Pick one ladies, you cant be both "equal" and more-than-equal at the same time.
If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
Apparently, it's sexist when hired female sales staff ("booth babes") wear T-shirts, makeup, and big hair. But apparently it is OK to use your feminine wiles if you declare yourself a feminist and a female technologist (and apparently, you don't actually need to know much about technology to do so). Can someone who is well versed in the intricacies of sexism and political correctness please explain who is allowed to wear revealing clothes under what circumstances, and who is not?
You know to dump a woman if she offers you Modern Warfare.
Judging by women's magazines, women like looking at pretty women too. There also an element of schadenfreude, criticizing celebrities' "plastic surgery" and "anorexia", playing to women's envy. Which is what is really going on here. The women aren't demanding the addition of "booth studs" or appearances by Justin Bieber, they want the women who look better than them to lose their jobs.
Microsoft's little rape joke and the fact that this ever even saw the light of day shows a lot about gaming culture...
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Pardon my ignorance, by why is it repulsive to see attractive people at product promotion booths?
It's not, and as one of the linked articles pointed out, the ban on booth babes at PAX didn't stop some companies having attractive women there to sell stuff -- the difference being that said women were dressed normally, and actually knew all about what they were selling (that is, they were regular salespeople for the company that happened to be women). If you can't see the difference between that and booth babes then you are part of the problem.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
Feminism has never been about equality. Equal Rights Movements were about equal rights. The two aren't the same.
Some 45% of gamers are women. They don't care. This is a small vocal minority that is complaining. You can (and should) ignore them.
I believe in equal rights for all. No special rights for anyone.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Why would I want to hit on every busty 20-year-old? Attraction among advanced creatures like humans is based on considerably more than mere first-physical-sight. There are women I'm attracted to and those I'm not, and this is not usually based on randomly pointing to people I pass on the street...
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Look at what those statistics actually say.
The first says women make up "45% of the entire gaming community." This includes mobile games like Candy Crush Saga and Words with Friends that aren't represented at E3. Women play video games. It doesn't mean they're playing the same video games as men. In fact, I know women who would be shocked if the label "gamer" was applied to them, despite them spending more time playing "video games" than I play. To them, Borderland, Skyrim, and other titles more likely to be represented at E3 are "video games" and what they play are not video games.
The second says women make up 46% of the most frequent game buyers. I know that I buy a hell of a lot more games for my mobile device than I buy for my PC, because the games are so much less expensive on my mobile device and I always have my mobile device with me. I also know that when I buy a game it is sometimes a gift, or a game for my kid. How does my purchase reflect *me* as the target audience? It doesn't. To put some context on this: even though I've spent WAY more time playing Civilization V, I only purchased it once, versus the many, many purchases I've spent LESS time playing on my phone. Using your logic this would make me more of a "mobile gamer" than a "PC gamer", but the opposite is actually true.
In short, both these statistics are absolutely meaningless in this context. Women don't make up even close to half of the market for the games and systems at E3.
So much of what I see here at E3 is aimed directly at the lizard hindbrain of a 13-year-old boy.
Is that some new, clever, more-polite way of saying "aimed at men, who think with their dicks?" 1)Men don't think about sex any more than women do. 2)Men are not interested in promiscuous sex, by and large. 3)Men are not only interested in sex, either. 4)We have agency, and that agency is not controlled any more by our dicks than your agency is controlled by your vagina, thank you very much.
All of the above has been proven with research and studies, which stand in stark face to the crap that just falls out of the mouth of many a feminist in the same breath as complaints about sexism. It's perfectly acceptable to say men think with their genitals and to call them pigs for being interested in sex while calling women interested in sex "empowered." Female nudity is celebrated; male nudity is controversial and rarely if ever portrayed or shown. We're told that women's sexual feature are beautiful, and men's genitals are gross, disgusting, etc.
Furthermore, I am not responsible for content or marketing aimed at my demographic any more than women would be held responsible for content or marketing aimed at them. This is particularly true given that any time this subject comes up with other men, the responses are that it is: cheesy, annoying, eye-roll inducing, and in many cases, not what any of us consider attractive. I don't find blonds with giant breasts to be attractive. Sorry. Don't. Tell that to a bunch of women on a "sexism in the game industry" panel and the response will be some strong variant of "You don't know what you're talking about." Actually, we fuckin' well do. We know better than you are. But it's not convenient to your little rant; what's convenient is to portray us all as drooling over booth babes with hard dicks.
You want equality? Great. So do we. Stop insulting us. Stop repeating sexist, made up bullshit. Stop dismissing us when we tell you you're wrong about prevailing attitudes.
Please help metamoderate.
"If you walked up and grabbed my ass, you'd get slapped with sexual harassment "
No. Not with me. You'd just smile and follow me.
You hair looks great, by the way.
If the booth babes thought it was sexist they would not be there. IMO saying booth babes should not exist, is saying that women can't be expected to make wise choices about their own lives - and THAT is much more sexist.